Research Article Performance Assessment of Solid Waste ...downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2014/868072.pdfsector participation in domestic solid waste management operationsinLagosState.Speci

Research ArticlePerformance Assessment of Solid Waste Management followingPrivate Partnership Operations in Lagos State Nigeria

Agboje Ifeoma Anestina Adeoti Adetola and Irhivben Bright Odafe

Department of Agricultural Economics University of Ibadan Nigeria

Correspondence should be addressed to Agboje Ifeoma Anestina anestina4bubblegmailcom

Received 28 September 2013 Revised 18 January 2014 Accepted 2 February 2014 Published 17 April 2014

Academic Editor Francesco Veglio

Copyright copy 2014 Agboje Ifeoma Anestina et alThis is an open access article distributed under the Creative CommonsAttributionLicense which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in anymedium provided the originalwork is properly cited

The strategy of delivering modern high quality public services and promoting competition in the waste management sector leadsto formation of private sector participation (PSP) to handle solid waste management in Lagos StateThe findings depict that qualityof service among the PSP operators recorded high success in the high income areas than those of the low and medium incomeareas On the average industry productivity was 663 tonnes per day per vehicle 18 out of 30 companies in the study area wereabove this average and in meeting increased productivity year of experience in operations number of trips made number of timestrucks were serviced and adhering to regulatory agency requirement were among the factors influencing companyrsquos productivityin the state The study therefore recommends that regulatory agency should be more aggressive in playing its statutory roles ofmanaging the PSP operators

1 Introduction

Municipal solid waste management constitutes one of themost crucial health and environmental problems facinggovernments of African cities This is because even thoughthese cities are using 20ndash50 percent of their budget insolid waste management only 20ndash80 percent of the wasteis collected The uncollected or illegally dumped wastesconstitute a disaster for human health and the environmentaldegradation [1] More so population growth high urbaniza-tion industrialization economic growth rates resulting ina huge increase in the volume of wastes generated daily inthe countrieswith ineffectual and underfunded governmentsand poverty prevent efficient management of wastes [2ndash4] Another problem is that developing countriesrsquo citiesare characterized by unplanned haphazardly constructedsprawling slums with narrow roads that are inaccessible tocollection vehicles [5 6] More so there has been often amuch smaller stock of environmental and social capital indeveloping countries

Urban solidwastemanagement inNigeria is constitution-ally the responsibility of the third tiers of government thatis the local government (Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999)

Financial material and human resources that have beencommitted to waste management by this tier of governmenthave not matched this responsibility However this has ledto lack of effective waste management systems in urban areasof the country As a result most urban households resort tothe haphazard dumping burning or burying of solid wasteThe common arrangement in the few urban communitieswhere a system is in place is forwastemanagement authoritiesto collect refuse from households and public containerson a regular basis using a collection truck Unfortunatelyoperations managed by the waste management authoritieshave mostly been inefficient and ineffective as evidencedby the mounds of decomposing refuse that have become aregular sight in many urban areas This is evident by thereasons indicated earlier the poor management of manylandfill sites and soil and groundwater pollution due tooften mixing of household industrial and toxic waste [7]In view of the environmental situation described abovein many urban areas many Nigerian cities have beendescribed as dirty unsanitary and aesthetically displeasing inthe world [8]

Waste generation nationally is alarming on the increasewith an estimated annual rate of about 05ndash07 and current

Hindawi Publishing CorporationJournal of Waste ManagementVolume 2014 Article ID 868072 8 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552014868072

2 Journal of Waste Management

figures ranging from 04 to 08 Ton per capita per annumComplexity in waste is also increasing with biodegradablewaste currently accounting for over 50 [9]This amounts toan annual average approximately 50 million tons per annumof waste burden on the nation with less than 10 wastemanagement capacity [10] Management has emerged as oneof the greatest challenges facing state and local governmentenvironmental protection agencies in Nigeria as the volumeof solid waste generated increases at a faster rate than theability of the agencies to improve on the financial andtechnical resources needed to parallel this growth It was alsofound that waste disposal habit of the people corruptionwork attitude and inadequate plants and equipment amongothers are militating against effective waste management inNigeria

As a result of the failures recorded by local governmentsin solid waste management many state governments haveput in place bodies that are regional in outlook (ie cover-ing more than one local government) For instance LagosState established the Lagos State Waste Disposal Board [11]which is now transformed to Lagos State Waste ManagementAgency (LAWMA) The agency is faced with the task ofeffectivelymanaging thewaste of about 18million residents ofthe state and delivering a clean environment through trans-portation management of waste disposal sites and muchrecently recycling LAWMA therefore went into publicmdashprivate partnership initiative to run the scheme It is public inthe sense that LAWMA serves as the regulators to both resi-dent and the private partners While the PSP carries out theservices delivery the LAWMA fixes the prices for residentsand establishments Charges for waste collection are basedon direct charges to household and other establishmentsTheamount to be paid for waste collection is not based on thevolume of the waste generated rather on the location and typeof householdsestablishments The services have been madeto be patronized by all Lagos residents under the state law asa pathway to keep the state cleanThis situation has also beencompounded by the reluctance of some resident householdsto pay for waste disposal services for reasons of poverty andnot willing to pay One of the reasons of not willing to payin the country and most especially in Lagos State lies on thefact that the Waste Management Board was established as anonprofit oriented sector and their services as being a publicgood that attract little or no charges

Based on the above challenges and the fact that Lagos is amega city (highly industrialized) with a population estimateof about 9113505 (2006 Population Census Commission)growing at the rate of 6ndash8 annually and generating about9000 metric tons of waste daily at 05 kg per capita per daywhich is quite a great quantity it is a huge burden to thestate More so it was found that waste management whichentails disposal is a labour and capital intensive function oftenconsuming 20ndash50 of themunicipal operational budget [12]In light of this the state government has contracted the solidwaste collection and disposal to the private sector operatorswith the hope that a clean Lagos can be sustained at noextra cost implication to the government The issue hereis how sustainable the project is in the state ensuring thatall the waste generated by residents and establishments are

collected without dumps on the streets of Lagos State and alsoa cleaner Lagos State for a long time More so conservationinterventions can only be successful in the long term iftheir aims and activities are accepted by local people [13]On the other hand a key determinant of acceptability isthe perceived fairness of the distribution of the costs andbenefits of the intervention [13] Arising from the foregoingthe study intendsto analyze the performance of the privatesector participation in domestic solid waste managementoperations in Lagos State Specifically it evaluates the generalcharacteristics of private sector participation contractors indomestic solid waste management and the users in LagosState Also attempts to evaluate the extent to which theobjective of service is met in practice-effectiveness (qualityof service rendered) evaluate the efficiency in production ofthe PSP operators in waste management of the selected areasexamine the factors influencing the production efficiency ofthe PSP operators and highlight constraints associated witheffective operations of the PSP operators in the state

2 Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

Sustainable development refers to a mode of human devel-opment in which resource use aims to meet human needswhile ensuring the sustainability of natural systems and theenvironment so that these needs can be met not only in thepresent but also in generations to come [14] It ties togetherconcern for the carrying capacity of natural systems with thesocial challenges faced by humanity The concept of sustain-able development has in the past most often been brokenout into three constituent parts environmental sustainabilityeconomic sustainability and sociopolitical sustainabilityTheidea of sustainability has its roots in systems theory Systemsare sets of interacting and adaptive structures and processeswhich together produce functional outputs and outcomesThey are characterized by their capacity to maintain theirfunctional outputs and outcomes within desirable param-eters while adjusting and adapting to variations in inputsFeedbackmechanisms adjust systemprocesses and structuresin response to input variation to maintain outputs andoutcomes Change is an inherent feature of systems Whilesystems are able to adapt to change in inputs they remainrelatively sustainableWhen they cannot adjust discontinuityoccurs until a new equilibrium is reached or disintegrationoccurs [15]

Systems theory has been widely applied to the under-standing of social organizations [16] For human serviceorganizations programs are organized sets of inputs (peoplefacilities and equipment) which carry out strategies (pro-cesses) designed to achieve specific outputs and outcomesThe three key attributes of sustainability are the benefits thatare produced over time for individuals and populations thecontingencies which cause the benefits and the costs of theprogram resources that are required to achieve them Pro-grams can be judged as unsustainable because (1) sufficientbenefit is not produced (2) the contingencies which causeoutcomes cannot be produced ormaintained and (3) the costof the program resources required to achieve the benefits is

Journal of Waste Management 3

too high [15] This sustainable development ideas need tobe well integrated into solid waste management and otherenvironmental intervention programmes

Solid waste management (SWM) is an important envi-ronmental health service and is an integral part of basicurban services Research on urban SWM in developingcountries has been developed from two main concernspublic sector reform (including privatization issues) and sus-tainable development in the urban context [17] The formeris closely connected to the neoliberal doctrine proclaiminga resurgence of the market and a reduction of state controlThe latter focuses on private sector involvement in serviceprovision it raises issues of public interest and acceptability[17] These ideas give rise to the demand for an effectivemanagement system An effective waste management systemis a veritable way to ensuring economic development InNigeria one state that has really championed the course ofenvironmental sanitation through effective waste manage-ment is Lagos State Against the backdrop of being regardedas one of the dirtiest states by the world press after the cele-bration of FESTAC rsquo77 this betterment was achieved throughpublic-private partnership of LAWMA and PSP operatorsLAWMA engages coordinates and evaluates the activitiesof the private sector participant (PSP) in the municipalsolid waste collection It is of importance to examine theopportunities and challenges posed by benefit distribution ofenvironmental service delivery with regard to PSP operationsin Lagos State Interventions can only be successful in thelong term if their aims and activities are achieved The stateprivate sector operation waste management project needsto be evaluated of the quality of service provided to itsconsumers and challenges facing its sustenance

A number of earlier studies on solid waste have beencarried out in Ghana There were studies focused on privatesector involvement in solid waste management and resultpointed that house-to-house service proved to be more effec-tive and appreciated by most residents [18ndash20] In Nigeriastudies were centered on characteristics of solid waste andcomposition [21 22] disposal and management [1 23ndash26]perception on payment for solid waste collection [27 28]In most cases the economic tools used were percentagesseverity index chi-square and ordinary least square modelsThere have been rarely a few or no studies on the performanceassessment of the private sector participation operation ofLagos State The present study is intended to fill this gap Theresult generated from this study will also be necessary forpolicy intervention in Lagos State and the country at large

3 Methodology

The study area is Lagos State The state is made up of 20local government areas It has a land size of 9996 km2 anda population of about 9113505 (2006 Population CensusCommission) Lagos State has a total of 337 domestic privatesector participations in solid waste management serving allresidential areas in the state The private sector participationoperators are well distributed in the local government areas(LGA(s)) and the number of operators in an area varies based

on the population and the need of the area Primary data weresought for through the use of structured questionnaire andinterview to ascertain the authenticity of the responses Datawere collected from domestic waste management operatorsand users of the services provided by the operators

Stratified sampling technique was employed to explorethe heterogeneous population of the study areaThe state wasstratified based on the socioeconomic group (high mediumand low income economic groups) One local governmentarea was randomly selected from each stratum The laststage involved a random selection of householdsresidentsand PSP operators in a ratio proportional to the size ofthe operators in the local government areas selected Withregard to socioeconomic group Eti-Osa local governmentarea (LGA) Ikeja LGA and Alimosho LGA were selectedfrom high medium and low income groups respectively inthe state Among the groups 4 PSP operators were randomlyselected from the total of 10 operators in Eti-Osa LGA 6out of 18 were randomly selected from Ikeja LGA and 20out of 56 were randomly selected from Alimosho LGA inthe state Users were randomly selected proportionate to sizebased on the number of PSP operators in the areas All 30 PSPoperators and 262 users were sampled in the study

31 Economic Tools Used for the Study The economic toolsemployed in this study include the following Descriptivestatistics such as percentageswere used to evaluate the generalcharacteristics of the private participation contractors andresidents The performance of the service providers wereassessed using productivity analysis and quality of serviceassessment (score card) Productivity analysis was carried outusing productivity analysis ratio and industry average pro-ductivity ratio was used as the base of comparison Quality ofservices was assessed using severity index Productivity wasbased on the last 24 months production

The severity index (SI) was calculated based on thefollowing equationThismeasure is also applied following thepattern of Al-Hammad and Assaf [29] Consider

SSI =sum

5

119894=1119886119894119909119894

5sum

5

119894=1119909119894

times 100 (1)

where 119886119894is the index of a class constant expressing the

weight given to the class 119909119894is the frequency of response

119894 = 1 2 3 4 5 and described as below 1199091 1199092 1199093 1199094 1199095are

the frequencies of response corresponding to 1198861= 1 119886

2= 2

1198863= 3 119886

4= 4 and 119886

5= 5 respectively

The rating classification was analysed following the clas-sification pattern of Majid and McCaffer [30] which is readas

(i) 119886111988611198861low or extreme ineffective 000 le SI lt 125

(ii) 1198862low or ineffective 125 le SI lt 375

(iii) 1198863moderate or effective 375 le SI lt 625

(iv) 1198864high or very effective 625 le SI lt 875

(v) 1198865very high or extreme effective 875 le SI le 100


32 Productivity Analysis The model adopted for the studyfollows from Sampson Oduro-Kwarteng [19] pattern Theproductivity of an individual vehicle V is defined as theaverage quantity of waste output 119902 for a period 119905 as follows

119875

119905

V =sum

119876

119902=1119882

119905

119902

sum

119879

119905=1119905

(2)

where 119875119905V = productivity of vehicle V during the period 119905 119905 =1 119879119882119905

119902= actual quantity of output 119902 for vehicle V during

the period 119905 119905 = 1 119879 and 119902 = 1 119876 119905 = the workingtime in days for vehicle V during the period 119905 119905 = 1 119879

Theproductivity of a company 119888 is defined as theweightedaverage of individual vehicles V for a period 119905 It is expressedas follows

119875

119905

119888=

sum

119881

V=1 119875119905

V119890119905

V

sum

119879

119905=1119905

(3)

where 119875119905119888= productivity of company 119888 during the period 119905

119905 = 1 119879 V = 1 119881 119890119905V =maximum output capacity forvehicle V during the period 119905 119905 = 1 119879 V = 1 119881Productivity ratio (PR) is the sum of the productive capacityof a company over a period of time divided by the number ofproductive inputs Consider

PR119905119888=

119875

119905

119888

sum119883119894

(4)

where 119883119894= productive inputs used for production by

operator 119894Therefore the industry average productivity ratio =

sum

119873

119899=1119875

119905

119888sum

119873

119899=1119909

119905 where 119875119905119888= productivity of company at the

particular period 119905119883119905 = productive inputs used by operatorsin the sample at the particular period 119905 and 119873 = number ofoperators in the sample where 119899 = 1 30

33 Econometric Model Probit model was used to analysethe relationship between productivity and factors influencingit among the private sector partnerships in domestic solidwaste management in the state Probit regression also calleda probit model is used to model dichotomous or binaryoutcome variables In the probit model the inverse standardnormal distribution of the probability is modelled as a linearcombination of the predictors

119901 = pr [119910 = 1 | 119909] = 119865 (1198831015840120573)that is the probability that 119910 = 1

119901 = pr [119910 = 0 | 119909] = 119868 minus 119865 (119883

1015840120573)

that is the probability that 119910 = 0

(5)

where 119884 the dependent variable is a binary response It takesonly two values 0 and 1

119884 =

0 if no1 if yes

(6)

and119883 is the explanatory variables likely to influence 119910

Hence 119884 = productivity of company belonging tocategory 119895 (1 is for above average productivity per day 0otherwise)

119883 = explanatory variables include (years of operationeducation of service manager number of daily trips ofcompany number of vehicles used for operations number ofhouseholds covered and daily operating cost)

In probit model 119865(1199091015840120573) is the conditional distributionfunction of the standard normal distribution which is thefunctional form of probit model

119865 (119909

1015840120573) = 120601 (119909

1015840120573) = int

1198831015840120573

minusinfin

120601 (119911) 119889119911(7)

where 120601(z) is the normal density function

120601 (119911) =

exp (minus (11990922))radic2120587

(8)

The predicted probabilities are limited between 0 and 1The marginal effects of the function are generated

Marginal effect is the result of a unit change in the explanatoryvariable on the probability given that all other explanatoryvariables are constant It is the net effect holding the othervariable at its means Hence marginal effects are partialderivatives of the probabilities with respect to the explanatoryvariables evaluated at their sample means Consider

120575119901

120575119909119894

= 119865

1015840(119909

1015840120573) 120573119894 (9)

The index 119894 is the 119894th observation of the independent variableThe marginal effects depend on 119909 (typically the means) Thecoefficients and marginal effects have the same signs because119865

1015840(119883

1015840120573) gt 0

Therefore the marginal effect for the probit model is

120575119901

120575119909119894

= 120601

1015840(119909

1015840120573) 120573119894 (10)

4 Results and Discussions

41 Providers The privatization of solid waste collection hasgiven rise to the spring up of quite large number of operatorsin the state Among the contractors interviewed 67 werefrom the low income area in Alimosho LGA 20 from themedium income area in Ikeja LGA and 13 from the highincome area in Eti-Osa LGAAll are operating in different sizeor capacity in terms of manpower and available equipmentThe strength and quality of staff with available facilities areoften an indication of firmrsquos waste collection capacity All thefirms have offices in their locations hence it becomes easierfor their customers and monitoring agencies to locate themin case of difficulties in service provisions

All the service providers use compaction trucks of aboutfive tonnes of capacity made available by the Lagos Stategovernment The firms either own the trucks or in a fewcases take on lease About 57 of the firms operate with twocompact closed trucks 26 of the firms operate with three


trucks 13 of the firms operate with four trucks and only3 make use of five trucks in the various areas surveyed inthe state The average age of their trucks ranges from 3 yearsto 7 years Firmsrsquo staff strength ranges from 7 to 19 Otherfacilities owned and provided by firms for efficient servicedelivery include vehicles for logistics shovels and protectivegears such as gloves boots and pullovers to shield the crewfrom injuries and direct contact with pathogenic organisms

The system of waste collection is mainly door-to-doorcollection In low income area and part of medium incomearea when the collection truck arrives on the streets tobe served it alerts the households by horning In the highincome areas waste is collected by the crews from the wastebin kept in front of the house

Waste collection frequency varies from one area toanother Around 73 of interviewed contractors reportedthat collection is done once per week in a particular areaHowever they admitted that most of the collection frequencydepends on the mechanical condition of collection trucksand on the agreement between the contractors and theresidents of the area It is observed thatmost collection truckspurchased from LAWMA are new except few fairly usedones Most contractorsrsquo collection crews are casual labourerswith little or no education and they are lowly paid witha salary between seven thousand to twenty thousand naira(naira is represented as 1) (ie from 1 7000 to 1 20000)depending on the area The low income area waste collectioncrew earns between 1 7000 and 1 14000 The mediumincome area labourers earn between 1 10000 and 1 18000while the waste collection crew in the high income areaearns between 1 10000 and 1 20000 The number of crewsvaries between 3 and 4 per truck in all the areas in the stateWhile the drivers earn higher amount of pay from 1 20000to 1 30000 the supervisors or managers who are mostlyeducated earn between 1 18000 to 1 40000 Other benefitsthat accrue to workers may include daily food stipends freeaccommodation and holidays in low income area In middleincome area contractors offer benefits such as allowancesopportunity for loan and holidays while the high incomearea contractors offer benefits such as allowance daily foodstipends loans and free accommodation All domestic solidwaste collection is done between 8 amand6pm fromMondayto Saturday

The monthly operating cost of the PSP operators variesfrom 1 500000 to 1 900000 in low income area from 1600000 to 1 800000 in middle income area and from 1640000 to1 1000000 in higher income area The operatingcost covers the cost of fueling trucks other vehicles cost ofmaintenance and repairs of trucks vehicles and generatorscost of renting other inputs in some cases like trucks andexpenditure made on paying salaries and wages to workersor staff members

Each contractor caters for varying number of houses incoverage areas of wards In the low income area contractorsare in charge of houses between 180 and 231 in mediumincome area it is between 192 and 230 houses and in highincome area it is between 125 and 240 houses Payment forservice rendered in all the areas is done mainly throughissuance of bills and paying through banks Around 60 of

the contractors claimed payment through this means and40 cash Contractors faces the challenges of delayed orrefusal of payment Only few operators recover more than50 of their user feesThe user fee depends on property valueand area in the state User charges range from 1 1000 to 11500 per month per house in low income area from 1 1500to 1 1800 per month in medium income area and from 11500 to 1 2000 in high income area

Wastes collected are disposed at the dump site Notechnology for waste minimization is employed rakes andshovels are used to clean up waste at the point of collection

42 Residents Among the residentsusers sampled 47weremale and 53 were female with an average age of 40 years78 of the respondents were married having an averagefamily size of 5 members About 45 of them were educatedup beyond secondary school educationwhile about 30weresecondary school certificate holders The educated ones earnan income between 1 20000 and 1 1000000 and abovedepending on the area

All users sampled prefer and accept the door-to-doorwaste collection system Around 79 of the users weresatisfied with the current level of cleanliness brought aboutthrough the effort of their own PSP operator in the area (78in low income area 77 in medium income area and 81in high income area) This is attributed to the reasons thatthey have witnessed waste overflow off bins or containersfoul smell and littered premises as a result of low collectionfrequency or delayed waste collection in the areas earlier

The most practiced allotted frequency of waste collectionin designated areas from users experience was once per week(88 in low income 65 in middle income area and 40in high income area) followed by twice per week frequency(12 in low income area 45 in medium income area and60 in high income area) However 44 of users in lowincome area 55 in medium income area and 18 in highincome area were not satisfied with low frequency of wastecollection On this basis it is obvious that the residents wouldappreciate the allotted frequency of waste collection servicesin the area to be increased Around 10 of users in lowincome area are willing to pay for higher user charges but inthe medium and high income areas residents do not acceptto pay higher user charges Only 48 of the users expect thefees to be determined by PSP operators and the public On thepart of the regulatory agencyLAWMA their monitoring andevaluation of the whole exercise have been poor as around78 of consumers hardly find their presence in the areas

43 Quality of Service The quality of waste collection servicewas assessed in two ways First by rating companies (on afive-point scale from very poor to very good) for servicequality attributes (reliability of collection waste overflow andsanitary conditions at bincontainer locations and response tocustomer complaints and crew attitude at waste collection)Second the residents were asked to indicate service satisfac-tion by responding as satisfied or not satisfied to the quality ofservice provided in the study area In a customer satisfactionsurvey service satisfaction is the customersrsquo perceptions


39

61

56

4456

44

High income Middle income Low income

Satisfied ()Not satisfied ()

area area area

Figure 1 Satisfaction with quality of service

of service received (perceived quality) compared to theirexpectations of the desired service quality

