Solid waste treatment non-waste index evaluation method based on multi-level index system

Abstract

The application discloses a kind of solid waste treatment no waste index evaluation method based on multi-level index system, belong to urban ecological civilization evaluation technical field.Method includes: S1, constructs the multi-level index system with the core of reduction, resource, harmlessness;S2, the data corresponding to each index area is collected and processed into original value;S3, based on sample data characteristics, planning target, domestic and foreign advanced value and national present situation value, determine the grading limit of each three indicators;S4, each index single index is calculated using interpolation method;S5, the weight of layered setting is obtained by using the combination of subjective and objective weighting method and weighted rank sum ratio method, and the final weight is obtained by multiplying step by step;S6, the total score of regional no waste index is obtained by weighted summation.The application realizes the penetration of two-level evaluation of city and region, and the comparability between regions, which can be compared horizontally and tracked vertically, accurately identify the short board of management, and provide standardized and replicable evaluation paradigm for no waste city construction in various places.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of urban ecological civilization evaluation technology, and in particular to a method for evaluating a zero-waste index for solid waste management based on a multi-level indicator system. Background Technology

[0002] The construction of zero-waste cities is being widely promoted across the country, and the evaluation system for zero-waste city construction is an important tool for carrying out this work. A team from the Ministry of Ecology and Environment has proposed the "Zero-Waste Index" method, a comprehensive index that objectively reflects the level of zero-waste city construction and the effectiveness of solid waste pollution prevention and control. Currently, various regions are systematically planning and coordinating the construction of zero-waste cities across their entire areas, with some regions taking the lead in piloting and proposing localized "Zero-Waste Indices" to guide and evaluate the work of building zero-waste cities across their entire regions.

[0003] Researching a waste-free index evaluation method applicable to large and medium-sized cities in China can transform national strategic requirements into technical specifications that can be implemented in various regions. This not only responds to the overall needs of the national waste-free city construction but also aligns with the current state of solid waste management in different regions. A city-wide "waste-free index" can intuitively represent the level of waste-free city construction in the city and its subordinate districts, providing the public with a direct perception of the effectiveness of solid waste management. At the same time, it can serve as a guide for the city-wide waste-free city work in various regions, identifying the advantages and disadvantages of waste-free city construction and guiding the direction of subsequent management work.

[0004] Existing zero-waste index evaluation methods suffer from several shortcomings. First, the selection of indicators is highly subjective and deviates from the true meaning of the "zero-waste index." For example, Chongqing uses both task and performance indicators, leading to overlap. Shanghai uses both outcome and work progress indicators, resulting in a blurred index concept. Second, the grading standards are incomplete and overly reliant on the statistical characteristics of sample data, causing them to be detached from reality. For instance, Shanghai directly uses the minimum, average, and maximum values ​​of data from megacities and super-large cities to determine scores of 60, 80, and 100, respectively. Third, the weighting is not rationally applied. Existing studies often use average weighting, failing to reflect the different levels of importance of indicators. While Chongqing uses subjective weighting, the basis for this is unclear. Fourth, at the application level, there is a lack of connection between the city and district levels. For example, Zhejiang and Chongqing only conduct evaluations and applications within their respective jurisdictions, while Shanghai faces transmission barriers between the city and district levels.

[0005] Furthermore, existing evaluation methods are mostly customized for specific cities or regions, and the selection of indicators and the setting of grading standards often rely directly on the historical statistical characteristics of the region, resulting in a lack of comparability and transferability between different cities. At the same time, due to differences in the stage of solid waste management and statistical foundations across regions, existing methods struggle to meet the evaluation needs of cities at different development levels. There is an urgent need to establish a universal zero-waste index evaluation method with a complete indicator system, scientific grading standards, reasonable weighting, and seamless integration between city and district levels, providing unified technical support for horizontal comparison and vertical tracking of the effectiveness of zero-waste city construction nationwide. Summary of the Invention

[0006] This invention aims to overcome the shortcomings of existing zero-waste index evaluation systems, such as strong subjectivity, unrealistic grading standards, unscientific weighting, and difficulty in interoperability between urban and rural levels. It constructs a universal, multi-level indicator system for solid waste reduction, resource recovery, and harmlessness, and combines grading with a subjective and objective weighting method to quantify the level of zero-waste construction. This enables horizontal regional comparisons and vertical time-series comparisons, accurately identifies governance shortcomings, and provides replicable solutions for zero-waste evaluation in various regions.

[0007] To achieve the above objectives, this invention provides a method for evaluating a zero-waste index for solid waste management based on a multi-level indicator system. The method emphasizes two points in indicator selection: first, it selects high-frequency indicators through statistical analysis of indicator frequencies in literature and policy documents, ensuring objectivity; second, it selects only indicators representing effectiveness, excluding task indicators and work progress indicators, highlighting the "zero-waste index's" connotation of objectively representing the effectiveness of zero-waste city construction. Specifically, it includes the following steps: S1. Construct a multi-level solid waste treatment evaluation index system. The index system is based on three dimensions: solid waste reduction, resource utilization, and harmlessness. It establishes a hierarchical index structure and selects multiple third-level core indicators that objectively represent the effectiveness of solid waste treatment. S2. Collect the basic statistical data of the region corresponding to each third-level indicator, and process the raw values ​​according to the preset calculation method of each indicator; S3. Establish grading standards, based on the characteristics of sample data, planning goals of relevant departments, advanced values ​​at home and abroad, and current national values, and determine the grading limits for each level of indicator; S4. Based on the data obtained in S2 and the grading standards established in S3, use interpolation to calculate the individual sub-index score corresponding to each tertiary indicator. S5. The weights of each level of indicators are set by combining subjective and objective weighting methods with weighted rank sum ratios. The final weights of each level of indicators are obtained by multiplying them by level after the weighting is done. S6. The individual sub-index scores calculated in S4 and the final weights of the corresponding three-level indicators set in S5 are weighted and summed to obtain the total score of the regional zero-waste index, which serves as the evaluation result of the regional solid waste management and zero-waste city construction level.

[0008] Preferably, in S1, the indicator system includes 3 primary indicators, 10 secondary indicators, and 11 tertiary indicators; The primary indicators include source reduction, comprehensive utilization, and harmless disposal; The primary indicator for source reduction includes four secondary indicators: general industrial solid waste, hazardous waste, construction waste, and domestic waste. Each secondary indicator corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the generation intensity of general industrial solid waste, the generation intensity of hazardous waste, the generation intensity of construction waste, and the generation intensity of domestic waste. The comprehensive utilization primary indicator has four secondary indicators: general industrial solid waste, construction waste, domestic waste, and agricultural solid waste. Each of the secondary indicators for general industrial solid waste, construction waste, and domestic waste corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the comprehensive utilization rate of general industrial solid waste, the resource utilization rate of construction waste, and the recycling rate of domestic waste. The agricultural solid waste secondary indicator has two tertiary indicators: agricultural film recycling rate and pesticide packaging waste recycling rate. The primary indicator for harmless disposal includes two secondary indicators: hazardous waste and domestic waste. Each secondary indicator corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the proportion of hazardous waste disposed of in landfills and the proportion of raw domestic waste disposed of in landfills.

[0009] Preferably, in S2, the calculation method for the original values ​​of each third-level indicator is as follows: General industrial solid waste generation intensity = General industrial solid waste generation amount / Industrial added value, unit: tons / ten thousand yuan; Hazardous waste generation intensity = Hazardous waste generation amount including medical waste / Regional GDP, unit: tons / 10,000 yuan; Construction waste generation intensity = Construction waste generation excluding slag and mud / Added value of the construction industry, unit: tons / ten thousand yuan; Household waste generation intensity = Household waste collection volume / resident population / 365, unit: kg / person / day; General industrial solid waste comprehensive utilization rate = General industrial solid waste comprehensive utilization amount / (General industrial solid waste generated in the current year + Comprehensive utilization of previous years' storage amount); Construction waste resource utilization rate = Construction waste resource utilization amount / Construction waste generation amount; Household waste recycling rate = Amount of household waste recycled / Amount of household waste generated; Agricultural film recycling rate = Amount of agricultural film recycled / Amount of agricultural film used; Pesticide packaging waste recycling rate = Amount of pesticide packaging waste recycled / Amount of pesticide packaging waste generated; The proportion of hazardous waste disposed of by landfill = the amount of hazardous waste disposed of by landfill / the amount of hazardous waste generated; The percentage of raw municipal solid waste sent to landfills = the amount of raw municipal solid waste sent to landfills / the amount of municipal solid waste generated.

[0010] Preferably, in S3, the method for determining the grading limit specifically includes: A typical set of cities was selected as the sample library, and the original data of each sample city on all tertiary indicators were obtained to form a sample dataset. Using the data distribution characteristics of each indicator in the sample dataset as the basic reference range, and combining the relevant planning target values ​​issued by the national and industry authorities, the international advanced level values ​​of similar indicators, and the national average value, the basic reference range is corrected and calibrated. The corrected and calibrated reference range is divided into several continuous score intervals according to the gradient from excellent to poor. The score values ​​of each level in the pre-set scoring system are used as the endpoints of the intervals to determine the grading limits of each level of score for each of the three-level indicators.

[0011] Preferably, in S4, the specific calculation method of the interpolation method is as follows: ; in, WORD p This is a sub-index of indicator P. I p This represents the original value of indicator P. BP Hi To and I p The highest value of the closest single indicator limit, BP Lo To and I p The lowest value of the closest single indicator limit. WORD Hi To and BP Hi The corresponding sub-indices, WORD Lo To and BP Lo The corresponding sub-index.

[0012] Preferably, in S5, the specific method for setting the weights is as follows: Based on the definition of a waste-free city, three primary indicators are subjectively weighted; based on the comprehensive ranking of the waste generation volume and environmental risk of different types of solid waste, the weighted rank-sum ratio method is used to weight the secondary indicators; the tertiary indicators are objectively weighted using an average allocation method; and the weights of each level of indicators are multiplied level by level after being weighted in a hierarchical manner to obtain the final weight.

[0013] Preferably, in S6, the formula for calculating the total score of the waste-free index of the region using the weighted summation method is: ; in, WORD The total score of the region's zero-waste index; WORD n This is the sub-index of the nth tertiary indicator; wt n This represents the final weight of the nth tertiary indicator.

[0014] Preferably, routine assessments are conducted on an annual cycle, while quarterly assessments can be used when high-frequency data statistics are available. The assessment results are used to achieve horizontal comparisons across multiple regions and vertical comparisons of different time periods within the same region, to identify shortcomings in regional solid waste management and guide the optimization of waste-free city construction.

[0015] Preferably, in S2, the sources of regional basic statistical data include information announcements on solid waste pollution prevention and control, regional statistical yearbooks, statistical bulletins on national economic and social development, and data obtained through institutionalized and regular special surveys.

[0016] Therefore, the present invention employs the above-mentioned method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system, which has the following beneficial effects: 1) Construct a universal, objective, and scientific multi-level zero-waste index evaluation system to evaluate the entire process of solid waste reduction, resource utilization, and harmless treatment, adapt to the current status of urban solid waste management nationwide, and solve the problems of insufficient subjectivity and scientific rigor in existing evaluation methods; 2) Supports horizontal comparisons between different regions and vertical tracking of the effectiveness of the same region at different times, clearly determining the stage and development positioning of zero-waste city construction in various places; 3) The indicators rely on existing statistical data, the calculation process is simple, the hierarchical standards and weighting rules are scientific and reasonable, and they are highly practical. 4) The entire evaluation method is standardized and modularized, and is replicable, providing a mature reference paradigm for cities across the country to build localized zero-waste index evaluation systems.

[0017] The technical solution of the present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. Attached Figure Description

[0018] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the solid waste treatment zero-waste index evaluation method based on a multi-level index system of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0019] The technical solution of the present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. Unless otherwise defined, the technical or scientific terms used in this invention should have the ordinary meaning understood by those skilled in the art. The present invention provides a method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level indicator system, which can be applied to the evaluation of the effectiveness of zero-waste city construction in large and medium-sized cities across the country. The specific implementation of the present invention will be described in detail below using a large city in my country (hereinafter referred to as "the city") as an example, but the application scope of the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0020] Example 1 like Figure 1 As shown, this embodiment provides a method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system, including the following steps: S1. Construct a multi-level evaluation index system for solid waste treatment.

[0021] In this step, a hierarchical indicator structure is built around the three dimensions of solid waste reduction, resource utilization, and harmlessness. Multiple third-level core indicators that objectively characterize the effectiveness of solid waste management are selected to evaluate the level of waste-free city construction based on the management of different types of solid waste.

[0022] Specifically, the indicator system includes 3 primary indicators, 10 secondary indicators, and 11 tertiary indicators.

[0023] The primary indicators include source reduction, comprehensive utilization, and harmless disposal.

