Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a case study of Sakubva high density suburb

Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a case study of Sakubva high density suburb
JEWM
Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a
case study of Sakubva high density suburb
Mafume Pascaline Nyarai1
, Zendera Willard2
, Mutetwa Moses*3
and Musimbo Ngenzile4
1
Department of Natural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Africa University, Box 1320, Old
Mutare, Zimbabwe
2
Department of Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Africa University, Box 1320, Old Mutare,
Zimbabwe
3
Alumni, Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Africa University, Box 1320, Old
Mutare, Zimbabwe
4
Department of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Solusi University, Box
Solusi, Bulawayo
The objectives of the study were to assess the current status on household solid waste
management challenges of collection and disposal. The research employed both quantitative (in
form of questionnaires) and qualitative (in form of interviews) methodologies. Field visits and
observations were done on residential areas and open dumpsites. The research found that there
are lots of challenges that are faced by residents and these range from collection, methods of
disposal and the involvement of other key stakeholders. The results revealed that the
challenges in poor refuse collection were attributed to serious shortage of refuse equipment,
and shortage of proper receptacles. Recycling strategies seemed to be nonexistent as revealed
by low percentages of residents who practice it. Since council does not collect waste as often
as it should, residents dispose waste through the traditional and unsustainable ways such as
backyard incinerator, burying, burning and illegal open dumps. With rapid urbanization, the
situation is becoming critical. It was recommended that councils should extend coverage to all
areas, increase their refuse collection frequency, provide receptacles to residents and raise
awareness campaigns on recycling and sustainable solid waste disposal. There is need for
involvement by private sector and NGOs in solid waste management.
Keywords: Solid waste management, Recycling, Disposal, Refuse equipment,
INTRODUCTION
Municipal solid waste management has emerged as one
of the greatest challenges facing environmental
protection agencies in developing countries (Ogwueleka,
2009). Solid waste is generated by any activity such as
food preparation, sweeping, cleaning and burning fuel,
gardening and recreation (Medina, 2010). Municipal Solid
Waste is generally defined as waste generated from
homes, street sweeping, industries, institutions and
commercial areas which needs to be collected by or on
behalf of local authority (Hester and Harrison, 2002).
*Corresponding author: Mutetwa Moses, Department of
Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural
Resources, Africa University, Box 1320, Old Mutare,
Zimbabwe. Email: mosleymute@gmail.com
Journal of Environment and Waste Management
Vol. 3(2), pp. 142-155, December, 2016. © www.premierpublishers.org, ISSN: 1936-8798x
Research Article

Mutetwa et al. 143
In most countries the population is increasing hence
causing many people to migrate to urban areas. Most
urban areas especially in the sub-Saharan Africa, half of
the solid waste generated is not collected. Waste in
developing countries is rarely recycled but thrown in
dump sites. This has posed serious health and
environmental impacts. In low income countries, the
situation is worse. Many cities and towns in developing
countries are not adequately meeting their refuse
collection obligations due to financial constraints (Mohee
and Simelane, 2015; Senkoro, 2003). There is an
observation that residents have resorted to illegal
dumping of some solid waste in open spaces (Tevera et
al., 2002). Researchers have carried out many
researches to answer the question why there are
variations of solid waste generation from place to place in
quality of waste generated and quantity. Manyanhaire
and Sango (2009) discovered that in Zambia, Chirundu
and Marondera in Zimbabwe 15.62% to 72% of waste
generated was vegetative components. In Zimbabwe’s
cities and towns, solid waste management has reached
crisis levels as there is now mismatch between planning
and policy implementations and this is worsened by some
financial problems experienced (Matowu and Tevera,
2002). It is estimated that each person produces over 1-
1.5 kg of garbage a day and this accumulation of waste
can lead to severe environmental degradation (Camille,
et al, 2012).
There are several key issues in developing countries on
solid waste. Policies are required for long term planning
which is realistic. Policies usually are made because of
the arousal of solid waste problems. In developing
countries there are limited resources in waste collection
and inadequate storage facilities. No proper solid waste
disposal facilities are available in developing countries
(Government of Zimbabwe, 2007;Mangizvo,
2010;Muchandiona, 2013). The use of technology has
been of much help in developing countries on waste
disposal but inappropriate technological facilities are
being used as well as the equipment. Developing
countries do lack enough funds and end up using the
equipment which will not be suitable for a certain task.
Scavenging process is also a key issue in developing
people are found searching through refuse for useful
material. This process allows waste to stay in
environments as this result in improper waste disposal.
There is also knowledge which is insufficient on basic
principles of waste management.
In most urban cities of Zimbabwe the issue of solid waste
management including refuse collection and disposal has
been a controversial issue in the environment. Litter has
become a common site along highways and in many
urban and peri-urban communities in Zimbabwe. Waste
management has collapsed, and this has triggered
chaotic and rampant waste dumping, putting the health of
residents at great risk (Makwara and Magudu, 2013).
Zimbabwe’s most solid waste generators often dispose
uncollected waste at illegal dumping sites. In less
economically developed countries most households do
not recycle waste but simply find their way to the
dumpsite (Akkucuk, 2015). Sakubva in Mutare amongst
other Zimbabwean cities has had disease outbreaks as a
result of improper refuse management.
The objectives of the study are to investigate the
challenges of solid waste management by assessing the
frequency of solid waste collection in Sakubva. It also
looks at the systems which are being used by residents in
solid waste disposal. The study is going to establish the
challenges on solid waste management being faced by
Sakubva residential suburb which hinders sustainable
development of the environment. For the concept of
sustainable development to be understood, discussions
concentrating on environmental impacts of solid waste
should be raised in academic circles. This study allows
the residents to give their own views on the management
of waste within their environment to attain sustainable
development and healthy environments. Through this
research, there is a high chance of influencing the
residents in terms of understanding that they have a
significant role when it comes to solid waste
management. Residents will also be able to understand
that they have a huge responsibility when it comes to
solid waste disposal in the environment. They will
understand that it is not only the city council and
municipality’s responsibility in solid waste disposal. The
information will be used by city fathers at large in policy
formulation on maintaining environmental sustainability
for a safe environment. This research brings out the
necessity of participation in the management of solid
waste in many cities as it incorporates all stakeholders in
the management of solid waste. These stakeholders
include the Mutare city council, NGOs, Environmental
Management Agency (EMA), ZINWA and other
responsible organizations in solid waste management.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Site Description and Experimental Design
The research was conducted in Mutare District in
Manicaland, located South-Eastern of Zimbabwe. Mutare
is the third largest city in the country. It is also the capital
of the Manicaland Province. It is the border city between
Zimbabwe and Mozambique. The city has a tropical
location but it has a temperate climate due to being
located in a mountainous area. The study area has a
variable climate from wet to semi-arid. The mean annual
temperature of the area is 19⁰C and the mean annual
rainfall is 818mm.

