Solid Waste Management

UNIVERSITY OF CALOOCAN CITY
Bachelor in Public Administration
Tulip St., Area C, Camarin, Caloocan City

Implementation of Waste Management Program in Three (3) Selected Barangays in District 1, Caloocan City

A Thesis Proposal
Presented to
The Faculty of Public Administration
UNIVERSITY OF CALOOCAN CITY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor in Public Administration

By:

Bato, Misha
Flores, Mary Adelita
Gueta, Janzen Mark
Labordo, Renelyn
Ratilla, Jeminah
Sta. Romana, Hannabet
Tradio, Emarie

BPA 4-B

2013

Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction In any nation or country, waste management is always part of their equation to maintain their balance, not just environmentally but economically. The Philippines is a country of 85 million people and encompasses 7,107 islands, though only about 2,000 islands are currently inhabited. The Philippines has a total area of 30 million hectares, which is roughly 90% the total area of the nearby country, Malaysia. The Archipelago stretches more than 1,800 kilometers (km) north to south and 1,100 km east to west, and is located between the South China Sea and the Philippine Sea. With a rapidly growing population and lack of adequate disposal sites, solid waste has become a major problem for most medium to large-size cities. When Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo took office in January, 2001, the first act she signed into law dealt with solid waste management. In recent years, inadequate solid waste management systems have posed serious health risks particularly in densely populated areas. In Manila, for example, the closure of the largest disposal site in 200 combined with the inadequate capacity at the other sites resulted in the disposal of tons of waste along city streets, empty lots, and in the waterways and bays in and around the city. Scavenging for recyclable material at open dumps is very common throughout many parts of the Philippines. Tragically, excessive open dumping of solid waste combined with the seasonal monsoon rains at the Payatas sire in July 2000 caused a large-scale slope failure that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of scavengers. Waste management practices can differ for developed and developing nations. It is the collection, transport, processing or disposal managing and monitoring of waste materials. The term waste management usually relates to materials produced by human activity, and the process is generally undertaken to reduce their effect on health, the environment or aesthetics. Waste management is also a distinct practice from resource recovery which focuses on delaying the rate of consumption of natural resources. All waste materials, whether they are solid, liquid, gaseous or radioactive fall within the remit of waste management.

Background of the study In the United States of America (USA), where over 311 million people live, almost all methods of waste management are being used. A program call Municipal Solid Waste does this. Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) - more commonly known as trash or garbage - consists of everyday items we use and then throw away, such as product packaging, grass clippings, furniture, clothing, bottles, food scraps, newspapers, appliances, paint, and batteries. This comes from our homes, schools, hospitals, and businesses. Each year produces a report on MSW generation, recycling and disposal. In 2010, Americans generated about 250 million tons of trash and recycled and composted over 85 million tons of this material, equivalent to a 34.1 percent recycling rate. On average, we recycled and composted 1.51 pounds of our individual waste generation of 4.43 pounds per person per day. They encourage practices that reduce the amount of waste needing to be disposed of, such as waste prevention, recycling and composting. Europe, where almost 739, 165,030 people live, make different strategies in dealing with waste. In the United Kingdom, the government is trying to encourage more people to recycle their waste and reduce the UK’s was mountain. Figures suggest 60% of all household waste could be recycled or composted, but the largest nation in the UK, England, appears to be reusing only 17.7%. In Switzerland, they are proud of its recycling efforts, and with good reason. Glass and paper are just some of the things the average Swiss refuses to simply throw away. But the Swiss do not recycle just because they care about the environment. There is a strong financial incentive. Recycling is free, but in most parts of Switzerland throwing rubbish costs money - each sticker is not just one euro, Waste is not just a waste. This is what Denmark, one of Europe’s “greenest” countries, believes. For decades, the Danish environment policy has been to regard waste as a resource. Tough standards have been set by consecutive governments, but are held up to the local authorities to collect whatever waste households may produce. Nearly 10,000 Danes are in the business of collecting waste - more than 0.1% of the entire population. The hard push towards a greener Denmark has given the country a proud record. Every year, one billion plastic drinking water bottles are thrown away in Greece, along with one billion soft drinks bottles and yet another billion plastic containers for cleansing fluids. Almost one-fifth of the entire waste produced by this country is plastic, and yet 1% of it is recycled. Ironically, Athens does have what is believed to be Europe’s largest recycling plant, built next to the landfill four years ago. But the plant has stood idle. An efficient system for the collection and disposal of waste is critically important in Singapore’s limited land area and dense population. Singapore has an advanced waste management system in place. Their National Environment Agency (NEA) has overall responsibility for the planning, development and management of solid waste disposal facilities and operations in Singapore. This includes the licensing and regulation of solid waste collection and enforcement of illegal dumping. In this paper, the role of authority in this seemingly unattractive statistics concerning Philippine waste management is put into focus. To be specific, the information dissemination, cooperation, and policies and procedures set for the purpose of implementation of waste management, the factors that cause it and its unacceptable levels that may influence the integrity and performance of Filipinos in how they treat their waste properly. It is for the reason that the researcher hold the belief that what is essential is invisible to the naked eye (Antoine Saint-Exupery, The Little Prince) and that these invisible yet, essential forces are the ones that will make or break the integrity of Philippine authority in the country.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The study will seek to answer the following questions: 1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of the following: 2.1. Age 2.2. Civil Status 2.3. Gender 2.4. Monthly Family Income 2.5. Educational Background 2. What are the problems encountered in the implementation of Waste Management Program in terms of the following: 3.6. Information Dissemination 3.7. Performance of Implementors 3.8. Cooperation of Barangay Residents 3.9. Policies and Procedures 3. Is there a significant difference on the perception of the two (2) groups of respondents on the effectiveness of the implementation of the program? 4. What solutions may be offered to solve the problems encountered in problem no. 2?

