- Introduction – Solid Waste Management
Solid-waste management (SWM) refers to the collection, treatment, and disposal of solid material after it has been thrown away. Societies have always engaged in various types of waste management, especially since the Industrial Revolution, when waste was first formally differentiated and discarded. In the 20th century, waste management improved with new technologies such as garbage grinders, compaction trucks, and pneumatic collection systems. When the public and governments noticed the impact of waste on health, they also realised the urgency to prioritise the management of such waste. As the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) affirmed, “tackling waste management (WM) helps to address more than half of the high-level sustainable development goals (SDGs) of the Post-2015 Development Agenda and promises significant early reductions in greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions throughout the economy” (UNEP & ISWA, 2015). While developing countries are impacted by unsustainably managed waste, they also have no control over over 90% of waste. (World Bank, 2022) Most lower-income countries have no control systems, an issue that leads to direct and indirect health consequences, such as breathing polluted air and blocked watercourses. The major waste generator sectors are Construction & Demolition (C&D), Commercial & Industrial (C&I) and Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). Municipal waste generation is linked with country income; in other words, lower-income corresponds to lower waste generation.
The UNEP pinpointed a WM hierarchy as a framework of guidelines organised from the most efficient to the least efficient way methods towards a green economy. In order from the top down, the principles in this hierarchy are:
Recycling is more frequent in high-income countries, while the rates in low and lower-middle-income countries range between 20-40%. Recycling depends on the degree of mixing materials and of the concentration of materials in products. “Products with a lower degree of mixing and higher values of the component materials are economical to recycle, while those with higher degrees of mixing and lower values are not.” In particular, the issue with recycling methods is often related to the concentration of critical materials, which is very low. (UNEP & ISWA, 2015)
According to international agencies, to improve WM an integrated approach should be preferred to a gradual approach. An integrated solid waste management (ISWM) system is based on reducing, reusing, and recycling waste. Data collection, analysis of waste, setting targets, and identification of stakeholders are crucial processes to pinpoint an ISWM implementation plan. As stated by (M.A. Memon, 2010), to collect data for the WM, firstly we should identify the administrative boundaries of a specific city and the production sectors that generate waste, specifically knowing the regulations and the fiscal policies, the institutions working in that particular territory and the current technology. Knowing the participants is equally important to proceed with the creation or changing of an efficient system. The stakeholders can be waste generators, service providers, regulators and the Government, community, neighbourhood, and whoever deals with the resource (re)generation. (Memon, 2010)
This paper aims to offer a preliminary step in research on the matter of glass and fabric management in Lagos State, Nigeria and where they may be disposed of. The paper begins with an overview of the political-economic situation and waste management system in Nigeria, outlining its basic structure and critical points. It goes on to detail case studies of glass and textile waste management systems–respectively, in Germany and in Italy–in order to outline potential circular systems of waste management in such countries. The paper concludes with a basic outline of policy and research recommendations aimed at initiating efficient circular waste management systems and eventually identifying ideal locations for the processing and disposal of glass and textile waste in Lagos State.
1.2 The political-economic situation and waste management in Nigeria
From an economic point of view, Nigeria experienced a sustained growth of 7% annually from 2000 to 2014. However, in the following seven years growth decelerated, and GDP plateaued because of monetary and exchange rate policy distortions. The Nigerian economy has to deal with minor oil production alongside the fuel subsidies system. Projections estimated an average of 3,4% growth from 2023 to 2025. If the government persists to liberalise the economy, insecurity could be reduced and rising funds and investments could be allocated for social and economic development projects. (The World Bank in Nigeria, 2023)
1.2.1 Waste Management in Nigeria
Nigeria is the most populated country of the African continent and produces 32 million tons/year of waste. Most of the waste is generated by households, local industrials, artisans and traders and it is usually left and thrown on the streets. The municipal solid waste management systems, in particular the collection and disposal phases, are not suitable for the amount of waste Nigeria’s federal states generate. However, the previous governments launched a series of laws to try to protect the environment.