[0024] The primary indicator for source reduction comprises four secondary indicators: general industrial solid waste, hazardous waste, construction waste, and domestic waste. These indicators primarily assess the generation intensity of these solid wastes, specifically the amount of general industrial solid waste generated per unit of industrial added value, the amount of hazardous waste generated per unit of GDP, the amount of construction waste generated per unit of construction industry added value (excluding slag and mud), and the average daily amount of domestic waste generated per person. Each secondary indicator corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the generation intensity of general industrial solid waste, hazardous waste, construction waste, and domestic waste.

[0025] The comprehensive utilization primary indicator has four secondary indicators: general industrial solid waste, construction waste, domestic waste, and agricultural solid waste. Each of the secondary indicators for general industrial solid waste, construction waste, and domestic waste corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the comprehensive utilization rate of general industrial solid waste, the resource utilization rate of construction waste, and the recycling rate of domestic waste. The agricultural solid waste secondary indicator has two tertiary indicators: agricultural film recycling rate and pesticide packaging waste recycling rate.

[0026] The primary indicator for harmless disposal has two secondary indicators: hazardous waste and domestic waste. Each secondary indicator corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the proportion of hazardous waste disposed of by landfill and the proportion of raw domestic waste disposed of by landfill.

[0027] The aforementioned indicator system revolves around the entire life cycle of solid waste from generation to disposal, focusing on three key stages: reduction, resource recovery, and harmlessness. It covers four major sectors: industry, agriculture, construction, and daily life, and can objectively reflect the true level of regional solid waste management. The structure of the indicator system is shown in Table 1.

[0028] Table 1 Evaluation Index System for Multi-level Solid Waste Treatment

[0029] S2. Collect the basic statistical data of the region corresponding to each third-level indicator, and process the raw values ​​according to the preset calculation method of each indicator.

[0030] In this step, the calculation methods for the original values ​​of each tertiary indicator are as follows: General industrial solid waste generation intensity = General industrial solid waste generation amount / Industrial added value, unit: tons / ten thousand yuan; Hazardous waste generation intensity = Hazardous waste generation amount including medical waste / Regional GDP, unit: tons / 10,000 yuan; Construction waste generation intensity = Construction waste generation excluding slag and mud / Added value of the construction industry, unit: tons / ten thousand yuan; Household waste generation intensity = Household waste collection volume / resident population / 365, unit: kg / person / day; The comprehensive utilization rate of general industrial solid waste = the amount of general industrial solid waste comprehensively utilized / (the amount of general industrial solid waste generated in the current year + the amount of stored waste from previous years comprehensively utilized), and the result is expressed as a percentage. Construction waste resource utilization rate = amount of construction waste utilized / amount of construction waste generated, the result is expressed as a percentage; Household waste recycling rate = amount of household waste recycled / amount of household waste generated, the result is expressed as a percentage; Agricultural film recycling rate = agricultural film recycling amount / agricultural film usage amount, the result is expressed as a percentage; Pesticide packaging waste recycling rate = amount of pesticide packaging waste recycled / amount of pesticide packaging waste generated, expressed as a percentage; The percentage of hazardous waste disposed of by landfill = the amount of hazardous waste disposed of by landfill / the amount of hazardous waste generated, expressed as a percentage. The percentage of raw municipal solid waste sent to landfills = the amount of raw municipal solid waste sent to landfills / the amount of municipal solid waste generated, expressed as a percentage.

[0031] The sources of basic regional statistical data include information bulletins on solid waste pollution prevention and control, regional statistical yearbooks, statistical bulletins on national economic and social development, and data obtained through institutionalized and routine special surveys. All data sources are supported by mature statistical systems, and the data acquisition is standardized and reliable. In this embodiment, the relevant data for the city are shown in Table 2.

[0032] Table 2. Original values ​​of each tertiary indicator in the city.

[0033] S3. Establish grading standards. Based on the characteristics of sample data, planning goals of relevant departments, advanced values ​​at home and abroad, and current national values, determine the grading limits for each level of indicator.

[0034] In this embodiment, 38 typical large and medium-sized cities (comprising lists of megacities, super-large cities, and 35 large and medium-sized cities) were selected as the sample database. Based on the characteristics of the sample data, relevant departmental planning objectives, advanced domestic and international values, and the current national situation, a five-tiered grading standard was determined: 60 points (passing), 70 points (average), 80 points (good), 90 points (excellent), and 100 points (outstanding). The grading limits for each of the three levels are shown in Table 3.

[0035] Table 3 Grading Standards

[0036] The aforementioned grading standards were determined by integrating multiple dimensions of reference: the sample database data reflects the actual governance level distribution of typical large and medium-sized cities in my country; the planning goals of relevant departments reflect policy guidance and requirements; domestic and international advanced values ​​represent the best practices in the industry; and the national current status values ​​ensure that the standards are adapted to the national conditions. The five-tier grading standards cover a complete gradient from passable to excellent, which can effectively distinguish different governance levels and provide clear directions and goals for improvement for each city.

[0037] S4. Based on the data obtained in S2 and the grading standards established in S3, use interpolation to calculate the individual sub-index score corresponding to each tertiary indicator.

[0038] When the indicator data matches the specific value in the grading standard table, the sub-index corresponding to that value is directly used as the sub-index of the indicator.

[0039] When the indicator data is not a specific value in the grading standard table, the corresponding sub-index is calculated using linear interpolation. The calculation formula is as follows: ; in, WORD p This is a sub-index of indicator P. I pThis represents the original value of indicator P. BP Hi To and I p The highest value of the closest single indicator limit, BP Lo To and I p The lowest value of the closest single indicator limit. WORD Hi To and BP Hi The corresponding sub-indices, WORD Lo To and BP Lo The corresponding sub-index.

[0040] Taking the city's general industrial solid waste generation intensity as an example, the original value is 0.0331 tons / 10,000 yuan. This value falls between 0.1 tons / 10,000 yuan (corresponding to a score of 90) and 0 tons / 10,000 yuan (corresponding to a score of 100) in the grading standard. Substituting into the interpolation formula: BP Hi =0.1, BP Lo =0, WORD Hi =90, WORD Lo =100, IP =0.0331; WORD =(90-100) / (0.1-0)×(0.0331-0)+100=96.69.

[0041] That is, the sub-index score of this indicator is 96.69.

[0042] Using the same method, the individual sub-index scores of the city's 11 tertiary indicators were calculated, and the results are shown in Table 4.

[0043] Table 4. Scores of individual sub-indices for each tertiary indicator

[0044] S5. The weights of each level of indicators are set by combining subjective and objective weighting methods with weighted rank-sum ratio. The final weights of each level of indicator are obtained by multiplying them by level after the weighting is done.

[0045] In this step, the weights are set in the following way: Based on the definition of a waste-free city, three primary indicators are subjectively weighted; based on the comprehensive ranking of the waste generation volume and environmental risk of different types of solid waste, the weighted rank-sum ratio method is used to weight the secondary indicators; the tertiary indicators are objectively weighted using an average allocation method; and the weights of each level of indicators are multiplied level by level after being weighted in a hierarchical manner to obtain the final weight.

[0046] Specifically, in this implementation, the weights of the indicators at each level are set as follows: At the primary indicator level: source reduction has a weight of 35%, comprehensive utilization has a weight of 35%, and harmless disposal has a weight of 30%. This weighting reflects a balanced consideration of the three dimensions of reduction, resource recovery, and harmlessness. Among them, source reduction and comprehensive utilization, as the front-end and mid-end links of solid waste management, have a slightly higher weight than end-of-pipe harmless disposal, in order to guide cities to pay more attention to source control and resource recycling.

[0047] At the secondary indicator level: Under the primary indicator of source reduction, general industrial solid waste accounts for 25%, hazardous waste 20%, construction waste 30%, and domestic waste 25%; under the primary indicator of comprehensive utilization, general industrial solid waste accounts for 20%, construction waste 35%, domestic waste 35%, and agricultural solid waste 10%; under the primary indicator of harmless disposal, hazardous waste accounts for 60% and domestic waste 40%. This weighting fully considers the differences in waste generation volume and environmental risk among different categories of solid waste. In specific implementation, under the primary indicator dimension, the included solid waste categories are ranked according to waste generation volume and environmental risk (higher rank is higher), and the weighted rank sum ratio (RSR) is calculated. After normalization, the weights of the secondary indicators are obtained. Taking general industrial solid waste under the primary indicator of source reduction as an example, its waste generation volume is ranked 3, and its environmental risk is ranked 4. According to the weight of risk:volume = 4:6, the weighted rank sum ratio (RSR) is calculated as follows: =0.68.

[0048] For example, construction waste generates a large volume of waste in the city, so it is given a higher weight; hazardous waste poses a high environmental risk, so it is given a 60% weight in the harmless disposal process.

[0049] At the tertiary indicator level: the tertiary indicators contained within each secondary indicator are weighted using an average allocation method, meaning the sum of the weights of all tertiary indicators under the same secondary indicator equals the weight of that secondary indicator. Specifically, the agricultural solid waste secondary indicator includes two tertiary indicators: agricultural film recycling rate and pesticide packaging waste recycling rate, each accounting for 50%.

[0050] After assigning weights in layers and multiplying them at each level, the final weights of the 11 tertiary indicators are obtained, as shown in Table 5.

[0051] Table 5 Indicator Weight Table

[0052] The agricultural districts under the city's jurisdiction directly adopt the weights shown in Table 5; non-agricultural districts, since there are no agricultural solid waste related indicators, need to allocate the corresponding weights of agricultural solid waste (i.e., agricultural film recycling rate 1.75% and pesticide packaging waste recycling rate 1.75%) according to the weight ratios of other solid wastes in the same dimension, in order to ensure the integrity of the evaluation system and the comparability between regions.

[0053] S6. The individual sub-index scores calculated in S4 and the final weights of the corresponding three-level indicators set in S5 are weighted and summed to obtain the total score of the regional zero-waste index, which serves as the evaluation result of the regional solid waste management and zero-waste city construction level.

[0054] The formula for calculating the total score of the waste-free index in a region using the weighted summation method is as follows: ; in, WORD The total score of the region's zero-waste index; WORD n This is the sub-index of the nth tertiary indicator; wt n This represents the final weight of the nth tertiary indicator.

[0055] Substitute the individual sub-indices of each tertiary indicator of the city and their corresponding final weights into the formula: WORD =96.69×0.0875+94×0.0700+60×0.1050+80×0.0875+87.42×0.0700+90.07×0.1225+82×0.1225+86×0.0175+87×0.0175+76.32×0.1800+100×0.1200.

[0056] The overall calculation results are shown in Table 6: Table 6. Calculation results of individual sub-indices, corresponding weights, and weighted scores for each tertiary indicator.

[0057] WORD =8.46+6.58+6.30+7.00+6.12+11.03+10.05+1.51+1.52+13.74+12.00=84.31.

[0058] The city's zero-waste index score was calculated to be 84.31.

[0059] According to the evaluation grading standards: a zero-waste index score of 60 or above but less than 70 points is rated as "Pass"; 70 or above but less than 80 points is rated as "Average"; 80 or above but less than 90 points is rated as "Good"; 90 or above but less than 100 points is rated as "Excellent"; and 100 points or above is rated as "Outstanding".

[0060] The city's zero-waste index score was 84.31, falling into the "good" category. Looking at the differences between the actual weighted scores and their weighted scores for each indicator, the proportion of hazardous waste disposed of in landfills (difference of 4.26 points) and the intensity of construction waste generation (difference of 4.20 points) are the most significant obstacles to improving the zero-waste index. The recycling rate of household waste (difference of 2.20 points) and the intensity of household waste generation (difference of 1.75 points) also still have considerable room for improvement. This evaluation result can provide data support and a basis for decision-making regarding the optimization direction of the city's subsequent zero-waste city construction work.

[0061] Example 2 This embodiment, based on Embodiment 1, further illustrates the application of the evaluation method of the present invention in regional comparison and dynamic tracking.

[0062] Routine evaluations are conducted annually, with an evaluation cycle of one year. When high-frequency data collection is available, more frequent evaluation cycles, such as quarterly evaluations, may also be used.

[0063] The evaluation results can be used to make horizontal comparisons between multiple regions: within the same evaluation period, the zero-waste index scores of each district under the city are calculated according to the same indicator system, grading standards and weight settings. Since the evaluation system is completely consistent, the scores between the districts are comparable, and the relative position and development differences of each district in the construction of a zero-waste city can be clearly determined.

[0064] At the same time, it can realize longitudinal comparison of the same region at different time periods: by tracking and comparing the zero-waste index scores of the city or its subordinate districts in different assessment cycles (such as different years), it can intuitively reflect the changing trend of regional solid waste management effectiveness, judge the actual effect of various management measures, and help the corresponding regions clarify their own positioning, determine phase goals, and grasp the construction process.

[0065] Furthermore, based on the zero-waste index calculation results, the advantages and disadvantages of zero-waste city construction can be accurately identified: the areas corresponding to indicators with high (low) sub-index scores are the areas of relative advantage (disadvantage) of the region, and the difference between the actual weighted score of the indicator and its weight score can reflect the obstacles of the solid waste management system, thereby guiding the precise adjustment of subsequent work directions and the effective allocation of resources.

[0066] Example 3 This embodiment, based on Embodiment 1, further illustrates the applicability of the evaluation method of the present invention in different types of regions.

