(LUẬN văn THẠC sĩ) a comparative study of the solid waste management practices of households from urban and rural communities surrounding laguna lake, philippines

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY

LEA BARTOLOME BUENAFRANCISCA

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES OF HOUSEHOLDS FROM URBAN AND RURAL
COMMUNITIES SURROUNDING LAGUNA LAKE, PHILIPPINES

BACHELOR THESIS
Study Mode: Full-time
Major

: Environmental Science and Management

Faculty

: Advance Education Program

Batch

: 2015-2018

Thai Nguyen, 2019

download by :


Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry
Degree Program

Bachelor of Environmental Science and Management

Student name

Buenafrancisca, Lea B.

Student ID

DTN1454290091
A comparative study of the solid waste management

Thesis Title

practices of households from urban and rural communities
surrounding Laguna Lake, Philippines

Supervisor(s)

Prof. Dr. Damasa Macandog (Philippines);
Ms. Ly Thi Thuy Duong (MA, Vietnam)

Signature of
Supervisor
Abstract:
Solid waste may come from household, agriculture, commercial and
industrial sources that causes land, air and water pollution. Solid waste
management is now a major global environmental concern. Water bodies such
as oceans, rivers and lakes are commonly affected by solid wastes. The
ecological status of Laguna Lake, the biggest lake in the Philippines, is
becoming worse since it is surrounded by households from urban and rural

communities that dump their solid wastes into the lake. This study aims to
compare the solid waste management practices and the level of awareness on
SWM of urban and rural communities surrounding Laguna Lake, to describe the
types of waste they generate, to identify the impacts of their solid wastes to the
ecological status of Laguna Lake and to recommend measures on proper solid
waste management. A face to face survey was conducted with local
communities residing in four urban cities and four rural municipalities. In each
municipality, six (6) communities from upstream, midstream and downstream
were randomly selected with five (5) households each with a total of 30
respondents per municipality/city. Analysis of the surveyed respondents showed
that there is a slight difference on the SWM practices of the urban and rural
ii

download by :


communities. The results indicate that urban communities are more aware of the
term SWM but are not practicing proper SWM while rural communities practice
more the proper SWM. It is recommended to disseminate more information on
proper SWM by conducting more seminars, training and projects in urban
communities. Further research is needed to identify the other negative impacts
of solid wastes that affect the ecological status of Laguna Lake.
Keywords

Solid Waste, Solid Waste Management, Urban, Rural

Numbers of pages

60 pages

Date of submission

September 25, 2019

iii

download by :


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my thesis
supervisors, Prof. Dr. Damasa Macandog, Professor, Institute of Biological
Science, University of the Philippines at Los Banos (UPLB) in the Philippines for
her help, guidance, suggestions and review of my thesis manuscript for this study.
Her patience and the encouragement she gave me throughout my research study
are also deeply appreciated. I am also deeply grateful to my second thesis
supervisor, Ms. Ly Thi Thuy Duong, Faculty, Advance Education Program, Thai
Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry (TUAF) in Vietnam for her
valuable recommendations and great support on my research study. Their guidance
and persistent help are the reason why this thesis is made possible.I would also like
to thank Ms. Rose Ann Lozano for the advices she gave me for this study.
I am sincerely thankful to my mother Pearly Buenafrancisca, for staying
beside me and encouraging me from conducting the survey to the sleepless nights
of writing this research study. To my father Ely Buenafrancisca and my sister
Angel Buenafrancisca, I appreciate your help, prayers, uplifting and wisdom words
you have given me to complete this study.
I would also like to thank my best friend, Mary Celine Janella Mercado for
the help and motivation since the very beginning of my study. My friends, Charina
Mikaela Galang, Heidilyn Patricia Sarapat, Elaiza Charm Tizon and Luis Albert

Ruelo for the assistance, support and motivation throughout my study. I am also
thankful to Mary Joy Ongkiatco for the help she gave me in creating my maps.

iv

download by :


And also, I owe my deep gratitude to my friend, John Maverick De Leon for the
encouragement and for helping me until the last days of my research study.
Above it all, I would like to thank God Almighty for the strength,
knowledge and ability to complete this study. Without his grace and blessing, this
study would not have been possible.
Lea Bartolome Buenafrancisca

v

download by :


TABLE OF CONTENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................IV
TABLE OF CONTENT .....................................................................................VI
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................IX
LIST OF TABLES ..............................................................................................XI
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................... XII
PART I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1
1.1. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ....................................................................... 1
1.2. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ....................................................................... 3
1.3. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................ 4

1.3.1. General objective ................................................................................... 4
1.3.2. Specific objectives .................................................................................. 4
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES ..................................................... 4
1.4.1. Research questions ................................................................................ 4
1.4.2. Hypothesis .............................................................................................. 4
1.5. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS .............................................................................. 5
PART II. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................... 6
2.1. DEFINING SOLID WASTE: ISSUES AND CONCERN ........................................... 6
2.1.1. Municipal solid waste ............................................................................ 6
2.1.1.1. Household waste.............................................................................. 7
a. Rubbish.................................................................................................. 8
b. Food waste ............................................................................................ 9
c. Hazardous waste.................................................................................... 9
2.1.1.2. Commercial waste ......................................................................... 10
2.1.2. AGRICULTURAL WASTE .............................................................................. 10
2.2. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ...................................................................... 10
2.2.1. Contemporary solid waste management methods ............................... 12
vi

download by :


2.2.1.1. Sanitary landfill ............................................................................. 12
2.2.1.2. Composting .................................................................................... 12
2.2.1.3. Incineration ................................................................................... 13
2.2.1.4. Recycling ....................................................................................... 13
2.2.2 Solid waste management in Philippines ............................................... 13
2.2.3. RELATED STUDIES ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT .................................... 17
2.2.3.1. Foreign studies .............................................................................. 17
2.2.3.2. Local studies .................................................................................. 17

PART III. METHODOLOGY AND MATERIALS ....................................... 19
3.1. MATERIALS AND INSTRUMENTS ................................................................. 19
3.1.1. Survey questionnaires .......................................................................... 19
3.1.2. GPS reader .......................................................................................... 20
3.1.3. ArcGIS software ................................................................................... 20
3.2. TIME AND LOCALE OF THE STUDY............................................................... 20
3.3. RESEARCH DESIGN ...................................................................................... 22
3.4. SAMPLING TECHNIQUE ................................................................................ 22
3.5. DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE ................................................................... 23
3.5.1. Household survey................................................................................. 24
3.5.2. Key informant survey ........................................................................... 24
3.6. ANALYSIS OF DATA ..................................................................................... 24
3.7. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY................................................. 25
PART IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...................................................... 27
4.1. PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS ................................................................... 27
4.1.1. Age and gender .................................................................................... 27
4.1.2. Household size ..................................................................................... 28
4.1.3. Level of education ................................................................................ 29
4.1.4 Ownership of Business Establishments ................................................ 30
4.2. AWARENESS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ........ 31
4.2.1. Knowledge on ordinances regarding SWM ......................................... 32
vii

download by :


4.3. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES.................................................... 33
4.3.1. Quantity of waste generated by the surveyed households ................... 34
4.3.1.1. Types of waste generated .............................................................. 35
4.3.1.2. Waste generated by business establishments ................................ 36

4.4.2. Solid waste receptacle ......................................................................... 38
4.4.3. Disposal system of uncollected garbage ............................................. 39
4.4.3.1. Frequency of uncollected garbage ................................................ 40
4.4.4. Evaluation of the garbage collection system ....................................... 41
4.5. EFFECTS OF SOLID WASTE IN THE ENVIRONMENT ....................................... 41
4.5.1. Observed dumped waste in street side ................................................. 42
4.5.2 Dumped waste quantity in Laguna Lake .............................................. 43
4.6. IMPACTS OF SOLID WASTE TO HUMAN HEALTH .......................................... 44
4.7. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT OF FARM AND LIVESTOCK OWNERS FROM
RURAL COMMUNITIES ........................................................................................ 45

4.7.1. Quantity of waste generated by surveyed farm owners ....................... 46
4.7.1.. Solid waste management of surveyed farm owners......................... 47
4.7.2. Quantity of waste generated by surveyed livestock owners ................ 48
4.7.2.1. Solid waste management of the surveyed livestock owners .......... 50
PART V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ............................... 52
5.1. CONCLUSION............................................................................................... 52
5.2. RECOMMENDATION .................................................................................... 54
REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 56
APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 61

viii

download by :


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 . Sources of Municipal solid waste in the Philippines, 2008-2013
(Manzanera, 2011) .................................................................................................. 7

Figure 2. Surveyed households in urban areas ..................................................... 21
Figure 3. Surveyed households in rural areas ....................................................... 21
Figure 4. Conceptual Paradigm of the Study ....................................................... 25
Figure 5. Age of surveyed households ................................................................. 27
Figure 7. Educational attainment of surveyed respondents .................................. 29
Figure 8a. Types of business establishments owned by surveyed respondents…30
Figure 8b. Types of business establishments owned by surveyed respondents ... 30
Figure 9a. Awareness of the surveyed respondents on SWM……………..……31
Figure 9b. Awareness of the surveyed respondents on ESWM ........................... 31
Figure 10. Respondents’ awareness on ordinances .............................................. 32
Figure 11. SWM practices of surveyed households ............................................. 33
Figure 12. Quantity of waste generated by surveyed households ........................ 34
Figure 13. Types of waste generated by surveyed households ............................ 35
Figure 14. Waste generated by business establishments ...................................... 36
Figure 15. Actual garbage collection done in public market ............................... 37
Figure 16. Solid waste receptacle used by surveyed households ......................... 38
Figure 17a. Disposal system of uncollected garbage by surveyed households .... 39
Figure 17b. Actual uncollected garbage dumped in street side………………....40

ix

download by :


Figure 18. Observed negative effects of solid waste in their surroundings ......... 42
Figure 19. Observed dumped waste on street side ............................................... 43
Figure 20. Observed dumped waste on Laguna Lake .......................................... 43
Figure 21. Impacts of Solid Waste to Human Health ........................................... 44
Figure 22. Surveyed farm and livestock owners from rural areas........................ 45
Figure 23. Kind of livestock surveyed ................................................................. 46

Figure 24. Waste quantity generated during planting and harvesting of farms ... 46
Figure 25. SWM of surveyed farms ..................................................................... 47
Figure 26. Waste quantity generated by the surveyed livestock .......................... 48
Figure 27. SWM of surveyed livestock ................................................................ 50

x

download by :


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Estimated household waste composition by Parfitt, 2002 ….............. 8
Table 2. Summary of Policies and Regulations Related to SWM …............... 14
Table 3. Schedule of the garbage collection in surveyed communities ….......37
Table 4. Surveyed respondents’ evaluation of the garbage collection
system………………………………………………………………………….

41

xi

download by :


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

3R’s

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle

ArcGIS

Architecture Geographic Information System

BENRO

Barangay Environmental and Natural Resources
Office

CALABARZON

Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, Rizal, Quezon Province

CENRO

City Environmental and Natural Resources Office

DENR

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

ESWM

Ecological Solid Waste Management

FAO

Food and Agriculture Organization

GIS

Geographic Information System

GPS

Global Positioning System

IRRI

International Rice Research Institute

KII

Key Informant Interview

LGU

Local Government Unit

MENRO

Municipal Environmental and Natural Resources
Office

MRF

Materials Recovery Facility

MSW

Municipal Solid Waste

MWSS

Metropolitan Manila Waterworks and Sewerage
System

RCRA

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

SLF

Sanitary Landfill

SWM

Solid Waste Management

SWMB/C

Solid Waste Management Board/Committee

US EPA

United States Environmental Protection Age

xii

download by :


PART I. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the study
One of the worst problems encountered all around the world is
environmental degradation and water contamination, which is worsened by the
increasing accretion of solid wastes that have been dumped and thrown just
everywhere. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA, 2017) defines
solid waste as “any garbage or refuse, sludge from wastewater treatment plant,
water supply treatment plant and other discarded material resulting from industrial,
commercial, agriculture operations and from community activities. Solid wastes
can be solid or semi-solid material which can be either hazardous or nonhazardous”. Households’ solid waste may be the most common problem of most
municipalities/cities. Frequently, improper handling of solid waste is the cause of
environmental phenomena like flooding or flash floods from even a small amount
of rain (Prasad & Narayanan, 2016). Solid wastes clogging drainage systems is
one of the major causes of severe problem of flooding in the Philippines, especially
in urban areas. Even rural areas near the lakes and rivers are experiencing flooding
due to improper waste disposal. Accumulation and poor management of solid
waste from households increases the rate of pollution thereby degrading the
environment and even causes human diseases. Improper waste disposal from
communities that are surrounding a water body tend to have the most impacts on
the environment that leads to higher risks. Proper solid waste management can be
a solution to this problem.

1

download by :

Proper management of solid waste reduces the unfavorable impacts on
the environment and enhances the quality of life. However, the management of
solid waste continues to be a major challenge throughout the world particularly in
the rapidly growing cities of the developing countries (Foo, 1997). Various
processes can be effective in managing waste for a municipality, such as collection
of garbage, monitoring and recycling. The most common methods of good solid
waste management are the 3R’s, or the Reduce, Reuse and Recycle approach. It is
advisable that these methods should be adopted as part of community’s solid waste
management.
Laguna Lake is the biggest freshwater lake in the Philippines. It is one of
the primary sources of freshwater fish in the Philippines and the most important
inland body of water in the Philippines. The water of the lake is drained to Manila
Bay via Pasig River. As reported by the Metropolitan Manila Waterworks and
Sewerage System (MWSS), only 15% of the residents in the area have an effective
waste disposal system. Moreover, of the families that live along the shoreline of
Laguna lake, 85% do not have their own toilets and/or septic tanks. Based on an
article, “The declining fishery productivity of Laguna Lake is the most glaring
evidence of its stressed ecological state” (Tamayo-Zafaralla et al., 2002). Many
communities from urban and rural areas are surrounding Laguna Lake and urban
solid waste is considered as one of the most immediate and serious environmental
problems. According to an article “As far as domestic wastes are concerned, around
10% of the 4,100 metric tons of waste generated by residents of Metro Manila is
dumped into the lake” (Batu, 1996). However, rural solid wastes can also be a
problem. Since rural areas have the most farmlands that use and produce pesticides
2

download by :

and insecticides, it can be one of the factors affecting the increasing stressed
ecological state of Laguna Lake.
The severely degraded ecological status of Laguna Lake is attributed mostly
to the wastes that are just dumped and thrown everywhere from the surrounding
communities. Some of the municipalities’ facilities and resources for their solid
waste management are not enough to collect all waste from the source and transfer
them to the right disposal site. The tendency is residents from these communities
merely throw, dump and scatter their wastes in the surrounding environment.
1.2. Significance of the Study
The results of the study will help the communities in increasing their
awareness and improvement of solid waste management within the barangays from
the selected urban and rural areas surrounding Laguna Lake.
Specifically, results of the study are deemed useful to the following:
Students. The results of study will serve as a ready reference for further
research and study.
Municipal Government. The findings of the study will serve as a guide in
the formulation of work plans and implementing ordinances for promoting services
or ecological sanitation in barangays.
Environmentalists. The information to be generated from this study can
be used as a benchmark data for conducting symposia on sustainable ecological
sanitation.

