Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 12

European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.40 No.2 (2010), pp.199-210 EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2010 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.

htm

Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia


Christia Meidiana Corresponding Author TU Graz, Department of Chemical Process and Environmental Technology,Graz, Austria Faculty of Engineering, Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia E-mail: meidiana@student.tugraz.at Tel: +43 316 873 7477; Fax: +43 316 873 74697 Thomas Gamse TU Graz, Department of Chemical Process and Environmental Technology, Graz, Austria Abstract Indonesia is one of the ASEAN countries with the highest population (about 220 millions) and growth rate of 1.2% per year (World Bankc, 2009). The population growth brings about the increasing amount of the waste which becomes a problem faced by the government. Some factors influencing the quality of the service such as, lack of policies/strategies and financial support, low involvement of private sectors, inefficiency, and low community awareness led to The low Level of Service (LoS) of municipal waste management (MWM). The problem occurred in all steps of solid waste management (storage, collection, transferring, transporting, treatment) with the tendency to rise at the end point, landfill. Based on the study of waste management conducted by UNEP in 2004, it showed that only 33% of the indicators for LoS of MSW has been fulfilled by the government. It means that the level of service of waste management was still low. There were surely many factors influencing the low LoS of waste management in Indonesia. Therefore, the study attempted to make review of the development of waste management implementation in Indonesia by comparing the conditions in 1999, in 2004 and in recent time. The same indicators have been evaluated and showed that only one indicator has been changed during two decades. The result may be used as the input for specific analysis addressed to the cause study.

Keywords: Municipal waste management, Waste policy, Indonesia Abbreviations: MSW, municipal solid waste; LoS, Level of Service; GoI, Government of Indonesia, CDM, Clean Development Mechanism,

1. Introduction
Indonesia has ratified The Kyoto Protocol and must participate actively in reducing the green house gas emission including landfill gas emission. The raising number of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects in waste sector approved by the international board of CDM and proposed by private/public sectors can be the indicator that the waste management in Indonesia becomes an important priority in national policy (Hilman, 2005). CDM project in waste sector is one of some ways to reduce the GHG emission. Therefore, the Government of Indonesia (GoI) should courage it more by providing better planning and implementation in waste management to improve the involvement of the

Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia

200

public and privat sector in CDM Project for waste sector. However, the current condition of the solid waste management is far from the adequate Level of Service (LoS). Inadequate waste policy in national and local level, low awareness of the community, shortage of budget and low private participation become main reasons for the low level of service in Municipal Waste Management (MWM) (Hilman, 2005). By comparing the previous and current waste management system, the study can analyze the development of waste management practices during the certain period to find out the potentials and challenges of waste management in Indonesia and take the advantage for better MWM concept therewith.

2. Method and Material


This study was conducted by means of documents provided by the local governments and waste authorities in Indonesia. Review of literatures related to waste management is also conducted in comparing the theories and implementations. The study focused on description analysis of the ten indicators evaluated by UNEP in 2004 comprising technical and non-technical aspects. The indicators were evaluated based on three period, namely before decentralization which was started in 1999, 1999 2004 when UNEP conducted the study in 2004, and 2005 2008 when the Waste Law No. 18/2008 was enacted in 2008

3. Results and Discussion


3.1. Waste Management Policies and Measures in Indonesia Indonesia has ratified some international waste legal frameworks such as Basel Convention in 1993 and Kyoto Protocol in June 2004 meaning that the government considers about the potentially adverse waste effect on environment (MoE, 2005; IPCC, 2006). However, more actual efforts are needed because in national and local level, there is shortage of waste regulations. There was no waste national policy until 2007 describing the concepts, aims and measures in national waste management. The existing waste laws did not control solid waste management specifically. Generally, the existing laws cover the environment management, the hazardous waste management, Waste Recycling, Pollution control, Health and Sanitation and the imported waste (UN, 2003). The new national regulation for waste management, Waste Management Law No. 18/ 2008 has been recently issued by the Government of Indonesian and be a legal tool in forcing all related parties in supporting national waste management policy. The following table shows the existing law/policy/regulations related to waste management in Indonesia.

