Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
On the basis of this investigation, the priority sequence of the factors in the waste
management systems on regional level might be declared.
The
first or most important issue is how and what materials are managed, treated
and disposed of (features of the collection, transfer and treatment systems, e.g.
materials recovery, organic material treatment, thermal treatment, and
final dis-
posal). As second and third, the environmental and legal factors both have the same
weight. These concern the state of the environment (pollution in the different areas,
liveability of the settlements), and the relevant legislation (e.g. prescriptive or
enabling legislation; EU, national, and municipal level legislation; legal de
nition
of municipal solid waste). Then, they are followed by the economic issues of the
system (system costs and revenues, available funding, etc.), and the institutional
factor such as stakeholder involvement, accountability, professionalism and trans-
parency. Finally, the list closes with the social factor where the main issue is to
accept the IWMS and to participate in its activities (selection, collection), to min-
imize the risks to public health, adapting the system to the local demands and
requirements and to willingness and ability to pay. However, the public plays an
important role in sustainable waste management for which awareness on waste
reduction, segregation and recycling need to be enhanced.
We set up the FCM model of the IWMS, and implemented its structure in a way
that its parameters and weights were
flexibly variable. As the data were obtained
from a wide scope of experts, we are convinced that by using the proposed new
approach sustainable waste management systems may be directly planned and
established, at least in any more or less closed geographical area.
Even though the FCM model was proposed for the integrated analysis of the
sustainability factors of IWMS on regional level, the validity of the method is
depending on the reliability of the input data. In the
fl
first approach, we carried out an
online survey where each stakeholder was asked to describe the existence and type
of the causal relationships among the factors and then to assess the strength of these
using a predetermined simple scale. In order to support their work we sent out a
guideline to describe the terms of concepts and the basics of the development of an
FCM before starting with the survey. This questionnaire guideline functioned as a
support material in answering the questions. In this case, the interviewees had to
rely only on the available information and had no chance to clarify uncertainties
with the researchers.
In order to enhance the ef
ciency and pragmatics of this research, further, to
establish a more suitable FCM model, we recently organized a workshop with the
participation of waste management experts from all areas. During the workshop we
explained to the participants what an FCM was, what its elements were and what
our aim was with the results thus obtained. In this situation, if any issues were
raised, we were able to explain the topics in more detail. As the participants were
able to understand the underlying basic information, they could assess the values
assigned to the connections more thoroughly. So, we assume, the difference
between the two expert knowledge extraction methods (online survey and work-
shop with personal presence) in
fl
uences the input data reliability essentially.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search