Assessment of Household Waste Management Systems in Rural Areas: A Study in Visakhapatnam

Introduction

Household waste management is a cornerstone of environmental sustainability and public health, particularly in rural regions where infrastructural deficits persist. Inadequate waste collection services, limited financial and technical resources, and low public awareness often lead to open dumping and burning practices that severely degrade soil, air, and water quality while facilitating the spread of vector-borne diseases such as malaria and cholera [1]. Despite the rising volume of household waste in rural areas due to population growth and changing consumption patterns, global attention has largely centred on urban waste systems, leaving rural communities vulnerable to unmanaged waste and its associated health risks [2].

Historically, rural households managed organic waste through composting, mulching, and livestock feeding. However, the increasing presence of non-biodegradable materials, especially plastics, has intensified environmental hazards and complicated traditional disposal methods [2]. In India, the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) has sought to address these challenges by mandating Gram Panchayats to implement Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) initiatives. These decentralised systems, such as composting units and biogas plants, have shown success when supported by community mobilisation, training, and infrastructure [3, 4]. Women, as primary household caretakers, have emerged as key agents of change, with studies from Telangana demonstrating their active participation in segregation, composting, and recycling when empowered by local institutions [5].

However, persistent barriers continue to hinder progress. Financial constraints, weak institutional capacity, and limited technical expertise undermine the scalability of SLWM initiatives [6]. Moreover, the perception that waste management is solely a government responsibility reduces community engagement, with over 70% of rural households still relying on open dumping and burning [1, 6]. Addressing these issues requires a holistic framework that integrates policy support, community participation, gender-inclusive strategies, and affordable technologies. As rural India strives toward the goals of SBM and broader sustainable development, strengthening household waste management systems will be essential for improving public health, environmental resilience, and overall quality of life.

Review of Literature

Ansari, Ahmed, et al. (2017) reviewed rural solid waste management in India, highlighting the shift in consumption patterns and the prevalence of open dumping and burning. They emphasised the environmental and health risks of such practices and proposed sustainable alternatives like vermicomposting and windrow composting. The study underscored the importance of public awareness, source segregation, and community involvement for effective waste management [7].

Nagpure et al. (2019) conducted a case study in Shahapur village, Maharashtra, revealing daily waste generation of 442 kg, with 79% being biodegradable. Challenges included poor collection and a lack of segregation. The authors recommended household-level interventions such as colour-coded bins and vermicomposting, noting that systematic waste management can enhance sanitation and support rural development [8].

Chauhan and Dubey (2025) explored waste disposal practices in rural households, finding that open dumping (70%) and burning (20%) were dominant, with minimal composting. Their study identified infrastructure gaps, low awareness, and limited government support as key barriers. They advocated for collaborative solutions involving local authorities, NGOs, and communities to promote sustainable waste practices [1].

Anupriya et al. (2020) assessed waste management knowledge among 210 rural women in Puducherry, finding that 98% lacked proper disposal awareness and none practised segregation. Common methods included backyard dumping and reliance on irregular panchayat services. The study highlighted the need for targeted health education and reinforcement of government initiatives like Swachh Bharat Abhiyan [9].

Spandana and Rani (2021) examined women’s roles in rural waste management, noting their central involvement in segregation and disposal. Despite their active participation, awareness of scientific methods was limited, and traditional practices prevailed. The authors stressed that empowering women through training and inclusion in governance could significantly improve waste outcomes [10].

Mahesh and Parvathi (2023) studied waste practices in Ananthapuramu district, Andhra Pradesh, where open dumping and burning were widespread. They identified major challenges, including poor infrastructure, low community engagement, and financial constraints. The study recommended decentralised systems, awareness drives, and integration of informal waste workers to foster sustainable management [11].

Discussion and Research Gaps: Based on the reviewed studies, it is evident that rural solid waste management in India continues to face persistent challenges, including inadequate infrastructure, poor segregation practices, limited awareness, and weak community participation [7; 8; 1; 9; 10; 11]. While these studies highlight region-specific issues such as unscientific disposal methods, lack of municipal support, and women’s limited awareness, they also point to common recommendations like decentralised composting, awareness campaigns, and stronger local governance. However, most existing research has concentrated on states like Maharashtra, Puducherry, and other states of India. Very few studies were conducted in the rural areas of Andhra Pradesh. Based on this limitation, the present study will be conducted in the rural areas of Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam’s unique socio-economic and geographic profile, being both an urban-industrial hub and surrounded by rural and semi-urban communities, presents a research gap in understanding how waste management practices differ across these rural-urban fringes, how local governance mechanisms function, and how community participation can be effectively mobilised in such contexts. Addressing this gap through a focused study in Visakhapatnam can provide critical insights into context-specific challenges and solutions for sustainable rural waste management.

Research Objectives

1. To assess the current household waste management practices in rural areas of Visakhapatnam.
2. To examine the level of awareness, attitudes, and participation of rural households in waste segregation and disposal.
3. To analyse the role of local government institutions, such as Gram Panchayats, Grama Sachivalayam, in implementing solid waste management practices.
4. To identify the major challenges and barriers in adopting sustainable waste management practices in Visakhapatnam’s rural areas.

Research Methodology

The present study was conducted in two villages named Saripalli and Gurrampalem, located in Visakhapatnam district. The study adopted a descriptive research design to understand the existing practices, challenges, and potential solutions in managing household waste. The research is based on both primary and secondary data sources. Primary data was collected through a structured interview schedule. The study selected 66 village households through a purposive sampling method. The data was collected through a structured, pre-tested interview schedule. Key variables include household waste generation patterns, segregation practices, disposal methods, awareness levels, participation of women, and the role of local governance. The descriptive statistics, such as frequencies, percentages, and cross-tabulations, were used to analyse the data. Qualitative data will be analysed thematically to identify recurring issues and potential solutions. Ethical considerations such as oral consent, voluntary participation, and confidentiality of respondents were strictly maintained.

Results of the study

The study was conducted in two villages, Saripalli and Gurram Palem village, with 66 households. The data was analysed, and the results were presented. The following are the results.

Gender: The study found that72.7% of respondents were female, indicating higher female involvement. It may be a reason that women play a vital role in household sanitation and waste-related tasks.

Education: The study revealed that 27.3% of respondents were illiterate, 22.7% of the respondents completed their primary education, while only 13.6% had completed graduation or higher. Educational attainment remains low, with most individuals having only primary or secondary education.

Caste: A majority of respondents (81.8%) belonged to the Backwards Classes (BC), followed by 13.6% scheduled caste (SC) and 4.6% scheduled tribes (ST). It may be a reason that the majority of the population in the selected village belongs to the BC Community.

Family: Most of the families (54.5%) consisted of 3–4 members, while 45.5% had 5–6 members. No joint families were reported, suggesting a predominance of nuclear family structures in the rural communities also.

Occupation: Agricultural and non-agricultural wage labour each accounted for 22.7% of income sources. The community shows a strong reliance on manual, labour-intensive employment with minimal economic diversification.

Economic Status: A significant majority (86.4%) of households were classified as below the poverty line. This highlights widespread financial hardship and the need for targeted socio-economic interventions.

Dry Waste Generation in a home: Non-biodegradable items such as plastics, paper, e-waste, and rubber dominate dry waste in the homes of the village. Over half of the respondents (54.5%) generate less than 250 grams daily, indicating low waste volumes. This trend supports the feasibility of targeted recycling and awareness programs.

Wet Waste Composition: Wet waste primarily includes biodegradable materials like food scraps, crop residues, and animal dung. A majority (61%) of respondents produce 250–500 grams daily, reflecting consistent organic waste generation suitable for composting initiatives.

Waste Disposal Practices: Most of the households (76.2%) rely on waste collectors for disposal, while 19% still practice open dumping. The study is in line with the study of Singh et al. [11, 12], who found that a majority of households disposed of waste through collectors, around 20–25% still dumped waste openly in vacant plots or roadside areas.This highlights both progress in service uptake and persistent environmental risks due to informal disposal methods. Proper waste disposal creates environmental and health problems to the general population [13].

Training and Oversight: Waste management education is primarily delivered by local government bodies, NGOs, and green members of the Panchayat. The Panchayat secretary plays a key role in monitoring waste collection, indicating institutional involvement in sanitation efforts. Green Members in the villages actively promote environmental sustainability through household waste segregation, composting, and sanitation monitoring. Their responsibilities also include awareness campaigns on plastic reduction, water conservation, and public hygiene.

Awareness on waste management committee: There is a solid waste management committee in the village. But, only 50% of respondents are aware of village-level waste management committees, while 22.7% report their absence, and 27.3% remain uncertain. Most committees (59.1%) are initiated by Panchayat officials, underscoring the need for broader community engagement.

Segregation Practices: Household waste segregation involves separating waste into wet (biodegradable) and dry (recyclable and non-recyclable) categories at home, often using separate bins. Just 13.6% of households consistently segregate waste, while 54.5% do so irregularly. A further 22.7% are aware but do not practice segregation, and 9.1% lack awareness entirely, indicating gaps in behavioural adherence. This study is in line with the study of Wadehra [14], who reported that very low baseline segregation in several Indian settings, for example, one pilot noted only 14% households segregating at baseline. The study also indicated that the households were aware, but few practised segregation owing to a lack of systems.

Perceived Benefits of Segregation: Composting and manure production are widely recognised (81.8%) as benefits of segregation. However, awareness of biogas generation (36.4%), soil improvement (31.8%), and landfill reduction (40.9%) remains limited.

Segregation bins: Only 27.3% of households possess separate bins for dry and wet waste. A majority (59.1%) lack such bins in the home, and 13.6% previously had bins but discontinued use, reflecting challenges in sustained implementation. The study is in line with the study of Gupta et al. [15], Schmidt et al. [16], and Sahoo et al. [17], who reported thatwhile awareness of segregation was high, a majority of households did not maintain separate bins for wet and dry waste, citing lack of municipal support and irregular collection. These studies were conducted in urban areas. But similar findings were also reported in this study, which was conducted in rural areas.

Willingness to Adopt Bins: Respondents are evenly split on purchasing separate bins, with 50% willing and 50% unwilling. This suggests that financial constraints, awareness gaps, or perceived utility may influence the adoption of segregation tools.

The most common waste collection frequency reported was twice a week (36.4%), followed by alternate-day collection (31.8%). A smaller segment (22.7%) experienced collection once every 10–15 days, while only 9.1% benefited from daily service. This uneven distribution underscores the need for more consistent and frequent waste collection to enhance sanitation and public health.

Modes of Waste Collection: Door-to-door collection using pushcarts was the dominant method, reported by 81.8% of respondents. Other modes included tricycles or auto trolleys (9.1%), tractors or trucks (4.5%), central bins (2.3%), and green members or sanitation workers (2.3%). The heavy reliance on manual pushcart systems highlights the need for mechanised and diversified waste collection infrastructure.

A majority (63.6%) of respondents lack household-level mechanisms for menstrual hygiene waste disposal, while only 36.4% have one. The most common method is handing waste to collectors, or through it nearby dustbins. These findings highlight the urgent need for infrastructure, education, and support in menstrual hygiene management.

Household Liquid Waste Disposal: Covered household drainage systems are used by 40.9% of respondents, representing the safest disposal method. However, 31.8% of the respondents lack any formal mechanism, leading to waste stagnation and associated health risks. Other methods include open drains, soak pits, and reuse for irrigation or animal purposes. The data underscores the need for improved infrastructure and awareness around liquid waste management.

The study found that 40.9% of respondents rated the village’s waste collection system as “Below average,” reflecting widespread dissatisfaction. Another 31.8% considered it “Average,” while only 18.2% rated it as “Good.” A small portion (9.1%) described the system as “Poor,” and none rated it “Excellent.” The study is inline with the study of Anchan & Palakshappa [18], who found that many respondents gave average or below-average opinionsabout their city’s waste management system. This mirrors your pattern of widespread dissatisfaction, and only a minority rates services as good. These results indicate that most households perceive the current arrangement as inadequate. The findings underscore the need for improved efficiency, coverage, and service quality in rural waste collection systems.

The study found that 40.9% of respondents rated the waste segregation and disposal system as “Average,” reflecting moderate satisfaction. A substantial 36.4% considered it “Below average,” and 13.6% rated it as “Poor,” indicating widespread concerns. Only 9.1% viewed the system as “Good,” while none rated it “Excellent.” It is observed that the waste segregation units are far away from the villages. The waste collectors segregating the dry waste and selling for themselves. The wet waste is dumped in out cuts of the village due to far of the segregation units.  It reduces the income to the villages and reduce the workload to the waste segregation units. The study is inline with the study of Pal and Bhatia [19], who reported that the recent reviews of MSW in India report that only a minority of generated waste is processed and that source segregation rates remain modest. These reviews emphasise moderate awareness and limited system performance among the villages.  These results suggest that most households perceive the current mechanism as inadequate. The findings emphasise the need for enhanced infrastructure, awareness, and operational efficiency in rural waste management.

The study found that 42.9% of respondents rated village-level awareness rallies, cleaning drives, and waste reduction initiatives as “Average,” while an equal proportion rated them “Below average.” Only 9.5% considered these efforts “Poor,” with minimal responses indicating “Good” or “Excellent.” These results reflect a general perception of limited effectiveness and visibility. The findings suggest that current initiatives may lack strategic planning and community engagement. Strengthening execution and promoting inclusive participation are essential to enhance their impact.