201
Table 1:
Issue

Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse


Environment- and Waste-related policies in Indonesia
Law/Regulation/Policy 1999 - 2004 Regulation 27/1999 Ministerial Decree 86/2002 Regulation 18/1999 Regulation 85/1999 Regulation 74/2001 Regulation 41/1999 Regulation 82/2001 Law 7/2004 Ministerial Decree 288/2003 Law No 32/2004 Ministerial Decree 230/1997 Remarks 2005-now Guidelines of env. management plan and env. monitoring plan

Before decentralization in 1999 Regulation 24/1992 Act 23/1997 Ministerial Decree 42/MENLH/11/1994 Reg. 68/BAPEDAL/05/1994 Reg. 1 5/BAPEDAL/09/1995

Environment

Ministerial Decree 45/2005 Ministerial Decree 18/2009 Waste Law 18/2008 Ministerial Decree 2/2008 Ministerial Decree 852/2008 Gov. Regulation 16/2005 Ministerial Decree 41/2008 -

Hazardous waste Waste management Recycling Air and Water Pollution

Health & Sanitation

Imported Waste Regulation 18/1999 Economic Regulation 18/1997 Instrument Source: UNEP, 2004; MoE, 2005, MoE, 2008

Latest act regarding to Community based sanitation which refers to the previous one Ministry of Trade & Industry Regulation on non-HW import. Revision of previous Act.

The latest waste policies are related to waste management and recycling which is new in waste policies in Indonesia. It can be an indicator that the Government is starting to concern about the waste problem and to find out other alternatives in minimizing the waster disposal in landfill. Realizing that there is increase in waste generation and change in waste composition, GoI has been promoting 3R since 2007 in order to increase material recovery and to reduce waste disposed in landfill. The new recycling policy wass issued by Ministry of Environment in 2008 . The change in waste composition is described in Table 4.
Table 2: Waste composition in 1989 and 2006
Composition (%wet weight basis) Plastic 3 14 Glass 1 2 Metal 4 2 Textile/le ather N.A 4 Inert/othe r 3 7

Waste generation Organics Paper (kg/cap/day) 1989* 0.4 87 2 2006** 1.12 62 9 Source: *UNDP (1987), Lee (1992), **MoE (2008) Year

Generally, there was significant change in waste composition percentage of organic waste, paper and plastic. Nevertheless, there was no change in policies and measures of solid waste management because the law used in 1989, and 2007 was still the same. In addition, none of the existing law regarding waste management covered the integrated waste management. Moreover, the new Waste Law does not include issue of integrated waste management. It covers public service principles, waste minimization and handling of domestic solid waste and specific waste, incentives and

Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia

202

disincentives mechanism, local government responsibility, financial system, private and public sector participation, and sanctions (MoE, 2008). In local level, all the provinces and cities in Indonesia have regulations related to cleaning management, institutional framework for waste management and waste management payment. Though the available local regulations, the enforcement is still low. The lack of the waste policies in national level and the low waste regulation enforcement of in local level can be a reason why the waste management in Indonesia is still low. In 2005, LoS MWM was 41.28%. The percentage increased to 56% in 2006. The GoI have to work seriously if they want to achieve the MDGs target of 70% in 2015 for urban waste service (Susmono, 2008).

4. Waste Generation and Treatment in Indonesia


The high percentage of organic waste was caused by the waste source composition dominated by household waste (43,4%). Yet, the local government could not collect total amount of household waste for treatment purposes such as landfill, composting, recycling or incineration, so that several waste handling systems are done by community (MoE, 2008). Table 2 and Table 3 show the waste generation by source and household waste treatment method respectively in year 2006.
Table 3: Waste generation by Source in 2006
Source Household Market Street Public facility Office Industry Other Total Source: MoE, 2008 Amount(million ton/year) 16.7 7.7 3.5 3.4 3.1 1.3 1.8 38.5 Percentage (%) 43.4 20 9 9 8 6 4.6 100

Table 4:

Household waste treatment in 2006


Amount(Million ton/year) 11.6 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.5 1.1 16.8 Percentage (% of total method) 69 9.6 7.15 4.8 2.9 6.55 100

Method Transported to landfill Buried Composted Burnt Disposed in river Others Total Source: MoE, 2008