In the official National Policy on Solid Waste Management (2020), the government affirmed that Nigeria is facing many challenges in handling SWM, such as inadequate laws and legislations, the lack of technical capacity and reliable data, and the lack of coordination between the institutions that should work together in the path toward a sustainable WM.
In the aforementioned National Policy document, many regulations and institutions were listed, but research shows that they have not been effective. According to data, many cities in Nigeria use open dumps. More than 50% of residents of Maiduguri in Northern Nigeria and Ughelli in Southern Nigeria locate their waste in open grounds which are unhealthy, smelly, and attract animals that may cause illnesses. Open dumps cause environmental challenges such as blockade of sewers, drain networks and choking of water bodies. Landfill is considered to be the cheapest and most convenient system to get rid of solid waste, this is why they are so widespread in lower-income countries. The concept of waste recovery, recycling and waste-to-energy systems is relatively new in the practice of waste management in Nigeria (Nwosu & Chukwueloka, 2020). As mentioned before, to implement an integrated sustainable waste management framework it is necessary to consider all the components of infrastructure, all the stakeholders, all the strategic aspects from political to social and economic ones.
The 2020 National Policy on Solid Waste Management declared that Nigeria will follow the Federal Government of Nigeria '5R's hierarchy’, which is quite different from the internationally recognized one. The most preferred method is reduction, which means decreasing waste generation involving institutional actors, manufacturers, educating the public to sustainability. The second method is repairing waste to give them a second life whenever it is possible. The third method of the hierarchy is reuse and recycle, while the last one is recovery, which is the controlled extraction of materials or energy from waste.
A WM action programme must promote market facilitation, investments in re-processing capacity and research, institutionalise management information data, encouraging recycling and make waste generators aware of their responsibility, educating on the potential wealth engendered by a sustainable solid waste management system. (National Policy on Solid Waste Management, 2020) The traditional SWM Strategy in Nigeria is the following: waste generation and characterization; waste collection and transportation; waste disposal/treatment. (Nwosu & Chukwueloka, 2020)
1.2.2 Institutional actors
The SWM policy must be executed at the national level and then at the State and local governments levels. The apex of the institutional pyramid is the Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEnv) which is responsible for promoting the implementation of the guidelines and standards on SWM, reviewing and reforming the existing legislation, making sure that the State and Local government institutions are aligned with the national system, and ensuring annual inspections and monitoring of the progress at the national level through the Department of Pollution Control & Environmental Health and National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA). FMEnv must promote waste minimization, segregation at source as well as reuse, recycling and recovery. To improve the quality of WM, standards for equipment and technologies should be established. As part of the recognized institutions, NGOs and community-based organisations should be involved in the projects. Environmental education and investments must be sought both through national and international organisations. To assign duties to each institutional role, the government has underlined a few principles, among which: decentralisation, infrastructure, the exploitation of existing resources, greater community awareness, and increased data collection.
Federal states must prepare plans, provide infrastructure, and focus on financial, social inclusion and private sector participation. In particular, the State governments should legislate to regulate activities and make sure that the national provisions are followed in its territory.
In order to supervise the pursuing of provisions, the State WM Authority was established to collect and dispose of solid waste, to provide commercial waste services both to the state and local governments and hire contractors to manage waste. It is responsible for conveying research and creating a State Solid Waste Database composed of information from monitoring, evaluation, and auditing processes. The State WM Authority is also in control of the public awareness campaigns and the involvement of the private sector stakeholders.
