# Study on the Method of Household Waste Collection: Case Study
## 3 Results  
Following the analysis of the data obtained through the questionnaires, the following graphical representation was derived (Figure 2 and Table 1). Figure 1: Working methodology. Figure 2: Distribution of the results obtained through the questionnaire. The following conclusions may be drawn from the graphic representation in Figure 2:  
* 70% of those who participated in the survey were from urban areas, with the rest from rural areas;
* The number of female respondents who completed the questionnaire was determined to be 128 greater than the number of male respondents who did so;
* The age group 18-29 years had the most respondents (182), with 57.7% from urban areas and 42.3% from rural areas;
- People aged 30 to 39 were the second largest category, in terms of the number of respondents, with 104, more precisely 84 from urban areas, and 20 from rural areas;
- The age groups with the lowest values corresponded to intervals of more than 65 years. Six respondents were found between the ages of 15 and 17, 36 respondents were found between the ages of 40 and 49, 14 respondents were found between the ages of 50 and 59, and for the age range of 60-64 years, just one responder was found. * There were 178 respondents with higher education, with 122 from the urban areas and 56 from the rural areas;
- There were 77 respondents with postgraduate degrees, 63 of them living in urban areas and 14 in rural areas; \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Class** & **Number** & **Contribution [\%]** \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Location of respondent (pcs.)} \\ \hline urban & 244 & 70.11 \\ rural & 104 & 29.89 \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Sex (person)} \\ \hline female & 110 & 31.61 \\ male & 238 & 68.39 \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Age (person)} \\ \hline
18–29 years & 182 & 52.30 \\
30–39 years & 104 & 29.89 \\
40–49 years & 36 & 10.34 \\
50–59 years & 14 & 4.02 \\
15–17 years & 6 & 1.72 \\
60–64 years & 5 & 1.44 \\ above 65 years & 1 & 0.29 \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Education level (person)} \\ \hline university & 178 & 51.15 \\ postgraduate & 77 & 22.13 \\ secondary & 71 & 20.40 \\ other studies & 15 & 4.31 \\ professional & 7 & 2.01 \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Waste collection method (pcs.)} \\ \hline garbage bags & 219 & 62.93 \\ dumpsters & 113 & 32.47 \\ garbage cans & 16 & 4.31 \\ cardboard boxes & 1 & 0.28 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Table indicating the studied parameters’ frequency analysis by classes, amount and waste collection method. * Those with a high school diploma had a score of 71, with 62% coming from urban areas and 38% living in rural areas;
* Other types of education applied to the remaining 3.73% of those who took part in the study (primary, secondary, vocational, or other). * Many urban women between the ages of 18 and 29 and between 30 and 39 who have finished their university and postgraduate degrees collect household waste in household bags;
* Most urban men between the ages of 18 and 29 and between 30 and 39, with a high school or university degree, collect home waste in garbage bags;
* The majority of women in rural areas, between the ages of 18 and 29, with college degrees, collect household waste in landfills;
* In rural areas, most men between the ages of 18 and 29 with a high school education are responsible for collecting household waste in the trash. In Table 1 it is noticeable that the largest share of 70.11% belonged to urban respondents. Men constituted the overwhelming share of 68.39% of the respondents. People aged 18-29 years constituted 52.30% of the respondents. It should be noted that respondents with higher education had a dominant share of 51.15%. Next, a statistical evaluation of the data collecting method was carried out, based on the respondents' location (Table 2) and age (Table 3). Based on this analysis, it was concluded that the collection of urban household waste in household bags accounted for the biggest percentage, at 79.01%.