141

 issn 1822 – 8402 european integration studies. 2010. no 4

TOWARDS SuSTAInABLE HAZARDOuS WASTE MAnAGEMEnT 
in lithuania

Jurgita Gaiziuniene, Jolanta Dvarioniene
Institute of Environmental Engineering, Kaunas University of Technology

Abstract

Growing consumption of goods, production and usage of various chemicals influence the amount of 
different hazardous waste (HW) flows. Society is increasingly facing the problem how to treat and where to 
dispose of waste in environmentally sound, and economically efficient way, also taking into account a social 
aspect.

Waste management is one of the principal pollution problems in many countries, and its control has so 
far not been addressed in a sustainable analysis. Each year in the European union alone people throw away 
1.3 billion tons of waste, 40 million tons of which being hazardous.  HW generally constitutes about 1% of 
the total waste amount generated in Europe; nevertheless, it presents a serious risk to the ecosystem and 
human health if not managed and treated properly. Several Eu countries report HW treatment rates over 
40%, the others export a large of portion of HW. Recently, lots of efforts having been put into proper HW 
identification, treatment, recycling, storage, transportation and/or disposal, this issue is still hot among the 
governments of the Eu.

In spite of the fact that all European union legal requirements concerning HW management are transferred 
to Member States legal framework, there are still a number of problems concerning inefficiency of an HW 
management system and Lithuania is not the exception. The total amount of waste generated in 2008 in 
Lithuania is about 7.8 million tons; about 145 thousand tons are considered as HW. While the incineration 
plant and landfill for HW is not built, HW is temporarily stored, processed, exported or managed in the 
companies which have the Integrated pollution prevention and Control (IppC) permits. It aims to manage 
HW in a more environmentally friendly way. However, the current HW management is not developed on an 
integrated approach, which allows to evaluate the environmental impact throughout the life cycle and to use 
cost-effective HW management processes, and all available technical and technological capabilities. The legal 
system determines the main HW management objectives, but compliance with them is often more formal 
than real.

Despite of the fact that waste has to be managed in accordance with the waste hierarchy principles, 
the hierarchy has some limitations. The latter restrictions motivate interested parties to look for the 
possibilities of more efficient HW management. An integrated waste management concept is considered as 
a tool for sustainable HW management. Environmental system analysis, integrated approach and tools for 
HW management system assessment are discussed and brief analysis of HW management in Lithuania is 
introduced in the paper.

The aim of this paper is to analyze HW management system in Lithuania and propose the tools for more 
efficient HW management in the context of sustainable development.

Keywords: 

Sustainable development, HW management, integrated approach, environmental assessment tools.

Introduction 

Recently, environmentally sound, economically 
efficient and socially acceptable management of various 
waste flows has become one of the most pressing issues of 
the World community pursuing all-round sustainability 
for current and future generations. The Treaty of 
Amsterdam has placed the principle of sustainable 
development and high level of environmental protection 
on the top of priorities. The EU community generates 

around 2000 million tons of waste each year, over 40 
million tons of which are classified as hazardous. In spite 
of the fact that HW generally constitutes about 1–2 % of 
the whole waste depending on the country; nevertheless, 
HW presents a serious risk to the ecosystem and human 
health if not managed and treated safely.

During the last decades all over the world, considerable 
work has been done in waste management and waste 
generation sectors trying to promote prevention and 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

142

achieve more sustainable waste management.
Lithuania is also trying to be in step with the global 

trends. In accordance with the requirements of the EU, 
by 2012 Lithuania is expected to close about 300 existing 
landfills, which do not comply with the environmental 
requirements, and to build up eleven regional landfills 
for municipal waste. It is prohibited to dispose of HW 
in new regional municipal waste landfills; it is important 
to manage them without harming the environment and 
human health, while even having an economic benefit. It 
is planned to build up one landfill especially for hazardous 
waste (HW) disposal and an incineration plant for HW 
treatment. They are expected to be installed until the end 
of 2010. 

Environmentally sound and cost-based HW 
management poses many challenges at various 
management levels not only in Lithuania but also in 
other EU countries. 

EU environmental and waste legislation results from 
the policy decisions laid out in the sequential series 
of the Environmental Action Programs (EAP) and 
the Waste Management Strategies. These Directives 
represent the legal obligations required for the Member 
States and are to be transposed into national legislation.  
The Waste Framework Directive (WFD) 2006/12/EC 
establishes the basis for the EU waste management. 
The HW Directive (HWD) 91/689/EEC develops 
legislation further with regard to HW only, specifying 
the properties that render waste hazardous and therefore 
applicable to the management structures outlined in the 
WFD. In the future, changes to waste legislation may 
see the measures of HWD integrated into WFD. A list 
of the wastes falling within the scope of the WFD and 
HWD is provided in separate legislation, the European 
Waste Catalogue (EWC) 2000/532/EC. Integrating the 
expanded HW List 94/904/EC, EWC is subject to the 
articles of HWD.

The other EU Directives focus on technical aspects 
of waste management (e.g. the Landfill Directive 99/31/
EC), or on particular waste flows through the application 
of producer’s responsibility (e.g. the Waste Electrical 
and Electronic Equipment Directive 2002/96/EC, the 
End-of-Life Vehicles Directive 2000/53/EC, and the 
Batteries and Accumulators Directive 2006/66/EC, etc.). 
European legislation regarding waste has considerably 
increased   since 1975, reflecting the waste policy of 
EAPs. The amount of legislation has led to varied rates 
of transposition into the national law of the Member 
States, and certain Directives are still in the process of 
full implementation. 

In spite of the fact that all EU legal requirements 
concerning HW management are transferred to 
Lithuanian legal framework, there are still a number of 
problems concerning inefficiency of an HW management 
system such as: not finely tuned HW records throughout 

the product life cycle and individual HW flows, lack of 
technological regulations, inaccurate National Waste 
accounting data reflection of HW generation and 
recycling rates, whereas the records are often just a 
formality. The lack of strict control of records and public 
servants’ responsibility for the control process creates 
the conditions for unqualified HW management. The 
above-mentioned problems determine unsustainable 
HW management and require application of tools for 
more sustainable HW management.

The aim of this paper is to analyze HW management 
system in Lithuania and propose the tools for more 
efficient HW management in the context of sustainable 
development.

Analysis of HW management situation in 
Lithuania and problem formulation

A stronger focus on the waste including HW 
management started to contribute to the environment 
after Lithuania’s accession to the EU, i. e. since 2004, and 
thus a more comprehensive scientific research into the 
waste management sphere is relatively new compared to 
that in the old EU Member States. The earlier researches 
were associated with the development of technologies 
for waste management or analysis of different waste 
flows. The biggest part of waste was not handled; 
industrial wastes were often stored at the company’s 
territory. Gradually, changes in consumers’ attitudes to 
products and waste instigated manufacturers to choose 
more environmentally sound processes and products 
and award more economically acceptable solutions. The 
latter decisions lead to more favourable societal aspects 
and at the same time all these aspects lead to sustainable 
waste management. Increasingly used waste prevention 
and minimization practices in the production serve as a 
tool how to generate less waste. 

According to the EU Environmental Protection 
Agency data for the year 2007, despite of all efforts the 
biggest part of the waste (368 kg/inhabitant from 400 
kg/inhabitant) still go to the landfill in Lithuania. One of 
the reasons for the choice of processing is a minimum 
of waste management costs compared to the other waste 
management options. HW formation in comparison to 
that of municipal waste is much lower. The total amount 
of waste generated in 2008 is about 7.8 million tons; 
about 145 thousand tons of them are HW. The generation 
of HW in Lithuania is presented in Fig. 2

Fig. 2 indicates a decreased amount of industrial 
waste in the period of 2000-2002. The introduction of 
a new data collection system and the change of waste 
classifications in the year of 2000 caused a break time 
series. The generated amount dropped and increased 
again in 2003. These fluctuations are apparently due to 
the introduction of a new data collection system and the 
economic crisis in Lithuania in 1998-1999. 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

143

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

year

tonnes

 
fig. 2 Development of HW generation in Lithuania 
(National waste accounting database, Environmental 
Protection Agency of the Republic of Lithuania)

As it was mentioned above, identification and 
classification of HW in Lithuania are performed 
according to the EU requirements. But it should be 
stressed that classification and identification of the waste 
started in 1992, when Lithuania became an independent 
country. Until 2000, the data on waste generation were 
collected from waste generators and waste management 
companies. Therefore, the amount and composition of 
HW varied. For example, in 2000 and 2001, reporting 
the data to the Eurostat Lithuania distinguished two 
types of waste - municipal waste and waste of the other 
origin. The latter referred to industrial waste, though the 
originating sectors were not specified. However, mining 
and quarrying were the only industrial activities for 
which the generated waste amount was specified. It has 
to be pointed out that Lithuania reports no figures on the 
total waste generation in Lithuania because the available 
data are considered to be incomplete (Ulinskaite et al., 
2006).

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

180000

200000

2004 2005 2006 2007

A
m

ou
nt

, t

Hazardous waste generated

Waste disp osal op erations

Waste recovery  op erations

Waste collection,
transp ortation, treatment
op erations

 
fig. 3 The amount of hazardous waste generated 
and managed by different operations (National waste 
accounting database, Environmental Protection Agency 
of the Republic of Lithuania)

The main HW management methods in Lithuania 
are: disposal, recovery and other treatment (including 
collection and transportation) (see Fig. 3). HW related 
activities are classified as recovery (R-codes) or disposal 
(D-codes) as defined in WFD.  The other treatment 
covers HW collection, transportation, import, export and 
treatment, when some sources of HW (e.g. WEEE, end-

of-life vehicles, accumulators, etc.) are cut, pulverized, 
etc., separating the parts which cause potential risk to 
the environment.

While the incineration plant and landfill for HW is 
not built, HW is temporarily stored, processed, exported 
or managed in the companies which have the Integrated 
Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) permits. It 
aims to manage HW in a more environmentally friendly 
way. However, the current HW management is not 
developed on an integrated approach, which allows 
to evaluate the environmental impact throughout the 
life cycle and to use cost-effective HW management 
processes, and all available technical and technological 
capabilities. The legal system determines the main HW 
management objectives, but compliance with them is 
often more formal than real. This problem is clearly seen 
in a municipal HW management sector. The amount of 
household HW is extremely small. As the actual amount 
of municipal HW is indeterminate, a lot of difficulties 
arise in planning the activities of a municipal HW 
system.

Designing new HW management facilities, 
environmental impact assessment is carried out, but 
this assessment does not reflect the impact of a HW 
management system on the environment throughout its 
all life cycle. To perform a comprehensive assessment, the 
tools mentioned above in the paper or their combinations 
can be applied. Sustainable HW management can be 
achieved by integrating different measures, assessing 
relevant aspects and optimizing the system.

The existing problems in the HW management 
system can not be solved without scientific knowledge. 
HW generation and management problems, methods for 
solving them as a research object are analyzed by a series 
of environmental engineering studies and the majority 
of them are based on “end-of-pipe” approaches. 

Different properties of waste flows, decontamination 
technologies, management and treatment studies 
have been carried out for some decades in Lithuania 
(Lapinskas and Jaskelevičius, 2000; Baltrėnas et al., 
2004; Čepanko et al., 2008). Considerable scientific 
research was done analyzing the following: planning 
and optimization of non-hazardous municipal waste 
management, its generation and forecasting (Denafas et 
al., 2004; Denafas and Rimaitytė, 2005), economic and 
social aspects of municipal waste management studies 
in the field of sustainable development (Žičkienė, 2004), 
assessment of an impact on the environment of municipal 
waste management systems development, and life-cycle 
assessment of municipal waste management scenarios 
(Denafas and Rimaitytė, 2005; Miliūtė, 2009). An 
integrated waste management approach and some waste 
minimization results achieved in Lithuania industrial 
enterprises are presented by Stani kis (Stani kis, 2005), 
whereas application of an integrated approach to HW 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

144

management has not been analyzed yet.
Globally, most of the integrated waste management 

research is carried out into municipal waste (McDougall 
et al., 2000; Najm et al., 2002; Morrisey and Browne, 
2004; Erickson et al., 2005), less – into construction and 
demolition of waste (Klang et al., 2005) and only a few - 
into different kinds of HW (Najm and El-Fadel, 2004; 
Zografos and Androutsopoulos, 2008; Ahluwalia and 
Nema, 2007; Zhang and Roberts, 2007). Here comes 
the need and importance of application of an integrated 
approach to the HW management system. 

For a long time it has been considered that waste 
management in environmentally acceptable way is 
based on the principles of the waste hierarchy. Lately, 
more and more often the fact has been broached that 
the waste management hierarchy has several major 
drawbacks and because of them its application is limited. 
According to the waste management hierarchy, the most 
preferable waste management option is prevention, after 
it goes waste reduction or minimization lowering the 
amount of produced waste, after it – reuse and recycling 
where materials are used repeatedly or for making new 
products, then – recovery of energy from waste. At the 
end of the waste hierarchy pyramid there is the least 
preferable option of waste management – landfilling. 

For a long time waste hierarchy was considered 
as the main direction for management of all kinds of 
waste, including various HW flows. However, the waste 
hierarchy does not guarantee the cost-effective and 
sustainable HW management.

McDougall (2001) was one of the first scientists who 
summarized the shortcomings of waste management 
hierarchy in his scientific papers. Main drawbacks 
of waste management hierarchy include the lack of 
scientific validity, complex application using different 
combinations of waste management, economic 
weaknesses. The above-listed deficiencies have led to the 
appearance of an integrated waste management concept 
and implementation in waste management activities as 
a tool for sustainable waste management. An integrated 
approach to waste management first of all includes 
waste management hierarchy (Turner and Powell, 
1991) taking into account direct effects (transportation, 
collection, processing and disposal) and indirect impacts 
(usage of energy and materials from the waste off-site 
the waste management system) (Korhonen et al. 2004). 
An integrated approach allows optimizing the existing 
systems, creating and implementing new ones of waste 
management and covers waste in physical conditions 
(solid, liquid and gaseous).

One of the first integrated waste management (IWM) 
definitions was proposed by the United Nations Economic 
Commission for Europe (UNECE) in 1991, where an 
integrated waste management was defined as a “process 
of change in which the concept of waste management is 

gradually broadened to eventually include the necessary 
control of gaseous, liquid, and solid material flows in 
human environment” (McDougall, 2001). Recently, 
integrated waste management concept combines 
waste flows, waste collection, treatment and disposal 
methods with an intention to achieve environmental 
benefit, economic optimization, and social acceptance 
(Coleman et al. 2003). The main principle of IWM 
concept is to integrate “all available waste management 
options into the existing geographic, environmental, and 
socio-economic waste management options that exist 
under certain geographical, environmental and socio-
economic conditions and to manage the generated waste 
better” (Najm and El-Fadel, 2003).

The application of IWM principles in Lithuania is 
a new departure and focuses on waste minimization at 
the generation source and provides specific examples of 
waste minimization practices at industrial enterprises in 
Lithuania (Stani kis, 2005). The application of the IWM 
concept to a   municipal waste management sector in 
Lithuania is widely analyzed by Miliūtė and Staniškis 
(Miliūtė and Staniškis, 2009). 

Analysis of the literature concerned with the subject 
and the experience of the other EU states has highlighted 
the need for an integrated waste management concept 
and application of its principles to the HW management 
system in Lithuania as a tool for seeking the sustainable 
HW management.

Methodology

A single method of waste management could not 
be applied to all waste materials to be treated in an 
environmentally sustainable, economically efficient and 
socially acceptable way. Systematic examination of HW 
management system is needed because practically each 
waste management system is built on closely related 
integrated processes.  

One of the aspects why integrated waste management 
is pre-eminent against waste management hierarchy 
is the fact that waste management is seen as a system, 
i.e. a systematic approach is applied. The systematic 
approach is often used in many scientific fields when 
environmental systems analysis studies focus on 
human activities’ impact on the environment and on 
the interaction between technical, economic, social and 
ecological systems using a variety of environmental 
assessment tools (Finnaveden et al. 2007).

The system can be viewed as a certain number of 
components interlinked in a totality.  The components 
and relations between them from the rest of the world 
(environment) are isolated by system boundaries, which 
indicate which components belong to the analyzed system, 
which do not. All systems are influenced by the factors 
which are outside the system boundaries and at the same 
time can influence their environment. The interaction 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

145

between the system and its environment is characterized 
by the input and output parameters (Fig. 1).

 

Influence on the system 
Input parameters 

ENVIRONMENT 

Response by the 
system 
Output parameters 

Defined 
 system 

fig. 1. System interaction with the environment. 
Adapted (from Klang, 2005)

Every individual system may have different system 
boundaries (e.g. physical, social, economic, time, etc.), 
depending on the complexity of the analyzed system. 
In pursuance of solution of the existing problems in 
the system, various models are developed. A model is 
a simplified representation of the real system omitting 
everything that is of little importance to the system 
response (output parameters) (Klang, 2005). The 
prerequisite for an accurate system analysis is that the 
elements of the system have to be well known and 
described. The elements of a waste system may be: 
different processing methods, waste collection vehicle 
efficiency, factors affecting waste separation efficiency 
at its source and the others.

In environmental system analysis a variety of 
tools are used either to measure its impact on the 
environment or to transform it into monetary units. 
Frequently, these tools are used for decision-making on 
waste management activities planning or determination 
which waste management option or their combination 
is more environmentally friendly and economically 
efficient. The selected tools do not point out which 
alternative should be chosen, but give the information 
about the economic and environmental impacts of waste 
management activities.

Tools of the environmental systems analysis can be 
categorized into analytical or procedural ones (Table 1). 
Procedural tools are focused on guiding the process to 
reach and implement environmental decisions, while 
analytical tools model the systems to provide technical 
information for decision making (Wrisberg et al., 2002). 
It should be noted that analytical instruments can be used 
as a part of the procedural tools for accurate evaluation 
of technical information about the decision to be taken.

Analytical tools can be used for accounting or 
change-orienting, for example, they describe the state or 
the consequences of that choice (Tillman 2000).

All the tools given in Table 1 and a number of the 
other less common instruments possess differences, 
similarities, advantages and disadvantages. Depending 
on the objectives (e.g. to assess the impact on the 

environment or to transform it into the monetary units, 
to calculate waste management costs, to make a decision 
concerning the waste management plan, program, 
project; to use it for region, nation or organization 
(including company), etc.) and on the desired result 
(e.g. natural resources, environmental impacts, natural 
resources and environmental impacts, economic aspects 
including natural resources and environmental impacts), 
on available resources (financial, human, time, available 
data, expertise, etc.), the stakeholders can choose 
different tools or their combination for assessment of 
the selected waste management system. Also there are 
a number of characteristics for consideration when tools 
are to be used in combination. These are as follows: type 
of comparison, degree of quantification, degree of site 
specifically or time specifically, system boundaries, type 
of impacts and effects considered, information provided 
by different tools (Moberg, 2006).

Table 1. The most commonly used tools for waste 
management systems assessment

Tools Type
Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) Analytical 
Environmental impact assessment (EIA) Procedural 
Environmental management systems (EMS) Procedural 
Input-output analysis (IOA) Analytical 
Life cycle assessment (LCA) Analytical 
Life cycle costing (LCC) Analytical 
Material flow analysis (MFA) Analytical 
Risk assessment (RA) Analytical 
Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) Procedural 
Material input per unit service (MIPS) Analytical

All instruments of waste management system 
assessment presented in Table 1 help managing waste 
not only in accordance with the waste management 
hierarchy principles, but also with economic, technical 
aspects taken into account. It is also obvious that the 
reduced impact on the environment has not so serious 
social impact.

Selected tools for environmental system analysis

As the name suggests, the system analysis is analysis 
of a system. Hence, instead of considering separate 
parts of a large system, a more holistic approach has to 
be taken. There is always a larger system whose part 
forms the studied system, but still the systems analysis 
approach aims at widening the perspective and thereby 
avoids sub-optimization and unwanted effects.

All tools of environmental system analysis presented 
in Table 1 could be applied to the HW management 
system. Depending on the purpose of research, the 
interested parties can choose any individual tool or 
combine some of them. 

A very popular analytical tool is life cycle assessment 
(LCA). LCA is particularly used for assessment of 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

146

environmental aspects of a municipal waste management 
system, but it could also be used for different flows of HW.

LCA evaluates the potential impact on the 
environment of waste management systems throughout 
all life cycle, from “cradle to grave” (Coleman 2003). 
In contradistinction to products, life cycle boundaries of 
waste (including HW) begins at the waste generation and 
covers the collection, sorting, transporting, processing 
and final disposal. The results of LCA lead to waste 
management system optimization. 

LCC can be used to assess the costs of HW services 
using the life cycle perspective. Social and environmental 
costs may be included.

RA is a broad term and includes risk assessment 
of both chemical substances and accidents. The latter 
concerns unplanned incidents, whereas the former 
concerns the dispersion of chemicals, which is often a 
part of the use of chemicals. RA of chemicals includes 
exposure assessment and effect assessment, while RA 
of accidents includes the analysis of probability and 
possible consequences. As to HW, RA can be used for 
selection the waste management and disposal sites, 
transportation routes with the aim to reduce the impact 
on the environment and society (Nema, Gupta 2003).

SEA is a procedural tool for handling environmental 
(and sustainability) aspects in strategic decision-making 
(policies, programs and plans). It is required by law for 
certain programs and plans. 

Concerning the factors described in the methodology 
section of this paper, choice of the tools for HW 
management assessment is a complex process and 
requires practice and scientific knowledge. The suggested 
tools for the system management or the planning process 
of each HW flow are to be analyzed in detail in future 
research. 

Conclusions

The issue related to both HW management and 
environmental pollution caused by HW having already 
been not a new one, the need for reasonable and 
sustainable waste management is still one of the most 
common complaints. HW management is an important 
part of corporate management because it is directly linked 
to urban infrastructure, human health, and industrial 
environment. Many products contain substances that are 
harmful to human health and the environment. It is of 
primary importance that such HW is sorted out and handled 
separately prior to disposal by recycling, incineration 
or land-filling. Disposal itself is to be monitored so as 
to avoid the release of hazardous substances into the 
environment, like poorly controlled recycling.

Even though there are a number of laws related to HW 
management; they do not address HW management in its 
entire spectrum in some countries which have become 
the EU Members together with Lithuania. Specific 
government agencies are mandated to manage different 

waste sectors, but their roles and responsibilities are not 
clearly defined. In addition, lack of resources, financing, 
technologies, capacity and skills for HW management 
are bringing the impact of waste to the forefront.

Economic feasibility is one of the most important 
considerations in the choice of one option to another. 
Therefore in the indicators’ system, economics of the 
activities is considered by paying special attention to 
HW impact on GDP.  

The waste management planning system is based 
solely on economic aspects. To ensure the sustainable 
HW management, environmental and social aspects 
have to be integrated.

Analysis has shown that the application of waste 
management hierarchy does not always ensure sustainable 
waste management. Effective HW management can be 
achieved only by applying a systematic approach and 
integrating various systems assessment tools. More 
comprehensive analysis of different tools or tools 
combination for HW system assessment is needed 
when   going towards sustainable HW management in 
Lithuania.

References 

Ahluwalia, P.K., Nema, K. A., (2007), A life cycle 
multi-objective optimization model for the 
management of computer waste. Resources, 
Conservation and Recycling 51(4): 792-826.

Baltrėnas, P., Raistenskis, E., Zigmontienė, A. (2004), 
Organinių atliekų biodestrukcijos proceso metu 
išsiskiriančių biodujų eksperimentiniai tyrimai 
Journal of Environmental Engineering and 
Landscape Management 12(1): p. 3-9.

Čepanko, V., Buinevičius, K., Pszczoła, J. (2008), 
Investigation and estimation of exhaust gas 
emission from fermentable waste combustion. , in 
The 7th International conference “Environmental 
engineering”. Technika: Vilnius. p. 1-8.

Coleman T., Masoni, P., Dryer, A., McDougall, F. (2003), 
International expert group on life cycle assessment 
for integrated waste management. The International 
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 8(3): 175–178.

Denafas, G., Buinevičius, K., Rimaitytė, I., Urniežaitė, 
I. (2004), Gyvūninės kilmės atliekų tvarkymo 
problemos Lietuvoje in Tarptautinė mokslinė 
konferencija „Lietuvos Žemės ūkio universitetui 
80“. Kaunas. p. 58-62.

Denafas, G., Rimaitytė, I. (2005), Tvaraus atliekų 
tvarkymo modeliai – įvairių ES šalių ekspertų 
bendro darbo rezultatas Mokslas ir technika 
11(557): 16-17.

Erickson, O., Reich, C. M., Frostell, B., Björklund, 
A., Assefa, G., Sundqvist J.-O., Granath, J., Baky, 
A., Thyselius, L. (2005), Municipal solid waste 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2010. No 4

147

management from a systems perspective. Journal of 
Cleaner Production 13: 241-252.

Finnaveden, G.; Ekvall, T., Moberg, Å. (2007), 
Environmental and economic assessment 
methods for waste management decision-support: 
possibilities and limitations. Waste Management 
and Research 25: 263–269.

ISO, 1997. Environmental management – Life 
Cycle Assessment – Principles and framework. 
International Standard ISO 14041. International 
Organization for Standartisation, Geneva.

Klang, A. G. (2005), Sustainable waste management 
– methods and framework for analysis. Norvegia: 
NTNU-trykk, Trondheim. 17 p. ISBN 82-471-
6893-6.

Klang, A., Vikman P.-Å., Brattebø, H. (2003), 
Sustainable management of demolition waste – an 
integrated model for the evaluation of environmental, 
economic and social aspects. Resources 
Conservation and Recycling 38: 317–334.

Korhonen, J.; Okkonen, L.; Niutanen, V. (2004), 
Industrial ecosystems indicators – direct and 
indirect effects of integrated waste- and by-product 
management and energy production. Clean 
Technologies and Environment Policy 6 (3): 162–173.

Lapinskas, D., Jaskelevičius, B. (2000), Plastmasės 
atliekų deginimas, in Trečioji Lietuvos jaunųjų 
mokslininkų konferencija „Lietuva be mokslo – 
Lietuva be ateities“. Technika: Vilnius. p. 125-130.

McDougall, F., White, P., Franke, M., Hindle, P. 
(2001), Integrated Solid Waste Management: a Life 
Cycle Inventory. Blackwell Publishing.

Miliūtė, J.; Staniškis, J. K. (2009. Application 
of lifecycle assessment in optimisation of 
municipal waste management systems. Case of 
Lithuania. Waste Management and Research, 
doi:10.1177/0734242X09342149.

Moberg, Å. (2006), Environmental system analysis 
tools for decision making. LCA and Swedish waste 
management as an example. Royal Institute of 
Technology, Stockholm.

Morrisey, A.J., Browne, J. (2004), Waste management 
models and their application to sustainable waste 
management. Waste Management 24: 297-308.

Najm M. A.; El-Fadel M. (2004), Computer-based 
interface for an integrated solid waste management 
optimization model. Environmental Modelling & 
Software 19: 1151–1164.

Najm, M., El-Fadel, M., Ayoub, G., El-Taha, M., 
Al-Awar, F. (2002), An optimisation for regional 
integrated solid waste management I. Model 

formulation. Waste Management & Research 20(1): 
37–45.

Najm, M.A., El-Fadel, M. (2004), Computer-based 
interface for an integrated solid waste management 
optimization model. Environmental Modelling & 
Software 19: 1151-1164.

Nema A. K.; Gupta S. K. (2003), Multiobjective 
risk analysis and optimization of regional 
HW management system. Practice Periodical 
of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste 
Management 7(2): 69–77.

Staniškis, J. (2005) Integrated waste management: 
concept and implementation. Environmental 
Research, Engineering and Management 3(33): 40-46.

Tillman, A-M.; Kärrman, E.; Nilson, J. (2000), 
Significance of decision-making for LCA 
methodology. Environmental Impact Assessment 
Review 20: 113-123.

Turner, R. K.; Powell, J. (1991), Towards and 
integrated waste management strategy. 
Environmental Management and Health 2 (1): 6–12.

Ulinskaitė, J., Staniškis, J. K., Motiejūnas, J. (2006), 
Analysis and improvement possibilities of 
hazardous waste management system in Lithuania 
// Environmental Research, Engineering and 
Management 4(38): 40-50.

Ulinskaitė, Jurgita; Židonienė, Sigita. (2009), 
Sustainability indicators for HW management system 
// 3rd International Conference “The Vital Nature 
Sign” proceedings [electronic source] : May 22-23, 
2009 Kaunas / Vytautas Magnus University (VMU). 
Kaunas: VMU. ISBN 9789955125426. p. 1-5.

Wrisberg, N.; Udo de Haes, H. A.; Klöpffer, W. 
(2002), Analytical tools for environmental design 
and management in a systems perspective. Kluwer 
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, ISBN 0-4020-
0626-8.

Zhang, W., Roberts, P. (2007), Report: Integrated 
industrial waste management. Waste Management 
& Research 25: 288-295.

Žičkienė, S. (2004), Sustainable development of 
Lithuania: Tentative Evaluation. Environmental 
Research, Engineering and Management 1(27): 15-19.

Zografos, K.G., Androutsopoulos, K. N. (2008), A 
decision support system for integrated hazardous 
materials routing and emergency responce decisions. 
Transportation Research Part C 16: 684–703.

The article has been reviewed.

Received in April, 2010; accepted in May, 2010.