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The Study is significant to the following: 1. Department of Environment and National Resources (DENR). The study will help provide information to update existing policies on waste management. Not only will it help in any updates of policies, this study will also help in finding ways of effective and efficient implementation of the waste management program. 2. Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG). Monitoring of the implementation of the waste management program will make a huge impact on environmental changes. This study will provide some evidences of lapses on the program’s implementation, where the department can study more to ensure a higher rate of obedience of the program. 3. Caloocan City Administrators. The result of this study will give them insights on the most frequent situations seen in their unit. The study will also provide them with possible programs that will help them cope with the situations and have a better understanding of it. 4. Barangay Officials. This study will provide sufficient data to solve the problems of the implementation of the program. 5. Researchers. This study will give them appreciation and full understanding of the policies, regulations and over-all implementation of waste management program. 6. Future Researchers. This study will serve as reference in conduct of a similar study or research in the future.

Conceptual Paradigm This Study will use the Input-Process-Output (IPO) model or the Systems Approach. The model is graphically shown below.
Figure 1. Theoretical Framework of the Study Entitled
“Implementation of Waste Management Program in Three (3) Selected Barangays in District 1, Caloocan City”

The Input will consist of the demographic profile of the respondent, the solid waste management program in the barangays and the law enacted for the topic. The Process will include the questionnaire, oral and written interview and the Document Analysis. The Output will result to a more effective implementation of the Solid Waste Management Program and a clean healthy community.

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY The study will assess the implementation of the Waste Management Program. The respondents will be randomly selected from the three (3) chosen barangays namely Barangay 174 of Camarin, Barangay 175 of Camarin, and Barangay 176 of Bagong Silang located in District 1 of Caloocan City. A total of 150 respondents will be selected where 50 each will come from the three (3) barangays. The period of the study covers from June 2012 to October 2012.

Definition of Terms

Assessment. The action or an instance of assessing and appraising.
Barangay Residents. People involved on the research study.
Barangay Staff, Officers and Employees. People involved on the research study.
Effectiveness. The quality or state of being effective.
Hygiene. The practice of measures designed to attain and preserve health.
Implement. To carry out or put into practice.
Information Dissemination. The adequate, clear and thorough giving of information to the right personnel or people.
Program. Plan or procedure.
Waste Management. The collection, transport, processing or disposal, managing and monitoring of waste materials.
Waste. Any type of materials which are consumed and spent.

