IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p7917-d1145007.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of Sustainability Assessment Criteria in Selection of Municipal Solid Waste Treatment Technology in Developing Countries: A Case of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Author

Listed:
  • Phuong Giang Le

    (Institute for Environmental Science, Engineering and Management, Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh City 70000, Vietnam)

  • Hung Anh Le

    (Institute for Environmental Science, Engineering and Management, Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh City 70000, Vietnam)

  • Xuan Thang Dinh

    (Hoa Lu Center for Research and Apply Environment, Ho Chi Minh City 70000, Vietnam)

  • Kieu Lan Phuong Nguyen

    (Faculty of Environmental and Food Engineering, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City 70000, Vietnam)

Abstract

Municipal solid waste (MSW) management is a significant problem for developing countries due to lack of sufficient infrastructure, poor management capacity, and low level of waste treatment technology. This study proposes three main groups of criteria, i.e., social, economic, and environmental, that can be used as an effective tool to assess the sustainability of MSW treatment technologies, considering Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam as a case study. The sustainability assessment criteria consist of a list of indicators which consider potential waste treatment plants. The indicators and technologies then undertake a selection process from identifying assessment goals and key aspects to data collection and consultation of experts. The findings from the previous phase will be used to select the most preferred waste technology through AHP and normalization approaches. As a result, 12 selected indicators are as follows: investment cost, treatment cost, operation and maintenance costs, revenue/benefits, job creation, community consensus, support policy, community health, air pollution, water pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and land quota. Among three MSW facilities selected, i.e., landfill, compost, and waste-to-energy incineration, waste-to-energy is determined as the best alternative solution for Ho Chi Minh City in a given context of approximate 70% of landfilling being applied. The selection process and indicators found can guide decision-makers and policy on selecting MSW treatment technologies in developing countries. Additionally, Ho Chi Minh City’s governors benefit from finding the most appropriate waste technology. A technology adoption roadmap and its implementation plan should be thought thoroughly to address challenges in MSW management in the city.