J. Environ. Waste Manag. 144
Figure 1. Map of Zimbabwe showing Districts of Manicaland Province and Mutare (Source, Google Maps
accessed March 6, 2016)
Table 1. Summary of sampling procedure
Section of
Suburb
Number of
houses
Sample size (%) Sample size Sample
interval
Chineta 188 5 9 21
Mawonde 426 5 21 20
Mazhambe 200 5 10 19
Muchena 400 5 20 20
Total 1294 20 60 80
N=60
There are more than 20 suburbs in Mutare having low,
medium and high density suburbs. Sakubva is the oldest
high density suburb in Mutare and it is characterized by
high population growth and overcrowding. It was
established in 1934 and it has a population density of
nearly 209 people per square kilometer (Sigauke, 2007).
The research design was based on the description of the
challenges of solid waste management in Sakubva high
density suburb of Mutare. This method was also used to
evaluate the disposal systems of solid waste, residents’
perceptions on current solid waste management by
Mutare city and the frequency of solid waste collection in
Sakubva.
The stratified sampling method was used in the research.
The 39 sections in Sakubva with a total housing stock of
5 327. were taken as stratas. Four stratas were selected
using convenience sampling determined by high rates of
illegal waste dumping, high population density and the
number of houses. The areas selected were Chineta,
Mawonde, Mazhambe, and Muchena. Deliberate
sampling or convenience sampling method was very
useful. The research used a sample size of 5% of the
number of houses in the section were the investigation
was conducted. Systematic sampling was then used to
determine the households to issue copies of a
questionnaire. Sampling interval (SI) was obtained by
dividing the population (P) by the sample size (n) (SI=
P/n). Every n
th
household unit from the sampling frame
was selected. Table 1 above summarizes the sampling
procedure.
The units of measurement were residents, vendors and
the Mutare city council. Two structured questionnaires
were developed and elicited responses from interviewees
provided the data required in the study.
Two types of questionnaires were constructed by the
researcher for the different groups including the residents
and the city council. The questionnaires collected data
through face to face interviews with residents of the
Mutare two suburbs and the city fathers. The
questionnaires were written in English and during
administering them on respondents, translation to Shona
was done when and where necessary.

Mutetwa et al. 145
Figure 2: Gender distribution of the respondents
Table 2: Age groups of respondents.
Measure of Central Tendency Age group (years)
Mean 25-34
Mode 25-34
Minimum <15
Maximum 50-64
Data Types and Data Sources
In this research study, both qualitative and quantitative
data collection methods were implemented. Quantitative
data was gathered through the use of close ended
questionnaires and the qualitative data through open
ended questions. Open ended questions allowed the
perceptions of residents on the current solid waste
management by Mutare city.
The study used both primary and secondary data.
Primary data was obtained from the use of
questionnaires which were administered to various
residents of Sakubva high density. It was also obtained
from the city council responsible with the collection of
solid waste in Mutare urban. Observations were also
used on some of the solid waste disposal systems used
by the residents of Sakubva suburb. The information
collected includes the systems used by residents in
disposing waste as well as what they think and suggest in
terms of solid waste management of the suburb. The city
council provided information on the frequency of waste
collection in the suburb including the equipment they use
in the collection of solid waste in the suburb.
Sources of secondary data used were published
textbooks and journals on solid waste collection and
disposal. This information on solid waste management
was collected from the use of the internet, the city council
and the library.
Data Analysis and Presentation
In this research the Statistical Package for Social
Sciences (SPSS) was used for data entry and analysis.
Data presentation analysis consists of examining,
categorizing, tabulating or otherwise re-combining the
evidence, to address the initial propositions of a study.
Quantitative data was presented using descriptive
statistics like percentages, means, tabulation, and
frequency distribution. Graphs, tables and photographs
will be used to present the outputs.
RESULTS
Data Obtained From Residents
Demographic and Socio-economic characteristics of
respondents
Gender distribution: Figure 2 shows the gender
distribution of the sample respondents in percentages of
the sample population of Sakubva residents. This
categorical variable is important in explaining decision
making patterns in waste disposal at household level.
Gender is a significant part of the study since most of the
household chores are done by ladies and they are the
ones who generate much of the waste. Of the 60
respondents, 53.3% were male and 46.7% were female.
Age group of respondents: The age frequency
distribution of the respondents from the sample
population is shown in Table 2. The age of the
respondents ranged from <15years to 64years. Most of
the participants (36.7%) were in the age group 25-
34years followed by 16-24years age group (23.3%).
53.3%
46.7%
Male Female

Table 3. Demographic and Socio-economic characteristics of respondents.
Variable Category Frequency(n=60) Percentage (%)
Marital status Never married
Married
27
33
45.00
55.00
Education
qualification
Below Grade7/Standard 6
Grade 7/Standard 6
O-Level
A-Level
Tertiary Certificate/Diploma
University degree
3
8
24
13
6
6
5.00
13.33
40.00
21.67
10.00
10.00
Employment
status
Employed formally
Self-employed informally
Unemployed but looking for work
Student
19
17
15
9
31.67
28.33
25.00
15.00
Tenure status Owner/Purchaser
Tenant
Lodger
Tied accommodation
19
16
16
9
31.67
26.67
26.67
15.00
Figure 3. Response of residents on frequency of waste collection
Marital status: Table 4 shows the marital status
distribution of sample respondents in percentages of the
sample population of Sakubva residents. The sample
constituted respondents who were never married
(45.0%), married (55.0%).
Education qualification: The majority of the
respondents (40.0%) went through the formal education
up to O-Level while 21.67% attained A-Level certificate. A
13.33% of the respondents attained Grade7 or Standard
5/6 while 10.00% attained a tertiary certificate/dilploma
the same as those with University degrees (Table 3).
Employment status: Data pertaining to employment
status of the respondents is show in Table 3. The
employment status is important since it affects income
and the ability to pay extra for the waste disposal when
council fails. Most of the respondents are formally
employed (31.67%) while the least percentage (15.00%)
of the respondents are students. A total of 28.33% of the
respondents were self-employed informally while the
remainder proportion of the respondents (25.00%) was
unemployed but looking for work.
Accommodation status: Data pertaining to
accommodation status revealed that most of the
respondents (31.67%) own or have purchased the house
they stay in, 26.67% are lodgers same as tenants while
remainder (15.00%) use tied accommodation (Table 4).
Solid waste collection by Council
Frequency of waste collection: Data pertaining to
council’s schedule on solid waste collection is shown in
Figure 3. Most of the respondents (35.0%) reported that
waste collection is irregular while those who reported no
collection of waste were 21.7%. The proportion of the
sample population who reported that waste collection
was only 8.3%.
23.3%
11.7%
35.0%
21.7%
8.3%
Once a week
Twice a week
Irregularly
Not collected
Everyday