Local governments must create a 5-year plan to ensure an efficient allocation of its resources and reiterate the national and State actions by, for example, encouraging NGOs and CBOs participation and involving the private sector. (National Policy, 2020)
1.2.3 Lagos’s case
A practical example of the situation in Nigeria was reported on The Conversation, where journalists found that the UNEP waste hierarchy is not followed by the Lagos community. In particular, they found that no waste separation is applied by residents; on the contrary, waste is accumulated in plastic bags which are transferred to the dumpsite. In 1991 the Lagos State Waste Management Authority was set up to collect, transport and dispose of municipal and industrial waste. Last year, Lagos promoted the Adopt-a-Bin initiative to effectively manage waste. 40.000 bins were distributed to households and commercial activities. Each user would have two different coloured bins: one for mixed waste and the other for recycling waste. According to what the governor said when the new programme was publicly presented, the bins are “smart and equipped with intelligent devices that enable tracking and identification.” (Nwannekanma, 2022)
2. WM in the glass production sector
Glass waste has become a valuable waste in most of the European countries thanks to the deposit-refund systems. The first patent was created in 1920, but the first reverse-vending machine was manufactured only in the 1950s. Since the 1970s, the deposit-refund system has been applied by many countries, such as eleven North American states and twelve Canadian provinces. The reverse-vending machine became a tool to apply a closed-loop system, the principle on which the circular economy model is based.
The deposit-refund scheme involves producers, retailers, consumers, operators and recyclers. The producer gives the product to the retailer who gives back the deposit charge. The retailer sells the product to the consumer at a price that includes the deposit charge. The consumer can bring back the glass to the retailer and receive the deposit chargeback,.after which the retailer can deliver it to the operator who gives back the deposit charge to the retailer. The operator has previously received the deposit charge from the producer. At the end of the process, the recycler pays the operator after receiving the materials. (Massi, 2020)
The goals of the deposit-refund system are to provide incentives against littering and to collect hazardous materials or high-value materials for recycling or reuse. Incentives could be the consequent gain from recovered materials and, of course, a decrease in public expenditure. (Laubinger, Brown, Dubois, & Börkey, 2022) The deposit-refund system (DRS) is so widespread also because the consumer is economically and environmentally involved. By paying a surcharge on the purchased product, the consumer is paying a deposit on the packaging. When the product is finished, the consumer is able to return the plastic or glass bottles to have the deposit chargeback. By applying the scheme, states implement and incentivize an efficient resource recovery mechanism.
The deposit amount depends on the type and size of the product and it should be adjustable. When consumers do not return the bottles, the deposit is considered to be unredeemed. (Laubinger, Brown, Dubois, & Börkey, 2022) Unredeemed deposits can be used to cover overhead operating costs. If governments have total or partial ownership of unclaimed deposits, they may spend the amount to cover externalities generated from the disposal process. Regarding the costs, they differ in the density of collection points and in how bottles are collected; manual collection implies that workers would be employed to sort materials, while automatic collection leads to more efficient and faster monitoring. When unredeemed deposits and revenues from the sale of recovered materials are not enough to cover all the operating costs, producers may include handling fees.
To implement a DRS, incentives to producers (such as a high market value of materials), policy intervention, and mandatory targets that push the industry to anticipate legislation or avoid liability to other producers, should be encouraged. Deposit-refund systems can coexist with other Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) policies. As defined by OECD, “Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle.” (OECD) Basically, the aim of EPR is to shift responsibility from municipalities towards producers, stimulating producers to consider their environmental footprint in the designing phase.
If a DRS is applied together with other EPR tools, recycling increases. A producer can individually or collectively fulfil its duties. EPR fees are established based on the recyclability, recycling rates and the presence of hazardous substances. These parameters are considered to increase the reuse and recovery of materials, consequently reducing end-of-life costs. (Laubinger, Brown, Dubois, & Börkey, Modulated fees for Extended Producer Responsibility schemes (EPR), 2021)
2.1 Germany Case: a solid WM system
After the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, Germany became famous for its efficient waste management system. The backbones of the German WM system are having clear laws, commitment to regularly promote campaigns and a fee methodology. Since the 1991 Packaging Ordinance, packaging manufacturers and distributors operating in Germany must fulfil their EPR obligations, which ensure recycling, recovery and reuse. In force from 03 July 2021, the Packaging Act regulates the distribution of packaging. The German packaging industry founded a Dual System Deutschland, which is a system to pick up household packaging alongside the municipal waste-collection systems. Moreover, Germany accompanied a systematic law production to educational campaigns. As an example, The Berliner Stadtreinigung (Berlin Waste Management, BSR) uses specific enterprise to manage the waste of 2 million households. Like many WM companies, BSR gives differently coloured bins to households to recycle as many waste materials as possible. Bins are divided into waste that cannot be recycled, organic waste, metal & plastic waste, papers, bottles & cans, and bulky waste. (BSR, 2024)
BSR is particularly keen to educate people to correctly recycle, as can be seen onBSR’s website where the enterprise underlines the importance of recognizing what can be reused and what can be recycled.
Berlin also has a PAYT system, which means that users pay a fixed fee plus a variable fee. The aim is to apply the “polluter pays” principle. The variable fee depends on the amount of waste. PAYT may be based on volume, sacks, weight, and frequency of the collection. PAYT systems should adopt electronic systems to identify users and measure waste. (European Commission, 2024)
2.1.1 The Pfand System
The Deutsche Pfandsystem GmbH (DPG) has been implemented since 2005 and was founded by the German Retail Association (HDE) & the Federal Association of the German Food Industry (BVE). As another deposit-refund system, the DPG is a one-way deposit system where manufacturers, retailers, collectors and consumers are involved in a sustainable loop cycle.
Producers supply materials to retailers from whom consumers buy the products. When the consumer finishes the product, he/she can return the used plastic and glass bottles to the retailers’ shops. The reverse-vending machines placed in the shops recognize the bottles’ Global Trade Item Number (GTIN) that can be recycled through the system (marked with the DPG Marking) and calculate the deposit the consumer should receive. The deposit payment would be received from the producer and used bottles are sold to the recycler companies. The new products are then reintroduced in the commodity cycle.
The deposit is reimbursed by retailers to consumers who return the materials, thus the producers repay the retailers. Glass bottles are usually linked with a deposit from 0.08 to 0.15 €, in proportion to their reusability, while single-use bottles have a 0.25€ deposit. BSR also lets people leave bottles on the sidewalks next to the bins to help the homeless or people who need to raise money with the Pfandsystem.
Some beverages have a mandatory deposit: almost all types of one-way plastic bottles and cans have a deposit. Some types of beverages do not have a mandatory deposit if the packaging is a beverage carton, gable, or cylinder packaging, PE tubular bags or foil stand-up pouches The products that have a volume of less than 0.1 litres or more than 3 litres are not subject to a mandatory deposit. (DPG – Deutsche Pfandsystsem GmbH, 2022)
Starting from January 1, 2024, the DPG system has been extended to the milk, mixed milk beverages and other milk products. (DPG, 2024) As a result of this system, in 2019, 467.4 kilotons of PET beverage packaging were consumed only in Germany, of which 9.5% have no mandatory deposit. (DPG, Environmental aspects, 2024)
3. WM in textile production: post-industrial and post-consumer
As far as concerns textile and garment waste disposal, it is estimated that billions of pieces of clothing are discarded when unsold and end up in landfills or are incinerated (Mckinsey Global Fashion Index, 2023). Clothing waste includes pre-consumption–meaning waste generated along the production process–and after -consumption, referring to the used clothes that need to be disposed of. There is also a difference between post-industrial textiles wastes (the waste generated during textile and apparel manufacturing process), which could include waste produced from cutting and cloth disposal, quality rejections and excess fabrics, and post-consumer textile wastes (PCTW), meaning the textile products that are disposed of as the owner no longer wants it (Domina & Koch,1999; Hawley,2006).