Table 1 shows the results of the quality of service acrossthe cities Residents across the income areas perceived somelevel of quality of service provided by PSP operators in theareas Result depicts that higher income area (Eti-Osa LGA)had the highest quality of service (74) followed by mediumincome area (Ikeja LGA) with 62 and the low income area(Alimosho LGA) with 61 Chi-square analysis shows thattherewas a significant difference (Chi-square value = 28097119889119891 = 6119875 lt 001) in quality of service across the income areasof the state

Furthermore the result from severity index used toanalyze the quality of service in the various areas depicts thatin the low income area the sanitary condition of house-to-house solid waste collection is moderate (SI = 59) whilein the medium and high income areas were rated as high(SI = 60) and very effective (SI = 75) respectively Thelater areas have a moderate-to-high clean environment withless spillovers of wastes The reason for a high rate of sanitarycondition in the high income areas might be attributed to ahigh rate of quick responses of service providers to customersrsquocomplaint (71) high rate of reliability in terms of wastecollection frequency (76) and high rate of positive attitudeof the waste collectorsrsquo crew to services

44 Service Satisfaction As shown in Figure 1 around 56 ofusers in the low income areas and around 61 of users in highincome area appear to be satisfied with the current quality ofservice provided by the domestic solid waste contractors

45 Productivity Productivity is an efficiency measure of theperformance of operators The productivity of each operatorwas computed using the sum total of the weighted averageindividual vehicle waste collected The productivity ratio isestimated using the ratio of total output of waste collected byeach operator in tonnes to operating inputs used (vehicles)

Table 2 shows the performance distribution of all 30companies surveyed in the various income areas based onthe average industry performance The industry averageproductivity was 663 tonnes per day per vehicle and 18 out of30 companies had values above this average In low income

10

9

8

7

6

5

Valu

e

Operator

Productivity ratioIndustry average productivity ratio

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10

C11

C12

C13

C14

C15

C16

C17

C18

C19

C20

C21

C22

C23

C24

C25

C26

C27

C28

C29

C30

Figure 2 A graph showing the productivity ratio of operators

areas companies C9 C10 C11 C12 C14 C15 C16 C17 C19C20 and C23 performed below average while C5 C6 C7C8 C13 C18 C21 C22 and C24 performed above averageInmedium income areas C27 is below average and C25 C26C28 C29 andC30 performed above averagewhile companiesC1 C2 C3 and C4 performed above average in high incomeareas This implies that companies with vehicle productivityabove average had a higher average daily quantity of wastecollected than those companies with productivity belowaverage Figure 2 shows each companyrsquos productivity capacityin the survey period

46 Econometric Results In the study area the relationshipbetween productivity performance of the service providercompanies and their influencing factors (derived from theframework of Wilson et al [31]) is examined using the probitregression model (see Table 3) The result showed that yearsof service operation number of trips per day number oftime vehicletruck serviced per month and adherence toregulatory arrangement are significant factors influencing theproductivity performance of the PSP domestic solid wastecontractorsThe result further depicts that a one year increasein the years of service provision will bring about 15 increasein productivity of the service providerrsquos company One moretime of servicing operators truck per month will necessitate77 increase in productivity of providers An additionalfrequency of monitoring service providers on controllingquality of service accessing their roles and obligations inpartnership will bring about 55 increase in productivityand an additional increase in the frequency of solid wastecollection (number of trips per day) will boost companyrsquosproductivity by 34

47 Constraint Thecommon constraints facing the PSP solidwaste contractors include customer challenges in the lowincome area (75) medium income area (21) and highincome area (3) Such challenges include debts and delayed


Table 1 Results of severity index on service quality scores by consumers across the income areasLGA

Income areas Sample size(119873)

Reliability atcollection

()

Sanitary conditionat bins()

Quick response tocustomers complaints

()

Crew attitude()

Overall quality ofservice()

Low 176 50 59 53 57 55Middle 54 65 66 58 61 62High 32 76 75 71 75 74Source Field Survey 2013

Table 2 Distribution of operators by their performance based onindustry average productivity ratio

PerformanceIncome group Sample size Below average Above averageLow 20 11 9Middle 6 1 5High 4 0 4Source Field Survey 2013

Table 3 Probit result on influence of productivity performance ofservice provider companies

Explanatory variables EstimatesYears of operation 0496lowast (02975) 01531+

Number of vehicles used 05656 (06737) 01740+

Number of houses covered minus00116 (00145) minus 00036+

Adherence to regulatoryarrangement 31568lowastlowast (13583) 05470+

Average number of times truck isserviced per month 24100lowastlowast (10571) 07692+

Number of daily trips 11001lowast (06300) 03390+

Proportion of user fee recovered 14410 (29540) 04434+

Operation cost of operator minus17271 (25769) 07140+

Source Field Survey Result generated from Stata 2013Log likelihood = minus93185lowastlowastlowast chi-square = 2174lowastlowastlowast pseudo 1198772 = 05385number of observations = 30 figures in parenthesis are standard errors ofthe coefficient+Marginal effect coefficientThe lowast lowast lowastindicates that variable is significant at 1The lowastlowastindicates that variable is significant at 5The lowastindicates that variable is significant at 10

payments of user fees Poorly managed dump site constitutesa greater challenge at rainy season as it results in incurringmore cost on repairs and services of collection trucksOther constraints include poor policy implementation andinfrequent monitoring of quality of service provision ofcontractors in the various areas

5 Conclusion

In this study the performance of the private sector companieswas analyzed in terms of quality of services provided and acompanyrsquos productivity Constraints associated with compa-niesrsquo performance were also examined The responses fromresidentsusers on quality of service on PSP operations can

be said to be highly effective in the state While the quality ofservice is rated highesthighly effective in high income area itis moderate in medium and low income areas signifying thatthere is a difference in quality of service across the incomesgroups in the state