Chapter 2
Research Framework
Review of Related Literature Foreign Literature In the United States of America (USA), where over 311 million people live, almost all methods of waste management are being used. A program call Municipal Solid Waste does this. Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) - more commonly known as trash or garbage - consists of everyday items we use and then throw away, such as product packaging, grass clippings, furniture, clothing, bottles, food scraps, newspapers, appliances, paint, and batteries. This comes from our homes, schools, hospitals, and businesses. Each year produces a report on MSW generation, recycling and disposal. In 2010, Americans generated about 250 million tons of trash and recycled and composted over 85 million tons of this material, equivalent to a 34.1 percent recycling rate. On average, we recycled and composted 1.51 pounds of our individual waste generation of 4.43 pounds per person per day. They encourage practices that reduce the amount of waste needing to be disposed of, such as waste prevention, recycling and composting. Europe, where almost 739, 165,030 people live, make different strategies in dealing with waste. In the United Kingdom, the government is trying to encourage more people to recycle their waste and reduce the UK’s was mountain. Figures suggest 60% of all household waste could be recycled or composted, but the largest nation in the UK, England, appears to be reusing only 17.7%. In Switzerland, they are proud of its recycling efforts, and with good reason. Glass and paper are just some of the things the average Swiss refuses to simply throw away. But the Swiss do not recycle just because they care about the environment. There is a strong financial incentive. Recycling is free, but in most parts of Switzerland throwing rubbish costs money - each sticker is not just one euro, Waste is not just a waste. This is what Denmark, one of Europe’s “greenest” countries, believes. For decades, the Danish environment policy has been to regard waste as a resource. Tough standards have been set by consecutive governments, but are held up to the local authorities to collect whatever waste households may produce. Nearly 10,000 Danes are in the business of collecting waste - more than 0.1% of the entire population. The hard push towards a greener Denmark has given the country a proud record. Every year, one billion plastic drinking water bottles are thrown away in Greece, along with one billion soft drinks bottles and yet another billion plastic containers for cleansing fluids. Almost one-fifth of the entire waste produced by this country is plastic, and yet 1% of it is recycled. Ironically, Athens does have what is believed to be Europe’s largest recycling plant, built next to the landfill four years ago. But the plant has stood idle. An efficient system for the collection and disposal of waste is critically important in Singapore’s limited land area and dense population. Singapore has an advanced waste management system in place. Their National Environment Agency (NEA) has overall responsibility for the planning, development and management of solid waste disposal facilities and operations in Singapore. This includes the licensing and regulation of solid waste collection and enforcement of illegal dumping. In this paper, the role of authority in this seemingly unattractive statistics concerning Philippine waste management is put into focus. To be specific, the information dissemination, cooperation, and policies and procedures set for the purpose of implementation of waste management, the factors that cause it and its unacceptable levels that may influence the integrity and performance of Filipinos in how they treat their waste properly. It is for the reason that the researcher hold the belief that what is essential is invisible to the naked eye (Antoine Saint-Exupery, The Little Prince) and that these invisible yet, essential forces are the ones that will make or break the integrity of Philippine authority in the country.
According to a Study on the Overview of Solid Waste Management in Malaysia, there are six elements of SWM: the generation, storage, collection, transportation and transfer, processing and treatment, and the disposal. In changes given during their current system of waste management, their current landfill is approximately 95%. In their given change for a targeted date of 2020, the statistics will change to a 65% landfill, making the 35% for recycling and intermediate processing. In the United Kingdom, the government is trying to encourage more people to recycle their waste and reduce the UK’s waste mountain. Figure 2 suggests that 60% of all household waste could be recycled or composted, but even the largest nation in the UK, England, appears to be using only 17.7%. Figure 2. WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES Even in USA, in 2010, Americans generated about 250 million tons of trash and recycled and composted over 85 million tons of this material, equivalent to a 34.1 percent recycling rate.

Local Literature According to a Study on the Overview of Solid Waste Management in Malaysia, there are six elements of SWM: the generation, storage, collection, transportation and transfer, processing and treatment, and the disposal. In changes given during their current system of waste management, their current landfill is approximately 95%. In their given change for a targeted date of 2020, the statistics will change to a 65% landfill, making the 35% for recycling and intermediate processing.

Chapter 3
Research Methodology

Research Method
This segment discusses the research method and techniques and the instrument to be used in gathering to be used in gathering data. The descriptive method of research will be used in gathering data in as much as the nature of the study is such that it aims to describe existing condition tackled. This method is being used because it describes the present status or prevailing condition obtaining in the research venue. Specifically, survey will be conducted which the questionnaire as the primary instrument.

DATA GATHERING TECHNIQUES The researchers selected three barangays, Barangay 174, 175, and 176. The respondents will be determined through lottery. There will be 150 respondents, 50 for each of the barangays.

STATISTICAL TREATMENT The following statistical tools will be use to analyze and interpret the quantitative data. 1. Simple percentage. This will be used to depict the profile of the respondents. The formula to be used are as follows:

Frequency and percentage formula
% = f – Frequency N –no. cases / total sample

%= fN x 100 Where
% = percentage f = frequency
N = total sample

2. Ranking method. Ranking will be used to identify the position of an individual or a group in a series of ranks. Rank 1 is variable with the highest frequency. Rank 2 is the variable with the highest frequency. And succeeding number for others. The formula to be used for ranking us as follows:

R= R1+ R22

Where R1 = rank of one variable as arranged in chronological order.
R2 = rank of the other variable

3. Weighted Mean; Likert Style with 5 point scale. This will be used to determine the level of effectiveness on the subject as responded by participants. VALUE SCALE | MEAN RANGE | INTERPRETATION | 5 | 4.51 - 5.00 | Very Much Effective | 4 | 3.51 - 4.50 | Very Effective | 3 | 2.51 - 3.50 | Effective | 2 | 1.51 - 2.50 | Less Effective | 1 | 1.00 - 150 | Not Effective at All |