Barriers to Sustainable and Integrated Waste Management in the Brazilian Amazon: An exploratory analysis using Lawshe’s approachAbstract
This study investigates critical barriers hindering Sustainable and Integrated Solid Waste Management (S-ISWM) in the Brazilian Amazon. Employing a four-stage methodology - (a) systematic literature review, (b) instrument development, (c) quantitative validation using Lawshe’s method, and (d) results interpretation - the research identifies and validates key obstacles specific to this complex region. An initial review of the literature identified 13 common barriers to waste management in developing countries. Expert validation using Lawshe’s method in the Amazonian context confirmed 11 as significantly relevant, demonstrating consensus among local researchers, private-sector professionals, and public-sector agents. The remaining two barriers exhibited divergent expert opinions, potentially reflecting nuanced perceptions of contextual factors and regional limitations. These findings underscore the need to understand the unique challenges involving waste management in the Amazon, where local conditions directly impact the effectiveness of potential solutions. The validated barriers offer essential insights for formulating targeted public policies and strategies that promote sustainability and effective waste management practices tailored to the Amazonian context.
Keywords:
waste management; circular economy; sustainability; barriers; amazon.
RESUMO
Este estudo investiga as principais barreiras que dificultam a Gestão Integrada e Sustentável de Resíduos (GISR) na Amazônia Brasileira. Empregando uma metodologia estruturada em quatro etapas — (a) revisão sistemática da literatura, (b) desenvolvimento de um instrumento, (c) validação quantitativa utilizando o método Lawshe e (d) interpretação dos resultados — a pesquisa identifica e valida obstáculos-chave específicos para esta região complexa. Uma revisão inicial da literatura identificou 13 barreiras comuns à gestão de resíduos em países em desenvolvimento. A validação por especialistas, utilizando o método Lawshe no contexto amazônico, confirmou 11 como significativamente relevantes, demonstrando um consenso entre pesquisadores locais, profissionais do setor privado e agentes públicos. As duas barreiras restantes apresentaram opiniões divergentes entre os especialistas, possivelmente refletindo percepções diferenciadas dos fatores contextuais e das limitações regionais. Estes resultados destacam a necessidade de compreender os desafios únicos enfrentados pela gestão de resíduos na Amazônia, onde as condições locais impactam diretamente a eficácia das potenciais soluções. As barreiras validadas oferecem insights essenciais para a formulação de políticas públicas e estratégias direcionadas que promovam a sustentabilidade e práticas eficazes de gestão de resíduos adaptadas ao contexto amazônico.
Palavras-chave:
gerenciamento de resíduos; economia circular; sustentabilidade; barreiras; Amazônia.
INTRODUCTION
The interconnection between waste generation and consumption patterns reflects an intricate and important dynamic in contemporary times: the more a household consumes, the greater the amount of garbage or waste generated (Han; Hu; Lin, 2020). In the present circumstance, urbanization is also a driving factor behind the increase in solid waste production. As urbanization progresses rapidly around the world, cities become vibrant centers of economic and social activity, simultaneously boosting consumption and generating increasing amounts of waste (Rajendiran; Arumugam; Subramaniam, 2020).
Solid Waste Management (SWM) emerged mainly as a technical challenge in developed countries during the 1970s (Marshall; Farahbakhsh, 2013; UN-Habitat, 2010). However, Wilson, Velis and Rodic (2013) point out that dissatisfaction with a strictly technical approach promoted the concept of Sustainable and Integrated Solid Waste Management (S-ISWM), now widely recognized worldwide (UN-Habitat, 2010).
S-ISWM seeks to improve system performance by balancing immediate responses with a long-term vision and promoting an integrated understanding of the interactions between its parts (UN-Habitat, 2010). In addition, it proposes a balance between costs, social acceptability, and environmental impact, a challenge that requires thoughtful decisions and intense debate to deal with the complexity of social and ecological systems (Marshall; Farahbakhsh, 2013; McDougall et al., 2007).
In recent years, S-ISWM has been consolidated as the standard approach in developing countries, where SWM is a complex challenge due to the limited resources and capacities of local governments. In addition to being costly, waste operations compete for funding with essential areas such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure (Maalouf; Agamuthu, 2023). In Brazil, this concern is even more relevant, as the country is among the largest generators of solid waste, and government initiatives to mitigate environmental impacts are still recent (Piao et al., 2024; Szigethy; Antenor, 2020).
The Legal Amazon, in particular, faces specific challenges that go beyond federal regulations, such as the National Solid Waste Policy (PNRS) (Brasil, 2010), and demands a distinguished approach (Ibict, 2021). The Legal Amazon, as defined by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), is an area that represents approximately 60% of the national territory and covers nine Brazilian states: Acre, Amapá, Amazonas, Maranhão, Mato Grosso, Pará, Rondônia, Roraima, and Tocantins (IBGE, 2022).
The Situational Diagnosis of Solid Waste Management in the Legal Amazon (Ibict, 2021), carried out as part of a project entitled Amazônia Legal sem Resíduo (Legal Amazon With No Waste), identified that Brazilian small cities face obstacles in implementing S-ISWM, given the specific characteristics of the municipalities part of the Legal Amazon.
Currently, the most widely used form of solid waste disposal in the Amazon is landfill, which accounts for 54.2%, followed by controlled landfills (21.01%), in which waste undergoes treatment and control, but still does not comply with Brazilian environmental legislation. Finally, sanitary landfills, which are the instrument provided for by the PNRS as the most suitable for final disposal, are still the least implemented in the region, with 18.49% (Ibict, 2021).
Given the abundance and diversity in the Legal Amazon region, it is important to direct efforts towards waste management to preserve natural resources, reduce contamination, and prevent the spread of disease, thus promoting the health of the population (Ibict, 2021). Understanding the challenges of S-ISWM in the Amazon is important, as this informed understanding can guide policies, investments, and practices for a balance between environmental conservation, human needs, and long-term sustainability.
In this context, this research aimed to identify, validate, and analyze the critical barriers to S-ISWM in the Brazilian Amazon to generate insights that can inform tailored policies and effective management strategies, suitable for the unique environmental, social, and economic conditions of the region.
METHOD
The proposed research strategy for this study includes: (a) a systematic literature review (SLR) focusing on the central topic of the research, S-ISWM in developing countries and its associated barriers, (b) the development of a data collection instrument, (c) data processing using Lawshe’s quantitative method, and (d) the generation of results and corresponding conclusions.
Batista et al. (2021) conducted an SLR from 2015 to May 2019, using the Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) databases. The study identified eight barriers, 11 critical success factors (CSFs), and 11 implementation practices that impact S-ISWM in municipalities in developing countries. Based on these elements, the researchers proposed a framework for improving waste management in these contexts.
As an update to this study, this research replicated the methodology of Batista et al. (2021), extending the analysis to August 2023 and including the Science Direct (SD) database. The search was limited to titles, abstracts, and keywords, considering research articles and reviews only. In addition, adjustments were made to the search strings to improve the accuracy and relevance of the results, including adding the term ‘challenge’ and replacing ‘legal aspect’ with ‘legislation’ in the sixth string.
A research protocol was therefore drawn up. In addition to the aforementioned parameters, it established the following criteria: (a) exclusion: research papers not addressing barriers or not considering developing countries or not considering SWM/S-ISWM; and (b) inclusion: research papers addressing barriers associated with SWM/S-ISWM in developing countries. The research protocol is shown in Table 1.
After generating the list of classified articles, the texts were read in full, taking into account their adherence to the topic, the research question, and the barriers.
Based on the results of the SLR, a questionnaire was created to assess SWM barriers and applied to professionals working in the Brazilian Amazon. The instrument covered three groups: researchers, private-sector professionals, and public-sector agents. The groups rated each barrier on a scale of importance (“Essential”, “Important but not essential”, and “Not important”). Before data collection, the questionnaire was submitted to and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Universidade do Estado do Pará (CEP/UEPA), as required for studies involving human beings in Brazil.
Lawshe’s method was used to validate the barriers identified in the literature and adapt them to the specific context of the Amazon. This method was chosen for its robustness and simplicity, allowing for a clear assessment of content validity, especially in contexts that require expert consensus. Unlike more complex quantitative methods, Lawshe’s method focuses on the relevance and essentiality of items and is particularly useful for validating the pertinence of barriers in the scenario in question (Lawshe, 1975). The application followed the guidelines of Rampasso et al. (2021) and Silva (2016), ensuring process compliance. Firstly, the Content Validity Ratio (CVR) was calculated for each criterion in the questionnaire. CVR values can vary from -1 to +1, with -1 representing total disagreement and +1 representing total agreement. It is worth noting that a positive CVR is obtained when more than 50% of survey participants consider the item analyzed to be “Essential”. A negative CVR is obtained when less than 50% of survey participants consider the item analyzed to be “Not important”. When the CVR is 0 (zero), it means that half of the experts questioned consider the criterion to be “Essential” while the other half do not (Lawshe, 1975).
The calculations were then carried out, and critical CVR was applied to analyze items discarded in the final composition due to CVR values below the critical limit. To calculate critical CVR, the mean, variance, and standard deviation were taken into account. Calculating the critical ratio will determine the importance of each item. The equations for the variables mentioned above are shown in detail in Table 2.
After the calculations, the results obtained are discussed and critically analyzed based on the literature. Subsequently, contributions to theory and practice are highlighted, along with conclusions and directions for future research.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Descriptive data analysis
This research began by investigating the barriers to S-ISWM in the literature through a primary search using Boolean operators and keywords in selected databases. Initially, 914 articles were identified: 287 in Web of Science, 111 in Science Direct, and 516 in Scopus. After applying filters, this number was reduced to 379 studies, 155 from Web of Science, 50 from Science Direct, and 174 from Scopus.
After removing duplicate documents, the articles were selected in two stages: first, titles and abstracts were screened for relevance to the study’s objectives; then, the remaining texts were read in full to assess their adherence to the topic. In the end, only articles that effectively addressed S-ISWM were included, without using the Snowball approach.
Thirty-five articles were selected that met the inclusion criteria, making up the final bibliographic portfolio of the research. All of them addressed barriers to S-ISWM in developing countries. After the selection, the data were organized in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and subjected to content analysis (Elo; Kyngäs, 2008), creating a taxonomy of the barriers identified.
Content analysis, according to Elo and Kyngäs (2008), is a systematic method for examining qualitative data and can follow an inductive approach, when categories emerge from the data, or a deductive approach based on a previous theoretical framework. The process involves three stages: preparing and defining the analysis unit; organization, which includes coding, categorizing, and grouping the data; and reporting the results, where the categories are clearly presented and supported by examples. Adopting this approach guarantees methodological rigor, ensuring the credibility and reliability of the findings.