Mutetwa et al. 147
Figure 4: Type of solid waste generated at household level
Table 4. Methods used in solid waste disposal.
Method Frequency
(n=60)
Percentages
(%)
Open dumping
Burying
Composting
Burning
Illegal dumping
Collection by Council
30
27
29
36
29
34
50.0
45.0
48.3
60.0
48.3
56.7
Type of waste and Systems used by residents in solid
waste disposal
The assessment did not attempt to quantify the amount of
waste generated by each household but rather sought to
find out the type of waste generated per household
(Figure 4). This study revealed that all of the households
surveyed generate plastic and food wastes. Of the 60
households surveyed those who produce
paper/cardboard waste constitutes 47.0% while those
who generate glass wastes are 28.0%. Other waste
generated is shown in Figure 4.
Almost every household produce plastic waste probably
because to a larger extent packaging of goods from
shops, supermarkets and even butcheries predominately
use plastic. From bread to margarine, meats, beverages,
mealie meal etc plastic packages eventually ends up in
trash cans at household level. On the other hand, every
household cook some food and waste is generated in
form of leftovers of too much food prepared. Waste is
also generated from uncookable and/or unpreferred parts
of the food being prepared which have to be cutoff and
disposed during preparing a meal. Perishable food which
is not cooked in time also contributes this waste. Like
plastic, paper is used in packages as a result after
serving its purpose at the house it become waste. As for
the other waste generated, the different activities that
happen at the houses determine the type of waste being
produced. At some households there are welding or
carpentry activities which take place thus translating to
metals and wood waste produced respectively. A lot of
construction has resulted in builder’s rubble generation
alongside with some electrical cables. Some of the
electricals are coming from broken down household
appliances such as stoves, geysers, DVD players, radios
and electric irons, which are thrown away.
Methods used in solid waste disposal by Sakubva
residents are shown in Table 4. Burying is the least
practised method (see, Plate1). Of the 60 sample
residents only 45.0% dispose their waste by digging pits
either in their yard or on open spaces and bury
household waste.
Other commonly practised method of disposal of waste at
household level in Sabvuka is through illegal dumping of
waste and 48.3% of the residents use this method (see,
Plate 1). Thirty-four out of the 60 (56.7%) households
surveyed effectively dispose waste generated at their
houses through the council when it comes to collect solid
waste from the residents. However, investigation
100%
28%
47%
25%
100%
5%
10%
3% 2%
13%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%

Source, Photo by Author, 2016)
Plate 1. Open dump
Source, Photo by Author, 2016
Plate 2. Vegetable garden fertilized by compost manure
revealed that the most frequently practised method of
waste disposal by Sakubva residents is burning of waste.
Although these methods are the least desired, the
residents attributed the use of these methods to the delay
by council to collect waste and/or non-collection at all.
Residents who are using improper receptacles are
illegally dumping their solid waste as their receptacles fill
up before the one week period. Placestargeted mostly by
illegal dumpers include vacant land, open spaces,
unfenced housing stands awaiting development, storm
water drains, market places, intersections of busy streets,
road verges and areas of high waste generation with
inadequate or no waste containers like informal
settlements that sustain high population densities. These
illegal open dumping often occurs mostly, but not
exclusively, at night as a way of reducing chances of
apprehension by municipal police officers. Respondents
however, suggested that local authorities should earmark
certain areas within the communities as legal sites for
solid waste collection for waste to be picked up by local
authorities. These could be properly managed by
providing for waste separation, fencing the area, and
regularly disinfecting waste to reduce disease. This could
reduce the costs of door to door collection of refuse and
organize waste recovery and recycling in a safer manner.
Composting is a marginally used method of waste
disposal by residents. Only 48.3% of the residents
compost some of their waste. In theory composting could
reduce environmental pollution and provide fertilizers
which can be used in lawns and backyard vegetable
gardens (see, Plate 2). This compost fertilizer also could
help improve agricultural production and improve soil
structure which means it offers a longer term advantage
over other non-compost mineral-based fertilizers. In
practice, composting is not a widely employed
technology. In spite of such initiatives, the quantity

Mutetwa et al. 149
Figure 5. Distribution of respondents regarding waste recycling
Table 5. Benefits from recycling solid waste.
Benefit Frequency (n=21) Percentage (%)
Monetary
Reduced waste
Aesthetic (beauty appearance)
No benefit
4
21
14
5
19.0
100.0
66.7
23.8
currently being disposed of through composting is
negligible owing to lack of markets for compost in the
suburb. This is also attributed to the fact that urban
agriculture is not vigorously pursued in the town and
volumes of compostable waste generated at household
level is low.
Usually solid waste segregation enables easier recovery
of waste at source and promotes recycling as the waste
is already sorted out and volume reduced. Segregation is
also vital in the management of hazardous waste from
households, for instance disposal of batteries. only 36.7%
of the residents separate waste at household level. This
is normally done to recover some of the waste in form of
plastic bags and plastic containers for reuse. Some of the
respondents indicated that they separate household
waste to facilitate for composting as well. Low levels of
waste segregation were generally reported by
households and cited various barriers to segregation of
waste. Residents reported that waste segregation makes
a mess around the house, takes too much room, takes
much time and is too inconvenient among other reasons
as well. Most of these barriers seem related to the
inconvenience of doing this, indicating that encouraging
this practice would need some incentives, to create
awareness of the benefits of waste segregation, facilitate
the practice, such as with receptacles and collection, and
support its implementation through promotion by public
health inspectors.
Although being the most promising method for
conservation of natural resources only 48.3% of the
residents recycle waste generated in their houses (Figure
5). The materials recycled largely comprise both paper
and plastic bags and containers, and soap. On the other
hand, because the recycling industry is still in its infancy
compared to the manufacturing, the compensation for
recyclable materials fluctuates a lot making it a less
attractive venture for these residents.
When the residents were asked further about the benefits
they derive from recycling, their responses as follows
(Table 6).
Perceptions on Solid waste Collection and disposal
The waste management system of Sakubva suburb of
Mutare involves generation, storage, collection and
disposal. The residents reported a high level of
dissatisfaction with the council when it comes to solid
waste collection and disposal. More than 85.0% of the
respondents have reported a poor to very poor
performance by the council in this regard (Figure 7).
Households reported that they do not get support for
accessing bins and have to buy these themselves.
TARSC, (2010) also reported similar findings for Mutare
residents in a study they conducted. One in eight
households had access to bins as these are usually
65.0%
48.3%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
No (n=39) Yes (n=21)

