Amidst rapid urbanisation going on in developing world cities, majority of the cities have movedrnji-om govemment monopoly in direct urban services delivelY toward privatisatiol1. The purposernof this study was to explore involvement of the private companies and Community-BasedrnOrganisations (CBOs) in municipal household solid waste management in Arusha municipality,rnTanzania. Further the study analyse stakeholders involved, explores household solid wasternsystem, assess privatisation outcomes, compares service delivered by private companies andrnCBOs with households ' satisfaction levels, and identify key challenges in waste management.rnJ employed purely qualitative approach for the study. PrimC/ly data were collected through semistructuredrninterviews with private companies, CBOs and households; key iliformant interviews,rniliforlllal interviews, and direct observation and photographing. Various secondC/ly sources werernalso incorporated. An actor-oriented approach and stakeholders' analysis were the mainrntheories that underpin the study.rnResults show that solid waste was privatised following government's gross failures in servicerndelively. Implementation of the Sustainable Cities Programme marked the shift ji'Olll govemmentrnmonopoly to non-state actors in service delively. Private companies are involved throughrncompetitive bidding and tendering at the municipality, while CBOs enters into service contractsrnwith ward administration but with an approval ji-om the municipality. MuniCipal household solidrnwaste management is broadly under Public-Private Partnership (PPP) system ' wherebyrngovemment owns the service but under private sector and civil society led provision.rnStakeholders involved are diversified, have different motives and peljorms different roles.rnAsymmetrical power relations, huild and use of manipulations at all levels are common featuresrnamong actors.rnPrivatisation outcomes in the municipality are mixed. There are places which have experiencedrnincreased waste collection efficiency and widened coverage, elimination of the illegal minidumps,rnand consolidation of the iliformal sector. CBOs have managed to extend service to therninaccessible peri-urban settlements by using combination of the lIIotorised and non-Illotorisedrnmovements in waste collection and transportation. Low-income areas in particular arernexperiencing privatisation deceptions whereby contractors exist by names only not in practice,rnor there is no any considerable change in the state of sanitation. Service variations betweenrnprivate companies and CBOs revolve around service areas and service itself, waste collectionrnsystems and transportation modalities, and user fee rates. Majority of the interviewed servicernusers are not satisfied with the service. Unsatisfied users are predominantly served by CBOs.rnReasons for customers' satisfaction or dissatisfaction are ji-equency and waste collectionrnschedule consistencies, user charge rates, state of sanitation in the neighbourhood, and kind ofrnlanguage used by waste or revenue collectors. The state of physical inji-astructures, contractors 'rncapacity and households' socio-economic statlls are highly influential on service variations.rnMajor challenges are within the realm of govemance failures, socia-cultural, economic issues,rnand inji-astrllctures and city planning; suggesting that all actors must come together for longtermrnmajor changes, and organisational and institutional set-lip ji-om down to up.rnKey word5: CBOs, Municipal household solid waste, Private companies, Privatisation