Based on this methodology, the barriers were identified and organized according to an inductive approach, allowing for continuous refinement of the categories. This process enabled a detailed understanding of the challenges that hinder the effective implementation of S- ISWM in developing countries. The synthesized results were organized into codes and shown in Table 3, highlighting the main obstacles faced in SWM.
In accordance with the procedures adopted and presented in section 3 (Method), with the data collected, Lawshe’s method was used to assess the content validity of the responses and ensure the robustness of the study’s conclusions. Initially, CVR was calculated for each barrier analyzed, considering a sample of 38 waste management experts in the Brazilian Amazon. The critical CVR determined was 0.318, serving as a reference for validating the barriers. Thus, only barriers with a CVR above that value were validated for the context studied. Those with a lower coefficient were not validated, considering the particularities of the region. The detailed results of this analysis are shown in Table 4.
Associated discussions
As shown in Table 4, according to experts in waste management in the Brazilian Amazon, barriers B01, B02, B03, B04, B05, B07, B08, B10, B11, B12, and B13 must be addressed as a priority to make S-ISWM viable in the region. On the other hand, barriers B06 and B09 were not considered critical factors for the effectiveness of local policies. This suggests that, while these factors may be relevant in other developing countries, the Amazon faces more pressing challenges that have a direct impact on sustainable waste management.
B01 – Projects that are financially unfeasible to implement
This barrier describes the economic challenges that prevent the implementation of waste management systems. Effective waste management is a significant financial challenge that compromises a large part of limited municipal budgets, as pointed out by Franceschi et al. (2022). In developing countries, there is a clear imbalance between income and expenditure, due to high costs and insufficient income (Jalalipour et al., 2021), reflecting in inadequate budget allocations for waste management (David Jr et al., 2019) and the financial unfeasibility of many projects (Batista et al., 2021).
Barrier B01 highlights the scarcity of financial resources as a critical challenge in the Amazon, where many municipalities have low revenue and depend on federal transfers to finance public projects. In addition, geographical dispersion and difficult access to various locations increase the logistical costs of collecting, transporting, and disposing of waste. These factors make sustainable management financially unviable without government subsidies or strategic partnerships.
B02 – Public policies that do not meet the specific needs, demands, or objectives for which they were designed
It refers to the inadequacy of government policies, which are often ineffective. Several developing countries lack adequate environmental policies and regulations for the management of municipal solid waste (MSW), according to Batista et al. (2021). According to Prajapati et al. (2021), municipal agencies continue to dump waste without planning or using safe methods. Policies related to municipal waste have been insufficient and ineffective (Priti; Mandal, 2019), resulting in inadequate waste management services and a failure to achieve sustainable SWM (David Jr. et al., 2019).
Barrier B02 highlights the inadequacy of public policies in the Amazon, which are often based on standardized urban models that do not meet the needs of riverside, indigenous, and remote communities. These populations require solutions adapted to their reality, which are often neglected in policies developed without an in-depth analysis of the region. As a result, environmental and social objectives are not achieved, perpetuating waste management problems.
B03 – Lack of detailed understanding of the specific characteristics of the region by those responsible for formulating or implementing public policies
The lack of in-depth knowledge of local particularities results in poorly adapted policies that do not take into account the real needs and capacities of the local population. In developing countries, the lack of knowledge about the local context and the complex interactions among variables affects SWM efficiency (Franceschi et al., 2022). SWM involves challenges associated with context peculiarities and target audience diversity (Piao et al., 2024). These countries face a unique challenge due to their particular characteristics, requiring a SWM system adapted to their specific needs (Weekes et al., 2021). In addition, municipal plans often lack proper diagnosis (Batista et al., 2021).
The B03 barrier directly affects the implementation of effective solutions due to the vast territorial extension and the difficulty of access in many locations in the Amazon. The region is home to communities with distinct consumption and waste disposal practices, such as indigenous, riverine, and extractive communities. However, many government initiatives impose uniform management models, disregarding traditional knowledge and local dynamics. This can generate resistance and compromise the effectiveness of SWM policies.
B04 – Absence or inadequacy of a process to sort and classify the different types of waste produced
Without an effective separation process, organic, recyclable, and hazardous waste are often mixed together, making it difficult to recycle, treat, and dispose of them properly. The lack of segregation of MSW prevents the creation of economic value from recovered waste, as pointed out by Kurniawan et al. (2021), Martins et al. (2022), and Melo et al. (2022). Rajendiran, Arumugam and Subramaniam (2020) highlight the lack of segregation between organic and dry waste at the source as a significant problem. In addition, the lack of clarity about the composition and physical-chemical properties of waste streams decreases the efficiency of MSW sorting and collection facilities, according to Wang et al. (2023).
The B04 barrier is crucial in the Amazon scenario, as it directly impacts the recovery of recyclable materials. In riverside and isolated areas, difficult access by boat or precarious roads makes it unfeasible to implement traditional systems for separating and disposing of waste. In addition, the lack of environmental awareness and education exacerbates the situation, with many communities unaware of the importance of waste separation and the impacts of improper disposal.
B05 – Shortage of qualified professionals
The absence of professionals with adequate technical knowledge results in poor strategies and no selection, implementation, or operation of treatment technologies. There is a lack of employee training and a shortage of qualified professionals in SWM technology, as noted by Malav et al. (2020). The limited availability of trained and qualified labor, along with low technical expertise, is highlighted by Jalalipour et al. (2021). In addition, there is a lack of qualified employees (Wang et al., 2023) and appropriate technology or technical support (Piao et al., 2024). David Jr, John and Hussain (2020) also point out the absence of qualified individuals with the necessary knowledge of waste treatment systems.
