December, 2014

Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Site Selection Using GIS and

Remote Sensing Techniques, Jigjiga Town, Ethiopia

Authors:

(1) Genemo Berisa (GIS Expert) and

(2) Yohanis Birhanu (Environmentalist)

Jigjiga University

i

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This research is funded by Jigjiga University (JJU) from its annual Research and Community

Service budget. Therefore, the authors express their deepest gratitude to JJU for funding the

research on competitive basis. We are also thankful to people in various positions in Jigjiga

Municipality, Namely: Mr. Farah from HORMUD solid waste management company and

Mr. Nesri Ahmed from Sanitation and Beautification Department for the invaluable

information they provide us during sites observation for landfill.

ii

Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ............................................................................................................ i

List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... iii

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... iv

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... v

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

1.1. Background of the Study ............................................................................................. 1

1.2. Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................ 3

1.3. Objectives of the Study ............................................................................................... 3

1.4. Significance of the Study ............................................................................................ 4

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................... 5

2.1. General Concepts and Definition of Terms..................................................................... 5

2.2. Solid waste management in developed countries ............................................................ 5

2.3. Solid waste management in Ethiopia .............................................................................. 6

2.4. Role of GIS and remote sensing for solid waste disposal site selection ......................... 7

2.5. Locating a Proper Waste Disposal Area ......................................................................... 8

2.6. Site Selection Criteria...................................................................................................... 9

2.7. Site Capacity ................................................................................................................. 13

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................................................................ 14

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

3.1.1. Geographic Location .............................................................................................. 14

3.1.2. Physiography and Drainage ................................................................................... 14

3.1.3. Geology and Soils .................................................................................................. 15

3.1.4. Climate ................................................................................................................... 15

3.1.5. Demographic Features ........................................................................................... 15

3.2. Methods ......................................................................................................................... 16

3.2.1. Determining Unsuitable Areas ............................................................................... 17

iii

3.2.2. Factor Criteria Setting ............................................................................................ 22

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ....................................................................................... 25

4.1. Solid Waste Status of the Town ................................................................................ 25

4.2. Landfill Suitability Evaluation .................................................................................. 30

4.3. The Best Suitable Site Selection .................................................................................. 32

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 35

5.1. Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 35

4.2. Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 35

References ............................................................................................................................... 37

iv

List of Tables

Table 3.1. Constraint Criteria .................................................................................................. 17

Table 3.2. Factor Criteria ........................................................................................................ 22

Table 3.3. Comparison judgments scale for assigning values (Saaty, 2006). ......................... 23

Table 3.4. External Weighting Schema ................................................................................... 23

Table 4.1: Solid waste disposal site suitability indices. .......................................................... 31

Table 4.2: Sub-criteria evaluation for most suitable landfill site selection ............................. 33

List of Figures

Figure 3.1. Study Area Map .................................................................................................... 14

Figure 3.2. GIS Methods flowchart ......................................................................................... 17

Figure. 3.3. Road Networks Constraint Map ........................................................................... 18

Figure. 3.4. Surface Water (River) Constraint Map ................................................................ 19

Figure. 3.5. Residential Areas Constraint Map ....................................................................... 19

Figure. 3.6. Important Building Constraint Map ..................................................................... 20

Figure. 3.7. Water Reservoirs Constraint Map ........................................................................ 21

Figure. 3.8. Boreholes Constraint Map ................................................................................... 21

Figure 4.1: Road networks factor map .................................................................................... 27

Figure 4.2: Surface water factor map ...................................................................................... 27

Figure 4.3: Residential areas factor map ................................................................................. 28

Figure 4.4: Important buildings factor map ............................................................................. 28

Figure 4.5: Boreholes factor map ............................................................................................ 29

Figure 4.6: Reservoirs factor map ........................................................................................... 29

Figure 4.7: Solid Waste Disposal Site Suitability of Jigjiga Town ......................................... 30

Figure 4.8: Candidate Suitable Sites for Solid Waste Disposal of Jigjiga Town .................... 32

Plate 1.Samplesof unacceptable open dump sites in Jigjiga Town ......................................... 26

v

Abstract

Municipal solid waste management is a problem that is experienced by all counties in the

world. Because of its nature, it has remained one of the major environmental problems man

continues to face. The most common problems associated with improper management of solid

waste include diseases transmission, fire hazards, odor nuisance, atmospheric and water

pollution, aesthetic nuisance and economic losses. Municipal solid waste management is

considered as one of the most serious environmental and social problems challenging

municipal authorities in developing countries. One of these impacts is raised from location of

dumping site in unsuitable areas. This paper deals with selection of suitable site for the

disposal of municipal solid waste generated from Jigjiga Municipality using GIS techniques.

The existing open dumping systems in the town are not environmentally sound and socially

acceptable as wastes have been dumped in inappropriate sites. The present study had

integrated environmental and socio-economic criteria like proximity to road networks,

distances from residences and important built up areas; surface water (river), boreholes and

reservoirs to select the most suitable solid waste disposal site in the study area. The result

reveals that out of five candidate landfill sites, a site with reasonable size (24 ha), at optimum

distance from residences (4.8 km) and accessible to the major roads (1 km) was nominated

as the most suitable site for the municipal solid waste disposal (landfill).

Keywords: Solid waste management, Landfill site selection, ArcGIS, Jigjiga Town.

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the Study

Waste was an early problem of mankind, and a growing one that is of major concern to every

nation of the world (Allende 2009). Municipal solid waste management is a problem that is

experienced by all counties in the world. It is an issue mostly witnessed in urban areas as a

result of high surge in population growth rate and increase in per capita income thus posing a

danger to environmental quality and human health (Javaheri 2006). Because of its nature, it

has remained one of the major environmental problems man continues to face. The most

common problems associated with improper management of solid waste include diseases

transmission, fire hazards, odor nuisance, atmospheric and water pollution, aesthetic nuisance

and economic losses (Jilani et al., 2002).

Municipal solid waste management has thus become a major issue of concern for many

underdeveloped nations, especially as populations increase (Bartone, 2000). The problem is

compounded as many nations continue to urbanize rapidly. For instance, 30-50% of

population in most developing countries is urban (Thomas-Hope, 1998) and in many African

countries, the growth rate of urban areas exceeds 4% (Senkoro, 2003). Although developing

nations do spend between 20% and 40% of municipal revenues on waste management

(Thomas-Hope, 1998; Schubeler, 1996; Bartone, 2000), they are often unable to keep pace

with the scope of the problem. (Senkoro, 2003) added that when the governments of African

countries were asked by the World Health Organization to prioritize their environmental

health concerns, results revealed that while solid waste was identified as the second most

important problem (after water quality), less than 30% of urban populations have access to

“proper and regular garbage removal”.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, 1996) issued many regulations and

limitations to control unfriendly environment projects, one of these is landfill site criteria, and

also many agencies in different countries of the developed world were established to control

this process. Developing countries just started to establish such agencies and institutions in

this field (PAEA, 2006). The issue of landfill site selection was complicated and time

consuming. During the last few decades and particularly when environmental planning

emerged this issue became systematic and technical. The evolution of GIS made this field

2

much easier and manageable. GIS gave the ability and functionality to find best location for

certain purposes with many limitations. GIS has very distinguishing, powerful functions and

can play an important role in decision making and planning process.

In Africa, rapid urban growth since the 1960s has put pressure on land resources within the

areas surrounding cities, and has led to increased generation of waste. The problem is

aggravated by the open dump nature of disposing waste especially in the slum areas of most

African cities (Hammer, 2003). Traditionally, administrations in African states permitted

uncontrolled dumping in abandoned quarry sites with no provision for sanitary landfill,

causing huge health problems (Martin, 1992; Hammer, 2003). A large part of the problem is

inadequate financial and data resources for site selection and management (Mwanthi et al.,

1997).

In locating proper sites (Landfills), consideration is giving to environmental factors mainly to

avoid environmental risk. Again waste disposal site should be located far from residential

areas and settlement. The site should be away from areas that are susceptible to flooding, as

this could result in washout of disposal waste into groundwater or stream and would pose risk

to human health, the local aquifer and the environment. Other factors relating to land use,

roads, slope etc were considered in locating a risk free and environmentally friendly waste

disposal site.

GIS is a suitable tool for site selection since it has the capability to manage large amount of

spatial data that comes from various sources (Kao et al., 1996). Daneshvar et al. (2005) claim

that GIS is an ultimate method for preliminary site selection as it efficiently stores, retrieves,

analyses and displays information according to user-defined specification. However, GIS can

be limited by the existing sources of data needed in siting analysis. The fundamental

analytical function of a GIS based spatial decision support system include query analysis,

proximity or buffer analysis, overlay analysis, neighbourhood analysis and network analysis.

Various combinations of these functions are commonly used during the geographical data

analysis process (BESR, 2002).

3

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Municipal solid waste generation is among the most significant sources that threaten the

global environmental health. Accordingly, it is essential that integrated systems of waste

management should be considered within the path towards achieving sustainable

development. Such systems generally emphasize on functional elements of waste

minimization (reduction), reuse, recycle and finally placing the remained material in landfills.

As sanitary landfilling is an inevitable part of municipal solid waste (MSW) management

system, appropriate site selection of waste disposal may play a key role in reducing the

environment contamination.

However, solid waste management system in Jigjiga Municipality is not effective as wastes

are seen dumped on all manner of places including roads, near sensitive areas, and on private

properties. It is therefore of importance that solid waste collected are properly disposed at

designated sites in the city in order to avoid environmental degradation. The study by

Genemo and Yohanis, 2013 identified that almost all solid waste generated in households was

indiscriminately disposed together in Jigjiga Town.

1.3. Objectives of the Study

The main objective of this research is to identify major challenges and find out a suitable site

for the disposal of solid waste generated from Jigjiga Municipality and peri-urban vicinities

by employing GIS techniques. Specifically, it was intended to meet the following objectives:

To investigate the challenges of solid waste disposal system in the study area;

To identify the environmental problems due to the indiscriminate solid waste disposal in the

study area;

To produce suitability map for the municipal solid waste disposal site/s using GIS techniques

in study area

4

1.4. Significance of the Study

This research was aimed to find out a suitable site for the disposal of municipal solid waste

generated from Jigjiga Town and peri-urban areas using GIS techniques. A suitable site for

waste disposal must have environmental safety criteria and attributes that will enable the

wastes to be isolated so that there will no unacceptable risk to people or the environment.

Therefore, the study considers physical and socio-economic criteria and integrate them for

selecting suitable sites for solid waste disposal and produce a final map layer in the study

area. As the final map presents land suitability from less suitable to the most suitable areas

for the municipal solid waste disposal, the findings from the study could be used for urban

planners and decision makers to implement ecologically sound waste management scheme in

the town.

The end results of the research also shows the efficacy of GIS and multi-criteria decision

making method in decision making using GIS environments. In light of this, the study had

both academic and practical relevance. Furthermore, the product of the study can be used by

academicians, researchers, practitioners and urban decision makers either for academic

purpose or decision making. If the candidate site/s for solid waste disposal that has been

identified by this paper is properly used by the inhabitants, healthy and neat environment

would be created.

5

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. General Concepts and Definition of Terms

Solid Waste comprises all the wastes arising from human and animal activities that are

normally solid and discarded as useless or unwanted. Similarly, solid waste means any

garbage, refuse, sludge, and other discarded solid materials, including solid waste materials

resulting from industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations, and from community

activities, but does not include solid or dissolved materials in domestic sewage or other

significant pollutants in water resources, such as silt, dissolved or suspended solids in

industrial wastewater effluents, dissolved materials in irrigation return flows or other

common water pollutants (Tchobanoglouset.al., 1977). Solid waste management (SWM) is

one of the basic services that are currently receiving wide attention in the urban agenda of

many developing countries. Lack of effective SWM can result in environmental health

hazards and has negative impact on the environment. This extends wider than just the

geographical boundaries of the town or municipalities. Solid waste management is in crisis in

many of the world’s largest urban areas as populations attracted to cities continues to grow

and this has led to ever increasing quantity of domestic solid waste while space for disposal

decrease (World Bank, 1999).

In most cities and towns of developing world, inappropriate handling and disposal of

municipal solid waste is the most visible cause of environmental degradation, i.e., air

pollution, soil contamination, surface and ground water pollution, etc., resulted from

improper disposal of municipal solid wastes (WHO, 1996).

2.2. Solid waste management in developed countries

Shortage of land for waste disposal and inappropriate landfill site is one of the biggest

problems in most of large urban areas in the world which has its negative impact on human,

and environment (Mcfaden, 2003). Therefore, more efforts are needed to overcome this

problem that leads different agencies and establishments to find common limitations to

protect human and environment from these consequences (Friedman, 1998). The U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency issued many regulations and limitations to control

6

unfriendly environment projects, one of these is landfill site criteria, and also many agencies

in different countries of the developed world were established to control this process (EPA,

1996). Developing countries just started to establish such agencies and institutions in this

field (PAEA, 2006). The issue of landfill site selection was complicated and time consuming.

During the last few decades and particularly when environmental planning emerged this issue

became systematic and technical. The evolution of GIS made this field much easier and

manageable. GIS gave the ability and functionality to find best location for certain purposes

with many limitations.

