Article

Modelling Key Performance Indicators in a Gamified Waste

Management Tool
Georgios Pappas 1,2,3, * , Iliana Papamichael 4 , Antonis Zorpas 4 , Joshua E. Siegel 5 , Jacob Rutkowski 5
and Konstantinos Politopoulos 2
1 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Michigan State University,
East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
2 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou,
15780 Athens, Greece; [email protected]
3 Laboratory of Educational Material and Methodology, Open University of Cyprus, Latsia, Nicosia 2220,
Cyprus
4 Laboratory of Chemical Engineering and Engineering Sustainability, Faculty of Pure and Applied Sciences,
Open University of Cyprus, P.O.Box 12794, Latsia, Nicosia 2252, Cyprus;
[email protected] (I.P.); [email protected] (A.Z.)
5 Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA;
[email protected] (J.E.S.); [email protected] (J.R.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Broader understanding of waste management has the potential to bring about broad societal
change impacting the climate crisis and public health. We present existing waste management tools
and commercially-available games involving waste management, highlighting the strengths and
opportunities left unaddressed by these tools in educational contexts and planning use cases. A
survey motivates the need for enhanced interactive tools providing clear feedback through quick-
visibility performance indicators. After identifying an opportunity to build upon highly-detailed
multi-criteria simulation tools, we explore the need for easy-to-read performance metrics that will
bring to the field of waste management easily identifiable and measurable key performance indicators





 (KPIs) that vary alongside factors affecting waste management policies. Such metrics are introduced
Citation: Pappas, G.; Papamichael, I.; and detailed as part of a unified waste management model. We then develop a representative
Zorpas, A.; Siegel, J.E.; Rutkowski, J.; gamified educational tool based upon this model to be used by students, decision makers planning
Politopoulos, K. Modelling Key real-world policies, and the public. This simulator is built upon the Unity Game Engine and emulates
Performance Indicators in a Gamified waste management techniques and resulting KPIs within the context of a virtual city.
Waste Management Tool. Modelling
2022, 3, 27–53. https://doi.org/
Keywords: waste management; key performance indicators; gamified tools; simulation; modelling
10.3390/modelling3010003

Received: 25 October 2021

Accepted: 17 December 2021
Published: 24 December 2021 1. Introduction
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral Waste management is an increasingly visible and essential element to functioning
with regard to jurisdictional claims in civilization. It is a particularly critical area of study in addressing growing climate [1] and
published maps and institutional affil- public health [2] crises, yet in-depth exploration of this important topic is often not feasible
iations. to the average person as knowledge barriers and challenges relating to data access hinder
public education efforts. In truth, it is these “average” individuals who most contribute to
these problems and—through behavioral changes—might best support their amelioration.
Increasing public awareness of challenges and opportunities in waste management
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. has the potential to bring about significant positive change. However, while the theory
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
of waste management is studied widely, and observational data from real-world cities
This article is an open access article
contribute to our modelling of it, waste management remains for many a difficult concept
distributed under the terms and
to understand–particularly as far as drivers of change are concerned. For many, a lack of
conditions of the Creative Commons
“hands on” data makes developing intuition difficult. For others, poor understanding of
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
critical evaluative performance metrics makes it tough to understand what effect policies
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
might have on waste generation and management.

Modelling 2022, 3, 27–53. https://doi.org/10.3390/modelling3010003 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/modelling

Modelling 2022, 3 28

Though tools have been developed to quantify waste management efficacy, and sim-
ulators have been built to allow individuals to “pull the levers” in a virtual environment
to gauge their impact, these metrics and simulators are needlessly complex and therefore
only serve a small audience. Existing simulations map inputs to performance indicators,
requiring a complex setup to develop and adapt models for environments such as cities.
This expertise requirement poses a barrier to knowledge that limits individuals’ under-
standing of waste management systems, whereas broader knowledge of waste management
could contribute positively towards the creation of enhanced social policies and constituent
engagement in an effort to reduce and manage waste.
There is an opportunity to create an informative, easy-to-use simulator to help all
types of individuals build an understanding of waste management and to evaluate the
impact of various changes on waste management performance, particularly in the context of
gamified tools. Building an understanding of challenges and opportunities within a larger
network has the potential to drive positive change in waste generation and management.
To that end, we build an educationally-focused tool in which students engage with a
virtual city, changing operational parameters and observing these parameters’ impact on
waste management performance. Adding to the novelty of the designed simulation is an
automated approach to selecting critical parameters and indicators to share with end users,
helping to select the most-informative features as a means of educating users on what to
look like when characterizing or designing their own waste management systems.
In this paper, we present existing waste management tools and commercially-available
games involving waste management, and highlight the strengths and opportunities left
unaddressed by these tools in educational and planning use cases. A brief survey motivates
the need for enhanced interactive tools focused on providing feedback through quick-
visibility performance indicators. After identifying an opportunity in building detailed
tools with enhanced multi-criteria simulation capabilities, we explore the need for easy-to-
read performance metrics that will bring to the field of waste management easily identifiable
and measurable key performance indicators (KPIs) that vary alongside factors affecting
waste management policies. To address this need, we develop a representative gamified
educational tool to be used by students and decision makers planning real-world policies.
This custom-built simulator is built upon the Unity Game Engine and emulates waste
management techniques and resulting KPIs within the context of a virtual city.

2. Prior Art
This section presents commercial games and research tools that include as a central
theme elements of waste management and waste management modelling. We present
popular games such as “Sim City 4” and “Cities: Skylines” alongside research tools like
“NetLogo” and explore the level of depth of their waste management approach as well as
their relative strengths and opportunities for improvement.

2.1. Simulation Games and Gamified Tools

Within cities, large populations and small regional boundaries lead to significant accu-
mulation of solid waste, making waste management—whether through reduction, reuse, or
recycling—essential. While waste is typically undesirable, elements of its management can
be made “fun” through the exploration of waste management techniques in games such as
those related to city building. One such example is the SimCity franchise of games, which
was first released in 1989 and has since witnessed four significant updates. Each version
includes increasingly-advanced waste management features. Haupt, Arnold, and Bidling-
maier found that SimCity 3000 (1999) and SimCity 4 (2003) included infrastructure systems
that were comparable to real-world cities and realistic enough to support research [3,4].
SimCity 4’s updated waste management system (elements of which are visible in Figure 1)
is notable as the definitive version for research [4]. In this model, all waste created in the
city fall are grouped together as “garbage”, though there are three different ways to dispose
of the city’s waste: landfill, recycling, and energy conversion, with each having positive
Modelling 2022, 3 29

and negative associated attributes. Landfill is inexpensive when disposing of waste in

small amounts, but it becomes expensive to maintain as the landfill reaches capacity—and
residents find proximity to the dump undesirable. Recycling reduces the percentage of
garbage relative to waste within the city, but may be cost-prohibitive. The waste-to-energy
plant creates power for the city while eliminating significant waste, but it creates pollution
and generates small amounts of power. SimCity 4 informs users of how well they manage
the city’s waste through different reporting means, including the city’s desirability score
and the user’s Mayor Rating (https://simcity.fandom.com/wiki/Mayor_rating, accessed
on 24 October 2021), which both depend partially on how much garbage has piled up
within the city. This rating varies from −100 to 100 and indicates citizens’ approval of the
mayor based on policies enacted, decisions made, and city statistics. The metric provides a
quick “gut check” for players to determine sentiment related to their policies comprising
social, economic, and other factors in one key performance indicator.

Figure 1. Landfill and waste-to-energy plant are potential options for waste management in SimCity 4.

Other city-building games have been used for urban development and waste manage-
ment research –Fernández and Ceacero-Moreno [5] tested Cities: Skylines (2015) to see if
it met the standards necessary to train environmentalists with gamified training scenar-
ios as well as to see if it was able to correctly identify and manage natural hazards that
occurred in the city. Cities: Skylines was also tested and scored in waste management, as
well as energy production, and health systems, and it was deemed sufficiently realistic
to be used in gamified learning [5]. Cities: Skylines is like SimCity 4 in that it groups all
types of waste as garbage, and all garbage can be treated or disposed of through various
means. In Cities: Skylines (Figure 2), waste disposal options include a floating garbage
collector for contaminated water, an incineration plant, a landfill site, a recycling center, an
ultimate recycling plant, a waste disposal unit, a waste processing complex, and a waste
transfer facility. These methods all have trade-offs, such as the waste disposal unit creating
a small amount of energy in exchange for a lot of pollution. One notable way in which
Cities: Skylines varies from SimCity is that some methods, such as the waste processing
complex and the recycling center, produce recycled materials from the waste, providing
Modelling 2022, 3 30

users with incentive to buy into more expensive recycling methods. Every building in the
city also has a garbage buildup meter showing how much garbage the building has and
its remaining capacity. If a building fills up with garbage, users are informed of the need
to empty the building lest it be abandoned. Research into both the SimCity franchise and
Cities: Skylines shows that commercial games are realistic enough to be viable for use in
gamified research and education, which makes their systems valuable to urban planning
and waste management.