Difference in productive performance was explored byanalyzing two groups of companies those below and aboveaverage performance using a criterion of industry averageResult depicts that 18 out of 30 companies had values aboveaverage productivity value of 663 tonnes per day per vehicleWhilemost companies in themedium and high income areasperformed above average most companies in low incomeareas performed below average The factors which explainthe difference in productivity by the individual companiesincluded the years of experience in operation the numberof trips made per day number of time vehicle serviced permonth and adherence to regulatory arrangement Henceeffective performance can be constrained by shortage of fundsby operators poorly managed dump site at rainy seasonand poor service monitoring and policy implementationTo enhance effective productivity it is recommended thatall PSP operators should strictly adhere to the regulatoryarrangement and policies governing the operations ensuringfrequent waste collection and increasing the number of dailytrips It is paramount that stiffer and healthy competitionamong the PSP operators is encouraged by LAWMA forthe programme to be sustainable Also there should bepublic forum where PSP service providers meet regularly tofind ways of overcoming challenges facing the business intheir areas of operation Above all government should makeand implement favorable policies targeted to sustainabilityof the intervention LAWMA as a body should take fullresponsibility in adequately maintaining dump sites and seekmeans of promoting PSP operations into waste minimizationand recycling technology for better use of waste

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] E Achankeng ldquoGlobalization urbanization and municipalsolid waste management in Africardquo African Studies Associationof Australasia and the Pacific 2003 Conference ProceedingsmdashAfrican on a Global Stage University of Adelaide AdelaideAustralia 2003


[2] UNEP International Source Book on Environmentally SoundTechnologies for Municipal Solid Waste Management (IETC)Technical Publication no 6 2002

[3] P L Doan ldquoInstitutionalizing household waste collection theurban environmental management project in Cote drsquoIvoirerdquoHabitat International vol 22 no 1 pp 27ndash39 1998

[4] S J Cointreau Environmental Management of Urban SolidWastes in Developing Countries A Project Guide The WorldBank Washington DC USA 1st edition 1982

[5] UNESCO Environment and Development in Coastal Regionsand in Small Islands UNESCO Abuja Nigeria 2003

[6] E Daskalopoulos O Badr and S D Probert ldquoAn integratedapproach to municipal solid waste managementrdquo ResourcesConservation and Recycling vol 24 no 1 pp 33ndash50 1998

[7] UNEP Depleted Uranium in Kosovo Post Conflict Environ-mental Assessment United Nations Environment ProgrammeBalkan Task Force Geneva Switzerland 2000

[8] A L Mabogunje ldquoThe camel without a rider a tale ofdevelopment policy in over the yearsrdquo in Proceedings of theSustainable Human Development Paradigm Role of the CivilSociety in Nigeria Workshop The United Nations DevelopmentProgramme Abuja Nigeria 2000

[9] OM Adienbo B Njoku and A Asara ldquoAn assessment of somecardiovascular and lung function parameters of municipal solidwaste workers in Port-Harcourt South-South NigeriardquoGreenerJournal of Human Physiology and Antomy vol 1 no 1 pp 1ndash62013

[10] R M Ossai ldquoMoving solid waste management into the 21stcentury in Nigeriardquo in Proceedings of the 6th National Councilon Environment Meeting Kastina State Secretariat KastinaNigeria 2006

[11] P Adefemi ldquoSituation report on solid waste disposal in Lagosstaterdquo Tech Rep The Training Centre Lagos Nigeria 1980

[12] L Thomas ldquoBrief history of solid waste managementrdquo Writtenfor the California Department of Health Services 2000

[13] M Sommerville J P G Jones M Rahajaharison and E JMilner-Gulland ldquoThe role of fairness and benefit distributionin community-based payment for environmental services inter-ventions a case study from Menabe Madagascarrdquo EcologicalEconomics vol 69 no 6 pp 1262ndash1271 2010

[14] J M Harris ldquoSustainability and sustainable developmentrdquoInternational Society for Ecological Economics InternetEncyclopaedia of Ecological Economics LAWMA pp1-2 2003httpwwwlawmagovngmd20presentationEconomic2-0Summitpdf

[15] H Swerissen Understanding the Sustainability of Health Pro-grams and Organisational Change A Paper for the VictorianQuality Council 2007

[16] J DThompsonOrganizations in Action Social Science Bases ofAdministrative Theory Transaction Publishers Piscataway NJUSA 2003

[17] I Baud S Grafakos M Hordijk and J Post ldquoQuality of lifeand alliances in solid wastemanagemen contributions to urbansustainable developmentrdquo Cities vol 18 no 1 pp 3ndash12 2001

[18] T I A Sampson Assessment of the performance of public andprivate municipal solid waste collection institutions in the tamalemetropolis [MS thesis] 2012

[19] S Oduro-Kwarteng Private sector involvement in urban solidwaste collection [PhD thesis] International Institute of SocialStudies The Hague The Netherlands 2011

[20] N Obirih-Opareh and J Post ldquoQuality assessment of publicand private modes of solid waste collection in Accra GhanardquoHabitat International vol 26 no 1 pp 95ndash112 2002

[21] T C Ogwueleka ldquoMunicipal solid waste characteristics andmanagement in Nigeriardquo Iranian Journal of EnvironmentalHealth Science amp Engineering vol 6 no 3 pp 173ndash180 2009

[22] L Salami A A Susu R J Patinvoh and O A OlafadehanldquoCharacterisation study of solid wastes a case of Lagos staterdquoInternational Journal of Applied Science and Technology vol 1no 3 2011

[23] O Olufayo and B J Omotosho ldquoWaste dispossal and wastemanagement in Ado-Ekiti Nigeriardquo The Social Science vol 2no 2 pp 111ndash115 2007

[24] K A Aderogba and B A Afelumo ldquoWaste dumps and theirmanagement in Lagos metropolisrdquo International Journal ofLearning amp Development vol 2 no 1 2012

[25] Adewole and A Taiwo ldquoWaste management towards sustain-able development in Nigeria a case study of Lagos staterdquoInternational NGO Journal vol 4 no 4 pp 173ndash179 2009

