Journal of Public Health in Developing Countries Vol. 2, No. 3, pp.

268-275
http://www.jphdc.org/

ISSN 2059-5409

Original Contribution Open Access

Health Effects of Solid Waste Disposal at a Dumpsite on the Surrounding

Human Settlements
Felicia Babs-Shomoye1, Russell Kabir2
1
MedBridge International, Abuja, Nigeria
2
Department for Allied and Public Health, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, UK

Correspondence to: Russell Kabir, Department for Allied and Public Health, Faculty of Medical Sciences,
Postgraduate Medical Institute, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, Essex, UK. Email:
russell.kabir@anglia.ac.uk

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article history:
Received: 28 Aug 2016
Accepted: 17 Oct 2016
Published: 7 Nov 2016
Background: Solid waste management is a major problem in most developing
nations, like Nigeria, and poses serious public health issues to those living around
such waste management facilities. We sought to evaluate the health impact of
Olusosun Dumpsite in Lagos State, Nigeria on the residents living around the site.

Methods: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, using non-probability sampling,

data was collected from 100 households within 250 metres radius of the dumpsite and
Keywords: 100 households between 250-500 metres from the dumpsite through the use of self-
administered questionnaires. Data was collected in October and November 2015.
 Solid waste
 Waste management Results: Most of the residents were within the economically active age range of 26-45
 Public health years. Majority of the respondents were females (60.4%), self-employed (69.8%),
 Pollution educated to secondary level (44.7%), and had lived in the area for over 7 years
 Nigeria
(42.1%). The number of children within the households varied, 50.3% of households
had 1-3 children, with the average household size being five people. A large majority
of the respondents (92.5%) believed that the location of the dumpsite had an impact
on the quality of their environment, 16.3% believed the dumpsite’s location affected
their health, and 83% identified the odour emanating from the dumpsite as their main
concern. The severity of health impact due to the dumpsite decreased as people
moved away from the dumpsite, however this was not statistically significant.

Conclusions: Open dumping is very common in developing countries like Nigeria,

and poses a risk to human health and the environment. Waste not properly managed
has been known to have a negative impact on health, environment and aesthetic
values. We recommend educating residents living around Olusosun Dumpsite on the
alternative and more sustainable waste management options, so that the dumpsite
can be gradually closed.

Citation: Babs-Shomoye F, Kabir R. Health Effects of Solid Waste Disposal at a Dumpsite on the
Surrounding Human Settlements. J Public Health Dev Ctries. 2016; 2(3): 268-275.

© The Authors 2016. All rights reserved, JPHDC.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 268
 INTRODUCTION
Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) is
one of the major problems faced by city planners
in developing countries due to poor planning,
increased urbanization and inadequate
resources [1]. Recently, there have been
growing concerns about the environmental and
health effects associated with the generation of
solid waste as well as the increasing cost of
MSWM [2]. Lack of effective MSWM can result in
environmental health hazards and negative
impact on the environment in general [3].
In major cities of Nigeria, the disposal of
solid wastes within the last few decades have
posed major environmental and public health
issues as the majority of open dumpsites which
were initially located on the outskirts are now
within the heart of the city as a result of
urbanization and migration [4]. Solid waste
management is on a downward spiral in Nigeria,
with most communities especially within city
centers not benefitting from the municipal waste
disposal services [5]. In some parts of Nigeria, it
is common to see refuse being dumped along
major roads and highways constituting a
nuisance in those locations [6]. This has become
an eyesore as major streets have been turned
into refuse dumps with ugly mountains of waste
causing serious traffic problems. Asides the
aesthetic issues caused by these improper
disposal methods, the health and environmental
implications cannot be ignored [7]. Due to the
action of rain water some of the wastes from the
dump end up in a river (Odo Alaro) which passes
by the dumpsite thus increasing the health risk
for surrounding communities who may be using
the water for multiple purposes.
The dumpsite is an ideal breeding ground
for disease vectors such as rats and mosquitoes
which present serious health issues to nearby
household residents. Such unsanitary
environment is a predisposing factor for the
spread of diseases/infections like malaria,
dengue fever, typhoid, tetanus, cholera, eczema
and dysentery [8]. Olusosun dumpsite is the
largest landfill with a transfer loading station
managed by the Lagos Waste Management
Agency (LAWMA) located at Ojota and Oregun
area of Ikeja Local Government in Lagos State,
Nigeria with an estimated lifespan of 20 years
[9]. The aim of this research was to assess the
effect of solid waste disposal at the dumpsite on
the surrounding human settlements.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study Site and Design
This is a descriptive cross-sectional study
among residents who live within and around
Olusosun Landfill in Lagos State, Nigeria. Data
rd
was collected from October 23 , 2015 to
th
November 5 , 2015.
Study Population and Sample Size
In accordance with the World Bank criteria on
the selection of a landfill site, most impact of
landfill operation on residential land use should
be experienced within 250 metres of any
dumpsite [10]. A total of 200 questionnaires were
administered to two sets of household
respondents: a) household residents close to the
dumpsite (within 250 metres) with particular
interest on those living at the entry/exit point of
the dumpsite along the route of LAWMA garbage
trucks, and b) far away household residents from
the dumpsite (between 250 and 500 metres). In
order to determine the effects the dumpsite has
on the household residents, it was crucial to
have two strata of households (nearby
household and far away household) so as to
ascertain if proximity has any relationship with
the type of health problems experienced by
members of the household.
Non-probability sampling was employed
throughout this study due to the absence of a
sampling frame for this population; purposeful
sampling was used to select streets located
within Ojota and Oregun area which were within
the specified radius (500m) from the dumpsite.
Convenience sampling was further used to
select the households in the streets located
within 250 metres from the dumpsite and
between 250 and 500 metres from the dumpsite.
Prior to data collection, Google map was used to
determine the street and houses located within
the specified radius from the dumpsite.
269
Questionnaire and Data Collection
The survey was conducted by means of paper-
based structured questionnaires to determine
the socio-economic characteristics of the
residents that lived around the dumpsite,
determine the perception of residents on the
proximity of the dumpsites and the health effect
of the dumpsite on the residents. Households
within and around the dumpsite were targeted
for this survey. Only household heads or adult
members (preferably females) of the community
who resided around the dumpsite and gave their
consent to participate in the study were
surveyed. Vulnerable groups were excluded
from this survey with parents serving as proxy
where health information was required for
children. The questionnaires were administered
by a trained research field worker
knowledgeable in environmental health and
safety.
Ethical Considerations
Ethical approval was obtained from the Natural
Sciences Ethics Sub-committee (NSESC). The
participants who were invited to take part in the
study were given a participant information sheet
detailing the rationale of the study and other
ethical considerations to enable them to make
informed decisions. Identifiers such as name and
address were not requested in the survey in
order to ensure privacy of the participants. Filling
the questionnaire was considered as consent
and was clearly stated on the information sheet.
Statistical Analyses
Data from the questionnaire was coded and
entered into a database. SPSS version 21 (IBM,
NY, USA) was used for analyses. Categorical
variables are presented as frequency and
percentage. The relationship between
households’ location and ill-health effects was
tested by the chi-square test. A p-value of <0.05
was considered to be statistically significant.
RESULTS
Demographic Characteristics of the
Participants
Table 1 shows the background characteristics of
the respondents. Most of the residents were
within the economically active age range of 26-
45 years even though the age ranged from 18-
73 years within the study sample. The mean,
median and standard deviation were 37.81, 35
and 11.56 years respectively. Gender
distribution was unequal in this survey, with
39.6% male and 60.4% female respondents.
Majority of the respondents were self-employed
(69.8%). A significant percentage of respondents
were educated, with 44.7% educated to
secondary level. The number of children within
the households varied with 50.3% of households
had 1-3 children and 18.9% had no children. The
average household size was five members, with
13.2% household had more than six members.
Most of the respondents (42.1%) had lived in the
study area for over 7 years. About 68.6% of the
households interviewed had an annual income of
less than Nigerian Naira (NGN) 20,000.
Perceptions regarding Environment and
Location of the Dumpsite
As shown in Table 2, more than half (57.2%) of
the respondents resided between 250 and
500metres from the dumpsite. Also noticeable
were the respondents who lived within 50metres
of the dumpsite along the entry/exit routes of the
waste management authority trucks at the rare
entrance of the dumpsite. About 67.9% of
household respondents acknowledged the
dumpsite as being a problem due to its location
within the area. Out of the respondents who
believed the dumpsite was a problem, 28.3%
and 10.1% classified the severity of the problem
as severe and highly severe respectively. Over
half (52.8%) of the respondents who complained
about the location of the dumpsite identified
unpleasant odour as the most urgent problem
within the area while 37% associated the
dumpsite’s location to various health issues. We
found that about 62.9% of the respondents
thought it was appropriate for individuals to
share in the responsibility of cleaning their
surroundings while approximately 14.5% felt it
was solely the responsibility of the LAWMA to
keep the environment clean.
Health Impact of the Dumpsite
A large majority of the respondents (92.5%)
believed that the location of the dumpsite had an
impact on the quality of their environment (Table
3). Around 16.3% of the respondents who
270
 believed the dumpsite’s location affected the
Table 1. Socio-demographic quality of their health complained of burning and
Characteristics of the Respondents smoke as the major issue, 83% identified the
odour emanating from the dumpsite as their
Characteristics n % main concern. Though about 52.8% believed the
dumpsite had an impact on their health, a large
Gender
proportion (45.9%) of the respondents
Male 63 39.6 maintained that the dumpsite has no impact on
Female 96 60.4 their health. About 42.1% of the respondents
Age (Years) answered in the affirmative that they or a
<25 17 10.7 member of their household had been sick within
26-35 66 41.5 the last 12 months. Figure 1 shows the number
36-45 45 28.3 of ill-health cases per household with a majority
46-55 15 9.4 of the households reporting between one to four
cases of ill-health across both categories.
>55 16 10.1
Employment status
Self-employed 111 69.8 Table 2. Perceptions of the
Employed 18 11.3 Respondents on Environment and
Unemployed 20 12.6 Location of the Dumpsite
Retired 10 6.3
Variables n %
Education level
No schooling 7 4.4 Distance of houses from dumpsite (metres)
<50 14 8.8
Vocational training 24 15.1
50-250 51 32.1
Primary 24 15.1 250-500 91 57.2
>500 3 1.9
Secondary 71 44.7
Is dumpsite a problem in your area?
Tertiary 33 20.8 Yes 108 67.9
Annual household income (NGN) No 32 20.1
Not sure 19 11.9
<20,000 109 68.6
Severity of the problem
20,001-50,000 37 23.3
Minor 15 9.4
50,001-100,000 8 5
Moderate 29 18.2
>100,000 5 3.1 I don't know 3 1.9
Household size (members) Severe 45 28.3
1-3 69 43.4 Highly severe 16 10.1
4-6 69 43.4 Urgent dumpsite problems
>6 21 13.2
Health problems 40 37
Length of stay in area
Water pollution 6 5.6
Less than a year 15 9.4 Eyesore 5 4.6
1-3 years 36 22.6 Unpleasant odour 57 52.8
4-6 years 41 25.8 Responsibility for ensuring clean
surroundings
7 years or more 67 42.1
Myself 35 22
Number of children
Waste Management
No children 30 18.9 23 14.5
Agency
1-3 80 50.3 Both 100 62.9
>4 49 30.8 I don't know 1 0.6

271
 in the households near the dumpsite when
Table 3. Health Impact of the Dumpsite compared to all the other diseases, none of the
on Respondents and Household differences were statistically significant with the
Members p-values >0.05.

Variables n %
Effects on the quality of environment DISCUSSION
Yes 147 92.5
No 12 7.5 In this study, we sought to evaluate the health
How dumpsite affects the quality of impact of Olusosun Dumpsite in Lagos State,
environment? Nigeria on the household residents living around
Odour 122 83 the site. The focus was on two factors which
Smoke from were health and location. Therefore, it was
24 16.3 necessary to have a comparison between the
burning
Aesthetics 1 0.7 nearby households and the far away
Does dumpsite have health Impacts? households. Most of the household respondents
living near the dumpsite and farther away from
Yes 84 52.8
the dumpsite perceived that the dumpsite had an
No 73 45.9
impact on their health and the quality of their
I don't know 2 1.3
environment, hence they suffered from related
Severity of health impacts illnesses such as malaria, chest pains, cholera,
Minor 16 19 skin infection.
Moderate 28 33.3 Most of the respondents were aged
I don't know 2 2.4 between 25-50 years, which represents the
Severe 29 34.5 country’s workforce. The higher participation of
women in this study was probably due to better
Highly severe 9 10.7 knowledge and awareness of women on the
Severity of health impact on household health issues affecting their children and
members household members. This was in contrast to the
Minor 17 20.2 generally held belief in most developing
Moderate 29 34.5 countries like Nigeria, that the men being the
I don't know 5 6 head of the households should be representative
of their households [11]. Most of the respondents
Severe 26 31
have resided around the study area for over 7
Highly severe 7 8.3
years and were mainly self-employed with an
Any sickness within the last 12 months?
income of less than NGN 20,000. Siting of
Yes 67 42.1 hazardous waste dumping sites, waste tanks,
No 80 50.3 sewerage plants and landfills is correlated with
I don't know 12 7.5 the economic status of people in surrounding
communities in Nigeria. Residents of highbrow
areas are aware of the implications of such
Relationship between Distance from the facilities in their vicinity and resist their siting,
Dumpsite and Ill-health whereas residents in lowbrow areas do not or do
not have the choice.
Table 4 shows the relationship between distance
to the dumpsite and the number of ill-health The distribution for level of education shows
cases for the different types of diseases within that majority of the respondents had secondary
the households that were in the dumpsite’s and tertiary education which is in line with the
vicinity. Although the expected counts were previous findings [12] that the dumpsite is home
different from the observed counts with malaria to many educated individuals who have taken
showing a higher number of cases in the refuge in the dumpsite and its vicinity as a
households farther away from the dumpsite than means of their survival. Results also revealed

272
 20

16
Number of Households
50-250 metres
250-500 metres
12

0
1 Case 2 Cases 3 Cases 4 Cases 5 Cases 7 Cases 8 Cases

Number of Ill-health Cases per Household

Figure 1: Relationship between the Distance from the Dumpsite and the Number of Ill-
health Cases

Table 4. Relationship between Distance from the Dumpsite and Ill-health Cases
for Different Types of Sicknesses per Household

Type of Distance from Number of Cases

Sickness the Dumpsite 1-2 3-4 >5 None

Count 20 4 0 6
Within 250 m Expected
19.7 5.4 0.4 4.5
count
Malaria
Count 24 8 1 4
250-500 m Expected
24.3 6.6 0.6 5.5
count
Count 5 0 0 25
Within 250 m Expected
4 0 0 26
Chest Related count
Illnesses Count 4 0 0 33
250-500 m Expected
5 0 0 32
count
Count 10 0 0 20
Within 250 m Expected
6.7 0 0 23.3
Cholera and count
Diarrhea Count 5 0 0 32
250-500 m Expected
8.3 0 0 28.7
count
Count 8 1 0 21
Within 250 m Expected
5.4 0.9 0 23.7
count
Skin infections
Count 4 1 0 32
250-500 m Expected
6.6 1.1 0 29.3
count

273
that both nearby households and far away
households suffered from related diseases due
to the location of the dumpsite within their
settlements. However, it was discovered that the
closer a community was to a dumpsite, the
higher the probability for the community to be
exposed to the cluster of illnesses. This is
consistent with the finding that as distance
between a community and dumpsite reduces,
the frequency of illnesses increases [13]. Hence,
household members are victims of diseases
such as malaria, cholera, diarrhea, chest-related
issues and skin infections.
The study shows that waste dumps near
living areas are detrimental to good health.
Waste dump can serve as a breeding ground for
mosquitoes, fly, rodents and rats. These animals
can transmit diseases to human beings either
from the waste dump itself or other related
sources [14]. Inappropriate disposal of solid
waste can be risky which often manifest by
contamination of surface and ground water
through leachate, air pollution by burning of
wastes, soil contamination through direct waste
contact, uncontrolled release of methane by
anaerobic decomposition of waste or spreading
of diseases by different vectors like birds, insects
and rodents [15]. Ojo [16] found that
indiscriminate disposal of waste results in
environmental degradation which in turn leads to
increase in the volume and diversity of
hazardous waste and the consequent
contamination of water. A large majority of the
respondents perceived unpleasant odour and
various health problems as being the most
urgent issues associated with living close to the
dumpsite.
With regards to the effects on the quality of
environment around the dumpsite, majority of
the household respondents (83%) complained of
the odour emanating from the dumpsite while
16% perceived the smoke resulting from open
burning of waste as the main issue. This is in
support of the position of Ohwo [17] who stated
that waste left unattended to for a long time
constitute serious hazard and produces
offensive odour which can cause serious health
challenges to those living around the site.
Furthermore, uncontrolled burning of waste in
open dumpsite could result in air pollution and
increase greenhouse gas emission which has
been known to contribute to climate change.
Burning waste is usually an environmentally poor
waste management option that releases a
hazardous mixture of cancer-causing
compounds and other toxic substances into the
environment [18].
CONCLUSIONS
Open dumping is very common in developing
countries like Nigeria, and poses a risk to human
health and the environment. Waste not properly
managed has been known to have a negative
impact on health, environment and aesthetic
values. It, however, provides an opportunity for
employment and a source of energy generation.
We recommend educating residents on
alternative waste management options, so that
gradually the dumpsite can be closed. However,
it is pertinent for further studies to be carried out
within the study area on those who work as
scavengers within the site and respondents of
commercial businesses around the dumpsite to
determine the impact the dumpsite has on their
health while controlling for other confounding
factors.
AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS
FB-S was responsible for designing the study,
data collection, conducting the literature review
and data analysis. RK was responsible for data
analysis, structuring the result section, and
manuscript preparation. Both authors have read
and approved the final manuscript.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to all the participants of
this research.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Authors have declared that no competing
interests exist.
274
 REFERENCES
1. Obirih-Opareh N, Post J. Quality assessment of
public and private modes of solid waste
collection in Accra, Ghana. Habitat
International. 2002; 26: 95-112.
2. Owoeye JO, Rotowa OO. Integrated approach
to Municipal Solid Waste Management in a
Rapidly Urbanizing Medium-Size City in
Nigeria. International Journal of Environmental
Planning and Management. 2015; 1: 131-9.
3. Srivastava V, Ismail SA, Singh P, Singh RP.
Urban solid waste management in the
developing world with emphasis on India:
challenges and opportunities. Reviews in
Environmental Science and Biotechnology.
2015; 14: 317-37.
4. Lagos Waste Disposal Board. Organizational
Development and Waste Management System
project. Lagos Waste Management Board
Assessment Report. 2006; 1: 1-5.
5. Fafioye OO, John-Dewole OO. A Critical
Assessment of Waste Management Problems
in Ibadan South-West Local Government Area,
Ibadan, Nigeria. Greener Journal
Environmental and Management Studies.
2013; 2: 60-4.
6. Oyeniyi BA. Waste management
contemporary Nigeria: the Abuja example.
International Journal of Politics and Good
Governance. 2011; 2: 1-8.
7. Olufayo O, Omotosho BJ. Waste disposal and
waste management in Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria. The
Social Science. 2007; 2: 111-5.
8. Komolafe SF. Sustainable Solid Waste
Management - A Possible Solution to
Environmental & Sanitation Problems in the
Ancient City of Ibadan, Nigeria. Journal of
Environmental Science & Technology. 2011; 4:
119-22.
9. Lagos Waste Management Authority. Olusosun
Landfill Site. LAWMA: Lagos waste
management authority, 2011 (Accessed 28
August 2016, at http://www.lawma.gov.ng/
lawma_landfill.html).
10. Nwambuonwo OJ, Mughele ES. Using
geographic information system to select
suitable landfill sites for megacities (case study
of Lagos, Nigeria). Comput, Inform Syst Dev
Inform J. 2012; 3: 48-57.
11. Opara AU, Eberendu IF, Uloneme. Assessment
of water and sanitation practices in five
communities in Owerri North Local Government
Area of Imo State. International Journal of
Advances in Case Reports. 2015; 2: 97-103.
12. Omoniyi O. Olusosun Dumpsite: From waste to
wealth. New Telegraph Newspaper, 2014
(Accessed 12 September 2015, at http://new
telegraphonline.com/olusosun-dumpsite-from-
waste-to-wealth).
13. Sankoh FP, Yan X, Tran Q. Environmental and
Health Impact of Solid Waste Disposal in
Developing Cities: A Case Study of Granville
Brook Dumpsite, Freetown, Sierra Leone. J
Environ Prot (Irvine, Calif). 2013; 2: 2013.
14. Rao CS. Environmental pollution control
of engineering. New Age International; 2007.
15. Visvanathan C, Glawe U. Domestic Solid
Waste Management in South Asian Countries:
in A Comparative Analysis. Promoting Reduce,
Reuse, and Recycle in South Asia. Asian
Development Bank, Manila, Philippines. 2006:
27.
16. Ojo M. Waste Management actions in cities.
Ibadan: Macmillan; 2010.
17. Ohwo O. Spatial Analysis of the Quality of
Borehole Water Supply in Warri-Effurun
Metropolis, Delta State, Nigeria. Ikogho: A
Multi-disciplinary Journal. 2011; 9: 91-103.
18. United Nations Environmental Program
Agency. Informal Solid Waste Management,
2006 (Accessed 12 September 2015, at
http://www.unep.org?PDF/kenyawastemngntse
ctor/sector/chapter1.pdf).
275