Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis.  Permission is given for 
a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and 
private study only.  The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without 
the permission of the Author. 
 
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 
STRATEGIES: 
IMP ACT OF WASTE GENERATION BEHAVIOURS IN 
RURAL AND URBAN COMMUNITIES. 
by 
LONE MORRIS JORGENSEN 
A Thesis presented in partial 
:fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of 
Doctor of Philosophy 
ID 
Environmental Technology 
Massey University, Pa1merston North, New Zealand. 
1996 
To my husband Jens. 
A patient and supportive partner. 
ABSTRACT 
The waste generation characteristics of households was investigated in relation to 
waste management principles and philosophies in urban and rural New 
Zealand, to evaluate current practices regarding municipal solid waste at the 
national, district- and city council leveL 
Two selected councils, one rural and one urban, were studied in detail. A 
household sample from each council was surveyed to establish the trends in 
household waste generation. The results from these surveys were compared 
using statistical analyses. The initial results suggested that rural and urban 
households show significant differences. Further analysis, involving a detailed 
case study of a rural settlement, suggests that these differences arise from the 
economic signals received from the council and not from population structure 
and culture, although some subgroups in the population appear to ignore these 
signals. 
A householders' survey analysis of waste designated for recycling proved to be 
unreliable and difficult to interpret This was caused by the public's general 
inability to interpret plastic recycling numbers for correct sorting, and to measure 
volume and weight correctly. Conclusions were reached with regard to paper 
2 
and household organic waste. While there appears to be little difference in the 
amounts produced per person in either the wards or between the councils, a 
proportional analysis suggests that middle income households compost and 
recycle more than low income households. This has been interpreted as a 
possible effect of multi-family dwellings and the type of education material used 
to deliver the recycling messages. 
An analysis of household waste delivered to the land fills by the collection system 
in the two selected councils shows that the rural household waste has a higher 
proportion of organics and a lower proportion of paper waste than do the urban 
households. The rural households also compost less and visit the landfill more. 
This supports the conclusion that economic signals dictate the waste generation 
behaviours of households. 
The effectiveness, in light of sustainability and economics, of the systems in place 
in New Zealand were studied and compared with international trends in waste 
management systems. Economic signals appear to be a strong motivator for 
individual waste generation behaviours. 
Composting as a potential waste minimisation system for New Zealand was also 
investigated. Green waste composting appears to be an economically viable 
method of waste minimisation for urban and some rural councils. The data 
3 
4 
collected in the surveys suggest that home composting of household organics can 
offer a solution to reduce waste from the household source. The methods and 
effects of implementing this as a strategy require more study. 
5 
6 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
I am indebted to Professor S.M.Rao Bhamidimarri, my chief supervisor, for 
encouraging me to begin this study and for his patience, support and sense of 
humour during the development and completion of the project 
I am grateful to Professor Anton Meister for widening my perspective on 
Resource Economics, and for his meticulous reading of this manuscript and 
suggestions for improvements. 
My deepest appreciation to Dr.Ganesh, who took me on the steepest learning 
curve I have ever been on. The statistics and graphs used in this thesis developed 
from the plenary of methods suggested by him. 
I am also grateful to Jenny Edwards for assisting with the SAS graph program. 
7 
8 
My sincerest thanks to the staff in the Department of Process and Environmental 
Technology for their friendly and supportive help throughout the study. The 
office staff, in particular, have given extensive cheerful and practical help. 
I wish to thank AIan McKerchar from the Palmerston North City Council for his 
extensive support and patient replies to all my queries. I also gratefully 
acknowledge the Palmerston North City Council for their financial support 
towards this project 
My sincerest thanks go to the staff and councillors from Horowhenua District 
Council for their support and interest in this project In particular, councillor Olga 
Scott, for her advice on and proof-reading of the Tokomaru study, Greg BoyIe for 
his approachability and Ken Hale for the information. 
My greatest appreciation goes to the citizens of Palmerston North, Levin and 
Tokomaru for their support and willingness to inconvenience themselves on my 
behalf. 
9 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
10 J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
j 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
J 
I 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
ABSTRACT 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
ABBREVIATIONS 
LIST OF TABLES 
LIST OF FIGURES 
CHAPTER 1 
INTRODUCTION 
1.1 The Background. 
1.2 The Objectives of this Thesis are to: 
CHAPTER 2 
DEFINING THE PROBLEM: 
2.1 The Carrying Capacity and Economic Growth. 
2.1.1 The Awakening of Environmental Consciousness. 
2.1.2 Legislative Attempts to Control Disposal. 
2.2 New Zealand and Waste Management. 
2.2.1 Demand for Sustainable Use of New Zealand Resources. 
2.2.2 Landfills and the RMA. 
2.3 Entropy and Sustainability. 
2.3.1 Energy and Waste. 
2.4 Waste Management and Landfills. 
2.4.1 The Waste Management Hierarchy. 
2.4.2 Recycling. 
2.4.3 Legislation and Waste Minimisation. 
2.4.4 Economic Tools and Waste Management. 
2.5 New Zealand and Waste Minimisation. 
2.5.1 A Multiplicity of Objectives. 
2.5.2 Local Waste Minimisation Systems. 
2.6 Legislation and Waste Classification. 
11 
1 
7 
11 
17 
21 
27 
29 
29 
29 
31 
33 
33 
33 
33 
34 
36 
36 
37 
38 
39 
41 
41 
41 
43 
43 
45 
45 
46 
47 
2.6.1 Waste Classification. 
2.6.2 Sources of Waste. 
2.6.3 Source Reduction. 
2.6.4 Impact Assessments. 
2.7 Waste Audits and Standards. 
2.8 Mechanism for Waste Reduction. 
2.8.1 The five Elements of the Mechanism. 
2.8.2 National or Local Application of the Elements. 
2.9 Waste management from a Mixed Cultural Perspective. 
2.10 Summary. 
CHAPTER 3 
WASTE SURVEYS 
3.1 Historical Waste Surveys. 
3.1.1 United Councils. 
3.1.2 The Effect of Local Body Amalgamation. 
3.1.3 Small City and Rural Household Surveys. 
3.2 Introducing the Project Survey. 
3.2.1 Palmerston North, Levin and Tokomaru [Figure 3.1]. 
3.2.2 The Survey. 
3.2.3 The Waste Analysis Protocol 
3.3 Technical Survey Problems. 
3.3.1 Sample Selection. 
3.3.2 Trial Survey. 
3.4 Response to Survey. 
3.5 Discussion of Errors. 
3.5.1 Response Error. 
3.5.2 Coverage Estimate Errors. 
3.5.3 Non-response Errors. 
3.5.4 Householders' Own Survey. 
3.5.5 Income Grouping Response. 
3.5.6 Instrument Errors. 
3.5.7 Collected Bag Survey. 
3.6 Discussion. 
CHAPTER 4 
WASTE GENERATION BEHAVIOUR 
12 
47 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
51 
52 
52 
53 
55 
55 
55 
55 
55 
56 
57 
57 
58 
61 
61 
61 
63 
64 
66 
66 
66 
66 
67 
68 
68 
68 
68 
71 
71 
PALMERSTON NORTH AND LEVIN 71 
4.1 Statistical Analysis of Survey Data. 71 
4.1.1 Target Population Grouping. 71 
4.1.2 Hypotheses Tested. 71 
4.2 Discussion. 76 
4.2.1 Compartmentalisation of Waste. 77 
4.2.2 Processing of Household Organics. 79 
4.2.3 Waste Produced for Collection 80 
4.2.4 Waste Behaviour Alternatives. 81 
4.2.5 Recycled Materials. 82 
4.3 Further Statistical Analysis. 89 
4.3.1 Two New Hypotheses. 89 
4.3.2 Comparisons of Waste Behaviour in Palmerston North and Levin. 91 
4.4 Discussion. 93 
4.4.1 Comparisons with Overseas Studies. 93 
4.4.2 Conclusions from the New Hypotheses. 94 
4.5 Householders' Own Survey. 95 
4.5.1 Relationship Between Non-recycling and Non-participation. 95 
4.5.2 Conclusions Based on Non-returns. 96 
4.6 Householders' Waste. 98 
4.6.1 Statistical Analysis of Organic and Paper Waste Weights Logged by Householders. 98 
4.6.2 Discussion of Data. 100 
4.6.3 Data Extrapolated for Palmerston North and Levin. 102 
4.7 Landfill Survey. 103 
4.7.1 Introduction. 103 
4.7.2 Analysis of Land fill Survey Data. 104 
4.7.3 Discussion . 105 
4.8 Garden Waste. 106 
4.8.1 Introduction. 106 
4.8.2 Composting in Palmerston North and Levin. 107 
4.8.3 Estimated Quantities from Households. 108 
4.9 Contractors Perspective. 110 
4.9.1 Survey Methods and Aims. 110 
4.9.2 Estimated Quantities from Contractors. 110 
4.10 Summary of Conclusions III 
CHAPTER 5 113  
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES. 113 
13 
5.1 Waste Management Internationally. 
5.1.1 Waste and the GDP. 
5.1.2 Disposal Options in Europe. 
5.1.3 Disposal Options in America. 