While individual consumers are becoming more aware of the matter, most of the regulations must be undertaken at a legislative and global level. Even when the individual consumer is aware of different uses and techniques that garment waste could have before being disposed of, on the structured level there is still a lack of coordination and regulation. Most initiatives are left to individual enterprises or private actors that want to improve their sustainability rates. Although many textiles can be recycled or reused, these practices are not fully included in the global supply chain and remain just best practices to be implemented.
Another issue regarding garments is that it is one of the most unsustainable industries in the world, due to the nature of the materials, such as the physical fiber, chemical colors, or treatments. Globally, the fashion industry is accelerating towards a more sustainable approach, including prevention and minimization of both pollution and waste in its production phases (Mckinsey Global Fashion Index, 2023). In order to prevent waste and pollution from textiles the use of more sustainable materials, like bio-based and compostable materials or hemp, and innovation is the first step.
Regarding the recycling phase, the most used and effective technique is textile-to-textile recycling, which means adopting already processed textiles or garments to produce different items. This is both sustainable and useful in terms of reducing the amount of waste that would go to landfills. According to McKinsey, by 2030 this recycling approach could be applied to a percentage between 18 to 26 percent of gross textile waste in Europe. There are already a series of companies that specialize in this: Renewcell, Ambercycle, Circ, Gr3n and Worn Again Technologies (Mckinsey Global Fashion Index, 2023). In post-industrial waste, efforts often include grassroots collaboration and groups of industries or researchers that develop innovative technologies. To address PCTW, on the other hand, a more complex and comprehensive group of measures has to be implemented, including – but not limited to - collecting data on volumes, addressing consumers habits and necessities, developing more general solid waste management policies.
Innovative legislation include the EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles, according to whichall textile products should be long-lived and recyclable by 2030. The EU Waste Framework Directive states that by 2025, member states are required to have separate textile-waste collections, though this is becoming difficult to implement. For this to happen, the“separate collection, sorting, re-use and recycling capacities”--which need infrastructure and technological investments–are required.
Furthermore, The Commission is proposing to introduce mandatory Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes for textiles in all member States. EPR schemes “require producers to take responsibility for the entire lifecycle of their products, in particular at the end of the product’s life”. Under the proposal, the level of the financial contributions of the producers will be based on the circularity and environmental performance of textile products (referred to as "eco-modulation"). This is a sort of mixed model that includes a recycling and incentives approach. (EU, Waste Framework Directive, 2020).
3.1 Case Study: Textile-to-Textile Recycling in Italy
A case study from Italy will be illustrated as follows; it takes into account a small-medium size enterprise that successfully activates textile-to-textile recycling practices. The name of the factory is Rifo Lab, and it is set in Tuscany, in the city of Prato.
Rifo Lab makes quality garments and accessories, using recycled and recyclable textile fibers. Starting from old clothes, they produce new yarn and with this, they craft new products. They recycle cashmere, wool, denim, silk and cotton. With cashmere (made out of 95% recycled cashmere and 5% recycled wool) they can reduce the use of water by 66% and Co2 emissions by 85%. The starting material is sorted by color and then reduced to fiber, then spun again to obtain recycled yarns, which significantly reduces water and chemical consumption compared to virgin yarn production. In the case of silk, it adopts a pre-consumer recycling process, using recycled industrial surplus of virgin Mulberry silk scraps. And as for cotton, the recycled product is obtained through complete recycling of waste from other processes with a pre-consumer approach.
In 2022 they recycled 13,8 tons of old garments and used 85% or recycled materials. Other elements that contribute to their success in terms of reducing waste, is that they limit overproduction and large-scale production and they are committed to reduce packaging. The way they function also considers the consumer textile waste, by providing the possibility to deliver used garments to their factory from all areas of Italy After collecting, there is a sorting process and then the items are re-used or recycled into new products.