Figure 2. The Recycling Center, Incineration Plant, and Landfill Site are among the waste management
options available to players of Cities: Skylines.

There have been recent research efforts to study the use of serious games in teaching
and evaluating strategies for urban waste management. Wu and Huang created a waste
management simulation game (Figure 3) that allows participants to control a city including
its waste management, and see the ramifications of their decisions on the city [6]. Simulation
users see waste accumulating in their city through a representative number of trashed
3D soda cans that litter the city’s streets if waste is not adequately managed. The effects
of this waste are also communicated to users through “official reports”, which provide
users with feedback and results related to their waste management choices, for example
with one report informing users that the dogs in the city are getting sick as a result of
consuming trash. Wu and Huang tested their waste management simulation on two
subject groups, Taiwanese undergraduate students and Taiwanese elementary school
students, and tracked both groups’ decisions relating to balancing economic growth and
the ecological effects of increased pollutants. Their research found that the undergraduate
students generally put more importance on economic growth while ignoring the negative
effects on the environment, while the group of elementary school students tried to balance
economic growth with limiting environmental pollution, leading to issues with untenable
resource allocation in other areas. Both situations focus on a core concept in teaching
waste management, notably that there must be compromise. A city may hire more waste
management workers and build more garbage trucks, but that will come at a monetary
and environmental cost—not to mention the need to sequester or otherwise dispose of
the waste.
Modelling 2022, 3 31

Figure 3. Wu and Huang’s Waste Management Simulation Game evaluated two groups’ planning
decisions with respect to economic and environmental impact (Adapted with permission from
Ref. [6]).

Wood of War is a serious game for waste management research created by Salazar
et al. [7]. This game (Figure 4) uses mobile user data to identify areas with excessive
solid waste build-up in Colima, Mexico throughout gameplay, and then compares these
data to a map of areas in Colima, Mexico with significant amounts of rainfall to identify
potential risk points where rain and trash could mix, blocking sewer drains and causing
flooding. The game encourages players to go to these areas to destroy or dispose of enemies
modeled to resemble sentient trash into piles of waste. Users are given extra points if
they find a new area of excess waste and tag it using GPS for the developers [7]. This
cycle of finding enemies in the real-world waste and finding trash-laden locations for more
points-bearing enemies keeps game participation high and allows the developers to collect
data valuable to local waste removal services [7]. Serious games like Wood of War can be
specialized to a specific area of need like Colima, Mexico, where urbanization has been
steadily growing in recent years while the waste management system is struggling to keep
up with its urban population’s excess waste. The game identifies areas of importance for
waste management officials to address such that associated negative externalities, such as
flooding from blocked sewer drains, can be managed responsively. Understanding where
waste build-up occurs most frequently by using the game’s data can also help officials
build more efficient waste removal routes.
Modelling 2022, 3 32

Figure 4. Wood of War encourages players to map trash by using real-world data to spawn trash
monsters (Adapted with permission from Ref. [7]).

Other gamified software for waste management is the Multi-Agent-Based Modelling

environment NetLogo [8] (Figure 5), developed in 1997 by Professor Uri Wilensky at the
Center of Connected Learning (CCL) at Tufts University. This programmable software
has been used in the modeling process in different areas including teaching, education,
and research.

Figure 5. NetLogo was used to model and project waste management in the Norte Pioneiro region of
Parana (Adapted with permission from Ref. [9]).

Eunice David Likotiko, Devotha Nyambo, and Joseph Mwangoka used NetLogo for
the real-time simulation of waste management decisions. In the simulation, citizens are
involved in optimizing the cost of waste collection services as well as providing decision
algorithms to determine the best mobility for waste collections and bins. The authors’
Modelling 2022, 3 33

model verified the optimal waste collection route, aiding the development of smart and
innovative waste management systems and modeling for real life scenarios. Continuous
empirical data and Geographical Information Systems (GIS) are proposed to be used for
further model extensions [10].
Addressing sociotechnical aspects of waste management, Vitor Miranda de Souza et al. [9]
used the dynamics of waste generation, disposal and collection to assess the eco-effectiveness
of a solid waste management plan using NetLogo. The authors assessed the eco-effectiveness
of Parana’s Norte Pioneiro region, forecasting waste generation, collection, and other
waste management processes. Different population growth scenarios were simulated from
2020–2038, with different criteria analyzed to generate success metrics. This illustrates
how NetLogo and similar ABMs may be used to inform socio-technical and socio-economic
aspects of waste management plans as well as model the influence of policy [9].
In Table 1, we summarize these representative games or gamified tools and showcase
their approach towards waste management.

Table 1. Comparison of waste grouping, disposal methods, notification methods, and use cases for
Waste Management Systems in Gamified Tools and Commercial Games.

Commercial Games Information About Waste

/Research Tools Management Systems
All waste lumped as “garbage”
Multiple disposal avenues
SimCity 4 (Landfill, Recycling, Waste-to-Energy)
Waste accumulation reported though
desirability reports, Mayor Rating
All waste lumped as “garbage”
Multiple disposal avenues
Cities: Skylines (Landfill, Recycling, Incinerator, Waste Processing, ...)
Waste accumulation reported though
feedback bubbles
All waste lumped as “garbage”
Multiple disposal avenues
Wu and Huang’s (Waste Product Dump, Incinerator, Environment Factory,
Research Tool [6] Trading Companies)
Waste accumulation reported though
reports of garbage-driven natural disasters
Multiple waste monsters found with varied garbage piles
Waste disposed of by defeating monsters
Wood of War Real-world waste reported through GPS tags
Real-world waste build-up is communicated to
developers, authorities
All waste types lumped
Sociotechnical approach for complex waste management
NetLogo and decision-making
Waste management parameters (agents) executed serially.
Empirical calibration necessary to mirror real-world scenarios.

A clear opportunity remains to develop a tool that combines gamification and ease-
of-use with robust simulation and easy-to-read performance metrics to provide a quick
feedback loop relating to policy and other changes.
Modelling 2022, 3 34

3. Factors Affecting Waste—Key Performance Indicators

Waste management tools are important to informing policy and educating the public
about the consequences of waste and necessary remediation. Here, we evaluate critical
waste parameters as a means of identifying the policy and procedural “levers” suitable for
changing certain key metrics. We will use the developed metrics and models as the basis
for the development of our novel waste management simulator.

3.1. Approaching the Waste Management Problem

Waste management modelling takes the form of a multi-criteria decision-making
problem comprised of multiple variables. The general form of this kind of problems is
expressed in Equation (1):

miny = F ( x) = { f 1 (x), . . . , f n (x)}

where x = ( x1 , . . . , xm ) ∈ X (1)
y = ( y1 , . . . , y n ) ∈ Y
F (x) represents multiple functions–relations (e.g., f 1 ( x )), x represents measurable value
variables and y represents the possible multiple results. The variables xi can be discrete
or continuous variables that belong to the bounded set X. In the real world, there are
no infinite values of measurements, thus f ( x ) factors need to be bounded. Similarly, y j
represents the possible measurements of results.
To solve this type of problem, which is equal to finding their minimum (optimization),
there are multiple methods—each one with pros and cons such as linear programming,
ELECTRE methods, NSGA-II, and SPEA2. In our case, we formulate the optimization of
the waste management problem:
n
miny = F ( x) = ∑ wi f i ( x ) (2)
i =1

The weights wi represent the values that each factor f i ( x ) affects the waste manage-
ment problem.
One possible waste management optimization could potentially approximate the
“Green City” target. The cities, according to the “Green City” targets, tackle the most urgent
environmental challenges involving five key areas: air, water, nature and biodiversity, circu-
lar economy and waste, and, lastly, noise. Mayors agreeing to the “Green City’ targets must
establish ambitious plans over-exceeding the requirements of the EU laws and implement
policies to achieve those by 2030 [11]. However, this optimization is hard or impossible
to solve as a unified solution since it may involve factors that are both measurable and
non-measurable, such as human behavior or unanticipated environmental consequences.
Some may be measured using field research techniques in real time (measurable variables),
whereas others may require approximation. This may necessitate measuring the indirect
effects of lesser-qualitative factors, such as policy changes, over time.
Based on the team’s prior field research [12–16], we present what we believe to be
the most crucial and measurable factors in waste management to inform the design and
development of a waste management tool (as described in Section 4). This way, we are
trying to model an approximation of the problem, but not optimize it, as our first step.
These factors are the Key Performance Indicators and are showcased in Section 3.2.

3.2. Key Performance Indicators

Waste management systems are becoming more complex as regions shift from landfill
to resource recovery-based solutions. This shift requires authorities to have information
concerning different aspects of waste management in order to develop plausible models and
actionable solutions [13]. The discovery of realistic and consistent data can be established
through the use of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) originating from real-world data
Modelling 2022, 3 35

collection. The purpose of these KPIs is to simplify assessing the perceived outcome
of waste management within a virtual city in order to provide quantifiable evidence of
performance [12].
The KPIs chosen to create a realistic user interface for the virtual city are amongst
those widely used in waste management analysis [12,13,15–19] and include: Waste Compo-
sitional Analysis (MSW-C), Municipal Solid Waste Production (MSW-P), Municipal Solid
Waste Recycling (MSW-R), Waste Production Rate (WPR), Waste Recovery Rate (WRR),
Generation Rate (WGR), Waste Infrastructure (WI), Clean Index (CI), Accumulation Rate
(AR) and Accumulation Index (AI), Mobility, Renewable Energy, Waste Water Treatment
Plant, Air Pollution, and Strategies.

