Landfilling remains one of the most widely used waste disposal methods in many low- and middle-income countries due to its relatively low cost, despite its significant environmental impacts. The key issue, therefore, is how to select acceptable landfill areas while considering socio-economic factors. In our case study, waste management is under growing pressure. Rapid economic growth and urbanization are increasing both the volume and complexity of solid waste. At the same time, existing landfill sites are reaching their environmental limits, while infrastructure remains inadequate. In this context, identifying new landfill areas is not just necessary but crucial to ensuring sustainable urban development and protecting public health. This study uses a hybrid remote sensing and GIS-MCDA (Geographic Information Science - Multi-criteria Decision Analysis) approach to assess landfill site suitability. We developed a municipal solid waste landfill index (MSWI) that combines multiple criteria into a single measure, allowing the method to be adjusted to different regional contexts and data conditions. This approach enables a more comprehensive evaluation of economic, environmental, topographical, and social criteria, thereby highly supporting the selection process more systematically and transparently. The results reveal a highly uneven spatial distribution of suitability across the study area, with only limited zones meeting the combined requirements for landfill development. Areas classified as very high and high suitability account for approximately 22.89% of the total study area. Environmental factors and distance-based buffer play a dominant role in shaping the spatial pattern of suitability. Our methodology is highly transferable and can be applied to other low- and middle-income countries that face challenges. It provides a practical tool to support more informed and context-sensitive decisions on landfill siting.
Nguyen et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: