An Evaluation of the Public Service of the Integrated Municipal Management of Urban Solid Waste in the Galapagos and the Amazonian Region of Ecuador

Abstract

Municipal solid waste (MSW) generation has become an issue for local governments due to the growing population and rising consumption. The aim of the present study was to assess the public service of SW in relation to technical, environmental, economic, social, legal, and quality indicators. Additionally, this research aimed to ascertain the waste generation and per capita production (PPC) of the municipal administration of the cantons of Loreto, Francisco de Orellana, Aguarico (province of Orellana, Ecuadorian Amazonian lowland), and Santa Cruz (Galapagos Islands). Additionally, the tariff model for small-category cantons were determined. A combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods, along with a field visit, were used. As a result, from the evaluation, it was determined that the technical aspects of the municipal administration of the canton Loreto were found to have a 41.30% Conformity (C), 28.26% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 30.44% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). Likewise, the canton of Francisco de Orellana showed 29.5% (C), 37.21% (NC−), and 33.29% (NC+), while the canton of Aguarico presented 25.6% (C), 43.83% (NC−), and 31.74% (NC+). Finally, the canton of Santa Cruz showed 71.74% (C), 28.26% (NC−), and 0% (NC+). Furthermore, in relation to the other aspects, the municipal administration presented Major Non-Conformity (NC+), since the final disposal phase was poorly handled. This phase is the most crucial because it pollutes the environment if it is not controlled technically. In terms of the production of municipal solid waste (MSW), the cantons of Francisco de Orellana, Loreto, and Aguarico produced 83.97 tons per day and 0.85 kg/inhab/day, 19.5 tons per day (MSW) and 0.7 kg/inhab/day, and 18.60 tons per day with 0.911 kg/inhab/day, respectively. In conclusion, this study made it possible to provide the groundwork for a management model for small-category canton municipalities that is based on the inclusive circular economy and the tariff system. This model could be used to uphold sustainability and improve the all-inclusive municipal management service of MSW in small municipalities.

1. Introduction

The integral management of MSW has become a significant issue for municipal governments worldwide. Because of accelerated demographic growth, the advancement of technology, and population growth, the inadequate management of each of the phases of MSW leads to environmental and social problems [1,2,3]. In their book “What a Waste 2.0”, the World Bank predicts that solid waste will rise from 73% in 2020 to 93% by 2050. This means that the global per capita production (PCP) of waste will be 1.09 kg/inhab/day [4,5].

Of the 8 billion inhabitants of the world, 662 million live in Latin America and the Caribbean, accounting for 8.2% of the total. It is estimated that by 2056, 752 million people will be facing significant difficulties with MSW due to deficiencies in all phases of its integral management including separation at the source, temporary storage, sweeping and cleaning, collection, transportation, storage and/or transfer, utilization, treatment, and, lastly, final disposal [6,7,8]. Recycling rates are poor, organic waste is not used, landfills lack biogas management systems, and technology is not used for energy recovery [9]. Additionally, only around 10% of the waste produced is recovered. The fact that 90% is managed inadequately should concern us and raise public awareness. With a PCP of 1.4 kg/inhab/day, Latin America reaches approximately 700 tons/day, increasing the need for services. It is noteworthy that only Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico account for 74% of the MSW generated [6,10,11].

In Latin America and the Caribbean, there is a lack of adequate collection services and final disposal of MSW, which is performed in open-air dumps. Additionally, sanitary landfills are not technically operated, which results in a reduction in their useful life. According to the United Nations Organization (UNO), approximately 540,000 tons of MSW is generated daily, with an estimated 671,000 tons per day by 2050. Of this amount, 75% is organic waste, 20% is recyclable waste, and 5% is non-recyclable waste. The inadequate management of the final disposal locations leads to socio-environmental problems in the area directly affected, because soil, air, water, and humans are exposed to MSW contamination [7,12,13,14,15,16].

Ecuador is a country of 256,370 km² situated on the northwestern coast of South America. It is divided into four regions including the Amazonian lowland, the highlands, the coast, and the Insular Region made up of the Galapagos archipelago. Administratively, Ecuador is composed of 24 provinces, each of which is further divided in cantons, with a total of 221. According to the 2022 Census, Ecuador has a population of 16,938,986 inhabitants with an average of 3.2 people per household, 48.7% of whom are men and 51.3% of whom are women. Recent data indicate that in 2022, 64 tons/day of MSW were generated. Only the province of Orellana in the Amazon region had a PCP of 0.7 kg/inhab/day for solid waste, compared to 0.9 kg/inhab/day in the urban sector. The PCP is roughly 0.7 kg/inhab/day in the Galapagos Insular Region [17,18]. Of the MSW generated, 55.8% is organic waste and 44.2% is inorganic waste. The total population in the Galapagos Island Region is 28,583 inhabitants, with 22,741 living in the urban area and the remaining 5842 in the rural area. There are about 8300 inhabitants in the canton of San Cristobal, 3050 inhabitants in Isabela, and 17,233 inhabitants in Santa Cruz. The PCP of the stationary population is 0.7 kg/inhab/day. The PCP of the floating population is 0.8 kg/inhab/day. Only the population of the Santa Cruz canton classifies the waste into organic, recyclable, and non-recyclable [19,20].

For the private waste disposal industry to provide high-quality services in Ecuador, four characteristics have been identified as crucial: security, calmness, punctuality, and empathy [21]. The private sector´s engagement suggests that there is a deficit in the budgets allotted for the integral management of MSW. At the national level, the collection, transportation, and final disposal phases were anticipated to cost USD 321.82 million in total in 2019. Nevertheless, to achieve 100% efficiency in the collection phase, a total of USD 505.59 million ought to have been allotted [22]. The waste management of the municipal administrations is also affected by social and political considerations, as seen by their lack of management funds and environmental education initiatives that link all stakeholders involved: the state, private companies, and individuals [23].

Similarly, the lack of participation from base recyclers, the lack of information on how to reduce the generation of MSW, and the failure to implement ordinances requiring generators to separate waste into the three categories of waste, recyclables, and organics have all exacerbated the poor waste management services offered by municipal governments [24,25]. Thus, waste management is a service that civil society, municipal administrations, and the business sector must all provide [26,27]. Additionally, the general public believes that the quality of services during the temporary storage phase is insufficient, necessitating urgent assistance with the estimated number of eco-bins. This forces the generators to place waste outside them, which attracts dogs, rats, and flies, creates bad odors, and leads to the spread of diseases.

On the other hand, municipal administrations with waste management ordinances do not consider all phases of solid waste management, including separation at the source, temporary storage, sweeping and cleaning, collection, transportation, storage and transfer, the use of recyclable waste, the treatment of organic waste, and final disposal. Everything gathered in final disposal cells thus shortens its useful life. In order to have public services for waste management, technology must therefore be implemented in the stages of the use of recyclable waste and gain technical feasibility for the integral management of MSW [28,29,30]. According to the technical reports of the National Institute of Statistics and Censuses (INEC), Ecuador´s municipal administrations in 2022 provided the operational costs incurred for the public service of waste management.

Table 1. Summary of operating costs by final disposal site.

Region	Monthly Total Spending on Integrated MSW	Tons Collected per Month	Average Price per Ton in USD
Sierra Region	26,208.53	295.23	88.77
Coastal Region	44,843.35	773.04	58.01
Amazon Region	17,513.66	118.00	148.42
Insular Region	49,655.06	213.55	232.53
Province	Sanitary Landfill
Galápagos	49,655.1	213.5	232.5
Orellana	77,397.0	930.0	83.2
Province	Emerging Cell
Galápagos	-	-	-
Orellana	-	-	-
Province	Dump
Galápagos	40,908.0	500.0	81.8
Orellana	13,864.5	397.5	34.9

Source: Technical Bulletin of Economic Statistics in Decentralized Autonomous Governments’ Solid Waste Management 2022 [33].

provides a summary of the operational expenses for each final waste disposal site at the regional level, as well as in the provinces of Orellana and Galápagos, where the research was conducted [31,32,33].

Municipal solid waste in the Santa Cruz canton has also been categorized by the populace since 2006. It is currently kept in green containers for organic waste, blue containers for recyclable waste, and black containers for general waste. The collection has an environmental complex and is performed in a unique way. An ordinance with a rate based on the idea of paying for what is generated—whose volume is variable—went into force between 2020 and 2023 [34]. As a result, the volume-based tariff model increased recyclable material by 64.46%, which was comparable to the collection model for electrical consumption because both have a variable that determines the monthly rate. The first model is based on the volume of generation, while the second is based on electrical consumption. However, the latter is the most effective because it is collected monthly and there are more users. This ordinance was abolished in 2024, when the policy was affected by administrative changes that followed the victory of a popular election [34,35,36].

In contrast, lawsuits were brought into the Francisco de Orellana canton because of complaints from the local community about the direct influence of the final disposal site, including vultures, untreated leachate discharge, and odors. As a corrective measure, the dump had to be closed within two years and an Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan had to be developed. Residents of the area that had an influence on the final MSW of the Loreto canton’s disposal site also filed a claim for protective action because of the inadequate management of MSW. Similarly, the people of the area of direct impact are suing the Decentralized Autonomous Municipal Administration of the Aguarico canton for failing to implement the technical closure of the existing waste dump.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the public service of the integral management of non-hazardous solid waste (GIRS) in the province of Orellana, within the cantons of Loreto, Francisco de Orellana (El Coca), and Aguarico, as well as in the Insular Region of the Galapagos province, with the Santa Cruz canton. The findings will make it possible to recommend the GIRS management model to every assessed canton. Additionally, it will also enable the application of the tariff model for small cantons. The GIRS comprises regulatory, operational, economic, financial, administrative, educational, planning, monitoring, and evaluation actions in order to manage non-hazardous solid waste and residues in compliance with technical, environmental, economic, social, and legal aspects [37,38,39]. Finally, thanks to the information provided, decision makers will be able to adhere to the authority granted in the regulatory framework.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

This study was carried out in three open-air waste dumps belonging to the Amazon region, the Orellana province, the Francisco de Orellana canton, Loreto, and Aguarico and a sanitary landfill belonging to the Insular Region, the Galapagos province, the Santa Cruz canton. There, each of these final disposal sites were overseen by the Decentralized Autonomous Municipal Governments (GADMs), which were for Loreto (MALC), Francisco de Orellana (MAFO), Aguarico (MAA) and Santa Cruz (MASC) (Figure 1).

The open-air waste dump of the Loreto canton is located in the Ávila Huiruno parish, the El Triunfo neighborhood, where the area designated for the final disposal site is roughly 20 hectares (ha). The open-air waste dump of the Francisco de Orellana canton is located in the El Dorado parish, the La Paz community, and it has an operating area of 13 ha. Likewise, the open-air waste dump of the Aguarico canton is located in the Kichwa Pandochicta commune, which is abandoned. Finally, as indicated in Figure 1, MASC handles solid waste in two locations; organic waste and recyclable materials are processed at the Fabricio Valverde Environmental Park, which is situated 4 km along the road to the Bellavista parish, while non-recyclable solid waste is taken to the sanitary landfill, located 27 km along the road to the Itabaca canal.

2.2. Methodology

Descriptive research was carried out to assess the public service of the integrated management of the non-hazardous solid waste (MSW) of the Amazon and Insular Regions. This study included interviews with citizens and technicians of the GADM, field visits to the final disposal sites, and a review of the documentation of the means used to verify compliance with the provisions established by current environmental regulations, as well as compliance with indicators set forth in national and international technical standards. Solid waste management is a complicated reality that cannot only be sustained with investments and equipment but depends on authorities in socially associated governance issues [40,41,42,43]. Consequently, as shown in Figure 2, six aspects divided into two MSW categories were evaluated.

