{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017719748193051995, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0023315458148752623, 'mean_word_length': 5.336779911373707, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Indicators as a tool to evaluate waste management efficiency

Solid waste management transformations are dynamic. The paradigm shift in technologies and processes are evolving at an accelerated phase to meet national or global targets. Most nations have formulated strategies for improvement in the waste management approach. In order to achieve these strategies, policies have been established. Parallel to waste management is the need to reduce waste or to prevent waste generation by implementing effective mechanisms to introduce the 3Rs (reduce, reuse, and recycle) within the system. The question is how effective are these policies? What rate of waste generation is reduced or what is the achievement in enhancing the concept of 3Rs? To comprehend these issues and to derive a reasonable reliability in the waste data, indicators become very necessary. Indicators can indicate the rate of generation, for example, and it can elucidate the changes that are occurring as the result of the implementation of specific policies. Indicators proposed would very much depend on the priority of thematic areas being explored. For example, in developing a countries waste generation rate is the fundamental parameter being measured, but data reliability is an issue. In developed nations, the focus would be more on resource management and waste prevention indicators. Similarly industrial waste generators may introduce indicators related to per capita generation per unit product manufactured. This would be used to increase the productivity efficiency and reduce waste generation, while conserving resources. Indicators may be classified as quantitative indicators, which would depend on quantitative data collected, such as waste generated or waste disposed, etc.; while response indicators would be similar to the above, but when an effective mechanism is in place to show waste reduction. Alternatively, response indicators would be a ‘pressure’ to implement changes to offset an issue that is affecting the community. Qualitative indicators could be used to evaluate the success (or failure) of a policy if there is such a document or not, for example the use of extended producer responsibility (EPR) in many developed nations, but these are not common in developing countries. The European Environment Agency (EEA) defines an indicator as an elementary data or a simple combination of data of measuring a deserved phenomenon. Thus, performance indicators could monitor the effect of policy measures. We will be able to conclude whether or not targets have been met or will be met, and to formulate additional measures to increase efficiency. Each indicator will reflect the performance of the waste management system, within the stipulated time and target predetermined. One would agree that the challenges in waste management go beyond simple quantification, and thus use of indicators will rely on several parameters. However, an indicator nevertheless is an important too since waste management and is extremely complex with serious variations among the nations. Environmental indicators have been used to monitor and evaluate the performance of waste management technologies. Changes in environmental indicators would mirror the effectiveness of the technology being employed. The Rio conferences in 1992 and 2012 repeatedly emphasised on environmental, social and economic indicators to monitor the progress in sustainability, the change of atmospheric parameters, and those indicators could also be related to waste pollution and its impacts on air, water and human health. If two or more indicators are combined, one could generate an index (for a specific waste technology or process). Lack of data and reliability of the data has often been the issue in formulating indicators that are really practical or applicable. Even more complex is when indicators are combined to derive certain parameters, such as global warming, caused by waste disposal. Most waste management policies emphasised minimisation of environmental impacts with overall priority to reduce waste generated. The second strategy would be to reduce resource usage with complete or partial recovery or recycling. In that case, indicators need to be qualified and these quality criteria include the following.