In 2001, the municipal waste was treated through final disposal/landfill/open dumping (40.09%), open burning (35,49%), recycling (1.61%), buried (7.54%), disposed on street/in river/in park (15.27%) (MoE, 2005). Though increase of waste percentage disposed in landfill in 2006, the rate of waste collection was still low counting 69.5%. Total amount of waste treated by the local authority was 11.6 million ton/year out of 16.7 million ton household waste generated per year (MoI, 2001). The waste can not be collected by the local government will be individually treated by the community. This condition leads to high percentage of improper waste treatment such as open burning, buried waste and disposal to the river. In addition, the open dumping method in final disposal sites produces methane causing significant increase of methane emission from landfills. Table 5 shows the methane emission from landfills from 1990 to 2000 and the projection for 2025. The projection is made based on the waste generation projection per person per day in 2025.

203

Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse

Once the waste volume and characteristic are known, the energy content of the waste can be calculated. The result is required since the decision on appropriate MSW Management depends also on the waste characteristic. The moisture content, the heating value and the organic component of waste is important to be analyzed. For example, Municipal Solid Waste with low caloric value because of high organics content is not suitable for incineration method, but appropriate for composting method. Due to the fact that there is no accurate data describing the waste characteristic in Indonesia, the author estimated the moisture content, caloric value, and organics content of Municipal Waste management based on the typical moisture content and caloric value (Brunner, 1983). Table 6 And Table 7 describes the moisture content and caloric value of MSW in Indonesia based on data 2006.
Table 5: Methane Emission from solid waste disposal sites from 1990 until 2025 (in 1000 ton)
1994 (t/year) 401.92 1995 (t/year) 457.49 2000 (t/year) 663 2025 (t/year) 1,581.74

1990 1992 1992 1993 (t/year) (t/year) (t/year) (t/year) 371.34 378.56 386.05 393.83 Source: Hoornweg et.al, 1995; MoE, 2005; IGES, 2008.

Table 6:

Moisture Content and Heating Value of MSW in Indonesia (based on data 2006)
Solid waste (%) 62 9 14 2 2 4 7 100 Moisture Content (%) 43.40 0.54 0.28 0.04 0.06 0.40 0.56 45.38 Heating Value (kJ/kg) 2885.00 kJ/kg 1508.00 kJ/kg 4560.00 kJ/kg 3.00 kJ/kg 14.00 kJ/kg 70.00 kJ/kg 50.00 kJ/kg 9090.00 kJ/kg

Component Organics Paper Plastics Glass Metal Textile Inert (dust, dirt) Total

Though the lower percentage, plastics contributed to higher heating value compared to the organic waste. Along with the domestic plastic consumption increase, projected to be 3% per year, the appropriate treatment of plastic waste such as recycle and incineration should take into consideration. Both the treatment can be an added value for the waste management.

5. Institutions
Before the implementation of decentralization, municipal solid waste management was the responsibility of several departments and ministries such as The Ministry of Public Works, Ministry of Home Affair, Ministry of Health, Agency for Technology Assessment and Development, Board of Environmental Impact Management (BAPEDAL), and the Sub Directorate for Solid Waste Management. The involvement of many institutions in solid waste management led to overlapping responsibilities and weak implementation and enforcement of laws and regulations of solid waste management. The decentralization in 1999 had brought about the change in national and local waste institution in Indonesia where the central government plays role as a regulator and the local governments are the prominent players. The local government obtained more responsibilities in planning and implementing solid waste management in their locality. Moreover, there was change in national waste management structure in 2002, as the Presidential Decree No. 2/2002 was enacted. The Ministry of Environment took over the responsibility of BAPEDAL which was responsible for controlling environmental pollution impact. Nowadays, there are three institutions which are involved in waste management. In national level there are Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Settlement and Regional Infrastructure, while at local level, the responsibility in controlling the environmental pollution impact is in the hand of BAPEDALDA or Local Board of Environmental Impact Management (UN, 2009). The Ministry of Environment is mainly responsible for policy developments, regulation

Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia

204

formulations and coordinating efforts in pollution control caused by waste, whereas The Ministry of Settlement and Regional Infrastructure is mainly responsible in providing technical guidance, promoting pilot projects, and supervising large-scale off-site sanitation systems including waste management system. Both of the ministries provide some sorts of training program for capacity building purposes (UN, 2003). For example, Capacity Building in Urban Infrastructure Management (CBUIM) to increase the local government capability in providing urban services sustainably which was implemented between 1998 and 2003 by collaboration with some other donor countries. There are other institutions in municipal level which are responsible for municipal waste management. Planning Agency (BAPPEDA) and Cleansing Department are responsible for the planning and implementation of solid waste management, such as transportation from the transfer points to the final disposal site. The municipality hires sometime private companies in cleansing and collecting street waste in commercial areas. Some large commercial and industrial enterprises in big cities, like Jakarta, Bandung and Surabaya, have to dispose of their own waste by either employing Cleansing Department and/or a private contractor (WBa, 2009).