The evaluation was performed in three stages. Stage 1: the development of a conceptual framework based on the technical, environmental, economic, social, and legal aspects that were measured through compliance indicators given in the legal framework, as well as using national and international technical standards. Stage 2: The identification of findings in Conformity (C), Minor Non-Conformity (NC-), and Major Non-Conformity (CN+). Hence, in order to quantitatively assess the degree of compliance, a weighting was applied based on the importance of each aspect and indicator, the level of confidence, and the risk in terms of provisions established in currently enacted regulations. The compliance level was identified through the traffic light system (green, orange, and red). Stage 3: the design of the MSW management model. Finally, Figure 3 outlines the methodology of the research produced for the evaluation [44].

2.2.1. Diagnosis of the Current Situation

The following factors were taken into account for the analysis when using the guide published by the Ministry of Environment, Water, and Ecological Transition’s (MAATE) Comprehensive Management of Solid Waste and project of Inclusive Economy (GRECI) for the characterization and quantification of non-hazardous solid waste and residues.

1.

Type of generator:

• Residential

  ▪

  Urban

  ▪

  Rural

• Not residential

  ▪

  Associated generators: shops, restaurants, hotels, and public and private institutions.

  ▪

  Other generators: educational institutions, markets, street sweeping, and public cleaning services.

2.

Categorization of the canton based on the current population using a geometric method.

$$P_f=P_o{(1+r)}^n$$

(1)

Source: [45].

In the above,

P_f= the final (current) population of citizens.

P_o = the initial population of citizens.

r = the annual growth or decline rate (%).

n = the number of years for which the population is to be projected, based on the initial population (P_o).

The category of the canton was identified in order to facilitate the characterization study (MSW) according to the following ranges (

Table 2. Type of canton.

Canton Type	Population (Citizens)
Micro	<15,000
Little	15,001–50,000
Middle	50,001–200,000
Big	200,001–1,000,000
Special	>1,000,000

Source: ECCRS—GRECI Guide [45].

).

3.

Definition of sample size.

$$n={\displaystyle \frac{{\left({\mathrm{Z}}_1-\frac{\propto }{2}\right)}^2\times \mathrm{N}\times {\mathsf{\delta }}^2}{E^2\times \left(N-1\right)+{\left(Z_1-\frac{\propto }{2}\right) }^2\times {\delta }^2}}$$

(2)

Source: [45].

In the above,

n = the number of samples.

(Z₁ − α/2) = 1.96 for a 95% reliability.

N = the total population to be sampled.

δ = the standard deviation.

4.

Per capita production (PPC) calculation.

$${PPC}_j={\displaystyle \frac{\left(\sum p_i\right)/nd}{{nh}_j}}$$

(3)

Source: [45].

In the above,

PPC_j = the average per capita production of solid waste from each household generator (j) in kg/inhab/day.

P_i = the daily weights of the generators that have a record in the week of sampling (i) in kg.

nd = the number of days for which there is a record of generators in the week of sampling.

nh_j = the number of inhabitants of each household generator (j).

2.2.2. Evaluation of the Phases of Integrated Solid Waste Management

For the quantitative assessment of the degree of compliance with the established aspects and indicators, the following were considered:

• The scale of the compliance of the aspects and indicators was from 1 to 10, where 10 meant that the aspect and the indicator were within the established or expected parameters and 1 meant an indicator with problematic performance at the established values.
• A weighting factor was used to determine the degree of the importance of compliance with the aspects and indicators provided.
• To determine the level of conformities and non-conformities found, the following Equations (1) and (2) were applied [9,43]. Table 3 lists the scale of the compliance of the aspects and indicators in a qualitative manner. Colors were also utilized to indicate compliance for the qualification of poor (red), average (orange), and good (green) levels.

$$Level of Certainty=\sum (W\times C)\times 10(\%)$$

(4)

Source: [46].

In the above,

C = level ratings from 1 to 10.

W = the weighting of the importance of the aspect or indicator

$$W=\sum {\displaystyle \frac{I_i}{I_{total}}}$$

(5)

Source: [46].

I = the rating of the importance of an environmental aspect on a scale from 1 to 10.

Table 3. Compliance scale for aspects and indicators [43,47].

Level Grading		Description
Qualitative	Quantitative
Deficient	1	Indicator with problematic performance according to established values.
Regular	5	When performance is potentially problematic or presents some non-serious deficiency.
Good	10	When indicator is within suggested or expected parameters.

Table 3. Compliance scale for aspects and indicators [43,47].

Level Grading		Description
Qualitative	Quantitative
Deficient	1	Indicator with problematic performance according to established values.
Regular	5	When performance is potentially problematic or presents some non-serious deficiency.
Good	10	When indicator is within suggested or expected parameters.

Table 4. Assessment of compliance level and identification of findings [43,46].

Assessment	Level of Certainty	Level of Non-Conformity	Findings	Assessment
0–0.25%	Very Bad	Low	Major Non-Conformity	NC+
26–50%	Bad	Medium	Minor Non-Conformity	NC−
51–70%	Average	High
71–90%	Good	Very High	Conformity	C
91–100%	Excellent	Excellent

was used to facilitate the evaluation, assessment, and determination of the findings in accordance with Conformity (C), Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), Major Non-Conformity (NC+), and the Level of Compliance. Likewise, the findings were evaluated in accordance with the provisions of the regulations set forth in the Organic Environmental Code (RCOA), Articles 499, 500, and 501 [48].

2.2.3. Selection Standards for the GIRS Management Model

The provisions of the Organic Code of the Environment (COA), which lays out the development of plans, programs, and projects for the collection, transportation, treatment, and final disposal systems of solid waste or residues, were also taken into account for the development of the management model for the comprehensive management of MSW. As a result, the analysis considered the characteristics of the population of the canton, as well as the current situation with regard to the provision of non-hazardous solid waste services. Therefore, three potential executable models were investigated. They are described in greater detail below:

• The current management model for non-hazardous solid waste in the canton.
• The direct institutional management of the canton is strengthened.
• The creation of a public company.

However, the management model took into account a variety of factors. First, the user, also referred to as the generator, was in charge of the waste hierarchy, which included the (a) prevention of and (b) reduction in generation at the source by remanufacturing, re-proposing, eco-design, reuse, repair, restoration, and servitization. Second, the municipal administration was in charge of the cleaning and sweeping stages, as well as the separate collection of MSW, recycling, organic waste treatment, and landfill disposal. Third, the Environmental Manager would receive the recycled material to be used as a raw material for new goods.

2.2.4. Tariff Model for Comprehensive MSW Management

Three models for calculating the GIRS rate were established by the collection criteria of the National Electricity Corporation (CNEL EP), which were used to create the tariff model proposal. These models are described below with the Unified TRB Formula:

$$TRB=\left(\right(1 \times B) + (SBU \times C) + (EAC \times D\left)\right)$$

(6)

Source: [49].

In the above,

B = the fixed value in USD to be applied to determine the value of the waste collection rate.

SBU = the amount of the Unified Basic Salary in effect on the date of calculation.

C = the percentage to be applied on the SBU to determine the amount of waste collection.

EAC = the total active energy consumption (kWh).

D = the value in USD to be applied to the EAC to determine the amount of waste collection.

• (1$\times$B) = a fixed value.
• (SBU$\times$C) = a value that may maintain an annual increase depending on the SBU.
• (EAC$\times$D) = a variable value depending on the customer’s consumption.

3. Results

3.1. Diagnosis of the Current Situation of the Social and Physical Components of the Final Disposal Sites

3.1.1. Francisco de Orellana Canton, Orellana Province

Following the characterization of MSW, it was found that the Francisco de Orellana canton produced 83.97 tons/day. This amount was derived from the sum of daily generations in residential sources (49.27 tons/day), non-residential sources (34.51 tons/day), and special sources (0.20 tons/day of sanitary waste). According to

Table 5. PCP from the canton Francisco de Orellana.

Estimated Population of the Canton in 2022	Domestic Production (ton/day)	Non-Domestic Production (ton/day)	Special Production (ton/day)	Cantonal Production (ton/day)	Average Cantonal PCP (kg/inhab/day)
98,530	49.27	34.51	0.20	83.97	0.85
	58.7%	41.1%	0.2%	100%

, total residential production accounted for 58.5% of total production, whereas non-residential and special sources presented a contribution of 41.1% and 0.2%, respectively, to total production at the cantonal level. Hence, the PCP of the Francisco de Orellana canton was 0.85 kg/inhab/day.

Likewise,

Table 6. Composition according to potential for utilization of waste and solid waste characterized in Francisco de Orellana canton.

Sources of Waste and Solid Waste Generation		Organic Waste	Recyclable Waste	Scrap	Total %
Urban (URB)		67.30%	12.40%	20.30%	100%
Rural (RUR)		63.30%	17.40%	19.30%	100%
Commercial Establishments (CE)		32.7%	38.8%	28.5%	100%
Hotels (H)		59.4%	20.7%	19.9%	100%
Markets (M)		67.90%	19.00%	13.10%	100%
Public and Private Institutions (PPI)		20.80%	44.30%	34.90%	100%
Educational Institutions (IE)		18.6%	55.4%	26.0%	100%
Restaurants (R)		75.7%	9.3%	15.0%	100%
Industrialists and environmental Managers (IGA)	from the sampling process	32.7%	33.5%	33.8%	100%
	about entry permits	0.08%	---	99.9%	100%
Cleaning and sanitation of public spaces and streets (AL)		71.6%	10.3%	18.2%	100%

lists the potential use of waste and solid waste characterized for each generation source at the cantonal level.

Nonetheless,

Table 7. Solid waste composition in the canton of Francisco de Orellana.

Types of MSW			Composition (%)
Useful	Organics	Organic Matter—Compostables	58.44%
	Recyclables	Paper	3.59
		Cardboard	3.76
		Glass	2.42
		Plastic	5.34
		Tetra brik (multilayer packaging)	3.95
		Metals	0.88
		Textiles (fabrics)	1.26
		Rubber, leather, rubber	0.55
Unusable	Waste	Single-use plastic bags, snack wrappers, cookie wrappers, candy wrappers, among others	6.29
		Sanitary waste (toilet paper/diapers/sanitary napkins, pet droppings, etc.)	6.56
		Batteries	0.10
		Styrofoam (expanded polystyrene)	2.73
		Inert waste (earth, stones, ceramics, bricks, among others)	3.79
		Residues of medical use	0.32
		Other uncategorized waste	0.02

shows that the physical makeup of urban waste in the Francisco de Orellana canton was made up of 19.81% waste, 21.75% recyclable waste, and 58.44% organic waste.

3.1.2. Loreto Canton, Orellana Province

It was found that the Loreto canton produced 19.5 tons/day of solid waste and residues, of which 74.9% was representative of total domestic production, 24.8% corresponded to total non-domestic production, and 0.3% was common waste from special sources. According to

Table 8. PCP of Loreto canton.

Estimated Population 2023	Domiciliary Production (ton/day)	Non-Domiciliary Production (ton/day)
28,108	14.66	4.8
Special Production (ton/day)	Cantonal Production (ton/day)	Average Cantonal PCP (ton/day)
0.06	19.5	0.7

, the canton produced a PCP of 0.7 kg/inhab/day.

Likewise,

Table 9. A summary of the composition according to the potential for the utilization of waste and solid waste characterized in the Loreto canton.

Sources of Waste and Solid Waste Generation	Organic Waste	Recyclable Waste	Scrap	Total %
Urban (UR)	74.3%	18.1%	7.6%	100%
Rural (RU)	45.7%	30.0%	24.3%	100%
Commercial establishments (EC)	57.0%	33.9%	9.1%	100%
Hotels (H)	54.6%	28.8%	16.6%	100%
Markets (M)	92.9%	5.2%	1.9%	100%
Restaurants (R)	78.7%	13.5%	7,9%	100%
Public and private institutions (IPP)	41.2%	38.8%	20.0%	100%
Educational institutions (IE)	44.9%	38.1%	17.0%	100%
Sweeping and cleaning of streets and public spaces (BL)	81.2%	15.9%	2.9%	100%
Public and private specials (ES)	25.9%	37.9%	36.2%	100%

, which summarizes the waste’s composition, shows the percentage composition based on the solid waste and waste´s potential for utilization for each source of generation at the cantonal level.

Table 10. Solid waste composition in the canton of Loreto.

Types of MSW			Composition (%)
Useful	Organic	Organic matter (food waste, weeds, pruning, bones, and the like)	63.12
	Recyclables	Paper (white, newspaper, and mixed)	3.21
		Cardboard (plain white, cardboard, brown, corrugated, and mixed)	4.62
		Glass (transparent, colored, and windows)	1.48
		Plastic (PET, HDPE, LDPE, PP, PS, and PVC)	9.42
		Tetra brik (multilayer packaging)	2.56
		Metals (tin cans, steel, iron, aluminum, and others)	1.10
		Textiles (fabrics)	1.51
		Rubber, leather, and rubber	0.50
Unusable	Waste	Single-use plastic bags (snack, cookie, and candy wrappers, among others)	1.58
		Sanitary waste (toilet paper/diapers/sanitary napkins and pet excrement)	6.71
		Batteries	0.01
		Styrofoam	0.10
		Inert waste (dirt, stones, ceramics, and bricks, among others)	2.46
		Medicine residues	0.03
		Other uncategorized waste	1.59

illustrates the physical composition of the MSW in the Loreto canton, which was composed of 12.48% waste, 24.40% recyclable waste, and 63.12% organic waste.

3.1.3. Aguarico Canton, Orellana Province

It was evident from MAA´s reviewed Development and Territorial Planning Plan (PDOT) data for the years 2023–2027 that they lacked a comprehensive solid waste management system and that the means they used for management were deficient and inappropriate. The characterization of solid waste was not completed, since they lacked the canton´s PCP calculation. As to the final disposal of solid waste, 27.7% was submitted to the municipal collector, 30.34% was dumped into vacant land or ravines, 19.28% was burned, 7.0% was buried, 13.18% was thrown into the river, and 2.5% was disposed of in another way [50]. The canton has an ordinance for the collection service depending on the kind of user. The value is USD 0.70 for domestic users, USD 1.40 for commercial users, and USD 0.35 for senior citizens. Given that the Yasuní National Park belongs to the canton, 25.7% of the population received the collection service, while 74.3% did not. As a result, 77% of the waste in the Yasuní parish was burned, 16% was buried, 5% was delivered to the collector, and 2% was left outdoors [51].

3.1.4. Santa Cruz Canton, Galápagos Province

Last but not least, the Santa Cruz canton has an extensive solid waste management system that separates recyclable waste, organic waste, and non-recyclable waste at the source. A characterization study conducted in 2015 found that the PCP was 0.76 kg/inhab/day, and the associated PCP was 0.15 kg/inhab/day. The PCP is listed by user type in

Table 11. PCP in the Santa Cruz canton.

Estimated Population 2019	Domestic kg/inhab/day	Commercial kg/inhab/day	Institutional kg/inhab/day
19,852	4.117	0.355	0.007
Restaurants kg/inhab/day	Hotels kg/inhab/day	Boats kg/inhab/day	Cantonal kg/inhab/day
0.092	0.017	0.009	0.911

. According to the Characterization, Quantification, and Diagnosis Study of Special, Hazardous, and Non-Hazardous Waste created in the Santa Cruz, Isabela, and San Cristobal cantons, the Santa Cruz canton also generated 18.60 tons/day [52,53,54]. As shown in

Table 12. Physical composition of solid waste in Santa Cruz canton.

Description	Household Waste % by Wt	Commercial % by Wt	Industrial % by Wt	Establishment Health % by Wt	Religious Worship % by Wt	Official Entities % by Wt
Organic matter	56.5	14.1	-	24.5	5.5	11.5
Paper and cardboard	5.0	30.3	61.3	20.0	8.4	32.7
Ferrous metals	0.4	--	--	--	--	--
Non-ferrous metals	1.6	--	--	--	--	--
Low-density plastic	5.3	9.0	4.5	18.7	5.1	8.7
High-density plastic PHDE	3.6	8.4	7.1	6.3	0.3	10.3
Rubber	1.7	2.4	--	-	6.5	--
Inert matter	4.5	19.4	--	1.7	13.2	13.7
Glass	3.7	4.2	4.0	7.4	7.2	13.3
Wood	1.0	1.7	5.8	--	--	--
Textiles	2.8	1.4	1.5	3.8	34.8	--
Toilet paper, diapers, towels	10.8	7.8	13.7	8.4	14.6	9.2
Tetrapak	1.2	0.1	--	1.0	--	0.06
PET plastics	1.2	1.3	2.0	8.2	4.6	0.5
Disposable (plates, cups)	0.7	--	--	0.08	--	--
Batteries	0.1	--	--	---	--	--

, MASC also completed the characterization of the canton’s solid waste for each generation source. Regarding the composition of household solid waste, 14.8% was recyclable, 67.0% was organic, 13.6% was non-recyclable, 4.4% was bulky, and 0.2% was hospital waste.

3.2. Evaluation of Phases of MSW’s Comprehensive Management

The following results were obtained from the evaluation and determination of the findings such as the Conformity (C), Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), Major Non-Conformity (NC+), and the Level of Compliance of each of the phases of the comprehensive management of the MSW and non-hazardous solid waste of the GADM. The Ministry of Environment, Water, and Ecological Transition (MAATE) established the technical, environmental, economic, social, and legal aspects that were taken into consideration when evaluating compliance.

3.2.1. Technical Aspects

As a result of the technical evaluation of 46 provisions for the selection of the final disposal site and the integral management of the solid waste (MSW) of each canton, MALC displayed a 41.30% Conformity (C), 28.26% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 30.44% Major Non-Conformity (NC+) (Figure 4). The Major Non-Conformity was the leachate discharge system to a private property without the owner´s consent that was outside the permissible limits. Neither a storm drainage system nor drainage for leachates was present in what was equivalent to the MSW. Additionally, during the separation phase at the source, generators did not classify solid waste. In the utilization phase, recyclers were present but lacked a place to use recyclable waste in a safe and healthy way. Organic waste was not treated during the final disposal phase, and there was no daily coverage of the cells, which led to the presence of vectors like vultures.

MAFO displayed a 29.5% Conformity (C), 37.21% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 33.29% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Major Non-Conformity was in the selection of the final disposal site, which was based on the land´s shape and the presence of water tables, which made the construction of the final disposal cells challenging. Because it lacks a river drainage system and drainage for leachates, the estuaries that are formed at the final disposal site may have changed the quality of the water. Similarly, the generators did not classify solid waste as MSW during the source separation step. During the storage phase, the waste bins located in public parks were not maintained. Trees were not pruned nor were weeds on main roads cleaned during the sweeping and cleaning phase, which alternated the landscape quality of the area. Stray dogs caused waste to spill on the sidewalks and roads during the collection phase, since it was not performed at the scheduled times. Waste built up in the canton as a result of the collection vehicles´ lack of preventive maintenance during the transport phase. Recyclable waste was not recycled during the utilization phase. There was no treatment for organic waste. During the last stage of disposal, no technically built cells were present. Because the cell was not cleaned every day, vectors like vultures and flies were present, while odors were produced that made the directly affected area uncomfortable.

MAA exhibited a 25.60% Conformity (C), 43.82% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 31.74% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). According to the visit and the interviews with former canton officials, the Major Non-Conformity was that they did not have a final disposal site. The canton had an abandoned final disposal area, the waste was scattered, it was not technically closed, and the verification of compliance with the comprehensive management system was halted. The municipal government declined to authorize it because it was pending legal action.

In the case of MASC, the evaluation showed a 71.74% Conformity (C), 43.82% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 0.00% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Minor Non-Conformity corresponded to the final disposal phase. It was noted during the field inspection that organic waste was not processed in a technical way. There were vectors, flies, and cats in the organic waste treatment area because of a percolate spill (Figure 4).

3.2.2. Environmental Aspects

In light of the regulatory framework, the areas were evaluated with 32 environmental aspects, of which MALC had a 31.25% Conformity (C), 43.15% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 25% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Major Non-Conformity corresponded to the discharge of water from the leachate treatment plant outside the established permissible limits [55]. According to the Laboratory Report, performed by the Environmental Analysis and Evaluation Laboratory (AQLAB), on the property adjacent to the final disposal site, the following parameters were outside the permissible limits: total cyanides, fecal coliforms, chemical oxygen demand (COD), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), phenols, total phosphorus, total nitrogen, ammoniacal nitrogen, total solids (TS), total suspended solids (TSS), and surfactants [56]. The assessment of MAFO showed a 17.25% Conformity (C), 50% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 31.25% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). Based on the AQLAB report, some metrics in the water discharge from the leachate treatment plant—COD, BOD, TS, TSS, surfactants and fecal coliforms, total iron, total magnesium, total nitrogen, and ammoniacal nitrogen—were over allowable limits [57].

The percentages for MAA were a 31.25% Conformity (C), 40.63% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 28.12% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The canton´s current lack of a final disposal site and leachate treatment plant and the incomplete technical closure of the final disposal site were the main causes of the Major Non-Conformity. Because of this, the water quality of the adjacent estuaries, the Napo River, and the tributaries to the protected Yasuní River would all be impacted by the leachates produced by the decomposition of the canton’s solid waste. As for the evaluation that was submitted to MASC, the findings were an 87.50% Conformity (C), 12.50% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 0.00% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Minor Non-Conformity resulted from the improper treatment of organic waste during the final disposal and the absence of perimeter channels for percolate spilling at the site. The results of the evaluation of the environmental aspects are provided by Figure 5.

3.2.3. Economic Aspects

When 21 economic aspects were taken into consideration, MALC showed a 47.61% Conformity (C), 23.83% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 28.56% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). Regarding MAFO, it presented a 23.81% Conformity (C), 47.62% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 33.34% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). MAA was found to have a 52.38% Conformity (C), 14.28% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 33.34% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). Finally, MASC presented an 85.72% Conformity, 14.28% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 0.00% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Major Non-Conformity was caused by the municipal government’s failure to allocate funds in a timely way for the comprehensive management of solid waste, vehicle maintenance, the technical closure of cells, the daily maintenance of cells, and the acquisition of covering material for daily covering of cells. The results of the evaluation are shown in Figure 6.

3.2.4. Social Aspects

Out of 18 measures that were analyzed from the social perspective, MALC presented a 30.05% Conformity (C), 25.77% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 44.18% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Major Non-Conformity was from the leachate treatment plant´s water discharge, which affected the nearby properties, without permission and outside the allowable bounds. Through Special Trial No. 22303202300134 from August 2023, the canton´s residents complained to the Judicial Council about the water flow into the Suno River [58]. MALC was found to have breached Ecuador´s constitutional rights by the multi-competent chamber of the provincial court of justice in Orellana. Thus, they issued an order requiring the technical closure of the waste´s final disposal site and the completion of all related administrative procedures, including the installation of a sanitary landfill that conformed to the technical requirements set by the government.

Similarly, MAFO displayed a 16.22% Conformity (C), 32.33% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 49.45% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Major Non-Conformity related to the discomfort of the population of the area under direct influence. The project was not socialized and the area of each environmental component—biotic, abiotic, and social—was not clearly identified within the study approved by the MAATE. The water quality of the estuaries that the community uses as drinking troughs for livestock and agricultural activities was also altered due to water discharge from the leachate treatment plant that was outside the permissible limits. Due to nearby geological faults and the presence of water outcrops, the cell designated for the final disposal of solid waste was not operational.

MAA showed an 18.20% Conformity (C), 29.65% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 52.15% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Major Non-Conformity stemmed from a complaint regarding the existence of a waste dump filed by the Kichwa Pandochicta Commune. Due to Trial No. 22U01202300094 from October 2023 [59], the Specialized Judicial Unit for Violence Against Women or Members of the Family Nucleus with headquarters in the Francisco de Orellana canton ordered the definitive technical closure and abandonment of the garbage dump in the territory of the Kichwa Pandochicta Commune within a maximum of nine months. Extensive environmental remediation should also be performed.

Lastly, MASC presented a 72.22% Conformity (C), 27.77% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 0.00% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Minor Non-Conformity resulted from discomfort caused by the fee collected for solid waste disposal using standardized bags. The results of the evaluation are shown in Figure 7.

3.2.5. Legal Aspects

The assessment of the admirative obligations established by the MAATE are shown in Figure 8. In contrast to MALC, which presented a 25.00% Conformity (C), 31.25% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 43.75% Major Non-Conformity (NC+), MAFO showed a 56.25% Conformity (C), 25.00% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 18.75% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). Whereas MAA presented a 12.50% Conformity (C), 18.75% Minor Non-Conformity (NC−), and 68.75% Major Non-Conformity (NC+), MASC presented an 87.78% Conformity (C), 12.22% Major Non-Conformity (NC−), and 0.00% Major Non-Conformity (NC+). The Organic Environmental Code (RCOA)’s Articles 566, 580, 582, 585, and 587, the Organic Law of Inclusive Circular Economy’s Article 33, and comprehensive waste management focused on inclusive recycling’s Article 43 [60] all failed to provide technical feasibility for the comprehensive management of non-hazardous solid waste and residues (MSW), which resulted in Major Non-Conformity. The National Plan for the Reduction of Plastic Waste and recycling incentives is absent from the General Regulations of the Organic Law on Inclusive Circular Economy, which links inclusive recycling to the phases of comprehensive waste management. The Municipal Comprehensive Management Plan for Non-Hazardous and Sanitary Waste and Scrap is also absent. They do not have updated ordinances, management models, environmental permits, implementation of the phases of comprehensive management, annual reports on compliance with this type of waste, annual declarations on the generation and management of non-hazardous solid waste and waste, inclusive recycling, and a monitoring plan for each of the environmental components [44,61,62].

MASC had a strong degree of compliance, while MALC, MAFO, and MAA had poor levels of compliance with technical aspects. In the environmental aspects, MALC, MAFO, and MAA had a medium degree of compliance, whereas MASC had an excellent level. The four final disposal sites—MALC, MAFO, MAA, and MASC—were all good from an economic standpoint. MASC was fair in the social aspects, while MALC, MAFO, and MAA were deficient. The four final disposal sites were unsatisfactory in the legal aspects.

3.3. Proposal for Integrated MSW Management Model

According to a study carried out in compliance with the Organic Code of the Environment (COA), three actors were taken into consideration before the solid waste management model based on the Strengthening of the Direct Institutional Management of the Municipal Government was selected. The actors engaged were the municipal administration, environmental managers of non-hazardous waste, and users (generators). They were responsible for following the guidelines outlined in municipal ordinances [63,64,65]. Figure 9 illustrates the inclusive circular economy-based management model suggestion for Ecuador’s municipal governments.

3.4. Tariff Model for Comprehensive MSW Management

Analogously, the accounting, economic, and financial factors were considered in order to develop the tariff model. In this way, Equation (6) was used to construct the tariff model, which considered the variable (EAC*D) of total active energy consumption (kWh) and was meant to accurately reflect operating costs, service efficacy, and long-term forecasts. This approach not only paid for waste management but also ensured that the rate was equitable and sustainable for the community, allowing for adequate funding for the ultimate disposal procedure and promoting effective resource management.

Table 13. A tariff model proposal for small cantons.

User	Price (USD)
Residential 0 kwh	0.28
Residential 25 kwh	1.00
Residential 100 kwh	2.92
Residential 130 kwh	4.59
Residential 300 kwh	5.68
Residential 700 kwh	9.83

shows the values derived from the proposed tariff model for small cantons.

4. Discussion

From the results of the MSW evaluation, diagnosis, and solid waste characterization, the Loreto canton, which has an estimated population of 28,108 inhabitants, produces 19.5 tons/day of MSW and a cantonal PCP of 0.7 kg/inhab/day. When it comes to the composition of the MSW, the urban area produces 74.3% organic waste, 18.1% recyclable waste, and 7.6% general waste, while the rural area generates 45.7% organic waste, 30.0% recyclable waste, and 24.3% general waste. The Francisco de Orellana canton with an estimated population of 98,530 inhabitants generates 83.97 tons/day of MSW and a cantonal PCP of 0.85 kg/inhab/day. The composition of the MSW is as follows: 67.30% of the waste generated by the urban area is organic, 12.40% is recyclable, and 20.30% is general waste, while 63.30% in the rural area is organic waste, 17.40% is recyclable, and 19.30% is general waste. It has been reported that MALC produces 14 tons/day of MSW, and it is confirmed that MAFO receives 54.81 tons/day of MSW at the sanitary landfill. These results contradict what was obtained in the field [18,66,67].

Similarly, according to secondary data from MAA, the Aguarico canton disposes of solid waste in the following ways: 27.7% is sent to the municipal collector, 30.34% is dumped in vacant lots or ravines, 19.28% is burned, 7.0% is buried, 13.18% is thrown into the river, and 2.5% is disposed of in another manner. With an estimated population of 19,852 inhabitants, the Santa Cruz canton generates 18.60 tons/day of MSW and a cantonal PCP of 0.911 kg/inhab/day [53,68,69]. As for the composition of household solid waste, 14.8% is recyclable, 67.0% is organic, 13.6% is general waste, 4.4% is bulky, and 0.2% is hospital waste [42,43]. But, according to Solíz (2020), the Aguarico canton generates 3161 tons/day and a PCP of 0.8 kg/inhab/day. The Santa Cruz canton is reported to generate 15,341 tons/day and a cantonal PCP of 0.8 kg/inhab/day. These values contradict the findings of this investigation. Even if these values were included while creating the daily cells for final disposal, the budget and effort would be overprotected [70,71,72].

According to the evaluation, assessment, and identification of the established findings, considering the technical, environmental, economic, social, and legal aspects, it was discovered that the final disposal site was chosen without a prior study, which resulted in Major Non-Conformity (NC+) in the technical aspect of MALC, MAFO, and MAA. Regarding the MSW, there were no regulations requiring the MSW generator to separate organic, recyclable, and general waste at the source. Technically, the final disposal sites are poorly constructed. The MSW cells are not covered every day, and there are no rainwater or leachate drainage systems. There is no pest control, while groundwater and biogas are not monitored [73,74]. The water discharge from the leachate treatment plant is beyond the permissible limits [75,76]. In terms of the environmental aspect, MALC and MAFO were judged to present Major Non-Conformity (NC+) due to water discharge, mentioned above, which was outside the allowable bounds set in the current environmental regulations.