4. Waste Management implications: finance and communication and awareness strategies
Every Waste Management service generates costs, namely investment costs such as design, planning, equipment, etc.,, as well as operation costs such as labour, fuel, energy maintenance, and administration. It is important to highlight that the costs for raising awareness campaigns and training, environmental auditors are not usually prioritised and that most of the costs are operating costs (about 60-70%).
Nevertheless formal WM activity may also earn money by selling recovered and recyclable materials, energy, and compost. Some materials are exchanged in a global market where price fluctuations are a fundamental factor for the material’s distribution, while unit costs are strictly related to the country’s income level and the density of WM regulations.
Benefits from a controlled WM system are social and political consensus, as well as community cohesion. Waste prevention also helps to reduce end-of-pipe WM costs and, of course, allows a country to save raw materials. Implementing a sustainable WM system is thought to lead to an increase in green jobs, improvement in livelihood, and reduction of GHG emissions and air pollutants.
The nature of MSWM implies that its control is limited, which means that non-paying users cannot be excluded from this particular service. “For example, street sweeping and safe disposal are public goods, since consumption of the clean environment cannot be restricted; the consumption of door-to-door collection is individual but the use is again common, so this is mainly a public good; the extraction, trading and processing of recyclables are examples of private goods.” (UNEP & ISWA, 2015) the responsibility is usually on the municipality, especially in lower-income countries where regulations are often weaker than in higher-income countries. Waste management can be a private business as well; this is the case in middle and higher-income countries where many waste generators, both public and private, are considered to be directly responsible for their waste. From the 1980s, a general privatisation of municipalities’ services occurred following the neo-liberal flow in most of the Western economies. Many companies, both public and private, thus flourished in the SWM sector.
The financial model is composed of the client, which is a waste generator, and the operator, which is the company delivering the service. Both revenue and investment finance have to be made: the former to pay the operator, the latter to maintain the service as efficiently as possible by investing in innovation. Each model differs in the chosen source of investment, how revenues are collected, whether the operator is public or private, and how much the SWM service is integrated. The more a system is controlled, the more businesses are protected by the legislation. Some businesses prefer to use a “charge method” linking the cost and revenue with the weight of waste, others prefer charging for the service in general, not focusing on the waste quantity. The public model is based on the municipal responsibility of the WM. As a service's revenues, municipalities have an annual budget that is raised with the local tax system or a national government’s funds. In this case, the problem could be that the public service is continuously influenced by politics and by the current administration's ideals.
This issue could be tackled by establishing a public-private partnership, where private providers deliver the service to the local administration. The key is pinpointed in a stable partnership ensured by a balanced contract between public and private actors. As urbanisation increases, urban waste must often be displaced to other territories, leading to inter-municipal cooperation, thereby achieving economies of scale and, consequently, more benefits for small local administrations that enjoy results from others’ investments. However, an inter-municipality organisation may have pros and cons, such as small municipalities not having decision-making power or difficulty collecting revenues. According to the Global Waste Management Outlook, a direct user charge or tax may be a good choice. In certain cases, the fee was added to other energy bills: it is the case of Greece (waste fee added to electricity fee). Nevertheless, sometimes citizens tend to consider WM as a service that should be free. (UNEP & ISWA, 2015)
5. Conclusions and recommendations
- Coordinate institutions and involve communities in data collection on quantities of waste generated and consumer behavior;
- Sharing best practices and collaborating with other countries’ regulations and institutions;
- National, State, and Municipality government investment in re-processing of waste;
- Raising awareness at community level–through educational programs, communications campaigns, etc.--on waste management hierarchy (prevention, minimization, reuse, recycling, other recovery including energy recovery, landfills & controlled (formal) disposal, and uncontrolled (informal) disposal).
- Further development of Recovery/controlled extraction of materials or energy from waste generated.
- Suggestions for future research:
- The present analysis is based on desk research which outlines case studies and methods for Lagos State WMA to implement in coming years, but it is necessary to triangulate with authority representatives to evaluate feasibility.
- It may be possible to convert existing structures into glass and textile waste management facilities according to the models described above, for which it would be necessary to do an in-depth analysis of the suitability of such structures for the models described above.
- Finally, it may also be necessary to conduct a contextual analysis of inter-institutional relations and community willingness to participate in such initiatives to understand potential stakeholder interest in implementing them.
Matilde Pierattini (Head Researcher G.E.O. - Environment Area) & Miriam Viscusi (Junior Researcher G.E.O. - Environment Area)
Bibliography
Bank, T. W. (2022, 02 11). Solid Waste Management. Tratto da https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/brief/solid-waste-management A-1
Bank, T. W. (2023, 10 02). The World Bank in Nigeria . Tratto da World Bank : https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/nigeria/overview A-1
BSR. (2024). BSR information in English. Tratto da BSR: https://www.bsr.de/die-berliner-stadtreinigung-in-englischer-sprache-26142.php A-1
Commission, E. (2024). Pay-as.you-throw. Tratto da greenbestpractice.jrc.ec.europa.eu: https://greenbestpractice.jrc.ec.europa.eu/node/7 A-1
Commission, E. Circular economy for textiles: taking responsibility to reduce, reuse and recycle textile waste and boosting markets for used textiles. Tratto da https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_3635 A-1
Commission, E. Textile Strategy. Tratto da https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/textiles-strategy_en A-1
Commission, E. (s.d.). Waste framework directive: Waste Framework Directive. Tratto da European Commission: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/waste-framework-directive_en A-1
Commission, E. Waste shipments . Tratto da https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/waste-shipments_en A-1
Eucolight. Extended Producer Responsibility. Tratto da https://www.eucolight.org/about-us/extended-producer-responsibility/ A-2
Eurostat. (2023, 01). Waste statistics. Tratto da eurostat: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Waste_statistics#Total_waste_generation A-1
GmbH, D. -D. (2022). Overview of beverage subject to deposit. Tratto da DPG - Deutsche Pfansystem GmbH: https://dpg-pfandsystem.de/index.php/en/ A-1
GmbH, D. -D. (2024). Environmental aspects. Tratto da DPG: https://dpg-pfandsystem.de/index.php/en/the-one-way-deposit-system/environmental-aspects.html A-1
GmbH, D. D. (2024). Useful information. Tratto da DPG: https://dpg-pfandsystem.de/index.php/en/the-one-way-deposit-system/useful-information A-1
GmbH, D. -D. Beverage manufacturers and importers (First Distributors). Tratto da DPG - Deutsche Pfandsystem GmbH: https://dpg-pfandsystem.de/index.php/en/stakeholders/beverage-manufacturers-and-importers.html A-1
Kiørboe, N. & et al. (2012). Prevention of Textile Waste: Material flows of textiles in three Nordic countries and suggestions on policy instruments. TemaNord, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen K,. doi:https://doi.org/10.6027/TN2012-545 B-1
Laubinger, F., Brown, A., Dubois, M., & Börkey, P. (2021). Modulated fees for Extended Producer Responsibility schemes (EPR). OECD. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/2a42f54b-en B-1
Laubinger, F., Brown, A., Dubois, M., & Börkey, P. (2022). Deposit-refund systems and the interplay with additional mandatory extended producer responsibility policies. OECD. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/a80f4b26-en B-1
Massi, E. (2020). From Trash to Cash: A Smarter Reverse-Vending Machine. In Call for change vol.2. University of Maastricht. B-1
McKinsey. (2023). The state of fashion. Tratto da the-state-of-fashion-2023-holding-onto-growth-as-global-clouds-gathers-vf.pdf B-1
Memon, M. A. (2010). Integrated solid waste management based on the 3R approach. Journal of Material Cycles Waste Management, 12, 30-40. doi:10.1007/s10163-009-0274-0 B-1
Nigeria, F. R. (2020). National Policy on Solid Waste Management . A-1