[26] O Adebayo C Lancheros J Ezinma and S NurudeenSolid Waste Management in the Cities of Developing CountriesDepartment of Development and Planning AalborgUniversityAalborg Denmark 2011

[27] E O Longe O O Longe and E F Ukpebor ldquoPeoplersquos per-ception on household solid waste management in Ojo LocalGovernment area in Nigeriardquo Iranian Journal of EnvironmentalHealth Science amp Engineering vol 6 no 3 pp 209ndash216 2009

[28] O A Akinjare C A Ayedun A O Oluwatobi and O CIroham ldquoImpact of sanitary landfills on urban residentialproperty value in Lagos state Nigeriardquo Journal of SustainableDevelopment vol 4 no 2 pp 48ndash60 2011

[29] A Al-Hammad and S Assaf ldquoAssessment of work performanceofmaintenance contractors in Saudi Arabiardquo JournalManagemtin Engineering vol 12 no 2 pp 44ndash49 1996

[30] M Z A Majid and R McCaffer ldquoDiscussion of assessment ofwork performance ofmaintenance contractors in Saudi ArabiardquoJournal of Management in Engineering vol 13 no 5 p 91 1997

[31] D Wilson A Whiteman and A Tormin Strategic PlanningGuide for Municipal SolidWaste ManagementTheWorld BankThe Department for International Development WashingtonDC USA 2001

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of



EcosystemsJournal of


MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of


Marine BiologyJournal of


Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in


Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of



Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics


Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of


BiodiversityInternational Journal of


ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of


The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


ClimatologyJournal of


figures ranging from 04 to 08 Ton per capita per annumComplexity in waste is also increasing with biodegradablewaste currently accounting for over 50 [9]This amounts toan annual average approximately 50 million tons per annumof waste burden on the nation with less than 10 wastemanagement capacity [10] Management has emerged as oneof the greatest challenges facing state and local governmentenvironmental protection agencies in Nigeria as the volumeof solid waste generated increases at a faster rate than theability of the agencies to improve on the financial andtechnical resources needed to parallel this growth It was alsofound that waste disposal habit of the people corruptionwork attitude and inadequate plants and equipment amongothers are militating against effective waste management inNigeria

As a result of the failures recorded by local governmentsin solid waste management many state governments haveput in place bodies that are regional in outlook (ie cover-ing more than one local government) For instance LagosState established the Lagos State Waste Disposal Board [11]which is now transformed to Lagos State Waste ManagementAgency (LAWMA) The agency is faced with the task ofeffectivelymanaging thewaste of about 18million residents ofthe state and delivering a clean environment through trans-portation management of waste disposal sites and muchrecently recycling LAWMA therefore went into publicmdashprivate partnership initiative to run the scheme It is public inthe sense that LAWMA serves as the regulators to both resi-dent and the private partners While the PSP carries out theservices delivery the LAWMA fixes the prices for residentsand establishments Charges for waste collection are basedon direct charges to household and other establishmentsTheamount to be paid for waste collection is not based on thevolume of the waste generated rather on the location and typeof householdsestablishments The services have been madeto be patronized by all Lagos residents under the state law asa pathway to keep the state cleanThis situation has also beencompounded by the reluctance of some resident householdsto pay for waste disposal services for reasons of poverty andnot willing to pay One of the reasons of not willing to payin the country and most especially in Lagos State lies on thefact that the Waste Management Board was established as anonprofit oriented sector and their services as being a publicgood that attract little or no charges

Based on the above challenges and the fact that Lagos is amega city (highly industrialized) with a population estimateof about 9113505 (2006 Population Census Commission)growing at the rate of 6ndash8 annually and generating about9000 metric tons of waste daily at 05 kg per capita per daywhich is quite a great quantity it is a huge burden to thestate More so it was found that waste management whichentails disposal is a labour and capital intensive function oftenconsuming 20ndash50 of themunicipal operational budget [12]In light of this the state government has contracted the solidwaste collection and disposal to the private sector operatorswith the hope that a clean Lagos can be sustained at noextra cost implication to the government The issue hereis how sustainable the project is in the state ensuring thatall the waste generated by residents and establishments are

collected without dumps on the streets of Lagos State and alsoa cleaner Lagos State for a long time More so conservationinterventions can only be successful in the long term iftheir aims and activities are accepted by local people [13]On the other hand a key determinant of acceptability isthe perceived fairness of the distribution of the costs andbenefits of the intervention [13] Arising from the foregoingthe study intendsto analyze the performance of the privatesector participation in domestic solid waste managementoperations in Lagos State Specifically it evaluates the generalcharacteristics of private sector participation contractors indomestic solid waste management and the users in LagosState Also attempts to evaluate the extent to which theobjective of service is met in practice-effectiveness (qualityof service rendered) evaluate the efficiency in production ofthe PSP operators in waste management of the selected areasexamine the factors influencing the production efficiency ofthe PSP operators and highlight constraints associated witheffective operations of the PSP operators in the state

2 Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

Sustainable development refers to a mode of human devel-opment in which resource use aims to meet human needswhile ensuring the sustainability of natural systems and theenvironment so that these needs can be met not only in thepresent but also in generations to come [14] It ties togetherconcern for the carrying capacity of natural systems with thesocial challenges faced by humanity The concept of sustain-able development has in the past most often been brokenout into three constituent parts environmental sustainabilityeconomic sustainability and sociopolitical sustainabilityTheidea of sustainability has its roots in systems theory Systemsare sets of interacting and adaptive structures and processeswhich together produce functional outputs and outcomesThey are characterized by their capacity to maintain theirfunctional outputs and outcomes within desirable param-eters while adjusting and adapting to variations in inputsFeedbackmechanisms adjust systemprocesses and structuresin response to input variation to maintain outputs andoutcomes Change is an inherent feature of systems Whilesystems are able to adapt to change in inputs they remainrelatively sustainableWhen they cannot adjust discontinuityoccurs until a new equilibrium is reached or disintegrationoccurs [15]

