Sustainability Indicators Model Applied to Waste Management in Brazil Using the DPSIR Framework
1. Introduction
Waste generated from human activities has a wide range of environmental, social, and economic implications. Sustainability indicators provide information on human–environment dynamics, detecting environmental changes over time based on pre-established parameters [1]. They could be used to measure the performance and efficiency of waste management practices, from the stage of waste collection to the generation of greenhouse gas emissions [2,3,4,5], at different spatial levels from the local to a national scale [6,7,8,9]. The application of waste indicators spans various dimensions and is crucial for monitoring and assessing public policies [10,11,12,13,14]. Various types of waste, such as municipal, construction and demolition, healthcare, and waste from electrical and electronic equipment, lead to a diverse array of flows and disposal methods involving numerous processes and stakeholders in waste management [15]. Therefore, identifying the waste types, rules, standards, and flows is critical to understanding the limitations and contexts of the entire waste management chain.
Waste management is a critical issue globally, but it poses unique challenges in developing countries [16] due to factors such as population and urbanization growth, limited resources and infrastructure, lack of local expertise, and inadequate regulatory frameworks, among others. In Brazil, the situation regarding solid waste management demands greater attention [17]. Brazil is the largest South American country, covering an area of 8,515,767 km2, with a population of 203 million inhabitants [18], contributing to 2.4% of the global GDP [19,20]. The Brazilian territory comprises 5570 municipalities, 27 federation units, and five macro-regions [20]. Recent data shows that the collected municipal solid waste (MSW) generated in Brazil is about 76 million tons, positioning the country as the fourth-largest generator of waste [21,22]. Of this MSW, around 2% is recycled, and about 40% is sent to improper locations, including open dumps, a practice that has been a source of health and environmental problems [22,23]. Estimates from the period 2016 to 2021 suggest that the health problems associated with the waste deposition in these inadequate locations cost 1.8 billion USD. Further, Brazil’s solid waste is estimated to account for 16% (over three million tons) of total methane emissions from decomposing trash and to produce the equivalent of over 47 million tons of CO2 [23]. Additionally, improper disposal of recyclable waste in landfills results in an annual loss estimated at approximately 2.5 billion USD [23].
In Brazil, waste management is primarily overseen by the public sector [24], with government policies playing a significant role in shaping waste management practices. Regulatory frameworks have been established, and incentives have been provided to address waste management challenges. Notably, the National Solid Waste Policy (PNRS in Portuguese), published in 2010, is the most comprehensive framework, emphasizing waste reduction, recycling programs, and the closure of open dumps. Under this federal law, municipalities are required to develop solid waste management plans to access financial resources from the federal government [17]. However, limited progress has been made in addressing these key issues [25]. Due to insufficient political instruments, 40% of urban solid waste is still directed to final disposal systems prohibited by law [21], and only 24% of Brazilian municipalities have implemented selective collection, which may help explain the country’s low recycling rate (2%). Moreover, waste generation varies depending on geographical region, income level, and municipality size [25,26]. For example, less developed regions of the country tend to have lower collection coverage compared to the Southeast and South regions [21]. In April 2022, the Brazilian Government enacted the National Solid Waste Plan (Decree No. 11.043), defining new targets for solid waste management in Brazil over the next 20 years, which include, for example, increase recycling rates up to 48% by 2040 and close the nearly 2600 dumpsites and uncontrolled landfills in operation in Brazil [23].
In recent years, research on waste management in Brazil has increased, driven by the urgent need to address environmental challenges and optimize resource utilization. Much of the waste management literature in Brazil is focused on MSW, reflecting the substantial challenges faced by municipalities in meeting the requirements outlined in the PNRS of 2010. For example, Rebehy et al. [26] studied the variables that influence the recovery of solid waste and best practices of efficient municipalities in Brazil; Paes et al. [25] focused on the main enablers of innovations in solid waste management in four municipalities and the respective actions between circular economy and climate change; Silva et al. [27] investigated the potential of utilizing MSW as refuse-derived fuel and the respective energy and greenhouse gas emissions impacts in Brasília; Jucá et al. [28] assessed the management of MSW in Recife through sustainability indicators across social, environmental, economic, and institutional dimensions; Fuss et al. [29] analyzed the development of a framework to evaluate MSW in Belo Horizonte, integrating economic, environmental, and social dimensions; Miranda et al. [30] studied the integration of recycling cooperatives in a medium-sized municipality (Londrina), aiming to assess their contributions within a circular economy structure and identify benchmarking options for similar cooperatives; and Alfaia et al. [17] and Lino et al. [22] carried out comprehensive reviews of MSW in Brazil. Other topics less explored in the literature include the management of specific types of waste, such as e-waste [31,32] and construction and demolition waste [33], waste characterization in Brazil [34], the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on solid waste generation in the country [35], public perceptions, residents’ awareness and attitudes toward waste management practices in specific Brazilian cities [36], and bibliometric studies on the impact of PNRS on Brazilian scientific production [37].
The literature indicates that applying reliable and accurate sustainable indicators in developing countries like Brazil poses a significant challenge related to the quality and availability of waste data [38,39,40,41,42,43]. In these countries, waste data are often dispersed among numerous government agencies and in different formats. Other issues include gaps in data provision, low transparency, the activities performed by informal entities that are not fully captured in official data, and many entities lack adequate infrastructure, technical expertise, and funds for data collection and management [21,44]. These problems result in the lack of reliable waste data, making it difficult to compile consistent datasets, mainly at a national level [45,46,47], and limiting the application of sustainability indicators to the waste sector [29,48]. For example, due to the unavailability of waste data in three Brazilian cities, Silva et al. [48] only applied 11 indicators from a total of 49 initially identified.
The difficulty in using sustainable indicators in the waste field reinforces the importance of developing creative and sensitive assessment models that incorporate reliable indicators for countries like Brazil [49]. In this context, the present study describes a comprehensive framework of sustainability indicators that incorporates both qualitative and quantitative aspects to improve waste management in Brazil. Indicators were sourced from documents published by Brazilian government institutions. The proposed framework is based on the Driving Force–Pressure–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) method, which has been widely used in the field of waste management. The framework described in this study has four main goals. The first goal is to identify practical and relevant indicators included in Brazilian public policies related to waste management, along with their respective domains of intervention. The second goal is to address the regional and institutional dispersion of waste data by compiling the information into a single framework. The third goal aims to provide public institutions with a tool enabling them to select, assess, and implement sustainability indicators, thereby enhancing and streamlining waste management practices toward sustainability. Finally, the fourth goal is to address the lack of waste information studies in developing countries, particularly in Brazil [16,43,50]. Thus, the study serves not only theoretical goals related to data compilation aimed at addressing gaps in the literature but also offers practical contributions that may assist public institutions in adopting more efficient waste policies.
4. Conclusions
In this study, a DPSIR framework was presented for identifying and classifying sustainability indicators related to waste management within Brazilian public policies. The framework was developed through a rigorous methodological process, which involved selecting and scoring sustainability indicators from legislative surveys conducted across various Brazilian public entities. Based on the conducted surveys, a total of 151 indicators, alongside 283 waste goals, targets, and obligations, primarily related to municipal waste, were identified. The evaluation revealed that 70% of the identified indicators met the quality criteria outlined by the EEA [59] and were classified as useful for waste management. Through distribution across the DPSIR components, 66 practical and relevant indicators were identified. These indicators, which can potentially be used for monitoring nationwide public policies related to waste management, span various domains, including sanitation, sustainable production and consumption, climate change, energy, the economy, public health, and demography.
While the methodology facilitated the integration of sustainability indicators from diverse fields, a significant challenge was encountered regarding the quality and continuity of waste data. Frequent discontinuity in data collection often hampers the continuity of historical data series. To improve the quality of waste data in Brazil, among other measures, it will be necessary to implement standardized data collection protocols, adopt interoperable information systems enabling real-time sharing of waste data between different government levels, and support municipalities in collecting and regularly publishing waste data.
This study has some limitations that should be highlighted. Our findings are primarily based on the search conducted on Brazilian legislation. Relying solely on governmental documents may introduce biases, potentially reflecting specific perspectives or political agendas. Further, the legislative survey conducted may not capture all relevant legal documents or fully represent the complexity of waste management practices across different regions and entities in Brazil. Moreover, defining indicators within the DPSIR framework, particularly for components such as Driving force and Pressure vs. State and Impact, can be complex, leading to potential inconsistencies or misinterpretations. These limitations could be addressed by incorporating complementary data sources, such as those from non-governmental organizations and scientific publications, involving stakeholders in the process utilizing data from ICT tools, among others. Utilizing these complementary sources could potentially ensure a more comprehensive and balanced understanding of waste management in Brazil.
Besides the described limitations, the framework offers novel opportunities for waste management, enabling the measurement of public policy responses and providing feedback to managers, decision-makers, politicians, and society. The framework can potentially be applied to other scales (municipal, regional, continental), requiring accurate and comparable waste data and the tailoring of sustainability indicators to local contexts. Integrating waste legislation and indicators from various governmental levels into the DPSIR framework can enhance its comprehensiveness and relevance by providing a holistic view of adopted practices. However, challenges may arise from inconsistencies in laws, data availability, and differing priorities among public entities. This needs careful coordination and alignment efforts to ensure effective integration and interpretation of diverse waste data sources within the framework. Further research is needed to test and validate the applicability of the described framework. This can be achieved by applying the methodology to various scales and case studies in Brazil and other countries to evaluate its effectiveness in analyzing waste management dynamics, identifying key drivers and pressures, assessing environmental and socioeconomic impacts, and informing policy responses. Additionally, involving waste management experts and stakeholders through workshops or focus groups to discuss the DPSIR framework could provide another avenue for validation and potentially improve the methodology.