The study found that 54.5% of respondents acknowledged the presence of government personnel involved in village-level waste management. However, 45.5% reported the absence of such support, indicating uneven institutional engagement. The study is inline with the study of Vinti & Vaccari [20], who reported that government service provision in rural areas is inconsistent and often limited. Many rural communities lack regular municipal collection or show low institutional engagement, producing heterogeneous (uneven) service coverage across villages. This gap highlights the need for expanded staffing and outreach to ensure equitable service delivery. Local Panchayat officials were noted to be consistently active in managing waste. Strengthening government presence can enhance operational efficiency and community trust in waste management systems.

Suggestions

• Awareness campaigns should be designed to encourage male participation in household and community-level waste management, promoting shared responsibility and reducing the burden on women.
• Targeted literacy and environmental education programs should be implemented to address low educational attainment and improve understanding of hygiene and sustainable waste practices.
• Inclusive training and outreach efforts must be directed toward marginalised communities to ensure equitable participation and benefit-sharing in sanitation programs.
• Government and NGOs should promote alternative livelihoods such as compost production, recycling enterprises, and small-scale businesses to diversify income and link economic growth with waste solutions.
• Waste management interventions should be integrated with poverty alleviation schemes, offering subsidies for bins, incentives for segregation, and employment in recycling to support below-poverty-line families.
• Community-based education drives, school programs, and reward systems are essential to strengthen household-level waste segregation and bridge gaps between awareness and practice.
• Affordable or subsidised bins for dry and wet waste should be provided to households, accompanied by regular monitoring to ensure consistent usage and infrastructure sustainability.
• Information campaigns and practical demonstrations should highlight lesser-known benefits of segregation such as biogas generation, soil enrichment, and reduced landfill burden.
• Standardised waste collection schedules, ideally every alternate day, should be enforced through increased manpower, mechanisation, and improved logistical planning.
• Mechanised collection methods like tricycles and auto-trolleys should be introduced to reduce manual burden and enhance service efficiency, especially in densely populated areas.
• Drainage infrastructure must be prioritised, and safe reuse methods such as soak pits, kitchen gardens, and irrigation should be promoted to manage liquid waste sustainably.
• Solid Waste Processing Centres should be upgraded with better technology, trained personnel, and consistent operations, while encouraging community involvement for transparency and efficiency.
• Waste management committees should be revitalised with diverse representation, regular meetings, and active monitoring to strengthen local governance and program implementation.

 

Role of Social Workers in Waste Management and Community Sanitation

• The findings of the study highlight several critical gaps in education, awareness, infrastructure, and service delivery in waste management within rural communities. In this context, social workers play an essential role in bridging these gaps and fostering community participation for sustainable sanitation.
• Firstly, social workers can act as community educators, addressing the low levels of literacy and awareness about waste segregation, disposal, and its health implications. They can design simple, participatory training programs that make environmental education accessible to women, men, and children alike. Given that most waste management work is carried out by women, social workers can empower them with knowledge and leadership opportunities while also mobilising men to share responsibility.
• Secondly, social workers serve as facilitators of behavioural change. The study revealed that although many households are aware of waste segregation, very few practice it consistently. Social workers can use counselling, demonstrations, and peer-led initiatives to close this gap between knowledge and practice. They can also encourage households to adopt sustainable practices such as composting, safe disposal of menstrual waste, and the use of separate bins for dry and wet waste.
• Thirdly, they can take on the role of advocates for infrastructure and services. With many respondents dissatisfied with waste collection, disposal mechanisms, and the functioning of Solid Waste Processing Centres (SWPCs), social workers can voice community concerns to local government bodies. They can advocate for better collection frequency, improved drainage systems, affordable bins, and stronger monitoring committees to ensure accountability and efficiency.
• Additionally, social workers act as mobilisers of community participation. The study indicated that awareness rallies and cleaning drives were perceived as ineffective. By involving youth clubs, schools, self-help groups, and marginalised communities, social workers can ensure greater inclusivity and engagement in these initiatives. Their role is crucial in transforming awareness activities into impactful community-led movements.
• Lastly, social workers function as linkages between government programs and communities. With nearly half of the villages lacking waste management staff, social workers can fill this gap by coordinating with Panchayats, municipal authorities, and NGOs. They can help in forming and strengthening waste management committees, ensuring that the benefits of government schemes reach all households, especially those living below the poverty line.

 

Limitations of the Study

• The study was conducted with only 66 households in two villages, limiting the generalisability of its findings to broader rural or urban populations.
• A predominance of respondents from the Backward Class and limited representation of SC and ST groups may have introduced sampling bias, affecting inclusivity.
• The reliance on self-reported data raises concerns about accuracy, as responses may be influenced by social desirability or recall errors.
• The absence of qualitative methods such as interviews or focus groups restricts deeper insights into cultural attitudes, gender roles, and community dynamics.