Nwannekanma, B. (2022, 02 24). Lagos unveils adopt-a-bin programme with 40,000 bins. Tratto da The Guardian News: https://guardian.ng/news/lagos-unveils-adopt-a-bin-programme-with-40000-bins/ B-1
Nwosu, A. O., & Chukwueloka, H. (2020). A Review of Solid Waste Management Strategies in Nigeria. Journal of Environment and Earth Science, 10(6). doi:10.7176/JEES/10-6-11 B-1
OECD. Control System for waste recovery. Tratto da https://www.oecd.org/env/waste/theoecdcontrolsystemforwasterecovery.htm A-1
OECD. Extended Producer Responsibility. Tratto da OECD : https://www.oecd.org/environment/extended-producer-responsibility.htm A-1
Piribauer, B., & Bartl, A. (2019, February). Textile recycling processes, state of the art and current developments: A mini review,. Waste Management & Research, 37(2), 112-119. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X18819277 B-1
Rapsikevičienė, J., Gurauskienė, I., & Jučienė, A. (2019). Model of Industrial Textile Waste Management. 75(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.erem.75.1.21703 B-1
Rifo Lab, Tratto da rifo-lab.com A-1
Rifo Lab (2022). From waste to new resources. Tratto da https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VziwPzLNqTc A-2
Santos, P. a. (2021). Practices for garment industry’s post-consumer textile waste management in the circular economy context: an analysis on literature. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, , 18(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.14488/BJOPM.2021.004 B-1
Santos, P. S., & al., e. (2021, April 5-8). Textile Waste Management Practices In The Garment Industry: a Circular Economy Perspective. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management . B-1
Sinha, P., & et al. . (2022). Addressing post-consumer textile waste in developing economies. The Journal of the textile institute, 112(9), 1887-1907. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2021.1954428 B-1
UNEP, & ISWA. (2015). Global Waste Management Outlook. UNEP. Tratto da https://www.uncclearn.org/wp-content/uploads/library/unep23092015.pdf A-1
Union, E. Textile Ecosystem transition pathway cocreation process. Tratto da https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/textiles-ecosystem/textiles-transition-pathway_en A-1
Yacout, D., & et al. (2015). Applying Waste Management in Textile Industry: Case Study an Egyptian Plant. The open Conference proceedings journal, 6, 35-40. B-1
Zhou, G., Gu, Y., Wu, Y., Gong, Y., Mu, X., Han, H., & Chang, T. (2020). Asystematic review of the deposit-refund system for beverage packaging: Operating mode, key parameter and development trend. Journal of Cleaner Production, 251. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119660 B-1
Content Information
1 Confirmed | Confirmed by other independent sources; logical in itself; coherent with other information on the topic. |
2 Presumably true | Not confirmed; logical in itself; coherent with other information on the topic. |
3 Maybe true | Not confirmed; reasonably logical in itself; coherent with some other information on the topic |
4 Uncertain | Not confirmed; possible but not logical in itself; no other information on the topic |
5 Improbable | Not confirmed; not logical in itself; contradicts with other information on the topic |
6 Not able to be evaluated | No basis to evaluate the validity of the information |
Trustworthiness of the source
A Trustworthy | No doubt about authenticity, reliability or competence; has a history of total trustworthiness. |
B Normally trustworthy | Small doubts about authenticity, reliability or competence, nevertheless has a history of valid information in a majority of cases. |
C Sufficiently trustworthy | Doubts about authenticity, reliability or competence; however, has supplied valid information in the past. |
D Normally not trustworthy | Significant doubt about authenticity, reliability or competence, however has supplied valid information in the past. |
E Not trustworthy | Lack of authenticity, reliability or competence; history of invalid information. |
F Not able to be evaluated | No basis to evaluate the validity of the information. |