Comparability — Armenia [top]

The unharmonized source variables indicate the regularity of garbage removal.

Comparability — Burkina Faso [top]

The 1996 sample has a code called "trash can" that is assumed to imply collection by a sanitation service and therefore categorized this way in the integrated variable. In the 2006 census, public and private trash removal services were differentiated.

Comparability — Cuba [top]

In 2012, households that disposed of trash into a landfill are considered to be using a "communal refuse dump."

Comparability — Dominican Republic [top]

Apart from slight universe differences, the data are comparable across samples.

Comparability — Ethiopia [top]

This variable is only available for the 2007 sample.

Comparability — Fiji [top]

Both Fiji censuses allowed respondents to indicate multiple methods of trash disposal. The integrated variable was hierarchically coded, such that households who reported any trash collection by a sanitation service were categorized as such (distinguishing sanitation service only from sanitation service and other methods). Households that reported no trash collection, but which reported burning or burying trash were assigned to those categories regardless of other methods. These are followed by river or sea disposal, then own refuse dump, composted and, finally, "other, none."

The 2007 and 2014 questionnaires distinguished between the river and sea. See the unharmonized source variables for more information.

Comparability — Guatemala [top]

The 1994 and 2002 questionnaires include an option for "throwing trash somewhere" (not specified location) which is coded as "other dumping".

Comparability — Indonesia [top]

The data for this variable was derived from two separate questions in the sample. One question asked about garbage disposal type and the other asked about garbage disposal method. For the original questions and categories one can refer to the unharmonized source variables. Any disposal type that was disposed by means of being "carried out" was classified as "Collected by a sanitation service."

Comparability — Jamaica [top]

The unharmonized source variable indicates the regularity of garbage removal.

Comparability — Kenya [top]

The 2019 unharmonized source variable distinguishes between three different sanitation services: a county government, a community association, and a private company; furthermore it allows to distinguish between waste burned in a pit or in the open.

In 2019, the waste dumped in "the compound" is classified as a "communal refuse dump."

Comparability — Malawi [top]

The 2018 unharmonized source variable distinguishes between three different types of collection: collection on a regular basis by authorized collectors, collection on an irregular basis by authorized collectors, and collection by self-appointed collectors.

Comparability — Mali [top]

This variable is only available for the 2009 sample.

Comparability — Mexico [top]

The 2015-2020 samples include fewer categories than 2000-2010.

Comparability — Morocco [top]

In 2014, households that disposed of trash in a municipal trashcan are considered as indirect collection from a garbage container.

Comparability — Mozambique [top]

The 2017 source variable distinguishes between municipal and private sanitation services.

Comparability — Nicaragua [top]

The source data have more detail on the type of trash collection service, retained in the unharmonized source variable.

Comparability — Paraguay [top]

The 1992 original source variable distinguishes households that threw garbage in their own yard or in a vacant yard. These categories are combined in the 2002 source variable.

Comparability — Philippines [top]

The Philippines 1990, 2000, and 2010 samples are concerned with the disposal of kitchen waste, not trash more generally.

Comparability — Rwanda [top]

The 2002 census question specified kitchen garbage disposal, not all trash.

Comparability — South Africa [top]

The 2001, 2007, and 2011 samples are comparable in terms of the major distinction between garbage collection and some other means of disposal. The 2016 sample includes two additional categories harmonized under indirect collection from a garbage deposit and other dumping.

Comparability — Trinidad and Tobago [top]

In 2011, the census question asked about the disposal method for eight different types of garbage but only information on organic waste was used for TRASH. The unharmonized source variables for this sample provide also information about the disposal method for white goods, electronic items, glass, plastic, paper products, vehicle tires, and vegetation and wooden products.

Comparability — Uruguay [top]

The 2006 sample was a survey and therefore only enumerates a subset of the population. It further restricts the universe to urban households, and only asks whether the household received regular trash disposal service.

Comparability — Zambia [top]

The unharmonized source variables indicate the regularity of garbage removal.