3

download by :


1.3. Objective of the study
1.3.1. General objective
The general objective of this study is to analyze and compare the solid waste

management practices of urban and rural communities.
1.3.2. Specific objectives
1. To compare the level of awareness on solid waste management (SWM)
and the solid waste collection practices of urban and rural communities.
2. To describe the types of waste they generate and the current solid waste
management practices of households.
3. To determine the effects of solid wastes on the Laguna Lake.
4. To recommend measures on proper waste management practices of urban
and rural barangay surrounding Laguna Lake.
1.4 Research questions and hypotheses
1.4.1. Research questions
The research study will have five (4) questions to answer, these are:
1. How different is the level of awareness of residents from urban and rural
communities on proper solid waste management and collection practices?
2. What is the most abundant type of waste produced by both communities?
3. What are the environmental impacts of solid wastes on the Laguna Lake?
4. What are some measures in proper waste disposal and collection practices
that can be recommended to apply for the two urban and rural barangays
surrounding Laguna Lake?
1.4.2. Hypothesis
HO (Null Hypothesis):
4

download by :


 There is no significant difference in terms of their solid waste management
and practices between urban and rural communities surrounding Laguna Lake.
 The selected households’ wastes have no effect on the ecological status of
Laguna Lake.

HA (Alternative Hypothesis):
 There is a significant difference in terms of their solid waste management
and practices between the urban and rural communities surrounding Laguna Lake
 The selected households’ wastes have an effect on the ecological status of
Laguna Lake
1.5. Scope and limitations
The study was conducted in the selected municipalities and cities in Laguna
that surround Laguna Lake from March to June 2018. The study focused on the
solid waste management practices of the households from the selected urban and
rural areas surrounding Laguna Lake by conducting both interviews of households
and key informant interview of officers from municipal, city and barangay levels.
However, barangay level interviews are limited owing to the lack of present
official on the day of the interview and barangays stated that they don’t have the
committee in relation to the researcher’s topic.
1.6. Definition of terms
Definition of terms can be found in Appendix D.

5

download by :


PART II. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Defining solid waste: Issues and concern
Solid waste are any garbage, refuse or discarded materials that can be
generated mainly from households, industrial, commercials and agricultural
operations. Solid waste can be organic and inorganic that are considered dumped
and thrown (RCRA, 2017). All around the world, solid waste is a problem
especially on wastes that has chemical compounds that gives negative impact on

human health and the environment (Whitworth, 2005).
The classification of solid waste according to their sources are the
following: (1) municipal or household waste, (2) commercial or industrial waste
produced by restaurants, markets and factories, (3) agricultural waste from
livelihood business such as poultry, piggery, other animal manure and as well as
farms, (4) institutional wastes from hospitals, schools, churches and, (5) other
waste from constructions and demolitions projects of governments and other
companies (Firth, et al., 1995).
However, with the application of proper solid waste management methods
solid waste can be valuable rather than just an obsolete and local problem
(IBRD/WB, 1999 as cited from Atienza, 2008). Thrown waste will not vanish and
can be used in some other form, and the value will still remain as a resource
(Guzman et al., 2010).
2.1.1. Municipal solid waste
The everyday waste produced by residential, commercial and institutions
are categorized as Municipal solid waste or MSW. From simple food craps to
6

download by :


unused appliances are considered as solid waste from municipal. However, waste
from sludge from municipal wastewater treatment and construction and demolition
debris are excluded. Figure 1 shows the sources of MSW in the Philippines.
Municipal solid waste must be collected and managed properly. 3R’s (Reuse,
Reduce, Recycle), composting, incineration and disposal of these waste in sanitary
landfills are the most common ways of managing these wastes.
There are two procedures in characterizing municipal waste. The first one
is by sampling which can be expensive and the second procedure is by material
flows wherein it includes large samples and most likely to have accurate results

Percentage (%) of Contribution of the various sources of
MSW

Residential
56.70%

Other
commerci
al
Commercial
27.10%

Market
18.3%

Industrial
Institutional4.10%
12.10%

Figure 1 . Sources of Municipal solid waste in the Philippines, 2008-2013
(Manzanera, 2011)
(Source: National Solid waste management Report (2008-2014), DENR, 2015)
2.1.1.1. Household waste
Major source of municipal solid wastes are from residential or household
including rental houses and apartments that mostly generate food wastes, plastics,
papers, garden waste, disposables and bulky household items like appliances,
electronics etc. Figure 1 shows that residential waste has the highest percentage
7

download by :


(56.70%) in municipal wastes.

