Develops a model linking governance and participation to waste management sustainability, implying enhanced urban solutions.
Urban solid waste management has become one of the most urgent sustainability challenges in developing countries, where rapid urbanization, limited infrastructure, and low public engagement often weaken existing systems. Waste banks have been introduced as innovative community-based solutions, yet their long-term sustainability remains fragile due to fragmented governance and limited stakeholder participation. This study develops and empirically tests a structural model that links collaborative governance, stakeholder participation, and network effectiveness to the sustainability of urban waste bank management. Using a quantitative explanatory survey of 200 respondents representing government, the private sector, civil society organizations, and community members in Pekanbaru City, the data were analyzed through Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The results demonstrate that collaborative governance and stakeholder participation significantly and positively influence both network effectiveness and sustainability, while network effectiveness plays a mediating role that reinforces these relationships. These findings highlight that effective collaboration across multiple actors, supported by strong participatory practices, is essential for enhancing institutional resilience, operational stability, and financial independence of waste banks. Theoretically, this research integrates collaborative governance and circular economy concepts into a single measurable framework, filling a gap in existing waste management studies. At a broader level, the study provides practical implications for policymakers and urban managers in developing contexts, suggesting that strengthening cross-sector partnerships, incentivizing participation, and embedding participatory governance are crucial pathways toward achieving sustainable urban waste systems and advancing the global sustainability agenda.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2026 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: