SUMMARY, CONLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter presents the summary, conclusions and recommendations of the findings the data analyzed and presented on practices and challenges of solid waste management in Mekaneselam town administration.
Based on the analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data gathered from the residents, house and construction development leaders, the two selected kebele executive leaders, hospital and health managers, health extension workers and FGD from sanitation and beautification workers the major findings of the study were presented as follows. The summary is presented according to the objectives of the study.
5.2.1. Current Practices of Solid Waste Management
The results of this research finding shows majority of residents, interviewers and FGD participants in the town dissatisfied with the current practice of solid waste management that get from respondents . There is no clear standard for disposal solid waste material it simply thrown in the street, open space and around the house avoid to burn in traditionally. With respect to awareness creation for the residents on how properly manage solid waste and impacts of poor solid waste management; leaders have no plan to make continuous awareness creation on SWM for the residents. Leaders of the town have less experience in sharing vision of solid waste for the residents and for stakeholders. Leaders and stakeholders have a limitation in conducting strong monitoring and evaluation on solid waste management activities in a sustainable way. Regarding to managing human resources involved in solid waste management, the data revealed that even though the delegated bodies are trying in organizing and leading employees,’ kebele development team leaders and sanitation and beautification workers, it was not as much as sufficient and sustainable to achieve solid waste management activities.
Even though there are many stakeholders and institutions in the town which have capacity of material, financial, technical, ideas support but, currently any government and non government body didn’t use these opportunity. Capability of residents to SWM in the town is weak and less attention to use waste as a resource. Most of the residents did not attention to separate solid wastes at the source and they did not carry out sustainable solid waste management it simply performs traditional activities.
Most of residential areas are environmental solid wastes but there is no preparation of compost by the households and by sanitation and beautification workers. The majority of the residents of the town did not perform waste collection activities, for disposing wastes generated in their house and all of them dumps on illegal places, and simply burn up in front of the house. There is no town disposal site it is simply thrown in near the house, on the street, open area, near to hotels, road gullies, and agricultural fields.
5.2.2. Challenges of Leadership in Solid Waste Management
The majority of the respondents of residents, FGD participants and interviewees of leader, hospital and health office managers disclose that: – weak coordination and mobilization of stake holders poor organizational structure, Lack of sufficient human resource, poor practice of residents , less attitudinal perception of residents, don’t attention to budget and resource allocation , lack of leadership commitment and poor practice of solid waste management in the residents are the challenges of leadership in solid waste management.
5.2.3 Practical and attitudinal perception of stakeholders
Majority respondent of residents, all interviewees, and FGD participants’ reveal that:- poor stakeholders discussion, residents don’t participate structural plan, less community perception, less perception of stakeholders, NGOs, institutions, residents understood lack of proper SWM is dangerous, but there is not implementation performance. It also accepted integrated SWM is use full ideally understands it, as compared as other towns there is poor practical management system of solid waste in the study area.