Barriers to organic waste management in a circular economy
| dc.contributor.author | Shristi Kharola | |
| dc.contributor.author | Mangey Ram | |
| dc.contributor.author | Nupur Goyal | |
| dc.contributor.author | Sachin Kumar Kumar Mangla | |
| dc.contributor.author | Om Prakash Nautiyal | |
| dc.contributor.author | Anita Rawat | |
| dc.contributor.author | Yigit Kazancoglu | |
| dc.contributor.author | Durgesh Pant | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-10-06T17:49:55Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2022 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Organic waste disposal methods notably landfilling not only deplete resources but also contribute to environmental challenges. This research looks at potential barriers to organic waste management solutions. The objective of this study is to identify the barriers to organic waste management solutions from an actor's perspective and to explore their causal relationships to overcome the organic waste management problem from a system perspective. Several key challenges were identified regarding organic waste management solution the current intervention overview indicates that promoting and tracking attention towards “value to waste” would be an effective solution approach. Waste collection fees unethical behavior and a lack of engagement and commitment in activities show a subsequent effect on consumer-household solutions which are currently acting as priority barriers in this research. In order to have a better understanding of this complex issue a detailed knowledge of barriers (leading to organic waste) is discovered and evaluated with the application of fuzzy Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL). The data for this research has been taken in the context of a developing economy like India. This work can provide structural support to the managers by knowing the cause (influencing) and effect-group (influencing) barriers to the effective implementation of an organic waste management system in a circular economy context. © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132282 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 09596526 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0959-6526 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85131258799&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jclepro.2022.132282&partnerID=40&md5=315846c96e5c55e0d318a47a2b43a1e6 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://gcris.yasar.edu.tr/handle/123456789/8673 | |
| dc.language.iso | English | |
| dc.publisher | Elsevier Ltd | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Cleaner Production | |
| dc.source | Journal of Cleaner Production | |
| dc.subject | Barriers, Circular Economy, Decision Making Trial And Evaluation Laboratory, Fuzzy Theory, Organic Waste Management, Sustainability, Consumer Behavior, Decision Theory, Sustainable Development, Waste Disposal, Barrier, Circular Economy, Decision Making Trial And Evaluation Laboratory, Decisions Makings, Disposal Methods, Environmental Challenges, Fuzzy Theory, Landfilling, Organic Waste Management, Organic Wastes, Decision Making | |
| dc.subject | Consumer behavior, Decision theory, Sustainable development, Waste disposal, Barrier, Circular economy, Decision making trial and evaluation laboratory, Decisions makings, Disposal methods, Environmental challenges, Fuzzy theory, Landfilling, Organic waste management, Organic wastes, Decision making | |
| dc.title | Barriers to organic waste management in a circular economy | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| gdc.bip.impulseclass | C3 | |
| gdc.bip.influenceclass | C4 | |
| gdc.bip.popularityclass | C3 | |
| gdc.coar.type | text::journal::journal article | |
| gdc.collaboration.industrial | false | |
| gdc.description.startpage | 132282 | |
| gdc.description.volume | 362 | |
| gdc.identifier.openalex | W4280640008 | |
| gdc.index.type | Scopus | |
| gdc.oaire.diamondjournal | false | |
| gdc.oaire.impulse | 73.0 | |
| gdc.oaire.influence | 5.152945E-9 | |
| gdc.oaire.isgreen | false | |
| gdc.oaire.popularity | 5.7442474E-8 | |
| gdc.oaire.publicfunded | false | |
| gdc.oaire.sciencefields | 01 natural sciences | |
| gdc.oaire.sciencefields | 0105 earth and related environmental sciences | |
| gdc.openalex.collaboration | International | |
| gdc.openalex.fwci | 10.2014 | |
| gdc.openalex.normalizedpercentile | 0.99 | |
| gdc.openalex.toppercent | TOP 10% | |
| gdc.opencitations.count | 61 | |
| gdc.plumx.crossrefcites | 15 | |
| gdc.plumx.facebookshareslikecount | 2 | |
| gdc.plumx.mendeley | 333 | |
| gdc.plumx.scopuscites | 77 | |
| person.identifier.scopus-author-id | Kharola- Shristi (57554043300), Ram- Mangey (55482383400), Goyal- Nupur (56893246900), Kumar Mangla- Sachin Kumar (55735821600), Nautiyal- Om Prakash (26768128700), Rawat- Anita (57724683800), Kazancoglu- Yigit (15848066400), Pant- Durgesh (23001780600) | |
| project.funder.name | Funding text 1: To fill the gap this study aims to analyze and classify some prominent barriers in context of developing economies such as India that hinder the implementation of proper OWM. This research becomes highly significant as it is timely in advancing the field of OWM solutions more explicitly. It also supports the 2030 Agenda of the United Nations (UN) by making specific contributions to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) such as zero hunger (SDG 2) affordable and clean energy (SDG 7) climate action (SDG 13) clean water and sanitation (SDG 6) and sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11).Chauhan et al. (2018) and Satapathy et al. (2018) carried out studies on how to address the issue of waste management in India. With the use of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques such as Interpretive Structural Modelling(ISM) DEMATEL Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE II) and the VIekriterijumsko KOmpromisno Rangiranje (VIKOR) method the barriers to this challenge have been identified and their importance has been established. Hung et al. (2007) investigated decision making in support of MSW management using an MCDM technique combined with a Consensus Analysis Model (CAM) using a case study in Taiwan. Mir et al. (2016) provided a systematic and logical way for SWM using the MCDM techniques such as Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and VIKOR to investigate and rate the treatment methods for environmental and economic advantages. Shahnazari et al. (2020) in their study analyzed and evaluated the thermochemical strategies utilized to burn MSW. They employed Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and TOPSIS to determine which technique is best based on technical economic and environmental parameters. Shukor et al. (2018) synthesized the use of decision-making to overcome the complexity of deciding on the optimum composing technique for organic waste disposal. Tseng (2009) evaluated different MSW management solutions using a combined effort that includes Analytic Network Process (ANP) and DEMATEL decision-making approaches. Coban et al. (2018) evaluated various waste disposal techniques that are used globally in different situations relevant in the context of developing countries using TOPSIS PROMETHEE I and PROMETHEE II. The findings highlight the importance of recycling and landfilling for developing countries using all tree methods. Sharma et al. (2020) presented adoption problems for the Internet of Things (IOT) in smart city waste management systems in developing economies like India. Various MCDM approaches were investigated at the same time to determine significant barriers. Using a fuzzy MCDM method Ali et al. (2021) evaluated the adoption barriers of CE in food waste management in underdeveloped countries. The report offers policy suggestions to public and private sector officials to help the food industry transition to a CE model.This work was supported and funded by Uttarakhand Science Education and Research Centre (USERC) Dehra Dun India (USERC/2019-20/602). The authors are grateful and acknowledge the assistance of USERC in implementing this joint research in collaboration with Graphic Era Deemed to be University Dehradun India, Yasar University Izmir Turkey, and O P Jindal Global University India and University of Plymouth Plymouth United Kingdom., Funding text 2: This work was supported and funded by Uttarakhand Science Education and Research Centre (USERC) Dehra Dun India ( USERC/2019-20/602 ). The authors are grateful and acknowledge the assistance of USERC in implementing this joint research in collaboration with Graphic Era Deemed to be University Dehradun India, Yasar University Izmir Turkey, and O P Jindal Global University India and University of Plymouth Plymouth United Kingdom. | |
| publicationvolume.volumeNumber | 362 | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | ac5ddece-c76d-476d-ab30-e4d3029dee37 | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | ac5ddece-c76d-476d-ab30-e4d3029dee37 |