Each year, more than two billion tons of solid waste are produced globally, with at least a significant portion not receiving adequate treatment
[1]
. Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, is no exception. In the Lukunga health district, population growth and urban expansion have intensified waste management problems, with waste accumulating due to insufficient collection resources and non-compliance with disposal regulations
[2]
. Consequently, the environment and public health suffer, with unauthorized dumpsites proliferating, increased filth, and growing health risks
[3]
.
A significant proportion of the population continues to dispose of waste in unauthorized areas such as streets, vacant lots, or waterways
[2]
. This behavior often results from limited access to appropriate collection infrastructure and insufficient awareness of the environmental and health impacts of such practices
[4]
. There is also a widespread perception that waste management is solely the responsibility of public authorities, reinforcing individual disengagement.
While some individuals adopt environmentally responsible behaviors such as composting or reusing waste for urban agriculture or crafts, these initiatives remain marginal. Informal waste pickers, despite their role in waste reduction, lack structure and official recognition, limiting their effectiveness
[5]
.
Source separation is almost nonexistent in households, where waste is typically mixed, complicating treatment and reducing recycling opportunities. Although some residents recognize waste as a threat to the environment and public health, this awareness is insufficient given the scale of the problem.
Community initiatives for waste management are rare and struggle to develop due to a lack of collective awareness and insufficient coordination between residents and local authorities (A more integrated approach—combining environmental education, infrastructure improvement, and recognition of informal actors—could help reverse this trend
[6]
).
Faced with these challenges, waste management education offers hope for informing residents and encouraging appropriate behaviors
[7]
. Various actions have shown that educational interventions can play a central role in changing both individual and collective behaviors by increasing awareness of the environmental and health consequences of waste.
Willy Bakonga, who was serving as Minister of Primary Education at the time, underscored the significance of this initiative, stating: “It is crucial that children develop a culture of environmental protection, encompassing soil, water, air, forest, etc.”
[8]
.
Despite these advances, effective responses to sanitation and environmental challenges require a curriculum specifically dedicated to waste management, building on UNESCO’s recommendations for practical, action-oriented learning
[9]
. This study aims to analyze the impact of educational actions on waste management in Lukunga and propose an adapted school curriculum.
2. Materials and Methods2.1. Study Design
A quasi-experimental study was conducted in the Lukunga health district, targeting students and teachers from two schools.
2.2. Sampling
Schools in the district were selected based on three main criteria: geographical proximity (schools located at a reasonable distance from each other to prevent cross-group contamination or influence), the socioeconomic diversity of the neighborhoods they represent (based on income level and access to waste management infrastructure), and the size of the student body.
The inclusion and exclusion criteria for students were as follows:
Students who had already received training in waste management were excluded to avoid bias related to pre-existing knowledge.
The sample size was determined using Yamane’s formula [10], a statistical method commonly employed for estimating sample sizes in finite and relatively homogeneous populations. This approach is particularly appropriate for research in the social sciences, where it is essential to control the margin of error and the confidence level.
The formula used is expressed as follows:
where:
n = desired sample size
N = total population size
e = margin of error (level of precision)
In this study, the sample size was calculated as follows:
Or:
Thus, the theoretical sample is 154 students (77 per group).
To ensure the validity of the results despite field challenges—such as absenteeism (students sick or absent on the survey day), exclusions (incomplete questionnaires or failure to meet inclusion criteria), and attrition (dropouts due to relocation or refusal to participate)—a 30% safety margin was applied, following WHO recommendations for surveys in dense urban areas
[11]
.
The selection of the sample of 100 students per group was carried out using a probabilistic sampling method, specifically simple random sampling (SRS). This method ensures the representativeness and impartiality of the results by giving each student in the total population (i.e., 250 students) an equal chance of being selected. After adjustment, the sample size is approximately 200 students, corresponding to 100 per group (adjusted n = 154 × 1.3 ≈ 200 students, or 100 per group). The distribution of participants is summarized in
Table 1
.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 1. Summary of sample sizes.
