SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN METRO MANILA:

WASTE GENERATION

CONTENTS

Statement of the Problem----------1

Objectives-----------------------1

Significance---------------------2

Limitations---------------------12

Method---------------------------------13

Presentation of Data----------------14

Analysis---------------------------------19

Institutions involved-------19

Waste Generation-----------28

Bibliography---------------------------37

Nathalie D. Dagmang

2010-24702 BS Community Nutrition

Sociology 11 WFU

Professor Rubio
 Passed October 6, 2010

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

OBJECTIVES

This paper aims to (1) present the background of solid waste management in the

Philippines, specifically in Metro Manila, (2) to establish that Solid Waste Management is a

Social Issue using Mills’ criteria, (3) to determine the institutions involved and their specific role

expectations in implementing Solid Waste Management, (4) to determine the contradictions

and debates within the institutions involved and (5) to explain and analyze the issue of Solid

Waste Management in Metro Manila, specifically the problem of rapid waste generation.

Will be included in the background to be presented in this paper are the definition of

solid wastes and solid waste management and the situation of solid waste management in the

Philippines, through the statement of the laws and description of waste flow in the country. To

be able to establish that it SWM is a social issue, the paper will also establish the problem as a

public concern, state the values threatened and describe the crises in institutional

arrangements and debates.

Furthermore, the paper will introduce the different institutions involved in

implementing Solid Waste Management, their role expectations, what they are actually doing.
It will also illustrate the contradictions and debates between and within institutions and analyze

the current status of SWM in Metro Manila through this. The paper will specifically analyze the

present problem of excessive and rapid waste generation in the area. To further study this

problem, the paper will analyze the functions and actions of the institutions responsible in

solving the problem.

SIGNIFICANCE

Solid wastes and solid waste management

According to the the Presidential Task Force on Waste Management solid wastes are

the“non-liquid waste material arising from domestic, trade, commercial, industrial and mining

activities. It also includes wastes arising from the conduct of public services such as street

sweepings, landscape, maintenance, and the clearing of typhoon-wrought debris. Note that the

term “non-liquid” is relative, because it includes sludge (semi-liquid slurry) such as those from

industrial sources and sewage treatment plants.” [ CITATION Fer00 \l 1033 ]

The Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003), on the other hand,

refers solid waste to “all discarded household waste, commercial waste, non-hazardous

institutional and industrial waste, street sweepings, construction debris, agricultural waste, and

other nonhazardous/non-toxic solid waste.” (Navarro, 2003) There are two broad classifications

of solid wastes: biodegradable (wastes that can be decomposted) and nonbiodegradable (e.g.
plastic, Styrofoam, metal), (Tidon, 2000) the latter being the main cause of pollution as a result

of its accumulation and dangerous chemical content.[ CITATION Tid00 \l 1033 ]

It also defines Solid Waste Management as the control of the “generation, storage,

collection, transfer and transport, processing and disposal” of solid waste in a fashion that is in

accordance to societal and economic needs while at the same time compliant to environmental

standards and principles (Navarro, 2003).

The Presidential Task Force on Waste Management (PTFWM), in contrast, provides a

more specific definition on Solid Waste Management. It pertains to “all acts pertaining to the

control, transfer, transport, processing and disposal of solid waste in accordance with the best

principles of public health, economics, engineering, conservation, aesthetic and other

environmental considerations. It scope include all attendant administrative, financial, legal,

planning and engineering functions.” Projects that are considered as Solid Waste Management

Programs are those related to solid waste management as defined by the PTFWM, which are

not lead not just by the national and local government but also private and non-government

sectors. Also parts of these programs are both the official and unofficial collaborations of

different sectors in their effort to manage waste in the country. [ CITATION Fer00 \l 1033 ]

Waste Flow in the Philippines

There are six functional elements of Solid Waste Management: (1) waste generation, (2)

storage and handling, (3) collection, (4) transfer and transport, (5) processing and recovery and

(6) disposal. (Fernando, 2000)

 Waste generation and production has a number of factors namely the state of the

national and individual economy, demography, industrialization, and extent to which waste

management programs are carried out. The second element, handling and storage includes the

putting of wastes in proper containers and handling solid wastes until placed in their storage

containers and storage pits. The collection of waste, according to the PTFWM, is the most

expensive functions of the solid waste management(SWM). According to the Environmental

Management Bureau (EMB), 40-80% of SWM goes to this function which is the main

responsibility of the local government units (LGUs).

After the process of `collection, the waste may undergo processing and recovery, which

involves the “size reduction, magnetic separation, density separation using air classifier and

other processes and operations designed to recover or produce usable materials like compost

or energy”(Ibid from Fernando, 2000) or be transferred and transported to transfer stations

and then disposed in assigned dumpsites. The waste may also be directly disposed in

designated dumpsites or undergo all processes. The interrelationship of the six functional

elements stated above is summarized in Figure 1.

TRANSFER AND TRANSPORT

WASTE
STORAGE
GENERATION DISPOSAL
COLLECTION

PROCESSING AND RECOVERY

Figure 1. Interrelationship of the Six Functional Elements of Waste Management (Fernando, 2000)
From
 Waste from the generators can also be self-disposed, discharged through legitimate

waste collectors such as junkshops or sent for recycling for the use of private establishments

such as businesses.

However, according to Navarro, the waste flow in Metro Manila only basically follows

the following set up: From the generators, they are burned by the generators themselves,

inappropriately dumped and littered, collected or recycled. Backyard burning or small-scale

community burning is a traditional waste treatment method and is usually done by households

within their premises. (Navarro, 2003)

Of the estimated 6,700 tons generated per day, approximately 720 tons per day is

recycled or composted. The remaining weight are either transported to the city’s dump sites,

illegally dumped on private land, in bodies of water, or openly burned (The Garbage Book). One

could infer from this given situation of waste flow in the country that the full compliance to RA

9003 is not achieved.

Legislation of Solid Waste Management

In the effort of the Philippine government to promote waste management in the

country, various laws have been formulated and promulgated for many years now.

A number of laws regarding solid waste management have been constantly revised and

reinforced due to the poor implementation and enforcement of previous laws regarding the

matter. Previous laws attempted to address the country’s problems on waste management,

particularly the unmonitored operations of open dumpsites, contamination of bodies of water,

and other problems related to the improper waste disposal. These laws include Anti-dumping

Law of 1938, Garbage Disposal Law of 1975 garbage disposal law (1975), Sanitation Code of
1975, Marine Pollution Control Decree of 1976 and the Toxic Substances and Hazardous and

Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990.

There are also laws regarding the strict implementation of solid waste management

programs, namely Presidential Decree (PD) 984 or the National Pollution Control Law, PD 115

Philippine Environment Policy (1978), PD 1152, Philippine environment code (1978), Executive

Order (EO) 432 (1990) and the Department administrative order no. 98-49 and 98-50. The roles

and responsibilities of different institutions are also constituted like the Local Government Code

of 1991, General Order no. 13 and RA 7160 local government code 1991.

Various laws are also implemented to further address the problems related to solid

waste management like the Clean Air Act of 1999 which provides a framework for a

comprehensive management of air pollution, mainly caused by improper waste disposal.

The Ecological Waste Management Act of 2000 (Republic Act 9003), specifically, is the

most comprehensive law regarding solid waste management. It “declares the adoption of a

systematic, comprehensice and ecological solid waste management program as a policy of the

state, adopting a community based approach and mandates waste diversion through

composting and recycling.” (Bennagen, et al, 2002) It features (1) the establishment of material

recovery facility (MRF) in local communities, (2) waste diversion of at least 25% of all solid

waste from disposal facilities through re-use, recycling and composting, (3) eco-labeling or

coding system for packaging materials to facilitate waste recycling and re-use and (4) the

prohibition and conversion of open dumpsites to controlled dumpsites which strictly conform
to universal standards. Before the law was passed, open dumps are operated in Metro Manila

where there were no engineering controls are used at all.

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AS A SOCIAL ISSUE

The Philippines’ problem regarding Solid Waste Management is a social issue,

considering the criteria of C.W. Mills: (1) it is a public matter; (2) it threatens the values of the

society; (3) it results to crises in institutional arrangements and (4) it brings about debates

regarding these values and crises[ CITATION Mil59 \l 1033 ] . To illustrate the presence of these

characteristics in the issue of Solid Waste Management, observations and statistics on

important problem indicators are provided.

1. It is a public matter.

As seen from the large budget allotment for waste management programs, it is clear

that the local and national government, taking into consideration its people’s needs and

demands, gives importance to SWM. In 2001, 5-24% percent total expenditures of Metro

Manila’s local governments went to solid waste management.

The considerable amount of money allocated for waste management programs was

seen necessary because of the significant quantity of solid wastes generated by the country

(annual generation by households was estimated at 10 million tons, with an expected rise

by 40% by the end of the decade [ CITATION Ant \l 1033 ])

 But because of the excessive amount of wastes and the increasing rate of its

production, Filipinos experience problems on the efficiency of garbage collection (only 40%

in rural areas and 80% in urban areas). Consequently, people

resort to improper waste disposal, causing environmental

problems such as land and water pollution in the process.

According to the Water Quality Association of the

Philippines, up to 58 percent of groundwater sampled is

contaminated with coli form bacteria, and needs treatment

and almost 45 percent of Metro Manila residents (4.8 million people) are willing to buy

bottled water due to this problem.

Health problems also follow the environmental problems brought about by the

improper waste disposal. Dengue cases in the country for the first seven months increased

48 percent compared to figures for the same period last year, the (Department of Health

report, Uy, 2010) and 40,648 cases were recorded with a total of 328 deaths due to

mosquito-borne diseases (January – July 2010). According to the Department of Health, in

2000, more than 500,000 morbidity and 4,200 mortality cases were attributed to water-

related disease while 31 percent of illnesses monitored for Figure 2. Type of Illness 1992-2000
(DOH-National Epidemiology Center
from Brown Environment)
a five-year period were caused by water-borne pathogens

(Figure 2). According to the Senate Economic Planning

Office, “the health costs of pollution in the cities of Metro Manila, Davao, Cebu and Baguio

in 2001 was 2.5% to 6.1% of per capita income in these cities, or 0.6% of the country’s gross

domestic product.” (2005)

 Those who are concerned with SWM are not only the generators and people who

experience the environmental and health risks of the huge amount of garbage present but

also those who benefit from it. From Martin Medina’s paper “Globalization, Development,

and Municipal Solid Waste: Management in Third World Cities”, approximately 12,000

scavengers live in municipal dumpsites and depend on scavenging for their basic necessities.

One of the provisions of the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act is the control of waste

picking and trading. Now, waste pickers are organized and given designated areas to pick

wastes from and identification cards for them to where within the site’s premises. However,

waste picking poses danger on the health and safety of the waste pickers. One example of

the dangers that they face is the caving in of the hill of garbage overlooking Payatas where

218 were killed and 300 families were left homeless in the year 2000.

Businesses also experience decline in customers due to the decreased tourism rates

which resulted from the negative effects of improper waste disposal on the aesthetics of

the country.

2. It threatens the values of the society

Mismanagement of waste has serious environmental consequences: ground and surface

water contamination, local flooding, air pollution, exposure to toxins, and spread of disease

(Philippines Environment Monitor, 2004). These consequences threaten the society’s values,

“the culturally defined standards that people use to decide what is desirable, good, and

beautiful and that serve as broad guidelines for social living” [ CITATION Tur06 \l 1033 ]. The

values threatened by the problem in SWM are as follows: safety, water, food, health,

aesthetics, shelter, life, business and livelihood.

 Due to the tropical climate of the Philippines, the country experience frequent rains and

flooding. But because of solid waste management problems, these worsen and cause alarming

dangers on Filipinos. Despite the promulgation of a number of laws regarding waste disposal,

Metro Manila residents still throw out their garbage into rivers, sea and drainage channels.

Former Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) Chairman Bayani Fernando said that the

MMDA’s floodwater pumping stations all over Metro Manila have been interfered and clogged

by accumulated garbage, which came from different creeks and other waterways, reducing the

efficiency of pumping stations to 70% (MMDA News Updates, 2010).

Scattered waste and debris are seen after flooding, causing tremendous public health

implications and destroyed property and aesthetics. When fecal matter and waste products

seep into primary water channels along with the floodwater, it would be hard for the citizens to

find clean sources of water, interfering and disrupting their daily activities and also posing

problems on food production.

Pollution in both land, air and water also produces health and safety risks on the

citizens. When organic waste decomposes, it emits greenhouse gases and other toxic fumes like

methane gas which may cause environmental problems like global warming. On the global

level, the DENR-EMB has estimated that solid waste brought to the dumps released 203

kilotons of methane, equivalent to an emission of 4,253 kilotons carbon dioxide in 1994

(Merilo, 2001). People living within the surrounding area (and within the actual area) of non-

sanitary landfills may be taken ill because of the pollution (Philippines Environment Monitor,

2004) and may be involved in dumpsite accidents.

 Most of the dump sites are also located near bodies of water and so the dump sites are

also cause of the water pollution in the Philippines. The most common and oldest waste

disposal method is landfill, where waste materials are dumped in a treatment site and covered

with layers of soil to decompose. The problem with landfill, however, is that decomposing

waste produces leachate fluids which spread throughout the area, contaminating groundwater

and possibly the bodies of water nearby (Fajardo III, 2008).

Clogged drains are also perfect breeding grounds for disease-spreading mosquitoes. In

addition, fecal matter and other organic wastes attract insects and rodents which are good

carriers of diseases like cholera and dengue fever (UDSU-EAPR, 1999).

Leachate from the garbage penetrates into the water table and contaminates

groundwater supply, posing health problems to the water consumers and decreasing the

already-scarce water supply. 38 Known diseases caused by polluted water include gastro-

enteritis, diarrhea, typhoid, cholera, dysentery, and hepatitis. According to the Department of

Health, in 2000, more than 500,000 morbidity and 4,200 mortality cases were attributed to

water-related disease. In the past, the contamination of beach water in Boracay produced a

significant number of cases of gastroenteritis and drove away foreign and local tourists.

Recently, the summer capital of the Philippines, Baguio City, experienced solid waste

management crises that threatened to drive away tourists (Quina, 2008).

3. It results to crises in institutional arrangements.

Lack of implementation of the RA 9003 is due to the crisis in institutional arrangement.

There is confusion in the roles of the institutions. It is not clear which institution is responsible
to perform certain roles in the implementation of solid waste management. Institutions are not

also able to perform their functions due to other issues such as the following: lack of budget,

lack of mass education about SWM, and lack of political will. Some institutions do not seem to

participate in managing wastes and coordination within institutions appears to be minimal.

4. It brings about debates about values threatened and crises in institutional arrangements.

Most of the debates occur between the Local Government Units(LGUs) and the

National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC). The non-compliance of the LGUs to

the RA 9003 is what is mainly being debated upon. There are also debates regarding the

contradiction on function and role implementation, where the problem may have arised from

the ineffective roles, passing of responsibilities and overlapping or conflicting functions. Some

debates also aroused from the inefficiency or lack of coordination of the institutions involved in

SWM programs and the accountability of these when problems arise.

LIMITATIONS

Due to lack of time, budget and access to the other necessary information, this paper

does not state and analyze data that are directly acquired through interviews, surveys,

experiments and observations. This paper only thoroughly discusses one aspect of Solid Waste

Management, the waste generation. Other aspects such as the collection, transfer/transport,

reduction/processing and disposal are not included.

 METHODS

Review of Related Literature

To be able to get the background of Metro Manila, the current situation of SWM in the

area and the significance of SWM, books and articles are used as references. Books are also

used as references, including C.W. Mills’ “The Sociological Imagination” which served as basis

for establishing the topic as a social issue. Other references used are previous studies on the

topic, handbooks about the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act (RA 9003), reviews/reports

on the implementation of SWM and news articles about the ill effects of the waste problems of

Metro Manila.

Illustration using Statistics and Data

 Statistics and data from certain agencies (e.g. MMDA, DENR-EMB, NSO) are used to

illustrate and emphasize the significance of the problem. These are also used to prove the

points and statements of the paper. These are presented with the help of charts and tables for

easier comprehension.

Analysis of data

Data, statistics and observations acquired from various references and records are then

interpreted and analyzed in the paper. This is done by enumerating the institutions involved,

their expected roles and functions, their actual actions, their interrelationship and the debates

between them. Some elements that also create an impact on waste generation are explained

and connected with certain aspects of SWM (e.g. industrialization).

PRESENTATION OF DATA

SITUATION OF SW AND SWM IN METRO MANILA

The Philippines generates more than 10,000

Figure 3. Sources of Solid Waste, Metro
Manila
tons of solid wastes per day, more than 50% of
construction
institutions Others
the total wastes or 5,800 tons/day coming from
Markets

Metro Manila (Bennagen, et.al., 2002). The

Commercial

household sector is the primary source of solid

Households
wastes in Metro Manila, accounting for almost 75% (See Figure 3).The other important sources

of solid wastes are industries, commercial establishments, markets, and institutions including

schools and government offices. About 45% of Metro Manila household wastes consist of

food/kitchen wastes, 16% paper, 15% plastic, and 9% glass and wood (Bennagen, et.al., 2002).

Both national and local governments allot a significant part of the Metro Manila’s

budget to Solid waste management programs in their effort to solve its problems regarding the

matter. Per capita cost of solid waste management ranged from P 64.00 in Pateros City to P

1,164.00 per person in Makati City (the affluent financial and residential district) Over P 3.54

billion was spent on the collection and disposal of solid wastes in Metro Manila, costing

approximately P 1,450 per ton. [ CITATION Ant \l 1033 ] Non-governmental organizations (NGOs),

private sectors and other groups also invest in these programs.

Despite the relatively large amount of money allocated for waste management

programs, there is still a lack or a low quality of SWM programs. Approximately 40-80% of this

money is used for collection in particular. However, the nation still faces problems regarding

the process of collection, transfer and transport of garbage. It can be observed from the data

gathered by the National Solid Waste Management Commission, that there is still a

considerable rate of illegal dumping (30-35%) (as shown in Figure 4) and low rate of collection

efficiency (40% in rural areas and 80% in urban areas). There are also problems brought about

by the lack of facilities in landfills and the failure to convert open dumpsites into sanitary

landfills due to the high cost of this process.

 sanitary
landfill
recycling
8-10%
collection open
65-70% dumpsites
generation discharge
67,000 tons 80%
illegal dumping controlled
30-35% dumpsites
self-disposal
6%

Figure 4.Solid Waste Flow in Metro Manila

Source: National Solid Waste Management Commission

WASTE GENERATION IN METRO MANILA

Of the six functional elements of solid waste management, the focus of this paper

would be on the waste generation in Metro Manila. It has several factors, namely

industrialization and urbanization which could result to population growth, urban drift and

economic developments.

Industrialization

An industrialized country takes on the following features: “has an economy in which

power-driven machinery replaces human and animal power, and steam, gas, or electricity

replaces wind and water as sources of power. The majority of the adult population works in

manufacturing or services, rather than agriculture. Work is based on a complex division of

labor, involving generally a considerable degree of mechanization and automation and a strict

separation of manual and mental labor.”[ CITATION Tur06 \l 1033 ]

 “The United Nations Commission on Human Settlements (Habitat) has cited rapid

urbanization and economic development in most developing countries (UNCHS Promotion of

Waste Recycling and Reuse in Developing Countries, Manila, January 1993, pp. 1-8). The

increased population in the cities and the rise of more businesses and industries have produced

a greater volume of wastes.” (JICA, 1998)

Industrialized countries also require more of manufacturing/producers goods which

mostly consist of non-biodegradable materials and less of raw materials that are usually

biodegradable and easier to dispose. Unlike in agricultural societies where wastes are mostly

from organic sources like plants and animals, developed societies face the problem of the

accumulation of wastes that do not decompose naturally.

As a result, industrialization plays a major role in the excessive waste generation in

Metro Manila. The economic developments, brought about by the industrialization, in turn

increase the production of industries, change the lifestyles of the citizens, increase the

frequency of replacement of certain consumer goods and generate more projects and

experiments in the field of science.

The generation of more wastes causes an increase in waste collection, controlled and

open dumping activities and collection, transfer and disposal costs, which decrease the SWM

budget needed for its other operations.

Population growth

The Philippines’ population increased rapidly from 27 million in the 1960s to 88.57

million in 2007 (Espaldon and Baltazar 2004; NSO 2008) at the rate of 2.04 % for the period

2000-2007 (NSO 2008). Out of the country’s population of 82.8 million in 2005, about 63% (51.8
million) lived in urban areas (Mangahas, 2006 from Atienza, 2008) where waste management is

more difficult compared to rural areas (Pujalte, 1993 from JICA, 1998).

Metro Manila, specifically, is a rapidly urbanizing metropolis and the center of

economic, social and political activities in the Philippines (Serrona, et al.). The National

Statistical Coordination Board of the Philippines (NSCB) recorded an accelerated growth in

Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP) from 2001 to 2002 at 4.59% (NSCB, 2003). “ With

65.2% of the population being economically active, aged between 15 to 64 years old, and a

98% literacy rate, there is a large potential for more growth in this region (NSO, 2003). “

(Navarro, 2003)

This increase in population largely contributes to the increased generation of solid

waste in the country. At present, each person generates about half a kilo of waste per day and

the variety of waste is increasing due to lifestyle changes (Philippines Canada-LGSP 2003).

Industrialization of the Metro Manila also causes influx of population from rural areas

because of the increased availability of work/educational opportunities and the promise of

modern lifestyle and development in the cities. This phenomenon is called the urban drift or

the migration of the population from rural areas to developed urban areas. But due to the

deficiency of shelter available for the immigrants brought about by the urban drift (the

movement of population from rural to urban areas), they usually become informal settlers, who

are said to be the main cause of water pollution. The squatter population was estimated at 1.6

M in 1990 (DENR, Pasig River Rehab Secretariat, 1993), 60,000- 70,000 of which live near rivers

and water basins. However, squatters cannot be reached due to narrow roads, and their

location near riverbanks and esteros so garbage are usually accumulated in these areas.
 Metro Manila also experiences increase in population during the daytime as students

commute daily into the cities from provinces. (Ouano, 1990 from JICA, 1998)

ANALYSIS

ROLE EXPECTATIONS OF MAIN INSTITUTIONS

There are 7 main institutions involved in the solid waste management of Metro Manila:

the National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC), Metro Manila Development

Authority (MMDA), Department of Environment and Natural Resources- Environmental

Management Bureau (DENR-EMB), local government units (LGUs), non-governmental

organizations (NGOs), municipal services, industries and the actual community members. Their

responsibilities and role expectations are stated in various laws and written in the constitution

or dictated by its members. (Their interrelationship and hierarchy is illustrated in Figure 5

below.) However, this does not mean that these

NSWMC

institutions perform what is expected of them.