2.3. Solid waste management in Ethiopia

The booming growth of cities of the developing world has outpaced the financial and

manpower resources of municipalities to deal with provision and management of services, of

which solid waste is the major one. Lack of these services greatly affects the urban poor,

women and children who are vulnerable to health hazards. Twenty two human diseases are

related to improper solid waste management (World Bank, 1999). Moreover, its effects are

also reflected in reduced productivity, low income and poor quality of life and deteriorated

environment. Similar to cities of most developing countries, provision of required services

lags behind the need and development of settlements in urban areas of Ethiopia. Integrated

infrastructure and housing development is not widely practiced. Provision of solid and liquid

waste collection and disposal is low (most urban areas lack the service). In addition to this,

deterioration of the immediate environment in the households and their surrounding is

increasing. With the current growth rate of urban population in Ethiopia, it is estimated that

the population of most urban areas especially small urban centers is doubling every 15-25

years. As solid waste generation increases with economic development and population

growth, the amount in these urban areas will double within a similar time range.

Municipalities in Ethiopia have to be prepared for this challenge (Yami Birke, 1999)with no

exception of Jigjiga Town.

An integrated urban rural development study undertaken in 1988 showed that among the

eleven project towns: Addis Ababa, Akaki, Assela, Ambo, Arsi Negele, Goba, Mizan Teferri,

Robe, Wolisso, Ziway, and Shashemene, only Addis Ababa had centralized waste disposal

system (NUPI et.al., 1989). The towns had no waste collection trucks, four of the

7

municipalities assigned other vehicles to collect waste once or twice a week. Among those

who have the service the coverage is very low, usually being limited to street and market

cleaning. Recently, most municipalities in Ethiopia have become aware of the negative

consequences of poor sanitation. Accordingly, they have devised and adopted a system to

collect and dispose-off solid waste.

A survey of present status of the system in fifteen randomly selected: large(Dessie, Bahir

Dar, Debre Zeit, Gondar, Mekele, Nazareth) and medium (Woldiya, Axum, Adigrat, Robe,

Gimbi, Adwa, Arbaminch, Wolayita Sodo, Debremarkos) urban areas shows that from the

sample of urban areas studied thirteen, i.e. 86.6 per cent used open dump to dispose waste,

while the rest used holes. Most of the other urban areas in Ethiopia are believed to use open

dump for disposal. Open dumps pollute surface and ground water, soil and the natural

environment as a whole. Even though, the beginning is encouraging, some technical matters

should have been considered in the selection of disposal techniques and also sitting. Almost

all municipalities visited did not take the required care in selecting the site for collection and

disposal. For instance, in case of Gimbi, and Robe towns, open sites were selected, and holes

of about one meter deep were dug and then people started dumping garbage. When the holes

are filled they will be covered by soil, and the process goes on like that.

In Dessie town, the collected waste is dumped along the main road and its vicinity, where it

has been carried away downstream to Kombolcha town. Most of the urban areas have no

collection containers, and the number is low in those having. For instance, Gondar, with

population of more than 90,000, has five existing 8m3 containers and now obtained additional

4 containers. (NUPI et.al., 1989).

2.4. Role of GIS and remote sensing for solid waste disposal site selection

Remote sensing is one of the excellent tools for inventory and analysis of environment and

its resources, owing to its unique ability of providing the synoptic view of a large area of the

earth’s surfaces and its capacity of repetitive coverage. Its multispectral capability provides

appropriate contrast between various natural features where as its repetitive coverage

provides information on the dynamic changes taking place over the earth surface and the

natural environment (Navalgund et al., 1983).

8

The role of GIS in solid waste management is very large as many aspects of its planning and

operations are highly dependent on spatial data. In general, GIS plays a key role in

maintaining account data to facilitate collection operations. In this manner, aspects such as

customer service; analyzing optimal locations for transfer stations; planning routes for

vehicles transporting waste from residential, commercial and industrial customers to transfer

stations and from transfer stations to landfills; locating new landfills and monitoring the

landfill, are important. GIS is a tool that not only reduces time and cost of site selection, but

also provides a digital data bank for future monitoring programme of the site (Tomlison,

1990).

GIS is a suitable tool for site selection since it has the capability to manage large amount of

spatial data that comes from various sources. Kao et al., 1996 pointed out that large amount

of spatial data can be processed using GIS and thus, it potentially saves time that would

normally be spent in selecting an appropriate site. While Daneshvar et al., 2005 claimed that

GIS is an ultimate method for preliminary site selection as it efficiently stores, retrieves,

analyzes and displays information according to user-defined specification. However, GIS can

be limited by the existing sources of data needed in sitting analysis.

According to Barron, 1995, GIS analysis of waste composition, degree of compaction and

resulting density along with volumetric changes during land-filling, can ensure that the most

efficient placement method is used and maximum capacity is achieved.

2.5. Locating a Proper Waste Disposal Area

A waste disposal area is a matter of public health concern. Considering the high rate of

urbanization, one should take the long term land use planning of suburbs into consideration to

locate the disposal area. Moreover, the present and future of garbage trucks traffic should be

taken into account. There are many factors which should be considered in locating a waste

disposal area. Obviously, the type of ground selected for this purpose directly affects the

design, usage and the tools needed for the effective operation (Chang et.al. 2007). These

factors mainly consist of: public health, extend and topography of the area, hydrology,

geology drainage system and weather of the area, the availability of landfills in the area to

9

cover the wastes, proximity to the residential and industrial areas, the distance to and from

the city, the weather of the area, the drainage system of the area, cost and the future land use

of the area (Chang et.al., 2007).

2.6. Site Selection Criteria

Identification of the suitability of potential landfill sites, and modifications to existing

facilities, requires a comprehensive assessment of site conditions and potential impacts on the

environment. This includes consideration of topography, surface water, drainage,

hydrogeology (groundwater), geology, climate (including air quality and odor modeling) and

flora and fauna, access and distance from the community the landfill will service.

The following landfill site selection criteria detail the key issues that need to be considered

when identifying potential landfill sites and planning site investigations and assessing the

suitability of a site for land filling. It is unlikely that the majority of sites will meet all

necessary criteria, in which case the assessment of the suitability of a site for a landfill needs

to consider and appropriately manage and justify the selection of a site that doesn‘t meet all

the necessary criteria. Consideration needs to be given to the: comparison of site

characteristics with alternative locations; Potential for engineered systems to overcome site

deficiencies; Methods of operation proposed for the site; and Social and cultural issues

associated with the site.

In order to minimize future risk to the environment from landfill activities, primary

consideration should be given to key issues and potential fatal flaws with respect to geology,

hydrogeology, surface hydrology and site stability (DPIWE, 2004).

Geology

Suitable geology is important to ensure containment of leachate in the long term, or in the

event of engineered containment systems failing. Geology should be assessed with regards to

the movement of leachate and landfill gas. Areas of low permeability (1x10-9m/s) in-situ

material are preferred and should be sought. Engineered liner systems have a finite lifetime,

the ability of the underlying strata to minimize the potential for liquids to migrate out of the

10

landfill into the environment should the liner either degrade, tear, or crack needs careful

consideration. Due to risk of off-site movement of leachate and landfill gas, landfills should

not be sited in areas with the following characteristics: High permeability soils, sands,

gravels, or substrata; High permeability seams or faults; and/or Regions with highly soluble

rocks, sinks and caverns.

An assessment of geology and site soils should consider the availability of on-site materials

for lining, cover and capping. Soils with a high percentage of clay particles are generally the

preferred soil type. Geological factors also influence storm water, silt and groundwater

controls, the containment and control of leachate and gas, as well as the availability of final

cover materials. (DPIWE, 2004).

Site Stability

In assessing the suitability of a site for a landfill the local soils need to be considered with

respect to the following. Localized subsidence areas, differential movement could render a

landfill unusable due to rupture of liners, leachate drains or other structures. Land slide prone

areas. The future weight could, through a wide variety of mass movement, destabilize the

landfill. Instability may also be triggered by earthquakes, rain and seepage. Local/ onsite soil

conditions that may result in significant differential settlement, for example compressible

(peat) or expansive soil, or sensitive clays or silts (DPIWE, 2004).

Hydrogeology

A suitable hydro geological location is important to protect groundwater resources and

understand the likely fate and rate of discharge of contaminants which may enter

groundwater. Landfills must not be located in the following areas: areas overlying drinking

water aquifers; and/or areas where, after taking into account specific design proposals, there

could be a risk of causing unacceptable deterioration of the groundwater quality in the

locality.

All new landfills require a hydro geological assessment. Existing landfills will require a

hydro geological assessment if the facility has no current monitoring program or the current

monitoring program is not adequate to determine whether the landfill is having an impact on

11

the environment. The purpose of a hydro geological assessment is to determine the

relationship between the landfill and surrounding hydrogeology in order to ascertain the

potential risk the landfill facility will have on the environment. In assessing the suitability of

a site for a landfill with respect to hydrogeology, the following need to be considered: depth

to water table and seasonal water table fluctuations; location of aquifer recharge areas, seeps

or springs; distance to water users; sensitivity of water users; dispersion characteristics of

aquifers; variations in groundwater levels; rate and direction of groundwater flow; existence

of groundwater divides; baseline water quality; and the potential effects of failure of leachate

containment and collection systems.

Hydrology

The pollution of surface water by leachate is one of the principal concerns in relation to

landfill location. If landfills are located in close proximity to waterways there is an increased

risk of water pollution. The potential impact of water pollution is greater in waterways that

are used for drinking water or aquaculture.

It is generally undesirable to site a landfill in the following areas: flood plains these are

generally areas which could be affected by a major (1 in 100 year) flood event; land that is

designated as a water supply catchment or reserves for public water supply; gullies with

significant water ingress, except where this can be controlled by engineering works without

risk to the integrity of the landfill; water courses and locations requiring culverts through the

site and beneath the landfill; or estuaries, marshes and wetlands.

Topography

Careful consideration needs to be given to the landforms in the vicinity of the disposal site as

they may influence: The type of disposal method that can be utilized; The suitability of the

site for construction of service facilities; Surface water drainage management; Groundwater

conditions; Soil erosion risk; Access to the site; Ability to screen the site from view; and The

impact of winds on the site.

Ideally the slope of the site should not be greater than 5% (1 vertical to 20 horizontal),

particularly where the trench method of disposal is used. Modest slopes enable easier storm

12

water control, leachate control and site stability measures, as well as facilitating the operation

of the site. When considering potential landfill sites an assessment of the potential for

existing topographical features to assist in minimizing impacts should be made (DPIWE,

2004).

Flora and Fauna

The development of landfills may impact on the flora and fauna of the local area. The

potential impacts on flora and fauna are: clearing of vegetation; loss of habitat and

displacement of fauna; loss of biodiversity by impacts on rare or endangered flora and fauna;

potential for spreading plant diseases and noxious weeds; litter from the landfill detrimentally

impacting on flora and fauna; contamination of sensitive ecosystems, such as wetlands, by

leachate; creation of new habitats for scavenger and predatory species; erosion; and alteration

of water courses.

A survey of the site and collection of comprehensive baseline environmental data are

essential steps in the assessment of potential impacts from proposed land filling operations.

The nature and extent of this data should be site-specific, taking into account the size of the

proposed operation and the risks posed to adjacent sensitive areas. This includes potential

impacts from scavenger birds on aircraft safety and water supplies, as well as impacts from

predatory animals, such as feral cats, on surrounding native fauna. Sites that contain protected

or endangered fauna and/or flora, or sensitive ecosystems are unsuitable for landfill facilities

(DPIWE, 2004).

Climate

Consideration should be given to the local climatic conditions when sitting a waste disposal

facility. The heavy rainfall situations which can occur in the Northern Territory can cause

severe erosion and storm water drainage issues if landfills are not sited and designed in an

appropriate manner. Hot, dry windy conditions can cause dust and windblown waste issues.

Landfills should be located in an area which facilitates the management of landfill issues.

(EPA Victoria, 2001).

13

2.7. Site Capacity

The life of the landfill and the demand for future landfill space should be considered during

the site selection process. Proponents should consider the type and quantities of waste

generated within the area being serviced by the landfill, the current disposal pathways for

these wastes, projected quantities and types of waste requiring disposal and the remaining

landfill capacity at existing landfills sites which service the area. Landfills should be designed

to ensure that sufficient capacity exists for the current and future waste management needs of

the community into the foreseeable future. (EPA South Australia, 2008).

14

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Description of the Study Area

3.1.1. Geographic Location

Jigjiga Municipality is located in the eastern part of Ethiopia and it is the headquarter of state

of Ethiopian Somali. It is spreaded over a land area of about 9218 ha (Structure Plan, 2012).

The municipality asteronomically lies between 9° 16' 30" to 9° 24' 30" N latitude and 42° 44'

0" to 42° 51' 0" E longitude (Figure 3.1).

Figure 3.1. Study Area Map

3.1.2. Physiography and Drainage

Jijiga town is almost located on a flat land with gentle slopes. The existing built up and

expansion areas are much suitable for urban development. On the other hand, some parts of

the town are characterized by poor drainage, gully and swampy land features. Gully areas

15

that are found in the western, southern, southeastern, and northern parts of the town require

immediate intervention or remedy measures since they expand to the expansion and built up

areas of the town.

3.1.3. Geology and Soils

The topography slopes down from the Karamara Mountain in the northwest spreads out in the

southeastern border of the town, with a few numbers of steep-sided valleys, rivers and

streams. In general, the topography is characterized by gentle morphology and flat land areas.

As a result, the stream drains towards southeastern from the Karamara ridge; southeast

direction from Cinaksan direction and other elevated areas of the eastern outskirts of the city.

Wetlands along Biribiris and Toga streams (including Elbahiy and Biyeda streams) and areas

south to the southwest of Elbahiy Dam are the major drainage systems in the town vicinity.

Jigjig Town and its surrounding hinterland is characterized by the following three categories

of geological features: Alluvial and lacustrine deposit sand, silt clay, diatomite, limestone

and beach sand; Hamaneli Formation (Oxfordian limestone and shale) and Jassoma

Formation: Late Cretaceous-Paleocene Sandstone.Information from Jijiga Woreda’s

Agriculture Office reveals that the hinterland of the town is dominated by mixed eutric

cambisols, chromic vertisols, black vertisols, mixed Calcic Cambisols and black Vertic

Cambisols withclay texture soil types.

3.1.4. Climate

Sub-tropical agro-ecological zone depicting a temperature ranging between 12.27°C and

27°C, and the minimum and maximum rainfall lying between 400mm and 800mm with the

annual mean of 712mm is attributable to Jigjiga Town and its vicinity.

3.1.5. Demographic Features

Evidences from various literature reveals that the annual population growth of Ethiopia is at

the rate of around 2.6 percent per annum. The high growth rate is as the result of the

16

country’s birth rate, which is 4.5 percent which is the highest in Sub-Saharan Africa. By

contrast, the death rate has been falling from 3.1 in 1950 to 2.3 in 1975 and further to 1.5 in

2000. Population forecast indicates that over the next 15 years the country’s population will

double i.e. the 73 million population of today will and becomes 146 million by the year 2025.

According to CSA data established in 2008, population of the Jigjiga Town has been

estimated to be about 125,876 people of which 67,128 were males and 58,745 were females.

Estimating an average of five individuals per household, the town has about twenty-five

thousand households. Being the largest town in the eastern rim of the country, it is the hub of

various businesses and office establishments and educational institutions including Jigjiga

University (Genemo and Yohanis, 2013).

3.2. Methods

It is evident that, many factors must be incorporated into landfill sitting decisions and GIS is

ideal for this kind of preliminary studies due to its ability to manage large volumes of spatial

data from a variety of sources. GIS efficiently stores, retrieves, analyzes and displays

information according to user defined specifications. The methodology utilizes GIS to

evaluate the entire town based on certain evaluation criteria for the analysis of landfill site

suitability. The criteria were selected according to study areas local characteristics. The

principal sub criteria that used for spatial analysis are: major road, high tension line, surface

water, residential area, important building, soils, boreholes and reservoirs. The suitable criteria

for landfill site selection process were extracted from national and international guidelines.

Digital data were obtained from different government authorities. ArcGIS 10 software

package was used to create landfill sitting layers. The GIS method used in this paper is

outlined in Figure 3.2.

Landfill siting criteria were divided into constraint and factor criteria. Constraint criteria

represent the unsuitable areas according to the regulations while factor criteria enhance the

placement of landfill of being placed within an area. According to different regulations

constraint criterion maps were created for all the six criteria. The unsuitable areas according to

constraint criteria are indicated in Table 3.1. All constraint criterion maps were overlaid to

create the final factor map.

17

Figure 3.2. GIS Methods flowchart

3.2.1. Determining Unsuitable Areas

The unacceptable areas are locations where due to environmental concerns and/or public

health is rejected for the purpose of waste disposal (Lunkapis, 2004). To determine these

areas, one should enter the collected data into the GIS environment and use geo-processing

techniques like buffering. According to various studies, buffer zones of different extent (Table

3.1) from each criterion was considered for this study too.

Table 3.1. Constraint Criteria

Criteria Unsuitable Areas Remark

Road Networks 100 m buffer zone

Surface water (rivers) 200 m buffer zone

Residential area 300 m buffer zone

Important building 300 m buffer zone

Boreholes 400 m buffer zone

Reservoirs 400 m buffer zone

Identifying waste disposal siting criteria

Individual constraint maps Buffering

Unsuitable

Areas

Suitable

Areas

Individual factor

maps

Internal

weight

External

weights

Final Suitability

maps

AHP

18

Most of the available data for this study are in analogue format. Therefore, they were first

digitized into vector format and thereafter introduced to the GIS plat form.The unacceptable

areas of different data layers are determined in GIS environment as following:

Road Networks: The road networking the town consists of main roads, secondary roads and

pedestrian roads. The waste disposal areas should not be too close to the road networks.

Therefore, a 100 m buffer zone is applied to these networks (Figure 3.3).

Figure. 3.3. Road Networks Constraint Map

Surface Water Sources: The waste disposal areas should not be in the vicinity of rivers,

lakes, or swamps where the underground water level is high. Since major rivers have a higher

discharge and greater downstream influence, no landfill should be sited within the floodplains

of major rivers (Bagchi, 1994).Hence, buffers of 200 m and 100 m for permanent and

temporary rivers are applied respectively. However, in the vicinity of the town permanent

rivers are hardly found. Therefore, buffer of 200 m is considered (Figure 3.4).

19

Figure. 3.4. Surface Water (River) Constraint Map

Residential Areas: The waste disposal areas should not be in the vicinity of residential

(Populated urban) areas. For this purpose a buffer zone of 300 m from all residential areas

(Figure 3.5) is applied to determine unacceptable areas.

Figure. 3.5. Residential Areas Constraint Map

20

Important Building: The data layer for important building centers is entered into the GIS

function and a buffer zone of 300 m (Figure 3.6) around these areas are considered.

Figure. 3.6. Important Building Constraint Map

Reservoirs: According to Bagchi, 1994, if the regional drinking water is supplied by surface

water impoundments, it may be necessary to exclude the entire watershed that drains into the

reservoir from landfill sites. A high groundwater level or a nearby high river level will cause

more risk to pollute the groundwater or river water. The potential landfill location with the

lowest groundwater or river level is more suitable for a landfill. All of the reservoirs in the

town are entered into GIS system and a buffer of 400 m is considered for them (Figure 3.7).

21

Figure. 3.7. Water Reservoirs Constraint Map

Boreholes: The waste disposal areas should be away from boreholes otherwise it can have

irretrievable human and environmental effects. All of the boreholes in the town are entered

into GIS system and a buffer of 400 m (Figure 3.8) is considered for them.

Figure. 3.8. Boreholes Constraint Map

22

3.2.2. Factor Maps Criteria Setting

After finding out where the unacceptable areas are, the remaining areas should be classified

into classes of high and low priority for being used as waste disposal areas. This is done

through two steps of weighting process. In the first step, each layer is internally weighted

based on minimum and maximum distances (Table 3.2). In the second step, each layer is

externally weighted based on the fact that how critical and important the data layer is to the

waste disposal problem (Vassiloglou, 2001). Each map layer was both internally weighted

based on their direct distance to features and environmental judgment and externally weighted

using AHP, based on the relative importance of the criterion.

