A Benefit–Cost Analysis of Food and Biodegradable Waste Treatment Alternatives: The Case of Oita City, Japan

Micky A. Babalola
Additional contact information
Micky A. Babalola: Graduate School of Education, Hiroshima University, 1-1-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima, Hiroshima 739 8524, Japan

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 5, 1-17

Abstract: As the generation of food scrap, kitchen, and biodegradable wastes increases, the proper handling of these wastes is becoming an increasingly significant concern for most cities in Japan. A substantial fraction of food and biodegradable waste (FBW) ends up in the incinerator. Therefore, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) benefit–cost analysis technique was employed in this study to compare different FBW treatment technologies and select the most appropriate FBW disposal technology for Oita City. The four FBW treatment options considered were those recommended by the Japanese Food Waste Recycling Law: anaerobic digestion, compost, landfill, and incineration, which is currently in use. The fundamental AHP was separated into two hierarchy structures for benefit analysis and cost analysis. The criteria used in these two analyses were value added, safety, efficiency, and social benefits for benefit analysis, and cost of energy, cost of operation and maintenance, environmental constraints, and disamenity for cost analysis. The results showed that anaerobic digestion had the highest overall benefit while composting had the least cost overall. The benefit–cost ratio result showed that anaerobic digestion is the most suitable treatment alternative, followed by composting and incineration, with landfill being the least favored. The study recommends that composting could be combined with anaerobic digestion as an optimal FBW management option in Oita City.

Keywords: criteria; food and biodegradable waste; analytic hierarchy process; benefit–cost analysis; multi-criteria decision analysis; waste disposal technology; anaerobic digestion (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1916/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1916/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:1916-:d:327843

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().