3.2.1. Waste Compositional Analysis(MSW-C)

MSW-C provides the data pertaining to the several produced waste streams, providing
authorities with measurable data to design and implement waste prevention and waste
management strategies [13,18]. MSW-C categorizes the types of material in solid waste
such as PMD, Plastic Film, non-recyclable Plastic, Aluminium and Ferrous objects, Paper,
Glass, Toilet and Kitchen Papers, Edible Food Waste, Inedible Food Waste, Organic Waste,
and other materials [13]. To provide a representative baseline for the creation of a novel
waste management simulator, a study in the Area of Paralimni, Cyprus was used. In the
study, according to the population of the area in 2011 (18,601 residents), 15,100,000 tonnes of
municipal solid waste were produced [12,13,15]. According to the compositional analysis
carried out for the population of 18,601, the numbers were scaled to reflect the population
of the virtual city (100,000). The estimated amount of each type of waste as scaled up for
the virtual city is shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Waste Compositional Analysis categories, percent relative range and scaled amount of Waste
for the virtual City.

Categories of Waste Range (%) Scaled Estimated Amount (tn)

PMD 5–30 7639
Plastic Film 1–7 3588
Plastics Non-Recyclable 1–3 1835
Aluminium/Ferrous 0.5–2 682
Paper 5–20 8572
Glass 1–7 4327
Toilet and Kitchen Paper 1–15 9652
Food Waste (edible) 2–20 12,055
Food Waste (inedible) 2–20 4091
Organic Waste(Green Waste, Yard Waste) 2–20 22,243
Others 1–10 6494
Total 81,178 (figures per [13])

MSW-C is defined in Equation (3). The equation presents the ratio of the known reported
amount of each category of MSW(QknownMSW ) to the total amount of MSW(QTotalMSW ) at a
given time(t) [18]:
Q (t)
MSW − C = knownMSW (3)
Q TotalMSW (t)
The values are adapted from [13].

3.2.2. Municipal Solid Waste Production(MSW-P)

MSW-P represents the ratio of the amount of MSW produced (QTot ) to the population
(POP) at a given time (t) in the selected area (see Equation (4)). This indicator delivers a
Modelling 2022, 3 36

ratio of the average waste quantity per capita [12,15,18]. City geometry and population
determine the range of this number:

Q Tot (t)
MSW − P = (4)
Q POP (t)

3.2.3. Municipal Solid Waste Recycling (MSW-R)

MSW-R measures the MSW that has been recycled (QRecycledMSW) in compari-
son with the total solid waste produced (QTotal MSW) at a moment in time (t), per
Equation (5). Table 3 presents the categories of the recycled waste which are PMDs,
Paper and Glass [12,13,16]. These numbers will be useful in the strategic planning of
Waste Management Systems, give information on the prevention activities performed in
each area as well as provide data regarding the technical aspects of Waste Management
like Waste Bin Capacity, types of Recycle Bins in each area, etc. [12]:

Q RecycledMSW (t)
MSW − R = (5)
Q TotalMSW (t)

The data used in Table 3 were obtained from www.greendot.com.cy, accessed on

24 October 2021, and reflect figures for Paralimni, Cyprus in 2011 as scaled to fit the
virtual city’s population of 100,000 [20]. Green Dot Cyprus Public Co Ltd. is a non-
profit organization and the first collective recycling system approved by the Ministry of
Agriculture, Rural Development and Environment in Cyprus. It is established based on
the Packaging and Waste Packaging (Amendment) Law, 2005 (Law No. 159(I)/2005) of
Cyprus and implemented based on Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and
the Council of the European Union [21,22].

Table 3. Municipal Solid Waste Recycling Categories and Range.

Categories Range (%) Estimated Amount (tn)

PMD 50–100 3819
Paper 50–100 4286
Glass 80–100 3461
Total 5172

3.2.4. Waste Production Rate (WPR)

WPR illustrates fluctuations in the volume of waste produced annually. These fluctua-
tions inform the actions necessary to minimize waste production increases [12,18]. With
the use of WPR, a possible percentage of achievement until a given time can be evaluated.
WPR can be calculated using Equation (6):

Qtotal waste production next year (t)

WPR = (6)
Qtotal waste production previous year (t)

3.2.5. Waste Recovery Rate (WRR)

WRR indicates the recovery of generated waste in a specific period (Equation (7)).
Numerous recovery options are available, including recycling, reuse, waste to energy, etc.
WRR should not be misinterpreted for MSW-R, as waste stream recycling states the actual
percentage of recycled material in a particular area with a specific population density,
whereas WRR refers to the potential of recovering 100% of any significant waste stream
like plastic, paper, etc. Waste recovery informs waste prevention strategies to reach the full
potential of recovery of a stream [12,16,23]. The recovery rate of each material is listed in
Table 4:
Modelling 2022, 3 37

RecoveredWaste
WRR = (7)
MSW − P

Table 4. Typical municipal solid waste recovery rates.

Range of Recovery (%)

Categories Estimated Waste Recovered (tn)
Min Max
PMD 50 100 3819
Aluminium/Ferrous 50 100 341
Paper 50 100 4286
Glass 80 100 3461
Food waste 50 100 8073
Green Waste 80 100 17,794
37,776

3.2.6. Waste Generation Rate (WGR)

WGR estimates the generation of waste in the selected area in unit of time (i.e., per
day, week, month, or year) and is represented by Equation (8) [16,24]. As product and
service demands increase along with economic and population growth, waste generation is
inevitable. World waste production was estimated at approximately 1.30 billion tonnes in
2012 and by 2016 waste generation reached 2.01 billion tonnes of waste. If waste generation
continues in the same trajectory, by 2050, this number is estimated to reach on average
3.40 billion tonnes of waste [25,26]. The indicator provides an assessment of an area’s
ecological trends as well as showcase the effectiveness of any sustainability practises and
strategies implemented in that area according to the increase or decrease of its value.
WGR will vary with the population density of each selected area in the virtual city.
As the total quantity of waste produced for the 100,000 citizens is 65,000 tones, an average
citizen will produce 650 kg/year.

WGR = (Waste production in one area (kg)) × (Citizens in the same area in one day) (8)

3.2.7. Waste Infrastructure (WI)

A crucial indicator (Equation (9)) concerning environmental performance is the avail-
able waste management infrastructure. WI estimates without limitation the number of bins
and collection bins in general in a specific area. It provides useful information about the
current infrastructure in relation to the residential density of that area [12,13,16].
Depending on area, the user will be able to choose from one to all the bins listed in
Table 5. WI depends strongly on the population density; as population density increases,
the number of bins will increase proportionally. Depending on the user’s choice, the
outcome will be different. For population density of 100,000 citizens and 65,000 tones of
waste, 750 bins are required. This indicator provides useful information to inform policies
and actions required in relation to the existing infrastructure and number of citizens [12,13].

# o f bins
W.I = (9)
Population density

The range of recycle bins per population density must comply with the requirements
of the level of services presented in Section 3.2.8. The minimum range of waste bin
capacity must be the minimum 0.5–1.5 L/capita in line with 3(C) and maximum/over
1.5–2.5 L/capita as mentioned in level 1(A) in Table 6 [12,15].
Modelling 2022, 3 38

Table 5. Types of recycling bins proposed range per population density and range.

Categories Bin Colour Proposed Range

Recycle Bin for:
Plastics Yellow
Paper Brown
PMD Blue min: W.I > 0.5–1.5 L/capita
Mixed waste Green max: W.I > 1.5–25 L/capita
Food Waste Pink
Green Waste Light Green
Batteries Transparent
Glass Packaging Grey
Aluminium Perforated

3.2.8. Clean Index (CI)

CI rates how clean the selected area is using Equation (10), where N Icol is the number
of items collected (i.e., cigarette butts, PMD, papers, other plastics, etc.) and Sur is the
surface in m2 of the specific selected area. K is a constant equalling 20 [12,15,16,27].
Table 6 is used to scale the area accordingly [16]. Using CI, the infrastructure of
the selected area can be assessed to optimize activities including waste collection period,
cleaning department size, number of recycling bins per citizen, etc. The indicator was first
suggested by Alkalay [27]:
N Icol
C.I = K (10)
Sur
According to [12,15,16], the Level of Services (LoS) may be interpreted as:
• 1(A): Outstanding waste collection, defined as at least three times daily (morning,
midday, afternoon). Waste bins exist at least every 100–200 m as well as other waste
infrastructure (such as separated recycling bins, collection of hazardous waste, or
increased waste awareness and informational signs). Mechanical cleaning of roads
two times weekly, with waste bin capacity at least in the range of 1.5–2.5 L/guest.
• 2(B): Acceptable collection of waste, three to four times/week and twice/day for
some areas (e.g., morning and afternoon collection, average waste bin separation of
200–400 m with other waste infrastructure (e.g., recycling bins). Waste bins capacity is
at least 1.0–1.4 L/visitor. Informational signs are visible, and mechanical road cleaning
occurs at least weekly.
• 3(C): Average collection of waste twice weekly and once per day in some areas. On
average, waste bins are spaced ever 500 m with some other waste infrastructure
available. Waste bin capacity varies from 0.5–1.4 L/visitor with limited awareness and
informational signs, with only periodic road cleaning.
• 4(D): Periodic collection of waste–approximately once weekly, with limited public
waste bins or other infrastructure, zero implementation of mechanical cleaning of the
roads and waste bin capacity 0.5–1.4 L/visitor.
• 5(E): Zero formal cleaning programs in the area, no waste infrastructure and no
mechanical cleaning of the roads. Little to no waste awareness or signage.

Table 6. Clean Index Identification.

Quality Level of Sevices (LOS) CI Identification

Very Clean 1(A) 0–2 No litter seen
Clean 2(B) 2–5 No litter seen over a large area
Moderate 3(C) 5–10 A few pieces of litter visible
Dirty 4(D) 10–20 A lot of litter visible
Very Dirty 5(E) 20+ Most of the area is covered in litter
Modelling 2022, 3 39

3.2.9. Accumulation Rate (AR)

AR evaluates the accumulation of waste per unit of surface area and unit time
(items/m2 /day) (Equation (11)) [12,13,17]. AR is directly affected by population den-
sity as, consequently, the more people there are in an area, the more waste will exist [28]. T
represents the time elapsed between the survey and the last cleaning activity which also
gives an indication of the number of days since the responsible authority completed a full
cleaning of the researched area [29]:

A.R = N Icol /S/T (11)

3.2.10. Accumulation Index (AI)

AI takes into account the rate of accumulation of liter (Equation (12)), complementing
CI and AR. While CI assesses area cleanness and hence the collection period, AI and
AR evaluate the accumulation of waste at a given area in a specific period [15]. Table 7
represents the classification given by [16]:

A.I = log10( A.R × 1000000) (12)

LOS is explained in Table 6.

Table 7. Accumulation rate and index classification.

LOS WAI WAR (items/m2 /day) WAR (items/km2 /day)

Extremely Low 1 ≤1 0.000001 1
Very Low 2 1–2 0.00001 10
Low 2–3 2–3 0.0001 100
Moderate 3 3–4 0.001 1000
High 4 4–5 0.01 10,000
Very High 4–5 5–6 0.1 100,000
Extremely High 5 ≥6 1 1,000,000

3.2.11. Air Pollution

Air Quality Indication (AQI) illustrates the gas emissions in the virtual city including
simulated CO2 , CO, NO, NO2 , SO2 , O3 and Benzene as shown in Table 8. The correlation
of air pollution with human activity is of significant interest, and are driven by emis-
sion sources like vehicles and industrial processes [30]. Greenhouse gas emissions from
solid waste treatment emerge mainly from uncontrolled disposal and dumping as well as
incineration [26].
The urbanization of the last 60 years has created high transportation network density,
encouraged building development, and driven population growth that promote the con-
sumption of variously-sourced energy sources and energy in general while the lifestyle in
urban environments make the application of environmentally conscious actions appear to
be a far off necessity rather than a personal responsibility [31]. Air quality management is
vital to both protect human health and improve the quality of life in urban and industrial
areas [32]. Strategies to better handle waste management can decrease greenhouse gas
emissions by as much as 200 million tonnes by 2030 [26,33].
The limits were provided considering the existing proposed limits by www.airquality
.dli.mlsi.gov.cy/, (accessed on 24 October 2021) presenting the pollutants concentration
values in Cyprus in real time. The results can be easily accessed from the official Air Quality
Cyprus mobile application [34].
Modelling 2022, 3 40

Table 8. Gas emissions observed.

Categories Range (%) Low Moderate High Very High

PM10 0–100 0–50 50–100 100–200 >200
PM2.5 0–100 0–25 25–50 50–100 >100
Carbon Dioxide (CO2 ) To be defined
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 0–100 0–7000 7000–15,000 15,000–20,000 >20,000
Nitrogen Monoxide (NO) 0–100
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2 ) 0–100 0–100 100–150 150–200 >200
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2 ) 0–100 0–150 150–250 250–350 >350
Ozone (O3 ) 0–100 0–100 100–140 140–180 >180
Benzene (C6 H6 ) 0–100 0–5 5–10 10–15 >15

3.2.12. Mobility
The Mobility metric indicates the public transportation available for a given popula-
tion density. Mobility is directly interlinked with fuel consumption and greenhouse gas
emissions. This indicator helps authorities explore new innovative mobility plan strategies
in order to limit the environmental impact of transportation, especially in urban areas [35].
The use of public transportation in the simulation versus the choice of the user to trans-
fer by car will make a crucial difference regarding gas emissions. The choices of public
transportation offered in the virtual city are listed in Table 9.

Table 9. Available transportation choices.

Transportation
Buses
Trams/Trolleys
Trains/Underground Metro
Bike lanes
Walk lanes
Electric Cars

Important criteria for the selection of Mobility transportation Choices should be when
applicable:
• [A] Public Transportation must line with existing EU regulations regarding Trans-
portation means (i.e., 80% Electric Cars by 2050 [36])
• [B] They must cover existing National plans and targets.
• [C] Satisfy the needs of Public Transportation for the maximum population density
requirements.
• [D] Contribute to the existing National Plans to reduce Carbon Dioxide emissions.

3.2.13. Green Space

The Green Space KPI denotes free green space per population density in m2 or
km2 (Equation (13)). Green spaces include parks, open-air sport facilities, playgrounds,
etc. [37].
Strategic urban planning for land management encourages good living conditions due
to psychological factors and also the reduction of the environmental impact of urban ar-
eas [38]. Natural and semi-natural areas designed in urban cities serve not only recreational
and aesthetic stress reducing purposes but provide an improved living environment. This
is achieved by natural processes in the presence of biodiverse green spaces like purifying
the air and water, providing protection from extreme weather conditions like heat and
thunderstorms, and also contributing to the reduction of noise pollution [39].
Modelling 2022, 3 41

The strategic distribution of green areas across the virtual city is essential in order for
all the citizens to have access to these green spaces. Therefore, Green Space must be closely
coupled to population density as well available public free space.
Table 10 indicates the choices of the user regarding green space categories. The limits
were chosen according to the recommendations of the World Health Organization [40,41].

Free green space

GreenSpace = (13)
Population density

Table 10. Green space requirements per capita.

Green Space Categories Green Space Requirements (m3 /capita)

Green Space (Parks, Playgrounds, min: 9 m3 /capita
Open-air Sport Facilities) optimum: 50–57 m3 /capita

3.2.14. Renewable Energy Sources (RES)

Fossil fuels have been a primary energy source for cities for decades. Wasteful handling
of raw materials, food, and energy made necessary the creation of innovative renewable
energy technologies [42]. The use of renewable energy sources, coupled with emerging
energy storage technologies, may present a more balanced approach towards sustainable
socioeconomic development and prosperity [43]. Production of renewable domestic energy
is of interest as a means of managing the need for raw materials that each technology
requires [43,44].
The RES available are listed in Table 11, calculated per population density or km2 . The
available categories of RES and the percentage they hold in the Total Energy production are
Photovoltaic (P/V) Parks (1–5%), P/V Houses (5–100%), and Wind Parks (1–4%) according
to the Transmission System Operator Cyprus for the year 2020 and the Cyprus Energy
Regulatory Authority [45,46]. The indicator measures the number of RES in place and
national targets.

Table 11. Renewable Energy Sources percentage share in Total Energy Production.

Category RES Share in Total Energy Production (MWh)

RES (P/V Parks, min: 11.7% (63,176 MWh)
P/V houses, Wind Parks) max ≥ 32% (≥114,760 MWh)

Data provided by the Transmission System Operator Cyprus for the year 2020 and the
Cyprus Energy Regulatory Authority [45,46]. The data collected concerned the population
of Cyprus of 888,000 citizens for 2019 and were scaled down for the 100,000 of the virtual
city [47]. The optimum maximum limit of 32% of Renewable Energy Sources in Total
Energy Production is derived from the Policy framework of the European Commission in
2014 for 2030 [48].