Systems theory has been widely applied to the under-standing of social organizations [16] For human serviceorganizations programs are organized sets of inputs (peoplefacilities and equipment) which carry out strategies (pro-cesses) designed to achieve specific outputs and outcomesThe three key attributes of sustainability are the benefits thatare produced over time for individuals and populations thecontingencies which cause the benefits and the costs of theprogram resources that are required to achieve them Pro-grams can be judged as unsustainable because (1) sufficientbenefit is not produced (2) the contingencies which causeoutcomes cannot be produced ormaintained and (3) the costof the program resources required to achieve the benefits is





3 Methodology






SSI =sum

5

119894=1119886119894119909119894

5sum

5

119894=1119909119894

times 100 (1)





2= 2

1198863= 3 119886

4= 4 and 119886

5= 5 respectively









119875

119905

V =sum

119876

119902=1119882

119905

119902

sum

119879

119905=1119905

(2)





119875

119905

119888=

sum

119881

V=1 119875119905

V119890119905

V

sum

119879

119905=1119905

(3)



PR119905119888=

119875

119905

119888

sum119883119894

(4)



sum

119873

119899=1119875

119905

119888sum

119873

119899=1119909





119901 = pr [119910 = 0 | 119909] = 119868 minus 119865 (119883

1015840120573)


(5)


119884 =

0 if no1 if yes

(6)





119865 (119909

1015840120573) = 120601 (119909

1015840120573) = int

1198831015840120573

minusinfin

120601 (119911) 119889119911(7)


120601 (119911) =

exp (minus (11990922))radic2120587

(8)



120575119901

120575119909119894

= 119865

1015840(119909

1015840120573) 120573119894 (9)


1015840(119883

1015840120573) gt 0


120575119901

120575119909119894

= 120601

1015840(119909

1015840120573) 120573119894 (10)

















39

61

56

4456

44



area area area








10

9

8

7

6

5

Valu

e

Operator


C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10

C11

C12

C13

C14

C15

C16

C17

C18

C19

C20

C21

C22

C23

C24

C25

C26

C27

C28

C29

C30









()



()

Crew attitude()
















5 Conclusion






References





































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics


















3 Methodology






SSI =sum

5

119894=1119886119894119909119894

5sum

5

119894=1119909119894

times 100 (1)





2= 2

1198863= 3 119886

4= 4 and 119886

5= 5 respectively









119875

119905

V =sum

119876

119902=1119882

119905

119902

sum

119879

119905=1119905

(2)





119875

119905

119888=

sum

119881

V=1 119875119905

V119890119905

V

sum

119879

119905=1119905

(3)



PR119905119888=

119875

119905

119888

sum119883119894

(4)



sum

119873

119899=1119875

119905

119888sum

119873

119899=1119909





119901 = pr [119910 = 0 | 119909] = 119868 minus 119865 (119883

1015840120573)


(5)


119884 =

0 if no1 if yes

(6)





119865 (119909

1015840120573) = 120601 (119909

1015840120573) = int

1198831015840120573

minusinfin

120601 (119911) 119889119911(7)


120601 (119911) =

exp (minus (11990922))radic2120587

(8)



120575119901

120575119909119894

= 119865

1015840(119909

1015840120573) 120573119894 (9)


1015840(119883

1015840120573) gt 0


120575119901

120575119909119894

= 120601

1015840(119909

1015840120573) 120573119894 (10)

















39

61

56

4456

44



area area area








10

9

8

7

6

5

Valu

e

Operator


C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10

C11

C12

C13

C14

C15

C16

C17

C18

C19

C20

C21

C22

C23

C24

C25

C26

C27

C28

C29

C30









()



()

Crew attitude()
















5 Conclusion






References





































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics
















119875

119905

V =sum

119876

119902=1119882

119905

119902

sum

119879

119905=1119905

(2)





119875

119905

119888=

sum

119881

V=1 119875119905

V119890119905

V

sum

119879

119905=1119905

(3)



PR119905119888=

119875

119905

119888

sum119883119894

(4)



sum

119873

119899=1119875

119905

119888sum

119873

119899=1119909





119901 = pr [119910 = 0 | 119909] = 119868 minus 119865 (119883

1015840120573)


(5)


119884 =

0 if no1 if yes

(6)





119865 (119909

1015840120573) = 120601 (119909

1015840120573) = int

1198831015840120573

minusinfin

120601 (119911) 119889119911(7)


120601 (119911) =

exp (minus (11990922))radic2120587

(8)



120575119901

120575119909119894

= 119865

1015840(119909

1015840120573) 120573119894 (9)


1015840(119883

1015840120573) gt 0


120575119901

120575119909119894

= 120601

1015840(119909

1015840120573) 120573119894 (10)

















39

61

56

4456

44



area area area








10

9

8

7

6

5

Valu

e

Operator


C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10

C11

C12

C13

C14

C15

C16

C17

C18

C19

C20

C21

C22

C23

C24

C25

C26

C27

C28

C29

C30









()



()

Crew attitude()
















5 Conclusion






References





































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics



























39

61

56

4456

44



area area area








10

9

8

7

6

5

Valu

e

Operator


C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10

C11

C12

C13

C14

C15

C16

C17

C18

C19

C20

C21

C22

C23

C24

C25

C26

C27

C28

C29

C30









()



()

Crew attitude()
















5 Conclusion






References





































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics















39

61

56

4456

44



area area area








10

9

8

7

6

5

Valu

e

Operator


C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10

C11

C12

C13

C14

C15

C16

C17

C18

C19

C20

C21

C22

C23

C24

C25

C26

C27

C28

C29

C30









()



()

Crew attitude()
















5 Conclusion






References





































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics


















()



()

Crew attitude()
















5 Conclusion






References





































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics

















































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics


















Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics














Documents

Research Article Performance Assessment of Solid Waste ...downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2014/868072.pdfsector participation in domestic solid waste management operationsinLagosState.Speci