Table 3.2. Factor Criteria

Factor Map Marginal Suitability Moderate

Suitability

High Suitability

Road Networks >1000 m 500-1000 m 100-500 m

Surface water 200- 350 m 350- 800 m >800 m

Residential areas 300-700 m 700-1000 m >1000 m

Important buildings 300-700 m 700-1000 m >1000 m

Reservoirs 400-600 m 600- 800 m >800 m

Boreholes 400-600 m 600- 800 m >800 m

The Internal Weighting: In this part, each data layer is studied individually. The locations

of each data layer can take a weight between zero to nine based on their direct distance to the

features, implementation as well as engineering judgment. As an example, considering the

road networks, the locations which are close to the roads have higher weight than the ones far

away from the road network. Similarly, for the river, boreholes and reservoirs, the locations

which are far from them have high weight and vice versa.

For residential and important building areas the locations are weighted based on their

distance to these centers. The distance should not be so far that the transportation becomes a

problem and not so close that provides an unpleasant appearance to the sightseeing, parks and

recreational facilities which are mostly in the vicinity of towns. For residential and important

23

building centers, the highest weight is given to locations with a distance of less than or equal

to one km.

The External Weighting: In the previous subsection the locations are weighted within each

data layer internally. However, it is obvious that the data layers themselves do not have equal

weight for the problem in hand. To obtain the external weights, the method described by

Saaty, 1980 was used. First all the criteria were compared against each other according to the

comparison judgment scale from Saaty (2006) which is indicated in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3. Comparison judgments scale for assigning values (Saaty, 2006).

Value Importance

1 Equal

3 Moderately dominant

5 Strongly dominant

7 Very strongly dominant

9 Extremely dominant

Therefore, each data layer is weighted based on the technical, implementation, safety,

environmental, economic and other factors. Table 3.4shows the external weighting schema

used in this study which itself is based on the ideas of GIS specialists and environmentalists

(Economopoulos, 2005).

Table 3.4. External Weighting Schema

Data Layer Weight

Road Networks 0.20

Surface water 0.18

Residential areas 0.16

Important buildings 0.20

Reservoirs 0.14

Boreholes 0.12

24

The final landfill area suitability map was created by overlaying all six factor criteria. Finally,

according to the minimum landfill area requirement in the vicinity of the town, suitable sites

for landfills were selected. These sites were visited for field validation.

25

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1.Solid Waste Status of the Town

Solid waste management system in Jigjiga Town includes collection, transportation and

disposal. Collection of solid wastes from the whole city is performed by the three collection

systems namely: municipal containers, collection from different institutions and house-to-

house collection that have been established by the municipality. In municipal container

system, large open steel containers (8 m3) are often located on open spaces near the public

schools and commercial areas in the city, where the households and other waste producers

deliver their waste to the containers. House-to- house collection system service is available

for those households that are located far from the major roads. Hence, solid waste is collected

from the households to container stations by the daily laborers and be ready for

transportation. However, solid waste from institutions is collected by order via payment per

container. The solid wastes collected by the three systems are transported to the final

dumping site (Shiek Ali Gure) located at 6km in the South-East part of the town center. It is

the only disposal site available for the town to dump all types of solid waste generated from

the town vicinity and it has been serving for the last seven years, even though it was designed

for a temporary use. The municipality of Jigjiga town has been facing problems related to

solid waste management. The problems start from the collection to final disposal due to the

increased waste generation, unplanned city infrastructures and scarcity of dumping site.

Moreover, the current open dumping system has been resulted in environmental and social

problems.

The study by Genemo and Yohannis (2013) shows that “Shiek Ali Gure” open dumping site

has been posing negative impacts on the environment and public health like downstream

water pollution, soil pollution and health problems to the surrounding community. The

problems resulted due to not considering environmental and social factors during site

selection.

The existing waste dumping sites, quite many in number, are located along drainage system

and surrounded by residential areas (Plate 1) that have been precipitating adverse effects on

human health and other social problems like nuisance, ugly sceneries and hindering economic

activities practiced nearby the waste dumping sites due to large amount of waste pickers and

26

rodents are continuously working on the sites. Moreover, the area is vulnerable to ground and

surface water pollution as it is located at very highly permeable ground and nearby streams

and faults in the region. On top of this, all types of solid wastes from domestic, market,

industry, commercial and hospitals, which may contain leachable toxic compounds, have

been dumped without any treatment and separation. Furthermore, there are no daily covering

of solid waste after disposal to reduce environmental and public health problem.

Plate 1.Samplesof unacceptable open dump sites in Jigjiga Town

These practices signify the risk to the public health and the environment. Hence, the current

locations of dumping sites do not satisfy both the national and international landfill standards.

Therefore, any of the existing open dumping sites in the town are not acceptable from

international and national environmental and humane perspectives. In general, the current

solid waste disposal system in the town is not environmentally friendly and socially

acceptable.

According to Structure Plan (2012) of the town, Jigjiga Municipality requires a minimum area

of 21,600 m2 (21.6 hectares) for waste disposal sites by 2020. By taking this fact into account,

this study tried to assess suitable site for the municipal solid waste disposal. To this end, the

Weighted Linear Combination (WLC) techniques in an ArcGIS environment was employed

to come up with the following factor maps showing three classes of suitability levels:

marginally suitable, moderately suitable and highly suitable. Figure 4.1 to 4.6 show all the

factor maps of six data layers involved in this study.

27

Figure 4.1: Road networks factor map

Figure 4.2: Surface water factor map

28

Figure 4.3: Residential areas factor map

Figure 4.4: Important buildings factor map

29

Figure 4.5: Boreholes factor map

Figure 4.6: Reservoirs factor map

30

4.2.Landfill Suitability Evaluation

With different degrees of importance, both environmental and socio-economic factors such as

surface water (river in this case), Boreholes, reservoirs, and proximity to road networks,

residential areas and important buildings were considered to determining landfill sites. The

evaluation of the weight overlay analysis shows that, with a slightly differences, all factor

maps (data layers) are equally influential as they are very important to protect water pollution

from landfill leachate and safeguard public health. The results from the Weighted Linear

Combination assessment in the ArcGIS software reveals three indices of site suitability for

the municipal solid waste disposal of Jigjiga Town. These are marginally suitable, moderately

suitable and highly suitable sites (Figure 4.7).

Figure 4.7: Solid Waste Disposal Site Suitability of Jigjiga Town

The area coverage of each suitability class of the sites was calculated in an ArcGIS algorithm

after converting raster map into vector. The result showed that 8,694 ha (94.3%) of the total

study area is unacceptable for landfill site as the areas are environmentally unfriendly,

socially unacceptable and economically impracticable to be proposed as a solid waste

disposal site. The unacceptable areas, therefore, include buildups and areas closer to major

road networks and water sources. The main purpose of these areas restriction was to protect

31

human health and environment from potential negative effects of landfill as well as to

minimize the cost of construction and waste transportation.

However, the remaining areas of about 524 ha (5.7 %) of the town has satisfied the

environmental, social and economic criteria set for the landfill site selection, in fact, with

different suitability indices (Table 4.1).