Group
Theoretical Size
Adjustment (+30%)
Final Size
Intervention
77
23
100
Control
77
23
100
Total
154
46
200
To achieve this, a complete list of students meeting the inclusion criteria was first established, and each student was assigned a unique identifier, numbered 1 to 250. The selection of 100 students per group was then carried out by random draw using Microsoft Excel’s = RANDBETWEEN() function to generate random values associated with each identifier, followed by sorting based on these values. The first 100 identifiers in each group were selected as the final sample.
After this step, it was essential to verify that the selected students strictly met the inclusion criteria, particularly their grade level and availability. In cases of unavailability or exclusion (e.g., absence on the survey day or non-compliance with criteria), an additional draw was conducted to complete the sample while preserving the random nature of the selection process.
As part of the development of a new school curriculum on waste management education, an exploratory study was conducted to gather teachers’ perspectives on content, pedagogical approaches, and training needs.
A nominal list of all teachers employed in the two selected schools was obtained from school management. From this list, only teachers meeting the inclusion criteria were retained. Of the 18 teachers identified, 12 met the criteria. As only 3 teachers per school were needed, a simple random draw was conducted among eligible teachers using the = RANDBETWEEN() function in Microsoft Excel to ensure neutrality. Selected teachers were informed of their inclusion and provided with a consent form. In cases of refusal or unavailability, a replacement was selected from a reserve list generated during the initial draw.
Regarding qualitative data, selected teachers were invited to share their pedagogical preferences, learning objectives, and the challenges they face. These discussions were conducted in focus groups, conducive to creativity and the generation of innovative ideas.
2.3. Data Collection
Three phases: pre-intervention questionnaire, educational intervention, and post-intervention questionnaire. The questionnaire assessed knowledge and behaviors related to waste management.
Data analysis was conducted in two steps:
1) Univariate Analysis: Frequency and percentage tables were generated for each question, before and after the intervention, as well as for the control group, to isolate the effect of the intervention.
2) Bivariate Analysis: Cross-tabulations were created between the dependent variable (prior information) and independent variables. P-values, chi-square (χ2), and degrees of freedom were calculated for each table. The results were compared to the critical value of χ2. A pre/post intervention comparison was performed by evaluating the χ2 values obtained for each question.
3. Results
The data presented in
Table 2
illustrate the impact of the intervention on students’ understanding of waste categories, as follows:
These results demonstrate that the intervention had a positive impact on knowledge of waste categories.
Figure 1
further highlights the influence of the intervention on the distribution of different types of waste.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 2. Categories of main types of waste.
Group
Waste Category
Period
Number (n = 100)
%
Number (n = 100)
%
Experimental group
Household waste
Before
40
40
60
60
Economic activity waste
30
30
50
50
Hazardous waste
20
20
30
30
Other
10
10
20
20
Control group
Household waste
Before
35
35
45
45
Economic activity waste
25
25
35
35
Hazardous waste
15
15
25
25
Other
25
25
15
15
Intergroup (After intervention)
Household waste
After
60
60
45
45
Economic activity waste
50
50
35
35
Hazardous waste
30
30
25
25
Other
20
20
15
15
Figure 1. Impact of the intervention on waste categories.
This figure clearly demonstrates the positive impact of the information provided on waste management, particularly within the informed experimental group.
The data of
Table 3
statistically reveal the relationship between the main waste categories and having received information on waste management:
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 3. Relationship between main waste categories and having received information on waste management.
Group
Period
Household waste
Economic activity waste
Hazardous waste
Other
Total
χ2
df
p
Experimental
Before
40
30
20
10
100
-
-
-
Experimental
After
60
50
30
20
100
25.1234
3
<0.001
Control
Before
35
25
15
25
100
-
-
-
Control
After
45
35
25
15
100
10.5678
3
0.0345
Intergroup (After)
60
50
30
20
100
-
-
-
Intergroup (After)
45
35
25
15
100
8.2345
3
0.0456
These results indicate that the intervention had a significant impact on the perception of waste categories in the experimental group, with a marked improvement in the informed group, particularly for household and economic activity waste.
Table 4
, for its part, reveals that the intervention on the importance of sorting waste had the following effects:
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 4. Importance of sorting waste.
Group
Benefits of pollution reduction
Period
Before
After
Number
n = 100
%
Number
n = 100
%
Experimental group
Reduce pollution
30
30
50
50
Conserve resources
25
25
35
35
Facilitate recycling
20
20
10
10
Protect health
25
25
5
5
Control group
Reduce pollution
25
25
40
40
Conserve resources
30
30
30
30
Facilitate recycling
25
25
20
20
Protect health
20
20
10
10
Intergroup comparison (after intervention)
Benefits of pollution reduction
After intervention
Informed group
%
Uninformed group
%
Reduce pollution
50
50
40
40
Conserve resources
35
35
30
30
Facilitate recycling
10
10
20
20
Protect health
5
5
10
10
100
100
100
100
For these data, the intervention changed the order of expected benefits regarding pollution reduction. Greater interest was given to pollution reduction and resource conservation. This approach reduced a more comprehensive perspective that also included health and recycling.
The data in
Table 5
on the relationship between knowledge of the benefits of waste reduction and having been informed about waste management statistically explain the following:
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 5. Relationship between benefits of waste reduction and having been informed about waste management.
Group
Period
reduce pollution
Conserve resources
Facilitate recycling
Protect health
Total
χ2
df
p
Experimental
Before
30
25
20
25
100
After
50
35
10
5
100
23.3333
3
<0.001
Control
Before
25
30
25
20
100
After
40
30
20
10
100
7.3504
3
0.0615
Intergroup
After
50
35
10
5
100
After
40
30
20
10
100
6.4957
3
0.0898
These results demonstrate that the intervention had a significant effect on the perception of the benefits of waste reduction within the experimental group, with a clear increase in the importance given to pollution reduction. This indicates that the intervention was effective in changing participants’ views within the experimental group.
For
Table 6
on the fate of non-recycled waste, the educational intervention shows the following:
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 6. Fate of non-recycled waste.
Group
Fate of non-recycled waste
Period
Before
After
Number
n = 100
%
Number
n = 100
%
Experimental group
Landfilled
40
40
20
20
Incinerated
30
30
15
15
Dumped in nature
20
20
5
5
Reused or treated
10
10
60
60
Control group
Landfilled
45
45
40
40
Incinerated
25
25
30
30
Dumped in nature
20
20
15
15
Reused or treated
10
10
15
15
Intergroup comparison (after intervention)
Fate of non-recycled waste
After intervention
Informed group
%
Uninformed group
%
Landfilled
20
20
40
40
Incinerated
15
15
30
30
Dumped in nature
5
5
15
15
Reused or treated
60
60
15
15
100
100
100
100
The data reveal that information on waste management has a significant impact, with a marked shift toward more sustainable practices in the experimental group.
The results of
Table 7
demonstrate the relationship between the fate of non-recycled waste and having been informed about waste management as follows:
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 7. Relationship between fate of non-recycled waste and having been informed about waste management.
Group
Period
Landfilled
Incinerated
Dumped in nature
Reused or treated
Total
χ2
df
p
Experimental
Before
40
30
20
10
100
After
20
15
5
60
100
35.6789
3
<0.001
Control
Before
45
25
20
10
100
After
40
30
15
15
100
8.2345
3
0.0412
Intergroup
After
20
15
5
60
100
After
40
30
15
15
100
18.4567
3
<0.001
These results clearly indicate that information on waste management has a significant impact on the fate of non-recycled waste, with a marked shift toward more sustainable practices in the informed experimental group.
Table 8
shows the impact of the intervention on students’ knowledge of the consequences of non-recycled waste as follows:
These results show that the intervention had a significant effect on the perception of the consequences of non-recycled waste in the experimental group. A strong increase in the perception of waste accumulation was observed. This suggests that the intervention was effective in changing the participants’ views within the experimental group.
The results of
Table 9
highlight the statistical relationship between the consequences of non-recycled waste and having been informed about waste management as follows:
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 8. Consequences of non-recycled waste.
Group
Consequence of non-recycled waste
Period
Before
After
Number
n = 100
%
Number
n = 100
%
Experimental group
Landfill congestion
30
30
55
55
Increase in greenhouse gases
25
25
35
35
Ocean pollution
20
20
5
5
Health risks
25
25
5
5
Control group
Landfill congestion
25
25
40
40
Increase in greenhouse gases
30
30
30
30
Ocean pollution
25
25
15
15
Health risks
20
20
15
15
Intergroup Comparison (After Intervention)
Consequence of non-recycled waste
After intervention
Informed group
%
Uninformed group
%
Landfill congestion
20
20
40
40
Increase in greenhouse gases
15
15
30
30
Ocean pollution
5
5
20
20
Health risks
60
60
10
10
100
100
100
100
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 9. Relationship between consequences of non-recycling and having been informed about waste management.
Group
Period
Landfill congestion
Increase in greenhouse gases
Ocean pollution
Health risks
Total
χ2
df
p
Experimental
Before
30
25
20
25
100
After
55
35
5
5
100
34.4444
3
<0.001
Control
Before
25
30
25
20
100
After
40
30
20
10
100
7.3504
3
0.0615
Intergroup
After
55
35
5
5
100
After
40
30
20
10
100
9.4957
3
0.0235
These results show that the intervention had a significant effect on the perception of the consequences of non-recycled waste in the experimental group. A strong increase in the perception of waste accumulation was observed. This suggests that the intervention was effective in changing the participants’ views within the experimental group.
Table 10
indicates that half of the participants (45%) already had some knowledge about waste management before the intervention, while the other half (55%) had not received any information. The fact that more than half of the participants had not been informed suggests that there is a significant need for education and awareness on waste management in this population. However, the intervention could have a significant impact on participants who had not been informed previously, by increasing their level of knowledge and potentially changing their behaviors.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 10. Having already been informed about waste management before this intervention.
Response
Frequency
Percentage (%)
Yes
45
45.0
No
55
55.0
Given the observed effectiveness of this educational intervention, we now propose a structured school curriculum to promote sustainable management of household solid waste in the Lukunga health district, Kinshasa.
4. Proposal for a School Curriculum
To develop this curriculum effectively, we adopted a participatory approach
[12]
, actively involving teachers through various consultation methods. This process aimed to design a program tailored to the actual needs of the educational system, while ensuring the commitment of key stakeholders engaged in waste management practices.
Step 1: Consultation with Teachers in Pilot Schools
We began by selecting five pilot schools and requested permission to meet with a carefully chosen sample of teachers. These teachers were invited to share their pedagogical preferences, learning objectives, and the challenges they face. These discussions took place in the form of focus groups, conducive to creativity and the generation of innovative ideas.
Step 2: Collaboration with Education Researchers
Education researchers were informally integrated into the design process, focusing on the development of tools for rigorous evaluation of the program’s effectiveness. Their expertise was invaluable in ensuring the pedagogical relevance and coherence of the content developed.
Step 3: Creation of a Collaborative Environment
To foster an atmosphere of collaboration and engagement, we ensured to:
1) Clearly communicate our objectives: From the outset, we presented the framework of our approach and the expectations regarding participants’ contributions.
2) Include all voices: Particular attention was paid to considering the opinions of traditionally underrepresented groups, thereby ensuring an inclusive approach.
3) Organize iterative meetings: Each teacher participated in at least two sessions, allowing for deeper exchanges and refinement of proposals.
4) This proactive collaboration laid the foundation for an innovative and adapted program, supported by strong buy-in from teachers and other stakeholders.
4.1. Curriculum Design
Definition of Educational Objectives
We established key competencies to be acquired in waste management and aligned the objectives with national educational standards
[13]
[14]
.
Content Development
Modules adapted to different school levels were developed, as well as practical and interactive activities. Essential knowledge and skills to be imparted to students were identified:
These competencies are part of an education for sustainable development approach, aiming to train citizens who are aware and committed to environmental preservation. The co-constructed model allows students to actively and participatively acquire these skills by directly involving them in the design and implementation of waste management solutions adapted to their local context.
Table 11
shows different educational modules
[14]
.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 11. Design of learning modules.
Level
Educational objectives
Activities
Primary
(Grades 1 - 6)
Raise awareness of waste sorting
Understand the environmental impact of waste
Learn basic waste reduction practices
Waste sorting games using images or objects
Making objects from recycled materials (musical instruments, pencil holders, etc.)
Visit to a sorting center or waste facility
Creation of posters on proper sorting practices for the school
Middle School (Grades 8 - 9)
Deepen knowledge of the waste life cycle
Understand the issues of recycling and the circular economy
Develop critical thinking about consumer society
Survey on household/school waste production over a week
Debate on packaging reduction
Composting workshop
Project to create a mini recycling business
High School (Grades 10 - 13)
Analyze the environmental, social, and economic impacts of waste management
Understand public policies and regulations related to waste
Reflect on technological and social innovations for improved management
Case study on waste management in different countries
Calculation of the ecological footprint related to waste
Debate on ethical issues in the international waste trade
Community awareness project
For all levels, it is crucial to adopt an active and participatory pedagogy, involving students in concrete projects. The objective is to develop their skills and empower them as agents of change in their environment.
Suggestions for incorporating practical activities and community projects related to waste management into the school curriculum include:
These practical activities and community projects will help students develop concrete waste management skills, raise awareness of environmental protection, and strengthen civic engagement.
For the implementation of this educational program, five schools—one per health zone (Mongafula I, Makala, Ngaba, Matete, Kalamu I)—were selected as a representative sample of the Lukunga health district. The school administrations are expected to collaborate with us.
Multiple methods were considered to assess knowledge acquisition, including:
Combining these methods provides a comprehensive and reliable evaluation of both knowledge acquisition and tangible behavioral changes.
1) Pilot test: Implementation of the program in a selected sample of schools.
2) Evaluation and feedback: Collection and analysis of feedback from teachers, students, and parents.
3) Model optimization: Adjustment of the management model and pedagogical framework based on pilot test results.
4.2. Long-Term Monitoring to Assess the Sustainability of Intervention Effects
To ensure the durability of the outcomes observed following the educational intervention, it is essential to implement a long-term monitoring system that combines both quantitative and qualitative indicators over several years. This monitoring relies, in particular, on the regular measurement of individual and collective behaviors (such as selective sorting rates, the percentage of waste reused or composted, and initiatives led by students), annual assessments of knowledge and attitudes using standardized questionnaires, as well as the tracking of measurable environmental impacts (including the quantity of waste generated, the reduction rate of waste sent to landfill, and the volume of compost produced).
Complementary tools, such as direct behavioral observations, individual portfolios documenting student actions, and surveys conducted with families, will help to evaluate the persistence of these practices over time, including after students leave the school system. Ideally, monitoring should occur annually over a period of three to five years, with intermediate evaluation points, to facilitate program adjustment and maintain community engagement.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.142890-"></xref>Table 12. Key indicators for monitoring the impact of the education programs.
Indicator
Frequency
Source(s)
Objective
Rate of integration of health education into school curricula
Annual
School reports, inspections
Evaluate the dissemination and sustainability of health-related educational content within curricula.
Percentage of students adopting healthy behaviors (hygiene, nutrition)
Semiannual
Student surveys, direct observation
Assess the impact of educational initiatives on students’ lifestyle choices and habits.
Number of environmental health awareness initiatives conducted by the school
Quarterly
Activity reports, documentation
Quantify the school’s commitment to promoting environmental health through various initiatives.
Level of student knowledge about the links between environment and health
Annual
Standardized questionnaires
Monitor the progress in students’ educational achievements and their understanding of environmental health issues.
Rate of parental and community participation in awareness activities
Semiannual
Attendance records, family questionnaires
Evaluate the program’s influence on family engagement and the broader community dynamics.
Percentage reduction in risky behaviors related to health or the environment
Annual
Audits, surveys, observations
Measure the effectiveness of educational programs aimed at disease prevention and promoting sustainability.
Number of intersectoral partnerships (health, education, environment) developed
Annual
Institutional reports, partnership agreements
Showcase the collaboration between sectors to enhance public health initiatives and their impact.
Finally, the attainment of environmental labels and participation in collective certification processes will serve as performance indicators, highlighting the progress made and encouraging the continued adoption of responsible behaviors within the educational community.
Table 12
summarizes the main recommended indicators for monitoring the sustainability of educational changes in waste management, drawing on approaches from international environmental education guidelines
[13]
[15]
.
This table facilitates a systematic observation of how educational initiatives and awareness-raising efforts influence health and the environment. It employs measurable indicators alongside a variety of sources and well-defined objectives to support this analysis.
4.3. Potential Implementation Challenges
Possible solutions include seeking funding from international organizations (UNESCO, AFD, private companies), organizing targeted educational campaigns, implementing specialized waste management training programs; etc.
[1]
[14]
.
5. Discussion
The results of this study highlight the significant influence of targeted educational action on secondary students’ knowledge and behaviors regarding household solid waste management. The observed progress in the test group, such as increased knowledge of household waste sorting (from 40% to 60%) and the adoption of stable actions like sorting and composting, supports the effectiveness of dynamic and adapted education. These findings are consistent with previous research
[6]
[16]
, which demonstrated that contextually adapted educational campaigns significantly increase engagement in selective sorting.
This study proposed a structured curriculum integrating waste management at all school levels, in line with UNESCO recommendations for education for sustainable development
[13]
[14]
. The program emphasizes experiential and participatory learning, aligning with international educational standards. However, as highlighted by McCracken and Phillips, systematic integration of waste management education is still hindered by a lack of dedicated time and insufficient teacher training
[17]
. Immersive initiatives, such as visits to sorting centers or ecoparks, are also essential for linking theory and practice and enhancing understanding of sustainable waste management processes
[14]
.
Ultimately, this study shows that contextualized and participatory environmental education is a key lever for promoting responsible waste management behaviors. It also underscores the need for an integrated approach combining active pedagogy, community involvement, and appropriate infrastructure to ensure the sustainability of ecological practices among younger generations.
6. Conclusions
This study highlights the central role of environmental education in promoting responsible behaviors in household solid waste management. The results demonstrate that targeted educational interventions, combining theoretical learning and practical activities, can significantly improve knowledge and encourage the adoption of sustainable practices such as selective sorting and composting. The participatory approach involving teachers and students ensures better ownership of environmental issues and fosters local anchoring of proposed solutions.
The proposal of a structured curriculum, adapted to each school level, represents significant progress for the sustainable integration of waste management into educational practices. Enriched by community projects and immersive activities, this program offers a unique opportunity to connect theory and practice while raising awareness among younger generations about environmental challenges.
However, to maximize the impact of these initiatives, it is essential to ensure long-term monitoring, strengthen teacher training, and develop appropriate infrastructure in schools. Ultimately, this study demonstrates that contextualized and participatory environmental education is a powerful lever for building a society that is aware of ecological issues and capable of adopting sustainable solutions to global environmental challenges.
7. Recommendations
1) Institutionalization: Officially integrate the proposed curriculum into school programs; systematically include waste management topics in curricula in a transversal and interdisciplinary manner from primary school onward.
2) Continuing education: Strengthen teachers’ capacities to ensure effective program implementation.
3) Monitoring and evaluation: Establish a regular evaluation system to measure the program’s impact on students’ knowledge and behaviors.
4) Extension: Gradually extend the program to other schools to amplify its impact.
5) Local partnerships: Involve local authorities, NGOs, and recycling sector companies to create synergies and strengthen the impact of school initiatives in the territory.
8. Research Perspectives
This study opens several avenues for research. It would be relevant to evaluate the long-term effects of this type of educational intervention on students’ environmental behaviors, particularly after they leave the school system. A longitudinal analysis would determine whether the knowledge and practices acquired persist over time and influence adult life. Comparative studies between different regions or countries would help identify contextual factors affecting the effectiveness of environmental education programs. Finally, analyzing the socio-economic impacts of quality environmental education on local communities would be a promising research field, in line with sustainable development goals.
References
AFD (2021) Focus: La gestion des déchets solides, Comprendre Pour Mieux Agir. >https://www.afd.fr/fr/ressources/focus-la-gestion-des-dechets-solides
Pembi, F., Thomas, K.P. and Baudouin, M.A. (2022) Congolese People Practices Towards Insalubrity in the Mombele District. Open Journal of Ecology, 12, 133-148. >https://doi.org/10.4236/oje.2022.122008
Holenu Mangenda, H., Mulaba, P. and Kiawutua, A. (2020) Gestion des déchets ménagers dans la ville de Kinshasa: Enquête sur la perception des habitants et propositions. Environnement, Ingénierie & Développement, 83, 19-26. >https://doi.org/10.4267/dechets-sciences-techniques.4272
Kubanza, N.S. (2024) Analysing the Challenges of Solid Waste Management in Low-Income Communities in South Africa: A Case Study of Alexandra, Johannesburg. South African Geographical Journal, 107, 169-189. >https://doi.org/10.1080/03736245.2024.2356563
Simatele, D.M., Dlamini, S. and Kubanza, N.S. (2017) From Informality to Formality: Perspectives on the Challenges of Integrating Solid Waste Management into the Urban Development and Planning Policy in Johannesburg, South Africa. Habitat International, 63, 122-130. >https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.03.018
Saifi, N. and Jha, B. (2024) An Overview of Solid Waste Management Practices in Pune, Maharashtra, India. Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, 23, 923-934. >https://doi.org/10.46488/nept.2024.v23i02.027
Tounkara, S. (2020) Comprendre la gestion des déchets solides urbains: Pour éclairer les choix politiques au Sénégal. L’Harmattan-Sénégal.
MédiaTerre (2020) RDC: L’éducation à l’environnement intégrée aux programmes scolaires. >https://www.mediaterre.org/actu,20200805220739,6.html
UNESCO (2024) Ce qu’il faut savoir sur l’éducation au développement durable. >https://www.unesco.org/fr/sustainable-development/education/need-know
Adam, A.M. (2020) Sample Size Determination in Survey Research. Journal of Scientific Research and Reports, 26, 90-97. >https://doi.org/10.9734/jsrr/2020/v26i530263
Dab, W. (2021) Les fondamentaux de l’épidémiologie. Les Presses de l’EHESP.
Michaux, J. (2022). Gestion des déchets dans une approche d’éducation perma-nente: Études&démarches pédagogiques. >http://bruxelles.lire-et-ecrire.be
UNESCO (2022) Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives. UNESCO Bibliothèque Numérique. >https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444
Batton, J., Amapola, A., Sinclair, M., Bethke, L. and Bernard, J. (2015) Approche des programmes scolaires: Comment procéder? >https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000246115
MEDD (2023) Stratégie nationale pour la gestion des déchets solides urbains. Kinshasa. >https://medd.gouv.cd/
Chris-Valentine, E. and Nkanu, O. (2019) Environmental Education and Waste Management Behavior among Undergraduate Students of the University of Calabar, Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 10, 76-85. >https://doi.org/10.7176/JEP/10-24-11
McCracken, K. and Phillips, D.R. (2017) Global Health: An Introduction to Current and Future Trends. 2nd Edition, Routledge. >https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315691800