F1000Research F1000Research 2046-1402 F1000 Research Limited London, UK 10.12688/f1000research.166745.1 Policy Brief Articles Reforming Urban Solid Waste Management in Amhara Regional State: Policy Analysis and Strategic Recommendations for Institutional Strengthening, Inclusion, and Coordination

[version 1; peer review: 1 not approved]

 Teku Degfie Conceptualization Formal Analysis Methodology Resources Visualization Writing – Review & Editing https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8003-8432 a 1 Getu Tesfaye Formal Analysis Resources Supervision Writing – Original Draft Preparation 1 Taye Andualem Conceptualization Resources Writing – Original Draft Preparation https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8003-3658 1 Wubshet Muluwork Conceptualization Resources Writing – Review & Editing 1 Ashagrie Kindnew Conceptualization Methodology Resources Visualization 1 Mekdela Amba University, Tulu Awlya, South Wollo Zone, Ethiopia degfie2023@gmail.com

No competing interests were disclosed.

 1 8 2025 2025 14 754 26 7 2025 Copyright: © 2025 Teku D et al. 2025 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Urban Solid Waste Management (USWM) in Amhara Regional State faces critical challenges stemming from rapid urbanization, informal settlement growth, and limited municipal capacity. Service delivery, particularly in low-income areas, is hampered by fragmented institutional mandates and weak local implementation of national frameworks such as Proclamation No. 513/2007 and the National Urban Sanitation Strategy. This has led to public health risks, environmental degradation, and disproportionate burdens on vulnerable groups. This brief evaluates three policy options: (1) incremental improvements in municipal capacity, (2) integration of informal waste actors into formal systems, and (3) establishment of a unified regional coordinating body. A hybrid strategy combining Options 2 and 3 is recommended to promote inclusive governance and systemic coordination. Effective reform will require legal harmonization, stakeholder engagement, capacity-building, and financing. If implemented, this approach can enhance service delivery, empower informal workers, and support cleaner, more equitable urban environments in Amhara.

 Urban Solid Waste Management Policy Reform Institutional Coordination Informal Waste Sector Sustainable Urban Development The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. 1. Introduction

Urban Solid Waste Management (USWM) in Ethiopia’s Amhara Regional State presents a growing public service challenge. 1 Rapid urbanization, population growth, and increased consumption have overwhelmed existing waste management systems, especially in cities such as Bahir Dar, Dessie, and Debre Berhan. 2 Despite the adoption of national policies such as Proclamation No. 513/2007 and the National Urban Sanitation Strategy, municipal enforcement remains weak, infrastructure is underdeveloped, and institutional mandates are fragmented. 3 Municipalities operate without cohesive bylaws, and regulatory responsibilities are dispersed across health, sanitation, and environmental sectors. 4 Informal waste pickers mainly women and youth are systematically excluded from formal systems despite playing a significant role in waste recovery. 1, 3 Chronic underfunding, capacity shortfalls, and low public engagement exacerbate the crisis, posing escalating public health, environmental, and economic risks. 5 This policy brief presents a critical analysis of current gaps in urban solid waste management across the region and proposes actionable reforms to promote institutional coordination, equity, and environmental sustainability.

1.1 Objectives

To evaluate the current state of solid waste disposal in urban centers of Amhara Regional State

To assess the adequacy and enforcement of existing legal and institutional frameworks

To analyze the socio-economic and environmental consequences of ineffective solid waste disposal

To investigate disparities in waste management service delivery across urban neighborhoods

To identify policy and operational barriers to effective stakeholder engagement

2. Methods

This policy brief uses a mixed-methods approach, combining secondary data analysis and stakeholder consultations. Sources include government policies, municipal records, and reports from development partners. Quantitative data on service coverage, staffing, and budgets were analyzed alongside qualitative insights from municipal officials, health experts, and informal waste workers. The assessment focused on five key areas: waste practices, institutional capacity, socio-economic and environmental impacts, service disparities, and stakeholder engagement. Figure 1 illustrates the thematic framework guiding the analysis.

Analytical framework for assessing urban solid waste management in Amhara Regional State. 3. Policy outcomes and implications 3.1 Current state of solid waste disposal in Amhara Regional State

Urban solid waste management in Amhara Regional State faces critical challenges due to rapid urbanization, weak institutional capacity, and outdated infrastructure. 6 Cities like Bahir Dar, Gondar, Dessie, and Debre Markos generate 1,500–2,000 metric tons of waste daily, yet only 50–60% is collected, and less than half of that is safely disposed. 7 Figure 2 illustrates that organic waste mainly food and agricultural residue makes up 65–70% of the total waste stream, indicating missed opportunities for composting and bio-recovery. Poor collection practices, aging fleets (e.g., Gondar operates with fewer than 10 trucks for over 350,000 residents), and widespread open dumping contribute to severe health and environmental risks. 8 Over 70% of urban centers lack sanitary landfills, making current disposal practices unsustainable. 9 As shown in Table 1, a significant portion of waste in key cities remains either uncollected or is collected but unsafely managed, further heightening public health threats and environmental degradation across the region.

Waste composition in urban areas of Amhara Regional State. <sup> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref> </sup> Estimated daily municipal solid waste flows in major urban centers of Amhara Region

(Source: Estimates derived from average per capita waste generation (~0.45 kg/person/day) and urban population data).

City Estimated daily Waste generation (t/day) Collected (t/day) Uncollected (t/day) Safely disposed (t/day) Key notes
Bahir Dar 99 73 (74%) 26 (26%) Minimal (<10 t) Collected mainly by private companies; lacks sanitary landfill.
Gondar 157 80 (51%) 77 (49%) Very low (<5 t) Limited infrastructure; disposal in open dumps.
Dessie 90 50 (56%) 40 (44%) <5 Open dumping common; limited municipal capacity.
Debre Markos 54 30 (55%) 24 (45%) <3 No proper disposal infrastructure.
Debre Birhan 25 13 (52%) 12 (48%) Negligible No known safe disposal mechanisms.
Debre Tabor N/A N/A N/A N/A Reliable data not available.
Enjibara N/A N/A N/A N/A Reliable data not available.
Woldiya N/A N/A N/A N/A Reliable data not available.
3.2 Legal and institutional challenges

Ethiopia’s national waste laws provide a framework, but Amhara struggles with poor local implementation due to outdated bylaws, fragmented governance, underfunding, and weak enforcement. 10– 14 Only 3 of 11 zonal municipalities have enforceable ordinances, and staffing falls well below WHO standards. Budget allocations under 5% limit essential services. 15 Overlapping mandates and frequent institutional restructuring hinder coordination and innovation. 12, 14 Behavioral challenges persist, with less than 10% of households practicing waste separation. 13 Informal waste workers mainly youth and women remain unrecognized and unprotected despite their vital recycling role. 1, 5, 16 These gaps underscore the urgent need for harmonized policies, strengthened institutions, better coordination, and inclusive approaches that empower informal actors and drive behavioral change. As shown in Table 2, significant disparities exist in legal frameworks and institutional capacities for SWM across municipalities in ARS.

Comparative analysis of Legal and Institutional Capacities for Solid Waste Management (SWM) in ARS [ <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>].
City Existence of updated waste bylaws Dedicated Waste Management Unit (WMU) No. of environmental health inspectors Budget allocation for SWM (% of Municipal budget) Inter-agency coordination mechanism Integration of informal sector
Bahir Dar Yes (2021 revision) Yes 5 (per 120,000 pop.) 6.2% Weak Limited between health & env’t depts. Informal workers unrecognized
Gondar Partial (outdated, 2013) Yes 4 (per 180,000 pop.) 5.1% Absent Siloed implementation Marginally engaged through NGOs
Dessie No enforceable bylaws Yes 2 (per 170,000 pop.) 3.4% Ad hoc coordination Excluded, work without PPE
Debre Markos Yes (draft pending ratification) Limited staffing 3 (per 120,000 pop.) 4.7% Weak inter-bureau alignment Informal sector not mapped
Debre Birhan Yes (2020) Yes (under Urban Services) 4 (per 140,000 pop.) 5.3% Moderate through joint task forces Largely unregulated
Debre Tabor No No formal WMU 1 (per 80,000 pop.) 2.9% Nonexistent No formal engagement
Woldiya Partial (in review) Basic unit exists 2 (per 100,000 pop.) 3.5% Weak Informal sector visible, unsupported
Enjibara No No 0 <2.5% Nonexistent No policy linkage
3.3 Socio-economic and environmental consequences

Poor solid waste management in Amhara’s cities has severe socio-economic and environmental impacts spreading diseases like cholera and malaria, polluting water bodies and farmland, worsening urban flooding, and degrading air quality. 17– 19 Informal settlements suffer the most due to poor sanitation and exposure to unregulated dumping. Informal waste workers, mostly women and youth, operate without legal or health protections despite their vital role in recycling. 20 Without inclusive, coordinated reforms, public health risks, inequality, and environmental damage will escalate. Urgent action is needed to integrate informal actors, strengthen safeguards, and support green, equitable waste systems.

 3.4 Intra-urban disparities

In Amhara’s cities, solid waste services are deeply unequal formal neighborhoods receive regular collection, while over 70% of informal settlements lack access, leading to unsafe dumping and health risks. 21– 23 In cities like Dessie and Kombolcha, informal workers operate without protection, facing high injury and disease risks. 24 Smaller towns struggle with poor infrastructure and weak municipal capacity. 22, 25– 27 These disparities rooted in systemic neglect and fragmented planning, demand urgent, inclusive policies to close service gaps and protect vulnerable communities and waste workers. 27– 29 As shown in Figure 3, waste generation has consistently outpaced service expansion from 2015 to 2024.

Trend analysis on waste generation vs. service expansion (2015–2024) (Analyzed from <sup> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">30</xref>– <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref> </sup>) 3.5 Barriers to stakeholder engagement

Urban solid waste management in Amhara is hindered by weak municipal commitment, poor coordination, and exclusion of key actors. 33, 34 Informal waste pickers and cooperatives, despite their critical role, remain marginalized from formal systems, limiting innovation and equity. 24, 27 Municipalities face financial and technical constraints that reduce stakeholder engagement and capacity-building efforts. 4 Community participation is low, especially in informal settlements, due to lack of sustained dialogue and awareness. 27 Private sector involvement is minimal, with regulatory hurdles limiting their role. 24 Youth-led cooperatives show promise but are constrained by funding and recognition gaps. 35, 36 Addressing these challenges demands coordinated policies to build municipal capacity, integrate informal and youth actors, and incentivize private sector participation to ensure sustainable and equitable waste management.

 4. Key findings

Policy Implementation Gap: Most municipalities lack enforceable bylaws and operational guidelines, undermining the national solid waste policy framework.

Institutional Fragmentation: Conflicting mandates between municipal, health, and environmental sectors cause operational inefficiencies and weak regulatory oversight.

Capacity Constraints: Only 3 of 11 municipalities have dedicated environmental engineers; environmental health inspection rates fall far below global benchmarks.

Chronic Underfunding: Waste management typically receives less than 5% of municipal budgets, restricting service expansion and infrastructure development.

Data and Planning Deficits: Most cities lack real-time waste data, hindering evidence-based planning and monitoring.

Public Health Risks: Poor waste disposal contributes to cholera, typhoid, and mosquito-borne outbreaks and exacerbates environmental degradation.

Informal Sector Exclusion: Informal waste actors lack recognition, legal protection, and access to protective equipment or support mechanisms.

Behavioral Barriers: Less than 10% of households engage in waste separation; community ownership and public participation remain minimal.

5. Policy implications

Legislative reform is urgent:

The absence of enforceable municipal bylaws and operational guidelines weakens the national policy framework, leaving solid waste systems vulnerable to legal ambiguity and inconsistent implementation. Clear, regionally adapted legislation is essential.

Governance restructuring is needed:

Institutional fragmentation undermines efficiency and accountability. Without clarified mandates and inter-agency coordination, efforts remain siloed, hampering holistic urban waste management and weakening public trust.

Investing in human capital is critical:

The severe shortage of skilled personnel, such as environmental engineers and health inspectors, limits municipalities’ ability to enforce standards and respond to public health threats. Capacity building must be prioritized.

Sustainable financing must be secured:

Chronic underfunding not only limits infrastructure development but also threatens the continuity of basic services. Increased and ring-fenced funding for waste management is essential to ensure reliable service delivery.

Planning gaps undermine efficiency:

Lack of real-time data weakens municipal planning, resource allocation, and monitoring systems. Digital data systems are crucial for responsive, data-driven decision-making and performance evaluation.

Urban health is at stake:

Inadequate waste disposal heightens the risk of disease outbreaks and environmental hazards, placing a heavy burden on health systems, especially in underserved communities.

Exclusion of informal workers worsens inequality:

The lack of legal recognition and protection for informal waste workers marginalizes a crucial labor force, missing an opportunity for inclusive, job-creating solutions in the green economy.

Public engagement is essential:

Without community participation and behavior change, top-down interventions will have limited success. Public education and incentives for household-level waste segregation are key to long-term success.

These implications reinforce the need for urgent, systemic, and inclusive reform in urban solid waste governance in Amhara Regional State.

 6. Policy alternatives and evaluation

Urban solid waste management (USWM) in the Amhara Region suffers from systemic inefficiencies rooted in institutional fragmentation, underdeveloped infrastructure, and the persistent exclusion of informal waste actors. While Ethiopia’s national frameworks such as Proclamation No. 513/2007 and the Climate Resilient Green Economy (CRGE) strategy provide high-level direction, implementation at the regional and municipal levels remains weak and inconsistent. To resolve these challenges and promote inclusive, efficient, and sustainable waste governance, this brief evaluates three viable policy alternatives and recommends a combined pathway that balances ambition with feasibility.

Option 1: Incremental strengthening of current municipal waste management systems

This option focuses on improving the performance of existing municipal systems without major legal or structural reforms. It calls for modest increases in budget allocation, standardization of enforcement, and use of digital planning tools such as GIS to enhance waste collection, monitoring, and public health risk mapping.

Concrete actions:

Increase annual municipal budgets for waste services.

Revise and harmonize local sanitation and waste bylaws.

Integrate digital waste tracking and GIS for real-time data monitoring.

Merits:

Builds upon existing institutional knowledge and operational structures.

Requires limited legal reform, enabling faster adoption.

Politically palatable, with minimal institutional disruption.

Demerits:

Offers only incremental improvements; unlikely to transform service equity or efficiency.

Retains existing exclusion of informal waste workers.

Remains vulnerable to political turnover and unstable funding flows.

Implications:

If adopted alone, this option risks prolonging inefficiencies, as it fails to address core governance issues. Improvements may be visible in service coverage but will likely remain unsustained and inequitable.

Option 2: Formal integration of the informal waste sector into urban waste systems (Preferred option)

This option prioritizes the legal and operational inclusion of informal waste actors particularly women and youth within formal municipal systems. By formally recognizing these actors through legal amendments, cooperative models, and public-private-community partnerships, municipalities can unlock grassroots innovation and inclusive employment while expanding recycling and reducing landfill pressure.

Concrete actions:

Amend municipal bylaws to legally recognize informal waste actors.

Establish training, protective equipment provision, and microfinance access.

Support the formation of cooperatives or social enterprises for collection and recycling.

Build inclusive partnerships with NGOs and private firms to scale innovations.

Merits:

Enhances environmental outcomes through expanded waste recovery and recycling.

Creates green, dignified jobs, especially for marginalized urban populations.

Attracts donor and climate financing aligned with SDG and CRGE targets.

Demerits:

Demands sustained inter-agency coordination and capacity-building.

May face resistance from formal operators or unions fearing competition.

Requires upfront investments in systems, training, and behavior change campaigns.

Implications:

If implemented, this strategy can fundamentally shift waste governance toward inclusive sustainability. The environmental, economic, and social dividends particularly job creation and emissions reductions justify the upfront costs and coordination efforts.

Option 3: Establishment of a unified legal urban waste coordination authority

This bold institutional reform proposes the creation of a single, legally mandated coordinating body such as a Regional Waste Management Authority responsible for consolidating the fragmented mandates of health, environmental, and municipal institutions. The authority would oversee urban waste policy, planning, enforcement, and inter-agency collaboration.

Concrete actions:

Draft and enact regional legislation mandating the new authority’s formation.

Redefine institutional roles to avoid jurisdictional overlaps.

Develop integrated data platforms and M&E systems across departments.

Establish vertical policy linkages between federal, regional, and municipal levels.

Merits:

Resolves mandate confusion and institutional rivalries.

Strengthens enforcement, monitoring, and budget accountability.

Improves coordination between planning, health, and environmental functions.

Demerits:

Requires high-level political commitment and legal reform.

Could trigger resistance from departments facing reduced influence.

Needs strong change management and transition planning.

Implications:

Adopting this option would lay the foundation for systemic reform, improving governance efficiency and service integration. If unaccompanied by inclusive engagement (e.g., informal actor integration), however, it may fall short of social equity goals.

6.1 Synthesis and strategic recommendation

While each option presents distinct advantages, they also carry trade-offs in terms of feasibility, cost, and inclusivity. Option 1 provides low-hanging administrative improvements but fails to tackle the root causes of dysfunction. Option 3 delivers institutional clarity but may take years to fully implement. Option 2, however, strikes a compelling balance by targeting environmental, economic and social objectives simultaneously making it the most transformative and inclusive path forward. Comparative analysis of these three alternative policies is given in Table 3.

Comparative analysis of policy options (Policy option matrix).
Criteria Option 1: Incremental Municipal strengthening Option 2: Integrate informal sector (Preferred) Option 3: Establish unified legal coordinating body
Clarity of Focus Strengthens existing municipal services Legally recognizes and integrates informal workers Centralizes mandate to overcome fragmentation
Measurability Improved collection efficiency, minor bylaw updates Trackable through formalization rates, recycling output Efficiency gains via unified enforcement metrics
Feasibility Highly feasible using current capacities Moderately feasible with training and stakeholder input Moderate feasibility due to required legal reform
Relevance to Problem Addresses municipal inefficiency, not system gaps Targets core equity, sustainability, and inclusion Directly addresses institutional fragmentation
Timeframe Short-term (1–2 years) Medium-term (2–3 years with phased scaling) Medium to long-term (3–5 years; requires legislation)
Advantages Politically safe; cost-effective improvements High impact; socially inclusive; aligns with SDGs Improves coordination, enforcement, and accountability
Drawbacks Limited impact; doesn’t fix systemic governance Potential resistance; needs capacity-building Complex to implement; bureaucratic resistance possible
Readiness to Implement Immediate requires minor procedural changes Preparatory work needed (legal, pilot models, training) Legislative drafting, clear mandate, interagency buy-in
Recommendation Supportive but insufficient on its own Primary vehicle for inclusive reform Essential structural reform to sustain long-term gains

Therefore, this brief proposes a hybrid strategy that:

Formally integrates informal waste actors (Option 2)—as a near-term intervention to enhance equity, reduce landfill loads, and unlock climate-linked financing.

Establishes a unified waste governance body (Option 3)—as a medium-term reform to harmonize mandates, coordinate enforcement, and consolidate fragmented institutions.

6.2 Barriers to implementation and strategic responses

Effective implementation of inclusive and sustainable urban waste management policies in the Amhara region faces several structural, legal, financial, and behavioral obstacles. These challenges, if left unaddressed, risk undermining the transformative potential of proposed reforms. Table 4 below summarizes the most critical implementation barriers alongside tailored strategic responses designed to mitigate risks, enhance institutional coherence, mobilize resources, and foster public participation. The proposed responses are actionable, locally adaptable, and aligned with long-term urban development and climate resilience goals.

Summarizes of key barriers to implementation and strategic responses.
Barrier Strategic response
Institutional fragmentation Enact regional proclamation to mandate a unified authority
Legal ambiguity for informal actors Amend municipal laws to codify recognition and regulation
Resistance from vested interests Implement change management programs and transitional planning
Budget constraints Leverage blended finance, carbon markets, and performance-based grants
Low public engagement Launch community education campaigns and school-based programs
Data gaps Build municipal GIS-based monitoring and evaluation platforms
6.3 Implications and call to action

If fragmentation and informal sector exclusion persist, Amhara’s cities will face rising waste, health crises, and governance failures that threaten national goals. A coordinated system empowering local actors can create cleaner cities, green jobs, and better spending. Without reform, urban health will worsen, inequality will deepen, and investor confidence will decline.

 6.4 Actionable recommendations

Here are actionable recommendations based on the key findings of the policy brief:

Strengthen legal and regulatory frameworks

Develop and enforce updated local bylaws aligned with national solid waste policies to provide clear operational guidelines and accountability mechanisms.

Enhance institutional coordination

Establish inter-agency coordination bodies to harmonize mandates across municipal, health, and environmental sectors, improving regulatory oversight and service efficiency.

Build technical capacity

Recruit and train more environmental engineers and health inspectors to meet international standards and support effective waste management operations.

Increase budgetary allocation

Allocate at least 10% of municipal budgets to waste management to expand services, upgrade infrastructure, and sustain operational needs.

Implement data-driven planning

Introduce real-time waste monitoring systems and data management tools to support evidence-based decision-making and continuous performance evaluation.

Mitigate public health risks

Prioritize safe waste disposal practices and infrastructure improvements to reduce disease outbreaks and environmental contamination.

Integrate informal waste sector

Formally recognize and support informal waste workers by providing legal protection, access to PPE, training, and inclusion in municipal waste plans.

Promote community engagement and behavior change

Launch sustained public education campaigns and incentivize household waste separation to enhance community ownership and participation in waste management.

These recommendations aim to close policy gaps, improve governance, and foster inclusive, sustainable solid waste management in Amhara’s urban centers.

 7. Conclusion

Amhara’s growing urban waste crisis demands bold, integrated reform. Incremental improvements alone are insufficient formal integration of informal waste workers and establishment of a unified legal authority offer the most impactful path forward. This dual-track approach fosters institutional coherence, social equity, and alignment with Ethiopia’s green growth goals, unlocking climate finance and green job opportunities. Without urgent action, fragmented services and urban inequalities will worsen. Now is the moment for policymakers to adopt inclusive, coordinated waste strategies that ensure healthier, more resilient cities for all.

 Data availability

No data associated with this article.

 References Manderso TM : Overview of existing wastewater management system in case of Debre Markos Town, Ethiopia. Engineering Mathematics. 2018;2(2):107. 10.1080/23311843.2018.1471025 Kassie KE : The problem of solid waste management and people awareness on appropriate solid waste disposal in Bahir Dar City: Amhara region, Ethiopia. ISABB Journal of Health and Environmental Sciences. 2016;2025(1):1–8. 40124195 10.1155/tswj/8504268 PMC11930384 Dagnaw B Wang Q Mariye M : Challenges and Practices of Integrated Solid Waste Management: Insights from Debre Berhan Reogiopolitant City, Ethiopia. Asian Journal of Environment & Ecology. 2025;24(3):12–30. 10.9734/ajee/2025/v24i3667 Reference Source World Bank: Extending operational support for waste management and delivery to cities in Ethiopia. 2021, June 8. Reference Source African Association of Entrepreneurs: Solid waste management and recycling in Ethiopia. 2022. Reference Source Genati G Ahmednur M Berihun G : Assessment of household solid waste management practice and associated factors in Debre Berhan Town, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia. International Journal of Waste Resources. 2021;11(4):416. Reference Source UNIDO: Solid Waste Management Strategy for Amhara Regional State. United Nations Industrial Development Organization;2021. Reference Source Wegedie TK : Households solid waste generation and management behavior in case of Bahir Dar City, Amhara National Regional State, Ethiopia. Cogent Environmental Science. 2018;4(1):1471025. 10.1080/23311843.2018.1471025 Sitotaw B Ayalew F Girma A : High prevalence of antibiotic resistance bacteria isolated from Bahir Dar City municipal solid waste dumpsite, North West Ethiopia. Environmental Health Insights. 2024;18:11786302241260508. 38859927 10.1177/11786302241260508 PMC11163931 Sisay T Teku D Abebaw E : Solid waste disposal site selection using GIS and the Analytic Hierarchy Process model: a case study conducted in Gimba Town, Northeastern Ethiopia. Frontiers in Sustainability. 2025;6:1528851. 10.3389/frsus.2025.1528851 Gebrekidan TK Weldemariam NG Hidru HD : Impact of improper municipal solid waste management on fostering One Health approach in Ethiopia—challenges and opportunities: a systematic review. Science in One Health. 2024;3:100081. 39525943 10.1016/j.soh.2024.100081 PMC11546791 Gebrekidan TK Gebremedhin GG Weldemariam AK : Municipal solid waste management in Ethiopia–physical and chemical compositions and generation rate: systematic review. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2024;74(12):861–883. 39441882 10.1080/10962247.2024.2416588 Birkie A Addisu S Mekuriaw A : Solid waste management practice and dumpsite suitability analysis using GIS technology in Debre Markos town, Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Science and Technology. 2020;13(2):1–12. 10.4314/ejst.v13i2.1 Debre Birhan Municipality: Urban sustainability review of Debre Berhan 2020: Thematic area: Solid waste management. 2020. Reference Source Amhara Regional Urban Development Bureau (ARUDB): Urban waste management assessment report. Amhara Regional Government;2023. Reference Source Amhara Environmental Protection Authority (AEPA): Annual environmental performance report. Amhara Regional Government;2024. Reference Source Haile D Gabbiye N : Groundwater quality assessment of Chilanchil Abay watershed: the case of Bahir-Dar City waste disposal site. Advances of Science and Technology: 8th EAI International Conference, ICAST 2020, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, October 2-4, 2020, Proceedings, Part I 8. Springer International Publishing;2021; pp.36–58. Ethiopia Health Cluster: Amhara Health Cluster Bulletin – Issue No. 1 : World Health Organization. 2022 Feb 28. https://reliefweb.int/report/ethiopia/amhara-health-cluster-bulletin-1-february-2022 Asmamaw M Debie E : Characterizing groundwater quality for a safe supply of water using WQI and GIS in Bahir Dar city, northwest Ethiopia. Water Practice & Technology. 2023;18(4):859–883. 10.2166/wpt.2023.046 WSP & Zereu Girmay Environment Consultancy: Waste Management Plan – Amhara IAIP & RTC. African Development Bank;2017. Reference Source Bayu EK : Gender and urban solid waste management: An investigation of the challenges and coping mechanisms of women’s in municipal solid waste management practices in Gondar city administration, Amhara Region of Ethiopia. Environmental Science: Current Research. 2023;6(1):1–14. 10.24966/ESCR-5020/100039 Gondo T : A hierarchical cluster-based segmentation analysis of potential solid waste management health hazards in urban Ethiopia. Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies. 2019;11(2):Article 716. 31308893 10.4102/jamba.v11i2.716 PMC6620491 Misganaw A Teffera B : Development of DPSIRO framework indicators for municipal solid waste management: A case of Bahir Dar city, Ethiopia. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2021;23(6):2101–2111. 10.1007/s10163-021-01266-9 Kebede A Derbew G Seyoum G : Efficiency of municipal solid waste management service delivery system and policy issues in debre markos town, north western ethiopia. Journal of Environment and Waste Management. 2019;6(2):298–305. Reference Source Sharma HR Abebe T Admassu M : Municipal Solid Waste Management and community awareness and involvement in management practices: an overview and a case study from Gondar town of Ethiopia. Int. J. Environ. Waste Manag. 2011;7(3-4):294–304. 10.1504/IJEWM.2011.039470 Reference Source Amhara Bureau of Labor and Social Affairs : Waste management and occupational health safety assessment in urban settlements (Unpublished internal report). 2022; Ethiopia: Amhara Regional State. Eskezia D Aderaw Z Ahmed KY : Prevalence and associated factors of occupational injuries among municipal solid waste collectors in four zones of Amhara Region, Northwest Ethiopia. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:862. 27554260 10.1186/s12889-016-3483-1 PMC4995673 UN Habitat : Waste Wise Cities Tool: Step by step guide to assessing municipal solid waste management performance (SDG 11.6.1). United Nations Human Settlements Programme. 2021. https://unhabitat.org/waste-wise-data Wilson DC Velis C Cheeseman C : Role of informal sector recycling in waste management in developing countries. Habitat Int. 2012;30(4):797–808. 10.1016/j.habitatint.2005.09.005 Ethiopian Ministry of Urban Development and Construction: Annual urban sanitation report. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia:2019. United Nations Environment Programme : Africa Waste Management Outlook. 2018; Nairobi, Kenya: UNEP. https://www.unep.org/ietc/resources/publication/africa-waste-management-outlook World Bank: Second Ethiopia urban water supply and sanitation project. n.d. Reference Source Birara E Kassahun T : Assessment of solid waste management practices in Bahir Dar City, Ethiopia. Pollution. 2018;4(2):251–261. Barklign G Gashu K : Nexus between perceptions of urban environmental planning and solid waste management practices in Debre Markos Town, Amhara Region, Northwest Ethiopia. Afr. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Dev. 2021;14(5):1288–1300. 10.1080/20421338.2021.1950109 Ethiopian Urban Development Policy: Ministry of Urban Development, Housing and Construction, Ethiopia. 2020. Beyene E Adam AG Minale AS : Examining the practice of urban governance using UN-Habitat urban governance index in Gondar city, North West Ethiopia. Cogent Social Sciences. 2023;9(1):2208934. 10.1080/23311886.2023.2208934 10.5256/f1000research.183780.r414791 Reviewer response for version 1 Marousek Josef 1 Referee https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5175-1961 Institute of Technology and Business, České Budějovice, Czech Republic

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

 19 9 2025 Copyright: © 2025 Marousek J 2025 This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. recommendation reject

Dear author(s),

kindly adapt the manuscript for global audience (please understand that the vast majority of international readership never heard of "Amhara"; do not mention any locations; do not refer to any "national" legislations or strategies; higher level of generalization is needed) and resubmit. Make sure the research hypothesis is urgent and significant from global perspective.

Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader?

No

Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

No

Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments?

No

Reviewer Expertise:

waste management; sustainability; circular economy

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.