MMDA

Lack of budget, corruption, lack of knowledge

LGUs NGOs
and training, conflicting/overlapping functions,

Residential Generators Industrial Generators Municipal Services lack of coordination, and unclear statement of

responsibilities may be hindrances to the

Figure 5. Institutional Set-up of SWM in Metro Manila
performance of the institutions.
[ CITATION Nav03 \l 1033 ]
National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC)

NSWMC is a Commission established by Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of

2000 (RA 9003) under the Office of the President, composed members from the government

sector and private sector. The government sector is represented by the heads of the 14

member-agencies (DENR, 2003). The private sector is represented by a representative from

NGOs whose purpose is to promote recycling and the minimizing of air and water pollution, a

recycling industry representative, and a manufacturing/packaging industry representative. The

NSWMC is responsible for the formulation of SWM programs, in monitoring the

implementation of solid waste management plans and the management of the solid waste

management fund. The Commission shall coordinate the operation of local SWM boards in the

provincial and city/municipal levels.

Despite the power given to NSWMC to supervise and coordinate the operations done in

SWM, the commission is not able to persuade all other institutions such as the LGUs to comply

with the provisions of RA 9003. Graft and corruption existing within the commission and in

most of the institutions that follow contribute to the lack of budget that can worsen the poor

implementation of SWM. Also, because the commission consists of members from different

branches of the government, their focus is not only on SWM issues but also other concerns that

their respective departments face. [ CITATION Nav03 \l 1033 ]

Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR-EMB)

Department of Environment and Natural Resources – Environmental Management

Bureau (DENR – EMB) provides secretariat support to the NSWMC. DENR-EMB is tasked to
prepare an annual NSWM status report, distribute SWM information, formulate methods for

waste reduction, collection and disposal, provide technical assistance to LGUs in

developing/implementing local SWM programs and promulgate rules and regulations to

reinforce the provisions of RA 9003.

The DENR, however, is not able to properly educate and disseminate information

regarding SWM due to certain financial issues and lack of facilities. They also fail to give

technical assistance in implementing local SWM plans to some LGUs because of this problem.

Local Government Units (LGUs)

In the NCR, there are 17 LGUs – 13 are cities while 4 are municipalities. Their

involvement in SWM in their respective jurisdictions involves solid waste collection, street

sweeping and river clean ups (Navarro, 2003). The LGUs shall be primarily responsible for the

implementation and enforcement of the provisions of RA 9003 within their respective areas.

LGUs can determine the appropriate penalties/ fines for violations. SWM is the responsibility of

local government units (LGUs), i.e., barangays, municipalities, cities and provincial

governments. The barangay is responsible for the segregation of waste at source, collection of

biodegradable and recyclable components and setting up of a materials recovery facility (MRF).

Many LGUs perform their expected roles. They implement the provisions of RA 9003

and monitor its area. However, these actions do not seem to be effective in managing the

waste of the cities/municipalities that they are handling. These problems, i.e. inefficient

collection and transfer and improper disposal, may have resulted from the use of “concepts,
technology, management techniques and institutions incompatible with prevailing social,

cultural, political and economic conditions in the area” (Ouano, 1990, p.1)

For example, most LGUs complain about the lack of budget needed for the carrying out

of waste management programs. This results to the lack of equipment needed for these

programs like vehicles, incinerating machines, etc. (Passe, 1993, p.5 from JICA, 1998) And

because of the lack of vehicles, and the poor maintenance of existing vehicles, collection service

at most times is delayed and inadequate. (Manimbo and Nombers, 1994 from JICA, 1998) In

areas that are inaccessible to huge garbage trucks, there is a lack of appropriate vehicles like

pushcarts to collect the residents’ wastes. To make this worse, many cities/municipalities also

lack garbage crews. And at times, the already-small number of garbage collectors (only an

average of 14000 sweepers and 1500 garbage collectors) performs labor strikes, slowing down

the collection process. There are also garbage crews who cheat on their loads, e.g. reporting as

fully loaded half-full trucks and not attending work during service days.

And even when the garbage are separated in individual homes, these still sometimes get

mixed up in when collected unlike in Marikina where garbage bags are tied with color coded

strings and are collected by separate garbage trucks. Also, at certain seasons, usually before

and after Christmas, when the volume of wastes is at its peak, or during rainy days, many

members of the garbage crew do not attend to their work. not available because of the

holidays.

Another cause of failure described by Navarro (2003) is the LGUs’ (and other

government agencies) tendency to “aspire to ‘fix’ the SWM problem within their political terms,
hence, long-term solutions, especially those that call for public participation, are not much

considered.” Also, critics say that the LGUs’ hiring of contractors to manage the solid waste

collection and transport to dumpsites is plagued with corruption as many contractors, as well as

politicians, see this sector as a lucrative venture 2002). The mentioned corruption in SWM and

the personal interests of authorities are some of the reasons of delay in the implementation of

ESWM’s provisions. (PCIJ, 2001 from Navarro)

Metropolitan Manila Development Authority

The MMDA was created with the task of overseeing metro-wide services within Metro

Manila without trespassing on LGU autonomy. It is dependent on subsidies and allocations from

the national government as well as contributions from LGUs. The implementation of RA 9003

widens its coverage of responsibilities, which includes creating a regional SWM framework in

accordance to the national framework (Navarro, 2003) and the operations of sanitary landfills.

Through its Environmental Sanitation Center, it is assigned to the beautification and cleanliness

of Metro Manila’s major roads and infrastructures[ CITATION Fer00 \l 1033 ].

However, due to lack of budget, facilities, human resources and cooperation from Metro

Manila residents, the MMDA still cannot completely implement SWM in the area. This can be

seen in the failure of a number of open dumpsites to close and be converted to sanitary landfills

which can cost the government millions. According to Stat-USA.gov, the most dominant issue

for solid waste management is the inadequacy of disposal facilities. Presently, open dumping is

still the most common waste disposal method while controlled dumpsites and sanitary landfills

(SLFs) are still not widely used in the Philippines (Philippine Solid Waste Management Market
Summary). The Carmona landfill, which was used by Metro Manila from 1993 to 1998, was

found to be discharging leachate with high levels of chromium and copper, toxic metals, into

the Menama River while the San Mateo landfill causes the same problems to the Marikina

Watershed Reservation. (Greenpeace SEA, 2000 from Navarro) The Payatas dump was also

considered to be the worst case of open dumpsites, with its tremendous amount of wastes that

have accumulated since 1973 without any form of environmental measure and was found to be

leaching out heavy metals and was located near the La Mesa dam, a primary source of Metro

Manila’s drinking water (Greenpeace SEA, 2000). Residents that use the Carmona and San

Mateo landfills found out the flaws of their designs and rallied and petitioned for the

immediate closure of both dumpsites even before they have reached maximum capacity. As a

result, Metro Manila’s garbage is now disposed in six open or controlled dumpsites. However,

these disposal sites only have the capacity to accept years for two years.

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)

NGOs focus on community-based projects such as environmental education. The

passage of RA 9003 also has long been fought for by a group of NGOs which include the

Recycling Movement of the Philippines, the Earth Day Network, Mother Earth, Linis Ganda15,

Concerned Citizens Against Pollution, and Greenpeace Philippines (Gonzales, 2002). After the

signing of RA 9003 into law, these NGOs did not cease to watch the process of implementation

of the act. properly implemented. Odette Alcantara, founder and head of Mother Earth, said

that they strongly oppose MMDA’s plans that focus more on finding the potential landfill sites

rather than promoting recycling and waste segregation (Personal Interview of Navarro, 2003).
 Aside from overseeing the legislation of SWM, they also conduct recycling and material

recovery programs and help set-up SWM systems in different communities (Navarro, 2003).

Residential Generators

The community is the primary waste generator in Metro Manila as seen from the data

gathered by JICA (1998) graphed in Figure 3. At the same time, they are expected to comply

with the Solid Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003) through segregating and recycling wastes.

However, despite the past efforts to promote the law’s provisions, the community still fails to

follow. Some reasons for this may be the “indifference of local residents to participate in

community waste management-related activities, local government collection services’ non-

allowance for segregated waste collection, residents’ attitude that government has the sole

responsibility over garbage management and lack of information and education campaigns.”

(Bennagen et al, 2002)

Despite the penalties and incentives given by SWM programs, still not 100% of Metro

Manila residents comply with the provisions of SWM. These are due to the lack of willingness of

the residents and discouragements brought by government issues such as graft and corruption

and the non-compliance of authorities. Some residents do not comply because of the lack of

knowledge about how to contribute to the SWM programs or the inability to do so due to

specific living conditions and other aspects (e.g. no house, house cannot be accessed by

collection trucks, etc.)

Dumpsites Beneficiaries
 Although majority of the institutions involved in the implementation of solid waste

management consider the excessive and rapid generation of wastes a problem, there are also

those who benefit from it through the money and business opportunities that these wastes can

offer.

All recovered recyclables are converted into recycled materials without any cost to the

government mostly by the ‘informal sector’ which is composed by scavengers, garbage

collectors and other individuals. In 2000, junkshops purchased about 101 850 tons of waste

paper, boards, cutlets, plastics and metals worth P 132.5 million and sold these to factories.

(WB, 2001 from Navarro)

The waste-pickers/scavengers, or those who earn a living from picking up wastes, from

open dumpsites and other waste storages that they can access (e.g. garbage bags left out in

front of households), that they then sell to junkshops (worth about 1B annually), small

businesses, or turn into something that they can sell. At present, there are also 2,312 existing

materials recovery facilities in Metro Manila where the scavengers can bring the wastes.

(NSWMC) Conflicts between household owners and scavengers arise when the waste-pickers

leave the trash scattered about after they have rummaged through the trash bins and plastic

bags. (Ouano from JICA, 1998) The garbage crew themselves can also scavenge through the

wastes they have collected. However, this may cause delay in the collection process.

These days, businesses who claim to support environmental programs sprouted and are

starting to multiply due to the observed high potential of environment-related businesses in the

market. A number of poor communities in the country are also developing programs that can
provide its residents business opportunities with the use of available resources which usually

consist of recyclable waste materials like plastic and newspaper that are abundant in these

areas. Common businesses developed are junkshops and craft businesses (e.g. bags out of tetra

packs and straw).

Municipal Services

Schools, hospitals, and other establishments that cater to Metro Manila’s residents are

not only expected to control the waste generation within their respective areas but are also

expected to perform their roles for the stricter and more effective implementation of SWM.

The heightening of awareness level necessary so as the society can efficiently follow and carry

out SWM programs can be achieved through the integration of SWM provisions in school

curricula, SWM campaign methods in establishments (e.g. posters) and conducting seminars for

the dissemination of the information needed for this. According to Sapuay (2007), although the

law is very clear on these aspects, it did not explain how this could be achieved given the

present situation of the country. “It seemed that the law pre-occupied itself in putting technical

details rather than preparing the society for compliance.” (Sapuay, 2007)

Industrial Generators

Industrial generators are abundant in the metropolis area which is the most developed

area in terms of infrastructure, attracting both foreign investors and tourists [ CITATION Nav03 \l

1033 ]. These contribute to the waste problem of Metro Manila through the waste generated by

the manufacturing process by-products (which mostly consist of biodegradable materials) and
the discharging of used items. They are also expected to comply with the SWM provisions and

cooperate with the whole community in their efforts to successfully implement the program.

WASTE GENERATION

The focus of this paper will be on the

waste generation, the functional element of

SWM where all its other elements branch out.

Figure 6 illustrates two models of

Figure 6. The Closed Loop Production Model vs. The production: the conventional model and the
Contentional Model [ CITATION Ant \l 1033 ]
closed loop model. The conventional model

shows how raw materials used in manufacturing consumer products become wastes in the end.

The closed-loop model, on the other hand, shows how “potential waste from different parts of

the production process are identified and recovered or recycled for on–site or off- site

applications.” [ CITATION Ant \l 1033 ]

Clearly, the closed-loop model of production is the goal of Metro Manila in its effort of

reinforcing SWM programs. It aims either to slow down or reduce its generated wastes that

need to be disposed of. To be able to achieve the minimum wastes generated, cities and

municipalities use the 3R (Reduce Reuse Recycle) method where the residents reduce their

waste through more “environmental-friendly” choices, reuse of old products and the recycle of
non-biodegradable wastes. Most of the communities that compose Metro Manila try to

implement the 3R policies in their respective areas but not all are successful in doing so. This

failure is due to the lack of awareness and willpower/willingness of both the residents and their

authorities. Furthermore, each of the institutions involved does not claim its responsibility over

the excessive and increasing rate of waste generation in Metro Manila although most hold the

residents accountable not considering their own contributions to this problem.

Residents

Most residents of Metro Manila wish to catch up with the developments occurring in

the country. In effect, they tend to demand and buy more products and perform more activities

that can add up to the wastes produced in the area. Some of them are also not educated about

the ill effects of the waste problem of the country, making them unconcerned of its current

situation. In addition, the residents are not aware of the large potential for waste reduction

through composting and recycling thus treating all discharges as wastes that should be disposed

of.

Hospitals

According to 2002 surveys, there were 2,068 hospitals in the whole Philippines,

producing 28 tons per day of biomedical wastes and projected to be producing 69.5 tons in

2050. In Metro Manila, there are 3,730 health care facilities, 1,509 of which are hospitals and

clinics and only 13 have their own incineration facilities. (MMDA). Furthermore, MMDA

estimates that in 2001, these facilities generate an average of 9 tons of infectious wastes out of

the 60 tons of wastes they produce while in a study conducted by WHO in 2003, 27 out of 47
tons of hospital wastes are infectious. It can be inferred from these data that although health

care facilities have succeeded in reducing their wastes, there still exists the problem of the large

amount of hazardous wastes that it produces due to the developments of new chemicals used

in modern medicine and new diseases that have arrived in Metro Manila.

Because some medical wastes are disposed in the same dumps where other kinds of

wastes are disposed, there is a potential spread of infectious bacteria from sharps (needles,

syringes & glassware), blood and body fluids and pathological wastes (tissues and organs)

(Emmanuel, 2001 from Navarro)

Hospitals are responsible not only for the waste generation but also for the

dissemination of SWM programs. Within the hospital premises, the health-care providers, staff

and their patients are also expected to minimize their wastes. SWM programs are also

campaigned in hospitals through the use of posters, manuals/brochures and word-of-mouth.

Industrial Generators

Metro Manila is the country’s center of industrialization and urbanization. These

processes call for faster, more efficient and high-quality production and the construction of

more business establishments for more profit. The heightened standards and changing

lifestyles of residents result to the frequent replacement of their purchases (e.g. upgrading of

gadgets and appliances). This also encourage the advancement of science and technology

innovation which require trial-and-error procedures/experiments that can also contribute

wastes. In some cases, these developments in science and technology promote the reduction of

wastes by introducing more efficient ways of manufacturing and recycling/reusing.

 The recycling program called for in RA 9003 includes requiring business establishments

of “eco-labeling, environmentally preferable purchasing and identification of non-

environmentally acceptable products and packaging” which can educate their consumers and

give them a choice whether to buy/use products that comply to the SWM provisions. To further

reinforce the policy, in 2003, the Philippines launched its eco-label, Green Choice Philippines

(owned by the DTR and DENR), which is awarded to twelve screened products including pride

and X-TEC fully synthetic engine oil.

The Industry Waste Exchange Program (IWES), which is managed by the Philippine

Business for the Environment (PEB), is another method used by the Philippines. It promotes

resource recovery through orientation, company in-house seminars, trade fairs, case

studies/publications, and IWEP advertisements in its quarterly Business and Environment

Magazine.

Companies (and a few LGUs and entrepreneurs) who join these programs mainly

because of the potential of environmental businesses and the benefits that they can get:

substitutions for rare raw materials, low cost and surplus of raw materials, energy savings,

reduced disposal costs, waste buyers and less conflict with environmental advocates. Despite

these benefits, IWEP only succeeded inside Metro Manila because of its economic set-up.

Others

Through education, children will be aware of the current environmental problems of the

society and will feel the need of the society for solutions to these problems. Through this, they

tend to take responsibility in their actions and make an effort in helping the whole society.
 To be able to perform the roles that they think are assigned to them or they are

responsible of, they must learn the different ways of performing their tasks. The students will

learn about these if the SWM provisions and other information needed are integrated in the

school’s curriculum and if the DENR-EMB, NGOs and LGUs help in the dissemination of SWM

information.

Certain government agencies also take part in the country’s effort to achieve “zero

waste”. Department of Science and Technology, for one, is expected to develop technologies

that can help manage and reduce waste which can also reduce the operational costs of

companies, attracting business establishments to comply with the SWM provisions. These

technologies that are currently used by many companies include plastic/tincans/electronic

waste recycling methods and energy conversion methods. However, some companies,

especially the small-scale ones, cannot afford these technologies. As a result, they resort to old

manufacturing methods that are less efficient thus generating more waste. (Antonio)

In contrast, local government units conduct livelihood programs that usually consume

recyclable/recovered wastes. One example is the case of Baranggay Bagumbuhay in Quezon

city where they applied low cost methods in recovering wastes for the use of the community

and the individual homes (e.g. for making compost and paving tiles) and eventually solved the

waste generation problems within the area.

DEBATES
 Debates related to the problem of excessive and rapid waste generation usually discuss

whose responsibility are the (1) waste segregation, (2) waste reduction, (3) SWM plan

formulation and (4) dissemination of the information about SWM necessary in its

implementation.

Waste Segregation

Many residents and other institutions in Metro Manila these days are already observing

waste segregation in their homes as they are expected to do by the government and advocates.

But at times, they get discouraged because they observe that the garbage collectors only mix

trash bags that contain different types of wastes (e.g. biodegradable, recyclables, etc.) in the

garbage trucks and in actual dumpsites. When these mix, the wastes that can still be recovered,

reused or recycled, will only be dumped in landfills and add up to the heaps of garbage

generated by Metro Manila. The role of waste pickers in waste segregation is also debated

among different sectors. Many do not approve of allowing waste pickers in dumpsite due to the

health problems that it may pose and the disorganization caused by their scavenging through

garbage containers. There are also those who allow the waste pickers to do what they do to

provide them a living instead of resorting to illegal practices done by other members of the

poor.

Waste Reduction

As a result of the ongoing industrialization and urbanization of Metro Manila, its

population demands more products from the industries, generating more potential wastes in

the process. It is now debated upon who should take the responsibility of making more
environmental-friendly choices: the industries who produce potential wastes (and generate

wastes in the process of manufacturing these) or the consumers who demand of the

production and development of these products.

SWM Plan formulation

The national government and local government units both formulate plans for the

implementation of SWM projects. But there is still the problem of which of them should

provide the SWM framework to specific cities/municipalities. Some people argue that the

national government should dictate the SWM projects to be implemented so that each area

complies to the same framework, making it easier for the cities to coordinate with each other

while others say that local government units should be the one to choose the methods to be

used so that these matches the economic/political state of the community and be effectively

carried out by the residents.

LGUs also do not allow the interference of MMDA in their SWM programs because it is

stated in RA 7924, the act regarding the creation of MMDA, that the agency is only given the

task of overseeing metro-wide services within Metro Manila without trespassing on LGU

autonomy, [ CITATION Nav03 \l 1033 ]

Dissemination of SWM information

SWM programs cannot be carried out if the expected actors do not have the necessary

knowledge on how to conform to these. It is still a problem, however, who should be the main

agent of the dissemination of SWM information and how it should be facilitated. Institutions
argue who should be held accountable of the people’s lack of awareness of the SWM programs:

the families (who should be teaching their children and serve as examples), schools (who

should be educating its students), the national government/agencies (who should campaign the

SWM provisions) or LGUs (who should monitor its area’s compliance with SWM policies)?

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The following is a list that summarizes the existing problems that hinder the strict

implementation of SWM:

1. Lack of SWM awareness among Metro Manila residents

2. economic interests of private individuals/groups

3. lack of incentives and strict monitoring of the residents’ compliance with SWM

provisions

4. lack of willingness of residents to cooperate

5. limitations in budget and technologies

6. inappropriate methods/technologies used

7. failure of the government and agencies to carry out their assigned tasks

Due to these factors, the implementation of Solid Waste Management is still not being

successfully carried out in most parts of Metro Manila. “The existing solid waste disposal

facilities in Metro Manila are far from satisfactory, judging from the criticisms from

environmental watchdogs such as NGOs and the general reaction of Manileños as well as
people from surrounding towns to garbage dumps. There is also an over reliance on landfills as

a means of solid waste disposal. With further research, other technologies that are more

environmentally reliant and economically viable could be found. Examples of such technology

are those that are used in a modern sanitary landfill.” (Navarro, 2003)

BIBLIOGRAPHY
(n.d.). Brown Environment .

Antonio, L. Study on 3R Policy and Waste Exchange in the Philippines.

Atienza, V. (2008). Breakthroughs in Solid Waste Management: Lessons from Selected Municipality
and Barangay in the Philippines. Oita-Ken: Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University.

Bennagen, e. a. (2002). Solid waste segregation and recycling in metro manila: household attitudes
and behavior.

Fernando, M. L. (2000). A study of solid waste management in greater Metro Manila and its
implications for national security. .

Gonzales, E. (2002). Wastes as Assets – Limits and Potentials. International Conference on Natural
Assets, Political Economy Research Institute and Centre for Science and Environment . Tagaytay.

Kevin Serrona, Kosuki Toshiki, Jeong-soo Yu. Urban Landfill Planning in Metro Manila, Philippines:
Resource Recovery Options and Challenges. Tohoku University.

Medina, M. (n.d.). Globalization, Development, and Municipal Solid Waste Management in Third
World Cities. Tijuana, Mexico: El Colegio de la Frontera Norte.

Mills, C. W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.

Navarro, R. (2003). A Systems Approach on Solid Waste Management in Metro Manila, Philippines.

Sapuay, G. (2007). Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (Republic Act 9000): A Major
step to Better Solid Waste Management in the Philippines.

The Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (Republic Act 9003). (2000). Philippines.

The study on solid waste management for Metro Manila in the Republic of the Philippines :
masterplan report. (1998). JICA.
Tidon, S. (2000). Management and Utilization of Urban Solid Waste. Research Information Series on
Ecosystems , 12 (3).

Turner, B. (2006). The Cambridge Dictionary of Sociology.

WHO. (2003). Overview of the Management of Health Care Waste in the Who's Western Pacific
Region.