SUSTAINABILITY FINANCING AND INVESTMENT IN INTEGRATED WASTE 

MANAGEMENT: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY IN GHANA 

 

 

By   

Daniel Agyapong 

 

    

 

Doctoral thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Doctor 

of Philosophy  

The Graduate School of Business Administration  

University of the Witwatersrand  

 

Supervisor: Dr George Tweneboah 

 

 

 

 

© Daniel Agyapong, January 2023



 

ii  

  

ABSTRACT 

The transition to a circular economy has been a major global developmental agenda, as reflected 

in the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (Agenda 2030). In line with this, Ghana has adopted the 

practice of integrating circularity into its development objectives to promote sustainability, 

particularly in the waste management sector, which has gained attention for its potential in efficient 

resource mobilization and access to secondary raw materials. However, despite policymakers 

integrating sustainability into the development framework, financing and investments in circular 

economy activities remain underexplored. Adequate financing and investments can transform 

waste streams into profitable projects and useful goods, such as recycling waste into secondary 

raw resources for further processing, recovering valuable resources like energy and precious 

metals, or converting waste into fuel or electricity through biological or thermal treatment.   

The study examined sustainability financing and investment and implications for sustainable 

development in Ghana. The overarching aim of the thesis is to investigate the factors influencing 

circular economy financing and investment, the impact of such financing on circular economy 

practices, and the broader implications for the waste management sector in Ghana. The study is 

structured into three self-contained empirical chapters, each addressing specific objectives through 

distinct analyses. Chapter Three examined the determinants of circular economy financing and 

investment supply, emphasizing the moderating role of the financial environment. Chapter 

Four assessed the effect of circular economy finance and investment supply on the adoption of 

circular economy practices in the waste management sector. Chapter Five examined the 

implications of circular economy practices on the performance of firms in the integrated waste 

sector.  



 

iii  

  

The study used a cross-sectional design and a quantitative research method. The target populations 

were the owner/managers of integrated waste management firms in the Environmental Service 

Providers Association of Ghana (ESPA) database. In all, there were 7,190 registered members of 

ESPA spread across the sixteen regions (16) of Ghana.  A total of 524 firms participated in the 

survey. The data was collected using a closed-ended questionnaire consisting of a seven-point 

Likert-like scale. The analytical techniques were PLS-SEM, necessary condition analysis and 

partial correlation. 

The results for Chapter Three revealed financial readiness and investment preparedness influence 

circular economy finance and investment supply. The country-level financial environment 

enhances the relationship between financial readiness, circular economy financing, and investment 

supply. Moreover, the country-level financial environment enhances the relationship between 

investment preparedness and circular economy finance and investment supply. Results for Chapter 

Four indicated that business environment, investment and finance are precursors of circular 

economy practices among waste management organisations. The result for Chapter Four also 

revealed that adequate and right investment supply, finance, and the appropriate business 

environment are necessary determinants for circular economy practices. The outcome of Chapter 

Five showed that waste recovery and upcycling positively and significantly affect firm 

performance in terms of economic, social, environmental, and governance. The results from the 

partial correlation network provide further insight into the nature of relationships among the 

circular economy practices and the associated drivers. The network diagram showed the 

importance of waste recovery, an important element in the waste hierarchy that significantly 

affects environmental performance. The network analysis shows waste recovery as a core activity 

because it is fundamental to subsequent circular economy practices such as upcycling.  



 

iv  

  

It was recommended that waste management firms develop a solid alliance with financial 

institutions and green funding organisations in addition to formalising corporate processes. Also, 

incentives like tax breaks or subsidised taxes could be provided by policymakers to investors and 

waste management owners who adopt sustainable development or circular economy practices.  

 

 

Keywords: Circular Economy Finance and Investment Supply, Financial Environment, Financial 

Readiness, Investment Preparedness 

 

 

JEL Classification: E22, F64, F65, G21, G23, L25, L26, O16, Q53, Q560 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

v  

  

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS AND RESEARCH OUTPUT 

Before submission, portions of the thesis were published in peer-reviewed journals. 

Agyapong, D., & Tweneboah, G. (2023). The antecedents of circular economy financing and 

investment supply: The role of financial environment. Cleaner Environmental Systems, 8, 100103. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

vi  

  

DECLARATION  

Candidate’s Declaration  

I hereby declare that this thesis is the result of my original research and that no part of it has been 

presented for another degree at this University or elsewhere.  

  

  

  26 February 2023  

Candidate’s Signature………………………Date………………………………….    

  

Name: Daniel Agyapong  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

vii  

  

DEDICATION 

To my wife, Gloria Agyapong and children, Solidad Aseda Agyapong, Jaiden Ayeyi Agyapong, 

and Annaya Aboagyewa Adom Agyapong. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 



 

viii  

  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

 I would like to sincerely thank everyone who contributed to the success of my doctoral study. My 

deepest gratitude goes to Dr. George Tweneboah of Wits Business School (Graduate School of 

Business Administration), who graciously consented to serve as my thesis supervisor. His 

guidance, insights, and unwavering support have been invaluable throughout this journey. 

I want to express my profound gratitude to my friend and lecturer, Dr. Daniel Ofori, from the 

University of Cape Coast, for his continuous support. His encouragement and assistance have 

been essential in keeping me motivated and focused. I also want to acknowledge all the faculty 

members of Wits Business School for their incredible support and mentorship. I would like to 

thank Prof. Jones Odei Mensah for his encouragement and academic guidance. Prof. Eric 

Schaling, PhD/Research Director, deserves special thanks for his strategic insights and advice 

which significantly shaped my research direction. Prof. Odongo Kodongo provided critical 

feedback that refined my work, and I am deeply grateful for his contributions. 

Mrs. Mmabatho Leeuw, the PhD/MMR Coordinator, offered invaluable administrative support 

and ensured that the academic process went smoothly. Jennifer Mgolodela and Owen Naicker 

have been tremendously helpful with their administrative assistance and encouragement. I also 

extend my gratitude to Veli Mongwe, whose assistance has been invaluable in navigating the 

administrative and academic requirements. The insightful feedback and suggestions from the three 

examiners have greatly enhanced the quality of my research. 

Finally, I want to thank all my PhD colleagues and cohorts at Wits Business School. Their 

camaraderie, support, and shared experiences have made this journey enriching and memorable. 

Their feedback and encouragement have been a constant source of motivation. To everyone who 



 

ix  

  

contributed to my doctoral study, I am deeply grateful for your support, mentorship, and 

friendship. Your contributions have been instrumental in the successful completion of this work 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

x  

  

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................ ii 

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS AND RESEARCH OUTPUT ..................................................... v 

DECLARATION .................................................................................................................... vi 

DEDICATION ...................................................................................................................... vii 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................. viii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................ x 

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. xvii 

TABLE OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... xviii 

CHAPTER ONE ..................................................................................................................... 1 

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 

1.1  Background to the Study ............................................................................................. 1 

1.2  Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................ 3 

1.3  Motivation ................................................................................................................... 8 

1.4  Research Objectives .................................................................................................. 13 

1.5  Research Questions ................................................................................................... 13 

1.6  Contributions of the Study ........................................................................................ 13 

1.7  Limitations of Thesis ................................................................................................. 15 

1.8  Organisation of the Thesis ......................................................................................... 15 

1.9  Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................... 15 



 

xi  

  

CHAPTER TWO .................................................................................................................. 17 

LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................... 17 

2.1  Introduction ............................................................................................................... 17 

2.2  Conceptual Review .................................................................................................... 18 

2.2.1  Integrated Waste Management Sector in Ghana ...................................................... 18 

2.2.2  Waste Contributors in Ghana .................................................................................... 19 

2.2.3  Composition of Waste in Ghana ................................................................................ 21 

2.2.3.1 Plastics ...................................................................................................................... 23 

2.2.3.2 Electronic Waste ........................................................................................................ 25 

2.2.3.3 Organic Waste ........................................................................................................... 26 

2.2.4 Waste Management in Ghana .................................................................................... 27 

2.2.4.1 Urban Waste Management ........................................................................................ 28 

2.2.5 Characteristics of Waste Management Firms in Ghana ........................................... 30 

2.2.6 Financing of Waste Management .............................................................................. 32 

2.2.7 Recycling of Waste ..................................................................................................... 33 

2.2.8 Investment preparedness and financial readiness ..................................................... 35 

2.2.9 Circular economy practices ...................................................................................... 37 

2.2.10 Circular economy finance and investment supply ..................................................... 40 

2.2.11 Financial environments ............................................................................................. 44 

2.3  Theoretical Review .................................................................................................... 47 



 

xii  

  

2.3.1 Ecological Finance Theory ....................................................................................... 47 

2.3.2 The Natural Resource-Based Theory ........................................................................ 48 

2.3.3 The Corporate Sustainability Principle .................................................................... 50 

2.3.4 The Stakeholder Theory ............................................................................................. 51 

2.3.5 Summary of the Theoretical Review .......................................................................... 53 

2.4 Empirical Review ...................................................................................................... 56 

2.4.1 The Antecedents of Circular Economy Finance and Investment Supply ................... 56 

2.4.2 Precursors of Circular Economy Practices ............................................................... 59 

2.4.3 Implications of Circular Economy Practices of Firms in the Integrated Waste 

Management Sector ................................................................................................... 63 