Hazardous waste can also be generated by

household that contains chemicals like batteries, paints and bottles (Otten, 2001).
Most houses have their own garbage bin where they first dispose their solid waste
and later thrown or collected by a collecting garbage collecting firm or person
usually from municipality or city.
According to a household waste composition study conducted in England
by Parfitt, 2002, the garden waste has the most share (20% in total) and the least
waste composition generated by household are disposable nappies (2%).
Table 1. Estimated household waste composition by Parfitt, 2002
Types of waste

Percentage

Garden waste

20%

Paper and board

18%

Kitchen waste

17%

Glass

7%

Wood

5%

Dense plastic

4%

Plastic film

3%

Disposable nappies

2%

a. Rubbish
“Flammable and nonflammable solid wastes are called rubbish”. An
example of combustible wastes are papers, tissues, kitchen scraps, garden trimmers
and nappies. On the other hand, glasses, small household appliances, unused light
8

download by :

bulbs and lighters are nonflammable. Food waste and putrescible or decaying
waste are excluded. These kinds of wastes are usually produced by households and
commercial activities (Tchobanoglous et al., 1993).
b. Food waste
Food loss is defined as ‘the decrease in quantity or quality of food”. Food
waste is a part of food loss as these are uneaten portion of a particular meal
generally from households, restaurants and cafeterias. Food wastes are
decomposable and can be managed by composting (FAO, 2014). Thus, disposed
foods are harmless for humans.
Based on the findings of Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in 2013,
an estimated one-third of all food or over 1.3 billion of food produced for human
consumption is lost or wasted worldwide. In the Philippines, based on The
International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) report, the postharvest rice losses can
reach 15%. In this process, other agriculture inputs are also wasted like water,
labor, seeds and fuels. Each Filipino generates waste at an average of 3.29kg/year
(IRRI, 2015).
c. Hazardous waste
Hazardous waste is simply defined as “waste with properties that make it
dangerous or capable of having a harmful effect on human health or the
environment” (US EPA, 2017). This waste contains chemicals and contaminants
such as heavy metals. Unlike other wastes, this type of waste is dangerous and
toxic to humans, animals and other living matter. Hazardous waste can possibly be
generated from households such as old batteries, containers of pesticides and other

9

download by :


chemical-based products that are highly corrosive. The management of hazardous

waste needs an urgent attention for it is harmful for living matter (Gupta, 2006).
2.1.1.2. Commercial waste
Waste from businesses usually includes the normal maintenance of the
business premises like garden clippings. Rubbish generated by costumers is also
considered as commercial waste. For instance, if it is a restaurant business wastes
that are produced by the costumers such as containers, food wrappers and food
waste are considered commercial waste (Toowoomba Region, 2011).
2.1.2. Agricultural waste
Wastes from different agricultural or farming activities like livestock
breeding, horticulture and dairy and poultry farming are called agricultural waste.
This includes spoiled food, pesticide containers and other hazardous materials
from farming activities. Agricultural wastes can be both organic and inorganic.
In the Philippines, about 47% of the 30 million hectares land area is
agricultural. Generally, these agricultural areas are used to grow food grains and
food crops such as rice, coconut and sugarcane. Consequently, husk, straws from
coconut and rice are the most common agricultural waste in the Philippines (Zafar,
2018). Agricultural waste can be an advantage but also a disadvantage when
discharged to the surrounding open areas. Especially in rural areas, where
communities are having the most agricultural lands and the discharging of waste
is not limited to a specific location (Ashworth & Azevedo, 2009).
2.2. Solid waste management
Solid waste management is a process where waste from various sources are
controlled and managed by storage, source type, separation or segregation,
10

download by :


collection, transportation to recycling facilities and disposal (Kreith, 2008). A
good management of solid waste should have a stable and legal disposal site which

can be a benefit and good for the communities’ health, the country’s economy,
financially and should be environmental-friendly (Othman, 2002).
Solid waste management is a worldwide problem. It’s a huge challenge for
communities everywhere (Chandra and Devi, 2009). Solid waste management
tends to have different and connecting parts and methods which provokes the
increasing threat in the environment and as well as humans civilization all around
the world (Kirunda, 2009). Improper solid waste management is the major cause
of the increasing problems in health and the environment (Chouhan and Reddy
1996). The general public and authorities will never take the issue of solid waste
seriously not until wastes are already causing bad impacts to our health,
environment and well-being (Mazumdar 1994). The problem with managing and
disposing solid wastes is actually a problem to both urban and rural areas because
every human being is both potential generator of waste and can also be a
contributor to the increasing problem of solid waste. Thus, solid waste problem
occur because of the type of waste generated and on how the waste was disposed
and managed (Shimada, 2014).
These problems are experienced by most of the residents of the Philippines.
The poor sanitation of the residents could be from their improper solid waste
management and practices. Most of the solid wastes thrown and dumped
improperly are from municipal waste in the majority of residential or household
waste as shown in Figure 1.

According to the Department of Environment and

Natural Resources (DENR), in Metro Manila, only 85% of the garbage is collected
11

download by :

from the 7000 metric tons of solid waste daily, with a daily waste generation of
0.66kg per capita per day. These uncollected wastes are usually thrown and
dumped everywhere that cause health problems, negative impacts on the
environment and the worsening problem of pollution. For example, the serious
problem of flooding in Metro Manila is due to clogged drains and blocked
waterways because of uncollected garbage piling up on the streets that is seen
everywhere. For over two decades ago, the practice of good solid waste
management and collection to lessen the waste problem was introduced in Metro
Manila. These practices have been slowly adopted with limitations because of the
lack of the political will and support in many communities (Bernardo, 2008).
2.2.1. Contemporary solid waste management methods
2.2.1.1. Sanitary landfill
Sanitary landfill (SLF) is the most popular and the standard method of
disposing solid waste. Basically, the wastes are scattered out in thin layers
compressed and covered with a layer of soil. The bottom of the modern landfills is
covered with impervious liner made of several layers of plastics and sand to
prevent groundwater contamination because of leaching (Cunningham and Saigo,
2001).
2.2.1.2. Composting
Biodegradable waste is used in composting and these wastes can be used as
fertilizers or soil conditioners. Good quality and environment friendly manure can
be used as compost for agricultural purposes like vegetable farms, flower farms,
trees and shrubs (Guzman et al., 2010)

12

download by :


2.2.1.3. Incineration

Burning of solid waste at high temperature until wastes are turned into ashes
is called incineration. This method could possibly be used to generate electricity
and reduce the volume of waste. However, incineration can also be a disadvantage
because this method produces foul odors and gritty smoke that causes bad effects
on human health (Cunningham and Saigo, 2003) and contributes emission to the
atmosphere that results to the increasing problem of global warming (Guzman et
al., 2010).
2.2.1.4. Recycling
Solid waste can also be defined as something valuable rather than just an
obsolete and local problem (Birute, 2012). Recycling of waste is the process of
converting a used and thrown waste into something valuable in another form.
Several municipalities implement ordinances where waste should be separated at
source and special truck schedules will regularly collect the garbage then transfer
to the recycling facilities. Recycling of recovery of resources is the most
convenient method in managing solid waste as it saves energy, produces less
pollution, does not harm wildlife or the environment and helps human beings
(Guzman et al., 2010).
2.2.2 Solid waste management in Philippines
The rapid increase of population and urbanization of a country will result
to an increase in waste problems (Atienza, 2008). The environment of the
Philippines, a developing country, has already fell into a critical state in relation to
solid waste management which is in need of serious attention and immediate action
from all sectors of the government. A number of disasters related to solid waste in
13

download by :