Table 4.1: Solid waste disposal site suitability indices.

Suitability index Area (ha) Area (%)

Highly Suitable 93 1

Moderately Suitable 352 3.8

Marginally Suitable 79 0.9

Unacceptable 8,694 94.3

Total Area 9,218 100

Source: computed from landfill site suitability map (figure 4.7)

As depicted in the table 4.1, municipal areas of 93 ha (1%) was categorized as highly suitable

whereas the rest 352 ha (3.8 %) and 79 ha (0.9 %) were respectively grouped as moderately

and marginally suitable for landfill site.

Most of the highly suitable landfill sites were identified in the northern and northwestern

parts of the municipality (Figure 4.7). The northern part of the town, which is at a relatively

higher elevation, is excluded from siting landfill as it is the recharge area for the low-lying

area in the southern. Additionally, the southern part of Jigjiga Town is believed to be the

potential source of ground water for the town vicinity hence not allowed for landfill site/s

where the existing dump site is mistakenly located. Therefore, some of the northern and

entire of southern parts of the town were excluded from landfill sites mainly to protect water

pollution. Some of the eastern and the western parts of the town where plenty of important

buildings such as Jigjiga University, airport, etc. and residences are concentrated were not

selected for municipal solid waste landfill site to safeguard public health and town’s esthetic

values.

32

Figure 4.8: Candidate Suitable Sites for Solid Waste Disposal of Jigjiga Town

The moderately suitable areas may be used for landfill site with some careful management

system such as lining the base of landfill and constructing leachate and gas collector so as to

minimize their negative effects on the environment and public health. In contrary to this, the

marginally suitable areas are currently restricted to be used for landfill site due to their close

proximity to public services.

4.3. The Best Suitable Site Selection

Areas identified as the highly suitable for landfill site are reevaluated for this purpose. Socio-

economic criteria like size of the site, distance from nearby settlements and access to

transportation are some of the determinant criteria used to select potential landfill site so as to

choose the best suitable site out of candidate highly suitable landfill sites. Size of landfill is

one of the most determinant criteria for sustainable solid waste management system as size of

land selected for landfill determines the number of years that the landfill site will last before

the end of its lifespan. From sustainability and economical point of views, larger size of land

that will serve for at least ten years are more preferable than small sized ones (Gizachew,

33

2011). This is mainly because of large sized landfill site can minimize the cost of another site

selection, design and construction over and again.

Therefore, further evaluation was made in ArcGIS environment to exclude small sized sites

that are economically not feasible owning to their area being less than ten hectares from the

sites that are classified as highly suitable (Figure 4.7). After the exclusion of smaller sites, the

remaining candidate landfill sites were inter competed by using the aforementioned socio-

economic criteria. Accordingly, the result of the analysis shows five candidate landfill sites

that were selected for further evaluation (Figure 4.8 and Table 4.2).

For evaluating best suitable landfill site, distance from the settlements land use of the town is

also another very important criterion from public health point of view. Landfill sites too close

to the center of the town are objectionable due to nuisance and adverse effects on human

health. Therefore, candidate landfill sites at farther distances from the center of the town

where human settlement is concentrated were given more weight than others.

From economic point of view, landfill sites accessible to transportation facilities are

preferable. Hence, by gauging each site’s distance from the major road networks, more

weights were assigned to sites a good amount of proximity to major roads.

Table 4.2: Sub-criteria evaluation for most suitable landfill site selection

Candidate

Landfill

Site

Areal Size (ha)

40% of weight

Distance from

Settlement (Km)

25% of weight

Distance from

transportation (Km)

35% of weight

Suitability

score out of

100%

Rank

Site 1 20 (33%) 4.3 (18%) 1.8 (19%) 70 2

Site 2 24 (40%) 4.8 (20%) 1.0 (35%) 95 1

Site 3 14 (23%) 6.0 (25%) 1.7 (21%) 69 4

Site 4 16 (27%) 5.0 (21%) 1.8 (19%) 67 5

Site 5 21 (35%) 4.0 (17%) 2.0 (18%) 70 2

Source: Computed in ArcGIS analysis tools

The result shows that the candidate landfill site 2 is the most suitable site for solid waste

disposal of the town, because it’s the largest in size, located at optimum distance from the

human settlements and the most accessible. Both landfill site 1 and 5 stood second by the

summative criteria but the former outweighs the later in terms of transport accessibility and at

34

a reasonable distance from inhabitants. In, general, landfill sites 2, 1 and 5 are the first three

most suitable sites to be used for municipal solid waste disposal as per the criteria we

devised.

35

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1.Conclusion

Solid waste disposal system in Jigjiga Town is open dumping without discriminations. As the

result, there are environmental and social problems facing the community from the dumping

sites. All types of solid wastes from hospitals, industries, domestic, market and commercial

are dumped together which may contain leachable toxic compounds that are harmful to the

environment and human health. The absence of any kind of waste treatment and separation

has been worsening the situation. Moreover, the popular dumping site at “Sheik Ali Gure’

locality is found along the major draining system of the town and is not at a reasonable

distance from residential houses whereby it has been posing both social and environmental

problems like nuisance, disease and economic disturbances due to a number of waste pickers

and wild animals working on the site every day.

Backed by poor waste management systems and the problems associated with it, the present

study employed GIS techniques to arrive at the most suitable solid waste disposal site by

integrating six factors maps namely: proximity to road networks, distances from residences

and important built up areas; surface water (river), boreholes and reservoirs in the study area.

The result of the final landfill suitability map showed that 5.7% of the entire study area is

categorized as suitable landfill site with various suitability indices ranging from highly

suitable to marginally suitable.

Further analysis in ArcGIS was conducted to identify the most suitable site for landfill of the

town among the five candidate sites on the basis of their size, accessibility and significant

distances from residents. A site with 24 ha area, 4.8 km away from residences and 1 km close

to the major roads was nominated as the most suitable site for the municipal solid waste

disposal (landfill). This site is located in new kebele ten, north western part of the town.

4.2. Recommendations

Owning to adverse effect of the existing dump sites, the researchers strongly

recommend the administrative body of Jigjiga Municipality to put the finding of this

study into effect as soon as possible.

36

The site selected as the best landfill is expected to serve the purpose for longer than

10 years in order to reduce the cost of landfill sites election and construction of

another site over and again. Therefore, the rates and volumes of solid waste generated

from the municipality should carefully be determined to further decide the dimension

of the landfill site during construction.

To protect downstream surface water pollution, runoff must not flow into and out of

the sanitary landfill. Hence, drainage system should be constructed around the

landfill.

The selected landfill site was only for non-hazardous solid waste. Therefore,

hazardous wastes should not be dumped into this site. Hazardous wastes from

industries, health institutions and/or house-holds should be separated from non-

hazardous solid waste before disposal. Hence, separate landfill should be selected for

such hazardous solid waste as siting parameters and construction of landfill for

hazardous solid waste is quite different from that of non-hazardous waste.

The present study considered a few of environmental, social and economic factors for

landfill site selection. However, other factors such as geology, elevation, slope,

ground water table depth etc. and community preferences were not incorporate as

evaluation criteria, partly because of expensiveness of remotely sensed data. Hence,

further study should fill this research gap by including these layers as evaluating

criteria.

37

References

Allende, R., 2009. Waste history in the Gambia. Thesis (MSC). University of the Gambia.

URL/Accessed on 20 January 2013.

Barron, J., 1995. An Introduction to Wastes Management. 2nd Edition. The Chartered

Institution of Water and Environmental Management.

Bartone, C., 2000. Strategies for Improving Municipal Solid Waste Management. Workshop

on Planning for Sustainable and Integrated Solid Waste Management, Manila, 18-22

September 2000. Washington, DC: Urban Management Division, World Bank.

Central Statistical Agency (CSA)., 2008. “Summary and Statistical Report of the

2007population and Housing Census Results” pp 8-19.

Chang, N.B., G. Parvathinathan and J.B. Breeden, 2007. Combining GIS with fuzzy

multicriteria decision-making for landfill siting in a fast-growing urban region,

Journal of Environmental Management, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.01.011.

Daneshvar, R., Fernandes, L., Warith, M., and Daneshfar, B., 2005. Customizing arcmap

interface to generate a user- friendly landfill site selection GIS tool. Journal of Solid

Waste Technology and Management, 31(1), 1-12.

DPIWE, 2004. Landfill Sustainability Guide, Department of Primary Industries, Water and

Environment Tasmania.

Economopoulos, A.P., 2005. A Multicriteria Model for Landfill Sitting, Technical Chambre

of Greece, Athens. URL/ Accessed on 17 February 2014.

EPA, 1996. Environmental Guidelines: Solid Waste Landfill, Environmental Protection

Authority.

EPA, 2001. Siting, Design, Operation and Rehabilitation of Landfills, Environment

Protection Authority Victoria, Publication 788.

EPA, 2008. Draft Guidelines for Groundwater Investigation and Monitoring for Landfills,

Environment Protection Authority South Australia.

Friedman, 1998. Integrated Solid Waste Management. Mc Graw-Hill: University of

California.

38

Genemo B. and Yohanis B., 2013. Assessment of Solid Waste Management Practices and

Role of Community Participation in Jigjiga Town. Jigjiga University, Ethiopia.

Unpublished

Gizachew Kabite, 2011. Gis And Remote Sensing Based Solid Waste Landfill Site Selection:

A Case Of Addis Ababa City, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Unpublished

Hammer, G., 2003. Solid waste treatment and disposal: effects on public health and

environmental safety. Biotechnology Advances, 22, 71–79. http://www.skat.ch/sf-

web/activities/ws/cwg/pdf/cwg-01.pdf: Accessed on 07/05/06

Javaheri, H., et al., 2006. Site Selection of municipal Solid Waste Landfills Using Analytical

Hierarchical Process Method in a Geographical Information Technology

Environment in Giroft. Iran Journal of Environmental Health Science

Engineering. 3, 177-184.

Jilani T., 2002. State of Solid Waste Management in Khulna City. Unpublished

Undergraduate thesis, Environmental Science Discipline, Khulna University Khulna, pp.

2585.

Kao, J., Chen, W., Lin, H. & Guo, S., 1996. Network Expert Geographic Information System

for landfill siting. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 122(10): 307-317.

Lunkapis, G.J., 2004. GIS as Decision Support Tool for Landfills Siting,

www.ums.edu.my. Accessed on 24 October 2014.

Martin, D. & Williams, H., 1992. Market-area analysis and accessibility to primary health-

care centers. Environment and Planning A24: 1009-1019.

Mcfaden, 2003. Environmental hot spots report: identified and evaluated in Palestine, Italian

Agency- Palestine.

Miles SB and HO CL, 1999. Applications and Issues of GIS as Tool for Civil Engineering

Modeling. J. Comp.City. Engrg. ASCE 13:144152.

Mwanthi, M.A., Nyabola, L.O., & Tenambergen, E.D., 1997. The present and future status

of municipal solid waste management in Nairobi. International Journal of

Environmental Health Research, 7, 345-353.

Navalgund RR and Kasturirangan K., 1983. The remote sensing satellite – A programme

overview. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Engg. Sci. –Remote Sensing – III, 6, 313–336.

39

Ozeair Abessi, Mohesn Saeedi, 2009. Site Selection of a Hazardous Waste Landfill Using

GIS Technique and Priority Processing, a Power Plant Waste in Qazvin Province

Case Example. Environmental sciences,6,4,121134.

Palestinian Agency for Environmental Affairs (PAEA), 2006. Solid waste standards report,

Ramalla.

Parametrix, Inc., 1987. Solid Waste Landfill Design Manual, Washington State Department

of Ecology, Publication No. 87-13.

Saaty, L.F., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill

Saaty, L.F., 2006. Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network

processes. European journal of operational research 168 (2), 557-570.

Savage GM, LF Diaz and GC Golueke, 1998. Guidance for Land Filling Waste in

Economically Developing Countries. Washington DC, USA: United States

Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research

Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, EPA 600/ R98040. URL/ Accessed on 15 January 2013.

Schubeler, P., Wahrle, K. & Christen, J., 1996. Solid waste management in low income

countries, urban management and infrastructure: Conceptual framework for

municipal solid waste management inlow-income countries, SKAT. August.

Working paper no. 9. UNDP/UNCHS (Habitat)/World Bank/SDC.

Senkoro, H., 2003. Solid Waste Management in Africa: A WHO / AFRO Perspective. Paper

1, presented in Dares Salaam at the CWG Workshop, Retrieved electronically:

Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H. and Eliassen, A., 1977. Solid waste: engineering principles

and management issues. McGraw-Hill. Kogakusha, ltd. Tokyo.

Thomas-Hope, E., 1998. Solid waste management: critical issues for developing countries.

Kingston: Canoe Press.

Tomlison, R. F., 1990. Current and Potential Uses of Geographic Information Systems: The

North American Experience. D. Peuquet and D. Marble (eds.), New York, Taylor and

Francis.

40

Vassiloglou, V., 2001. Multicriteria Analysis and Evaluation of New Landfill Areas, Report,

Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering Division, Dept. of Civil Engineering,

Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. Washington, DC.

WHO, 1996. Guides for Municipal Solid Waste Managements in pacific countries, Health

Cites, Health Islands Document Series No.6.World Health organization, Western

pacific region.

World Bank. 1999. Technical Guidance Report on Municipal Solid Waste Incineration.

Yami Birke, 1999 integrated development for water supply and sanitation25th WEDC

Vonference, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.