2.5 Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................. 65 

2.5.1 Conceptual framework for antecedents of circular economy finance and investment 

supply ......................................................................................................................... 66 

2.5.2 Conceptual framework for precursors of circular economy practices ...................... 67 

2.5.3 Conceptual framework for implications of circular economy for waste management 

firms ........................................................................................................................... 68 

2.6 Gaps in the Existing Literature .................................................................................. 69 

2.7 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................... 70 

CHAPTER THREE ............................................................................................................... 71 

ANTECEDENTS OF CIRCULAR ECONOMY FINANCE AND ...................................... 71 



 

xiii  

  

INVESTMENT SUPPLY: THE ROLE OF FINANCIAL ENVIRONMENT ...................... 71 

3.1  Introduction ............................................................................................................... 71 

3.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................. 74 

3.2.1 Data and Methods ..................................................................................................... 74 

3.2.2 Sampling Procedure .................................................................................................. 75 

3.2.3 Analytical Procedure ................................................................................................. 76 

3.3 Results ....................................................................................................................... 77 

3.3.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Firms .......................................................... 78 

3.3.2 Hypotheses Tested ..................................................................................................... 79 

3.3.3 Assessment of Measurement Model ........................................................................... 80 

3.3.4 Test of Convergent and Discriminant Validity ........................................................... 86 

3.3.5 Collinearity Diagnostics ............................................................................................ 89 

3.3.6 Financial readiness, investment preparedness and circular economy finance and 

investment supply ...................................................................................................... 89 

3.3.6 Financial Environment, Financial Readiness and Circular Economy Finance and 

Investment Supply ...................................................................................................... 90 

3.3.7 Financial environment, investment preparedness and circular economy finance and 

investment supply ...................................................................................................... 93 

3.4 Discussions ................................................................................................................ 95 

3.5 Chapter Summary .................................................................................................... 100 



 

xiv  

  

CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................... 101 

PRECURSORS OF CIRCULAR ECONOMY PRACTICES ............................................ 101 

4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 101 

4.2 Empirical Methodology ........................................................................................... 103 

4.2.1 Data and Methods ................................................................................................... 103 

4.2.2 Sampling Procedure ................................................................................................ 104 

4.2.3 Analytical Procedure ............................................................................................... 106 

4.3 Empirical Results .................................................................................................... 106 

4.3.1 Hypotheses Tested ................................................................................................... 107 

4.3.2 Measurement Model Assessment ............................................................................. 107 

4.3.3 Assessment of the Structural Model ......................................................................... 111 

4.3.4 Collinearity Diagnostics ...........................................................................................112 

4.3.5 Significance Test of Hypothesised Paths ..................................................................112 

4.3.6 PLS Predict ...............................................................................................................114 

4.3.7 Necessary Condition Analysis ..................................................................................116 

4.4 Discussions ...............................................................................................................117 

4.5 Chapter Summary .....................................................................................................119 

CHAPTER FIVE ................................................................................................................. 120 

IMPLICATIONS OF CIRCULAR ECONOMY PRACTICES FOR FIRMS IN THE 

INTEGRATED WASTE SECTOR .......................................................................... 120 



 

xv  

  

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 120 

5.2 Empirical Methodology ........................................................................................... 122 

5.2.1 Data and Methods ................................................................................................... 122 

5.2.2 Sampling Procedure ................................................................................................ 123 

5.2.3 Operationalisation of Variables .............................................................................. 123 

5.2.4 Analytical Procedures ............................................................................................. 124 

5.4 Results and Discussions .......................................................................................... 126 

5.4.1 Assessment of Measurement Model ......................................................................... 126 

5.4.2 Test for Convergent and Discriminant Validity ....................................................... 131 

5.4.3 Assessment of the Structural Model ........................................................................ 133 

5.4.4 Partial Correlation .................................................................................................. 143 

5.5 Discussions .............................................................................................................. 147 

5.6 Conclusions and policy prescriptions ...................................................................... 149 

5.7 Chapter Summary .................................................................................................... 151 

CHAPTER SIX ................................................................................................................... 152 

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................... 152 

6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 152 

6.2 Summary of Key Findings ...................................................................................... 152 

6.2.1 Antecedents of circular economy financing and investments supply: the moderating 

role of the financial environment ............................................................................. 152 



 

xvi  

  

6.2.2 Precursors of circular economy practices in the waste management sector .......... 154 

6.2.3 Implications of circular economy practices of firms in the integrated waste sector156 

6.3 Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 156 

6.3.1 Antecedents of circular economy financing and investments supply: the moderating 

role of the financial environment ............................................................................. 156 

6.3.2 Precursors of circular economy practices in the waste management sector .......... 158 

6.3.3 Implications of circular economy practices of firms in the integrated waste sector159 

6.4  Recommendations for Policy and Practice .............................................................. 161 

6.4.1  Antecedents of circular economy financing and investments supply: the moderating 

role of the financial environment ............................................................................. 161 

6.4.2 Precursors of circular economy practices in the waste management sector ............. 162 

6.4.3 Implications of circular economy practices of firms in the integrated waste sector . 164 

6.5 Suggestions for Further Research ............................................................................ 165 

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 167 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

xvii  

  

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 3.1. Measurement of Variables ............................................................................................ 77 

Table 3.2. Reliability and Validity Assessment ............................................................................. 81 

Table 4.1 Measurement of Variables ........................................................................................... 105 

Table 4.2 Reliability and Validity Tests....................................................................................... 108 

Table 4.3. Fornel-Larcker ............................................................................................................ 109 

Table 4.4. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)..........................................................................110 

Table 4.5. Coefficients .................................................................................................................114 

Table 4.6. PLS Predict ..................................................................................................................115 

Table 4.7. NCA Effect Sizes for Circular Economy Practices .....................................................117 

Table 4.8. Bottleneck....................................................................................................................115 

Table 5.1. Measurement of Variables .......................................................................................... 124 

Table 5.2. Reliability and Validity Assessment ........................................................................... 127 

Table 5.3. Report the explanatory power indices: R square, F square ........................................ 135 

Table 5.4. Coefficients ................................................................................................................ 136 

 

  

  

  

  

   



 

xviii  

  

TABLE OF FIGURES 

Figure 2.1. Integrated Waste Management Organisations ............................................................ 31 

Figure 2.2. Conceptual framework for antecedents of circular economy finance and investment 

supply ............................................................................................................................................ 66 

Figure 2.3. Conceptual framework for precursors of circular economy finance and investment 

supply ............................................................................................................................................ 67 

Figure 2.4. Conceptual framework for implications of circular economy for waste management 

firms .............................................................................................................................................. 68 

Figure 3.1. Structural Model ......................................................................................................... 90 

Figure 3.2. Structural Model ......................................................................................................... 91 

Figure 3.3. Structural Model ......................................................................................................... 94 

Figure 4.1. Structural model ........................................................................................................ 111 

Figure 4.2. Scatter Plot .................................................................................................................114 

Figure 5.1. Structural Model ....................................................................................................... 134 

Figure 5.2 Estimated network structure ...................................................................................... 144 

Figure 5.3. Centrality indices ...................................................................................................... 144 

Figure 5.4. Bootstrapped confidence intervals of estimated edge weights for the estimated network

..................................................................................................................................................... 146 

Figure 7.1. Financial readiness and country-level environment ................................................. 204 

Figure 7.2. Financial readiness and firm-level environment ...................................................... 204 

Figure 7.3. Financial readiness and international-level environment ......................................... 205 

Figure 7.4. Investment preparedness and country-level environment ........................................ 205 

Figure 7.5. Investment preparedness and firm-level environment .............................................. 206 

 



 

xix  

  

 TABLE OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

ABBREVIATION MEANING 

AU African Union  

AVE Average Variable Extraction 

BFR Brominated Flame Retardants 

CSIR Centre for Scientific and Industrial Research 

CFCs Chlorofluorocarbons 

CE Circular Economy 

CFA Confirmatory Factor Analyses 

CSR Corporate Social Responsibility 

EEE Electrical and Electronic Equipment 

EPA Environmental Protection Act 

ESPA Environmental Service Providers Association 

GTZ German Agency for Technical Cooperation 

GCF Green Climate Fund 

HTMT Heterotrait-Monotrait Correlation Ratio 

HCFCs Hydrochlorofluorocarbons 

IDCs International Development Corporations 

MMDAs Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies 

NPAP National Plastic Alliance Partnership 

NCA Necessary Condition Analyses 

PLS-SEM Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modelling 

SCP Sustainable Consumption, and Production 

SDGs Sustainable Development Goals 

RBV Resource-Based View 

ZL Zoomlion Ghana Limited 

 

 





 

1 

 

CHAPTER ONE 

INTRODUCTION 

1.1  Background to the Study  

The United Nations issued a call to action in 2015 by establishing the seventeen Sustainable 

Development Goals (SDGs), often known as the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable 

Development. Some of the goals included developing actions to control natural resource depletion 

and the potential climate change consequences without complicating the resource demands of 

future generations. Regional and national agendas for sustainable development were triggered and 

set in motion by the United Nations Agenda 2030. According to the African Union Commission 

(AUC), the African Union’s Agenda 2063 strategy which was introduced in 2015 closely 

resembles the United Nations' Agenda 2030 (AUC, 2015). In Ghana, medium- and long-term 

goals usually reaffirm these international and regional strategies. For instance, about 70% of the 

SDGs and Agenda 2063 are found in Ghana's Medium-Term National Development Policy 

Framework (2014–2021) (National Development Planning Commission, 2021).  

Sustainable environmental management, sustainable consumption and production, and 

environmentally friendly corporate practices are aspects of these goals that are shared at national, 

regional, and international levels. SDGs 6, 11, and 12 collectively call on the global community to 

ensure access to and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. These goals also 

advocate for the creation of inclusive, secure, resilient, and sustainable cities and human 

settlements, as well as the promotion of sustainable consumption and production practices. The 

range of global, regional, and national challenges—including climate change, natural disasters, 

pollution, deforestation, resource shortages, food insecurity, and health risks—caused by 



 

2  

  

economic and resource constraints underscores the urgency of these goals (Terragni, 2014; Kapur, 

2016; World Resource Institute, 2017; Schwartz & Popovich, 2019). 

These issues not only create physical, informational, and mental challenges but also introduce 

significant financial and investment hurdles. All sustainable development initiatives, whether 

national, regional, or international, require substantial funding. Sustainable investment is crucial 

for achieving global goals (Kapur, 2016; World Resource Institute, 2017). According to the 2013 

World Economic Forum Green Investment Report, an additional USD 0.7 trillion annually is 

required to address climate-related challenges in sectors such as forestry, sustainable 

transportation, and renewable energy infrastructure. 

Corporate entities have increasingly identified sustainable practices as a significant avenue for 

generating revenue (Mohanty, 2012). This is further reinforced by the waste-to-resource 

philosophy (Bharati et al., 2018). In this context, a circular economy is described as one in which 

businesses maximize the benefits they derive from resource use through recycling and regeneration 

(Stahel, 2016; Jorgensen & Pedersen, 2018; Agyapong, 2020). Firms' sustainability practices 

encompass their involvement in initiatives such as recycling, remanufacturing, reduction, 

recovery, and reinvestment. 

Sustainable environmental management, consumption, and production, along with 

environmentally friendly corporate practices, are aligned with these goals at all levels. SDGs 6, 

11, and 12 together emphasize the importance of guaranteeing sustainable access to water and 

sanitation while promoting the development of inclusive and sustainable cities and human 

settlements. They also encourage adopting sustainable production and consumption practices to 

tackle critical challenges. Global, regional, and national issues such as climate change, natural 



 

3  

  

disasters, pollution, deforestation, resource shortages, food insecurity, and health risks—largely 

driven by economic and resource pressures—highlight the timeliness of these goals (Terragni, 

2014; Kapur, 2016; World Resource Institute, 2017; Schwartz & Popovich, 2019). 

1.2  Statement of the Problem  

Ghana faces a myriad of sustainability issues that require urgent attention. Climate change 

contributes to the country's global warming, while unsustainable business practices and inadequate 

household waste management contribute to environmental degradation. Additionally, resource 

depletion is significantly driving up the cost of goods and services. According to the Forestry 

Commission (2017), Ghana experienced an annual deforestation rate of 794,214 hectares between 

2013 and 2015. Furthermore, reports indicate that the nation lost 60% of its forest cover between 

1950 and the turn of the century (FAO, 2010; Forestry Commission, 2017). 

 

Illegal surface mining, commonly referred to as galamsey, and logging are significant contributors 

to deforestation in Ghana. Moreover, galamsey activities not only pollute surface and groundwater 

but also reduce soil fertility (Antabe et al., 2017; Aboka, Cobbina & Doke, 2018). As a result of 

this pollution, freshwater sources for domestic and industrial use have become increasingly scarce. 

Additionally, plastic debris now blankets nearly every open area, sewer, and dump site. Studies by 

Kortei and Quansah (2016) and Lambert and Sabutey (2016) indicate that plastic waste constitutes 

a substantial portion of Ghana's total waste. 

 

Furthermore, electronic and electrical waste (e-waste) has recently garnered attention due to its 

severe detrimental effects on both human health and the environment. However, research 

conducted by Mohanty (2012) and Baldé et al. (2014) suggests that effective management of e-



 

4  

  

waste presents significant financial opportunities for society. In urban areas, issues related to food 

and water waste are also prevalent (Attipoe & ZaiGui, 2016). Additionally, challenges such as 

energy consumption and oil waste management further complicate the situation in the country. 

 

The cumulative effects of these challenges—characterized by resource depletion and inadequate 

waste management—result in elevated levels of land, water, and air pollution, which pose serious 

threats to the nation. For instance, Raihan and Tuspekova (2022a) and Batala, Qiao, and Regmi 

(2023) argue that the depletion of forest resources drives climate change and increases 

temperatures. Wulandari, Utomo, and Narmaditya (2017) indicate that waste mismanagement 

adversely impacts public health and wellbeing. Similarly, Taghizadeh-Hesary and Taghizadeh-

Hesary (2020) identify pollution as a major contributor to lung cancer. Waste mismanagement is a 

key source of pollution (Mihai et al., 2021), particularly in developing countries like Ghana. 

 

The waste management crisis in Ghana is exacerbated by small to medium-sized enterprises that 

often lack the technical and financial capacity to address these challenges effectively. The question 

of financing and investment in integrated waste management remains a contentious issue. The eco-

evolution theory (Ehrlich & Raven, 1964) posits that entities—whether living organisms or 

organizations—evolve in tandem with their environments (Baum & Singh, 1994). This concept 

has implications for understanding how human activities impact natural ecosystems and vice versa. 

From the perspective of the green growth hypothesis, current economic growth patterns are 

initially suboptimal due to resource misallocation among various production elements, 

underinvestment in natural resources, and overinvestment in activities that harm the environment 

(Chang et al., 2017). As previously suggested, these ideas emphasize the importance of 



 

5  

  

sustainability awareness but often fall short in addressing how to finance such initiatives or 

develop action plans to resolve these issues. The stakeholder theory closely aligns with the 

principles of green or sustainable funding, as it stresses the necessity of considering the interests 

of all stakeholders, including the environment, in decision-making processes. According to this 

theory, households, corporations, and the government have responsibilities as economic agents to 

consider the well-being of all stakeholders (Freeman et al., 2010). This responsibility encompasses 

efforts and strategies aimed at achieving both financial and ecological sustainability. 

  

Ghana has taken steps to address the challenges of financing and investment in integrated waste 

management, including passing new legislation and amending existing laws to support sustainable 

development. For instance, the Environmental Protection Agency Act of 1994 (Act 490) proposed 

the establishment of the National Environment Fund to promote environmental education, 

research, and capacity building. This initiative was intended to equip individuals to effectively 

manage environmental issues. However, nearly 30 years later, no such fund has been created to 

mobilize the financial resources needed to tackle the country’s environmental challenges. 

 

Ghana also enacted the Hazardous and Electronic Waste Control and Management Act, 2016 (Act 

917) to regulate the control, management, and disposal of hazardous, electrical, and electronic 

waste, among other objectives. A key provision of this law was the establishment of an e-waste 

fund to finance the management of electronic waste and mitigate its harmful effects on human 

health and the environment. However, despite the law being in place, there have been no 

disbursements from the fund to support e-waste management efforts in Ghana. Thes raise questions 

about the sources of financing and investment for waste management, particularly for e-waste. In 



 

6  

  

2020, Ghana developed the National Plastic Management Policy to establish a robust framework 

for managing plastics across their entire life cycle and value chain, aiming to transition the country 

toward a circular economy. However, the financial and investment considerations for 

implementing such initiatives remain largely unanswered. Furthermore, since the launch of the 17 

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015 and the African Union's Agenda 2063, Ghana, 

like many other nations, has worked to integrate and align its national development strategies with 

these global and regional frameworks. 

 

Ghana's Long-Term National Development Plan (2028–2057) aligns the country's five-point long-

term goals with both the SDGs and the AU Agenda 2063. This plan incorporates the seventeen 

sustainable development goals and the twenty goals of Agenda 2063 (National Development 

Planning Commission, 2021). The rationale for adapting and adopting these global and regional 

targets is to synchronize the country's development efforts with broader international goals. 

However, a lack of a sustainable funding and investment plan is evident across government, 

business, and household levels. Investments and financing are often treated as secondary to 

sustainability initiatives, which could hinder the country's ability to fully realize its sustainability 

objectives. 

   

Kortei and Quansah (2016) examined Ghana's plastic waste problem and recommended several 

solutions, including a gradual ban on plastic, the use of biodegradable alternatives, and the 

engineering of genetically modified organisms to break down unwanted plastics. However, like 

many similar studies, this one proposes strategies for managing plastic waste without addressing 

the financial and investment implications. Similarly, Sabutey (2016) argues that Ghana's waste 



 

7  

  

management challenges stem from a lack of public awareness. On the other hand, this author 

suggested that the lack of investment in waste management is primarily due to insufficient 

household income.  

 

Public awareness and interest in waste management can significantly drive investment in this 

sector. Worlanyo and Jiangfeng (2021) highlighted that mining activities and mining waste 

negatively impact surface water, ultimately affecting the health of both people and wildlife. While 

these studies address the various waste streams and their societal impacts, they often overlook the 

financial and investment aspects of integrated waste management. Alongside examining the 

nature, types, and effects of waste, some research has also explored the relevance of finance and 

investment in sustainability efforts. In their short communication, Majunder and Chakraborti 

(2018) emphasized the critical role of finance in sustainability strategies, suggesting that effective 

sustainable development programs should integrate financing and investment components. 