5.2 Waste Costs. 
5.2.1 Diversion: Costs and Savings in the United States of America. 
5.2.2 Diversion Targets in the VK. 
5.3 Economics of Recycling. 
5.3.1 Resource and Energy Conservation. 
5.3.2 Life-cycle Assessments versus Traditional Economics. 
5.3.3 Waste Management Plans and National Resource Policies. 
5.4 Waste Generation Worldwide. 
5.4.1 The Effect of Industrialisation on Waste. 
5.4.2 Waste Management Strategies for Different Countries. 
5.5 Legislation and Recycling. 
5.5.1 Commitment to Recycling in the USA. 
5.5.2 Recycling in the EC: The German Experience. 
5.6 Recycling Markets. 
5.6.1 Green Consumerism. 
5.6.2 Transportation Costs and Markets. 
5.7 Cost-benefit Considerations for MSW Facilities. 
5.7.1 Economic and Environmental Factors. 
5.7.2 Integrated Solid Waste Management. 
5.8 Waste as High Entropy Material. 
5.8.1 The Effect of Sorting on Entropy. 
5.8.2 The Entropy Cost of Sorting. 
5.8.3 Considerations for Minimum Cost Solutions. 
5.9 New Zealand's Position. 
5.9.1 New Zealand as a Western Economy.  
5.9.2 The New Zealand MSW Stream. 
5.9.3 Policies and Strategies. 
5.10 The State of Waste in New Zealand Municipalities. 
5.10.1 The Survey. 
5.1 0.2 Summary of Survey Results. 
5.10.3 Conclusions from Survey Results. 
5.11 The New Zealand System Compared to Systems in Other Countries. 
5.11.1 Possible Solutions to the New Zealand MSW Problem. 
5.1l.2 The Danish System as a Model. 
14 
113 
113 
113 
116 
118 
118 
120 
121 
121 
123 
124 
125 
125 
126 
128 
128 
130 
131 
131 
132 
133 
133 
135 
137 
137 
138 
141 
141 
141 
142 
144 
145 
145 
145 
149 
150 
150 
152 
5.11.3 The Danish Model Compared to the Palmerston North and Levin Survey. 160 
5.11.4 New Zealand's Position in Relation to European Models. 160 
5.12 Market Forces and Legislation. 161 
5.12.1 The Waste Oil Market Failure. 161 
5.12.2 Economic Tools in the USA. 162 
5.13 Recycling in Australia. 163 
5.14 Conclusion. 164 
CHAPTER 6 167 
A CASE STUDY 167 
6.1 Planning an Integrated Community Waste Management Program. 167 
6.1.1 Introduction. 167 
6.1.2 Setting the Goals. 167 
6.2 The Village of Tokomaru. 169 
6.2.1 Present Day Characteristics. 169 
6.2.2 Historical Background. 170 
6.3 The Survey. 172 
6.4 Population Statistics Summary [Appendix 13]. 174 
6.5 Waste Behaviour in Tokomaru, 1993- 1994. 175 
6.6 Past and Present Costs of the System. 180 
6.7 Follow-up. 196 
6.8 Conclusion. 197 
CHAPTER 7 199 
THE COMPOSTING OPTION 199 
7.1 The Case for Composting. 199 
7.1.1 Entropy in Biological Systems. 199 
7.1.2 History of Composting. 200 
7.1.3 Corn posting and the Environment. 202 
7.1.4 Cornposting and Entropy. 204 
7.2 Alternative Organic Waste Management Methods. 206 
7.3 Other Justifications for Cornposting. 207 
7.4 The International Scene. 208 
7.5 New Zealand and Corn posting. 211 
7.5.1 New Zealand Standards. 211 
7.5.2 USA Standards. 213 
7.5.3 European Standards. 214 
7.5.4 Composting and Commercial Benefits. 214 
15 
7.6 Composting and Waste Minimisation in New Zealand 
7.7 Home Composting Overseas. 
7.8 Composting Systems. 
7.8.1 Introduction. 
7.8.2 Source Separation. 
7.8.3 Garden Waste. 
7.9 Central Composting. 
7.10 New Zealand Operations. 
7.10.1 Councils and Home Composting. 
7.10.2 Home Composting Systems. 
7.11 Composting as Part of the Waste Management Strategy 
7.12 Commercial Green Waste Operations in New Zealand. 
7.13 Composting at Work. 
7.13.1 Masterton District Council. 
7.13.2 Horowhenua District Council. 
7.13.3 Living Earth. 
7.14 Conclusion. 
CHAPTERS 
FINAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 
REFERENCES. 