From an economic perspective, it was found that MALC, MAFO, MAA, and MASC presented Major Non-Conformity (NC+) because the budget was not allocated promptly, resulting in failure to perform vehicle maintenance, technical closure of the cells, daily cell maintenance, and the acquisition of covering material for the daily cell covering [32,42,77]. Major Non-Conformity (NC+) was obtained in the social aspect because the population in the area under direct influence was uncomfortable. The projects were not socialized, the biotic, abiotic, and social environmental components´ areas of direct influence were not clearly identified, the water quality had changed, and offensive odors were produced [36,78,79]. Regarding the legal aspect’s findings, MALC and MAA exhibited Major Non-Conformity (NC+) because the technical feasibility for the MSW was not obtained. The Municipal Comprehensive Management Plan for non-hazardous and sanitary waste and residues was also absent [80,81,82].

Additionally, it has been found that MSW adoption improves the solid waste life cycle and yields better economic outcomes [11,83,84]. This is consistent with the findings of this study, since the public service increases the efficiency of every stage of the integrated management by processing the MSW while taking into account all aspects. Even so, it was shown that the MSW was more efficient with the private sector than with the public sector, which runs counter to the findings, because privatization would raise the rate for the MSW and have an impact on citizens [81,85,86].

The management model based on a circular and inclusive economy is suggested by the municipal administrations of the three studied Amazonian cantons, as well as Santa Cruz. One of the components of this model is strategic planning, which enables the provision of an organized, sustainable, and competitive public service [16,87,88]. The circular economy is a crucial tool to develop management models that guarantee the environmental, social, and economic sustainability of public services [89,90]. Furthermore, the use of the circular economy model in the sectors where the model has been implemented has improved the levels of environmental protection [16,91]. Nevertheless, it has also been said that the circular economy is less effective than plastic recycling because it cannot create new items, as just 2% of plastic is recycled globally [92,93,94]. It has been shown that some private companies are falsifying their commitments to the circular economy, leading to reckless actions. To make matters worse, municipal governments do not create management models inspired by the circular economy that requires generators to recycle materials like plastic in order to minimize their negative environmental effects [14,77,95]. Therefore, the viability of putting circular economy-based public management models into practice should be the main focus of future lines of research. MSW is one of the fundamental pillars of the circular economy, since it should emphasize the value-adding of plastic waste as part of the energy system [20,65,96].

According to Calero (2021), the implementation of MSW is crucial to lowering greenhouse gas emissions and maximizing the recirculation of products and materials. Additionally, the creation of ordinances to raise public awareness of environmental protection principles aligns with findings of reviewed case studies on the integral management of solid waste [96,97]. Implementing MSW, the phase of using recyclable waste, and treating organic waste have been shown to increase the quality of life in the area directly influencing the final disposal site, since it creates sources of work [41,73]. Similarly to this, the MSW phase of using recyclable waste mitigates its negative impacts on the environment, saves money for the public sector by extending landfills´ useful lives, and reduces greenhouse gas emissions [36,98,99].

In a similar vein, a study conducted on the efficacy of inter-municipal cooperation for the MSW, which involved 22 Decentralized Municipal Autonomous Governments in the provinces of Azuay and Cañar in the Ecuadorian highlands shows that large municipalities with circular economy models perform better in terms of sustainability and physical dimensions [36,100,101]. Three aspects of sustainability were considered in the research for the comprehensive management of MSW in the Quevedo canton on the coast of Ecuador using multi-criteria models. This allowed for an efficient operation, and the model indicated that the separation of MSW at the source reduced economic, environmental, and social aspects [72,76,102,103]. However, research performed on the evaluation of environmental impacts generated by the management of MSW in the open-air dump of the Loreto canton revealed shortcomings in adhering to current environmental regulations for the comprehensive management of solid waste. These impacts were caused by the open-air dump´s discharge of water from the leachate treatment plant into the Suno river [44,104].

A tariff model based on the volume of waste that is disposed of in colored bags has been implemented by the Santa Cruz canton. For organic waste, 10 L bags cost USD 0.67, 20 L bags USD 1.12, 30 L bags USD 1.19, and 50 L bags USD 2.34. Black bags are used for general waste and cost USD 0.60 for 10 L bags, USD 1.03 for 20 L bags, USD 1.55 for 30 L bags, and USD 2.00 for 50 L bags. The light blue bags are free for recyclable waste. The South Korean tariff model, which was abandoned, owing to political rather than technical reasons, provided the basis for this adopted tariff model [34,35,105].

There are certain limitations in the present study. One is that, in order to evaluate conformity with current environmental regulations, authorization and verification measures had to be obtained by the GADM. The dearth of studies on MSW and solid waste in the Amazon and Insular Region is another.

5. Conclusions

After a comprehensive evaluation of MSW within the public service in the cantons of Loreto, Francisco de Orellana, and Santa Cruz, considering technical, environmental, economic, social, and legal aspects, it was concluded that there were deficiencies in the implementation of the integral management of non-hazardous solid waste. The principal reasons were the absence of ordinances requiring the waste’s separation into recyclable waste, organic waste, and scrap at the source (with the exemption of Santa Cruz), technicians lacking adequate expertise, and the lack of political will on the part of the municipal governmental authorities to provide funds for the construction of technically operable sanitary landfills.

According to the Provincial Court of Justice of Orellana, residents of the region directly affected by the final disposal sites of solid waste managed by the municipal governments of the Loreto, Francisco de Orellana, and Aguarico cantons complained to the court about inadequate waste management that led to the release of disagreeable odors and the deterioration of the quality of the soil and water used for livestock. Because of the trials that have been carried out, they have thus had an advantage in determining the technical feasibility of MSW and securing the approval of the Municipal Comprehensive Management Plan for non-hazardous, sanitary waste and residues.

Finally, a comprehensive MSW management model was provided to address the requirements of the existing environmental regulations. This concept reinforces direct and institutional management and is based on the inclusive circular economy.