Barrier B05 is relevant in the Amazon context due to the lack of skilled labor, and the absence of educational institutions and training programs focused on waste management. The lack of technical and higher education courses in the region limits the qualifications of local professionals. In addition, precarious working conditions, low salaries, and no incentives make it difficult for qualified professionals to stay. As a result, there is a dependence on workers from other regions or incomplete projects.
B06 – Inability or underutilization of available technological and physical resources
Often, appropriate technologies for waste collection, treatment, and recycling are not fully utilized because of the wrong methodology or a poorly-designed physical infrastructure. The poor selection and development of waste treatment and disposal methodologies are significant challenges (Malav et al., 2020), as are inadequate treatment methodologies (Jerin et al., 2022). In developing countries, the lack of waste disposal facilities and poorly managed collection coverage are major problems contributing to environmental contamination (Jebaranjitham et al., 2022).
Barrier B06 was not validated for the Amazon context, possibly because the region has technologies adapted to its environmental and geographical conditions, which reduces the underutilization of resources. Research and innovation initiatives, promoted by academic institutions, government bodies, and NGOs, have contributed to the development of sustainable technologies adapted to the region. Furthermore, the challenges in the Amazon are primarily driven by logistical constraints, insufficient funding, and socio-cultural barriers rather than the absence or ineffectiveness of available technologies. For this reason, the non-validation of barrier B06 is justified, since the region has adequate technological resources and active initiatives.
B07 – Individuals, organizations, or entities that do not comply with the laws, regulations, or standards established by the competent authorities
The lack of adherence and compliance with environmental regulations compromises the effectiveness of waste management policies. Authorities frequently struggle to effectively enforce MSW regulations. There is a widespread inability to enforce these regulations (Prajapati et al., 2021), and the absence of strict law enforcement further weakens the MSW policy framework (Jerin et al., 2022). In addition, there is no effective implementation and enforcement of SWM laws and regulations (Amugsi; Muindi; Mberu, 2022), with the existing regulatory mechanism considered very weak. Most local authorities lack adequate SWM programs (Fernando, 2019).
The validation of barrier B07 is justified by the frequent disconnection between environmental legislation and the practice of SWM. The lack of adequate inspection contributes to non-compliance with the law, in addition to the informality of economic activities, such as small businesses and rural producers, who often do not have registrations or licenses. The vast territory of the region and poor traveling conditions make it difficult for environmental agencies to act. They have small teams and limited resources, making it impossible to monitor all areas and allowing irregular practices to happen without legal consequences.
B08 – Lack of stimuli or motivators that encourage individuals, companies, or governments to invest in infrastructure and technologies to recover energy from solid waste
In developing countries, few efforts are made to maximize the use of the energy content of MSW, as noted by Franceschi et al. (2022). In addition, the absence of waste segregation practices at the source prevents the composting of biodegradable waste and recycling, making it difficult to transform waste into energy, as mentioned by Jerin et al. (2022). According to Adeleke et al. (2021), there are no advanced waste-to-energy facilities or systems to explore the full energy potential of waste. The predominance of landfills, without prioritizing the energy recovery of MSW, results in a waste of energy and a mismatch in SWM systems, as pointed out by Batista et al. (2021).
The validation of barrier B08 highlights the lack of investment and infrastructure in the Amazon, which prevents the generation of energy from waste. Resistance to adopting new technologies due to the predominance of traditional waste disposal models is a limiting factor. In addition, the lack of awareness about the energy value of waste and the absence of a stricter regulatory framework hinder the transition to sustainable and innovative energy recovery solutions in the region.
B09 – Interruption or abrupt termination of cooperation between government entities and private sector companies in carrying out projects or providing services
Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are not well established, especially in SWM activities, as highlighted by David Jr, John and Hussain (2020). In developing countries, weak state facilitation, payment issues, and inadequate management have led to the discontinuation of PPPs after a short contract time, as evidenced by Prajapati et al. (2021). The lack of government incentive policies is a significant barrier for the private sector to improve the SWM system and engage in new business in the area, according to Pheakdey et al. (2022). The most significant challenges that slow down the development of PPP projects in SWM include financial, institutional, and physical limitations of district and municipal governments (Siagian et al., 2019).
The non-validation of barrier B09 is due to the presence of continuous and long-lasting partnerships in the Amazon, involving the government, the private sector, and civil society organizations in environmental and waste management projects. The growing international pressure for sustainable practices also encourages these partnerships to continue. Thus, barrier B09 does not apply to the region, as existing partnerships tend to be resilient and strategic, ensuring the continuity of projects even in the face of other challenges.
B10 – Lack of clarity and precision in defining the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders
MSW management in developing countries faces significant challenges due to the lack of coordination, as pointed out by Wang et al. (2023). The unclear distribution of responsibilities among interested parties or stakeholders, not well defined by regulations, results in a lack of coordination between the different levels of government (D’ávila et al., 2024; Piao et al., 2024). Nogueira et al. (2024) and Silva, Weins and Potinkara (2019) highlight the need to clarify the responsibilities of the different levels of government, companies, and consumers. In addition, the roles of the agencies involved are not clearly specified, and collaboration between them is insufficient (David Jr; John; Hussain, 2020).
Barrier B10 affects waste management governance in the Amazon due to the lack of coordination among municipalities, states, and the federal government, generating conflicts and operational gaps. Municipalities with less technical and financial capacity are overwhelmed, with insufficient structure to fulfill their obligations. In addition, this lack of clarity hinders the participation of the private sector and civil society organizations, as companies and cooperatives are unaware of their legal obligations.
B11 – Lack of structure and knowledge on logistics and the circular economy to effectively manage the flow of recyclable, reusable, and recoverable materials
SWM faces significant challenges in regions with insufficient logistics structure and low industrialization, resulting in high percentages of recyclable waste, such as paper, plastic, and metal, being disposed of in landfills or open dumps, as discussed by Mancini et al. (2021). In addition, challenges include the effective implementation of Reverse Logistics (RL) and the adoption of circular economy principles, as highlighted by Silva, Weins and Potinkara (2019), where understanding and applying these concepts is essential to reduce waste and promote sustainability in SWM (Martins et al., 2022; Melo et al., 2022; Nobre et al., 2022).
The challenge represented by barrier B11 reflects the difficulties faced in overcoming the region’s existing limitations. The lack of regular commercial routes, the high cost of freight, and dependence on river transportation make it difficult to integrate the region with recycling production chains located in other states of the country. Furthermore, many municipalities still operate with a linear production model, without considering reuse, remanufacturing, and recycling strategies as viable alternatives.
B12 – Discrepancies, contradictions, or lack of harmony between different sources of information or data sets
MSW management faces substantial challenges due to the scarcity of complete and clear information on its generation, as highlighted by Kurniawan et al. (2021), and the lack of accurate statistics on the waste produced, as mentioned by Silva, Weins and Potinkara (2019). Conflicting data on MSW generation and processing between different agencies highlights flaws in the data collection procedure, as noted by Priti, Mandal (2019). In addition, the lack of accurate and reliable waste data is one of the main obstacles to moving towards sustainable management, as pointed out by Adeleke et al. (2021).
Barrier B12 was validated in the Amazon context due to the complex network of stakeholders, including NGOs, governments, and local communities, who generate information with divergent approaches and methodologies. These differences create uncertainties and make it difficult to plan joint actions. Contrasting guidelines between academic research, government recommendations, and local practices create confusion, jeopardizing the implementation of effective and sustainable waste management solutions.
B13 – Lack of active and meaningful involvement of the population in decision-making processes, public policy formulation, or project implementation
MSW management faces substantial challenges due to insufficient public involvement, as evidenced by Prajapati et al. (2021). Lack of awareness among residents is identified as the main cause of poor implementation of MSW regulations in cities, as highlighted by Amugsi, Muindi and Mberu (2022). To improve the situation, it is important to promote changes in the behavior of the population, as many citizens still dispose of solid waste and wastewater directly into the streets, landfills, and poorly maintained rivers, as pointed out by Rahmasary et al. (2019). The lack of awareness and effective contribution from the population is one of the main obstacles in SWM, as mentioned by Abu Hajar et al. (2021).
Barrier B13 is critical in the Amazon because SWM in the region cannot be treated homogeneously; each group has its own needs, practices, and knowledge concerning waste management, which makes the involvement of all these communities a key aspect in creating solutions adapted to local realities. The lack of involvement of the population in the formulation of policies and the implementation of projects can lead to solutions that are far removed from the reality of those who experience environmental and social challenges on a daily basis.
CONCLUSION
In light of the above, the objective of identifying and validating barriers to S-ISWM in developing countries, with a focus on the Amazon, was achieved. The research began with a SLR, which identified 13 common barriers to waste management. Using Lawshe’s method, 11 barriers were validated in the Amazonian context, while two did not receive consensus. The validation ensured the relevance of these barriers to the local reality of the region.
The validated barriers pointed to structural and socio-economic challenges specific to the Amazon, such as the lack of infrastructure, scarcity of financial resources, and low participation by the population. Although common in other developing countries, these obstacles are more critical in the region due to its large size, dispersed communities, and cultural diversity. These factors make it difficult to implement effective public policies and coordinate the agents involved in waste management.
Validating the barriers for the Amazon context contributes to the development of more effective policies aligned with local specificities. The study highlights the importance of collaboration between governments, the private sector, and civil society to overcome the challenges. In addition, the research is aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially SDG 11 and SDG 12, highlighting the importance of integrated waste management for the environmental and social sustainability of the region.
Although the study yielded significant findings, certain limitations must be acknowledged. The number of participants in the survey, only 38, compromised the representativeness and robustness of the results. In addition, the absence of a face-to-face case study limits the generalizability of the results. These limitations indicate the need for further research with a larger sample and more practical methodologies for a more detailed and contextualized understanding.
Although barriers B06 and B09 were not validated, this result may indicate that experts perceive these challenges differently in the Amazon, possibly due to region-specific factors. These results suggest that, for more effective implementation of waste management policies, it is important to consider local nuances, adapting solutions to overcome validated barriers and adjusting expectations concerning non-validated challenges. Finally, this research contributes to the advancement of knowledge about waste management in the Amazon, offering insights for building a more sustainable and integrated management model. The study also stands as a basis for future research and practical actions, which must take into account the specificities of the region and the global challenges affecting the Amazon, especially in international events such as COP 30.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request
REFERENCES
-
ABU HAJAR, Husam A.; AL-QARALEH, Lubna A.; MOQBEL, Shadi Y.; ALHAWARAT, Amal M. Prospects of sustainable waste management in developing countries: A case study from Jordan. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, v. 193, n. 732, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09522-z
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09522-z -
ADELEKE, Oluwatobi; AKINLABI, Stephen; JEN, Tien-Chien; DUNMADE, Israel. Towards sustainability in municipal solid waste management in South Africa: a survey of challenges and prospects. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, v. 76, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/0035919X.2020.1858366
» https://doi.org/10.1080/0035919X.2020.1858366 -
AMUGSI, Dickson A.; MUINDI, Kanyiva; MBERU, Blessing U. Implementation of solid waste management policies in Kenya: challenges and opportunities. Cities and Health, v. 6, p. 528-535, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2022.2071566
» https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2022.2071566 -
BATISTA, Marcio; CAIADO, Rodrigo Goyannes Gusmão; GONÇALVES QUELHAS, Osvaldo Luiz; LIMA, Gilson Brito Alves; LEAL FILHO, Walter; ROCHA YPARRAGUIRRE, Ivany Terezinha. A framework for sustainable and integrated municipal solid waste management: Barriers and critical factors to developing countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 312, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127516
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127516 -
BRASIL. Lei Federal nº 12.305 de agosto de 2010. Institui a Política Nacional de Resíduos Sólidos; altera a Lei nº 9.605, de 12 de fevereiro de 1998; e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, DF, 3 ago. 2010. Available at: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/lei/l12305.htm Accessed on: Feb. 12, 2024.
» https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/lei/l12305.htm - D’ÁVILA, Ananda Letícia Martins; ALFAIA, Arthur Tadeu Trindade; ANDRADE, Evelyn Viana; DIAS, Isabela Coimbra; MELO, André Cristiano Silva. Stakeholders and Responsibilities in Reverse Supply Chains: A Literature Review. InterScience Place. v. 19, p. 1-26, 2024.
-
DAVID JR, Victor Emery; JOHN, Yasinta; HUSSAIN, Shahid. Rethinking sustainability: a review of Liberia’s municipal solid waste management systems, status, and challenges. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, v. 22, p. 1299-1317, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-020-01046-x
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-020-01046-x -
DAVID JR., Victor Emery; WENCHAO, Jiang; JOHNA, Yasinta; MMEREKIB, Daniel. Solid waste management in Monrovia, Liberia: Implications for sustainable development. Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management, v. 45, p. 102-110, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.5276/JSWTM.2019.102
» https://doi.org/10.5276/JSWTM.2019.102 -
ELO, Satu; KYNGÄS, Helvi. The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, v. 62, p. 107-115, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
» https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x -
FERNANDO, R. Lalitha S. Solid waste management of local governments in the Western Province of Sri Lanka: An implementation analysis. Waste Management, v. 84, p. 194-203, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.11.030
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.11.030 -
FRANCESCHI, Fabiana F.; VEGA, Lili T.; SANCHES-PEREIRA, Alessandro; CHERNI, Judith A.; GÓMEZ, Maria F. A combined approach to improve municipal solid waste management in upper-middle-income countries: the case of Sabana Centro, Colombia. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, v. 24, p. 2547-2562, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-022-02333-x
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-022-02333-x -
HAN, Xuemei; HU, Ci; LIN, Ling. A study on the impact of China’s urbanization on the quantity of municipal solid waste produced. Waste Management and Research, v. 38. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X19886912
» https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X19886912 -
INSTITUTO BRASILEIRO DE GEOGRAFIA E ESTATÍSTICA (IBGE). Amazônia Legal: quadro geográfico de referência para produção, análise edisseminação de estatísticas. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE, 2022. Available at: https://www.ibge.gov.br/apps/quadrogeografico/pdf/2022_040_amazleg.pdf Accessed on: Feb. 14, 2024.
» https://www.ibge.gov.br/apps/quadrogeografico/pdf/2022_040_amazleg.pdf -
INSTITUTO BRASILEIRO DE INFORMAÇÃO EM CIÊNCIA E TECNOLOGIA (IBICT). Diagnóstico da Gestão e Gerenciamento de Resíduos Sólidos na Amazônia Legal. Brasília, DF: Ibict, 2021. Available at: https://www.amazonialegalsemresiduo.ibict.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2021.-IBICT.-ALSR.-Diagnóstico-da-Gestão-e-Gerenciamento-de-Resíduos-Sólidos-na-Amazônia-Legal.-1.pdf Accessed on: Feb. 15, 2024.
» https://www.amazonialegalsemresiduo.ibict.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2021.-IBICT.-ALSR.-Diagnóstico-da-Gestão-e-Gerenciamento-de-Resíduos-Sólidos-na-Amazônia-Legal.-1.pdf -
JALALIPOUR, Haniyeh; JAAFARZADEH, Neematollah; MORSCHECK, Gert; NARRA, Satyanarayana; NELLES, Michael. Adoption of sustainable solid waste management and treatment approaches: A case study of Iran. Waste Management and Research, v. 39, p. 975-984, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X20978300
» https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X20978300 -
JEBARANJITHAM, J. Nimita; CHRISTYRAJ, Jackson Durairaj Selvan; PRASANNAN, Adhimoorthy; RAJAGOPALAN, Kamarajan; CHELLADURAI, Karthikeyan Subbiahanadar; GNANARAJA, Jemima Kamalapriya John Samuel. Current scenario of solid waste management techniques and challenges in Covid-19 – A review. Heliyon, v. 8, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09855
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09855 -
JERIN, Delufa Tuz; SARA, Hasna Hena; RADIA, Marzuka Ahmad; HEMA, Prianka Sultana; HASAN, Shahriar; URME, Salma Akter; AUDIA, Camilla; HASAN, Md. Tanvir; QUAYYUM, Zahidul. An overview of progress towards implementation of solid waste management policies in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Heliyon, v. 8, n. 2, e08918, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08918
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08918 -
KHANAL, Ashish; AROYEHUN, Adeyinka Richard; GARBA, Auwal; IBRAHIM, M.B.; ADEWALE, Pedro Sanjo; GIRI, Suja. Role of Informal Waste Workers for Sustainable Waste Management in Nigeria and Nepal. Journal of Environmental Informatics Letters, v. 10, p. 1-9, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3808/jeil.202300114
» https://doi.org/10.3808/jeil.202300114 -
KURNIAWAN, Tonni Agustiono; LO, Waihung; SINGH, Deepak; OTHMAN, Mohd Hafiz Dzarfan; AVTAR, Ram; HWANG, Goh Hui; ALBADARIN, Ahmad B.; KERN, Axel Olaf; SHIRAZIAN, Saeed. A societal transition of MSW management in Xiamen (China) toward a circular economy through integrated waste recycling and technological digitization. Environmental Pollution, v. 277, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116741
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116741 -
LAWSHE, Charles Hubert. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, v. 28, 1975. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
» https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x -
MAALOUF, Amani; AGAMUTHU, Pariatamby. Waste management evolution in the last five decades in developing countries – A review. Waste Management and Research, v. 41, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X231160099
» https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X231160099 -
MALAV, Lal Chand; YADAV, Krishna Kumar; GUPTA, Neha; KUMAR, Sandeep; SHARMA, Gulshan Kumar; KRISHNAN, Santhana; REZANIA, Shahabaldin; KAMYAB, Hesam; PHAM, Quoc Bao; YADAV, Shalini; BHATTACHARYYA, Suparna; YADAV, Virendra Kumar; BACH, Quang-Vu. A review on municipal solid waste as a renewable source for waste-to-energy project in India: Current practices, challenges, and future opportunities. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 277, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123227
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123227 -
MANCINI, Sandro Donnini; MEDEIROS, Gerson Araújo de; PAES, Michel Xocaira; OLIVEIRA, Benone Otávio Souza de; ANTUNES, Maria Lúcia Pereira; SOUZA, Ricardo Gabbay de; FERRAZ, José Lázaro; BORTOLETO, Ana Paula; OLIVEIRA, José Antônio Puppim de. Circular Economy and Solid Waste Management: Challenges and Opportunities in Brazil. Circular Economy and Sustainability, v. 1, p. 261-282, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00031-2
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00031-2 -
MARSHALL, Rachael E.; FARAHBAKHSH, Khosrow. Systems approaches to integrated solid waste management in developing countries. Waste Management, v. 33, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.12.023
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.12.023 -
MARTINS, Vitor William Batista; NUNES, Denilson Ricardo de Lucena; MELO, André Cristiano Silva; BRANDÃO, Rayra; BRAGA JÚNIOR, Antônio Erlindo; NAGATA, Verônica de Menezes Nascimento. Analysis of the Activities That Make Up the Reverse Logistics Processes and Their Importance for the Future of Logistics Networks: An Exploratory Study Using the TOPSIS Technique. Logistics, v. 6, n. 3, p. 60, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6030060
» https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6030060 -
MCDOUGALL, Forbes R.; WHITE, Peter R.; FRANKE, Marina; HINDLE, Peter. Integrated solid waste management: A life cycle inventory. 2. ed. Malden: Blackwell Science, 2007. p. 532. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/9780470999677.fmatter Accessed on: Mar. 02 2024.
» https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/9780470999677.fmatter -
MELO, André Cristiano Silva; NUNES, Denilson Ricardo Lucena de; BRAGA JÚNIOR, Antônio Erlindo; LIMA, Rayra Brandão de; NAGATA, Verônica de Menezes Nascimento; MARTINS, Vitor William Batista. Analysis of activities that make up reverse logistics processes: proposition of a conceptual framework. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management. v. 19, n. 2, e20221376, 2022. https://doi.org/10.14488/BJOPM.2022.001
» https://doi.org/10.14488/BJOPM.2022.001 -
NOBRE, Alice Vasconcelos; OLIVEIRA, Caio Cézar Rodrigues; NUNES, Denilson Ricardo de Lucena; MELO, André Cristiano Silva; GUIMARAES, Gil Eduardo; ANHOLON, Rosley; MARTINS, Vitor William Batista. Analysis of Decision Parameters for Route Plans and Their Importance for Sustainability: An exploratory study using the TOPSIS technique. Logistics, v. 6, n. 2, p. 32, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6020032
» https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6020032 -
NOGUEIRA, Caio José Lima Gouvêa; ROCHA, Helton Pinheiro da; NUNES, Denilson Ricardo de Lucena; SANTOS, Iedo Souza; LIMA, Alberto Carlos de Melo; MELO, André Cristiano Silva. Current Context in Brazil and in the State of Pará Regarding Studies on Electro-Electronic Waste Integrated into Reverse Logistics: A Systematic Literature Review (SLR). Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, v. 18, n. 11, p. e09643, 2024. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n11-044
» https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n11-044 -
PHEAKDEY, Dek Vimean; QUAN, Nguyen Van; KHANH, Tran Dang; XUAN, Tran Dang. Challenges and Priorities of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Cambodia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, v. 19, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148458
» https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148458 -
PIAO, Roberta de Castro Souza; VINCENZI, Ticiana Braga; VAZQUEZ-BRUST, Diego A.; YAKOVLEVA, Natalia; BONSU, S.; CARVALHO, M. M. Barriers toward circular economy transition: Exploring differentstakeholders’ perspectives. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, v. 31, p. 153-168. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2558
» https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2558 -
PRAJAPATI, Kishan Kumar; YADAV, Monika; SINGH, Rao Martand; PARIKH, Priti; PAREEK, Nidhi; VIVEKANAND, Vivekanand. An overview of municipal solid waste management in Jaipur city, India - Current status, challenges and recommendations. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, v. 152, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111703
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111703 -
PRITI MANDAL, Kasturi. Review on evolution of municipal solid waste management in India: practices, challenges and policy implications. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, v. 21, p. 1263-1279, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-019-00880-y
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-019-00880-y -
RAHMASARY, Annisa Noyara; ROBERT, Suzanne; CHANG, I-Shin; JING, Wu; PARK, Jeryang; BLUEMLING, Bettina; KOOP, Stef; LEEUWEN, Kees van. Overcoming the Challenges of Water, Waste and Climate Change in Asian Cities. Environmental Management, v. 63, p. 520-535, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01137-y
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01137-y -
RAJENDIRAN, Balamurugan; ARUMUGAM, Arun; SUBRAMANIAM, Sudagar. Challenges in municipal solid waste management: a key. International Journal of Ambient Energy, v. 43, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2020.1784275
» https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2020.1784275 -
RAMPASSO, Izabela Simon; SIQUEIRA, Renê Grottoli; MARTINS, Vitor W. B.; ANHOLON, Rosley; QUELHAS, Osvaldo Luiz Gonçalves; LEAL FILHO, Walter; SALVIA, Amanda Lange; SANTA-EULALIA, Luis Antonio. Implementing social projects with undergraduate students: an analysis of essential characteristics. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, v. 22, p. 198-214, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-11-2019-0323
» https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-11-2019-0323 -
SHIJIANG, Xiao; DONG, Huijuan; GENG, Yong; FRANCISCO, Medel-Jimenez; PAN, Hengyu; WU, Fei. An overview of the municipal solid waste management modes and innovations in Shanghai, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v. 27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09398-5
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09398-5 -
SIAGIAN, Erwin Sondang; SUMARYANA, Asep; WIDIANINGSIH, Ida; NURASA, Heru. Public-private partnerships in solid waste management: arrangements in Indonesia. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, v. 41, p. 56-62, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2019.1592845
» https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2019.1592845 -
SILVA, Christian Luiz da; WEINS, Niklas; POTINKARA, Maija. Formalizing the informal? A perspective on informal waste management in the BRICS through the lens of institutional economics. Waste Management, v. 99, p. 79-89, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.08.023
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.08.023 -
SILVA, Isabela Caroline Ribeiro da. Aplicação do Método de Lawshe Para Avaliação da Percepção de Clientes de Belo Horizonte a Respeito dos Serviços de Supermercados. 2016. 71 p. Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso (Especialização) – Faculdade de Ciências Econômicas da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 2016. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/1843/44102 Accessed on: Feb 12, 2024.
» http://hdl.handle.net/1843/44102 -
SZIGETHY, Leonardo; ANTENOR, Samuel. Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos no Brasil: Desafios tecnológicos, políticos e econômicos. Centro de Pesquisa em Ciência, Tecnologia e Sociedade, 2020. Available at: https://www.ipea.gov.br/cts/pt/central-de-conteudo/artigos/artigos/217-residuos-solidos-urbanos-no-brasil-desafios-tecnologicos-politicos-e-economicos Accessed on: Feb. 10, 2024.
» https://www.ipea.gov.br/cts/pt/central-de-conteudo/artigos/artigos/217-residuos-solidos-urbanos-no-brasil-desafios-tecnologicos-politicos-e-economicos -
UN-HABITAT. Solid waste management in the world’s cities: water and sanitation in the world’s cities 2010. London: Routledge, 2010. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849774871
» https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849774871 -
WANG, Chao; SUN, Yongkang; LIM, Ming K.; GHADIMI, Pezhman; AZADNIA, Amir Hossein. An analysis of barriers for successful implementation of municipal solid waste management in Beijing: an integrated DEMATEL-MMDE-ISM approach. Industrial Management and Data Systems, v. 123, p. 931-966, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-08-2022-0464
» https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-08-2022-0464 -
WEEKES, Jasmine G.; WASIL, J. C. Musa; LLAMAS, K. Malave; AGRINZONI, C. Morales. Solid waste management system for small island developing states. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, v. 7, n. 2, p. 259-272. 2021. https://doi.org/10.22034/gjesm.2021.02.08
» https://doi.org/10.22034/gjesm.2021.02.08 -
WILSON, David C.; VELIS, Costas A.; RODIC, Ljiljana. Integrated sustainable waste management in developing countries. Waste and Resource Management, v. 166, p. 52-68, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1680/warm.12.00005
» https://doi.org/10.1680/warm.12.00005
Edited by
-
Editor:
Luciano Matos Queiroz https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8390-1274