Figure 6. Residents’ responses on quality of solid waste disposal by council
Figure 7. Residents’ responses on quality of solid waste disposal by civic organizations and NGOs
obtained when the civic organizations and NGOs do their
clean-up campaigns in the area while a very small
proportion indicated they get bins elsewhere (Figure 8).
Slightly above 30.0% of the households rated satisfactory
to excellent the quality of solid waste disposal done by
civic organizations and NGOs. The significance of the
private sector was poorly rated as most of the residents
reported that they have not seen any private players
(more than 65.0% - Don’t know) in solid waste disposal in
their area (Figure 9). This could be a reflection of the
council not being proactive in looking for partners to
collaborate with in solid waste management or the
partners are just not interested in waste disposal.
Majority of the respondents use black plastic paper bins
and hard plastic bins for waste collection at household
level (see, Plate 3). However, the council does not
provide these receptacles to the residents. Some of the
receptacles used include sacks, cardboard boxes,
mealie-meal plastics and metal tins. In an earlier study by
Muchandiona, (2013) he found that the coverage of
receptacles for all cities was above 50.0%. Receptacles
are important for successful recycling programs because
they enable separation and sorting of different types of
waste. However, the available receptacles were not even
enough for storing unsorted waste and different types of
solid waste
Zimbabwe does not have an overall waste act that
provides the essential legal basis for a consolidated
waste management strategy in the country. However,
there is a comprehensive legal framework that guides
waste management in both urban and rural areas. A
number of Acts of Parliament and regulations deal
directly and indirectly with environmental pollution in
0.0
0.0
13.3
56.7
26.7
3.3
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Excellent
Good
Satifactory
Poor
VeryPoor
Don’t Know
% of total househlds (n=60)
6.7
26.7
20.0
21.7
10.0
15.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Excellent
Good
Satifactory
Poor
VeryPoor
Don’t Know
% of total househlds (n=60)

Mutetwa et al. 151
(Source, Photo by Author, 2016)
Plate 3. Waste receptacles
Figure 5. Distribution of respondents on knowledge of
legislation
general and waste management in particular. A number
of ministries are involved in the administration of the Acts,
but the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
takes overall responsibility and accountability. In addition
to the Acts of Parliament and policies on waste
management most local authorities have by-laws which
they employ to effectively regulate activities in the areas
under their jurisdiction.
Data obtained by the researcher revealed that out of the
60 respondents 83.3% of the respondents were not
aware of the regulations that governs solid waste
disposal (Figure 5). However, all the respondents who
are aware of the regulatory legislation to do with solid
waste disposal none of them gave mention of any act
suggesting that they only head of the existence of these
regulations but do not know what it says.
Efficiency Levels Of Council’s Solid Waste
Management
Solid waste collection and disposal system
The frequency and regularity of waste collection vary
greatly in the town of Mutare. The refuse collection
schedule shows that solid waste is collected daily in
Sakubva. However, the senior hygiene officer reported
that some of the schedules are not being met as the
council is suffering from a lot challenges. Where no
benefit from any formal waste collection service reaches
the residents the communities experience high levels of
illegal dumping and land pollution from the use of
unsustainable practices as a way of disposing waste.
These findings also concur with Masocha (2004) who
reported that residents resort to illegal dumping and to
16.7%
83.3%
Aware of legislation Not aware of legislation

Table 6. Refuse equipment for solid waste management.
Equipment Functional No-functional Ideal
Refuse compactor
Front-end-loader
Tractor and trailer
Dozer
Landfill compactor
Skip bins
Skip trucks
Weighbridge
Incinerator
Tipper trucks
1
1
1
1
0
10
0
0
1
1
2
1
-
1
0
20
0
0
0
3
3
1
2
1
1
30
2
1
1
5
Table 7. Household to Staff ratio and staff break down proportions for urban councils
(Source, Muchandiona, 2013)
burning of refuse when the council failed to collect refuse.
Burning is not allowed as it causes further environmental
pollution. The report by the senior hygiene officer is in
agreement with Bartone, (2000) who argued that to
improve solid waste management, there is need to
enforce laws against illegal dumping and use the crude
dumping system to dispose of their solid waste. This is
whereby waste is tipped into a dump, which has very little
on-site management. Open waste dumps are prime
breeding sites for houseflies, rodents, mosquitoes, and
other vectors of communicable diseases, such as fever,
dysentery, diarrhoea, cholera and malaria (Musademba
et al., 2011). Illegal dumping is a criminal offence which
can attract a fine from the Environmental Management
Authority but residents dump their refuse at night. This
has forced residents to use cardboard boxes and mealie-
meal plastics which quickly filled up and overspill
resulting in illegal burning and open space dumping. The
use of plastic papers for bins has proved to be ineffective
in solid waste management. Although they are cheap and
easily available to the residents and light to lift up, they
are not strong to hold waste or scrap metal and bottle

Mutetwa et al. 153
hence tear off easily. Plastic container/bins are the best
option for household solid waste because of their
durability.
The municipal crew when they collect the waste from
residents they take it to the landfill. The estimated
quantity of waste collected per day is 30truckloads of
5.88 tonnes waste. Thus on average the crew collects
1.500 tonnes of waste per month according the hygiene
officer. At the landfill bulldozers and front-end loaders are
used to manage the waste by spreading it. Since not all
waste is collected from the residents when it should, the
efficiency of council is not at its best. This was reported to
be attributed to poor performance of the town system,
weak financial resource, which forces the municipal to
rely on inadequate vehicles and fail to invest in solid
waste infrastructure. In another study by Muchandiona
(2013), he noted that the collection efficiency of municipal
solid waste for Mutare urban council was 90.0%.
However, the mean for the Zimbabwean urban councils
of 63.9%, was low when compared to the mean for the
world cities of 89.0% (UN Habitat, 2010). This shows that
Zimbabwean urban councils were operating below the
performance of international cities.
3.2.2 Major constraints
Since 1998, when the national economy started to falter,
the Municipality of Mutare has encountered a number of
challenges including shortages of fuel, equipment,
inadequate funds and insufficient labor force, which
hamper efficient delivery solid waste management
service. The prevailing unstable macro-economic
environment characterized by critical shortages of foreign
currency and political instability has resulted in poor
performance of the municipal waste management
systems throughout the country.
Shortage of adequate refuse trucks
There is lack of adequate and appropriate refuse trucks,
which suit the high density nature of the waste produced
in the suburb. The municipal has over time failed to
achieve satisfactory waste collection level, which are met
in other areas partly because of its reliance on
inadequate trucks. The shortage of adequate vehicles
also results in over use of those trucks that are currently
functional resulting in high wear and tear, which are
major causes of frequent breakdowns.
Table 6 presents the results of the refuse equipment.
Serious shortage of landfill equipment against the ideal
number of landfill equipment is also leading to poor
sanitary disposal of waste. The reason why the councils
use open dumpsites and fail to bury refuse on daily basis
in open dumpsites could be attributed to lack of landfill
equipment. Mudzengerere and Chigwenya (2012) and
Muchandiona, (2013) have also reported that this is a
problem facing other towns in the country. Blight and
Mbande (1996) also highlighted the issue of equipment
shortage and the use of old and inappropriate machinery
which is inefficiency in the management of waste in many
cities in developing countries. With these shortages,
there was need to engage private players to assist in the
collection of refuse.
Inadequate human resource
The critical shortage of sufficient personnel is also a
major hindrance to the provision of a sustainable solid
waste management system in the town. Although at the
managerial level, the municipal has adequate skilled
personnel who have relevant professional qualifications,
the number of staff at the operational level is grossly
inadequate. Currently, people who are employed in the
waste management division of the council are 112
against a requirement of 225 people and only 4people
work at the municipal dump.
A study was done by Muchandiona, (2013) on the
adequacy of manpower for solid waste management in
the Zimbabwe.Table 8 presents four parameters;
Households to Staff Ratio, Top management to Total staff
Ratio, Middle management to Total staff Ratio and
Labourers to Total staff Ratio.
The mean Households to Staff ratio for the 22 urban
councils was 911 and ranged from 208 to 7,690 as
shown in Table 7. The wide range was due to Epworth
which had only 6 workers to deal with solid waste
management. The reason why Epworth had few workers
was that it was not collecting refuse in residential areas.
According to (Henderson, 2005) the international
standard for Household to Staff ratio is between 150 to
200. Comparing the international standards with the
Zimbabwean performance range of 208 to 7690, it
showed that Zimbabwe had a serious shortage of refuse
manpower. Similar studies in South Africa by DEAT
(2007) revealed that the average Household to Staff ratio
was 273. Comparing the South African average with the
Zimbabwean average of 911, it showed that South Africa
has a higher number of manpower than Zimbabwe.
Shortage of manpower in Zimbabwe was as a result
financial constrains. Table 7 also shows that the mean
ratio of Top management/ Total refuse staff is 6% and
ranged from 0 to 25%. Cities and municipalities had low
top management to staffing ratio in the range of 0.3 to
3%. High Top management to Total staff ratio was
common for urban towns. According to (Henderson,
2005) the optimum refuse staff break down is 10% Top
management to Total staff ratio. Comparing the
international best practice with the Zimbabwean Top
management to Total refuse ratio of 6% it shows that
Zimbabwean urban councils did not have adequate top
management man power. Table 8 also showed that the
average Middle management to Total staff ratio is 4%

and Laborers to Total refuse staff is 90%. According to
Henderson (2005) the optimum staff breakdown is 25%
for Middle management and 65% for Laborers. All the
urban councils failed to reach the optimum international
best practice of 25% for Middle management to Total
refuse staff. The Laborers to Total refuse staff have an
average of 90% for Zimbabwean urban councils which
were above the international best practice. This implied
that the composition of manpower in Zimbabwe had a
bias towards laborers than the managerial level.
Impact Of Solid Waste To Council
Available literature (Kungnulskiti, 1990; Nath et al., 1991;
Satterthwaite, 1993; Hunt, 1996;Khan and Mudassir,
1996; Eerd, 1997) shows that the direct handling of
wastes can result in various infections and diseases and
the worst affected are waste workers. In Zimbabwe as
elsewhere in the developing world, it is difficult to quantify
the health impacts of solid waste disposal because to
date few studies have attempted to directly link disease
outbreaks to unsanitary waste disposal. Nonetheless,
some studies (e.g. Tevera et al., 2002) have highlighted
that the failure by urban authorities to properly dispose of
tonnes of solid waste undermine public health and the
urban poor are the most vulnerable. In this study, the
council has managed to get some economic benefits of
USD$102,000.00 for the month of February 2016 alone.
This suggests if solid waste disposal can be managed
proficiently it can generate lots of monies for the council
and also those who may want to participate as well.
Social benefits derived from solid waste management
include improvement of quality of life, reduced disease
vectors and suppressing and preventing of disease
outbreaks among others.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study revealed that solid waste quantities are ever
increasing, but the problem faced by Mutare City Council
to render effective and consistent solid waste collection
and disposal services in Sakubva remains unabated. The
main challenge identified included lack of cooperation
and awareness by some residents, financial constraints,
and poor enforcement of laws by the authorities. The
study which was carried out in Zimbabwe on challenges
of solid waste management systems came up with the
following conclusions:
Frequency of solid waste collection in residential
areas of Sakubva high density suburb: Poor refuse
coverage and collection in Sakubva was caused by
inadequate equipment as the existing equipment was far
from reaching the optimum levels. Inadequate human
resources in the management of waste is also a major
contributor of poor refuse collection services, as the
figures were far from international best practices. Poor
refuse coverage and Collection efficiency was also poor
because of lack of proper receptacles.
Systems used by residents in solid waste disposal:
The disposal of solid waste was far from being
environmentally sustainable and most residents were
using illegal open dumps, burning and burying of waste.
Challenges in recycling were as a result of no separation
of waste at source as evidenced by a critical shortage of
receptacles, recycling reduce waste.
Perception of residents on the current solid waste
management by Mutare City: Council is not collecting
waste as often as it should resulting in illegal dumps.
Communication between council and residents is poor.
Recommendations
1. The councils should increase equipment to meet
the capacity of solid waste collection and disposal.
2. Councils should increase refuse human
resources to optimum levels.
3. Councils should increase the number of proper
receptacles to cover all areas.
4. Council should encourage recycling, through
supplying residents with adequate receptacles, public
campaigns and involving users in the planning and
collection of waste.
5. Council is encouraged to promote reuse, recycle,
compost, or recover materials for use as direct or indirect
inputs to new products
6. Council should improve interaction with residents
so that their efforts of waste management are clearly
understood by residents. This can be done by increasing
the visibility of the Public Health officers visiting the
residents
7. Council to increase residents’ participation in
solid waste management.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Our gratitude also goes to the Mr and Mrs Mafume for
funding this research. We wish to extend many thanks to
Mr T. Masaka for his assistance in the development of
this paper.
REFERENCES
Akkucuk U (2016). Handbook of research on waste
management techniques for sustainability, IGI Global,
U.S.A.
Bartone CR (2000), Strategies for Improving Municipal
Solid Waste Management: Lessons from a Decade of
WorldBank lending. Regional Conference ‘Partnership
in Municipal Solid Waste Management, Cairo, 10-12
April 2000. World Bank, Washington, DC, USA.

Mutetwa et al. 155
Blight GE, Mbande CM (1996), Some Problems of Waste
Management in
Developing Countries. Journal of Solid Waste
Technology and Management 23, no. 1, February, 19-
27.
DEAT (2007) Assessment of the Status of Waste
Service Delivery and Capacity at the Local Government
Level. Department of Environmental Affairs and
Tourism.
Eerd M (1997). Occupational Health Aspects of Waste
Collection and Recycling: An Inventory Study in India,
UWEP Working Documents 4 – Part II, Gouda,Waste,
Calcutta.
Government of Zimbabwe (2007) Environmental
management (Effluent and Solid Waste Disposal)
Regulations 2007. Harare, Government printers.
Henderson CR. (2005) Handbook of Solid Waste
Management, McGraw Hill.
Hester RE, Harrison RM. (2002) Environmental and
Health Impact of Solid Waste Management Practices,
Cambridge, UK.
Hunt C (1996). Waste Pickers in India: The occupation
and its Health Risks, Environment and Urbanization,
8(2): 111-118
Khan I, Mudassir SM (1996). Enviromental Impact of
urban sanitary landfills. ITPI Journal, (14): 17-22.
Kumar CR (2008). Research Methodology, APH Learning
Private Corporation, New Delhi, India
Kungnulskiti N (1990). Public Health Aspects of a Solid
Waste Scavengers Community in Thailand, Waste
management and Research, 8 (2): 167-171.
Makwara E, Magudu S (2013). Confronting the Reckless
gambling with people’s health and lives, Urban solid
waste management in Zimbabwe, Europian journal of
sustainable development (2):1 67-98.
Mangizvo R (2010). Illegal Dumping of Solid Waste in the
Alleys in the Central Business District of Gweru,
Zimbabwe Journal of Sustainable Development in
Africa, (12):2, 110-123.
Manyanhaire I, Sango I (2009). Analysis of Domestic
Solid Waste Management in the Town of Chinhoyi.
Masocha M (2004) Solid Waste Disposal in Victoria Falls
Town: Spatial Dynamics, Environmental Impacts,
Health Threats and Social-Economic Benefits.
Geography and Environmental Science. Harare,
University of Zimbabwe.
Medina M (2010). Scavengers Cooperatives in Asia and
Latin America :Resources , Conservation and
Recycling.
Mohee R, Simelani T (2015). Future directions of
municipal solid waste management in Africa, African
Institute of South Africa, Pretoria South Africa.
Muchandiona A (2013). Challenges and Opportunities in
Solid Waste Management in Zimbabwe’s Urban
Councils. MSc thesis, University of Zimbabwe
Mudzengerere FH, Chigwenya A (2012) Waste
Management in Bulawayo City Council in Zimbabwe: in
Search of Sustainable Waste Management in the City
Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, (14):1.
Musademba D, Musiyandaka S, Muzinda A,
Nhemachena B, Jambwa D. (2011) Municipality Solid
Waste (MSW) Management Challenges of Chinhoyi
Town in Zimbabwe: Opportunities of Waste Reduction
and Recycling Journal ofSustainable Development in
Africa, 13 .2.
Nath KJ, Chakrabarty I, Kahali D (1991). Socio-economic
and Health Aspects of Recycling of Urban Solid Waste
Through Scavenging, 1987 – 1991, All India Institute of
Hygiene and Public Health, Department of Sanitary
Engineering, Calcutta.
Ogwueleka T (2009). Municipal Solid Waste
Characteristics and Management in Nigeria, Abuja:
University of Abuja.
Satterthwaite D (1993). The Impact on Health of Urban
Environments, Environment and Urbanization, (5):107-
113.
Senkoro H (2003) Solid Waste Management in Africa. A
WHO/AFRO Perspective. CWR
Workshop on Solid Waste Collection that Benefits the
Urban Poor. Dares Salaam.
Sigauke E (2007). Analysis of domestic solid waste
management system: A case of Sakubva high density
surburb in the city of Mutare, Manicaland Province,
Mutare, Africa University.
TARSC CFH (2010). Assessment of Solid Waste
Management in Three Local Authorities in Zimbabwe.
Training and Research Support Centre and Civic
Forum on Housing.
Tevera D, Conyers D, Matovu D (2003) Solid Waste
Management Practices in Eastern and Southern Africa:
The Challenges and New Innovations in Urban Solid
Waste Management. Intenational Development
Research Centre, Canada.
Tevera D, Chimhowu, N, Chimbetete G Stambiso (2002).
Urban Solid Waste Management in Zimbabwe, In
Conyers D, Matovu G, Tevera D. (eds) The Challenges
and New Innovations in Urban Solid Waste
Management: Issues and Policy Options, Working
Policy Document, MDP/IDRC, Harare.
Un Habitat (2010). Solid Waste Management in the
World’s Cities Water and Sanitation
in the World’s Cities, United Nations Human
Settlements Programme, London • Washington, DC
Accepted 19 July, 2016.
Citation: Mafume PN, Zendera W, Mutetwa M, Musimbo N
(2016). Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a
case study of Sakubva high density suburb. Journal of
Environment and Waste Management, 3(2): 142-155.
Copyright: © 2016 Mutetwa et al. This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution,
and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author
and source are cited.

Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a case study of Sakubva high density suburb

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Similar to Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a case study of Sakubva high density suburb

More from Premier Publishers

Recently uploaded

In this document

Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a case study of Sakubva high density suburb