16 
215 
217 
218 
218 
219 
220 
222 
223 
223 
224 
227 
229 
231 
231 
232 
233 
234 
237 
237 
245 
ARA 
ARC 
ARWB 
CAT 
CBEC 
DBC 
DCC 
DTI 
EC 
EPA 
HBUC 
HCC 
HOC 
IHC 
ISLR 
MCC 
MDC 
MfE 
M-WRC 
NapierCC 
NelsonCC 
NSC 
NZISS 
ABBREVIA TIONS 
Auckland Regional Authority 
Auckland Regional Council 
Auckland Regional Water Board 
Centre for Advanced Technology 
Community Business and Environment Centre 
Devonport Borough Council 
Dunedin City Council 
Department of Trade and Industry 
European Community 
Environmental Protection Agency 
Hawkes Bay United Council 
Hamilton City Council 
Horowhenua District Council 
Intellectually Handicapped Society 
Institute for Self Reliance 
Manukau City Council 
Masterton District Council 
Ministry for the Environment 
Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council 
Napier City Council 
Nelson City Council 
North Shore City 
New Zealand Income Support Service 
17 
18 
NZWSDA 
PCE 
PNCe 
RMA 
TRC 
WSDA 
WMI 
WDC 
wee 
wec 
wsee 
New Zealand Water Supply and Disposal 
Association 
Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment 
Palmerston North City Council 
Resource Management Act 
Taranaki Regional Council 
Water and Disposal Association 
Waste Management Institute 
Wanganui District Council 
Waitakere City Council 
Wellington City Council 
West Sussex County Council 
19 
20 
LIST OF TABLES 
Table Page 
3.1 Response to survey in the four PaImerston North wards. 65 
3.2 Response to survey by householders in Levin 65 
4.1 SAS GLM summary:Hypotheses 1-6 74 
4.2 Contrasts: Variable::: Bags 74 
4.3 Proportional comparison of waste disposal behaviours in 
PaImerston North and Levin 91 
4.4 Comparison of the waste behaviours in PaImerston North 
and Levin 92 
4.5 Amounts of household organic waste and potentially 
recyclable paper waste per person per week in PaImerston 
North and Levin 98 
4.6 SAS GLM summary 99 
4.7 DUNCAN'S multiple range test Variable=Paper 100 
4.8 Organic and paper waste generated for recycling and tipping 
in one week by the population of households in PaImerston 
North and Levin 102 
4.9 Proportion of totals composted and recycled in PaImerston 
North and Levin (from survey) 104 
4.10 Organic and paper waste found per bag at the landfills in 
PaImerston North and Levin 105 
4.11 Estimated amounts of organic household and potentially 
recyclable paper waste produced per week in the four surveyed 
wards and Levin (from land fill) 105 
21 
22 
Table Page 
4.12 Proportion of categories of waste in Palmerston North and 
Levin 105 
5.1 Estimated materials recycling costs 124 
5.2 Comparison of category analysis of MSW from a 
developed and undeveloped economy 126 
5.3 Projected trends in municipal waste disposal in some 
European countries 128 
5.4 The effect of sorting on the calorific value of MSW 143 
5.5 Comparison of components in NZ MSW stream with 
those of the USA, Germany, Denmark and the UK. 140 
6.1 Proportion of family groupings and household sizes 
in Palmerston North, Levin and Tokomaru. 175 
6.2 Tokomaru waste behaviours in relation to social groups 176 
6.3 Waste behaviours in the family groupings in 
Palmerston North, Levin and Tokomaru 179 
6.4 The cost/benefit analyses for the old and upgraded 
operations of T okomaru tip 181 
6.5 The cost/benefit analyses for the Tokomaru bag collection 181 
6.6 The cost/benefit analysis for a monthly bin service 
and a weekly bag collection 185 
6.7 The cost/benefit analysis of a fortnightly MGB service 
combined with a recycling centre 187 
6.8 The cost/benefit analysis of using private contractors 
for waste collection in Tokomaru 189 
6.9 Cost/benefit analysis of a bag-collection, recycling 
system and twice yearly kerbside collection 191 
23 
24 
Table Page 
6.10 Summary table of cost/benefits to council of the five 
systems discussed 192 
7.1 Comparative chemical analysis of sewage sludge before 
and after composting 205 
7.2 Estimates of organic wastes generated and collected 
in the US in 1980 208 
7.3 Comparisons of heavy metal concentration standards 
for composts in Florida and New York states, Canada, 
England and Germany 213 
25 
26 
LIST OF FIGURES 
Figure Page 
3.1 Maps of survey region 59 
4.1 First receptacle for household waste 79 
4.2 Processing of household organics 79 
4.3 Bags of household waste produced per week 80 
4.4 Tipping.Recycling,Composting and incineration behaviours 81 
4.5 Householders' stated recycling behaviours 83 
4.5a Plasic types recycled 84 
4.5b Glass and paper types recycled 84 
4.6a Choices in combination of recycled materials 86 
4.6b Choices in combination of recycled materials(alluminium) 87 
4.6c Choices in combination of recycled materials(Paper and clothes) 88 
4.7 Recycling methods used 88 
4.8 Disposal of garden waste 107 
4.9 Estimated amounts of garden waste 109 
5.1 Options for MSW 136 
7.1 The Composting sequence 230 
27 
28