REFERENCES

[1] Chauhan, K., & Dubey, N. (2025). A study on household waste management in rural areas. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 14(3), 101–103. https://doi.org/10.35629/7722-1403101103

[2] Igwe, P. U., & Evan, E. (2020). An assessment of rural solid waste management system in Aguata Local Government Area, Anambra State, Nigeria. International Journal of Environment, 9(1), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.36632/ije/2020.9.1.4

[3] National Institute of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj (NIRD&PR). (2016). Solid waste management in rural areas: A step-by-step guide for Gram Panchayats. Hyderabad: Centre for Rural Infrastructure.

[4] Gour, D., & Saraswat, S. (2022). A case study on solid waste management in rural areas: Findings & suggestions on waste treatment. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, 9(12), 547–549.

[5] Spandana, B., & Rani, B. J. (2020). A study on solid waste management practices by rural women in Medak, Telangana State. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 9(12), 1569–1574. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.912.185

[6] Thakur, C., & Gupta, P. (2022). People’s perception on solid waste management in rural areas: A case study of selected Panchayats of Nirmand Block, Himachal Pradesh. International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 11(1), 20–27.

[7] Ansari, A. A., Haseeb, A., Aamir, S., Usama, A., Osaid, A., & Hassan, M. (2017). Rural solid waste management. IOSR Journal of Engineering (IOSR-JEN), 1(1), 8–11.

[8] Nagpure, A., Motghare, H., Motghare, N., Tirpude, S., Bhatankar, D., & Deshpande, A. (2019). Solid waste management in rural area: A case study for Shahapur village. International Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Science, 4(5), 1–3.

[9] Anupriya, R., Divyasree, P., Puja, K., Tamilselvi, N., & Gomathi, A. (2020). Knowledge and practice regarding household waste management among women in selected rural area at Puducherry. Community and Public Health Nursing, 5(1), 9–12. https://doi.org/10.21088/cphn.2455.8621.5120.1

[10] Spandana, B., & Rani, B. J. (2021). Household waste management practices by women in rural areas. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research, 10(4), 45–52.

[11] Mahesh, K., & Parvathi, G. (2023). Rural solid waste management in Ananthapuramu district: A study. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts, 11(4), 22–29.

[12] Singh, R. P., Tyagi, V. V., Allen, T., Ibrahim, M. H., & Kothari, R. (2019). An overview for exploring the possibilities of energy generation from municipal solid waste (MSW) in Indian scenario. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 693–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.200

[13] Mutluri, A., Lakshminarayana, N., & Samueljohn, A. (2024) An Evaluation of G20’s Stand on Environment and Climate Change Adaption: A Critical Review, Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International, Volume 28 (1) Pp: 26-37 DOI: https://doi.org/10.9734/jgeesi/2024/v28i1742

[14] Wadehra, S. (2017). Segregation of waste at the household level(pilot/working paper). Indian School of Development and Innovation / IGC field materials. Available at https://isid.ac.in/~epu/acegd2017/papers/ShivaniWadehra.pdf

[15] Gupta, N., Yadav, K. K., & Kumar, V. (2015). A review on current status of municipal solid waste management in India. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 37, 206–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2015.01.034

[16] Schmidt, W.-P., Haider, I., Hussain, M., Safdar, M., Mustafa, F., Massey, T., & Biran, A. (2022). The effect of improving solid waste collection on waste disposal behaviour and exposure to environmental risk factors in urban low-income communities in Pakistan. Tropical Medicine & International Health, 27(7), 606–618. https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.13787

[17] Sahoo, K. C., Bhatia, V., Parija, P., Bhatia, A., Parija, D., & Pati, S. (2022). Dynamics of household waste segregation behaviour in an urban community in Ujjain, India: A framework analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(6), 3357. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063357

[18] Anchan, S. S., & Palakshappa, K. (2023). People’s participation and perceptions in the solid waste management of Mangalore City Corporation, Karnataka, India. Journal of Wastes and Biomass Management, 5(2), 76–87.

[19] Pal, M. S., & Bhatia, M. (2022). Current status, topographical constraints, and implementation strategy of municipal solid waste in India: a review. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 15(12), 1176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-10414-w

[20] Vinti, G., & Vaccari, M. (2022). Solid waste management in rural communities of developing countries: An overview of challenges and opportunities. Clean Technologies, 4(4), 1138–1151. https://doi.org/10.3390/cleantechnol4040069