3.2.15. Waste Water Treatment (WWT)

Urban wastewater management constitutes a challenging topic due to poor synchro-
nization among infrastructure development and population growth. The main concern of
Waste Water Treatment is to protect the environment and specifically the surface of waters
from organic pollution and the degradation of aquatic life as well as the protection of human
health [49]. In real life situations, agglomerations and collection systems provide a much
more provable approach regarding the level of treatment of wastewater. Agglomerations,
referred to as a sufficiently concentrated area for wastewater to be collected and further
conducted to a nearby treatment plant, are usually required to be sufficient for a number
of populations equivalent (1 Population Equivalent (P.E) unit is the organic biodegrad-
able load of having a five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) of 60 g of oxygen per
Modelling 2022, 3 42

day) [50]. The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (WWTD) which is directly linked
to zero waste ambitions in the European Green Deal requires all European settlements to
provide their cities with agglomerations of the size of 2000 population equivalents or above
and equipment (i.e., Collection systems, Wastewater Treatment Plants) sufficient for the
waste water [51].
In this section, the indicator of Equation (14) presents only the number of houses
connected to the waste water treatment plant with a range of values from 0–100% [52].
This range submerges from data of Eurostat% [53], where, until 2018, Denmark, Latvia,
France, Malta, Finland, Austria, and the Netherlands had a 100% of their population
connected to a Wastewater Treatment facility, whereas Kosovo maintained only a 0.52% of
the population connected to wastewater treatment with the very next being Serbia with
14.12. Due to the fact that the quality of wastewater treatment emerges from the level of
treatment (Primary, Secondary, Tertiary) as well as the available infrastructure mentioned
above (Agglomerations and collection system), the indicator will be used regarding the
following conditions:
• [A] The wastewater treatment plant will perform all primary, secondary, and tertiary
treatment [50].
• [B] Agglomerations and collection systems are 100% treated in the wastewater treat-
ment plant.
• [C] The P.E of each area will always be within the limits provided by WWTD (≥2000
P.E).
• [D] Wastewater Treatment plants will protect environment and surface waters as well
as human health [49]:

connected population
W.W.T = × 100. (14)
total population

3.2.16. Strategies
Seeking to grow a sustainable world has necessarily increased the strategic relevance
of waste prevention [54]. To reduce the impact of industrial processes that affect severely
the environment, corporate policies must be set in place. The main focus of waste pre-
vention strategies is the reduction of landfill material, resource saving, the protection of
human health, and improved quality of life by sustainable economic development [14,18].
Strategies available include circular economy, the European Green Deal, the United Nations
Sustainability Goals, Zero Waste Policy, Energy Recovery, Smart Cities, Environmental
Management Systems, and R-strategies [12,28,43,55–57]. Strategies like these, effectively
implemented, will create a social shift in attitude that is vital to the success of any policy or
indicator. Table 12 illustrates the user’s available choices [16,43].

Table 12. Strategies for action.

Categories
Circular Economy
European Green Deal (EGD)
United Nations Sustainability Goals (UNSDGs)
Zero Waste Policy
Low Carbon Society
Waste Prevention
Energy Recovery
Smart City
Environmental Management Systems (i.e., ISO14001, EMAS)
R-strategies

Corporate policies, such as ISO 14001, EMAS, zero waste, etc., can reduce the im-
pact of industrial processes on the environment by limiting energy requirements, im-
Modelling 2022, 3 43

proving waste water treatment processes, and increasing the social acceptance of such
initiatives [12,16,28,43,55–57].
At the same time, alternative energy scenarios which revolve around renewable energy
resources and/or energy recovery ensure the supply of reliable and efficient energy and
utilisation [58]. The emissions related to fossil fuels combined with climate change have
already forced many countries worldwide to explore strategies for better energy sources
compared to the global energy mix [59]. The transition to clean renewable energy and zero
emissions can be enabled by a shift to a more circular economy [43].
The concept of a Circular Economy (CE) is powerful tool many social groups including
policy makers, urban designers, and academics employ to fundamentally link resource use
with waste. CE is recognized by the European Union as an “irreversible global mega trend”
and is now an essential strategy for the accomplishment of the goals set in the European
Green Deal [43,60]. The shift from a linear to circular approach can result in the implemen-
tation of environmental and economic policies in order to achieve waste prevention, reuse,
and recycling which directly contributes to clean production and manufacturing. This
creates a stronger economy where resources are used in a more sustainable way [12,24].
An important category included in strategic sustainable development are the preven-
tion activities carried out by individuals or groups of people in a social structure. The
awareness activities related to waste prevention practices like reuse, recycling, refurbish-
ment, and material recovery are important for the successful transition to a sustainable,
environmentally acceptable development. Both domestic and industrial changes can lead to
the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and to the development of new waste treatment
concepts [12,61].
The secret to waste prevention plans and to the implementation of strategies like
these is social behaviour and acceptance [14]. A broad-based willingness to contribute to
sustainable development is the fastest way to meet the standards and targets set by the
policy makers and urban developers [18]. While the behavior regarding household waste
prevention activities has been explored mostly on a qualitative rather than quantitative
level, activities focusing on the reduction of waste and thoughtful use of everyday products
are likely to reduce landfill waste [14,62]. It is vital for citizens to understand that waste
prevention is everybody’s responsibility and taking thoughtful actions before an item
becomes waste is an essential step to meet the sustainability standards [12].
Actions like these are presented in Table 13 where the available categories to assess
any prevention activities are introduced, e.g., food waste reduction or participation in home
composting, participation in web-platforms related with waste management in household
level, etc. [13].

Table 13. Prevention activities.

Categories
Use of leftovers
Use of reusable Grocery Bags
Reusable Coffee Cup
Home Composting
Food Waste Campaign
Donations where possible (i.e., Toys,Books,clothes etc)
Book exchanges
Smart shopping list (buying exact necessities from stores)
Keeping vegetables and fruits in loosely tied bags
Reuse of electrical appliances
Electrical Appliances repair stores to extend life time of devices

3.2.17. Correlations among KPIs

When researching the Environmental Performance of an area, correlating the Key
Performance Indicators reveals scenario-dependent interaction. Table 14 offers a brief
Modelling 2022, 3 44

qualitative approach to codify these correlations that, with methodological analysis, may
lead to not only qualitative but also quantitative assessment of an area’s sustainability by
addressing connections and dependencies between the indicators for the creation of links
on waste management systems [63].

Table 14. Proposed Correlations between KPIs which will be defined through research at field and
software such as lifecycle assessment, or other simulation tools.
Renewable Waste Water
MSW-C MSW-P MSW-R WPR WRR WGR WI CI AR AI Air Pollution Mobility Green Space Strategies
Energy Treatment Plant
MSW-C 3 3 3 3 3 3
MSW-P 3 3 3 3 3 3
MSW-R 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
WPR 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
WRR 3 3 3 3
WGR 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
WI 3 3 3 3 3
CI 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
AR 3 3 3 3 3 3
AI 3 3 3 3 3 3
Air Pollution 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mobility 3 3 3
Green Space 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Renewable Energy 3 3 3 3 3 3
Waste Water Treatment Plant 3
Strategies 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Acronyms and Terms
MSW-C Waste Compositional Analvsis
MSW-P Municipal Solid Waste Production
MSW-R Municipal Solid Waste Recycling
WPR Waste Production Rate
WRR Waste Recovery Rate
WGR Waste Generation Rate
WI Waste Infrastructure
Cl Clean lndex
AR Accumulation Rate
Al Accumulation Index

4. Design and Development of Waste Management Tool

Once we had identified and selected critical KPIs (Section 3), we proceeded to design
and develop an interactive Waste Management Tool suitable for education and informing
policy. The concept was to create an application that can help students understand the
challenges associated with waste management, and guide them through learning about
KPIs that affect waste management systems’ performance. Gamification elements make the
experience more engaging, interactive, and pedagogically “sticky” to encourage concept
retention. In order to design the tool, we used Unity Game Engine and we purchased rele-
vant low-polygon count 3D objects from the Unity Asset Store to accelerate development.
The game interface is described in the following subsections.

4.1. Current Status of the Tool

In its current form, the tool comprises a main menu (Figure 6) and a main scene
(Figure 7). The main menu enables users to transition to main playable scene or alternatively
allows the user to showcase the credits or exit the game.
The main scene is the interactive core of this application. It features an imaginary
virtual city with population of 100,000 people that is comprised of nine areas laid out in a
3 × 3 matrix (Figure 7). Each area has unique and distinct parameters that may be randomly
defined or tuned related to waste generation and management. When the main scene is
loaded, the player camera moves from a close-up view to a top-down perspective to allow
an overview of the entire city in a single window. From this top-down view, players are
able to select and engage with the various interactive areas and elements of the city.
Upon loading the main scene, each area is automatically assigned with a random
population number out of specific options. These options are 1500, 2000, 5000, 6500, 7000,
10,000, 18,000, 20,000, and 30,000 to sum to 100,000. The total population of 100,000 people
helps to simplify calculations for the user. The graphics and the building models including
Modelling 2022, 3 45

houses do not reflect the numbers of the area population assigned but are representative
and increase user engagement and relatability. In Figure 7, we see that the population of
Area11 was automatically set to 2000 people by the tool. The rest areas were assigned with
each area having the value of one of the remaining choices from the options list.

Figure 6. The Waste Management Tool’s main menu allows players to start the simulator, view the
credits, or exit the game.

Figure 7. The Main Scene features a top-down view of the city, divided into nine parts. Each part can
be highlighted, selected, and clicked to view information about waste management KPIs and policies
in that region.

Having selected a specific area of the virtual city, the users may press the “Indicators”
button on the right side of their screen. After doing so, a panel with the indicators (Figure 8)
for the selected area appears. These indicators are the same KPIs that we have identified
and presented in Section 3.
Modelling 2022, 3 46

Figure 8. Key performance indicators for each region are shown on a dashboard to provide a
high-level, easily interperable overview of waste management performance.

In this panel, the KPIs present new buttons that users can interact with. For illustrative
purposes, we will explain how the first two indicators work. Starting with the Waste
Compositional Analysis (MSW-C), this KPI is comprised of multiple configurable values
each as described in Section 3.2.1. Using the amounts measured at Municipality of Paralimni
and scaling up from 18,601 to 100,000 people for our simulator, we created Table 15 to
display possible ranges in these categories for internal design purposes only. These amounts
are scaled to fit each population option for all areas. The final bounds for each population
option are presented in Table 16. These values are stored to an external and accessible
file enabling easy customization in the case of new research developments necessitating
specific game permutations.

Table 15. Waste Compositional Analysis categories for a population of 100,000 people and possible
range in tn for each of the categories (figures per [13]). This table is used only for designing purposes
and its amounts were later scaled to express the upper and lower bounds of each of the area
population options.

Categories of Waste Scaled Est. Amount (tn) Range (tn)

PMD 7639 5000–10,000
Plastic Film 3588 2000–5000
Plastics Non-Recyclable 1835 1000–3000
Aluminium/Ferrous 682 500–1000
Paper 8572 6000–10,000
Glass 4327 3000–5000
Toilet and Kitchen Paper 9652 8000–11,000
Food Waste (edible) 12,055 10,000–14,000
Food Waste (inedible) 4091 3000–5000
Organic Waste (Green Waste, Yard Waste) 22,243 20,000–25,000
Others 6494 5000–7000
Modelling 2022, 3 47

Table 16. The Lower and Upper Bounds for each of the categories for all population options. These values were scaled based on the range from Table 15.
Population: 1500 Population: 2000 Population: 5000 Population: 6500 Population: 7000 Population: 10,000 Population: 18,000 Population: 20,000 Population: 30,000
Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound
PMD 750 1500 100 200 250 500 325 650 350 700 500 1000 900 1800 1000 2000 1500 3000
Plastic Film 300 750 40 100 100 250 130 325 140 350 200 500 360 900 400 1000 600 1500
Plastic Non Recyclable 150 450 20 60 50 150 65 195 70 210 100 300 180 540 200 600 300 900
Aluminun/ Ferrous 75 150 10 20 25 50 32 65 35 70 50 100 90 180 100 200 150 300
Paper 900 1500 120 200 300 500 390 650 420 700 600 1000 1080 1800 1200 2000 1800 3000
Glass 450 750 60 100 150 250 195 325 210 350 300 500 540 900 600 1000 900 1500
Toilet and Kitchen paper 1200 1650 160 220 400 550 520 715 560 770 800 1100 1440 1980 1600 2200 2400 3300
Food Waste Edible 1500 2100 200 280 500 700 650 910 700 980 1000 1400 1800 2520 2000 2800 3000 4200
Food Waste Inedible 450 750 60 100 150 250 195 325 210 350 300 500 540 900 600 1000 900 1500
Organic Waste 3000 3750 400 500 1000 1250 1300 1625 1400 1750 2000 2500 3600 4500 4000 5000 6000 7500
Others 750 1050 100 140 250 350 325 455 350 490 500 700 900 1260 1000 1400 1500 2100
Modelling 2022, 3 48

Similar to the area populations, the tool automatically loads the lower and upper
bounds for the relevant population number. At the same time, it randomly sets a new
value in the respective sliders for each category, creating a unique but broadly-similar city
waste footprint for each user. A representative example for Area11 is showcased in Figure 9.
Users may then choose to change these values.

Figure 9. Each area’s waste generation and policy parameters can be altered independently.

Next, we have the Municipal Solid Waste Production KPI (MSW-P). This KPI does
not have any user-configurable categories and is completely independent of MSW-C. This
value comes from the division of the total amount of waste divided by the population of
the area, as shown in Equation (4).
Based on the tool’s randomly-generated amounts (Figure 9) and the population of
Area11 , (2000), we have the following:

Q Tot (t) 159 + 93 + 46 + 19 + 148 + 96 + 163 + 240 + 99 + 418 + 105

= = 0.793 (15)
Q POP (t) 2000

As we notice in Figure 10, the result is the same as the calculated one in Equation (15).
This result can change in real time when a slider value from MSW-C panel is also changed.

Figure 10. Clicking each metric provides information about how it is calculated, which helps students
learn to create effective management policies. These indicators reflect the parameters as identified in
Section 3 (note that due to regional differences, the figure shows a comma rather than a period in the
numeric text).
Modelling 2022, 3 49

These examples are representative of how all models involved in the computation of
waste production and management are handled in the game design.
Using these indicators, along with configurable elements thereof, allows individuals to
use the game as a means of modelling waste generation and management. Through study
and play, users may learn those metrics most affecting waste production and mitigation in
order to inform effective policies for diverse scenarios.
With the game created and reflecting the model developed in Section 3, this tool will be
used to enable a range of academic studies that will be the subject of future work. Ongoing
work will conduct playtesting with diverse constituents, the feedback from which will be
fed into a version of the game to be made freely available to researchers (please contact the
authors for additional information).

5. Conclusions and Future Work

Waste management is a critical and growing challenge, particularly in urban envi-
ronments. Observational data are some of the best ways to study waste management to
devise effective policy and to raise individual awareness that may curb waste production.
Existing tools are either oversimplified or too complex for individuals to pick up and play,
so we developed a game meeting the opportunity of joining a robust multi-factor waste
generation and management model with ease of use and clear, rapid feedback to users.
In this educationally-focused tool [64–66], students and policymakers may engage with
the waste chain of a virtual city, changing model parameters and observing their affect on
waste management performance through the use of visible key performance indicators.
The game itself is built upon a robustly-defined multi-criteria decision-making problem
comprising multiple variables.
Compared with existing modelling approaches that either oversimplify or require
complex setup and deep domain knowledge, this game is a “Pareto optimal” solution. It
is a highly-detailed real-world planning tool that also does an excellent job relative to the
effort involved in setting up and running the simulation. From easy-to-make changes and
readily-visible indicators, the broad impact of generation and policy changes is clearly
understood. Enhanced knowledge stemming from gameplay may therefore contribute
towards the creation of enhanced social policies and constituent engagement in efforts to
reduce and manage waste. Particularly, participants will leave playing the game having
a better understanding of the challenges associated with waste management with gami-
fying elements such as clearly presented and easy-to-track KPIs making the experience
memorable and enduring.
While today, waste data are simulated, future virtual cities may instead make use
of real-world data from municipalities and other government agencies in real time using
IoT [67] to showcase examples of effective—and suboptimal—performance.
The designed tool may be integrated with other game-based simulators [68,69] to
help quantify and seek to reduce other negative externalities, such as vehicle emissions,
using real-world automotive diagnostic data and solutions [70–72]. Real-world fault data
may also be captured from mobile devices [73–79] as a means of informing simulation of
fuel-wasting faults such that the transit planning strategies reflect true inefficiencies, while
a broader game might even model how waste bin placement might impact pedestrian
traffic [80] and efficiently mirror cities digitally and in real time [81]. Even industrial
processes [82,83] may be mirrored with the aim of improving resource efficiency and
reducing waste. In the consumer-facing world, there may be opportunities to mitigate
significant healthcare and home-life related waste, for example by integrating gameified
waste modelling with digitally-connected disposable smart devices such as diapers [84] to
track and trace the true chain of custody and provenance of real-world waste.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, G.P., A.Z. and K.P.; methodology, G.P., I.P. and A.Z.;
investigation, J.R. and I.P.; writing—original draft preparation, I.P., J.E.S., J.R., G.P. and K.P.; writing—
review and editing, G.P., J.E.S., A.Z. and K.P.; visualization, G.P.; supervision, G.P., A.Z. and J.E.S.;
Modelling 2022, 3 50

project administration, G.P., A.Z. and J.E.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.
Funding: There was no external funding provided for this research.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no known conflict of interest.

