SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kocaeli Journal of Science and Engineering / 2026 / Cilt: 2026 Sayı: 17

Assessment of the Waste Management Strategies of Municipal Wastes in Türkiye with respect to “Zero Waste Approach”

Türkiye'de Belediye Atıklarının Atık Yönetimi Stratejilerinin "Sıfır Atık Yaklaşımı" Açısından Değerlendirilmesi

Dilara Çetindamar(KOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, FEN BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ)0009-0009-3394-372X
İsmail Özbay(KOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-7720-3709
Aykan Karademir(KOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9668-335X
Pages
50–61
Publication Date
2026-06-04
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conversely, Kastamonu recorded the lowest ZWI value (0.28), followed by Şanlıurfa (0.31) and Afyonkarahisar (0.38).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:To mitigate the swift depletion of natural resources, recycling-based recovery constitutes a key element that enables the reintegration of waste into economic processes, establishing a circular economy and sustainable waste management strategies of cities.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The core principle of the ZW philosophy is predicated on the notion that products should be integrated as feedstock in the generation of new materials.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conversely, Kastamonu recorded the lowest ZWI value (0.28), followed by Şanlıurfa (0.31) and Afyonkarahisar (0.38).
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Geri dönüşüm · Sürdürülebilirlik Atık Yönetimi · Türkiye

Abstract

To mitigate the swift depletion of natural resources, recycling-based recovery constitutes a key element that enables the reintegration of waste into economic processes, establishing a circular economy and sustainable waste management strategies of cities. Considering these aspects, it is crucial to enhance MWMS through the implementation of a Zero Waste (ZW), ensuring that urban environments are administered within an optimized and sustainable WMS. The core principle of the ZW philosophy is predicated on the notion that products should be integrated as feedstock in the generation of new materials. Implementation of this system will dicrease the volume of waste directed to final disposal and the demand for landfill capacity, while conserving both water and energy resources in fast-developing urban cities. ZW index and waste characterization data serve as essential tools for local authorities in determining the most suitable MWM system. In this study, the waste characterization of geographical regions, along with the characterization of all provinces in Türkiye, was calculated and presented the ZW index and RWR Potential of the provinces were computed. Kilis exhibited the highest ZW Index (0.75), followed by Edirne (0.72) and Burdur (0.70). Conversely, Kastamonu recorded the lowest ZWI value (0.28), followed by Şanlıurfa (0.31) and Afyonkarahisar (0.38).

Özet

Dünyamızda doğal kaynakların hızlı tüketiminin önüne geçebilmek için atıkların geri kazanım ve geri dönüşüm yoluyla ekonomiye yeniden kazandırılması, şehirlerin döngüsel ekonomisi ve sürdürülebilir atık yönetimi stratejilerinin belirlenmesi büyük önem taşımaktadır. Tüm bunlar göz önünde bulundurularak MWMS'de sıfır atık (ZW) yaklaşımı ile iyileştirmeler yapılmalı ve şehirler optimum bir WMS ile yönetilmelidir. ZW felsefesinin temeli; ürünlerin yaşam döngüleri boyunca sonsuz kullanıma sahip başka bir malzemenin ürünü olması. Bu sistem ile nihai bertarafa giden atık miktarı ve depolama tesislerine olan ihtiyaç azaltılacak, enerji ve su tasarrufu sağlanacaktır. Nüfus artışının ve kentleşmenin hızlı olduğu şehirlerde, atık karakterizasyon verileri ve sıfır atık endeksi, yerel yönetimlere en uygun belediye atık yönetim sistemine karar vermeleri için rehberlik etmektedir. Bu çalışmada Türkiye'deki illerin atık karakterizasyon verileri ve 7 bölgenin atık karakterizasyonu hesaplanmış ve sunulmuştur. İllerin sıfır indeksi ve RWRP oranları hesaplanmıştır. Kilis, 0,75 ile en yüksek ZWI'ye sahipken, onu Edirne (0,72), Burdur (0,70), Muğla (0,65) takip etmektedir. En düşük ZWI 0,28 ile Kastamonu'da bulunurken, onu Şanlıurfa (0,31), Afyonkarahisar (0,38) takip etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çetindamar, D., Özbay, İ., Karademir, A. (2026). Assessment of the Waste Management Strategies of Municipal Wastes in Türkiye with respect to “Zero Waste Approach”. Kocaeli Journal of Science and Engineering, Cilt: 2026 Sayı: 17, 50–61. https://doi.org/10.34088/kojose.1802375

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (26)

  1. Siddiqua A, Hahladakis JN, Al-Attiya WAKA. An overview of the environmental pollution and health effects associated with waste landfilling and open dumping. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2022;29:58514-58536. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21578-z.
  2. UNEP. UN Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/Published 2023. Accessed 2023 Jun 9.
  3. Cheapa Waste. Global waste statistics 2022. https://cheapawasteskips.com.au/global-waste-statistics-2022/#msm/. Published 2022. Accessed 2024 Feb 15.
  4. EEA (European Environment Agency). Reaching 2030’s residual municipal waste target-why recycling is not enough. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/reaching-2030s-residual-municipal-waste/. Published 2023. Accessed 2024 Mar 8.
  5. Zaman AU, Lehmann S. The zero waste index: A performance measurement tool for waste management systems in a ‘zero waste city’. J Clean Prod. 2013;50:123-132. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.041.
  6. Wikurendra EA, Abdeljawad NS, Nagy IV. A review of municipal waste management with zero waste concept: strategies, potentialand challenge in Indonesia. Int J Environ Sci Dev. 2023;14(2):147-154. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijesd.2023.14.2.1427.
  7. Majid MI, Jamal H, Asghar A. Solid waste management (SWM) challenges and their solution by using zero waste strategy: Karachi as a case study. JISR Manag Soc Sci Econ. 2022;20(2):92-110. Available from: https://doi.org/10.31384/jisrmsse/2022.20.2.6.
  8. Molayzahedi SM, Abdoli MA. A new sustainable approach to integrated solid waste management in Shiraz, Iran. Pollution. 2022;8(1):303-314. Available from: https://doi.org/10.22059/poll.2021.330183.1175.
  9. Özbay İ, Gokceviz NA. Towards zero-waste airports: A case study of Istanbul Airport. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag. 2022;24(1):134-142. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-021-01308-2.
  10. Zaman AU, Swapan MSH. Performance evaluation and benchmarking of global waste management systems. Resources Conserv Recycl. 2016;114:32-41. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.06.020.
  11. Zaman AU. A comprehensive studyof the environmental and economic benefits of resource recovery from global waste management systems. J Clean Prod. 2016;124:41-50. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.086.
  12. Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK). https://www.tuik.gov.tr. Published 2022. Accessed 2023 Oct 28.
  13. General Directorate of Mapping (GDM). Area measurements of provinces and districts. https://www.harita.gov.tr. Published 2023. Accessed 2023 Nov 12.
  14. Official Gazette Number: 18132. Environmental Law No. 2872. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/ Published1983.
  15. Turkish Court of Accounts (TCA). Plastic waste management Court of Accounts report 2022. TCA; 2022.
  16. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (ÇSB). National waste management and action 2016-2023, Türkiye. ÇSB; 2016.
  17. KAAP. Solid waste master plan final report. Türkiye: ÇSB; 2006.
  18. Official Gazette Number: 31523. Packaging waste control regulation. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/ Published 2021.
  19. ZeroWaste. ÇSB climate change department of zero waste practices. https://zerowaste.gov.tr/. Published 2023. Accessed 2023 Dec 21.
  20. Ayçin E, Kayapinar KS. Towards the circular economy: Analysis of barriers to implementation of Turkey’s zero waste management using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Waste Manag Res. 2021;39(8):1078-1089. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X20988781.
  21. Directorate Climate Change (DCC). https://www.iklim.gov.tr. Published 2023. Accessed 2023 Nov 9.
  22. Zero Waste International Alliance (ZWIA). https://zwia.org/. Published 2023. Accessed 2024 Mar 8.
  23. General Directorate of Local Governments (GDLG). Local administrations general activity report 2022, Türkiye. GDLG; 2023.
  24. ÇSB. Provincial environmental status reports 2022. https://www.csb.gov.tr. Published 2023. Accessed 2023 Nov 9.
  25. Gu B, Tang X, Liu L, Li Y, Fujiwara T, Sun H, Gu A, Yao Y, Duan R, Song J, Jia R. The recyclable waste recycling potential towards zero waste cities—A comparison of three cities in China. J Clean Prod. 2021;295:126358. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126358.
  26. Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK). https://www.tuik.gov.tr. Published 2022. Accessed 2023 Oct 28.