6. Finance Mechanism
One of the problems in waste management in Indonesia is financial shortage. Before the decentralization, the local government had received solid waste program financed by the state budget and some financial assistances from ADB Loan, IBRD Loan, JICA and JBIC. Thereafter, financial sources for municipal waste management are from waste collection fee, waste retribution, and local governmental budget. After the decentralization, solid waste program is mostly financed by local government. However, the amount of the whole contribution is still little (about 2 % of the total local budget) and can not fulfill the needed expenditure on waste management since the collection rate of the retribution amounted only 40 - 50 % of the revenue. Limited allocation for waste sector aspect leads to low level of service of municipal solid waste management. In 2001, only 34% of the population in Indonesia was provided by MSW service (WBa, 2009).. During 1990s, allocation for urban public infrastructure was approximately 0.4 percent of GDP which was about 8% of it (0.03% of GDP) spent on solid waste management (WBa, 2009). For example, in 1993, GoI allocated 0.34% of the GNP on municipal waste management (Farlane, 1998). Compared to other ASEAN cities, this percentage was very low considering that Indonesia is the ASEAN country with highest population. This allocation increased in the next decades but the percentage was still very low compared to the National Budget. Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur) and Vietnam (Hanoi) allocated about 0.38% and 0.80% of its GNP for municipal waste service in 1994 relatively. While Philippine (Manila) spent 0.37% of the GNP on Solid waste management in 1995 (Farlane, 1998). Table 7 illustrates how much the municipalities in selected ASEAN countries expend their budget for urban waste management revenue. In 2001 and 2002, waste sector belonged to environmental sector where the overall budget for environmental sector was only 1% of the National Budget (UNEP, 2004). Limited budget for waste management is the reason for some existing problems in landfill operation such as inadequate investment for sanitary facilities, low affordability in providing proper sanitary facilities for limited operational and maintenance cost, deprived quality and quantity in sanitary services. Consequently, the local governments can not operate the landfill which meets the requirements of the sanitary landfill (Hilman, 2005).

7. Economic Instruments in MWM


Economic instruments encourage financial incentive and disincentive mechanisms to drive effective environmental management (UNEP, 2003). Hence, waste problem which is always related to environmental management can use also this method. There are some ways in encouraging all stakeholders including industrial sector in Municipal Solid Waste Management. Especially for industrial sectors, Government of Indonesia (GoI) through Ministry of Environment has been applying

205

Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse

some economic instruments in order to control the pollution caused by the industrial activities. Some cases implemented economic instruments as control tools in MSWM are Environmental soft loan program for pollution control equipment, import duty exemption for pollution control equipment, effluent/emissions charges for municipal services (drinking water, wastewater treatment, solid waste collection and disposal) and criminal and economical sanctions. (UN, 2003).
Table 7: Municipal Urban Waste Service Expenditure
Year 1994 1995 1994 1993 Expenditure on MWM per capita (US$) 15.25 4 2 1.77 GNP per capita(US$) 4,000 1,070 250 740 % GNP 0.38 0.37 0.80 0.34

City/country KualaLumpur/Malaysia Manila/Philippine Hanoi/Vietnam Jakarta/Indonesia Source: Farlane, 1998

Table 8

Use of Economic Instrument in Municipal Solid Waste Management


Method Charge system Application Collection and disposal services received waste generation charges Tax system pollution charge pollution taxes Ministerial Decree 35/1995 (MoE) Ministerial Decree 15/1996 (MoE) Presidential Decree 28/2008 Ministerial Decree 36/1997 (MoF) Presidential Decree 28/2008 Legal Framework Government Regulation 20/1997 Purposes internalizing the externalities associated with the production, transportation and disposal of waste