References
1. Ackerman, F. Waste management and climate change. Local Environ. 2000, 5, 223–229. [CrossRef]
2. Seeberger, J.; Grandhi, R.; Kim, S.S.; Mase, W.A.; Reponen, T.; Ho, S.m.; Chen, A. Special report: E-waste management in the
united states and public health implications. J. Environ. Health 2016, 79, 8–17. [PubMed]
3. Haupt, T.; Arnold, U.; Bidlingmaier, W. Studien-und Hochschulübergreifender Einsatz Einer Engl.-spr. Multimedialen Urban
Infrastructure Development Simulation in der Akademischen Ausund Weiterbildung-MUrIDS (Cross-Study and Cross-University
Use of an English Multimedia Urban Infrastructure Deve. Workshop: Multimedia in Bildung und Wirtschaft–Einsatz und
Nachhaltigkeit von eLearning, Volume 22, p. 5. Available online: https://his-he.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationen/Pro
jektberichte_alte_Website/Hochschulplanung/hp165.pdf (accessed on 24 October 2021).
4. Arnold, U.; Söbke, H.; Reichelt, M. Simcity in infrastructure management education. Educ. Sci. 2019, 9, 209. [CrossRef]
5. Fernández, P.; Ceacero-Moreno, M. Urban sustainability and natural hazards management; designs using simulations. Sustain-
ability 2021, 13, 649. [CrossRef]
6. Wu, K.C.; Huang, P.Y. Treatment of an Anonymous Recipient: Solid-Waste Management Simulation Game. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2015,
52, 568–600. [CrossRef]
7. Lepe-Salazar, F.; Cortés-Álvarez, T.; Serratos-Chávez, E.; Jáuregui-Flores, L.; Juárez-Cervantes, E.; Valdovinos-López, R.; Rincón-
Martínez, D.; la Madrid, R. A Game-Based Service to Mitigate the Risk of Inundations Caused by Solid Waste Accumulation. In
Making Smart Cities More Playable: Exploring Playable Cities; Nijholt, A., Ed.; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 279–299. [CrossRef]
8. Wilensky, U. NetLogo. 1999. Available online: http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/ (accessed on 24 October 2021).
9. de Souza, V.M.; Bloemhof, J.; Borsato, M. Assessing the eco-effectiveness of a solid waste management plan using agent-based
modelling. Waste Manag. 2021, 125, 235–248. [CrossRef]
10. Likotiko, E.; Nyambo, D.; Mwangoka, J. Multi-Agent Based IoT Smart Waste Monitoring and Collection Architecture. Int. J.
Comput. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2017, 7, 1–14. [CrossRef]
11. European Commission. Green City Accord Target Areas. 2021. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/green-city-
accord/monitoring-framework_en (accessed on 24 October 2021).
12. Loizia, P.; Voukkali, I.; Zorpas, A.A.; Navarro Pedreño, J.; Chatziparaskeva, G.; Inglezakis, V.J.; Vardopoulos, I.; Doula, M.
Measuring the level of environmental performance in insular areas, through key performed indicators, in the framework of waste
strategy development. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 753, 141974. [CrossRef]
13. Zorpas, A.A.; Lasaridi, K.; Voukkali, I.; Loizia, P.; Chroni, C. Household waste compositional analysis variation from insular
communities in the framework of waste prevention strategy plans. Waste Manag. 2015, 38, 3–11. [CrossRef]
14. Zorpas, A.A.; Lasaridi, K.; Voukkali, I.; Loizia, P.; Chroni, C. Promoting Sustainable Waste Prevention Strategy Activities and
Planning in Relation to the Waste Framework Directive in Insular Communities. Environ. Process. 2015, 2, 159–173. [CrossRef]
15. Voukkali, I.; Loizia, P.; Navarro-Pedreño, J.; Zorpas, A.A. Urban strategies evaluation for waste management in coastal areas in
the framework of area metabolism. Waste Manag. Res. J. Sustain. Circ. Econ. 2021, 39, 0734242X20972773. [CrossRef]
16. Zorpas, A.A. Strategy development in the framework of waste management. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 716, 137088. [CrossRef]
17. Sharp, V.; Giorgi, S.; Wilson, D.C. Methods to monitor and evaluate household waste prevention. Waste Manag. Res. 2010,
28, 269–280. [CrossRef]
18. Vardopoulos, I.; Konstantopoulos, I.; Zorpas, A.A.; Limousy, L.; Bennici, S.; Inglezakis, V.J.; Voukkali, I. Sustainable metropolitan
areas perspectives through assessment of the existing waste management strategies. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28,
24305–24320. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Victor, P.A. Indicators of sustainable development: Some lessons from capital theory. Ecol. Econ. 1991, 4, 191–213. [CrossRef]
20. Green Dot Cyprus. Green National Household Results per Municipality per Year Cyprus. 2011. Available online: https:
//greendot.com.cy/en/ (accessed on 24 October 2021).
21. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating
to the environment and amending with regard to public participation. Off. J. Eur. Union 2003, 17–25.
22. Printing Office of the Republic of Cyprus. Packaging and Waste Packaging (Amendment) Law; (Law No. 159(I)/2005); Printing Office
of the Republic of Cyprus: Nicosia, Cyprus, 2005.
Modelling 2022, 3 51

23. Rhyner, C.; Schwartz, L.; Wenger, R.; Kohrell, M. Waste Management and Resource Recovery; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017;
pp. 1–528. [CrossRef]
24. Luttenberger, L.R. Waste management challenges in transition to circular economy—Case of Croatia. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,
256, 120495. 2020.120495. [CrossRef]
25. Bhada-Tata, P.; Hoornweg, D. What a Waste?: A Global Review of Solid Waste Management. 2012. Available online: http:
//hdl.handle.net/10986/17388 (accessed on 24 October 2021).
26. Kaza, S.; Yao, L.; Bhada-Tata, P.; Van Woerden, F. What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050; The World
Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2018; p. 292. [CrossRef]
27. Alkalay, R.; Pasternak, G.; Zask, A. Clean-coast index—A new approach for beach cleanliness assessment. Ocean. Coast. Manag.
2007, 50, 352–362. [CrossRef]
28. Messineo, A.; Panno, D. Municipal waste management in Sicily: Practices and challenges. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 1201–1208.
[CrossRef]
29. Loizia, P.; Voukkali, I.; Chatziparaskeva, G.; Navarro-Pedreño, J.; Zorpas, A.A. Measuring the Level of Environmental Performance
on Coastal Environment before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study from Cyprus. Sustainability 2021, 12, 2485.
[CrossRef]
30. Ghorani azam, A.; Riahi-Zanjani, B.; Balali-Mood, M. Effects of air pollution on human health and practical measures for
prevention in Iran. J. Res. Med. Sci. 2016, 21, 65. [CrossRef]
31. Zarate, E. Understanding the Origins and Fate of Air Pollution in Bogotá, Colombia. 2007. Available online: https://infoscience.
epfl.ch/record/100037 (accessed on 24 October 2021).
32. Ho, B. Urban Air Pollution; IntechOpen: Rijeka, Croatia, 2012. [CrossRef]
33. Hogg, D.; Ballinger, A. The Potential Contribution of Waste Management to a Low Carbon Economy; Eunomia Research & Consulting
Ltd.: Bristol, UK, 2015.
34. Department of Labour Inspection (DLI) of the Ministry of Labour; Insurance, S. Air Quality in Cyprus. Available online:
https://www.airquality.dli.mlsi.gov.cy/ (accessed on 24 October 2021).
35. Pisoni, E.; Christidis, P.; Thunis, P.; Trombetti, M. Evaluating the impact of “Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans” on urban
background air quality. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 231, 249–255. [CrossRef]
36. Kasten, P.; Bracker, J.; Haller, M.; Purwanto, J. Assessing the Status of Electrification of the Road Transport Passenger Vehicles and
Potential Future Implications for the Environment and European Energy System; Öko-Institut: Darmstadt, Germany, 2016.
37. De la Barrera, F.; Reyes-Paecke, S.; Banzhaf, E. Indicators for green spaces in contrasting urban settings. Ecol. Indic. 2016,
62, 212–219. [CrossRef]
38. Gerstenberg, T.; Hofmann, M. Perception and preference of trees: A psychological contribution to tree species selection in urban
areas. Urban For. Urban Green. 2015, 15, 103–111. [CrossRef]
39. European Commission. Building a Green Infrastructure for Europe; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg;
Brussels, Belgium, 2013; p. 22. [CrossRef]
40. World Health Organisation(WHO). Health Indicators of Sustainable Cities in the Context of the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable
Development; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012.
41. Russo, A.; Cirella, G. Modern Compact Cities: How Much Greenery Do We Need? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2180.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Delponte, I.; Schenone, C. RES Implementation in Urban Areas: An Updated Overview. Sustainability 2020, 12, 382. [CrossRef]
43. European Commission. Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions—The Green Deal in partnership with local and
regional authorities. In Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, The European Council, The Council, The
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions the European Green Deal; Number COM(2019) 640 Final;
European Commission: Brussels, Belgium; Luxembourg, 2019; p. 24.
44. Zorpas, A.A.; Saranti, A. Multi-criteria analysis of sustainable environmental clean technologies for the treatment of winery’s
wastewater. Int. J. Glob. Environ. Issues 2016, 15, 151–168. [CrossRef]
45. Cyprus, T.S.O. Transmission System Operator Cyprus. 2020. Available online: https://tsoc.org.cy/electrical-system/energy-gen
eration-records/res-penetration/ (accessed on 24 October 2021).
46. Regu, C.E. Cyprus Energy Regulatory Authority. 2021. Available online: https://www.cera.org.cy/en-gb/smv/sp-graph
(accessed on 24 October 2021).
47. Republic of Cyprus, Statistical Service, Ministry of Finance. Demographic Statistics 2019. 2019. Available online:
https://www.mof.gov.cy/mof/cystat/statistics.nsf/populationcondition_21main_en/populationcondition_21main_en
?OpenForm&sub=1&sel=1 (accessed on 24 October 2021).
48. European Commission. Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the Promotion of
the Use of Energy from Renewable Sources (Recast) (Text with EEA Relevance)Text with EEA Relevance; Technical Report; European
Commission: Brussels, Belgium; Luxembourg, 2018.
49. Pesqueira, J.F.J.R.; Pereira, M.F.R.; Silva, A.M.T. Environmental impact assessment of advanced urban wastewater treatment
technologies for the removal of priority substances and contaminants of emerging concern: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,
261, 121078. [CrossRef]
Modelling 2022, 3 52

50. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Policy Framework for Climate and Energy in the Period from 2020 to 2030; European
Commission: Brussels, Belgium; Luxembourg, 2014.
51. European Commission. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions- Tenth Report on the Implementation Status and Programmes for Implementation (as required
by Article 17 of Coun; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium; Luxembourg, 2016.
52. World Health Organisation(WHO). Population Connected to Wastewater Treatment Facilities. 2015. Available online: https:
//gateway.euro.who.int/en/indicators/enhis_4-population-connected-to-wastewater-treatment-facilities/ (accessed on 24
October 2021).
53. Eurostat. Population Connected to Wastewater Treatment Plants. 2018. Available online: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/n
ui/show.do?dataset=env_ww_con&lang=en (accessed on 24 October 2021).
54. Niccolucci, V.; Botto, S.; Rugani, B.; Nicolardi, V.; Bastianoni, S.; Gaggi, C. The real water consumption behind drinking water:
The case of Italy. J. Environ. Manag. 2011, 92, 2611–2618. [CrossRef]
55. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions Closing the Loop—An EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy; Number COM(2015) 614
Final; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium; Luxembourg, 2015.
56. Nations, U. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://sdgs.un.or
g/2030agenda (accessed on 24 October 2021).
57. Mohanty, S. Everything You Wanted to Know About Smart Cities. IEEE Consum. Electron. Mag. 2016, 5, 60–70. [CrossRef]
58. Stambouli, A.B.; Khiat, Z.; Flazi, S.; Kitamura, Y. A review on the renewable energy development in Algeria: Current perspective,
energy scenario and sustainability issues. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 4445–4460. [CrossRef]
59. Petinrin, J.O.; Shaaban, M. Renewable energy for continuous energy sustainability in Malaysia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,
50, 967–981. [CrossRef]
60. Calisto Friant, M.; Vermeulen, W.J.V.; Salomone, R. Analysing European Union circular economy policies: Words versus actions.
Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021, 27, 337–353. [CrossRef]
61. Wittmaier, M.; Langer, S.; Sawilla, B. Possibilities and limitations of life cycle assessment (LCA) in the development of waste
utilization systems—Applied examples for a region in Northern Germany. Waste Manag. 2009, 29, 1732–1738. [CrossRef]
62. Brook Lyndhurst. WR1204 Household Waste Prevention Evidence Review: L1 m1—Executive Report, a Report for Defra’s Waste and
Resources Evidence Programme; Technical Report; Brook Lyndhurst: London, UK, 2009.
63. Shi, Y.; Ge, X.; Yuan, X.; Wang, Q.; Kellett, J.; Li, F.; Ba, K. An Integrated Indicator System and Evaluation Model for Regional
Sustainable Development. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2183. [CrossRef]
64. Strzebkowski, R.; Gehrmann, T.; Siegel, J.E.; Politopoulos, K.; Christodoulides, C.; Pappas, G. AR/VR/Game-based Edutainment
Applications and Real-Time Data Visualisation Technologies for Discovery Learning in the Industry and Distance Education; OEB: Berlin,
Germany, 2018.
65. Avraamidou, A.; Lambis, S.; Pappas, G.; Christodoulides, C. Enhancing Distance Education Students’ Learning Experience
Through Emerging Technologies. In Proceedings of the INTED2019 Proceedings, Valencia, Spain, 11–13 March 2019; Volume 1,
pp. 3022–3029. [CrossRef]
66. Pappas, G.; Peratikou, P.; Siegel, J.E.; Politopoulos, K.; Christodoulides, C.; Stavrou, S. Cyber Escape Room: An educational
3D escape room game within a cyber range training realm. In Proceedings of the INTED2020 Proceedings, 14th International
Technology, Education and Development Conference, Valencia, Spain, 2–4 March 2020; pp. 2621–2627. [CrossRef]
67. Pappas, G.; Siegel, J.E.; Vogiatzakis, I.; Politopoulos, K. Gamification and the Internet of Things in Education. In Handbook of
Intelligent Techniques in Educational Process; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022.
68. Pappas, G.; Siegel, J.E.; Politopoulos, K. VirtualCar: Virtual Mirroring of IoT-Enabled Avacars in AR, VR and Desktop Applications.
2018. Available online: https://diglib.eg.org/handle/10.2312/egve20181381 (accessed on 24 October 2021).
69. Pappas, G.; Siegel, J.E.; Politopoulos, K.; Sun, Y. A Gamified Simulator and Physical Platform for Self-Driving Algorithm Training
and Validation. Electronics 2021, 10, 1112. [CrossRef]
70. Siegel, J.E. Cloudthink and the Avacar: Embedded Design to Create Virtual Vehicles for Cloud-Based Informatics, Telematics,
and Infotainment. S.M. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013.
71. Wilhelm, E.; Siegel, J.E.; Mayer, S.; Sadamori, L.; Dsouza, S.; Chau, C.K.; Sarma, S.E. Cloudthink: A scalable secure platform for
mirroring transportation systems in the cloud. Transport 2015, 30, 320–329. [CrossRef]
72. Siegel, J.E. Data Proxies, the Cognitive Layer, and Application Locality: Enablers of Cloud-Connected Vehicles and Next,-
Generation Internet of Things. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016.
73. Siegel, J.E.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Deshpande, A.; Sarma, S.E. Vehicular engine oil service life characterization using on-board
diagnostic (OBD) sensor data. In Proceedings of the IEEE Sensors 2014, Valencia, Spain, 2–5 November 2014; pp. 1722–1725.
74. Siegel, J.E.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Deshpande, A.; Sarma, S.E. Smartphone-Based Wheel Imbalance Detection. In Proceedings of the
Dynamic Systems and Control Conference, Columbus, OH, USA, 28–30 October 2015.
75. Siegel, J.E.; Kumar, S.; Ehrenberg, I.; Sarma, S.E. Engine misfire detection with pervasive mobile audio. In Proceedings of the
Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, Riva del Garda, Italy, 19–23 September
2016; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 226–241.
Modelling 2022, 3 53

76. Siegel, J.E.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Deshpande, A.; Sarma, S.E. Smartphone-Based Vehicular Tire Pressure and Condition Monitoring.
In Proceedings of the SAI Intelligent Systems Conference, London, UK, 21–22 September 2016; pp. 446–455.
77. Siegel, J.E.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Kumar, S.; Sarma, S.E. Air filter particulate loading detection using smartphone audio and
optimized ensemble classification. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2017, 66, 104–112. [CrossRef]
78. Siegel, J.E.; Sun, Y.; Sarma, S.E. Automotive Diagnostics as a Service: An Artificially Intelligent Mobile Application for Tire
Condition Assessment. In Proceedings of the International Conference on AI and Mobile Services, Seattle, WA, USA, 25–
30 June 2018.
79. Siegel, J.E.; Coda, U.; Terwilliger, A. Surveying Off-Board and Extra-Vehicular Monitoring and Progress Towards Pervasive
Diagnostics. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2007.03759.
80. Pappas, G.; Siegel, J.E.; Rutkowski, J.; Schaaf, A. Game and Simulation Design for Studying Pedestrian-Automated Vehicle
Interactions. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2109.15205.
81. Siegel, J.E.; Kumar, S.; Sarma, S.E. The Future Internet of Things: Secure, Efficient, and Model-Based. IEEE Internet Things J. 2017,
5, 2386–2398. [CrossRef]
82. Kumaravel, B.T.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Siegel, J.E.; Sarma, S.E.; Arunachalam, N. Development of an Internet of Things enabled
manufacturing system for tool wear characterization. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 3rd International Symposium in Robotics
and Manufacturing Automation (ROMA), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 19–21 September 2017; pp. 1–6.
83. Siegel, J.E.; Beemer, M.F.; Shepard, S.M. Automated non-destructive inspection of fused filament fabrication components using
thermographic signal reconstruction. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 31, 100923. [CrossRef]
84. Sen, P.; Kantareddy, S.N.R.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Sarma, S.E.; Siegel, J.E. Low-cost diaper wetness detection using hydrogel-based
RFID tags. IEEE Sens. J. 2020, 20, 3293–3302. [CrossRef]