[0067] For agricultural areas (such as agricultural districts under the jurisdiction of the city), a complete indicator system is directly used for evaluation, including two tertiary indicators related to agricultural solid waste (agricultural film recycling rate and pesticide packaging waste recycling rate), which comprehensively reflects the effectiveness of agricultural areas in agricultural solid waste management.

[0068] For non-agricultural areas (such as the city's central urban area), where there is no agricultural film and pesticide packaging waste, the corresponding indicator data cannot be obtained. In this case, the weights corresponding to the secondary indicators of agricultural solid waste (totaling 3.5%, i.e., agricultural film recycling rate 1.75% and pesticide packaging waste recycling rate 1.75%) need to be allocated according to the weight ratios of other solid wastes in the same dimension. The specific allocation method is as follows: Under the primary indicator of comprehensive utilization, in addition to agricultural solid waste, there are three secondary indicators: general industrial solid waste (weight 20%), construction waste (weight 35%), and domestic waste (weight 35%), with a total weight of 90%. The 3.5% weight is allocated in a ratio of 20:35:35, that is, the comprehensive utilization rate of general industrial solid waste increases by 0.78 percentage points (adjusted to 7.78%), the resource utilization rate of construction waste increases by 1.36 percentage points (adjusted to 13.61%), and the recycling rate of domestic waste increases by 1.36 percentage points (adjusted to 13.61%). After the adjustment, the total weight of the three-level indicators in non-agricultural areas remains at 100%, ensuring the integrity of the evaluation system and the rationality of the evaluation results.

[0069] Through the aforementioned flexible weight adjustment mechanism, the method of this invention can be adapted to the actual solid waste treatment in different types of regions (agricultural and non-agricultural areas, industrial and service-oriented areas, etc.), and has good regional adaptability and promotion value.

[0070] Therefore, this invention adopts the above-mentioned evaluation method for zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level indicator system. By scientifically constructing the indicator system, establishing grading standards, and using the weighted rank sum ratio method combined with subjective and objective weighting, it solves the problems of strong subjectivity, insufficient scientificity and rationality, and weak applicability of the existing evaluation system. It realizes the connection between the city and district-level evaluations, intuitively reflects the level of zero-waste city construction, and identifies shortcomings.

[0071] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention and not to limit them. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications or equivalent substitutions can still be made to the technical solutions of the present invention, and these modifications or equivalent substitutions cannot cause the modified technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating a zero-waste index in solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: S1. Construct a multi-level solid waste treatment evaluation index system. The index system is based on three dimensions: solid waste reduction, resource utilization, and harmlessness. It establishes a hierarchical index structure and selects multiple third-level core indicators that objectively represent the effectiveness of solid waste treatment. S2. Collect the basic statistical data of the region corresponding to each third-level indicator, and process the raw values ​​according to the preset calculation method of each indicator; S3. Establish grading standards, based on the characteristics of sample data, planning goals of relevant departments, advanced values ​​at home and abroad, and current national values, and determine the grading limits for each level of indicator; S4. Based on the data obtained in S2 and the grading standards established in S3, use interpolation to calculate the individual sub-index score corresponding to each tertiary indicator. S5. The weights of each level of indicators are set by combining subjective and objective weighting methods with weighted rank sum ratios. The final weights of each level of indicators are obtained by multiplying them by level after the weighting is done. S6. The individual sub-index scores calculated in S4 and the final weights of the corresponding three-level indicators set in S5 are weighted and summed to obtain the total score of the regional zero-waste index, which serves as the evaluation result of the regional solid waste management and zero-waste city construction level.

2. The method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system according to claim 1, characterized in that, In S1, the indicator system includes 3 primary indicators, 10 secondary indicators, and 11 tertiary indicators; The primary indicators include source reduction, comprehensive utilization, and harmless disposal; The primary indicator for source reduction includes four secondary indicators: general industrial solid waste, hazardous waste, construction waste, and domestic waste. Each secondary indicator corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the generation intensity of general industrial solid waste, the generation intensity of hazardous waste, the generation intensity of construction waste, and the generation intensity of domestic waste. The comprehensive utilization primary indicator includes four secondary indicators: general industrial solid waste, construction waste, domestic waste, and agricultural solid waste; Each of the secondary indicators for general industrial solid waste, construction waste, and domestic waste corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the comprehensive utilization rate of general industrial solid waste, the resource utilization rate of construction waste, and the recycling rate of domestic waste. The secondary indicators for agricultural solid waste include two tertiary indicators: agricultural film recycling rate and pesticide packaging waste recycling rate. The primary indicator for harmless disposal includes two secondary indicators: hazardous waste and domestic waste. Each secondary indicator corresponds to one tertiary indicator, namely, the proportion of hazardous waste disposed of in landfills and the proportion of raw domestic waste disposed of in landfills.

3. The method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system according to claim 2, characterized in that, In S2, the calculation methods for the original values ​​of each tertiary indicator are as follows: General industrial solid waste generation intensity = General industrial solid waste generation amount / Industrial added value, unit: tons / ten thousand yuan; Hazardous waste generation intensity = Hazardous waste generation amount including medical waste / Regional GDP, unit: tons / 10,000 yuan; Construction waste generation intensity = Construction waste generation excluding slag and mud / Added value of the construction industry, unit: tons / ten thousand yuan; Household waste generation intensity = Household waste collection volume / resident population / 365, unit: kg / person / day; General industrial solid waste comprehensive utilization rate = General industrial solid waste comprehensive utilization amount / (General industrial solid waste generated in the current year + Comprehensive utilization of previous years' storage amount); Construction waste resource utilization rate = Construction waste resource utilization amount / Construction waste generation amount; Household waste recycling rate = Amount of household waste recycled / Amount of household waste generated; Agricultural film recycling rate = Amount of agricultural film recycled / Amount of agricultural film used; Pesticide packaging waste recycling rate = Amount of pesticide packaging waste recycled / Amount of pesticide packaging waste generated; The proportion of hazardous waste disposed of by landfill = the amount of hazardous waste disposed of by landfill / the amount of hazardous waste generated; The percentage of raw municipal solid waste sent to landfills = the amount of raw municipal solid waste sent to landfills / the amount of municipal solid waste generated.

4. The method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system according to claim 3, characterized in that, In S3, the method for determining the grading limit specifically includes: A typical set of cities was selected as the sample library, and the original data of each sample city on all tertiary indicators were obtained to form a sample dataset. Using the data distribution characteristics of each indicator in the sample dataset as the basic reference range, and combining the relevant planning target values ​​issued by the national and industry authorities, the international advanced level values ​​of similar indicators, and the national average value, the basic reference range is corrected and calibrated. The corrected and calibrated reference range is divided into several continuous score intervals according to the gradient from excellent to poor. The score values ​​of each level in the pre-set scoring system are used as the endpoints of the intervals to determine the grading limits of each level of score for each of the three-level indicators.

5. The method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system according to claim 4, characterized in that, In S4, the specific calculation method of the interpolation method is as follows: ； in, IZWI p This is a sub-index of indicator P. I p This represents the original value of indicator P. BP Hi To and I p The highest value of the closest single indicator limit, BP Lo To and I p The lowest value of the closest single indicator limit. IZWI Hi To and BP Hi The corresponding sub-indices, IZWI Lo To and BP Lo The corresponding sub-index.

6. The method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system according to claim 5, characterized in that, In S5, the specific method for setting weights is as follows: Based on the definition of a waste-free city, three primary indicators are subjectively weighted; based on the comprehensive ranking of the waste generation volume and environmental risk of different types of solid waste, the weighted rank-sum ratio method is used to weight the secondary indicators; the tertiary indicators are objectively weighted using an average allocation method; and the weights of each level of indicators are multiplied level by level after being weighted in a hierarchical manner to obtain the final weight.

7. The method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system according to claim 6, characterized in that, In S6, the formula for calculating the total score of the waste-free index of a region using the weighted summation method is as follows: ； in, ZWI The total score of the region's zero-waste index; IZWI n This is the sub-index of the nth tertiary indicator; wt n This represents the final weight of the nth tertiary indicator.

8. The method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system according to claim 1, characterized in that, Annual evaluations are conducted routinely, while quarterly evaluations can be used when high-frequency data statistics are available. The evaluation results are used to achieve horizontal comparisons across multiple regions and vertical comparisons of different time periods within the same region, identifying shortcomings in regional solid waste management and guiding the optimization of waste-free city construction.

9. The method for evaluating the zero-waste index of solid waste treatment based on a multi-level index system according to claim 1, characterized in that, In S2, the sources of regional basic statistical data include information bulletins on solid waste pollution prevention and control, regional statistical yearbooks, statistical bulletins on national economic and social development, and data obtained through institutionalized and routine special surveys.

Images