Suggested Citation

  • Phuong Giang Le & Hung Anh Le & Xuan Thang Dinh & Kieu Lan Phuong Nguyen, 2023. "Development of Sustainability Assessment Criteria in Selection of Municipal Solid Waste Treatment Technology in Developing Countries: A Case of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-21, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7917-:d:1145007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7917/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7917/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nguyen Huu Hoang & Csaba Fogarassy, 2020. "Sustainability Evaluation of Municipal Solid Waste Management System for Hanoi (Vietnam)—Why to Choose the ‘Waste-to-Energy’ Concept," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Petra Schneider & Le Hung Anh & Jörg Wagner & Jan Reichenbach & Anja Hebner, 2017. "Solid Waste Management in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: Moving towards a Circular Economy?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Contreras, Francisco & Hanaki, Keisuke & Aramaki, Toshiya & Connors, Stephen, 2008. "Application of analytical hierarchy process to analyze stakeholders preferences for municipal solid waste management plans, Boston, USA," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 979-991.
    4. Christina Fountzoula & Konstantinos Aravossis & Panagiotis P. Repoussis, 2022. "Decision-Making Methods in the Public Sector during 2010–2020: A Systematic Review," Advances in Operations Research, Hindawi, vol. 2022, pages 1-13, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mag Geisielly Alves Guimarães & Pedro Victor Garcia de Oliveira & Denise de Carvalho Urashima & Eleonardo Lucas Pereira & Beatriz Mydori Carvalho Urashima, 2023. "Cyclic Fatigue Durability of Woven Geotextiles for Use in Sustainable Waste-Dewatering Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-14, September.
    2. Jenny Gutierrez-Lopez & Ronald G. McGarvey & Christine Costello & Damon M. Hall, 2023. "Decision Support Frameworks in Solid Waste Management: A Systematic Review of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making with Sustainability and Social Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-31, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    2. Wasi Ul Hassan Shah & Rizwana Yasmeen & Muddassar Sarfraz & Larisa Ivascu, 2023. "The Repercussions of Economic Growth, Industrialization, Foreign Direct Investment, and Technology on Municipal Solid Waste: Evidence from OECD Economies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Davor Mance & Siniša Vilke & Borna Debelić, 2020. "Sustainable Governance of Coastal Areas and Tourism Impact on Waste Production: Panel Analysis of Croatian Municipalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-16, September.
    4. Neshat, Aminreza & Pradhan, Biswajeet & Dadras, Mohsen, 2014. "Groundwater vulnerability assessment using an improved DRASTIC method in GIS," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 74-86.
    5. Tamara Avellán & Mario Roidt & Adam Emmer & Janis Von Koerber & Petra Schneider & Wolf Raber, 2017. "Making the Water–Soil–Waste Nexus Work: Framing the Boundaries of Resource Flows," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Guoxian Cao & Chaoyang Guo & Hezhong Li, 2022. "Risk Analysis of Public–Private Partnership Waste-to-Energy Incineration Projects from the Perspective of Rural Revitalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, July.
    7. Noudeng Vongdala & Hoang-Dung Tran & Tran Dang Xuan & Rolf Teschke & Tran Dang Khanh, 2018. "Heavy Metal Accumulation in Water, Soil, and Plants of Municipal Solid Waste Landfill in Vientiane, Laos," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Morteza Aien & Omid Mahdavi, 2020. "On the Way of Policy Making to Reduce the Reliance of Fossil Fuels: Case Study of Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-28, December.
    9. Jean Pierre Doussoulin & Cristian Colther, 2022. "Evaluating the Efficiency of Municipal Solid Waste Collection Services in Developing Countries: The Case of Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    10. Manuel Herrador & Tran Tho Dat & Dinh Duc Truong & Le Thu Hoa & Katarzyna Å obacz, 2023. "The Unique Case Study of Circular Economy in Vietnam Remarking Recycling Craft Villages," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    11. Sue Ellen Taelman & Davide Tonini & Alexander Wandl & Jo Dewulf, 2018. "A Holistic Sustainability Framework for Waste Management in European Cities: Concept Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-33, June.
    12. Yuan Hu & Xuan He & Mark Poustie, 2018. "Can Legislation Promote a Circular Economy? A Material Flow-Based Evaluation of the Circular Degree of the Chinese Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, March.
    13. Nina Tsydenova & Alethia Vázquez Morillas & Álvaro Martínez Hernández & Diana Rodríguez Soria & Camilo Wilches & Alexandra Pehlken, 2019. "Feasibility and Barriers for Anaerobic Digestion in Mexico City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, July.
    14. Samuel David S. Anonas & Francis Darwin T. Eugenio & BenJeMar-Hope F. Flores & Paul Heherson M. Balite & Jan Goran T. Tomacruz & Lawrence A. Limjuco & Joey D. Ocon, 2023. "From Waste to Renewable Energy: A Policy Review on Waste-to-Energy in the Philippines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-26, August.
    15. Thu-Trang T. Nguyen & Ngan-Ha Ha & Thanh-Khiet L. Bui & Kieu Lan Phuong Nguyen & Diem-Phuc T. Tran & Hong Quan Nguyen & Ashraf El-Arini & Qamar Schuyler & Thu Thi Le Nguyen, 2022. "Baseline Marine Litter Surveys along Vietnam Coasts Using Citizen Science Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-15, April.
    16. Giulia Caruso & Stefano Antonio Gattone, 2019. "Waste Management Analysis in Developing Countries through Unsupervised Classification of Mixed Data," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-15, June.
    17. Ismaila Rimi Abubakar & Khandoker M. Maniruzzaman & Umar Lawal Dano & Faez S. AlShihri & Maher S. AlShammari & Sayed Mohammed S. Ahmed & Wadee Ahmed Ghanem Al-Gehlani & Tareq I. Alrawaf, 2022. "Environmental Sustainability Impacts of Solid Waste Management Practices in the Global South," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-26, October.
    18. Doorga, Jay R.S. & Hall, Jim W. & Eyre, Nick, 2022. "Geospatial multi-criteria analysis for identifying optimum wind and solar sites in Africa: Towards effective power sector decarbonization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    19. Pazhuparambil Jayarajan Sajil Kumar & Lakshmanan Elango & Michael Schneider, 2022. "GIS and AHP Based Groundwater Potential Zones Delineation in Chennai River Basin (CRB), India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-22, February.
    20. Achillas, Ch. & Vlachokostas, Ch. & Moussiopoulos, N. & Banias, G. & Kafetzopoulos, G. & Karagiannidis, A., 2011. "Social acceptance for the development of a waste-to-energy plant in an urban area," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(9), pages 857-863.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7917-:d:1145007. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.