Economic Instrument Revenue raising instruments

Revenue providing instruments

Import tariffs Exemption (Fiscal Instruments)

Soft loans & grants (Financial Instrument)

Non revenue Instruments Source: UN, 2003; UNEP, 2008

free import tariff/duty on waste treatment & pollution control equipment Incentive for implementation of CP system & pollution control technology Eco-labelling

Reward desired behaviour

Presidential Decree 28/2008

Performance disclosure,

8. Private Sector Participation


Basically, Private Sector Participation (PSP) in waste sector has been initiated since 1995 when the Indonesias Program for Pollution Control, Evaluation, and Rating (PROPER) was initiated (WBb, 2009). However, the PSP mostly is not in form of direct involvement in municipal waste management system such as waste treatment or disposal but the participation of private sector (industries, factories) in such program pushing the industries to disclose their environmental performance to public and stakeholders. There is very little private sector participation in management the waste, for example, PT. Patriot Bangkit Bekasi which operates the Bantar Gebang Landfill in Bekasi, West Java (Hilman, 2005). The industries participated in public disclosure system are encouraged to involve in

Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia

206

implementation of pollution control regulations and to adopt practices contributing to clean technology. The industries participated in the program will be evaluated and rated by using a colorcoded rating, ranging from gold for excellent performance to black for poor performance. The implementation of PROPER 1995 influenced the industries environmental performance. During the first pilot project period (June 1995 March 1997) there were 187 industries involved and the percentage of the industries fulfilled the preferred parameter increased from 35% to 51%. In 1998, the number of industries in Sumatra, Java, and Kalimantan participating in the program expanded to 350 industries (WBb, 2009). In 2002, the Government through Ministry of Environment issued the renewed PROPER Program which included water, air and hazardous waste called PROPER 2002. The number of factories participating in the
Figure 1: Percentage of Indonesian cities implementing some ways of public participation in SWM (MoE, 2008)

rate system during 2002 to 2004 decreased compared to 1998. There were 85 industries which were evaluated and the result showed the positive trend though the less number of involved factories. There was 81% decrease of factories with black category and 76% increase of factories with blue category (Roosita, 2004). Along with the PROPER Program, the government also has set a kind of partnership program in the hazardous waste management called KENDALI Program by enacting the Board of Environmental Impact Management Regulation No. 03/1998. This program involved 141 industries which comply with Indonesian Regulation. 15% of these industries treat their own waste by the existing technology and 73% of industries send their wastes to the treatment facility.

9. Community Participation
There are various ways to involve the community in reducing and recycling the waste. The most easiest and common way is by charging them for waste retribution. Waste generator has to pay waste bill according to certain criteria such as house type, building function or electricity voltage (MoE, 2008). Yet, the community initiative is still the best option for the local government because it can help the local government can not provide good solid waste services for the community. There are a range of community initiatives, such as women-owned collection cooperatives, itinerant waste pickers improvement, neighborhood-based youth groups for collection, contract to micro-enterprises, neighborhood composting or vermin-composting facilities, and collection of user charges from each household. For such services, the community have to pay small amount of addition cost for community savings used to pay operational activities for example paying the salary of garbage collectors and street sweepers, providing garbage bins and containers, purchasing of carts (UN, 2003; WBa, 2009). In many Indonesian cities, all of the above practices are present with various modifications. The other

207

Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse

ways to engage community in waste management are by implementing neighborhood waste treatment, introducing waste management in the schools, applying community based management and planning, and initiating waste separation closed to the source point. Figure 1 shows that community initiative (92%) and retribution (75%) were widely implemented by the local governments in improving the public participation in waste management. Communities provided with SWM service are obligatory to pay a collection fee since the collection of domestic waste is carried out by community neighborhood organization (RWs). The collection fee usually includes also other communities fees such as security and environmental improvement. Each household pays on monthly basis and the fee ranges from IDR 10,000 to IDR 30,000 (about US$ 1.1 US$ 3.2). The amount of community fee charged depends on the living conditions of the residential area and is decided amongst community members. In addition to collection fees, there is also transportation and disposal costs of solid waste. The amounts charged for transportation and disposal costs depend on the dimensions (land area) of the residential plot. The payment for transportation and disposal can be done through water bill, electricity bill or direct payment. Households connected to the city water supply system pay their solid waste fees through their water supply bills. Thus the water supply bill includes the solid waste fee. The water supply company then delivers the payment to the account of the City on a monthly basis. Solid waste fees for transportation and disposal generally vary from between IDR 6,000 IDR 14,000 (US$ 0,55 US$ 1.5). Direct payment is applied when the households not connected to the water supply system (UN, 2003). Figure 12 illustrates that the most of the payment is direct payment where the customer have to pay waste retribution through community initiatives collecting it and transfer it to the municipality via bank (MoE, 2008).

10. Information System


One of the factors causing the low service of solid waste management in many Indonesia cities are lack of information about the exact amount of waste generated at the source point, collected at transfer point, and delivered to final disposal site. The inadequate information about the components in waste management leads to the inefficient planning of municipal waste management in most Indonesian cities. Until now, there is no weighing system in transfer point and final disposal site required in estimating the waste generation and collection rate. If there is such system, the local government can take advantage for landfill area estimation. The accurate estimation of landfill area can minimize the number of overload landfills which currently occurs in many Indonesian cities. Based on the data from MoE in 2006, 60% of the landfills in Indonesia closes to the end-year-period (23% next year and 37% in next 5 year). This could be a problem, because the planning and construction process of landfill sites can not be accomplished in short time.

Conclusion
Inadequate waste management law led to inefficient solid waste management in Indonesia. The current laws do not regulate specifically the solid waste management. Furthermore, the new Waste Management Law No. 18/2008 introduced in 2008 has not been implemented well causing low Level of Service (LoS) in waste management. The current practices focusing on the end-pipe-approach bring about the problem in final disposal site. Many cities are facing the problem of overburdened landfill because of limited land availability and open dumping sites equipped no sanitary system, such as soil cover, leachate collection and treatment system polluting the environment through CH4 emission and leachate intrusion into ground and surface water. Waste management improvement is required because, based on comparison data between data from UNEP and the authors compilation, only one indicator of waste management aspects which was not fulfilled in 2004 has been realized in 2008. Table 9 shows the development of some indicators of waste management aspect in Indonesia. It shows that from 10 indicators of municipal waste management aspects, 4 aspects has been adequate

Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia

208

since 1999 and only one aspect was improved after the UNEP evaluation. The training program for capacity building in municipal waste management has been provided by The Ministry of Environment and The Ministry of Settlement and Infrastructure. Therefore, the efforts to improve the above indicators should be initiated by viewing the inferior condition as a challenge and use the potentials to develop them. Potentials and challenges in MWM in Indonesia are showed in Table 10. In addition, the enactment of new waste law introduced in 2008 can be a mile stone for the waste management development in Indonesia which can encourage the national and local government to implement a better waste management.
Table 9: Municipal Waste management aspect implementation in three periods.
Waste Management Aspect 1. Policy on Integrated Waste Management 2. Policy on Solid Waste Management 3. Institutional arrangement to handle/ manage wastes 4. Regulatory framework for waste management 5. Budget support for waste management 6. Training program for waste management 7. Private sector participation 8. Community participation 9. Information system 10. Economic Instrument NA: Not available, A: Available Before decentralization in 1999 NA NA A A NA NA NA A NA A 1999 2004 (UNEP) NA NA A A NA NA NA A NA A 2005-now NA NA A A NA A NA A NA A

Table 10: Potentials and challenges for Municipal Waste Management in Indonesia
Potentials 1. Waste Law No. 18/2008 accommodates greater role in MWM for local government. Challenges 1. Enactment of Waste Law No 18/2008, forced Local government to propose plan and implementation for open dumping closing at the latest 1 year and 5 year from the waste law enactment (May 2008) 2. Landfill developer is obliged to build waste separation system 3. MDGs achievement target in waste sector is 70% community is provided by MWM by 2015 4. Low public awareness in separating waste

2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

Community participation has been actually practiced although indirectly. It can be improved into direct involvement such as waste separation. Incentives and disincentives scheme including in Waste Law can encourage law enforcement New recycling policy in 3R can increase the possibility in waste reduction, material recovery and revenue High organic content waste is a source for composting treatment. Projected plastics consumption increase can be potentials in achieving added value from the waste since it can be a material input for recycling plant and incinerator in the future.

5. Low priority in the local governments annual budget allocation 6. Low private sector participation 7. Lack of infrastructure 8. Though the enactment of Waste Law, there is no policy on Solid waste management since most municipal waste is solid waste

Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank Directorate General of Higher Education, Department of National Education of the Republic of Indonesia for their important contributions to the development of this work.

209

Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse Brunner, RC. Waste to energy combustion. In: Tchobanoglous G, Kreith F, editors. Handbook of solid waste management. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2002 p.13.384. Farlane, Mc., (1998). Financial and Operational factors Influence the Provision of Municipal Solid Waste Services in Large Cities. Unpublished Paper, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Denmark. Hilman, M.,(September 2005). Prospect of municipal waste management through CDM Project Indonesia, Proceeding of International Workshop on Landfill Gas development and The CDM, September 5 7 , Bali, Indonesia Hoornweg, D., L. Thomas, K. Verma. (1999). What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in Asia. Washington DC IGES, (2008). Climate Change Policies in the Asia-Pacific. IGES, Japan. Lee, K.B., and S. Troxler, (1992), Assesment of waste management in the Asean Regions. p. 103 - 138 In T.-E. Chua and L.R. Gaces [eds]. Waste management in the Coastal Areas of ASEAN Regions: roles of governments, banking institutions, donor agencies, private sectors and communities. ICLARM Conference Proceedings 33, 218 p. Ministry of Environment (2005). Indonesia Country Fact Sheet. Jakarta, Indonesia. MoE, Jakarta Ministry of Environment (2008). Indonesian Domestic Solid Waste Statistics Year 2008. MoE, Jakarta Roosita, H., (December 2004). Public Disclosure System as an effective tool for pollution control. The Implementation of PROPER in Indonesia. Unpublished Paper: Keynote Address presented at the GFSD Conference on Economic Aspects of Environmental Compliance Assurance, Paris Susmono, (January 2009). Urban Environment Sanitation Infrastructure Improvement in Indonesia. Unpublished Paper: Keynote Address presented at the Conference on Delta Challenges in Urban Areas, Jakarta The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), (2006). 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara T. and Tanabe K. (eds), IGES, Japan. The Ministry of Infrastructure, (2001). Data and General Information of Urban and Rural Development. MoI, Jakarta. United Nation of Development Program, (1987). The Need for Solid Waste Management. ASEAN Report, UNDP Thailand UNEP (2003). Sustainable Use of Natural Resources in the Context of Trade Liberalization and Export Growth in Indonesia. A Study on the Use of Economic Instruments in the Pulp and Paper Industry. Division of Technology, Industry and Economics UNEP, Geneva. United Nation for Environmental Program (2004). State of Waste Management in South East Asia. UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics International Environmental Technology Centre, UNEP Kusatsu City, Japan United Nations, (2003). Cities and Sustainable Development. Lesson and Experiences from Asia and The Pacific. UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, New York. United Nations, (Retrieved 10th May 2009). Sanitary Country Profile Indonesia. Sanitation 2004-Indonesia, http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/indonesa/sanitationIndonesia04f.pdf UNEP, (2002). Enhancing Synergies and Mutual Supportiveness of Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the World Trade Organization. A Synthesis Report, Unpublished Paper, United Nations, Geneva

References
[1] [2]

[3]

[4] [5] [6]

[7] [8] [9]

[10]

[11]

[12] [13] [14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia [19]

210

[20] [21]

[22]

UNEP, (2008). Demonstrating Environmentally Sound Technologies (ESTs) for Building waste Reduction in Indonesia, Background Document on Economic Instruments with special reference to Debris and C&D Waste Management. The Debri Project, UNEP. World Banka, (Retrieved 10th June 2009). Indonesia Environment Monitor 2003 - Special Focus:Reducing Pollution. http;//web.worldbank.org World Bankb, (Retrieved 1st July 2009). Indonesias Program for Pollution Control, Evaluation, and Rating (PROPER). http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEMPOWERMENT/Resources/14825_Indonesia_Proper -web.pdf World Bankc, (Retrieved 10th June 2009). Indonesia data and statistics World Development Indicators Database April 2009. http;//web.worldbank.org

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi