COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

MSc (Environmental Management)
A RESEARCH PROPOSAL BY: Ari Vlastos

Using a QR code waste stream characterisation, a

smartphone application, and a website to implement
a recycling system in a high rise residential
apartment block

Candidate: Mr Argiris Vlastos

Supervisor: Mrs Tracey McKay

Student no.: 42063159

Contact Details: 071 1940 406
ari.vlastos@gmail.com
I declare that the work I am submitting for assessment contains no section
copied in whole or in part from any other source unless explicitly identified in
quotation marks and with detailed, complete and accurate referencing.

..
Argiris Vlastos

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

BACKGROUND / RATIONALE...................................................................................1

2.

RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES.......................................................................2

3.

4.

2.1

Study aim.....................................................................................................................2

2.2

Scope of the study.......................................................................................................4

PRELIMINARY LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................4

3.1

Introduction.................................................................................................................4

3.2

Methods and techniques for characterising the waste stream.....................................5

3.3

The use of the ICT technologies in waste management and recycling.......................5

3.4

Rates of recycling........................................................................................................7

3.5

Motivating and demotivating factors to recycling.......................................................7

3.6

Household solid waste stream methodologies.............................................................9

3.7

South African Experience..........................................................................................10

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY........................................................11

4.1
4.2.2.

Research design.........................................................................................................11
Data collection.......................................................................................................14

4.2

Costs..........................................................................................................................14

4.3

Description of the Study Area...................................................................................15

4.4

Limitations of the study.............................................................................................16

4.5

Ethical considerations................................................................................................17

5.

APPENDIX A: CONSISTENCY MATRIX.................................................................18

6.

REFERENCES...............................................................................................................19

1.

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................1

2.

RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES.......................................................................2

3.

2.1

Study aim....................................................................................................................2

2.2

Scope of the study......................................................................................................4

PRELIMINARY LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................4

3.1

Introduction...............................................................................................................4

3.2

Methods and techniques for characterising the waste stream..............................5

4.

3.3

The use of the ICT technologies in waste management and recycling.................5

3.4

Rates of recycling.......................................................................................................7

3.5

Motivating and demotivating factors to recycling..................................................7

3.6

Household solid waste stream methodologies.........................................................9

3.7

South African Experience.......................................................................................10

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY........................................................11

4.1

Research design........................................................................................................11

4.2

Methodology.............................................................................................................11

4.2.2.

Data collection......................................................................................................12

4.3

Permissible recyclables............................................................................................13

4.4

Costs..........................................................................................................................14

4.5

Description of the Study Area.................................................................................14

4.6

Limitations of the study..........................................................................................16

4.7

Ethical considerations.............................................................................................16

5.

APPENDIX A: CONSISTENCY MATRIX.................................................................18

6.

REFERENCES...............................................................................................................19

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 15.1: High-level study methodology...............................................................................17
Table 5.2: Tabulation of costs of project...................................................................................19
Figure 4.1: Waste composition for general waste, 2011 (% by mass), for South Africa (DEA,
2012)...........................................................................................................................................6
Figure 5.1: Location of Glendower Place apartment block, Edenvale, Ekurhuleni..................14
Figure 5.2: Research design......................................................................................................15
Figure 5.3: Project data flow.....................................................................................................16
Figure 5.4: Recycling system waste flow schema....................................................................18
4

1. INTRODUCTIONBACKGROUND / RATIONALE
Waste management is increasingly considered as a challenge of primary importance on a
global scale (Catania & Ventura, 2014; Xevgenos, Papadaskalopoulou, Panaretou,
Moustakas, & Malamis, 2015).

Whilst waste is an unavoidable by-product of human

activities, increasing urbanisation and population together with improved living standards,
has resulted in increased solid waste generation (Mogotsi, 2008; Samah et al., 2013). By
2020, more than 50% of the sub-Saharan population will live in urban centres, leading to
increases in per-capita waste production rates (Simelane & Mohee, 2012).
Municipal solid waste quantities are growing faster than the economy in many cities (DEA,
2012). South Africa generated around 19 million tons of municipal waste in 2011, 25% of
which were recyclables such as glass, paper, tins and plastics, but recycling rates are very low
(Oelofse, 2012). This is partly because separation at source is a new concept in South Africa
and is not widespread at present (CSIR, 2011; DEA, 2012). Despite waste management
legislation, with important recycling and composting components, a lack of awareness of and
compliance with these means practically that their effect is minimal (Sehlabi & McKay,
2016).
It is only recently that the need to collect recyclables separately became a requirement with
the promulgation of the Waste Act (No. 59 of 2008) (CSIR, 2011, p. 6; Oelofse, 2012). The
problem in South Africa is compounded by municipalities which face financial and
management difficulties, as well as challenging labour conditions (Mogotsi, 2008; CSIR,
2011).
In terms of organised collection of recyclables, worldwide household waste collection
systems vary from no organised collection at all, to the collection of 10 separated recyclables
at the doorstep in multi-compartment vehicles (Dahln and Lagerkvist, 2010). But for South
Africa most recyclable solid waste usually ends up in landfills (DEA, 2012; Sehlabi &
McKay, 2016). Consequently, a large portion of recyclables are still reaching landfills,
representing the loss of a resource to the recycling industry as well as diminishing premium
landfill capacity. There is very little residential source-separation and organised collection of
recyclable wastes and in 2010 only 3.3% of the countrys urban population regularly recycled
their waste (CSIR, 2011; Oelofse, 2012; EMM, 2015).

Various solutions have been proposed, such as, the involvement of and partnership with the
private sector to provide kerb side collection services, and the establishing of drop-off and
buy-back centres in strategic locations to allow community members to deliver recyclables
(CSIR, 2011). Large-scale recycling facilities such as that in Kraaifontein which feature a
mechanised materials recovery facility (MRF) which can sort 100 tonnes/day require a steady
flow of source-separated wastes to be feasible (SAICE, 2012). The situation is analogous in
other developing states, by way of two examples. In Nairobi, efforts to reduce, reuse and
recycle have only been partially successful, with increasing volumes of waste reaching
landfills (Kipngetich, 2014). Additionally, in Douala, Cameroon, processing capacity cannot
meet rapidly increasing municipal solid waste levels, resulting in both environmental and
human health hazards (McKay, Mbanda, & Lawton, 2015).
The intention of this study is to leverage readily available technologies, namely a simple QR
code methodology, to gather waste stream data, together with a user smartphone application
and website, to implement a reactive recycling system in a residential apartment block, with
the greater goal of achieving increased recycling participation and diversion of recyclable
wastes from landfill.
As the IoT (Internet of Things) becomes more and more established, the concept of the smart
city, where thewith an increasing number of connected devices capable of acquiring
environmental data, will allow sophisticated applications to manage resources, meet quality
of service demands, and ultimately improve citizens quality of life (Catania & Ventura, 2014;
Poncela et al., 2014).
It is argued here that this is also possible within the sphere of waste management. In South
Africa, opportunities exist to encourage user participation and recycling rates using
smartphone applications and other ICTs (Information and Communications Technology).
Sustainability goals including cost recovery and design of recycling facilities to meet user
needs can be greatly enhanced by such user participation enabled by ICTs (Kipngetich, 2014).
2. RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

2.1 Study aim

The overall aim of this study is to implement a formal recycling in an apartment complex and
make it part of residents daily activities. The innovation in the proposed approach will be in
leveraging an ICT component (website, smartphone app, QR code quantification) to
2

quantify the waste stream and achieve as high a diversion rate (of recyclables from landfill)
as possible. In order to achieve this, long-term behavioural changes around the daily act of
disposing of solid wastes need to be effected. The ideal situation would be where recycling is
as simple and convenient as possible. Whilst the notion of a recycling system in the context
of an apartment block is in itself simplistic, getting people to expend effort on sourceseparation as new practise, is not likely to be as simple. It is hoped that the results of the
study will provide practically valuable input to facilitate the implementation of efficacious
recycling systems in other apartment complexes and aggregated living spaces.
2.1.1 Objectives
The aim of this study will be realised through the following objectives:

Test a QR code methodology for waste stream characterisation

Determine the quantities of general waste and recyclables produced in an apartment

complex, before and after recycling system implementation

Develop a smartphone application for residents to interface with the recycling system

and its managers, in terms of tracking performance and logging issues

Use feedback from the website and smartphone application to increase the source-

sorting ratio
Set up a website for the apartment complex, with provision for reporting on the waste
management and recycling system in particular, as well as a blog for informing
residents

2.1.2 Research questions

1. How much waste does a typical high-rise household produce on a daily/weekly basis
(recyclables and non-recyclables) both before and after a QR code, website and
smartphone app intervention?
2. What is the ratio of waste generated by commercial units to that of residential units?
3. Does QR code, website and smartphone app intervention increase the recycling rates
of paper, plastic, metal and glass?
4. Can a QR code, website and smartphone app intervention generate precise waste
stream data?
5. What are the prevailing attitudes of residents/shops with respect to recycling and a
QR code, website and smartphone app recycling intervention?
6. Does QR code, website and smartphone app intervention increase source-sorting
ratios?

7. What are the realised setup and operating costs of the QR code, website and
smartphone app intervention?
2.1.3 Hypothesis
Whilst not rigorous in the statistical sense, the following predictions are made in the study:
(1) The QR code method will be effective in generating detailed waste stream data for the
apartment complex, but is suitable for relatively short periods of time due to the timeconsuming nature of the measurement process.
(2) Methodological difficulties encountered (QR code waste stream characterisation) will
lead to a refinement of the process for subsequent applications.
(3) Survey data from residents will corroborate findings in the literature for successful
adoption of recycling practises in an apartment-complex setting.
(4) The source-sorting ratio will increase after introduction of the website and smartphone
application post- recycling system implementation.

2.2 Scope of the study

The study is limited to the recycling of plastic, paper, glass and metals. Organic wastes
including compostables will not be quantified. Recyclables still remaining in residual
(unsorted) wastes after sorting will also not be determined. Shop tenants occupying the two
basement levels will be included in Phases II and III of the study.
3. PRELIMINARY LITERATURE REVIEW

3.1 Introduction
Human activities of any kind imply the generation of waste and, thus, a fundamental
environmental issue is how to identify and manage waste streams (Twardowska, 2004).
Countries in the EU are moving away from landfilling and trends such as Waste-to-Energy
(WtE) (such as incineration, pyrolysis, anaerobic digestion) and recovery (including
recycling) are becoming predominant. Countries such as Germany, Italy and Belgium now
dispose of less than 20% of solid wastes in landfills (DST, 2014). Recycling has gained
increasing attention as a means of mitigating environmental damage since it offers one of
the most sensible solutions both economically and ecologically for managing waste (Omran,
Mahmood, Abdul Aziz & Robinson, 2009:276). However, all successful waste management
4

programmes requires accurate data. This includes both the type and quantity of waste
generated by a community. Adequate data informs the design of systems from the level of
apartment blocks and small communities, all the way to municipal waste management
systems (Twardowska, 2004; Kamara, 2006; Pollard, Popp, Gbur & Cleaveland, 2007; Taiwo,
2009; Dahln and Lagerkvist, 2010; Mbeng, Nwokedi, 2011; Tudor and Fairweather, 2011;
Late and Mule, 2012; Samah et al., 2013). With data, decisions can be made about facilities
and equipment, and targets set for waste prevention and reduction, as well as providing
baseline data against which to assess whether goals and targets were achieved (EPA, 1995).
Globally, the data available are extremely limited, including within the USA and the EU,
particularly with regard to long-term waste stream changes and trends (Twardowska & Allen,
2004). Similarly, a pervasive problem in South Africa is that there is little information on the
types of wastes being generated throughout the economic sectors, hindering decision making
around effective waste management systems which can meet targets (DEAT, 2005; Nwokedi,
2011; DEA, 2012; Simelane & Mohee, 2012).

3.2 Methods and techniques for characterising the waste stream

Waste management data collection relies on various methodologies and
techniques. Modelling techniques are based on generic waste generation
rates, are inexpensive, but are less accurate and only provide a general
idea of waste volume and type.

Physical separation techniques whilst

being more accurate are more expensive and time consuming. These can
be useful for estimating a communitys waste profile, and include
quartering, block and grid methods. Direct measurement techniques are
capable of generating highly accurate data describing the waste stream.
The drawbacks, however, are that these techniques can be time
consuming and costly compared with other methods.

A balance,

therefore, needs to be found between the cost (and time) required to

undertake the waste characterisation and the precision required for the
waste system being considered (EPA, 1995).

3.3 The use of the ICT technologies in waste management and recycling
The EPA (1995) links barcode monitoring of wastes with weight-based charging systems
where users are billed according to how much of each waste type they release into the waste
5

stream. Primary advantages include accuracy, long-term cost-efficiency, and capacity to

monitor waste collection crews. Primary disadvantages include high initial/capital costs, and
technical issues around implementation (EPA, 1995). An example implementation is found
in LAWA (2007), primarily for managing domestic and commercial waste collection. Waste
collection crews scan each bin during collection using a handheld scanner, recording
recycling participation, proof of collection, and any damage to the bin.

Data can then be

analysed and reported on, giving feedback to City Council to adjust their campaign targets, as
well as issuing letters to householders depending on the issue.
Catania and Ventura (2014) employ a QR code and RFID (Radio-Frequency Identification)
sensor on refuse bins, where authenticated users scan QR codes via a smartphone application
to log disposal events, allowing comparison between users and incentives to encourage
system usage. The use of proximity sensors in the lids and weight sensors inside of refuse
bins also allows users to become consumers of information, since they have access to
information such as bin capacity and status, and material types, encouraging recycling
behaviours (Catania & Ventura, 2014). Medvedev, Fedchenkov, Zaslavsky, Anagnostopoulos
and Khoruzhnikov (2015) developed a model for intelligent transportation systems, allowing
for dynamic route optimisation, due to data collected by sensors, networked surveillance
cameras, and actuators. Drivers receive optimised route information and can also report
issues by submitting photos (such as blocked bins), via a smartphone application, which also
allows for fleet management. Kipngetich (2014) asserts that smartphones are rapidly
becoming the central device in peoples daily affairs.

The researchers developed a

smartphone application to assist in effective solid waste management in Kenya. The featureset included the ability to report and view bins on a map, report on areas which are polluted,
and search for nearby recyclers.
When used in scientific studies, the use of smartphones, termed M-participation by Erti
(2013), allows for a portable solution where diverse audiences can be reached at times
convenient to the end-user, including collection and analysis of data which would otherwise
be cost-prohibitive (UKISL, 2015). Whilst smartphone apps are ubiquitous, an important
technical challenge is to provide apps which are compatible cross-platform (iOS, Android,
Windows Mobile), to ensure the widest inclusivity for the potential user (Kipngetich, 2014;
UKISL, 2015). Even in relatively well-developed states such as the UK, the provision of
smartphone apps to members of the public to manage recycling systems is still in limited use
(UKISL, 2015). A decisive contributing factor in this regard is that the development of a
6

smartphone app can be very costly and time consuming. As such, UKISL recommend the
functionality of the app be kept simple by functionally serving only the most important
features as identified during project design.

Maputo, Mozambique, has experienced

significantly increased demand for public services with increase in urban core and peripheral
settlements -densities (Barroca, 2014). The lack of public infrastructure has initiated the
development of an ICT platform, including smartphones and the internet. This has allowed
for the collection and organisation of detailed, real-time information from citizens, whereby
municipal authorities can monitor operations through specific indicators, and lower reaction
times where service failures occur (Barroca, 2014).
Whilst QR codes as a means for encoding information enjoy near ubiquitous smartphone
support compared with NFC (Near Field Communication) (Catania & Ventura, 2014), the
RFID remains a viable alternative to developing intelligent systems. Chang and Pires (2015)
report on an intelligent pay-as-you-throw systems, promoting waste reduction and reducing
collection costs, based on the use of RFID tags placed inside waste bins, allowing
smartphones/other devices to acquire bin information and send it to a database server for
analysis and reporting. RFIDs are more expensive, however from around $25 depending on
several factors and are only compatible with selective devices, adding system cost (Roberti,
2013), compared with QR codes with negligible cost.

3.4 Rates of recycling

Knowing the volume and type of waste entering the waste stream is the starting point for any
waste management system. The rate of recycling is taken as the recovered material over the
potential recyclable material, and is one of the key dimensions when evaluating effectiveness
of a recycling programme (Dahln & Lagerkvist, 2010). Across six municipalities in Sweden,
source-sorting ratios (the ratio of source-sorted materials to sum of mass of sorted and
unsorted materials collected) varied widely: between 58% and 22% (Dahln & Lagerkvist,
2010). Whilst the source-separation of recyclables and organics in Sweden was responsible
for diverting 33% of total waste from landfill or incineration, an estimated 80% of the total
waste stream could be diverted with optimised source-separation (la Cour Jansen and
Aspegren, 2011). A further comparison is offered in the city of Flanders, Belgium, which
achieved a 95% diversion rate in 2007, 49% of which were recyclables (Allen, 2012).
Recycling rates are not taken in isolation when assessing system performance. For example,
certain recyclables have more significant environmental profiles than others per unit mass.
7

Bernstad et al. (2011) found that 60% of the environmental benefits from theorised optimal
source separation could be achieved through plastic and metal packaging alone.

3.5 Motivating and demotivating factors to recycling

Taking the example of Malaysia, despite significant efforts, recycling has not been adopted
universally, with over 100 million tonnes of solid waste alone of recyclable waste not being
recycled (Omran et al., 2009). Several studies (Pollard et al., 2007; Omran et al., 2009;
Taiwo, 2009; Dahln & Lagerkvist, 2010; Abdelnaser, Mahmood & Read, 2011; Samah et al.,
2013) focus on or have integrated into their design a consideration of the factors which
facilitate or act as barriers to recycling practises. A knowledge of these often illuminate the
types of issues which need to be taken into account in interpreting quantitative waste stream
data, as well as in designing recycling-intensive waste management systems and maximising
their performance.
3.5.1

Factors and trends affecting the household solid waste stream composition

At the municipal level, differences in residential waste stream composition are affected by
many factors including socio-economics, extent and type of industry, geographic location,
climate, consumption levels, collection systems, population density, levels of recycling,
legislative and regulatory structures, and attitudes towards waste management and recycling
(Taiwo, 2009). Significant variation in the waste stream of apartment complexes, in
particular, was found to be linked primarily to economic influences, the keeping of pets (for
example cat litter), and seasonal variation (Pollard, 2007). Factors affecting generation rates
are mostly caused by demographic factors, according to Samah et al. (2013). The outputs and
changes in outputs of recycling systems in particular can be attributed to three categories:
changes in choice in private consumption, changes in product design (esp. packaging of
product), and changes in source-separating behaviour (Dahln & Lagerkvist, 2010). In turn,
some more than forty factors are reported by Dahln and Lagerkvist (2010) to influence
recycling behaviour, including but not limited to types of wastes collected, education
program, encouragement of composting, employment status of adults, residential structure
(household size, property type, urban/rural), frequency of pet ownership, and seasonal
variation.

3.5.2

Motivating factors

In Pulau Piang, Malaysia, recycling was highest in students and private-sector workers, and
in residents of apartment blocks and other aggregated dwellings, where respondents cited the
following as primary motivating factors: keeping the environment clean, conserving
resources for posterity, and saving landfill space (Abdelnaser, Mahmood and Read, 2011).
Amongst Malaysian homeowners in particular, Omran et al. (2009) found that newspapers
were the foremost source of information, where-again recyclers wanted to predominantly:
save landfill space, fulfil personal duty, and save environmental resources for posterity.
Dahln & Lagerkvist (2010) found that municipalities in Sweden that used weight-based
billing structures had significantly lower total waste amounts than those without. Ferrara and
Missios (2005) found that implementing garbage collection fees according to waste
categories (most for unsorted, least for sorted), as well as making certain recycling programs
mandatory, had a significant positive impact on recycling levels for households in Ontario,
Canada.
3.5.3

Demotivating factors

The extra effort involved in recycling-related activities, especially in correctly storing, sorting
or depositing recyclables, leads to complex and numerous factors hindering recycling
practises (Omran et al., 2009). Inconvenience was a common factor in all studies reviewed
which focused on barriers to recycling, stated explicitly (Omran et al., 2009; Abdelnaser et
al., 2011) or in equivalent terms, where recycling was troublesome and requiring of too
much time and effort (Ko & Poon, 2009). More specifically, respondents mentioned that
dropoff/collection centres were too far away, that there was no time, i.e. recycling was not
of sufficient priority, that facilities were inadequate, that very little recyclables were being
generated, or that there was insufficient space at home to store recyclables (Ko & Poon, 2009;
Omran et al, 2009; Abdenlaser et al., 2011).

3.6 Household solid waste stream methodologies

Traditional waste characterisation studies involve expensive and time consuming hand
sorting post disposal in waste bins or dumpsters. For example, Dahln & Lagerkvist (2010)
hand-sorted 200kg representative samples from waste truck samples/loads taken from regular
collection routes in several municipalities. The data was used to determine total household
waste (recyclable and residual) per municipality in kg/capita/year, using on weigh-bridge
data. Similarly, the Chicago Department of Environment (CDOE) hand-sorted 500 samples
9

between 90 and 136kg, per truckload along regular collection routes for two seasons, which
they used to formulate residential composition profiles (CDOE, 2010). Using a very similar
methodology, Cascadia (2010) found that for residential waste, over half of materials were
organics. Smaller scale studies have followed a similar pattern. Late & Mule (2010) selected
25 representative households to participate, provided waste bags, and collected these daily for
weighing and sorting. Samples of 1kg were obtained by mixing bag contents for processing,
and the researchers included a physico-chemical laboratory assay component to describe
parameters including pH, organic matter, and carbon content. Pollard et al. (2007) described
the waste stream of an apartment complex over two years, with sampling periods of eight
weeks per year. All units participated since residents consented upon signing their leases to
participate in the source-sorting / recycling programme. The researchers averaged the mass
of commonly encountered recyclable materials (e.g. PET bottles, Wal-Mart bags, steel and tin
cans), which they used to calculate whole-complex mass by counting all items disposed of in
the complex collectively. Mbeng et al. (2011) weighed general waste from 47 households
using a hand-scale, and then transported to a site for hand-sorting, including the use of a 10
mm screen for filtering out fines (one of the materials categories, amongst organics,
plastics, metal, paper, glass, textiles and miscellaneous). It was found that organic wastes
were high at 45%. The waste stream characterisation conducted by Nagawiecki (2009)
sampled 11 dumpsters across the University of Idaho. Paper was found to constitute 58% by
mass but only 16% by volume, for example, and since the university is billed by volume, the
resulting recommendations helped to focus campaign efforts on materials which could save
on significant waste removal costs. Wolf, Spitz, Olson, Zvodsk and Algharaibeh (2003)
weighed waste using an electronic scale, and estimates of 0.47 kg/person/day were obtained.
Samah et al. (2013) described the waste stream of a residential area in Balakong Area,
Malaysia, assessing 4,433 residents over a period of one month. Total mass per household as
well as proportion recyclables (paper, metal, plastic, glass, and other) were measured with an
electronic balance of 50 kg maximum capacity. Organic waste was shown to have the highest
composition, ranging from 50% to 77% by mass across the sampling areas.

3.7 South African Experience

According to Nxumalo (1999) recycling occurs for three primary reasons: altruistic
motivations (protection of the environment and related resources); economic factors (cost of
waste disposal versus reuse of recyclable materials) and legal dimensions (implying
mandatory recycling activity).

With this in mind Kamara (2006) looked at the factors

10

affecting household participation in domestic waste disposal and recycling in Tshwane.

Source-sorting rates ranged from 30% (Waterkloof, upper-income), to 15% (Sunnyside,
middle-income), to 0% (Mamelodi, low-income). Kamara (2006) showed a positive
relationship between education levels and recycling on a daily basis. Given this insight into
the South African context (but by no means restricted to this region), Kamara rightly points
that significantly improving participation across socio-economic communities is likely to fail
without environmental education. However, Kamara also argued that with waste disposal
having no cost for Mamelodi residents were was no financial incentive to recycle. This
dovetails with work done in the CCT (City of Cape Town) where residents in less affluent
areas said compensation in return for participation in recycling efforts is required (Nkala,
2012). Nwokedi (2011) studied recycling behaviour in 60 small and micro enterprises in
Johannesburg and found that 62% of businesses did not recycle at all. As with international
studies, lack of time, followed by lack of nearby facilities, were quoted as primary barriers
according to study respondents.
South Africa does not have a shortage of landfill space, a main driver behind recycling and
recovery in developed countries, and disposal costs are very low. However, the considerable
value lost R9.2 billion for a 60% diversion of domestic waste by 2025 (DST, 2014) especially in certain high-value waste streams, warrants a more aggressive approach to
recycling and recovery (Burger, 2014).
4. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

4.1 Research design

The proposed research is largely descriptive (waste stream quantification, attitudes of
residents towards recycling) versus explanatory in nature. Since the study includes the
testing of a data collection methodology (QR code waste stream quantification) on a
community, and the comparison thereafter of waste stream data after an intervention (a
recycling system facilitated by ICT mechanisms: website, smartphone application), a case
study will be used.
Case studies are the most widely used means of postgraduate research in South Africa (Rule
& John, 2007), and in the proposed research, will allow for detailed insights to be obtained
into a particular instance, allowing for generalisation to be explored to other instances in
similar and broader contexts. The case study allows for a depth of approach versus looking at
11

a number of sites more superficially, makes for a feasible/manageable study in terms of

resource and scope constraints, and importantly, serves as a platform for testing and
improvement of a means of acquiring at present very limited data on the solid waste stream of
aggregated, residential living spaces, as well as implementing an intervention and measuring
its effectiveness.
The proposed study will have components from both quantitative and qualitative traditions,
and will also embed other approaches into the case study, such as the survey. A summary of
the research process proposed is included below in Table 1.
4.1.1

Phase I: pilot study

In this phase the QR code method for quantifying the waste stream is tested. About a third of
residents will participate, termed purposive sampling by Leedy and Ormrod (2010). Daily
measurements will be taken and logged using a QR code-scanning smartphone application.

It is a case study

4.2 Methodology
Table 1: High-level study methodology
Phas

Sub-

Activity

Sampling

e
I

phase
community
QR code waste stream characterisation pilot study
No recycling
All residents
Ia
Source-sorting
Participating
Ib

Time
scale
5 weeks
5 weeks

residents

II

III

Whole-complex waste stream characterisation

General waste quantification (no

Residents

recycling)

shops

Recycling system implementation

Dual-stream recycling: (1) paper;
IIIa
IIIb

(2) glass, plastic, metal

Dual-stream
recycling
smartphone

app.

and

with
website

and

2 months

Residents

and

1 month

shops
Residents

and

1 month

shops

implemented

12

4.2.1

Phase I: pilot study

In this phase the QR code method for quantifying the waste stream is tested. About a third of
residents will participate, termed purposive sampling by Leedy and Ormrod (2010). Daily
measurements will be taken and logged using a QR code-scanning smartphone application.
4.2.2

Phase II: whole-complex characterisation

In Phase II, a baseline will be established for general waste quantities (no recycling),
including commercial / shop tenants and residents, using the QR code method as tested in
Phase I..
4.2.3

Phase III: recycling system implementation

In Phase III is the intervention phase, where the recycling system will be implemented to
divert

recyclables

from

landfill.

13

A
smartphone app and website will be introduced in the second sub-phase (Phase IIIb) to
quantify the effects of these on diversion rates.Figure 5.4 below is a summary of the waste
flow and quantification points representing the recycling system implementation.

The

differentiation point is that the smartphone application and website will only be introduced
after a month of the system implementation (see Table 5.1 above).
Residential residual waste measurements will be conducted daily, whilst the two
recyclables-streams will be taken as often as required (when recycling bins are full) or at
least once weekly.

14

4.2.4

15

Sampl
ing
Popp, Gbur and Cleaveland (2007) express that for a relatively small population size such as
that of an apartment complex, 100% sampling is effective. Convenience sampling will likely
result, however, because of the inherent difficulty in obtaining 100% survey participation.
The limited sample size will therefore be approximately representative, and will only serve as
a guide to quantified aspects of the resident profile and not lead to rigorous interpretation and
conclusion (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010).
4.2.2. Data collection
Survey data will be collected towards the end of Phases I, IIIa and IIIb via electronic or
conventional means, primarily assessing respondents attitudes toward and involvement in
recycling. The study is primarily empirical and quantitative, generating primary data on the
waste stream. Primary data will be collected via (see Figure 2 below): direct measurement
(of various waste types), survey (questionnaires given to residents/users of the recycling
system), smartphone application (electronic user feedback), and website (user forum). The
survey component is descriptive and quantitative, and is delivered via structured electronic

16

questionnaires (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010). The questions are evaluative, descriptive and
exploratory.
4.2.5

Waste stream quantification

The study is methodologically divided into phases of activity designed to achieve the study
objectives, and outlined in Table 5.1 below:

4.3 Costs
A summary of the costs incurred to run the study is included in Table 5.2 below.
Table 5.22: Tabulation of costs of project
Item

Description

Cost/unit(
R)

Qty

Total
(R)

Janitor wage, Phase I

daily measurement of wastes

(per week)
daily measurement of wastes
(per month)
daily measurement of wastes
(per month)
management
of
on-site
activities (per month)
Adam CPW150 Plus
developer consulting fees

300

10

800

3,000.0
0
1600.00

1000

2000.00

3000

1710
15000

1
1

new bins to replace existing

ones, 2 per floor, 5 floors
disposal bins for paper and
other recycling streams, 2
per floor, 5 floors

500

10

12000.0
0
1710.00
15000.0
0
5000.00

500

10

5000.00

Janitor wage, Phase II

Janitor wage, Phase
III
Coordinator wage
150kg scale
Smartphone app
General waste
(residential)
Recycling
(residential)

bins
bins

17

Recycling
bins
(communal)
Website
hosting
setup
Mobile
phone
for
janitor
Corrugated
cardboard roll
Bin liners
Bin liners
Labels
Airtime for scanning
of
barcodes
via
smartphone
Coloured paper
Flyers

disposal bins for shared area

disposal by commercial units
Initial website hosting setup
and domain registration costs
HTC Desire S

800

1600.00

200

200.00

1000

construction of separation
bins
Green (refuse)
red 600 x 600 (separated
wastes) x 500
24 labels per page, pack of 20
100mb data bundle

25

30

1,000.0
0
750.00

187
380

4
1

748.00
380.00

85
30

4
4

340.00
120.00

bin labels, A4 sheets, 10s

study participation flyers for
each unit

12
0.5

4
60

48.00
30.00

TOTAL

R 50,526.00

4.4 Description of the Study Area

Ekurhuleni municipality, containing the study site, is South Africas fourth largest metro by
population, home to nearly 3.18 million people (StatsSA, 2012). Formal dwellings, including
apartment blocks, account for 77.4% (2.46 million) of the populous (StatsSA, 2011). Eightyeight percent of Ekurhulenis residents have weekly waste removal services by the local
authority, with 100% of formal dwellings receiving kerbside removal services (EMM, 2015).
The mitigation of illegal dumping activities (a major issue within the municipality), basic
service delivery, and cleanliness remain areas of macro-focus for the municipality. Whilst
recycling has received attention in the form the establishment of mini recycling stations and
recycling banks stationed at schools (EMM, 2015), only 1% - 3% of recyclables were
diverted in 2015, with a 2016/17 target of 8% (EMM, 2015).

18

Although local council has the authority to mandate recyclable waste separation, it has not
done so. At the municipal level, despite the considerable value of recyclables currently lost
to landfill, there may be limited incentive for municipalities to invest in mechanisms to more
effectively collect recyclables since they bear the cost but do not necessarily derive benefit
from the exercise, as might private sector who can access the resources (Burger, 2014). In
apartment blocks located in suburbs neighbouring the study site, very few have recycling
facilities/systems and there is little or no data reflecting their performance if present (C.
Bond, pers comm, June 6, 2016).

A major challenge around recycling in apartment

Figure 1: Location of Glendower Place apartment block, Edenvale, Ekurhuleni

complexes is in justifying the efforts to source-sort wastes where these recovered materials
aggregate in insufficient quantities to generate significant funds.
The apartment complex/flats, Glendower Place, is situated in Edenvale, Ekurhuleni, Gauteng,
GPS coordinates -26.149873, 28.135390. There are five residential floors in the, each with
12 units, constituting 60 units in total. Below the residential units are two floors of shops in
the basement levels, including restaurants, craft shops, a deli and a speciality chocolate
wholesaler, and other miscellaneous shops, totalling 29 units.
Communal bins on each floor are emptied daily by a janitor into a waste skip on the basement
level. A private company empties these skips once a week. There has never been a formal
recycling programme in place since the origin of the complex in the 1970s. Presently,
informal recycling is expressed as paper recycling bins on each residential floor.

19

4.5 Limitations of the study

Two janitors and a project coordinator the latter a resident and body corporate committee
member - will be employed, to take daily measurements and coordinate practical aspects of
the project as the author will be unable to visit site for Phase III of the project.
The relatively small sample size for Phases I & II, to ensure willing and reliable
participants, and that janitors can cope with the large number of discrete measurements
during separation phase, might introduce bias in those participants being closer to ideal
recyclers, meaning the sample is not representative.
The organic waste category will be omitted from the waste stream characterisation to
simplify the study and because of the lack of space / a suitable area in which to perform
composting were organics collected. Whilst studies show that (see Section 4: Preliminary
literature review) organics constitute a significant portion of general waste, the study will
focus on quantifying of recyclables in the waste stream, the diversion of these from landfill,
and the use of technological mechanisms to enhance this process.
Methodological problems with the QR code system could introduce errors into the waste
stream data. The study design is that Phase I will expose major issues with the system, so
that its re-use later in the project (Phase II and III) will be less prone to these sources of error.

4.6 Ethical considerations

In Phases I & III, surveys will be deployed to form a profile of participants and get feedback
on the recycling system respectively. Participants will be numbered to maintain anonymity,
and names will not be used in when reporting back to the public.
Participants in Phase III will be required to install and use a smartphone application, for
which they will have to authenticate. This is to ensure that certain modes of participation or
data contributions are controlled. Public access to the application will be allowed but with
selective functionality.

Registered users reporting an issue, for example, may do so

anonymously or may include their unit number. In addition, the website user forum will only
accept user contributions from authorised persons (with a validated account), and will be
moderated for inappropriate behaviour and comment.
Participation in study or recycling activities will be voluntary, and residents ability to dispose
of their waste will not be affected in any way.

Extra burden on the janitors will be

20

compensated and okayed by the Body Corporate. Whilst there will be engagement with
residents to encourage participation, this will not be enforced in a way which is obtrusive,
and face-to-face communications will be attempted at a convenient time.

21

5. APPENDIX A: CONSISTENCY MATRIX

22

Research question
Data collection tool
Data analysis
description
1. How much waste does a Phase I QR code waste stream Numerical
typical high-rise household
produce on a daily/weekly
basis (recyclables and nonrecyclables) both before and
after a QR code, website and
smartphone app intervention?

characterisation
Phase III website and smartphone
app intervention

descriptive statistics

2. What is the ratio of waste Phase II QR code waste stream Numerical description
generated by commercial units
to that of residential units?

characterisation

3. Does QR code, website and Phase III website and smartphone Numerical
smartphone app intervention
increase the recycling rates of
paper, plastic, metal and glass?

description
descriptive statistics

intervention

4. Can a QR code, website and Phase I QR code waste stream Subjective

smartphone app intervention
generate precise waste stream
data?

5. What

are the prevailing

attitudes of residents/shops
with respect to recycling and a
QR code, website and
smartphone app recycling
intervention?

characterisation

Phase I questionnaire,
2,3,4,13-17,21-23
Phase II questionnaire, Q 8
Phase III questionnaire, Q 5

methodological

observations

Qs

Questionnaire
response
summarisation and description

6. Does QR code, website and Phase III website and smartphone Numerical description
smartphone app intervention
increase source-sorting ratios?

intervention

7. What are the realised setup Spreadsheet recording of costs

Tabular summary

and operating costs of the QR

code, website and smartphone
app intervention?

6. REFERENCES
Abdelnaser, O., Mahmood, A., & Read, A. (2011). A study of the motivation and demotivation factors influencing the participation of people of Pulau Pinang in recycling of
solid wastes. Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management, 37(1), 91-101.
Allen, C.

(2012). Flanders, Belgium: Europes best recycling and prevention program.

Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives. Retrieved November 20, 2015, from http://noburn.org/downloads/ZW%20Flanders.pdf
Barroca, J. (2014). Citizen monitoring for waste management services in Maputo. Retrieved
January 5, 2016, from http://www.slideshare.net/jeanbarroca/citizen-monitoring-for-wastemanagement-services-in-maputo

23

Bernstad, A., la Cour Jansen, J. & Aspegren, H. (2011). Life cycle assessment of a household
solid waste source separation programme: a Swedish case study. Waste Management &
Research: The Journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association,
ISWA, 29(10), 102742.
Breytenbach, M. (2014, October 31). Waste materials recovery facility to increase production.
Engineering

news.

Retrieved

21

August,

2016

from

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/waste-materials-recovery-facility-to-increaseproduction-2014-10-31
Burger, S. (2014, November 14). South Africa begins waking up to the economic potential of
waste

recycling.

Engineering

news.

Retrieved

21

August,

2016

from

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/south-africa-begins-waking-up-to-the-economicpotential-of-waste-recycling-2014-11-13/rep_id:4136
Cascadia (2010). City of Tacoma municipal waste stream composition study. California,
Cascadia Consulting Group. Retrieved October 10, 2015, from http://www.cityoftacoma.org
Catania, V., & Ventura, D. (2014). An Approach for Monitoring and Smart Planning of Urban
Solid Waste Management Using Smart-M3 Platform. 15th Conference of Open Innovations
Association FRUCT, 2431. http://doi.org/10.1109/FRUCT.2014.6872422
Chamberlain, A., Paxton, M., Glover, K., Flintham, M., Price, D., Greenhalgh, C., Fraser,
D.S.

(2014). Understanding mass participatory pervasive computing systems for

environmental campaigns. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 18(7), 17751792.

http://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-013-0756-x
Chang, N. & Pires, A. (2015). Sustainable solid waste management: a systems engineering
approach. New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons.
Chicago Department of Environment (CDOE). (2010).
Chicago,

CDM.

Retrieved

Waste characterisation study.

March

10,

2015,

from

http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/doe/general/RecyclingAndWasteMgmt_
PDFs/WasteAndDiversionStudy/WasteCharacterizationReport.pdf
City of Johannesburg (CoJ).

(2013).

Waste management by laws. Provincial Gazette

Extraordinary, 216(19), 3-52. Pretoria, Gauteng Provincial Government. Retrieved June 25,
2016, from http://indigo.openbylaws.org.za/api/documents/46/attachments/58/download
24

Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). (2011, March). Municipal waste
management good practices. Edition 1. Pretoria, CSIR. Retrieved December 10, 2015, from
www.csir.co.za/nre/docs/Waste_Management_Toolkit.pdf
Dahln, L., & Lagerkvist, A. (2010). Evaluation of recycling programmes in household
waste collection systems.

Waste Management & Research, 28, 577-586. doi:

10.1177/0734242X09341193
Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA). (2011). National waste management strategy,
November

2011.

Pretoria,

DEA.

Retrieved

November

5,

2015,

from

https://www.environment.gov.za/sites/default/files/docs/nationalwaste_management_strategy.
pdf
Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA). (2012, November 14).
information

baseline

report.

Pretoria,

DEA.

National waste

Retrieved

from

http://sawic.environment.gov.za/documents/1880.pdf
Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA). (2015). Guideline for the development of
integrated

waste

management

plans.

Retrieved

November

10,

2015,

from

https://www.environment.gov.za/sites/default/files/legislations/integratedwaste_management_
guidelines.pdf
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). (2005, April 4). National waste
management strategy implementation: Waste stream analysis and prioritisation for recycling.
Pretoria, DEAT. Retrieved from http://sawic.environment.gov.za/documents/234.pdf
Department of Science and Technology (DST). (2014). A National Waste R&D and
Innovation Roadmap for South Africa: Phase 2 Waste RDI Roadmap. Pretoria, Department of
Science

and

Technology.

Retrieved

from

http://www.wasteroadmap.co.za/download/trends_in_waste_management.pdf
Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (EMM). (2015).

Integrated Development Plan,

2015/16. Germiston: Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality. Retrieved June 12, 2016, from
http://www.ekurhuleni.gov.za/idp-1/849-01-annexure-a-final-idp-may-2015-edited20052015-1/file
Erti, T. (2013). M-participation: the emergence of participatory planning applications.
Research Briefings. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from www.turku.fi/kaupunkitutkimus/julkaisut/
25

Ferrara, I., & Missios, P. (2005). Recycling and waste diversion effectiveness: evidence from
Canada. Environmental & Resource Economics, 30, 221-238. doi: 10.1007/s10640-0041518-z
Kamara, A.J. (2006). Household participation in domestic waste disposal and recycling in
the Tshwane metropolitan area: an environmental education perspective.

Published MSc

dissertation.

2015,

Pretoria,

UNISA.

Retrieved

June

5,

from

uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/1460/dissertation.pdf
Kipngetich, B.L. (2014). A Mobile Phone Application for Public Awareness and
Participation in Solid Waste Management in Kenya. MSc Dissertation. Nairobi, University of
Strathmore. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from https://su-plus.strathmore.edu/handle/11071/4252
Ko, P.S., & Poon, C.S. (2009). Domestic waste management and recovery in Hong Kong.
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 11, 104-109. doi: 10.1007/s10163-0080232-2
Late, A., & Mule, M.B. (2012). Composition and characterisation study of solid waste from
Aurangabad City. Universal Journal of Environmental Research and Technology, 3(1), 5560.
Leedy, P.D., & Ormrod, J.E. (2010). Practical research: planning and design (9th ed.). New
Jersey, Pearson Education.
Local Authority Waste & Recycling (LAWA). (2007). Collection Barcode System. LAWA.
Retrieved October 5, 2015, from http://www.edie.net/lawr
Mbeng, L.O., Tudor, T., & Fairweather, R. (2011). Survey of Household Waste Generation
and Composition to Drive Strategy Developmenta Case of Three Residential Areas in
Douala, Cameroon. The Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management, 37(4), 284
296. doi: 10.5276/JSWTM.2011.284
McKay, T.J.M., Mbanda, J.T., & Lawton, M. (2015). Exploring the challenges facing the
solid waste sector in Douala, Cameroon. Environmental Economics, 6(3), 93102.
Medvedev, A., Fedchenkov, P., Zaslavsky, A., Anagnostopoulos, T., & Khoruzhnikov, S.
(2015). Internet of things, smart spaces, and next generation networks and systems: 15th
international conference, NEW2AN 2015 and 8th conference, ruSMART 2015 St. Petersburg,
Russia, August 26-28, 2015 proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including
26

Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 9247,
104115. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-23126-6
Mouton, J. (2006). How to succeed in your Masters and Doctoral Studies: A South African
guide and resource book. Pretoria, Van Schaik.
Nagawiecki, T. (2009, June). University of Idaho waste characterisation. Retrieved October 5,
2015,

from

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.uidaho.edu/~/media/UIdaho-

Responsive/Files/current-students/Sustainability/Reports/Waste%2520Characterization
%2520Study.ashx&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwjWveKAprDJAhVImBoKHcKnBuwQFggEMAA
&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNFDEywYYOXTLUEiHyFVSJ5gKZdLDQ
Nkala, Z.C. (2012). An analysis of waste minimisation initiatives in the city of Cape Town,
South Africa. Published MPhil. Thesis. Stellenbosch, University of Stellenbosch. Retrieved
June 5, 2015, from https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/71793
Nwokedi, I.O. (2011). Solid waste generation and collection for recycling in small and micro
enterprises: a case study of Braamfontein district, Johannesburg. MSc Thesis. University of
the Witwatersrand. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10539/10418
Nxumalo, F.T. (1999). Waste management through recycling and composting: a case study
of some schools in greater Edenvale, Pietermaritzburg, Kwazulu-Natal. M.Env.Dev. Thesis.
Pietermaritzburg, University of Natal. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10413/4447
Oelofse, S. (2012). All South African households in large centres to separate household
waste by 2016. Council for Industrial and Scientific Research (CSIR). Retrieved November
5, 2015, from http://www.csir.co.za/enews/2012_nov/01.html
Omran, A., Mahmood, A., Abdul Aziz, H., & Robinson, G.M. (2009).

Investigating

households attitude toward recycling of solid waste in Malaysia: a case study. International
Journal of Environmental Research, 3(2), 275-288.
Pollard, S.P., Popp, J.S., Gbur, E.E., & Cleaveland, M.K. (2007). Multi-family dwelling
recyclables generation and composition.

Journal of Solid Waste Technology and

Management, 33(3), 158-170.

Poncela, J., Vlacheas, P., Giaffreda, R., De, S., Vecchio, M., Nechifor, S., Demestichas, P.
(2014). Smart cities via data aggregation. Wireless Personal Communications, 76(2), 149
168. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-014-1683-5
27

Roberti, M. (2013). What are the current trends for smartphone RFID readers? RFID
Journal. Retrieved 5 January, 2016, from http://www.rfidjournal.com/blogs/experts/entry?
10616
Rule, P. & John, V. (2007). Your guide to case study research. Pretoria, Van Schaik.
Samah, M.A.A.S., Manaf, L.A., Ahsan, A., Sulaiman, W.N.A., Agamuthu, P., & DSilva J.L.
(2013).

Household solid waste composition in Balakong City, Malaysia: Trend and

Management. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 22(6), 1807-1816. Retrieved 10

December,

2015,

from

www.pjoes.com/pdf/22.6/Pol.J.Environ.Stud.Vol.22.No.6.1807-

1816.pdf
Sehlabi, R., & McKay, T.M. (2016). Municipalities, commercial composting and sustainable
development, the case of Johannesburg, South Africa. Environmental Economics, 7(1), 53-59.
Simelane, T. & Mohee, R. (2012, September). AISA Policy brief no.81: Future directions of
municipal solid waste management in Africa. Africa Institute of South Africa. Retrieved
August 21, 2016, from http://www.ai.org.za/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/10/No.-81.Future-Directions-of-Municipal-Solid-waste-Management-in-Africa.pdf
Skinner, J.H. (2004). Solid waste management policies for the 21st century.
In I. Twardowska, H.E. Allen, A.A.F. Kettrup and W.J. Lacy (Eds.), Solid Waste: Assessment,
Monitoring

and

Remediation

(pp.

1091-1098).

Elsevier

B.V.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0713-2743(04)80043-6
South African Institute of Civil Engineering (SAICE). (2012, December). Kraaifontein
waste management facility.

Civil Engineering, 20(11), 18-22.

Retrieved from

http://saice.org.za/downloads/monthly_publications/2012/2012-Civil_EngineeringDecember.pdf
Statistics South Africa (StatsSA). (2011). Statistics by place: metropolitan municipality:
Ekurhuleni.

Statistics

South

Africa.

Retrieved

June

6,

2016,

from

http://www.statssa.gov.za/?page_id=1021&id=ekurhuleni-municipality
Statistics South Africa (StatsSA). (2012). Census 2011: Statistical release, P0301.4. Pretoria:
Statistics

South

Africa.

Retrieved

10

June,

2016,

from

http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P03014/P030142011.pdf

28

Statistics South Africa (StatsSA). (2015a). General household survey, selected development
indicators, metros, 2015, Report No. 03-18-20. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa. Retrieved
10 June, 2016, from http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-03-18-20/Report-03-18202015.pdf
Statistics South Africa (StatsSA). (2015b). Mid-year population estimates, 2015, statistical
release, P0302.

Pretoria, Statistics South Africa.

Retrieved 10 June, 2016, from

http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0302/P03022015.pdf
Taiwo, O.E. (2009). Integrated solid waste management as a solution to dwindling landfill
capacity in Johannesburg. PhD Thesis. Pretoria, Tshwane University of Technology.
Twardowska, I. (2004). Solid waste: what is it? In I. Twardowska, H.E. Allen, A.A.F.
Kettrup and W.J. Lacy (Eds.), Solid Waste: Assessment, Monitoring and Remediation (pp.
1091-1098). Elsevier B.V.
Twardowska, I., & Allen, H.E. (2004). Solid waste origins: sources, trends, quality, quantity.
In I. Twardowska, H.E. Allen, A.A.F. Kettrup and W.J. Lacy (Eds.), Solid Waste: Assessment,
Monitoring and Remediation (pp. 1091-1098). Elsevier B.V.
United Kingdom Integrated Skills Limited (UKISL). (2015). Public/resident smartphone
and tablets for managing waste and recycling collections. Retrieved January 5, 2016, from
http://www.ukisl.com/blog/smartphone-tablets-for-managing-waste-recycling-collections/
Wolf, A.M., Spitz, A.H., Olson, G., Zvodsk, A., & Algharaibeh, M. (2003).
Characterisation of the solid waste stream of the Tohono Oodham Nation.
Environmental

Health,

65(8),

9-15.

Retrieved

Journal of
from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12690820
Xevgenos, D., Papadaskalopoulou, C., Panaretou, V., Moustakas, K., & Malamis, D. (2015).
Success Stories for Recycling of MSW at Municipal Level: A Review. Waste and Biomass
Valorization, 6(5), 657684. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-015-9389-9

29