Understanding Customers’ Satisfaction with Solid Waste Management Services in Morogoro Municipal Council, Tanzania

Abstract

The study aimed to understand the customers’ satisfaction with solid waste management services in Morogoro Municipal Council, Tanzania. The cross-sectional research design was used to collect data at a single point in time. The study used a mixed-method research approach to ensure both quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently. The study employed the simple random sampling technique to obtain 388 respondents for the household questionnaire survey method. The purposive sampling technique was used to get 12 key informants for in-depth interviews and 16 participants for the Focus Group Discussions. The quantitative data were analysed by descriptive statistics and inferential statistics, whereas the qualitative data were analysed by content analysis. The results show that the majority of both males (95%) and females (96%) respondents generated food waste, followed by plastic waste. Other solid wastes generated were paper and cardboard, glass materials, metal, textile, and e-waste. Also, most of the respondents (48%) reported that solid waste was collected from their households through roadside collection. Other methods were the door-to-door collection, informal waste collectors, and the communal collection points. The results further show that customers had higher satisfaction with solid waste management services in two aspects. Specifically, respondents were satisfied that solid waste collection service is available in their area (M = 3.11, σ = 1.40) and the collection vehicles and equipment are suitable (M = 3. 21, σ = 1.33). On the other side, they had low satisfaction with solid waste management services in the following aspects: Solid waste collection points are easily accessible (M = 2.93, σ = 1.32), waste collection is done regularly as scheduled (M = 2.79, σ = 1.48), waste is handled in a hygienic manner (M = 2.43, σ = 1.26), service interruptions are minimal (M = 2.71, σ = 1.19), service providers respond quickly to complaints (M = 2.76, σ = 1.13), and waste collection fee is affordable (M = 2.51, σ = 1.30). Additionally, the results from ordinal logistic regression model show that the collection schedules (B = -.619, p = .002, Exp (B) = 0.538, 95% CI: 0.364 - 0.797), coverage of services (B = -.425, p = .027, Exp (B) = 0.654, 95% CI: 0.449 - 0.953), cost of service (B = -.422, p = .033, Exp (B) = 0.656, 95% CI: 0.445–0.967), quality of equipment and vehicles (B = -.441, p = .027, Exp (B) = 0.643, 95% CI: 0.436–0.951), and response to complaints (B = -.390, p = .048, Exp (B) = 0.677, 95% CI: 0.460–0.997), had a statistically significant negative influence on households’ satisfaction with solid waste management services. These findings implied that the collection schedules that was not followed, partial coverage service, unaffordable service, poor quality of equipment and vehicles, and the delayed response to complaints were less likely to influence higher customer satisfaction compared to the followed schedules, full coverage service, affordable service, good quality of equipment and vehicles, and timely response to complaints. The study recommends that service providers and responsible authorities should improve the collection schedules, ensure full coverage of service, improve affordability of services, enhance complaint handling systems, and upgrade transport infrastructure to promote accessibility to all customers.