Unfortunately, many studies fail to adequately incorporate these financial considerations.  

Indeed, these researchers recognized the critical role of finance and investment in sustainability 

efforts. For instance, Annan-Aggrey, Bandauko, and Arku (2021) argued in a working paper that 

financial resources are essential for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 

particularly in developing countries. Similarly, Agyapong (2017) suggested, through a 

documentary review approach, that both domestic and foreign funding should be utilized to secure 

adequate resources for managing electronic waste. However, these studies have primarily been 

exploratory rather than empirical. Additionally, the discussions surrounding sustainability 

financing and investment have tended to be quite general. Current research is increasingly focused 



 

8  

  

on financing and investments specifically within the integrated waste management sector in 

developing countries. 

Furthermore, current literature emphasizes waste management practices and technologies, along 

with the adverse effects of improper waste management on the environment, health, and society. 

Although a few studies, such as those by Annan-Aggrey, Bandauko, and Arku (2021), Hajdys and 

Kogut-Jaworska (2018), and Agyapong (2017), have addressed funding and investments in waste 

management, they did not employ rigorous analytical techniques in their analyses. In contrast, the 

current study utilizes structural equation modeling, a method capable of handling small sample 

sizes and testing theoretical frameworks from a predictive perspective, particularly in cases where 

the structural model is complex. 

1.3  Motivation  

One of the primary motivations for the current study is the desire to facilitate the transition to a 

circular economy. Understanding how to finance such initiatives is essential as nations strive to 

achieve sustainable development goals. As previously highlighted in the works of Mihai et al. 

(2021), Wulandari, Utomo, and Narmaditya (2017), and Arfasa, Owusu-Sekyere, and Doke (2023), 

waste management poses a significant threat to both human health and the environment in 

developing countries, including Ghana. More importantly, it is crucial to assess how prepared 

businesses in the integrated waste management sector are for financing and investment. Currently, 

there is a limited understanding of the origins and drivers behind the financial efforts, models, 

supplies, and sustainability-related instruments within the circular economy. To date, no previous 

study has explored the phenomenon of sustainability finance in Ghana. 

 



 

9  

  

With the right funding structure and conducive environmental conditions, certain waste streams 

can be transformed into profitable ventures and useful products (Tulashie, Boadu, & Dapaah, 2019; 

Qiu et al., 2020). For instance, recycling can convert plastic and electronic waste into secondary 

resources for further processing in other industries (Awasthi et al., 2019; Qiu et al., 2020). Valuable 

resources such as plastics, precious metals, and secondary raw materials can be retrieved from 

waste (Agyapong, 2017; Tesfaya, Lindberg, & Hamuyuni, 2017). Lu (2018) found that waste can 

generate energy and raw materials, including metallic products. Similarly, Xue et al. (2008) 

described waste as a resource in transition. Lu (2018) concluded that biological or thermal 

treatment could convert general waste into fuel or electricity when resource recovery is not 

feasible. In 2022, the United Nations Development Programme estimated that Ghana generates 

approximately 12,710 metric tonnes of solid waste daily, of which only 10% is collected and 

disposed of properly. This implies that nearly 90% of the waste remains improperly collected, 

disposed of, or processed. The waste management sector is predominantly composed of small 

businesses with limited financial resources, complicating the challenge. There are relatively few 

larger organizations involved in waste collection, and those that exist typically collect and dump 

waste in designated landfill sites without adding or processing any value (Ministry of Sanitation 

and Water Resources, 2020). 

 

Several landfill sites have been established across the country for towns and cities, illustrating this 

issue. Small-scale waste collectors exacerbate the problem with their rudimentary waste 

management methods, such as open burning (Owusu-Sekyere, 2022). In many instances, small-

scale collectors only extract specific waste streams (e.g., copper wire); their limited technology 

often leads to the improper disposal of parts they cannot process. This suggests that appropriate 



 

10  

  

technology and infrastructure can transform waste into valuable products, but this transformation 

hinges on adequate financing and investment. Research on integrated waste management is crucial 

for developing nations like Ghana, which continue to grapple with managing increasing waste in 

cities, towns, and villages (Gbadamassi et al., 2020). Solid waste, encompassing plastic, metal, 

electronics, gaseous oil, and other liquid and solid materials, constitutes the majority of waste (Das 

et al., 2019). Numerous studies, including those by Adanu, Gbedemah, and Attah (2020), Mensah 

(2020), and Grant and Oteng-Ababio (2019), have documented diverse efforts aimed at initiating 

and implementing programs to address waste issues. 

 

Adanu et al. (2020) focused on potential hazards, such as physical harm to individuals involved in 

e-waste operations, emphasizing the lack of technology stemming from financial constraints. 

However, this study did not investigate the financing and investment needs of waste management 

businesses. Mensah (2020) concentrated on proper waste management practices and concluded 

that these practices did not adhere to the waste management hierarchy. Grant and Oteng-Ababio 

(2019) examined the value of e-waste processing in Ghana, analyzing the roles of both formal and 

informal firms while highlighting the inadequacies of government policy and technology in 

promoting effective waste management. These studies reveal that the existing literature primarily 

addresses waste management practices and technology, as well as the negative consequences of 

improper waste management on the environment, health, and society. Only a few studies, including 

those by Annan-Aggrey, Bandauko, and Arku (2021), Hajdys and Kogut-Jaworska (2018), and 

Agyapong (2017), have tackled funding and investment in waste management, and they did not 

employ rigorous analytical techniques. In contrast, the current study utilizes structural equation 



 

11  

  

modeling, a method that can accommodate small sample sizes and test theoretical frameworks 

from a predictive perspective, particularly when the structural model is complex. 

 

As previously indicated, studies such as Sarfo-Mensah (2019) propose that waste is a resource in 

transition. There is currently a growing interest among entrepreneurs and businesspeople in 

creating new products and businesses that transform waste into profitable ventures. Therefore, the 

availability of funds and investments to support initiatives in integrated waste management is 

crucial. However, current studies rarely describe the financial services and products accessible to 

waste management enterprises in Ghana. Additionally, existing financial structures may not 

adequately support the circular economy (Brunstein et al., 2019). Research has shown that 

numerous existing financial models have failed to serve their intended purposes (Geissdoerfer et 

al., 2017; Mähönen, 2019; Rizos et al., 2015). While sustainability financing models focus on 

socially responsible investing, traditional models emphasize profit and wealth maximization. 

Larson and Henderson (2022) and Martin (2024) argue that, whereas the sustainability investing 

model aims to balance financial returns with positive social, environmental, and governance 

impacts, traditional investing prioritizes financial returns. Traditional credit-granting institutions, 

for example, often adhere to the 5Cs (character, capacity, capital, collateral, and conditions) model; 

however, this may not be suitable for credit seekers engaged in sustainability activities. 

 

Currently, there is no evidence that the traditional approach to financing and investment, which 

predominates in developing countries like Ghana, effectively supports sustainability initiatives, 

including waste management. The conventional financing model lacks the social and 

environmental focus that underpins sustainable financing and investment. Existing studies have 



 

12  

  

outlined various sustainable finance strategies relevant to developed economies. For instance, 

Soppe (2009) suggests strategies for financing sustainability, including sustainable corporate 

finance (SCF), which integrates a corporate entity's financial, social, and environmental 

considerations. 

 

Kats et al. (2011) advocate for long-term state funding mechanisms and federal initiatives to raise 

financing for sustainability activities, including carbon market funding, mortgage-backed energy 

financing, and state/municipal loan programs. Lagoarde-Segot (2019) also proposed a regional-

level sustainability financing approach. Although these financial strategies could support 

sustainability activities like waste management, variations in the financial environment and system 

may pose limitations. Therefore, an empirical investigation into the Ghanaian context is necessary 

to contribute to policy and practice. Ghana's quest to transition to a circular economy necessitates 

the effective management of all waste streams. This requires an investigation into strategy, 

technology, policy, finance, and investments, all of which are essential components for a successful 

transition to circularity. Previous studies in Ghana have extensively examined these elements, 

specifically focusing on sustainable financing and investment. Thus, the motivation for this study 

arose from the need to analyze the financial environment, its impact on financing and investment 

for the circular economy, and the nation's readiness to support sustainable financing. Furthermore, 

it aims to evaluate the readiness of firms in the waste management sector for financial planning 

and investment, which is a critical factor in attracting funding. Notably, no study has addressed the 

financial and investment readiness of the integrated waste management sector. 

 



 

13  

  

 

1.4  Research Objectives  

 The purpose of the study was to analyse sustainability financing and investment and its 

implications for sustainable development in Ghana. The specific objectives are:   

1. To analyse the antecedents of circular economy financing and investment supply.  

2. To assess the precursors of circular economy practices among waste management firms in 

Ghana.  

3. To examine the implications of circular economy practices of firms in the integrated waste 

sector.  

1.5  Research Questions  

 To analyse the sustainability financing and investment and implications for sustainable 

development in Ghana, the following questions were asked:  

1. What are the antecedents of circular economy financing and investments supply?   

2. What are the precursors of circular economy practices among waste management firms in 

Ghana?  

3. What are the implications of circular economy practices of firms in the integrated waste 

sector?  

1.6  Contributions of the Study   

This thesis contributes to the knowledge on circular economy finance in Ghana and serves as a 

valuable reference document for informing policy and guiding practice in the waste management 

sector. These contributions are outlined below. 

 



 

14  

  

This study makes significant contributions to academic research by enhancing the understanding 

of circular economy finance and its determinants within Ghanaian waste management companies. 

It addresses a critical gap in the literature by examining how financial environments impact 

investment decisions in the circular economy. Additionally, it provides a framework for future 

research that could explore the relationships between financing, sustainability, and operational 

efficiency in similar contexts, thereby enriching the scholarly discourse on sustainable business 

practices. 

 

The insights generated from this study hold substantial implications for policymakers. By 

highlighting the financial challenges faced by small waste management businesses, it encourages 

the development of targeted policies that facilitate access to financing. Recommendations for tax 

incentives or supportive regulatory frameworks could empower these businesses and stimulate 

foreign investment in the sector. Policymakers can utilize the findings to craft policies that align 

with the broader goals of sustainable development and economic growth, ultimately fostering a 

more resilient and environmentally conscious economy. 

 

From a practical standpoint, the study offers actionable recommendations for waste management 

companies seeking to navigate their financial environments effectively. By advocating for the 

formalization of internal processes and the establishment of partnerships with financial 

institutions, it provides a roadmap for these firms to enhance their credibility and access necessary 

funding. Additionally, the emphasis on adopting circular economy principles encourages 

businesses to innovate and create sustainable practices that can lead to increased profitability. The 



 

15  

  

findings serve as a catalyst for change, inspiring stakeholders within the waste management sector 

to pursue sustainable practices and secure their role in the circular economy. 

1.7  Limitations of Thesis  

The thesis had some limitations. The instrument used did not permit respondents to give 

information other than the ones presented on the scale. Also, the longitudinal study methodology 

could have revealed a more accurate measurement of these organizations' performance. The 

analyses for integrated waste management firms did not consider cluster analysis. All waste 

management firms were treated as homogenous firms.  

1.8  Organisation of the Thesis  

The thesis consists of six chapters. The background, statement of the research problem, study 

motivation, research objectives, and questions are in Chapter One. The review of related literature 

is in Chapter Two and includes a theoretical assessment of the thesis. It looks at both theoretical 

and empirical ideas about where the circular economy came from, how it affects the waste 

management industry in terms of money and investments, and what effects circular economy 

practices have on businesses in the integrated waste industry. Chapters Three, Four and Five 

discussed the objectives of the research (or questions). Chapter Six of the study contains the 

summary, conclusions, and recommendations. The chapter also suggests possible areas for further 

research.  

1.9  Chapter Summary 

Chapter One provides the introduction to the study on sustainability financing and investment in 

Ghana's integrated waste management sector. It contextualizes the research within the frameworks 

of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the African Union's Agenda 



 

16  

  

2063, highlighting the urgency of addressing critical sustainability issues like climate change and 

waste mismanagement. The chapter identifies key environmental challenges, including 

deforestation and plastic waste, linked to unsustainable practices and inadequate financial support. 

It emphasizes the motivation for transitioning to a circular economy and the necessity of 

understanding financial mechanisms to support this shift. The chapter outlines research objectives 

focused on analyzing circular economy financing and assessing practices among waste 

management firms while articulating specific research questions. Finally, it highlights the study's 

contributions to policy and practice, aiming to enhance the financial environment for waste 

management and outlining the thesis organization for subsequent chapters. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

17  

  

CHAPTER TWO 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

2.1  Introduction 

This chapter of the dissertation delved into an extensive review of literature pertinent to the study's 

objectives. It encompassed three main sections: conceptual review, theoretical review, empirical 

review, and the development of a conceptual framework. the conceptual review, literature 

pertaining to the core concepts central to the study was synthesized. This included definitions and 

discussions around sustainability financing, circular economy practices, integrated waste 

management, and the specific environmental and economic contexts in which these concepts 

operate. The conceptual review aimed to establish a clear understanding of the key terms and their 

interrelationships within the study's scope.  

 

The theoretical review section provided a comprehensive examination of the theoretical 

foundations that underpin the study. It explored various theories relevant to sustainability financing 

and investment, focusing on how these theories inform the understanding of financial mechanisms 

in waste management sectors, particularly in developing countries like Ghana. The empirical 

review critically analysed existing studies that directly relate to each of the study objectives. This 

section reviewed empirical research conducted in similar contexts, examining findings and 

methodologies used in exploring sustainability financing in waste management sectors. It 

identified gaps and insights from previous studies that contributed to shaping the research 

questions and hypotheses. 

 



 

18  

  

Lastly, the conceptual framework visually depicted the interplay between the study objectives, 

theoretical underpinnings, and empirical findings. It provided a structured overview that connected 

theoretical concepts with practical applications, illustrating how theories inform the study's 

exploration of sustainability financing and investment in Ghana's integrated waste management 

sector. 

 

2.2  Conceptual Review 

This section of the study presents on the review of the key concepts. 

 

2.2.1  Integrated Waste Management Sector in Ghana  

Ghana is currently grappling with a waste management crisis, as evidenced by the indiscriminate 

disposal of waste in urban areas. This issue is particularly acute in major cities and towns in Ghana 

(Knott, 2020). The challenges stem from poor behavioural control exhibited by households, 

commercial establishments, and waste management service providers. Inadequate, ineffective, or 

unaffordable service delivery arrangements exacerbate these issues (Kassah, 2020). According to 

Lissah et al. (2021), waste transfer stations are often poorly located and insufficient in number, 

leading to irregular waste collection. Door-to-door collection services are prevalent, especially in 

metropolitan areas, but private sector providers tend to serve selectively due to ambiguous zoning 

regulations, leaving marginalised households underserved or resorting to informal waste disposal 

methods. 

  

Waste collection and transportation in Ghana are predominantly handled by private sector 

providers, varying in size and operational models (Bening, Kahlert & Asiedu, 2022). According to 

the Ministry of Sanitation and Water Resources (2020), primary waste collection involves door-



 

19  

  

to-door or curb-based services provided by formal contractors working for local government 

bodies or informal small-scale providers serving households directly. Secondary collection focuses 

on national-scale waste evacuation services for communal skip containers and public areas, 

managed under the Sanitation Improvement Package (SIP). The SIP, a critical component of 

Ghana's waste management system, involves service agreements between MMDAs and private 

providers at the national level. 

 

Most urban areas in Ghana rely on designated dump sites managed by local government 

contractors. However, there is a lack of widespread waste reduction, re-use, and recycling 

initiatives across the country (Gyeduaah, 2020). Ad-hoc recycling activities occasionally occur, 

primarily in Ghana's urban centres. Because there are few recycling facilities nationwide, these 

regions frequently receive recyclables for processing. The waste management sector in Ghana 

mainly focuses on common recyclable materials such as single-use plastics, e-waste plastics, and 

other subtypes such as cardboard, glass, and metals (Ministry of Sanitation and Water Resources, 

2020). While there are a variety of recycling facilities, ranging from informal aggregation points 

to small-scale enterprises, there is little investment available for advanced and commercially 

sustainable recycling businesses capable of producing export-grade recyclables. 

 

2.2.2  Waste Contributors in Ghana  

The main environmental issue facing authorities in Ghana is the disposal of trash, especially solid 

waste. With a population of 27,043,093 in 2017 and an estimated garbage output rate of 0.47 per 

person per day, Ghana generated 12,710 metric tonnes of rubbish daily. The United Nations 

estimates that Ghana's population will reach 32,790,257 by 2023, with each individual expected 

to produce 15,411 metric tonnes of trash daily. The detrimental effects of garbage in the numerous 



 

20  

  

towns and cities throughout Ghana are a result of the country's ongoing population growth and 

related economic activity. Tacoli (2012) emphasised that garbage generation outpaces waste 

management in emerging nations. Over time, a variety of sources, types, and classifications of 

solid waste have emerged. According to Abdel-Shafy and Mansour (2018), the main sources are 

home garbage, waste from buildings, waste from businesses, automobile wrecks, other worn-out 

parts, and industrial waste. According to Chati's (2012) classification, garbage falls into 

commercial waste (waste that originates from residential sources, excluding those related to 

cooking and eating), institutional waste (including waste from schools, state offices, prisons, and 

hospitals). Tchobanoglous et al. (1993) submitted construction and demolition waste as other type. 

These wastes are generated by repairs to individual residences, commercial buildings, and other 

structures. Other forms include waste from razed buildings, broken-out streets, sidewalks, and 

bridges. Others include municipal waste that emanate from street sweeping, roadside litter, 

landscaping, municipal litter, dead animals, abandoned vehicles, and tree trimmings. There are 

also trash include agricultural waste, industrial solid waste, and garbage from treatment plants. 

  

Evidence from studies such as Nabegu (2010), Nagabooshnam (2011), and Okot-Okumu (2012) 

indicates that most of the waste produced in developing countries emanates from households. 

According to them, the household generates about fifty-five to eighty percent (55%–80%) of solid 

waste, and the remaining ten to thirty percent (10%–30%) emanates from economic activities such 

as market areas and institutions, among others. Valkenburg et al. (2008) further stressed that the 

waste generated from these sources is very heterogeneous and possesses variable physical features 

depending on its specific source. 

  



 

21  

  

According to Okine (2014), waste from used electrical and electronic equipment (UEEE), 

normally referred to as e-waste, is another major source of waste. Okine (2014) opined that, like 

many other developing countries, Ghana has become a recipient of large volumes of UEEE, mostly 

from developed countries. The author emphasized that Ghana lacks an effective mechanism to 

control and manage the import of obsolete and non-functioning UEEEs. Also, enforcement 

authorities at the various ports in Ghana do not have the necessary or sufficient logistical, technical, 

and legal ability to handle the flow of such equipment into the country. Okine (2014) further stated 

that while Energy Commission officials seize prohibited and banned UEEE imports such as used 

air conditioners, refrigerator freezers, and other freezers, the country currently does not physically 

examine its WEEE imports at the ports to determine whether they are e-waste or not, due to a lack 

of legislation in that regard (Yousif & Scott, 2007). 

 

2.2.3  Composition of Waste in Ghana  

In both urban and rural settings, waste disposal is a serious and pervasive issue in many developed 

and developing nations (Hussein & Mona, 2018). For instance, in some of Vietnam's largest cities, 

organic waste makes up roughly 60%–70% of the total trash, while plastics make up 10%–15% 

of the waste. In Ghana, waste production ranges from 0.2 to 0.8 kg per individual per day, which 

is also the same as the total amount of waste produced in many West African towns (UNEP, 2013). 

According to this estimation, individuals in the highest socioeconomic class generated the most 

waste of the highest quality, followed by those in the middle and lower classes, respectively. This 

implies that the composition of waste is critical in both developed and developing countries. 

However, the collection and disposal of waste is currently a problem in several countries (Hussein 

& Mona, 2018). The composition of waste is critical for proper handling and effective waste 

management.  



 

22  

  

 

The composition of waste materials determines the potential for recovery and recycling of usable 

resources, as well as emissions during waste processing and final disposal. For waste management 

planning and decision-making, knowledge of waste composition is essential. Effective techniques 

are required to evaluate the impact of governmental, logistical, and technological actions on the 

waste stream. Analysing trash trends and their composition regularly is required to gauge the 

success of such initiatives. The Waste Composition Analysis (WCA) research provides data on 

the weight of the components that make up a particular waste stream. To accomplish this, we must 

collect samples from various waste streams and sort them into weighted groups based on a 

predetermined criterion. Meizah et al. (2015) report that 61% of garbage in Ghana is organic, 14% 

is plastic, six percent is inert, five percent is paper, three percent is metal, one percent is leather 

and rubber, and five percent is other.  

 

Waste in Ghana typically consists of municipal organic waste and Agri-industrial leftovers (non-

municipal waste). Market remnants, solid waste, sewage waste, and waste from food production 

comprise municipal garbage. The Agri-industrial residues include oil palm, fruit, cocoa, starch, 

breweries, cashew processing, animal farming, and slaughterhouses (Ghana Market Survey, 

2019). Homes dispose of fifty-eight percent (58%) of their solid waste in approved dumping sites, 

25% in other unmarked areas, and only 15% not collected (Bowan & Tierobaar, 2014). Because 

of garbage collection and transportation factors, determining the composition of waste has become 

difficult. Poor bin collection techniques, collection, transfer, and/or transport systems have a 

significant impact on solid waste properties. Poor route design, a lack of knowledge about the 



 

23  

  

collection schedule, the number of vehicles used for collection, bad roads, and inadequate 

infrastructure can also impact the characteristics of solid trash.  

 

In general, Ghana's waste composition has turned into a problem rather than a chance for circular 

economic operations. Particularly for plastic residues. Ghana collects approximately 9.5% of its 

annual production of 840,000 metric tonnes of plastic garbage for recycling. More than 2,000 

trash collectors are improving the environment by scrubbing down sewers, beaches, and other 

places. Currently, electronic trash (e-waste) is getting a lot of attention. The issue of e-waste in 

the country has piqued the government's interest. The government initiated a programme in 

cooperation with the European Union to ensure the correct waste composition of e-waste. We 

launched the "E-waste Management in Ghana: From Grave to Cradle" initiative to educate and 

raise awareness about e-waste.  

 

Major cities in Ghana generate 2000 metric tonnes of mixed municipal waste every day, of which 

80% is collected (Cofie et al., 2009). People dispose of waste either publicly or at one of the few 

easily accessible landfills. There are now just five landfills in Ghana, and the bulk of them are not 

functional. Due to the absence of a landfill in Accra, the city transfers the majority of its waste to 

Kpone. Tema, a city 24 kilometres distant. Compared to plastic garbage, organic waste in Ghana 

has not received as much attention (Ghana Market Survey, 2019). 

 

2.2.3.1 Plastics  

The amount of plastic produced worldwide in 2017 was 348 million metric tonnes (Trust 

Magazine, 2020). Despite growing concerns about the environmental issues associated with both 

plastic manufacturing and plastic waste, recent predictions indicate that plastic output and related 



 

24  

  

trash will quadruple by 2035 (European Commission, 2018). From 1950 to 2017, the creation of 

an estimated 9,200 million metric tonnes of plastic resulted in 75% of it becoming waste. Of this 

garbage, less than 10% was recycled. What's left? We either burn, dispose of, or allow these items 

to pollute our rivers, lakes, and seas (Gardner, 2022; Lamb et al., 2018). The European Union 

recently sought a study on the possibility of taxing plastic items to reduce the amount of plastic 

waste polluting the environment and the oceans (Walker et al., 2020). In 2018, the EU began a 

programme to recycle all plastic packaging by 2030 (World Bank Group, 2018). As a result of the 

current global trend, garbage creation will eventually overtake population growth. 

 

By 2050, global trash will contain twice as much plastic. Managing such a large volume of garbage 

responsibly is one of the biggest challenges for countries around the world. Since waste 

management is a complicated issue, we must take the necessary actions to strive towards 

sustainable solid waste management that is suitable from an environmental, economic, and social 

standpoint. Data on solid waste production and management are essential for local government 

and planning (Sharma & Jain, 2020). Plastics enter the ocean and the marine food chain at the 

present rate of 11 million metric tonnes annually, which includes our seafood (Gardner, 2022; 

Garcia, Fang & Lin, 2019). 

 

The garbage that is tossed into the environment rather than being collected accounts for two-thirds 

of the land-based plastic debris that ends up in the seas, while the remaining one-third is the 

product of ineffective waste management techniques. According to some studies, a one percent 

decline in marine ecosystem services may cost the world's ecosystems $500 billion a year. We 

still do not fully understand how micro- and nano-plastics affect both human and ecological 



 

25  

  

health. Recent research revealed that 2,400 chemicals used in the production of plastics are 

potentially harmful to human health. They include substances that mimic, block, or otherwise alter 

the action of hormones (Gardner, 2022; Lamb et al., 2018). 

 

2.2.3.2 Electronic Waste  

Since 2014, the global amount of electronic trash (e-waste) has increased by 9.2 million metric 

tonnes, and projections indicate that it will reach 7.7 million metric tonnes by 2030. Asia created 

the most e-waste (24.9 Mt) in 2019, followed by America (13.1 Mt) and Europe (12 Mt). E-waste 

production in Africa and Oceania was 2.9 MT and 0.7 MT, respectively (Global E-waste Monitor, 

2020). Screens and displays (6.7 Mt), small IT and communications equipment (4.7 Mt), lights 

(4.7 Mt), big equipment (13.1 Mt), tiny equipment (17.4 Mt), and temperature exchange 

equipment (10.8 Mt) made up most of the world's e-waste in 2019. (0.9 Mt). "E-waste" refers to 

electrical and electronic equipment discarded without any consideration for reuse (Gupta, 2011). 

EEE consumes at higher rates, has shorter life cycles, and offers fewer repair options, all 

contributing to an increase in e-waste (Arya & Kumar, 2020). 

 

Toxic materials found in e-waste, such as mercury, brominated flame retardants (BFR), 

chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), both threaten the 

environment and human health (Shittu, Williams & Shaw, 2021). Rising rates of e-waste, poor 

collection rates, and ecologically irresponsible disposal and treatment increase the risks to the 

environment and human health (Li & Achal, 2020). The management of e-waste accomplishes 

some of the sustainable development objectives (SDGs). These include SDGs 3 (excellent health 

and well-being), 6 (clean water and sanitation), 8 (decent job and economic growth), and 14 (life 

below water) (Forti, Baldé, Kuehr & Bel, 2020). 



 

26  

  

 

2.2.3.3 Organic Waste  

 Food trash is responsible for a significant portion of organic waste produced worldwide. The 

Food Agricultural Organisation (FAO) estimates that each year, we lose 30 percent, or around 1.3 

billion metric tonnes, of all food produced globally. Food waste is both a resource waste and a 

significant source of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change (FAO, 2010). This 

impacts the economy, environmental sustainability, and food security. According to World Bank 

Group data from 2018, organic waste makes up around 44% of all globally managed solid waste. 

However, as growing nations move from lower to medium and higher income levels, increasing 

urbanization and population expansion make it increasingly difficult to manage waste collection, 

removal, and treatment (Sharma & Jain, 2020). Globally, food waste accounts for a sizable amount 

of organic waste. 

  

The Food Agriculture Organisation estimates that food waste accounts for around 1.3 billion 

metric tonnes annually, or 30% of all food produced worldwide. Food waste is not only a waste 

of resources, but it also has a significant impact on climate change through GHG emissions (FAO, 

2010). This poses a problem for the sustainability of the environment, the economy, and food 

security. The World Bank Group estimates that in 2018, organic garbage made up around 44% of 

all solid waste managed globally. However, rapid urbanisation and population growth make the 

collection, disposal, and treatment of waste more and more challenging to handle (Sharma & Jain, 

2020). As developing countries move from lower-income levels to middle- and higher-income 

levels, their organic waste management conditions also change. According to Kumar et al. (2017), 

unmanaged rubbish hinders Ghana's economic growth, pollutes the seas, clogs sewers, spreads 

illnesses, and worsens breathing problems. 



 

27  

  

 

Recycling organic wastes for agricultural use has the potential to become a viable solution that 

will allow for value addition and innovative applications. Organic wastes are a bountiful source 

of organic matter and vital plant nutrients (Sharma et al., 2019). The total quantity of garbage 

produced in low-income nations is predicted to have grown by more than three times by 2050 

(World Bank Report, 2023). 

 

2.2.4 Waste Management in Ghana  

The Environmental Protection Act of Ghana from 1993 defines trash as any abandoned, undesired, 

or surplus item, regardless of its intended sale, recycling, reprocessing, recovery, or purification 

(EPA, 2009). Typically, we label items as garbage when they cease to function as intended or when 

the owner no longer considers them valuable. With a daily output of 13,000 metric tonnes of solid 

trash, Ghana produces an average of 0.45 kg of solid waste per day, or 3.0 million metric tonnes, 

annually (Miezah et al., 2015; Foray, 2012; Puopiel, 2010). Now, managing solid waste is the 

responsibility of several Metropolitan, Municipal, and District Assemblies (MMDAs) around the 

country. 

 

Techniques and practices for solid waste management have significantly changed over time. The 

cost of adoption, the ease and simplicity of the strategy, the accessibility of technology, and the 

strategy's environmental friendliness are all factors in its progression. In Ghana, waste 

management methods, most of which are unrelated to engineering, involve gathering and 

disposing of landfill sites. A few assemblies have created sanitary landfills. Other assemblies rely 

on dirty open-dumping techniques (Adu-Boahen, 2012). Up until 1985, Ghana's main rubbish 

disposal strategy included incinerators (Kyere, Addaney & Akudugu, 2019). This model has 



 

28  

  

trouble remaining viable due to financial support. The only option left was waste disposal at every 

location (Asase & Oduro-Kwarteng, 2010). The Ghanaian government established the Waste 

Management Department as a brand-new component to manage waste. The German Agency for 

Technical Cooperation (GTZ) provided funding for the department (Kyere, Addaney & Akudugu, 

2019). 

 

2.2.4.1 Urban Waste Management  

To minimise its effects on people and the environment, garbage must be collected, handled, 

dumped, controlled, and monitored (Pacione, 2005; Anomanyo, 2004). Trash management is 

defined by the United Nations Statistics Division as "all the activities and actions required to 

handle waste from its conception to its final disposal." Okine (2014) asserts that waste 

management must consider the diverse types of waste and their impact from various analyses and 

measurements. As a result, we can manage waste from a financial, business, and environmental 

perspective to minimise its impact. Over time, most developing nations, including Ghana, have 

identified the metropolitan areas as the primary producers and sources of trash. This has 

significantly expanded due to the increasing population and the expansion of urban infrastructure 

(Dorji et al., 2019). According to Dorji (2017), managing waste in cities has been a very 

challenging task. Waste's quality and substance have evolved because of the ongoing changes in 

lifestyle and consumption patterns, which have a growingly negative impact on these cities.  

 

In metropolitan areas, dry trash from households and offices, organic waste from hotels and 

restaurants, and waste from food and vegetable markets are the most common types of trash. 

Business owners and other junk dealers benefit from waste management innovation (Rebehy, 

Costa, Campello, de Freitas Espinoza, & Neto, 2017). According to Rebehy et al. (2017), waste 



 

29  

  

management can lead to people starting small enterprises and finding other employment 

opportunities. There are ways to ensure trash reduction, separation, processing, management, 

recycling, and reuse. Solutions for improving urban trash collection, management, and disposal 

can improve both urban settlements' social behaviour and climate. Three of the strategies for 

controlling garbage in metropolitan areas include incineration, sanitary landfills, and waste 

recycling. 

 

The incineration method of waste management involves the process of burning waste materials 

and substances. It is the most used technique in countries with a lack of landfills, and it is also 

particularly prevalent in Ghana's rural areas and other developing nations. Experts have described 

this method as both highly impactful and hazardous. Therefore, while this method significantly 

reduces waste, it also leads to contamination. Examples include hospital waste and hazardous 

waste produced by manufacturing operations. Sanitary landfills typically identify and select large 

areas away from people, where they then dump or deposit their waste. This method typically 

involves sorting the waste into different categories based on similarities and composition and 

dumping it accordingly.  

 

Waste recycling is the process of converting used or discarded materials into new, useful materials 

or products. Recycling is critical because it reduces energy consumption and helps to control air, 

water, and land populations. A certain level of innovation is required to ensure the proper recycling 

of waste. Individuals, households, and personal waste in offices can recycle themselves, provided 

they possess some creative skills. Research indicates that this method is the most effective in 

reducing costs and generating income. 



 

30  

  

2.2.5 Characteristics of Waste Management Firms in Ghana  

Despite numerous laws, the informal sector largely dominates the waste management space. There 

is currently no single database for integrated waste management firms in the country, except for 

the Environmental Service Providers Association (ESPA). The association has membership in 

sixteen (16) regions of Ghana. It is by far Ghana's largest and most comprehensive database of 

integrated waste organizations. Members of ESPA are private waste management companies 

working in a public-private partnership (PPP) arrangement to manage waste in the Metropolitan, 

Municipal, and District Assemblies (MMDAs). 

 

The largest waste management companies, including Zoomlion Ghana Limited (ZL), comprise 

ESPA. Established in 2006, Zoomlion Ghana Limited (ZL) manages over eighty-five thousand 

(85,000) workers under various PPP arrangements, with a core staff of three thousand (3,000). 

Others include the J. Stanley Owusu (JSO) Group, incorporated in 1970. JSO works in various 

sectors of the economy, engaging in recycling, landfill management systems, and waste treatment. 

Information on the size of JSO and similar integrated waste management systems is not readily 

available. Figure 2.1 presents the characteristics of the various categories of integrated waste 

management firms found in the ESPA database. 

 



 

31  

  

  

Figure 2.1. Integrated Waste Management Organisations  

Source: The Environmental Services Providers Association Database, 2020  

 

According to Figure 2.1, 95% (6,831) of the firms are in the informal sector, with only about 5% 

(359) in formal business. This is a reflection of the situation in Ghana's general waste management 

landscape. The characteristics of the informal waste management sector are that the firms are 

largely micro firms, unregistered, and often employ crude methods in their operations, thus 

compounding the sustainability challenges with regards to waste. Another intriguing characteristic 

of the informal waste management firms is that they worked with individual clients and 

households, whereas larger formal firms like Zoomlion Ghana Limited work with the MMDAs 

and thus are able to raise a sizable investment to build waste management infrastructure. 

 

Furthermore, Figure 2.1 shows that less than one percent (5 firms) are involved in recycling. This 

also indicates that few waste management companies are involved in waste processing. Informal 

waste processors fill the gap in the number of waste management processing firms. However, the 



 

32  

  

lack of appropriate technology and financial constraints have rendered the waste management 

activities of these micro firms unsustainable. Among other things, micro firms’ waste management 

practices include open-buying (Owusu-Sekyere, 2022). This practice tends to negatively affect 

the environment. The few larger waste management firms, such as Zoomlion Ghana Limited, with 

their considerable number and state-of-the-art equipment, can engage in relatively more proper 

waste management activities than the micro firms. 

 

For instance, since 2019, Zoom lion has projected to spend US$20 million on the construction of 

recycling plants across the country (Takouleu, 2019). Takouleu (2019) expects the construction of 

these plants to supply 100 metric tonnes of organic compost per day, thereby reducing chemical 

fertiliser imports by 864,000 per year. The plants also plan to create a total of 1,000 youth jobs. 

This implies that implementing waste management requires significant financial resources and 

investment if it is to have a significant impact on Ghana's economy. 

 

2.2.6 Financing of Waste Management   

Over the years, manual collection, landfilling, and improper disposal of waste have characterised 

Ghana’s waste management system. However, this approach has typically been ineffective and 

unsustainable because of the low wages paid to workers engaged in waste collection at the 

municipal level. The massive amount of rubbish produced daily in these cities overburden the 

waste management firms with modern infrastructure for collection (Meizah et al., 2015; Mensah, 

2005). Local authorities anticipate dedicating between 50 and 70 percent of their budget to trash 

management (Ocran, 2006). Additionally, the Ghanaian government spends GHS 6.7 million a 

year on garbage collection and disposal, as well as GHS 550,000 every month on paying waste 

contractors and maintaining landfills (Water and Sanitation Programme, 2012). 



 

33  

  

  

To reduce waste disposal problems and their consequences, the Ghanaian government settled debts 

amounting to $200 million to waste management contractors in 2019 (Teta et al., 2020). The 

Ministry of Sanitation and Water Resources published the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework 

for 2019–2022, revealing that the government of Ghana has allocated GHS 71,047,355 to address 

liquid waste, solid waste, environmental management, health, and hygiene education. In 2019, the 

Ministry also received donations amounting to GHS164,187,158 and GHS2,394,867 from 

internally generated funds for sanitation management (Ministry of Sanitation and Water Resources, 

2019). The Ministry authorised a budget of GHS255,531,354.00 for the 2017 fiscal year, allocating 

GHS3,919,475.00 for goods and services for the industry's internal management. 

  

We set aside a capital expenditure budget of GHS28,000,000.00 to implement programmes and 

projects in sanitation and water. We allocated a total of GHS216,122,028 to the donor and set aside 

GHS5,094,774 for employee remuneration. We paid out sums of GHS1,498,978.00 and 

GHS5,094,774.00 for supplies and services and employee remuneration, respectively, from the 

permitted budget. Capital expenses received no release. Within the same time frame, donor funds 

and internally generated fund expenditures totalled GHS205,960,000.00 and GHS1,470,000.00, 

respectively. 

 

2.2.7 Recycling of Waste   

Approximately 9.5 per cent of Ghana's annual plastic waste production (840,000 tonnes), is 

collected for recycling. Beaches, sewers, and other areas are being cleaned up with the assistance 

of more than 2,000 garbage pickers. Typically, 40% of solid waste is recyclable and 29% is 

compostable (Agyei, 2020). Recycling trash has become a popular financial option around the 



 

34  

  

country, despite the high cost of collection. Some businesses may lower their demand for raw 

materials, energy, and water while simultaneously reducing the requirement for waste treatment, 

discharge, and disposal by utilising garbage recycling technology.  

 

Recycling waste is a beneficial tactic for improving items' economic competitiveness. Nineteen 

per cent (19%) of all imported plastic items are made from recycled plastic, compared to a meagre 

0.1 per cent from plastic reuse. The research estimates that Ghana produces 12.710 tonnes of solid 

trash per day for the total population or 0.47 kilogram per person per day. Several enterprises have 

formed in Ghana due to diminishing concentrations of important metals in electronic items and 

miniaturised products, which are increasingly difficult to recycle. One such sector that is having 

problems right now is recycling.  

 

More research has been conducted since the previous e-waste monitor was released in 2017 on 

the connections between unlimited e-waste recycling and unfavourable health impacts. Large 

populations might be in danger in hotspots for recycling e-waste. It does not follow that a country 

does not have an e-waste problem if there is no concentrated region for e-waste recycling. E-waste 

is a part of a larger waste context that is typically collected door to door or disposed of alongside 

other rubbish in landfills. Waste-pickers, who are among the most vulnerable and impoverished 

people in communities across the world, might be exposed (Gutberlet & Uddin, 2017). E-waste is 

commonly recycled locally in Latin American towns, as opposed to being centralised (UNIDO, 

2022).  

 



 

35  

  

Around 51 trillion plastic particles may be present in the oceans and along the shoreline, and 12.7 

million tonnes of plastic garbage wash into the sea each year, according to the United Nations 

Environment Programme (Mambra, 2020). The regional capital of Accra is home to many plastic 

waste recycling plants. The firms driving Accra's effort to manage plastic trash include 3G Plastic 

Limited, GP Waste Recycle Company Ltd, Universal Royal, and Super Paper Product Co. Ltd. 

These businesses are some of those involved in the recycling of waste. These companies collect 

and recycle plastic waste from small-scale pickers and Zoomlion Company (Okai, 2020). Water 

supply companies Bela Aqua and Voltic make a significant contribution to reducing plastic waste 

by collecting their customers' plastic water bottles for recycling. For instance, the cleaning staff 

at our school site gathers used water bottles and sells them for a set price per kilogram to these 

recycling companies in the area.  

 

In Ghana, only a small selection of plastics is recycled (Kortei & Quansah, 2016). Ghana could 

annually save millions of gallons of oil and countless cubic metres of landfill space if it, like 

industrialised nations, could recycle 50% of its plastic garbage (Agbai, 2018). If the plastic 

garbage produced in Ghana could be recycled, GHS1.2 million might be created each month, 

according to a feasibility study by the Centre for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) (Teta 

et al., 2020). 

  

2.2.8 Investment preparedness and financial readiness  

Investment preparedness entails multiple factors, such as securing foreign equity financing and 

ensuring enterprises are prepared to participate in this type of funding. Equity aversion, 

investability, and presentational faults are the main components of investment preparedness. 

Myers (1984) emphasizes that small and medium-sized enterprises frequently oppose equity 



 

36  

  

capital because owners are reluctant to give up ownership and control as their company grows 

(Hutchinson, 1995; Howorth, 2001; Oakey, 2007). Entrepreneurs typically exhibit hesitation 

when considering equity funding, viewing it as relinquishing a share of ownership in their 

company. Equity aversion among entrepreneurs may result from a lack of comprehension 

regarding market dynamics and other funding options (Van Auken, 2001). 

 

Insufficient understanding of the various financial sources typically causes many potential venture 

capital candidates to be ineffective in their presentations. Improved understanding of how 

different financial instruments support organizations' growth can motivate more enterprises to 

explore equity funding (Mason & Kwok, 2010). However, the problem goes beyond just 

knowledge to the basic preparedness of firms for investment, referred to as investability. Studies 

(Granz, Henn & Lutz, 2020; Capizzi, Croce & Tenca, 2022) show that many businesses looking 

for outside funding do not match the requirements established by venture capital firms and 

business angel investors.  

 

The investment decision-making process consists of two separate stages. Investors initially assess 

prospects using predetermined criteria, including industry sector, firm stage, investment amount, 

and geographical location (Granz, Henn & Lutz, 2020). While evaluating possible investments, 

business angels prioritize aligning investment prospects with their criteria (Mason & Kwok, 

2010). Geographical location, financial needs, and market knowledge have a substantial impact 

on investment choices. Therefore, investors frequently reject enterprises that do not meet these 

criteria due to a discrepancy between entrepreneurs' presentations and their standards. 

 



 

37  

  

Identifying appropriate investors can be somewhat challenging, because most business angels 

choose to maintain anonymity. The appraisal process persists as possible investments face 

additional examination, with rejections usually linked to entrepreneurial or company-related 

deficiencies (Feeney et al., 1999). These factors may consist of a lack of entrepreneurial foresight, 

honesty, or dedication, along with shortcomings in managerial skills, marketing tactics, and 

financial forecasts. The majority of rejected possibilities have several problems, whereas those 

excluded after thorough evaluation usually have fundamental concerns that make them 

inappropriate for investment (Mason & Harrison, 1996). 

 

Reuter (2020) found that business angels' decision-making shows that companies without focus, 

thorough market data, and a distinctive selling offer frequently struggle to attract funding. 

Investors prioritize unique features that differentiate products or services from competitors and 

lead to long-term competitive advantages. Ventures must meet these requirements to make 

themselves more appealing to potential investors. Investment preparedness entails overcoming 

equity aversion and presenting a compelling investment argument that aligns with investors' 

expectations and preferences. 

 

2.2.9 Circular economy practices  

In addressing the challenges of the twenty-first century, which encompass economic, social, and 

environmental dimensions, the limitations of the prevailing linear economic model become 

evident. A critical imperative emerges to devise innovative approaches capable of mitigating the 

adverse impacts of existing production processes (Genovese et al., 2017). Central to this discourse 

is the imperative of developing a model that effectively integrates environmental, social, and 



 

38  

  

economic considerations. Numerous organisations actively pursue the implementation of the 

circular economy (CE), a prominent paradigm that aims to achieve this overarching objective. 

  

The core idea of the circular economy (CE) is to prolong the life of products and create closed 

cycles for resources, waste, and components. The Circular Economy (CE), in contrast to the 

conventional "cradle to grave" approach, advocates for a "cradle to cradle" philosophy that 

incorporates products back into the production cycle instead of discarding them (Maqbool et al., 

2020). By embracing this paradigm, the CE holds the potential to mitigate the adverse social and 

environmental impacts inherent in traditional supply chains. Furthermore, the circular economy 

encourages enterprises to implement resource-efficient methods, leading to increased value 

generation (Khan & Haleem, 2020; Bag et al., 2019). This involves retrieving, renewing, and 

reusing products and components that have reached the end of their functional lifespan (Govindan 

& Hasanagic, 2018). 

  

Academic and professional circles widely discuss both the concepts of circular economy and 

sustainability, each with its unique focus and approach. Sustainability encompasses economic, 

environmental, and social goals, while the CE focuses on closed-loop systems to improve resource 

management and reduce waste (Govindan, Soleimani & Kannan, 2015). The circular economy 

model is essential for improving supply chain and business sustainability by implementing 

circular business practices to maximise resource efficiency and minimise environmental harm (De 

Angelis, Howard & Mi