i good governance in national solid waste … · good governance in national solid waste management...
TRANSCRIPT
i
GOOD GOVERNANCE IN NATIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
POLICY (NSWMP) IMPLEMENTATION: A CASE STUDY IN KUALA
LUMPUR
MUHAMAD AZAHAR BIN ABAS
A thesis submitted in
fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the
Doctor of Philosophy
Faculty of Technology Management and Business
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
JUNE 2017
iii
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this thesis to
ALMIGHTY GOD “ALLAH S.W.T”
(Who gave me strength, knowledge, patience and wisdom)
MY PARENTS “ABAS YUSOF & SALMAH POSO”
(Their pure love, devotion, cares and prayers had helped me to attain my target)
MY LOVELY WIFE & DAUGHTER “ZAMRIAH & ARISSA”
(Their love, care, encouragement and motivation made me to accomplish this
valuable work)
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This study would not have been possible without the support of many people. I
would like to express my sincere thanks and cordial appreciation to my supervisor
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Seow Ta Wee. He is the one who had pulled me through the
uncertainty of this study and had given his precious time and energy for my study.
Without his help, it will be impossible for me to complete this research.
My appreciation also goes to En. Azmy bin Mohd Ali (Deputy Director
Department of National Solid Waste Management), Hajah Halizah binti Gumri
(Director of Solid Waste Corporation Kuala Lumpur), and En. Azman Shawal
(Manager of Corporate Communication) from Alam Flora Sdn Bhd for allowing my
presence to their organisation. The information provided from their organisation was
very significant and useful in this study. I also cannot forget the member of
Malaysian Environmental NGOs (MENGOs) for the cooperation and participation
given throughout the study.
Also thanks to my friends, Mohd Reduan Buyong, Muhd Nur Syufaat
Jamiran, Zainal Zulhilmi, and Mohd Mahathir Suhaimi for their help to make my
PhD journey enjoyable and magnificent through their friendship, encouragement, and
sharing ideas. Without them, it will impossible for me to complete this research
within the time period fixed by the university.
Sincere thanks to Faculty of Technology Management and Business, UTHM
for providing pleasant facilities during my study. Last but not least, I wish thank you
to the Minister of Higher Education Malaysia for allocating research fund under the
Program MyBrain15.
v
ABSTRACT
National Solid Waste Management Policy (NSWMP) has been introduced as main
guideline in Malaysia’s solid waste management. The execution of NSWMP has
involves diverse stakeholders which the practice of good governance is a significant
requirement to attain the aims of NSWMP. However, the implementation of
NSWMP is ineffective because of poor governance. Therefore, this study is
conducted to explore the governance of NSWMP in Kuala Lumpur. This research
has four (4) research objectives which are to identify the perception of stakeholders
in NSWMP governance, to analyse the practices of good governance that
implemented by stakeholders, to investigate the constraints of good governance and
to develop a good governance framework for effective NSWMP implementation. A
convergent parallel strategy is adopted in this study to gather both quantitative and
qualitative data in concurrently and to analyse both data separately. A total of 640
respondents were selected through quota sampling method to participate in the
quantitative data collection (questionnaire distribution). Besides that, six (6)
respondents were selected through purposive sampling method for qualitative data
collection (in-depth interview). Descriptive and inferential data analyses were
conducted to interpret the quantitative data by using Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS). Content analysis was adopted to interpret the qualitative data by
using NVivo Software. After that, triangulation technique was conducted to develop
a good governance framework for NSWMP implementation. In general, the
perception of stakeholders on NSWMP governance which based on four main
variables (policy clarity, resources management, stakeholder’s competency,
implementation system) was moderate. Moreover, this study has found out that the
practice of good governance is not a new practice by stakeholders. However, these
practices are still insufficient. Accordingly, five (5) constraints of good governance
have been identified such as inadequate fund, bureaucratic burden, poor staff
competency, poor communication among stakeholders and lack of policy
implementation guideline. To address the poor governance issue, this study has
developed a good governance framework for effective NSWMP implementation.
This framework can improve the decision-making process in NSWMP
implementation. Besides that, this framework also enables to enhance the
understanding of government and corporate agencies on good governance practice in
NSWMP implementation. Basically, this study has given empirical evidence that the
good governance theory is applicable for effective NSWMP implementation in
Malaysia.
vi
ABSTRAK
Dasar Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara (DPSPN) telah diperkenalkan sebagai sebuah
panduan utama bagi pengurusan sisa pepejal di Malaysia. Pelaksanaan DPSPN telah
melibatkan pelbagai pihak berkepentingan yang memerlukan tadbir urus yang baik.
Namun, tadbir urus yang lemah telah menyebabkan pelaksanaan DPSPN menjadi
tidak berkesan. Oleh itu, kajian ini dilakukan untuk meneroka tadbir urus DPSPN di
Kuala Lumpur. Kajian ini mempunyai empat (4) objektif iaitu mengenal pasti
persepsi pihak berkepentingan terhadap tadbir urus DPSPN, menganalisis amalan
tadbir urus baik yang dipraktikkan pihak berkepentingan, menyiasat kekangan
pelaksanaan tadbir urus baik dan membina sebuah kerangka kerja tadbir urus yang
baik bagi pelaksanaan DPSPN yang berkesan. Strategi pengumpulan serentak
(Convergent Parallel Strategy) diaplikasi untuk pengumpulan data kuantitatif dan
kualitatif secara serentak. Namun, data-data tersebut dianalisis secara berasingan.
Teknik persampelan kuota digunakan bagi memilih responden (640 responden
dipilih) untuk pengumpulan data kuantitatif (borang kajian soal selidik). Selain itu,
teknik persampelan bertujuan telah digunakan bagi memilih responden (6 responden
dipilih) untuk pengumpulan data kualitatif (temu bual mendalam). Analisis data
diskriptif dan inferensi diaplikasi bagi data kuantitatif menggunakan perisian
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Analisis kandungan pula
digunakan bagi mentafsir data kualitatif menggunakan perisian Nvivo. Selepas itu,
teknik triangulasi data diaplikasi bagi membina kerangka kerja tadbir urus yang baik
dalam pelaksanaan DPSPN. Hasil kajian telah mendapati persepsi keseluruhan pihak
berkepentingan terhadap tadbir urus DPSPN adalah sederhana. Di samping itu,
kajian ini juga mendapati amalan tadbir urus baik merupakan amalan yang telah
dipraktikkan pihak berkepentingan. Namun, amalan tadbir urus yang dipraktikkan
adalah masih lemah dan tidak mencukupi. Sehubungan itu, lima (5) kekangan amalan
tadbir urus baik dikenal pasti seperti peruntukkan dana yang tidak mencukupi,
prosedur birokrasi yang membebankan, lemah tahap kompetensi staf, komunikasi
tidak bekesan antara pihak berkepentingan dan tiada panduan pelaksanaan dasar
yang komprehensif. Bagi mengatasi masalah lemah tadbir urus ini, satu kerangka
kerja tadbir urus baik bagi pelaksanaan DPSPN yang berkesan telah dibina.
Kerangka ini mampu menambah baik proses membuat keputusan dalam pelaksanaan
DPSPN. Selain itu, kerangka ini juga mampu meningkatkan pengetahuan agensi
kerajaan dan korporat dalam amalan tadbir urus. Secara asasnya, kajian ini telah
menyumbang kepada perbincangan berkaitan aplikasi teori tadbir urus baik bagi
pelaksanaan DPSPN yang berkesan di Malaysia.
vii
CONTENTS
TITLE i
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES xv
LIST OF FIGURES xvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xviii
LIST OF APPENDICES xix
DEFINITION OF TERMS xx
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Background Study 3
1.3 Problem Statement 7
1.4 Research Questions 9
1.5 Objectives 9
1.6 Research Scope 10
1.7 Organisation of the Thesis 11
1.8 Research Significant 12
1.9 Chapter Summary 13
viii
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 14
2.1 Introduction 14
2.2 The Concept of Solid Waste Management 15
2.2.1 Definition of Solid Waste 15
2.2.2 Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) 16
2.2.2.1 Municipal Solid Waste Management
(MSWM) 18
2.2.2.2 Municipal Solid Waste Management: A
Global and Local Perspective 19
2.2.2.3 The Issues of Municipal Solid Waste
Management 30
2.2.3 The Rationale of Sustainable Municipal Solid
Waste Management 31
2.2.4 Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM): A
Paradigm towards Sustainable Solid Waste
Management 32
2.3 The Concept of Stakeholders in Solid Waste
Management 34
2.3.1 Stakeholders in Solid Waste Management 36
2.3.1.1 Public Sector (Government Agencies) 37
2.3.1.2 Private Sector (Contracted/Concession
Company) 39
2.3.1.3 Local Communities 40
2.3.2 Factors Influence Stakeholder’s Perception 41
2.4 The Concept of Public Policy for Solid Waste
Management 41
2.4.1 Definition of Public Policy 42
2.4.2 Understanding the Public Policy Process 43
2.4.3 Public Policy Implementation 46
2.4.3.1 Approaches for Policy Implementation 49
2.4.4 Solid Waste Management Policy 52
2.4.4.1 Policy Change in Solid Waste
Management 53
2.4.4.2 The Impact of Development in Solid
Waste Management Policy 54
2.4.4.3 The Policy of Solid Waste Management
in Malaysia 56
ix
2.5 The Significant of Policy Governance in Solid Waste
Management 60
2.6 Good Governance Theory 62
2.6.1 Good Governance Practices 65
2.6.2 Poor Governance 66
2.7 Theoretical Framework 67
2.7.1 The Issues of Poor Governance in Solid Waste
Management Policy Implementation 69
2.7.2 The Impacts of Poor Governance in Solid Waste
Management Policy Implementation 70
2.7.2.1 Pollution and Disaster 70
2.7.2.2 Public Health and Sanitation Problem 71
2.7.2.3 Economic Development Issues 72
2.7.3 Significant Good Governance Factors that
Influence Policy Implementation 73
2.7.3.1 Clarity of Policy Context 78
2.7.3.2 Resources Management 80
2.7.3.3 Stakeholder’s Competency 81
2.7.3.4 Policy Implementation System 82
2.7.4 Good Governance Practice for Effective Policy
Implementation in Solid Waste Management 85
2.8 Chapter Summary 87
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 88
3.1 Introduction 88
3.2 Study Area 88
3.2.1 Background of Kuala Lumpur 89
3.2.2 Justification of the Study Area Selection 91
3.3 Research Paradigm 92
3.4 The Rationale of Mix-Methods Approach 93
3.5 Research Strategy 93
3.5 Research Flow 94
3.6 Respondents Sampling 95
3.6.1 Quota Sampling 97
x
3.6.2 Purposive Sampling 98
3.7 Data Collection Strategy 99
3.7.1 Questionnaire 99
3.7.1.1 Questionnaire Development 100
3.7.1.2 Questionnaire Distribution 106
3.7.2 In-depth Interview 108
3.7.2.1 Interview Questions Development 108
3.7.2.2 Background of Respondents for
Interview Session 111
3.8 Data Analysis Strategy 112
3.8.1 Quantitative Data Analysis 113
3.8.1.1 Data Computing 113
3.8.1.2 Normality Test 113
3.8.1.3 Descriptive Statistical Analysis 114
3.8.1.7 Inferential Statistical Analysis 115
3.8.2 Qualitative Data Analysis 117
3.8.2.1 Transcribing Interview’s Data 117
3.8.2.2 Content Analysis 118
3.8.2.3 Summarising Data 118
3.8.3 Triangulation of the Data 119
3.9 Design the Framework 119
3.9.1 Framework Validation 121
3.9.1.1 Respondents for Framework Validation 121
3.10 Ethics Consideration 122
3.11 Chapter Summary 122
CHAPTER 4 PERCEPTION OF STAKEHOLDERS ON NSWMP 123
4.1 Introduction 123
4.2 Primary Stakeholders of NSWMP 124
4.2.1 Respondent’s Profile of Primary Stakeholder 124
4.2.2 Perception of Primary Stakeholders 126
4.2.2.1 Perception on Clarity of NSWMP 126
4.2.2.2 Perception on Resources Management 127
4.2.2.3 Perception on Stakeholder’s
Competency 128
xi
4.2.2.4 Perception on NSWMP Implementation
System 129
4.2.3 Socio-Demographic Factors that Influence
Perception of Primary Stakeholders 130
4.3 Secondary Stakeholders of NSWMP 134
4.3.1 Respondents Profile of Secondary Stakeholder 134
4.3.2 Perception of Secondary Stakeholder 135
4.3.2.1 Perception on Clarity of NSWMP 136
4.3.2.2 Perception on Resources Management 137
4.3.2.3 Perception on Stakeholders Competency 137
4.3.2.4 Perception on NSWMP Implementation
System 139
4.3.3 Socio-Demographic Factors that Influence
Perception of Secondary Stakeholder 140
4.4 Tertiary Stakeholders of NSWMP 144
4.4.1 Respondent’s Profile of Tertiary Stakeholders 144
4.4.2 Perception of Tertiary Stakeholder 145
4.4.1.2 Perception on Clarity of NSWMP 146
4.4.1.3 Perception on Resources Management 146
4.4.1.4 Perception on Stakeholder’s
Competency 147
4.4.1.5 Perception NSWMP Implementation
System 148
4.4.3 Socio-Demographic Factors that Influence
Perception of Tertiary Stakeholder 149
4.6 Chapter Summary 153
CHAPTER 5 THE PRACTICES OF GOOD GOVERNANCE AND ITS
CONSTRAINTS 154
5.1 Introduction 154
5.2 The Practices of Good Governance in NSWMP
Implementation 155
5.2.1 Practices of Good Governance in Clarity of
NSWMP 155
5.2.1.1 Promotion of the NSWMP 157
5.2.1.2 Clarify Stakeholder’s Responsibility 158
xii
5.2.1.3 Participation of Stakeholders 160
5.2.2 The Practices of Good Governance in Resources
Management 162
5.2.2.1 Adequate Staff 162
5.2.2.2 Competent Expertise 164
5.2.2.3 Practical Budget Management 166
5.2.3 The Practices of Good Governance in Staff
Development 167
5.2.3.1 Training and Workshop 168
5.2.3.2 Knowledge Sharing 170
5.2.3.3 Encouragement to Further Studies 171
5.2.4 The Practices of Good Governance in Policy
Implementation System 172
5.2.4.1 Effective Enforcement and Monitoring
System 173
5.3.4.2 Structured Coordination System 174
5.3 The Constraints of Good Governance Practices in
NSWMP Implementation 175
5.3.1 Inadequate Fund 176
5.3.1.1 Lack of Support from Federal
Government 178
5.3.2 Burden Procedure of Bureaucratic 179
5.3.2.1 Excessive Bureaucratic Procedure 180
5.3.3 Poor Staff’s Competency 180
5.3.3.1 Lack of Expertise 181
5.3.3.2 Lack of Knowledge and Information
regarding NSWMP 183
5.3.4 Lack of Mutual Understanding 185
5.3.4.1 Poor Communication among
Stakeholder 185
5.3.5 Ambiguity of Policy Implementation System 186
5.3.5.1 Lack of Guideline in NSWMP
Implementation 187
5.3.5.2 Weak of Monitoring and Enforcement
System 189
5.3.5.3 Unaccountable Coordination System 190
5.4 Chapter Summary 191
xiii
CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS AND FRAMEWORK
DEVELOPMENT 192
6.1 Introduction 192
6.2 Discussion of Findings 193
6.2.1 Perception of Stakeholders on NSWMP 193
6.2.2 The Practices of Good Governance and Its
Constraints 198
6.3 Development of Good Governance Framework 207
6.4 The Results of Framework Validation 210
6.5 Discussion of the Framework Application 214
6.6 Chapter Summary 215
CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 216
7.1 Introduction 216
7.2 Achievement of Research Objectives 216
7.2.1 Research Objective 1 217
7.2.2 Research Objective 2 218
7.2.3 Research Objective 3 219
7.2.4 Research Objective 4 220
7.3 Recommendations to Enhance the Governance
Practices in NSWMP Implementation 221
7.3.1 Clarity of Policy 221
7.3.1.1 Comprehensive Promotion of NSWMP 221
7.3.1.2 Enhancement of Knowledge Transfer
among Stakeholders 222
7.3.2 Enhance Resources Management 223
7.3.2.1 Collaboration with Public Experts and
Private Sector 223
7.3.2.2 Enhancement of Staff Management 224
7.3.3 Enhance the Competency of Stakeholder’s Staff 224
7.3.3.1 Enhance Staff Development 225
7.3.3.2 Special Incentive for Motivation 225
7.3.4 Enhance Policy Implementation System 226
7.3.4.1 Enhance Law Enforcement with Clear
Guideline 226
xiv
7.4 Research Contribution 227
7.4.1 Contribution to the Body of Knowledge 227
7.4.2 Contribution to the Government Agencies 228
7.4.3 Contribution to the Corporate Agencies 229
7.5 Limitation of the Research 229
7.6 Recommendation for Further Research 230
7.7 Conclusion 231
xv
LIST OF TABLES
1.1 Solid Waste Management Related Act in Malaysia 5 2.1 The Sources of Municipal Solid Waste and its Types 17
2.2 Physical Composition of Municipal Solid Waste 17
2.3 Solid Waste Generated based on Region 21
2.4 Municipal Solid Waste Generated in Urban Centres of
Peninsular Malaysia 22
2.5 Percentage (%) of the Solid Waste Composition in Malaysia 23
2.6 Factors Comparison between Top Down and Bottom Up 51
2.7 National Recycling Target in Specific Sectors by year 2020 59
2.8 Good Governance Practices based on Principles 65
2.9 The Good Governance Factors Emphasised by International
Organisation 75
2.10 The Significant Factors of Good Governance in Policy
Implementation (Literature Review) 77
2.11 Main Factors of Good Governance in Policy Implementation 78 3.1 The Summary of Respondent Sampling 97
3.2 Number of Respondents Selected using Quota Sampling 98
3.3 Number of Respodents from Purposive Sampling 99
3.4 The Questions Developed for Questionnaire 103
3.5 The Details of Section in Questionnaire 103
3.6 The Result of Reliability Test for Pilot Study 106
3.7 Section Description for Interview Question 110
3.8 The detail of Interview Sessions 111
3.9 Background of Respondents Participated in Interview 112
3.10 The Result of Normality Test (Skewness and Kurtosis) 114
3.11 The Details of Respondents in Validation Process 121 4.1 Respondent’s Profile of Primary Stakeholders 125
4.2 Perception of Primary Stakeholders on Clarity of NSWMP 126
4.3 Perception of Primary Stakeholders on Resources Management 127
4.4 Perception of Primary Stakeholder on Stakeholder’s
Competency 128
4.5 Perception of Primary Stakeholders on NSWMP
Implementation System 129
xvi
4.6 The t-test Results for Demographic Factors and Perception of
Primary Stakeholders 130
4.7 The ANOVA test Results for Demographic Factors and
Perception of Primary Stakeholders 131
4.8 Respondent’s Profile of Secondary Stakeholders 135
4.9 Perception of Secondary Stakeholder on Clarity of NSWMP 136
4.10 Perception of Secondary Stakeholder on Resources
Management 137
4.11 Perception of Secondary Stakeholder on Stakeholder’s
Competency 138
4.12 Perception of Secondary Stakeholder on NSWMP
Implementation System 139
4.13 The t-test Results for Demographic Factors and Perception of
Secondary Stakeholders 141
4.14 The ANOVA test Results for Demographic Factors and
Perception of Secondary Stakeholders 141
4.15 Respondent’s Profile of Tertiary Stakeholders 145
4.16 Perception of Tertiary Stakeholders on Clarity of NSWMP 146
4.17 Perception of NGO on Resources Management 147
4.18 Perception of Tertiary Stakeholders on Stakeholder’s
Competency 148
4.19 Perception of Tertiary Stakeholders on NSWMP
Implementation System 149
4.20 The t-test Results for Demographic Factors and Perception of
Tertiary Stakeholders 150
4.21 The ANOVA test Results for Demographic Factors and
Perception of Tertiary Stakeholders 151 6.1 Comparison of Stakeholder’s Perception on Variables of
NSWMP Governance 194
6.2 Perception of Stakeholders based on Main Variables and Sub-
variables 196
6.3 Significant Demographic Factors that Influence the Perception
of Stakeholders 197
6.4 Summary of the Practices of Good Governance Implemented
by Stakeholders 199
6.5 Summary of the Constraints in Good Governance Practices 203
6.6 Rating Results of the Framework Validation 210
6.7 Summary of Respondent’s Response on Validation Questions 213
xvii
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 Concession Companies based on Region in Peninsular of
Malaysia 4 2.1 Percentage of Waste Generated by Country Income Level 20
2.2 Percentage of Waste Collected by Countries Income Level 26
2.3 Percentage of Worldwide Municipal Solid Waste Disposal 28
2.4 Percentage of Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Method by
Country Income Level 29
2.5 Integrated Solid Waste Management Paradigm 34
2.6 Classification of Stakeholders into Different Group in Solid
Waste Management 36
2.7 Multi-stakeholders in Solid Waste Management Process 37
2.8 Policy Cycle 44
2.9 Five (5) Stage of Goals and Objectives of Solid Waste
Management Policy 54
2.10 Approaches to the Management of solid Waste Management 56
2.11 Strategies and Policies Regarding Solid Waste Management in
Malaysia 60
2.12 Theoretical Framework 68 3.1 The Map of Kuala Lumpur based on Parliamentary
Constituencies 89
3.2 Research Flow 96
3.3 Development of the Questionnaire 101
3.4 Development of the Interview Questions 109
3.5 Development of Framework 120 5.1 Good Governance Practices Implemented by Stakeholders in
NSWMP Implementation 156
5.2 The Constraints of Good Governance Practices in NSWMP
Implementation 177 6.1 Good Governance Framework for NSWMP Implementation 211
xviii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
NSWMP
DNSWM
SWCorp HQ
SWCorp KL
UNEP
OECD
PAHO
IPCC
WCED
DANIDA
RIC
SLC
KPI
NGO
MSW
MSWM
ISWM
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
National Solid Waste Management Policy
Department of National Solid Waste Management
Solid Waste Corporation Headquarters
Solid Waste Corporation Kuala Lumpur
United Nations Environment Programme
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Pan American Health Organization
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
World Commission on Environment and Development
Danish International Development Agency
Regional Implementation Committee
Service Level Committee
Key Performance Index
Non-Governmental Organisation
Municipal Solid Waste
Municipal Solid Waste Management
Integrated Solid Waste Management
xix
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX TITLE PAGE
A Questionnaire form for DNSWM 256
B Questionnaire form for SWCorp KL 259
C Questionnaire form for Alam Flora Sdn Bhd 262
D Questionnaire form for NGOs 265
E Questionnaire form for Local Community KL 268
F Interview form for stakeholders 271
G Framework description 274
H Framework validation form 276
I
J
Respondent’s response on framework
validation
Table for determining sample size
282
284
xx
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Solid Waste Any substances or scarp materials where the holder
discards or intends to discard
Public Policy A guideline for the process and action of government in
decision making to overcome the public problem
Governance The way in which power is exercised in the process of
decision-making for development
Good Governance Ability to manage the resources effectively and solve
the conflict in decision making
Poor Governance Inability to manage the resources effectively and solve
the conflict in decision making
Stakeholder A people or group of people with responsibility to
respond, negotiate, and change the strategy and decision
of the organisation
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
From the past few years, good governance is one of the captivating concepts that was
mostly discussed in public administration. Good governance has represented the
modes of governing that involves a multiplicity of informal actors and formal
institutions in decision-making (Budd et al., 2006). This new mode of interaction has
involved a network of government sectors, non-profit organisations, non-
governmental organisations (NGO) and other non-state. Poor governance is
characterised by unreasonable policy making, unaccountable bureaucracies and
unenforced legal systems which can put organisations at risk of failure (Andrew,
2008)
In accordance with this study, this good governance is used to address the
issue of poor governance in solid waste policy implementation. Nowadays, efficient
solid waste management in urban area is very crucial. Ineffectiveness of solid waste
management would cause huge obstacle on social development, environmental
vitality and economic stability Marshall & Farahbakhsh, 2013). Rapid increment of
solid waste generated over years in urban area has brought a massive challenge to the
government. A progressive solid waste management policy is necessary to cope with
this issue. In Malaysia, National Solid Waste Management Policy (NSWMP) has
2
been introduced in 2007 under Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing
Management Act (Act 672) through Ninth Malaysia Plan (9MP).
The aim of NSWMP is to establish integrated solid waste management which
based on solid waste hierarchy system (Reduce, Reuse and Recycling) (Sreenivasan
et al., 2012). Enactment of Act 672 and development of NSWMP have brought
Malaysia’s solid waste management legislation to the worldwide level. However, a
typical solid waste management in developing countries including Malaysia display
an array of problems. One of the problems that need to be taken into account is the
poor governance of solid waste policy (Bjerkly, 2013; Marshall & Farahbakhsh,
2013; Mutalib, 2013).
The governance of solid waste management policy implementation has
continues to be more complicated and challenging as the urbanisation keep growing
(Manaf et al., 2009). Besides that, the transformation of solid waste management has
brought a huge responsibility to stakeholders in Malaysia. Therefore, there are
governance issues that have been emerged in NSWMP implementation (Nadzri &
Larsen, 2012). Good governance is one of the most captivating concepts that have
potential to cope with the poor governance issue in policy implementation (Read,
1999; Andrew, 2008; Bjerkli, 2013). Good governance concept in policy
implementation emphasised the aim of policy, promote integrity, and good values
among stakeholders, transparent and accountability in decision-making, and enhance
stakeholder’s competency. Moreover, stakeholder’s participation is very crucial to
practice good governance concept in policy implementation (World Bank, 1995).
Therefore, this study will use good governance concept to investigate the
governance of NSWMP implementation. This concept also will help to explain the
issue of poor governance and it helps to enhance the governance practice by
stakeholders in NSWMP implementation. Towards the end, the aim of this study is to
develop a good governance framework for NSWMP implementation. This
framework could be an insight for Malaysia towards sustainable solid waste
management.
3
1.2 Background Study
The phenomenon of urbanisation has dragged half the world's population to live in
urban areas. According to the United Nations Human Settlements Programme
(2008), almost the entire surface of the earth will be dominated by the city in the
middle of this century. Moreover, the proportion of Asian living in cities will rise
from 35 percent (%) to 53 percent (%) between the year 2000 and 2030 (Cohen,
2004).
Based on the report by the Department of Statistics, Malaysia (2010) Kuala
Lumpur has shown the highest urbanisation rate from the year 2000 until 2010.
Unfortunately, the rapid urbanisation rate has caused various environmental
problems such as climate change, various pollutants, and reduction of raw materials
and eradication of biodiversity (Grimmond, 2007; Uttara, Bhuvandas & Aggarwal,
2012). Nowadays, one of the issues that have grabbed the global and local concern is
the solid waste management (World Bank, 2012a).
Tremendous population growth is the main contribution towards escalating of
solid waste generated in urban area (Zamali et al., 2009). According to the United
Nations Environment Programme (2012), the total weight of municipal solid waste at
the global level had reached 1.84 billion tons, an increase of 7 percent (%) compared
to 2003. Total global weight of municipal solid waste is expected to increase
continuously over years. In Malaysia itself, municipal solid waste generated has
increased 1.9 percent (%) over years (Agamuthu et al., 2009).
Manaf et al. (2009) has reported, the average solid waste generated in
Malaysia is within range 0.5 kg/person/day to 0.8 kg/person/day at rural and small
town, whiles average of solid waste generated at urban area is around 1.9
kg/person/day. Kuala Lumpur has been recorded the highest weight of municipal
solid waste generated since 1970 until 2002. This estimated weight of municipal
solid waste generated would keep increasing, as the urbanisation process continuous.
To address this problem, Malaysian Government has comes up with several
strategies and plans toward effective solid waste management. Effective solid waste
management practices need to be updated to suit the current waste quantity and
4
composition (Manaf et al., 2009). Reflecting from that, solid waste management in
Malaysia has been addressed comprehensively in Ninth Malaysia Plan.
Transformation of Malaysia’s solid waste management has arisen in 2007.
Malaysia has experienced a transformation of solid waste management in term of
institutional and policy development (Nadzri & Larsen, 2012). Plenty of programs
have been conducted to introduce the solid waste transformation plan to the citizens
(Goh, 2007). This transformation has set a goal which to achieve integrated solid
waste management throughout Malaysia. The solid waste management
transformation process has been embarked through two (2) strategies, which are i)
federalising the solid waste management through the enactment and amendment of
Acts and regulation, and ii) privatising the collection and transportation of the
household’s solid waste (Nadzri & Larsen, 2012).
Figure 1.1: Concession Companies based on Region in Peninsular of Malaysia
(Mutalib, 2013)
Table 1.1 shows the solid waste management related Acts in Malaysia that
has been enacted and amended by Malaysian Government. Privatising of solid waste
services is regulated to reduce financial pressure on local government (Nadzri &
Larsen, 2012). Moreover, privatising process has been conducted through a
concession agreement between federal government and three (3) private companies
based on the region of states (Figure 1.1).
5
Table 1.1: Solid Waste Management Related Act in Malaysia
(Department of National Solid Waste Management, 2014)
List of Solid Waste Management Legislation Acts
Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act Act 672
Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Corporation Act
Act 673
Local Government Act (Amended)
Act A1311
Street, Drainage and Building Act (Amended)
Act A1312
Town and Country Planning Act (Amended)
Act A1313
This transformation has involved a number of stakeholders. Moreover,
stakeholders also have gained huge responsibility to ensure sustainable solid waste
management can be achieved (Manaf et al., 2009; Nadzri & Larsen, 2012).
Stakeholders in solid waste management are classified into three (3) groups such as
primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary stakeholder is refers to the people that
responsible for solid waste policy development, enforcement, and implementation.
The private sectors such as concession company that participated in the solid waste
services either formally or informally is known as secondary stakeholder. Besides
that, tertiary stakeholder is waste generator which refers to the people that are
compliance with the solid waste regulation (World Bank, 1995; Gugssa, 2012).
Hence, each stakeholder has a pivotal role in the governance of solid waste
management.
Department of National Solid Waste Management (DNSWM) is one of the
primary stakeholders which has established under Solid Waste and Public Cleansing
Management Act (Act 672) which gazetted on 30 August 2007. This department is
coordinated under the Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing, and Local
Government. Act 672 now vests all the legislation related to solid waste
management. The uniformity of these Acts is involved throughout Peninsular
Malaysia and the Federal Territories of Putrajaya and Labuan.
This Act 672 has given executive authority to the federal government in
implementing solid waste management and public cleansing throughout Malaysia.
The purpose of this department is to integrate the national solid waste management
6
system which including collection, transportation, and disposal. As a guide, NSWMP
has been formulated under this department. The aims of the NSWMP are:
i) Establish an integrated solid waste management system, which is holistic,
cost effective, socially acceptable and sustainable which is emphasizes the
environment conservation, affordable technology and securing the public
health; and
ii) Implement solid waste management based on solid waste hierarchy which
emphasizes waste minimisation through 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse and Recycling),
solid waste treatment and final disposal
To clarify further, six (6) objectives have been formulated by the DNSWM
such as:
i) A solid waste management that is integrated and cost effective, which
includes collection, transportation, intermediate treatment and disposal
ii) Minimisation of solid wastes from the domestic, commercial, industries,
institutions community and construction through 3R
iii) Services that are efficient and cost effective through privatisation
iv) Selection of technologies that are proven, affordable in terms of capital
expenditure (CAPEX) and operational expenditure (OPEX), and environment
friendly technologies
v) Ensure conservation of the environment and public health
vi) Establish institutional and legal framework for solid waste management
(Department of National Solid Waste Management, 2014)
This means that governance of policy implementation is very crucial to
achieve effective solid waste management. However, the regulation and policy
established is not implemented according to its original plans because of poor
governance in NSWMP implementation on the ground. This problem is a significant
barrier for Malaysia to strive sustainable solid waste management which has
emphasizes three (3) pivotal elements, includes environmental effectiveness, social
acceptability, and economic affordability.
7
1.3 Problem Statement
At present, poor governance has caused ineffective NSWMP implementation in
which will brought negative impacts towards environment and human health. Policy
is a tool to achieve sustainable solid waste management. Therefore, effective policy
implementation on solid waste management is very crucial. Plenty of studies have
been conducted regarding the negative impact of ineffective solid waste management
to quality of life (Baud et al., 2001; Bernstein, 2004; Cointreau, 2006; Jamshidi et
al., 2011; Bjerkli, 2013).
In Malaysia, poor governance has caused the implementation of solid waste
policy which was focusing on Reduce, Reuse and Recycling approach seem like
feeble and doubtful and not implemented according to its original plan. Based on the
report of Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Corporation (2014), the
recycling rate among Malaysian is still low which is at ±10 percent (%). The low
recycling rate among the civilian has caused the increasing of solid waste number
that send to landfill year after year (Zamali et al., 2009; Norizan et al., 2011). Based
on the 9th Malaysia Plan report, the number of solid waste generated and sent to
landfill per day in Peninsular Malaysia has increased 15 percent (%) which is from
16, 200 tonnes per day to 19, 100 tonnes per day between year 2001 until 2005
(Economic Planning Unit, 2006). In 2012, Ministry Urban Wellbeing, Housing and
Local Government of Malaysia has recorded the number of waste generated and send
to landfill has increased drastically to 33, 000 tonnes per day which is equal with the
expected waste generated in 2020 (Manaf et al., 2009). Hence, effective solid waste
management policy implementation is significantly required.
In fact, landfilling is the main method of disposal in Malaysia. Mohamad and
Keng (2013) has argued 75 percent (%) of the solid waste in Malaysia was directly
disposed at landfill, 20 percent (%) of solid waste was burnt and dumped into river
and illegal site, and only 5 percent (%) of the solid waste was treated before
disposed. Sreenivasan et al. (2012) also has reported only 40% of the solid waste has
been disposed properly through recycling, composting, incineration, inert landfill,
and sanitary landfill while 60 percent (%) of the solid waste generated are disposed
8
to the uncompleted landfill which is not equipped with leachate treatment system as
well as facilities. This statistic has proven the policy on solid waste management in
Malaysia was not implemented effectively. In fact, the adoption of environmentally
friendly solid waste management method as emphasized in the National Solid Waste
Management Policy has been neglected.
Furthermore, poor governance in solid waste policy implementation has
caused the increment of solid waste management cost. Hassan et al. (2001) have
found the local government of Malaysia has provided a large amount of financial
provision for solid waste management which more than 20 percent (%) of their
annual budget. Moreover, Lau (2004) has stated the budget for solid waste collection
was ranging from 40 percent (%) to 50 percent (%) of state budget which depend on
the size of municipality. Nadzri and Larsen (2012) has also discussed on the average
cost of solid waste management in Malaysia which has increased to nearly 70 percent
(%) of its yearly budget. The increase of solid waste management cost since 2000
until 2012 has proven the significant correlation between the solid waste
management cost and the effectiveness of solid waste policy implementation. Hasnah
et al. (2012) has discovered the increasing of the solid waste management cost is due
to the ineffective policy implementation on solid waste management. The increase of
budget in solid waste management will affect the budget of other services that is also
important for the community. Therefore, good governance is crucially required to
ensure the national policy of solid waste management is implemented effectively.
Moreover, lack of commitment by stakeholders has caused poor governance
practices in NSWMP implementation. Implementation of the NSWMP has extremely
demand a huge commitment and responsibility from the government and its
stakeholders such as concession companies and local community. However,
commitment from stakeholders in NSWMP is poor (Hassan, 1997; Nadzri & Larsen,
2012). Ineffective policy implementation happened in the most developing countries
because of poor governance in its management (Lingard et al., 2000; Jones et al.,
2011; Nicolli et al., 2012; Fischer & Gottweis, 2012). Most of the solid waste policy
that has been enacted in developing countries merely focuses on the technical
dimension where management and social dimension has been ignored (Gerlargh et
al., 1999; Agamuthu et al., 2009). Therefore, social and management element should
be considered during NSWMP implementation.
9
Involvement of all stakeholders in the process of policies implementation is
very crucial to ensure the policy could be implemented effectively on the ground
(Ahmed & Ali, 2005). Besides that, there are countries in Asia and Europe has
proven the successful of policy implementation by practicing good governance.
Integration of social dimension and technical dimension are emphasised in good
governance concept (Lingard et al., 2000). Therefore, this study attempts to reveal
the governance practices among stakeholders at Kuala Lumpur in NSWMP
implementation. Moreover, the stakeholder’s views and perceptions on the existing
solid waste management policy are crucial as a guideline to improve the governance
of this policy in the future.
1.4 Research Questions
Based on the problem statement, four (4) research questions have emerged which
are:
i. What are the perceptions of stakeholders on the governance of NSWMP?
ii. What are the good governance practices implemented by stakeholders in
NSWMP implementation?
iii. What are the constraints faced by stakeholders in practising good governance
in NSWMP implementation?
iv. How to enhance the good governance practices in NSWMP implementation?
1.5 Objectives
Based on the research questions, four (4) research objectives have been developed
which are:
i. To identify the stakeholder’s perception on governance of NSWMP
10
ii. To analyse the practices of good governance that implemented by
stakeholders in NSWMP implementation
iii. To investigate the constraints of good governance practices in NSWMP
implementation
iv. To develop a good governance framework for effective NSWMP
implementation
1.6 Research Scope
This research only focuses on Kuala Lumpur as a case study. Prior to that reason, the
respondents were comprised of stakeholders only from Kuala Lumpur. This study
has involved the stakeholders that influence the NSWMP implementation in Kuala
Lumpur such as government agencies like Department of National Solid Waste
Management (DNSWM) and Solid Waste Corporation Kuala Lumpur (SWCorp KL)
and concession company (Alam Flora Sdn Bhd). These stakeholders are responsible
to ensure the solid waste policy is successfully implemented and deliver the solid
waste management services in Kuala Lumpur. Besides that, stakeholders like NGOs
(MENGOs) and local community (Residents of Kuala Lumpur) also have involved in
this study because they are the waste generator in Kuala Lumpur. Participation of
these stakeholders in this study is very crucial.
In accordance with the subject to be studied, this study only covers the
perception of stakeholder on the governance of NSWMP. The perception of
stakeholders were measured based on four (4) main variables, namely policy clarity,
resources management, stakeholders competency and policy implementation system.
After that, the practices of good governance and its constraints in NSWMP
implementation were being studied in this study. Moreover, this study only covers
two types of instruments to gather the data from respondents such as questionnaire
and in-depth interview.
This study has adopted a good governance theory. This theory emphasise
fairness in decision making at all level of stakeholders. This theory was adopted to
11
understand the governance factors that influence the effectiveness of NSWMP
implementation. A framework of good governance practices in NSWMP
implementation was developed based on this good governance theory and data
collected from respondents.
1.7 Organisation of the Thesis
This thesis is arranged and divided into seven (7) chapters. Chapter 1 presents a brief
picture regarding this study. It is all about research introduction, background study,
problem statement, research questions, research objectives, and research scope and
thesis arrangement. In addition, research significant also was discussed in this
chapter.
Chapter 2 has included the literature review of the study. It explores several
concept related to this study such as the concept of solid waste, concept of
stakeholders, concept of public policy and concept of policy implementation. These
concepts are discussed deeply to understand the issues related to this study.
Moreover, this study emphasise good governance practices in policy implementation.
Therefore, this chapter has highlighted the theoretical framework that was developed
based on good governance theory to understand the issues and fill the gap of poor
governance in policy implementation.
Chapter 3 describes the detail of study area profile and justification of study
area selection. Besides that, this chapter also explains the related method that is used
for the study. The detail of methodology used covers sampling method, data
collection method, and data analysis. Moreover, ethic of research also has been
discussed briefly in this chapter.
Chapter 4 and 5 discuss the result of this study. Chapter 4 discussed about
perception of stakeholder on the governance of NSWMP. Besides that, Chapter 5
discussed about the practices of good governance and its constraints in NSWMP
execution.
12
Chapter 6 presented the discussion of findings. Besides that, this chapter also
discussed about the good governance framework for effective NSWMP
implementation which developed based on findings and policy governance model.
The last chapter is Chapter 7 which about the discussion on the achievement of
research objectives, contribution of research, limitation of research and
recommendation for further research.
1.8 Research Significant
The finding from this study is very significant for government agencies such as
DNSWM and SWCorp to enhance the governance practices in NSWMP
implementation. For example, it would help the policy and planning division to
coordinate and review all the issues with regard to policy development more
effectively. Moreover, the findings of this study also useful for enforcement and
regulation division to monitor all the enforcement activity effectively. Besides that,
the finding from this study also is very relevant for government agencies to plan and
manage all the activities and programs with regards to the enforcement and
implementation of policy.
Furthermore, the data and finding from this study is related with solid waste
management policy in Malaysia. Hence, this data is significant for academicians and
researchers who are interested in research of solid waste management policy area.
The findings from previous researches are possibly different in the context of locality
and time. Hence, the finding of this study is significant to enrich the knowledge of
solid wastes management policy research. Besides that, the finding from this research
is also significant to fill the gap of poor governance in policy implementation. As a
result, awareness among private and government staff in good governance practices
of policy implementation would be enhanced.
13
1.9 Chapter Summary
Chapter 1 discussed the introduction and background of the study. Besides that, the
issues and research problems have been explained deeply. Resulting to this, several
research questions have emerged and several objectives established. Moreover,
scopes of this research have been formulated to ensure this study is following the
right track and the objectives that have been set up are achievable. Ineffective
implementation of solid waste management legislation becomes a huge issue in many
countries including Malaysia. A good governance practices through integration of
technical and social dimension in policy implementation is an effective strategy.
14
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter focuses on the literature review related to this study. The previous
concepts and studies related with this reseearch were discussed briefly. This chapter
extensively discuss the concept of solid waste which including the definition, the
issues of solid waste and the rationale of sustainable waste management. In addition,
the concept of Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) also discussed as a
paradigm towards sustainable solid waste management. After that, the concept of
stakeholder in solid waste management was explained to give an overview of the
parties that involved in municipal solid waste management. The relationship between
public policy and solid waste management policy also discussed to understand the
process of policy cycle and the important of policy for solid waste management.
Moreover, the concept of policy implementation was reviewed to analyse the factors
that influenced the effective governance of policy implementation. Besides that, the
idea of good governance theory was analysed in this chapter as an approaches to
understand the good governance practices that influence the effectiveness of solid
waste policy implementation. Then, the theoretical framework is explained at the end
of this chapter as a guide of this study and it provides justification for the choice of
research subject.
15
2.2 The Concept of Solid Waste Management
Solid waste is unwanted things that produced by the human activities. Solid wastes
have a mass, weight, and constant volume (Pichtel, 2005). There are several classes
of solid waste which are municipal solid wastes, agriculture wastes, construction
wastes, electric and electronic wastes (E-waste), and industry wastes (World Bank,
1999a). In fact, this solid waste classification is based on the place where the solid
wastes have produced. However, regardless of its origin, whether the solid waste
from municipal, agriculture, industrial or commercial, it shows the incomplete usage
of natural resources as well as raw material. Hence, it is a financial loss to the world,
country and individual itself (Holmes, 1996).
2.2.1 Definition of Solid Waste
There are plentiful definitions for the solid waste constitutes and classification
(World Bank, 1999a). In fact, these definitions are attempting to segregate and
categories the solid waste material. Most of the countries have defined solid waste by
act (Read, 1999). Since early 1989, in the Basel convention, solid waste has been
defined as a thing that needs to be disposed or required to be disposed by individual
institutional, and industry under the national regulation (World Bank, 1999a). Hence,
the definition of solid waste may different in each country.
The definition of solid waste by United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP) in the Agenda 21 is quite similar with most of the countries including
Malaysia (United Nations, 1992b). Solid waste is all types of not dangerous domestic
waste which derived from commercial, agriculture, household, institutional,
construction and civil activities (Read, 1999; Hansen et al., 2002; Pichtel, 2005).
Besides that, the European Union Framework Directive on Waste
(91/156/EEC) and Malaysia Act 672 have defined solid waste in a quite similar
perspective which is any substances or scarp materials which the holder discards or
intends to discard (World Bank, 1999a). The scarp or substances that that no longer
16
been used or needed are consider as the solid waste. In fact, the dimension of solid
waste definition has become complicated reflect the emerging of complex wastes
characteristics. In Malaysia, solid wastes are generally categorised into three major
groups and each group is under the responsibility of different government department
such as Ministry of Housing and Local Government is responsible for municipal
solid waste, Department of Environment is responsible for schedule/hazardous waste
and Ministry of Health is responsible for clinical waste (Manaf et al., 2009).
2.2.2 Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
Municipal solid waste is known as the waste that generated within the urban area
which is from household, commercial centre, institution, and industry (Ludwig et al.,
2003). The solid waste from the municipal is heterogeneous which comprising of
various materials such as glass, metal, plastic, paper (Table 2.1).
Municipal solid waste is segregate and categories based on their physical
compositions which are organic or inorganic waste (Table 2.2). Organic waste
consists of food waste, garden waste, paper waste, and textile and rubber waste.
Besides that, inorganic waste consists of plastic waste, metal waste, and glass waste.
Moreover, in other perspective, municipal solid waste is defined base on its
biodegradable status which fully biodegradable such as some organic waste, paper
and textiles, partially degradable like some organic waste, disposable napkin and
sanitary waste and non-degradable such as metals, glass and electronic waste (Jha et
al., 2011).
17
Table 2.1: The Sources of Municipal Solid Waste and its Types
(Franklin Association, 1999)
Source of Municipal Solid Waste Type of Solid Waste
Residential
Food waste, food container and packer, can, bottles, papers
and newspaper, clothes, garden waste, e-wastes, furniture
waste
Commercial Centre
(office lot, small shop, restaurant)
Various type of papers and boxes, food waste, food
container and packer, can, bottles,
Institutional
(school, university, college, hospital)
Office waste, food waste, garden waste, furniture waste
Industry
(factory)
Office waste, cafeteria waste, processing waste
City Centre
(drainage and road)
Various type of garden waste, construction waste, public
waste
Table 2.2: Physical Composition of Municipal Solid Waste
(Pichtel, 2005)
Physical
Composition
Basic
Classification Examples
Organic Food waste Vegetables, meats
Garden waste Dried leaves, twigs, cut grasses
Textile and
rubber
Clothes, leather products
Paper and Box Newspaper, vary type of paper and box products
Inorganic Plastic 1 = Polyethylene terephthalate, 2 = High-density polyethylene, 3
= Polyvinyl chloride, 4 = Low-density polyethylene, 5 =
Polypropylene , 6 = Polystyrene, 7 = Multilayer Plastic
*based on coding plastic system by Plastics Industry Association
Incorporation
Glass Various type of glass products used in home, laboratory, and etc.
Metal Ferrous products, zinc, chromium, and vary type of metal
products
18
Based on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) definition, municipal waste is collected and treated by or for municipalities.
It covers waste from households, including bulky waste, similar waste from
commerce and trade, office building, institutions and small business, yard garden,
street sweeping, content of litter containers and market cleansing (OECD, 2013).
Wastes form sewage networks and treatment, as well as municipal construction and
demolition is excluded. Besides that, Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)
has defined municipal solid waste as solid or semi-solid waste generated in
population including domestic and commercial wastes, as well as those originated by
the small-scale industries and institutions which including hospital and clinics,
market street sweeping and from public cleansing (PAHO, 1998). The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has included the following in
MSW such as food waste, garden waste, park waste, paper and cardboard, wood
textile, nappies (disposable diapers) rubber and leather, plastics, metal, glass, ash,
soil, electronic waste (IPCC, 2006).
2.2.2.1 Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM)
As various type of municipal solid waste generated nowadays, the management of
these solid wastes become more complicated. System used in municipal solid waste
management is depending on the characteristics of the solid waste generated. In fact,
the system of municipal solid waste management is quite similar in many countries
(Read, 1999). The system has involved a solid waste storage, collection,
transportation, treatment and disposal. However, efficacy of the system adopted is
different in high income countries and low income countries. Municipal solid waste
management in high income countries is looks more effective than the low income
countries (World Bank, 1999a). Moreover, the high income countries are continuous
to spend most of their SWM budget on disposal. Besides that, the low income
countries are continuous to spend most of their SWM budget on solid waste
collection rather than disposal (Memon, 2010). The discussion of global and local
perspective with regard to municipal solid waste management should give an
19
overview of current municipal solid waste generation, composition, collection and
disposal.
2.2.2.2 Municipal Solid Waste Management: A Global and Local Perspective
Solid waste is inextricably linked to urbanisation and economic development. As the
countries urbanised, their economic wealth is increase. As standards of living and
disposable incomes increase, consumption of goods and services increase, which
results in a corresponding increase in the amount of waste generated in urban area.
Solid waste management is the responsible of the local authorities in most of
the countries. The main objective of municipal solid waste management is to take
care of the wastes generated in the most economically, socially and environmentally
optimal condition. However, this objective seems difficult to be achieved since
plenty of problems have emerged as abundant of solid waste is generated. In fact,
solid waste is one of the pernicious local pollutants. Hence, the municipal solid waste
management need to deal with integrated aspects.
In general, the municipal solid waste management system in Malaysia is quite
similar with the global perspective which involving the storage, collection,
transportation, treatment, and disposal (Seow, 2009; World Bank, 2012a). In
Malaysia, solid waste management is begins from the storage at household or
commercial centre or storage centre within municipal area. After that, is the
collection and transportation of solid waste before proceed into treatment phase.
Solid wastes that disable to treat were disposed at landfill. In fact, solid waste
management system practiced in Malaysia is quite similar to the developed countries.
However, efficiency of the solid waste management system is main constraint
existed in Malaysia and most of developing countries (Seow, 2012; Jha et. al., 2011).
20
(a) Solid Waste Generated
The current world municipal solid waste generated levels are approximately 1.3
billion tonnes per year. This figure is estimated increase to approximately 2.2 billion
tonnes per year by the year 2025 (World Bank, 2012a). Based on Figure 2.1, waste
generated rates are influenced by economic development, the degree of
industrialization, public habits and local climate. The rapid economic development
and urbanisation has increasing of solid waste generated (Manaf et al., 2009;
Tchobanoglous et al., 1993). The high income countries has contributed 46 percent
(%) of the world solid waste generated followed with upper middle income countries
(29%), lower middle income countries (19%) and lower income countries (6%).
Figure 2.1: Percentage of Waste Generated by Country Income Level
(World Bank, 2012a)
Moreover, the rate of waste generated is different by region, country, and
cities. For Example, based on Table 2.3, the amount of waste generated per year in
East Asian countries is lower (270 million tonnes/year) than European countries (572
million tonnes/year) even the urban population in East Asian countries in much
greater with 777 million peoples than European countries with 729 million peoples.
The living standards and consumption of goods are increase as urbanisation is
continues. As the result, the amount of waste generated is increase year after year.
46%
6%
29%
19%
High income
Lower income
Upper Middle Income
Lower Middle Income
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Percentage of Waste Generated based on Country
Income Level
21
Table 2.3: Solid Waste Generated based on Region
(World Bank, 2012a)
Region Urban Population
(million)
Waste Generated
(million tonnes/year)
Waste Generation
(kg/person/day)
Africa 260 62 0.09 – 3.0
East Asia/Pacific Region 777 270 0.44 – 4.3
Eastern/Central Asia 227 93 0.29 – 2.1
Latin America/Caribbean 399 160 0.1 – 1.4
Middle East/North Africa 162 63 0.16 – 5.7
European Countries 729 572 1.1 – 3.7
South Asia 426 70 0.12 – 5.1
The quantity and characteristics of the solid waste generated is very
significant in planning of solid waste management (Tchobanoglous et al., 1993).
However, most of the studies conducted on waste generated and characteristics are
focused on the solid waste collected and disposed at landfill. In the context of
Malaysia, documentation of the data regarding municipal solid waste generation is
still limited and uncompleted in some area as compared to the European countries
(Manaf et al., 2009).
The change in rate and pattern of solid waste generated was influenced by
several crucial factors such as demography factors and urban lifestyle (Vergara &
Tchobanoglous, 2012). Solid waste generation in Malaysia is estimated about 26
million tons in 2007. The composition of municipal solid waste is 30 percent (%)
from the total solid waste generated (Larsen, 2007). Statistics show nearly 50 percent
(%) of the municipal solid waste generated in Malaysia is comes from household
followed by commercial waste, street cleansing, institutional, industry and
construction (Saeed, 2009). Table 2.4 shows the municipal solid waste generation in
Malaysia’s city centre since 1970 until 2002. The pattern of municipal solid waste
generation at West Peninsular Malaysia City centre is increase dramatically compare
to the city centre in the east peninsular Malaysia. This condition shows the
urbanisation process is rapidly occur in west peninsular Malaysia as compared to east
peninsular Malaysia. Moreover, average of solid waste generated by per person per
day in Malaysia is between 0.5 kg to 0.8 kg at rural and small town, whiles average
of solid waste generated per person per day at urban area is around 1.9 kg (Manaf et
22
al., 2009). This figure is estimated to keep increasing as the urbanisation process
continuous in Malaysia.
Table 2.4: Municipal Solid Waste Generated in Urban Centres of Peninsular
Malaysia
(Agamuthu et al., 2009; Eusuf et al., 2011)
Urban Centres Solid Waste Generated (tons/day)
1970 1980 1990 2002 2010
Kuala Lumpur 98.9 310.5 586.8 2754.0 3620.0
Johor Bahru
41.1
99.6
174.8
215.0
463.2
Ipoh
22.5
82.7
162.2
208.0
412.5
Georgetown
53.4
83.0
137.2
221.0
470.0
Klang
18.0
65.0
122.8
478.0
770.2
Kuala Terengganu
8.7
61.8
121.0
137.0
210.0
Kota Bharu
9.1
56.5
102.9
129.5
215.0
Kuantan
7.1
45.2
85.3
174.0
254.0
Seremban
13.4
45.1
85.2
165.0
250.0
Melaka
14.4
29.1
46.8
562.0
842.0
Composition of municipal solid waste might be different as well as variable
depend on the area. However, organic waste is the main composition which
generated nearly 50 percent (%) of the total municipal solid waste followed by
plastics, paper, metal and glass. This condition is quite similar as occurring in most
of developing countries which the organic waste is the main solid waste composition
as compared to the developed countries (World Bank, 1999a). Table 2.5 shows the
pattern of municipal solid waste composition generated in Malaysia since 1975 until
2005. The generation of organic wastes is reducing 18.9 percent (%) in 2005 as
compared to the year 1975. Besides that, the generation of inorganic waste is
increasing in average nearly 7 percent (%) in 2005 which lead by plastics waste
followed by paper and glass waste. This change of solid waste composition pattern
and characteristics reflects the change of nature lifestyle of the Malaysian population
during this period.
23
Table 2.5: Percentage (%) of the Solid Waste Composition in Malaysia
(Agamuthu et al., 2009)
Physical
Composition
Type of Solid
Waste 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Organic Food/garden 63.7 % 54.4 % 48.3 % 48.4 % 45.7 % 43.2 % 44.8 %
Inorganic Paper 7.0 % 8.0 % 23.6 % 8.9 % 9.0 % 23.7 % 16.0 %
Plastics 2.5 % 0.4 % 9.4 % 3.0 % 3.9 % 11.2 % 15.0 %
Glass 2.5 % 0.4 % 4.0 % 3.0 % 3.9 % 3.2 % 3.0 %
Metal 6.4 % 2.2 % 5.9 % 4.6 % 5.1 % 4.2 % 3.3 %
Others Others 17.9 % 34.6 % 8.8 % 32.1 % 32.4 % 14.5 % 17.9 %
(b) Solid Waste Storage
Waste storage is a first step in municipal solid waste management system which is
very crucial to ensure the solid waste collection can be operated effectively (World
Bank, 2012a). In fact, the method used in solid waste storage is absolutely influenced
by the collection method that practiced (Goh, 2007). In general, there are two types
of solid waste storage that practiced at waste generator level which are mixed storage
or separated storage. Mixed storage method is operated by keep all type of solid
waste in the bins or rubbish bags. Besides that, separated storage method is operated
by keep the solid waste based on its types for recycling purpose (Sreenivasan et al.,
2012).
In separated wastes storage, the waste generators are required to separate
their waste at source into wet waste such as food waste and organic matter and dry
waste like recyclables item. In addition, it is possible a third stream of waste which is
non-recyclables as well as residues (World Bank, 2012a). In some developed
countries like United Stated, the unsegregated solid waste that potential to be
recycled could be separated using advanced technology such as Material Recovering
Facilities (MRF) (Sreenivasan et al., 2012). In developing countries, solid waste is
not separated or sorted before it is taken for disposal. The recyclables are removed by
24
waste pickers during the collection process and disposal phase at landfill sites (Seow,
2009). In developed countries, solid waste is separated systematically since at waste
generators level. However, storage of solid waste practiced is depending on the local
regulations (Read, 1999).
Municipal solid waste storage in Malaysia can be divided into two phase. In
the first phase, solid waste is stored temporary by the waste generators near its
generated point. Usually, the waste is packed using small or medium plastic bag
before transfer into big garbage bag. The reused of plastic bag as a temporary
garbage bag is not a new phenomenon in Malaysia. It has been practiced for many
decades. However, segregation of recyclables is not practiced by Malaysian
household (Goh, 2007; Norizan et al., 2012). Most of the household’s waste such as
food waste, plastic waste and glass waste is discarded into garbage bags.
In the second phase, the solid waste is kept outside of the houses, premises,
offices, or factories until it is collected by the waste collectors (Sreenivasan et al.,
2012). Usually, all the wastes are deposited into garbage bins that have been
provided or purchased. For the landed property owners, they are compulsory to
purchase a suitable waste bin from the local authorities in reasonable price (Goh,
2007). Besides that, properly designed bins are provided for free to premises and
residential area like apartment and illegal settlement. However, in some cases, the
bins or containers are poor in maintenance which resulting the damage of the bins
(Goh, 2007). Some households just leave the garbage bags by the street side because
the bins and containers are unusable. Hence, it has given an opportunity to the stray
animals like dog and cat to scatter the wastes along the street.
(c) Solid Waste Collection
Municipal solid waste collection is an important aspect to maintain the cleanness and
public health in the cities (Sreenivasan et al., 2012). Hence, collection of municipal
solid waste is a crucial element in solid waste management system. The purpose of
solid waste collection is to collect the solid waste from point of production such as at
232
REFERENCES
Abrahamsen, R. (2000). Disciplining Democracy: Development Discourse and Good
Governance in Africa. Landon: Zed Books Ltd.
Adeosun, A. B. (2012). Nigeria@50: The Role of Good Governance and Effective
Public Administration towards Achieving Economic Growth and Stability in
Fledgling Democracy. International Journal of Politics and Good
Governance, 3(3), pp. 976-1195.
Adesola, S. A. (2012). Entrenching Democracy and Good Governance: The role of
ICT. In Book of Proceedings International Congress on Social & Cultural
Studies, 4-8 September 2012, pp. 423-430, Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
Agamuthu, P., Hamid, F.S. & Khidzir, K. (2009). Evolution of solid waste
management in Malaysia: Impacts and Implications of the Solid Waste Bill
2007. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 11, pp. 96-103.
Ahmed, S. A. & Ali, M. (2005). Partnerships for waste management in developing
countries: linking theories to realities. Habitat International, 28(3), pp. 467-
479.
Alam Flora (2014). Corporate Information. Retrieved on November 20, 2014, from
http://www.alamflora.com.my/about/corporate-information
Alex, A. B. (2012). Assessing the Operations and Management of the Kojorom Final
Waste Disposal Site by the Sekondi Takoradi Metropolitan Assembly. Kwame
Nkrumah University of Science and Technology: M.Sc. Thesis.
Alreck, P. L. & Settle, R. B. (1995). The Survey Research Handbook. 2nd ed. Boston:
Irwin.
Aly, W. O. (2013). Bad Governance and Failure of Development Progress in Egypt:
Causes, Consequences and Remedies. Journal of Public Administration and
Governance, 3 (4), pp. 39-60.
Anderson, J. E. (2003). Public Policy Making: An Introduction. Boston: Hougton
Mifflin Company.
233
Andrew, M. (2008). The Good Governance Agenda: Beyond Indicators without
Theory. Oxford Development Studies, 36(4), pp. 379-407.
Arentsen, M. J. (1991). Policy Organization and Policy Implementation. Enscheda:
University of Twente Press.
Austin, R. (1968). Political Science and Public Policy. Chicago: Markham
Publishing Company.
Australian Government (2010). Good Governance: Guiding Principles for
Implementation. Canberra: Australian Agency for International Development
(AusAID).
Australian Government (2013). Cabinet Implementation Unit Toolkit. Canberra:
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Australia.
Bang, H., & Esmark, A. (2013). A Systems Theory of Good Governance. ICPP,
Grenoble. 45.
Banzeley, P. & Jackson, L. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo. 2nd ed.
Singapore: SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd.
Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W. & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational Research:
Determining Appropriate Sample Size in Survey Research. Information
Technology, Learning and Performance Journal, 19(1), pp. 43-50.
Baud, I., Grafakos, S., Hordijk, M. & Post, J. (2001). Quality of Life and Alliances in
Solid Waste Management: Contributions to Urban Sustainable Development.
Cities, 18(1), pp. 3-12.
Ben, C. & Valerie, C. (1999). Effectiveness of Promotional Techniques in
Environmental Health. Water and Environmental Health at London and
Loughborough (WELL), Task no. 5.
Bernstein, J. (2004). Toolkit: Social Assessment and Public Participation in
Municipal Solid Waste Management. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Betts, J. & Wedgwood, H. (2011). Effective Institutions and Good Governance for
Development. Evaluation Insight, 4, pp. 1-11.
Bhuiyan, S.H. (2010). A Crisis in Governance: Urban Solid Waste Management in
Bangladesh. Habitat International, 34(1), pp. 125–133.
Bjerkli, C. L. (2013). Governance on the Ground: A Study of Solid Waste
Management in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research, 37(4), pp. 1278-1287.
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & Heerden, J. V. (2004). The Concept of
Validity. Psychology Review, 111(4), pp. 1061-1071
234
Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (2002). Cities and the Geographies of “Actually
Existing Neoliberalism”. Antipode, 34(3), pp. 349-379.
Bressers, H., Huitema, D. & Kuks, S. M. M. (1994). Policy Networks in Dutch
Water Policy. Environmental Politics, 3(4), pp. 24-51.
Bressers, H., O’Toole, L. J. Jr. & Richardson, J. (1994). Networks as Models of
Analysis: Water Policy in a Comparative Perspective. Environmental
Politics, 3(4), pp. 1-23.
Breuss, F. (2013). Towards a New EMU. Wien: Austrian Institute of Economic
Research.
Briner, G. & Moarif, S. (2016). Unpacking Provision Related to Transparency of
Mitigation and Support in the Paris Agreement. France: OECD.
Brosseau, J. (1994). Trace Gas Compound Emissions from Municipal Landfill
Sanitary Sites. Atmospheric-Environment, 28(2), pp. 285-293.
Brown, S., & Squire, B. (2007). Capabilities and Competences: Toward Strategic
Resonance between Operations and Strategy Processes. Paper number 07/16.
Exeter: University of Exeter.
Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Method. 4th ed. New York: Oxford.
Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do When Stakeholders Matter. Public Management
Review, 6(1), pp. 21-53.
Bryson, J. M., Gibbons, M. J. & Shaye, G. (2001). Enterprise Schemes for Nonprofit
Survival Growth and Effectiveness. Nonprofit Management and Leadership,
11(3), pp. 71-88.
Budd , L., Charlesworth, J. & Paton, R. (2006). Making Policy Happen. New York:
Routledge.
Budiman, Y. (2002). Keterkaitan Aspek Kelembagaan, Teknologi, Ekonomi Dan
Partisipasi Masyarakat Dalam Pengelolaan Sampah Perkotaan: Studi Kasus
Di Kota Pontianak Kalimantan Barat. Institut Pertanian Bogor: M.Sc. Thesis.
Burden, B. C., Canon, D. T., Mayer, K. R. & Moynihan, D. P. (2012). The Effect of
Administrative Burden on Bureaucratic Perception of Policies: Evidence
from Election Administration. Public Administrative Review, 72(5), pp. 741-
751.
Cashore, B. & Howlett, M. (2007). Punctuating which Equilibrium? Understanding
Thermostatic Policy Dynamics in Pacific Northwest Forestry. American
Journal of Political Science, 51, pp. 532-552.
235
Cerna, L. (2013). The Nature of Policy Change and Implementation: A Review of
Different Theoretical Approaches. ILE, OECD.
Chen, F., Federgruen, A. & Zheng, Y. S. (2001). Coordination Mechanisms for a
Distribution System with One Supplier and Multiple Retailers. Management
Science, 47(5), pp. 693-708.
Cheryl, B. T. (2009). Descriptive Data Analysis. Air Medical Journal, 28(2), pp. 56-
59.
Chowdhury, N. & Skarstedt, D. E. (2005). The Principle of Good Governance.
Oxford: Centre for International Sustainable Development Law (CISDL).
Chua, Y. P. (2006). Asas Statistik Penyelidikan. Buku 2. Kuala Lumpur: Mc Graw
Hill.
Coffey, M. & Coad, A. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing
Countries. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-
Habitat).
Cohen, B. (2004). Urban Growth in Developing Countries: A Review of Current
Trends and a Caution Regarding Existing Forecast. World Development,
32(1), pp. 23-51.
Cointreau, L. S. (1994). Private Sector Participation in Municipal Solid Waste
Services in Developing Countries. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Cointreau, S. (2006). Occupational and Environmental Health Issues of Solid Waste
Management: Special Emphasis on Middle and Lower Income Countries.
Europe: Waste Management Unit, World Health Organization (WHO).
Coker, M. A. & George, G. M. E. (2014). Bad governance: The bane of peace,
security and sustainable development of Nigeria. International Journal of
Development and Sustainability, 3(5), pp. 1121-1146.
Creswell, J. W. & Clark, P. V. L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods
Research. United States: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Approaches. 2nd ed. United States: Sage publication.
DANIDA, Danish International Development Agency (2007). Effective and
Accountable Public-Sector Management – Strategic Priorities for Danish
Support for Good Governance, Copenhagen. Copenhagen: Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Denmark.
Daniel, S. & Ingie, H. (2004). Tools for Policy Impact: A Handbook for Researchers.
London: ODI.
236
Dawes, S. S. (2010). Stewardship and Usefulness: Policy Principles for Information-
based Transparency. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4), pp. 377-383.
Dayanandan, R. (2013). Good Governance Practice for Better Performance of
Community Organization-Myths and Realities. Journal of Power, Politics &
Governance, 1(1), pp. 10-26.
Degnbol-Martinussen, J. & Engberg-Pedersen, P. (2003). Aid-Understanding
International Development Cooperation. Landon: Zed Books Ltd.
Degnbol-Martinussen, J. (2004). Society, State & Market: A Guide to Competing
Theories of Development. 4th ed. København: Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke.
DeLeon, P., & DeLeon, L. (2002). What ever happened to policy implementation?
An alternative approach. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 12(4), pp. 467-492.
Department of Information Malaysia (2014). The Background of Federal Territory
Kuala Lumpur. Retrieved on November 20, 2014, from
http://www.penerangan.gov.my/wilayah/index.php/profil/latar-belakang
Department of Statistics Malaysia (2010a). Population and Housing Census of
Malaysia 2010. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysia Government.
Department of Statistics Malaysia (2010b). Population Distribution and Basic
Demographic Characteristics. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysia Government.
Dieleman, M. & Harnmeijer, J. W. (2006). Improving Health Worker Performance:
in Search of Promising Practices. Geneva: World Health Organization, pp. 5-
34.
Dieleman, M., Shaw, D. MP. & Zwanikken, P. (2011). Improving the
Implementation of Health Workforce Policies through Governance: A
Review of Case Studies. Human Resources for Health, 9, pp. 1-10.
DNSWM, Department of National Solid Waste Management (2014). National Solid
Waste Management Policy. Retrieved on March 10, 2014, from
http://www.kpkt.gov.my/jpspn_en_2013/main.php?Content=vertsections&Ve
rtSectionID=170&IID
DNSWM, Department of National Solid Waste Management (2014). National Solid
Waste Management Policy: Aims and Objectives. Retrieved on March 10,
2014, from
http://www.kpkt.gov.my/jpspn_en_2013/main.php?Content=vertsections&Ve
rtSectionID=170&IID=
Doeveren, V. V. (2011). Rethinking Governance Identifying Common Principles.
Public Integrity, 13(4), pp. 301–318.
237
Drost, E. A. (2011). Validity and Reliability in Social Science Research. Education
Research and Perspectives, 38(1), pp. 105-123.
Dye, T. R. (2002). Understanding Public Policy. 10th ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Dziany, F. K. (2011). The Effect of Bureaucracy on Policy Implementation in the
Public Sector: A Case Study of Ghana Audit Services. Kwame Nkrumah
University of Science and Technology: M.BA. Thesis.
Economic Planning Unit (2006). Malaysia 9th Plan. Putrajaya: Economic Planning
Unit.
Eden, C. & Ackerman, F. (1998). Making Strategy: The Journey of Strategic
Management. London: Sage Publication.
Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P., & Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990). Perceived Organizational
Support and Employee Diligence, Commitment and Innovation. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 75, pp. 51-59.
Elbakidze, M., Angekstam, P. K., Sandstrom, C. & Axelsson, R. (2010). Multi-
Stakeholder Collaboration in Russian and Swedish Model Forest Initiatives:
Adaptive Governance towards Sustainable Forest Management. Ecology and
Society, 15(2): 14. Retrieved on October 20, 2014, from
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art14/
Eldho, T. I. (2001). Groundwater Contamination: The Challenge of Pollution Control
and Protection. Journal of Indian Water Work Association, 33, pp. 171-180.
Essendi, H. & Madise, N. (2014). Factor Influencing Perception of Development in
Rural Kenya: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach. European Journal
of Research and Social Sciences, 2(4), pp. 21-36.
Esther, C. (2009). Developing a Best Pratice Framework for Implementing Public
Private Partnerships (PPP) in Hong Kong. Queensland University of
Technology: Ph.D. Thesis.
European Commission (2008). Governance for Sustainable Development. Lodz:
Education, Audio visual & Culture Executive Agency.
Eusuf, M. A., Ibrahim, M., Din, S. A. M. & Islam, R. (2011). Solid Waste
Generation Characteristics: The Malaysian Local Authorities’ Outlook.
Journal of Malaysian Institute of Planner, 9, pp. 51-76.
Eyles, J. (1992). Interpreting the Geographical World: Qualitative Approach in
Geographical Research. in Eyles, J. & Smith, D. M. (Ed.). Qualitative
Methods in Human Geography. Oxford: Blackwell Publisher.
238
Farr, J., Hacker, J.S., and Kazee, N. (2006). The policy scientist of democracy: The
discipline of Harold D. Lasswell, American Political Science Review, 100(4),
pp. 579- 587.
Fenger, M. & Klok, P. J. (2001). Interdependency, Belief and Coalition Behaviour: A
Contribution to the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Policy Sciences, 34(2),
pp. 157-170.
Fischer, F. & Gottweis, H. (2012). Public Policy as Communicative Practice. United
States: Duke University Press.
Fiske, S. T. & Taylor, S. E. (2013). Social cognition: From brains to culture. Sage
Flick, U. (2011). Introducing Research Methodology: A Beginner’s Guide to Doing a
Research Project. 1st ed. India: SAGE Publications.
Flintoff, F. (1976). Management of Solid Waste in Developing Countries. New Delhi:
WHO Regional Publication.
Franklin Association (1999). Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United State. Washington DC: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA.
Frederickson, H. G. (2004). Whatever Happened to Public Administration?
Governance, Governance Everywhere. Belfast, UK: Queen’s University
Belfast Press.
Freeman, B. (2012). Innovative Approaches, System and Resources for University
Policy Review, Association for Tertiary Education Management and Tertiary
Education Facilities. Tertiary Education Management Conference, 16-19th
September 2012.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholders Theory of
Corporation: Concept, Evident and Implication. Academic of Management
Review, 20(1), pp. 65-78.
Freeman, R. E. (2004). The Stakeholder Approach Revisited. Journal for Business,
Economic & Ethic, 5(3), pp. 228-241.
Freeman, R.E. (1999). Response: Divergent Stakeholders Theory. Academic of
Management Review, 24(1), pp. 23-36.
Friedman, A. L. & Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders: Theory and Practice. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Fritz, J. (2010). Towards a ‘New Form of Governance’ in Science-Policy Relations
in the European Maritime Policy. Marine Policy, 34, pp. 1–6
239
Galavan, R. J. (2015). Understanding Resources, Competences, and Capabilities in
EU Common Security and Defence Policy. Working Paper. Belgium: The
European External Action Service (EEAS).
Garcia V. J. P. (2010). Successful Practices and Policies to Promote Regulatory
Reform and Entrepreneurship at the Sub-National Level. OECD Working
Papers on Public Governance, No. 18, OECD Publishing. doi:
10.1787/5kmh2r7qpstj-en.
George, D. & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide
and Reference. 10th ed. Boston: Pearson.
George, G. M. E. (2013). Good Governance: Antidote for Peace and Security in
Nigeria. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 2(2), pp. 56-65.
Gerlargh, R., Pieter, V.B., Madhu, V., Yadav, P. P. & Preety, P. (1999). Integrated
Modelling of Waste in India. London: International Institutes of Environment
and Development.
Giacchino, S. & Kakabadse, A. (2003). Successful Policy Implementation: The
Route to Building Self-Confident Government. International Review of
Administration Sciences, 69(2), pp. 139-160.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, L., Nowotny, H., Schwartman, S., Scott, P. & Trow, M.
(1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and
Research in Contemporary Societies. London, UK: Sage Publication.
Gisselquist, R. M. (2012). Good Governance Concept and Why This Matters for
Development Policy. Helsinki, Finland: UNU-World Institute Development
Economics Research (WIDER).
GIZ, German Society for International Cooperation (2011). Policy: Transparency
and Information. Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).
Goh, B. L. (2007). Malaysia. in Environmental Management Centre, India (Ed.).
Solid waste Management: Issues and Challenges in Asia. Tokyo: Asian
Productivity Organization.
Goh, K. C. (2011). Developing Financial Decision Support for Highway
Infrastructure Sustainability. Queensland University of Technology: PhD
Thesis.
Griffiths, J., Maggs, H., George, E. (2008). Stakeholder Involvement. Geneva: WHO
Press.
240
Grimmond, S. (2007). Urbanisation and Global Environmental Change: Local
Effects of Urban Warming. Cities and Global Environmental Change, pp. 83-
88.
Gugssa, B. T. (2012). The Cycle of Solid Waste: A Case Study on the Informal
Plastic and Metal Recovery System in Accra. Uppsala University: Master
Thesis.
Hair, Jr. J. F., Money, A. H., Samouel, P. & Page, M. (2007). Research Methods for
Business. Chichester: John Wiley & Son Ltd.
Halasz, G. & Michel, A. (2011). Key Competences in Europe: Interpretation, Policy
Formulation and Implementation. European Journal of Education, 46(3), pp.
289-306.
Hamzah, T. A. A. (2011). Making Sense of Environmental Governance: A Study of
E-waste in Malaysia. Durham University: Ph.D. Thesis. Retrieved on October
10, 2014, from http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/670/
Hansen, W., Christopher, M. & Verbuecheln, M. (2002). EU Waste Policy and
Challenges for Regional and Local Authorities. Berlin: Institute for
International and European Environmental Policy.
Hardoy, J. E., Mitlin, D. & Satterthwaite, D. (2001). Environmental Problems in an
Urbanizing World, Local Solutions for City Problems in Africa, Asia and
Latin America. London: Earthscan Publications
Haruna, P. F. & Kannae, L. A. (2013). Connecting Good Governance Principles to
the Public Affairs Curriculum: The Case of Ghana Institute of Management
and Public Administration. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 19(3), pp.
493-514.
Hasnah, A., Noraziah A., Abd Rashid, A., Maznah, I., Shaharuddin, A. & Sarifah, Y.
(2012). Solid Waste Management and the Willingness to Pay for Improved
Services towards Achieving Sustainable Living. Advances in Natural and
Applied Sciences, 6(1), pp. 52-60.
Hassan, M. N. (1997). Issues and Problems of Solid Waste Management in
Developing Countries: The Case of Malaysia. In proceeding of R’97-
Recovery, Reintegration Congress. Switzerland: World Health Organization
(WHO).
Hassan, M. N., Rahman, R. A., Theng, L. C., Zakaria, Z. & Awang, M. (2000).
Waste Recycling in Malaysia: Problems and Prospects. Waste Management
and Research, 18, pp. 320-328.
241
Hassan, M. N., Theng, L. C., Rahman, M., Salleh, M. N., Zakaria, Z., & Awang, M.
(2001). Solid waste management–what’s the Malaysian position. Malaysian
Journal of Environmental Management, 2, pp. 25-43.
Hede, K. D. K. (2006). Human Rights, Democratization and Good Governance in
Danish Development Policy. København: Økonomforbundets Publisher.
Hertzog, M. A. (2008) Consideration in Determining Sample Size for Pilot Study.
Research in Nursing and Health, 31(2), pp. 180-191.
Hezri, A. A. & M. N. Hassan (2006). Towards Sustainable Development? The
Evolution of Environmental Policy in Malaysia. Natural Resources Forum,
30, pp. 37-50.
Hezri, A. A. (2010). Towards 3R-Based Waste Management: Policy Change in
Japan, Malaysia and the Philippines, in Kojima, M. (Ed.). 3R Policies for
Southeast and East Asia. Jakarta: ERIA, pp. 274-290.
Hill, M. & Hupe, P. (2014). Implementing Public Policy: An Introduction to the
Study of Operational Governance. London: Sage Publication.
Hockings, M., Stolton, S., Leverington, F., Dudley, N. & Courrau, J. (2006).
Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing Management
Effectiveness of Protected Areas. 2nd ed. Gland: IUCN.
Holmes, J. R. (1996). United Kingdom Waste Management Industry. Northampton:
IWM.
Howitt, R. (2013). Governance in Local Government–University Partnerships:
Smart, Local and Connected?. Australia: State of Australian Cities.
Howlett, M. & Ramesh, M. (2003). Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy
Subsystems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hussein, A. A. (2008). Pembentukan Polisi Awam. 1st ed. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan
Publications and Distributors.
IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2006). Waste: Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Rio de Janeiro: IPCC
Issing, O. (2005). Communication, Transparency, Accountability: Monetary Policy
in the Twenty-first Century. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, 1, pp.
65-84.
Jaafar, J. (2004). Emerging Trend of Urbanisation in Malaysia. Journal of the
Department of Statistics, Malaysia, 1, pp. 43-54
Jackson, K. Z., Mugeni, G. B., & Apollo, W. M. (2015). Evaluating Factors
Determining Mobile Payment Adooption in Kenyan Secondary Schools.
242
Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 6(10),
pp. 598-604.
Jamshidi, A., Taghizadeh, F. & Ata, D. (2011). Sustainable Municipal Solid Waste
Management: Case Study: Sarab County, Iran. Annals of Environmental
Science, 5, pp. 55-59.
Jha, A. K., Singh, S. K., Singh, G. P. & Gupta, P. K. (2011). Sustainable Municipal
Solid Waste Management in Low Income Group of Cities: A Review.
Tropical Ecology, 52(1), pp. 123-131.
JICA, Japan International Cooperation Agency (2006). Final Report: The Study on
National Waste Minimisation in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of
Housing and Local Government Malaysia.
John, C. & Miriam, C. (2009). The Policy Governance Model. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Johnson, G. & Scholes, K. (2002). Exploring Corporate Strategy. 6th ed. Harlow,
England: Pearson Education.
Johnston, M. (2006). Good Governance: Rule Of Law, Transparency, and
Accountability. New York: United Nations Public Administration Network.
Jones, N., Halvadakis, C. P. & Sophoulis, C. M. (2011). Social Capital and
Household Solid Waste Management Policies: A Case Study in Mytilene,
Greece. Environmental Politic, 20(2), pp. 264-283.
Joshua, O. O. (2013). Solid Waste Management for Sustainable Development and
Public Health: A Case Study of Logos State in Nigeria. Universal Journal of
Public Health, 1(3), pp. 33-39.
Juiz, C., Guerrero, C., & Lera, I. (2014). Implementing Good Governance Principles
for the Public Sector in Information Technology Governance
Frameworks. Open Journal of Accounting, 3, pp. 9-27.
Julious, S. A. (2005). Sample Size of 12 per Group Rule of Thumb for a Pilot Study.
Pharmaceutical Statistics, 4(4), pp. 287-291.
Kalolo, J. F. (2015). The Drive towards Application of Pragmatic Perspective in
Educational Research: Opportunities and Challenges. Journal of Studies in
Education, 5(1), pp. 150-171.
Kandel, N., Thovaral, L., Oosterhuis, F., Shaw, B. & Ekins, P. (2007) Designing
Environmental Policy to be Innovation Friendly. France: Cm International.
Kathiravale, S. & Muhd Yunus, M. N. (2008). Waste to Wealth. American Economy
Journal, 6, pp. 359-371.
243
Kingdon, J. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. New York: Harper
Collins.
Klok, P. J. (1991). An Instrument for Environmental Theory. Enscheda: University of
Twente.
Konteh, F. H. (2009). Urban Sanitation and Health in the Developing World:
Reminiscing the Nineteenth Century Industrial Nations. Health and Place,
15(1), pp. 69-78.
Konting, M. M. (1990). Kaedah Penyelidikan Pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur : Dewan
Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Kothari, C. (2005). Research Methodology: Methods & Techniques. New Delhi:
New Age International.
Kraf, M. E. & Vig, N. J. (1994). Environmental Policy from the 1970s to the 1990s:
Continuity and Change. in Vig, N. J. & Kraf, M. E. (Ed.). Environmental
Policy in the 1990s: Towards a New Agenda. Washington DC: CQ Press.
Krejcie, R. V. & Morgan, D. W. (1970) Determinig Sample Size for Research
Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, pp. 607-610.
Krosnick, J. A. & Fabrigar, L. R. (1997). Designing Rating Scales for Effective
Measurement in Surveys. In L. Lyberg, P. Biemer, M. Collins, E. De Leeuw,
C. Dippo, N. Schwarz & D.Trewin (Eds.), Survey Measurement and Process
Quality. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Kuala Lumpur City Hall (2014). Economic Base and Population. Retrieved on
November 20, 2014, from
http://www.dbkl.gov.my/pskl2020/english/economic_base_and_population/in
dex.htm
Larsen, I. (2007). Malaysian and International Trend in SWM. In Seminar of
Structuring and Institutionalizing SWM. Penang: Socio-economic &
Environmental Research Institute (SERI).
Lasswell, H. D. (1951). The Policy Orientation. in Daniel, L. & Harold, D. L. (Ed.).
The Policy Sciences: Recent Developments in Scope and Method. Stanford:
Stanford University Press.
Lau, V. L. (2004). Case Study on the Management of Waste Materials in
Malaysia. Forum Geookol, 15(2), pp. 7-14.
Leach, S. & Collinge, C. (1998). Strategic Planning and Management in Local
Government. London: Pitman.
244
Lester, P. J., Ann, O’M. B., Malcolm, L. G. & O’Toole, L. J. (1995). Public Policy
Implementation: Evolution of the Field and Agenda for Future Research.
Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management, 7, pp. 71-94.
Leung, W. C. (2001). How to Design a Questionnaire. Student BMJ, 9.
Ligatti, J. A. (2006). Policy Enforcement via Program Monitoring. Princeton
University: Ph.D. Thesis.
Ligteringen, J. J. (1998). The Effects of Public Policies on Household Metabolism. in
Klaas J. N. & Ton S. U. (Ed.). Green Households: Domestic Consumers,
Environment and Sustainability. London: Earthscan.
Lingard, H., Graham, P. & Smithers, P. (2000). Employee Perception of the Solid
Waste Management System Operating in a Large Australian Contracting
Organization: Implications for Company Policy Implementation.
Construction Management and Economics, 18, pp. 383-393.
Liu, J. S. (1996). Metropolized Independent Sampling with Comparisons to
Rejection Sampling and Important Sampling. Statistic and Computing, 6, pp.
113-119.
Lockwood, M. (2010). Good Governance for Terrestrial Protected Areas: A
framework, Principles and Performance Outcomes. Journal of Environmental
Management, 91, pp. 754-766.
Löfgren, K. (2015). Implementation Studies: Beyond a Legalistic Approach.
In Research Methods in European Union Studies (pp. 154-167). Palgrave
Macmillan UK.
Ludwig, C., Hellweg, S. & Stucki, S. (2003). Municipal Solid Waste Management:
Strategies and Technologies for Sustainable Solutions. Heidelberg: Springer.
Lundqvist, L. (2001). A Green Fist in a Velvet Glove: The Ecological State and
Sustainable Development. Environmental Values, pp. 455-472.
Lynn, Jr. L., C. Heinrich & C. Hill. (2001). Improving Governance: A New Logic for
Empirical Research. Washington. D.C.: Georgetown University Press
Maiyaki, A. A., & Sany, S. M. M. (2011). Determinants of Consumer Behavioural
Responses: A Pilot Study. International Business Research, 4(1), pp. 193-
197.
Makmor, M., Ismail, Z., Hashim, R. & Mat Nasir, N. (2012). Malaysia under the
Purview of the United Nations and Agenda 21. International Journal of
Social, Management, economics and Business Engineering, 6(12), pp. 767-
771.
245
Malaysia (2007). Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act: Act 672 2007
Malhortra, N. K. (2008). Essentials of Marketing: an Applied Orientation. 2nd ed.
Australia: Pearson Education.
Manaf, L. A., Samah, M. A. A., & Zukki, N. I. M. (2009). Municipal solid waste
management in Malaysia: Practices and challenges. Waste
management, 29(11), pp. 2902-2906.
Manasan, R. G., Gonzalez, E. T. & Gaffud, R. B. (1999). Indicators of Good
Governing; Developing an Index of Governance Quality at the LGU Level.
Makati City, Philippines: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
Marina, I. M. & Jamil, A. (2013). Kesahan dan Kebolehpercayaan Instrumen
Penilaian Pelaksanaan Pentaksiran Kompetensi Persijilan Modular (PKPM),
in proceeding of the International Conference on Social Science Research,
ICSSR 2013, 4-5 June 2013, Penang, Malaysia.
Marshall, R. E. & Farahbakhsh, K. (2013). System Approaches to Integrated Solid
Waste Management in Developing Countries. Waste Management, 33, pp.
988-1003.
Martin, K. K., Shihua, Q. I. & Yata, S. L. (2013). The Impact of Poor Municipal
Solid Waste Management Practices and Sanitation Status on Water Quality
and Public Health in Cities of the Least Developed Countries: the Case of
Juba, South Sudan. International Journal of Applied Science and Technology,
3(4), pp. 87-99.
Matland, R. E. (1995). Synthesizing the implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-
Conflict Model of Policy Implementation. Journal of Public Administration
research and Theory, 5(2), pp. 145-174.
Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Social Research, 1(2).
Retrieved on August 18, 2014, from http://qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-
e/2-00inhalt-e.htm
Memon, M. A. (2010). Integrated Solid Waste Management Base on the 3R
Approach. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 12, pp. 30-40.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Application in
Education. 2nd ed. Thousand Oak, Cliff: Sage Publication.
MHLG, Ministry of Housing and Local Government Malaysia (2005). National
Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Management: The Strategic Plan (Volume 1).
Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Housing and Local Government Malaysia.
Miles, M. B. & Huberman, M. A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded
Sourcebook. 2nd ed. Sage: Beverley Hills.
246
Miller, C. D. (1991). Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement.
Newbury Park, California: Sage publications.
Ministry of Housing and Local Government Malaysia (1988). Action Plan for Solid
Waste Management. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Housing and Local
Government Malaysia.
Ministry of Tourism and Culture Malaysia (2014). State of Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur.
Retrieved on November 20, 2014, from
http://www.tourism.gov.my/en/my/places/states-of-malaysia/kuala-lumpur
Ministry of Tourism and Culture Malaysia (2014). State of Malaysia: Johor.
Retrieved on November 20, 2014, from
http://www.tourism.gov.my/en/my/places/states-of-malaysia/johor
Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government (2014). Number of
Authorities by States and Status. Retrieved on October 20, 2014, from
http://jkt.kpkt.gov.my/english.php/pages/view/138
Mohamad, Z. F., & Keng, J. (2013). Opportunities and Challenges in Sustainable
Waste Management Transition in Malaysia: A multi-level socio-technical
perspective. In Globelics Seminar on Low Carbon Development, pp. 4-5.
Mohamed, S. (2014). Malaysian Local Governments’ Role towards Sustainable
Development Focusing on Knowledge Transfer Practices Framework.
Universiti Tun Husseon Onn Malaysia: Ph. D. Thesis.
Mohatlane, E. J. (2014). Back-Translation as a Quality Control Mechanism in
Sesotho Translation. Journal Social Science, 41(2), 167-175.
Morita, S. & Zaelke, D. (2005). Rule of Law, Good Governance and Sustainable
Development. In proceeding of 7th International Conference on
Environmental Compliance and Enforcement. Morocco: International
Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement, pp. 15-21.
MPPP, Municipal Council of Penang Island (2014). Waste Management. Retrieved
on November 20, 2014, from http://www.mppp.gov.my/en/pengurusan-sisa-
pepejal
Mutalib, R. A. (2013). The Effect of Federal Government Policy on Local
Government Service Delivery: A Case Study on Refuse Collection
Privatization. Korean Society of Public Administration, Fall Conference,
2013 (Single Issue), pp. 2128-2138.
Nadzri, Y. & Larsen., I. B. (2012). Federalising Solid Waste Management in
Peninsular Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Department of National Solid Waste
Management.
247
Natarajan, N. (2011). A Study on the Stakeholder’s Perception of Corporate
Governance Practices with Reference to the Software Companies in India.
Educational and Research Institute University: Ph.D. Thesis.
National Higher Education Research Institute (2010). The State of Penang, Malaysia:
Self-Evaluation Report, OECD Review of Higher Education in Regional and
City Development, IMHE.
Neyroud, P. & Beckley, A. (2001). Policing, Ethics and Human Rights. Cullompton:
Willan Publishing.
Ngidi, T. L. & Dorosamy, N. (2014). Imperatives for Good Governance: A Case
Study of the Implementation Batho Pele Principles at Durban Home Affairs
Regional Level. Journal Social Science, 38(1), pp. 9-21.
Nicolli, F., Mazzanti, M. & Iafolla, V. (2012). Waste Dynamics, Country
Heterogeneity and European Environmental Policy Effectiveness. Journal of
Environmental Policy and Planning, 14(4), pp. 371-393.
Norizan, M. N., Asyirah, A. A., Fera, F. A. F., Suzyrman, S., Syarilla, M. S.,
Muhamad, A. A., Siti, M. A. K. & Mohd, R. R. (2012). Campus Community
Responses on Waste Recycling Activity towards Sustainable Lifestyles. in
Proceeding of 3rd International Conferences on environment Research and
Technology. Penang: School of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains
Malaysia. pp. 399-404.
Norizan, M. N., Asyirah, A. R., Fera, F., Suzyrman, S., Tarmiji, M., Syarilla, S.,
Govin, J., Siti Mariam, A. K., Nur Amalina, T., Muhamad Azahar, A. &
Mohd Ridzlie, R. (2011). Enhancing Urban Sustainable Living within
Universiti Sains Malaysia and Its Neighboring Communities, Penang,
Malaysia. presented in 2nd International Academic Consortium for
Sustainable Cities Symposium (IACSC) 2011. Penang: Universiti Sains
Malaysia.
Nutt, P. & Backoff, R. (1992). Strategic Management of Public and Third Sector
Organizations: A handbook for Leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
O’Toole, L J. R. Jr. (1995). Rational Choice and Policy Implementation. American
Review of Public Administration, 25(1), pp. 43-57.
O’Toole, L. J. Jr. (2000). Research on Policy Implementation: Assessment and
Prospects. Journal of Public Administration and Theory, 10, pp. 263-288.
OECD, Organisation for Economic Cooperative and Development (2013). Waste
Management Services. Competition Policy Roundtable, DAF/COMP (26).
Okoroma, N. S. (2006). Educational Policies and Problems of Implementation in
Nigeria. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 46(2), pp. 243-263.
248
Okwesili, J., & Iroko, C. (2016). Urban Solid Waste Management and Environmental
Sustainability In Abakaliki Urban, Nigeria. European Scientific
Journal, 12(23), pp. 155-183.
Orquin, J. L., Bagger, M. P., & Loose, S. M. (2013). Learning Affects Top Down
and Bottom Up Modulation of Eye Movements in Decision
Making. Judgment and Decision Making, 8(6), pp. 700-716.
Owoye, O., & Bissessar, N. (2012). Bad governance and corruption in Africa:
Symptoms of Leadership and Institutional Failure. In First Global
Conference on Public Policy & Administration in the Middle East. Ifrane,
Morroco.
PAHO, Pan American Health Organization (1998). Diagnosis of Municipal Solid
Waste Management in Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington DC:
World Health Organization.
Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS Survival Manual. 4th ed. Australia: Allen & Unwin Book
Publishers.
Parag, Y. (2005). Policy Process Networks: The Formation of Environmental Public
Policy in Israel. Tel Aviv University: Ph.D. Dissertation.
Paudel, N. R. (2009). A Critical Account of Policy Implementation Theories: Status
and Consideration. Nepalese Journal of Public Policy and Governance,
15(2), pp. 36-54.
Peters, B. G. & Pierre, J. (1998). Governance without Government? Rethinking
Public Administration. Journal of Public Administration and Theory, 18, pp.
223-243.
Pichtel, J. (2005). Waste Management Practices: Municipal, Hazardous and
Industrial. Boca Raton, Florida: Taylor and Francis Group.
Pressman, J. L. & Wildavsky, A. (1973). Implementation: How Great Expectations
in Washington are dashed in Oakland. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Rainey, H. G. & Steinbauer, P. (1999) Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of
a Theory of Effective Government Organisations, Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, 9(1), pp.1-32.
Read, A. D. (1999). Making Waste Work: Making UK National Solid Waste
Strategy Work at the Local Scale. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
26, pp. 259-285.
249
Read, A. D. (2013). Best Practice of Waste Management in Low and Medium
Income Countries in ExCo71, 21 May 2013 Cape Town South Africa, Waste
Management & Resources Efficiency, Ricardo-AEA.
Rhodes, R. (1996). The New Governance: Governing without Government. Political
Studies, 44(4), pp. 652-667.
Robertson, C. J., Diyab, A. A. & Ali, A. (2013). A Cross-National Analysis of
Perception of Corporate Governance Principles. International Business
Review, 22, pp. 315-325.
Robinson, G. M. (1998). Methods and Techniques in Human Geography. Chinhester:
Wiley.
Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
Rondinelli, D. A. (2003). Partnering for Development: Government-Private sector
Cooperation in Service Provision. Calorado, US: Lynne Rienner Publisher.
Rose, N. & Miller, P. (1992). Political Power Beyond the State: Problematics of
Government. British Journal of Sociology, 43(2), pp. 173-205.
Rosenau, J. N. (2000). The Governance of Fragmegration: Neither a World Republic
nor a Global Interstate System. Quebec, Turkey: International Political
Science Association (IPSA).
Roseni, D., M. Ahmad., M. Faisal, K. Z., N. M. Sidek., A. A. Karim., N. A. Johar.,
K. Jusoff., M. S. Zakaria., K. A. Mastor. & S. R. Ariffin (2009). Validity and
Reliability of the e-Learning Style Questionnaire (eLSE) Version 8.1 Using
the Rasch Measurement Model. Journal of Quality Measurement and
Analysis, 5(2), pp. 15-27.
Saeed, M. O., Hassan, M. N. & Mujeebu, M. A (2009). Assessment of Municipal
Solid Waste Generation and Recyclable Materials Potential in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia. Waste Management, 29(7), pp. 2209-2213.
Sakawi, Z., Mastura, S. A. S., Ariffin, M. R., Ismail, L., & Jaafar, O. (2012).
Analysis of Heavy Metal Concentration in the Vicinity of a Landfill
Site. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, 7(7), pp. 349-353.
Saleem, M., Prot, S., Anderson, C. A. & Lemieux, A. F. (2015). Exposure to
Muslims in Media and Support for Public Policies Harming Muslims.
Communication Research, pp. 1-29.
Sandelowski, M. (1995). Triangle and Crystal: on Geometry of Qualitative Research.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 18(6), pp. 569-574.
250
Santiso, C. (2001). Good Governance and Aid Effectiveness: The World Bank and
Conditionality. The Georgetown Public Policy Review, 7(1), pp. 1-22.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business
Students. 6th ed. Landon: Pearson Education Limited.
Scharf, F. W. (1997). Games Real Actors Play: Actor-centreed Institutionalism in
Policy Research. Boulder: Westview.
Schofield, J. (2001). Time for a revival? Public Policy Implementation: A Review of
the Literature and an Agenda for Future Research. International Journal of
Management Review, 3(3), pp. 245-263.
Schübeler, P. (1996). Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste
Management in Low-income Countries. Gallen, Switzerland: Swiss Centre
for Development Cooperation in Technology and Management (SKAT).
Sekaran, U. & Bougie, R. (2010). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building
Approach. 5th ed. Chichester: John Willey and Sons Ltd.
Seow, T. W. (2009). Masalah Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal di Daerah Batu Pahat,
Johor. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia: Ph.D. Thesis.
Seow, T. W. (2012). New Perspective of Integrated Solid Waste Management in
Malaysia. in Proceeding of 3rd International Conference on Human Habitat
& Environment in the Malay World. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Shah Alam City Council (2014). Urban Services: Domestic Garbage Collection.
Retrieved on October 20, 2014, from http://www.mbsa.gov.my/en-
my/mbsa/perkhidmatan/perkhidmatanperbandaran/Pages/kutipan_sampah_do
mestik.aspx
Shehu, Z. & Akintoye, A. (2010). Major Challenges to the Successful
Implementation and Practice of Programme Management in the Construction
Environment: A Critical Analysis. International Journal of Project
Management, 28(1), pp. 26-39.
Sinclair, T. A. P. (2001). Implementation theory and practice: Uncovering policy and
administration linkages in the 1990s. International Journal of Public
Administration, 24(1), pp. 77–94.
Skelcher, C., Mathur, N., & Smith, M. (2004). Negotiating the Institutional Void.
Political Studies Association Annual Conference, Lincoln
Skinner, V., Agho, K., White, T. L. & Harris, J. (2007). The Development of a Tool
to Stress Levels of Stress and Burnout. Australian Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 24(4), pp. 8-13.
251
Smith, B. C. (2007). Good Governance and Development. Hampshire: Palgrave
McMillan.
Smith, E. E. (2013). A Perceptual Study Regarding the Governance and
Sustainability of Organisations in South Africa. European Journal of
Business and Social Sciences, 2(3), pp. 63-82.
Smith, J. A. & Eatough, V. (2006). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. in G.
Breakwell, C. Fife-Schaw, S. Hammond & J. A. Smith (Ed.). Research
Methods in Psychology. 3rd ed. Landon: Sage.
Sreenivasan, J., Govindan, M., Chinnasami, M. & Kadiresu, I. (2012). Solid Waste
Management in Malaysia: A Move towards Sustainability. Intech, 3, pp. 55-
70.
Stankowska, M. (2014). Good Governance and the Non-Governmental
Organizations. International Journal of Governmental Financial
Management, 14(1), pp. 43-48
Stoker, G. (1998). Governance as Theory: Five Propositions. Malden, USA:
Blackwell Publishers.
Subroto, A. (2011). Understanding Complexities in Public Policy Making Process
through Policy Cycle Model: A System Dynamics Approach. in Proceeding
of 2nd Conference of WCSA-World Complexity Science Academy. Palermo,
Italy: World Complexity Science Academy.
Suriati, G. & Colonius, A. (2008). Pencarian dan Penafsiran Maklumat Kualitatif
dalam Penyelidikan Geografi: Pengalaman daripada Kajian Kesejahteraan
Ketua Keluarga Wanita. di dalam Manusia dan Masyarakat Siri Baru Jilid
16. Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit Universiti Malaya.
SWCorp, Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing Corporation (2011).
Laporan Tahunan SWCorp 2011. Kuala Lumpur: Perbandanan Pengurusan
Sisa Pepejal dan Pembersihan Awam (SWCorp).
SWCorp, Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing Corporation (2014a).
Background. Retrieved on October 20, 2014, from
http://www.SWCorp.gov.my/index.php/mengenai-SWCorp/latar-belakang
SWCorp, Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing Corporation (2014b). State
Director. Retrieved on November 20, 2014, from
http://www.SWCorp.gov.my/index.php/ms/pengarah-negeri
Syarilla, M. S. (2011). Komuniti Berpagar, Enklaf dan Pendidikan untuk
Pembangunan Lestari: Kajian Kes Kampus Induk, Universiti Sains Malaysia,
Pulau Pinang. Universiti Sains Malaysia: M.Sc. Thesis.
252
Syed Arabi, I. (1992). Kaedah Penyelidikan Komunikasi dan Sains Sosial. Kuala
Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Tadesse, T. (2004). Solid Waste Management. Ethiopia Public Health Training
Initiative, The Carter Centre. Ethiopia: Ethiopia Ministry of Health.
Tadlock, B. L., Tickamyer, A. R., White, J. A., Henderson, D. A. & Pearson-Nelson,
B. J. (2005). Leadership in an Age of Devolution: County Commissioners’
Role in the Implementation of Appalachian Ohio’s Welfare Reform. Public
Administration Quarterly, 29(1/2).
Tanaka, S. (2007). Engaging the Public in National Budgeting: A Non-Governmental
Perspective. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 7(2), pp. 139-177.
Tavakol, M. & Dennick, R. (2011). Making Sense of Cronbach’s Apla. International
Journal of Medical Education, 2, pp. 53-55.
Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H. & Vigil, S. A. (1993). Integrated Solid Waste
Management: Engineering Principle and Management Issue. New York:
McGraw Hill Inc.
Teddlie, C. & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research:
Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Techniques in the Social and
Behavioral Sciences. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Themelis, N. J. & Mussche, C. (2013). Municipal Solid Waste Management and
Waste-to-Energy in the United States, China and Japan, in 2nd International
Academic Symposium on Enhanced Landfill Mining. Houthalen-Helchteren:
Enhanced Landfill Mining Consortium (ELFM).
Thomas, J. W. & Grindle, M. S. (1990). After Decision: Implementation Policy
Reforms in Developing Countries. World Development, 18(8), pp. 1163-
1181.
Thompson, G. (2005). Networks and Public Management. International Workshop
on New Developments in Institutional Theory and the Analysis of
Institutional Changes in Capitalism, Roskilde: Roskilde University
Thong, J. Y. L., Yap, C. S. & Raman, K. S. (1994). Engagement of External
Expertise in Information System Implementation. Journal of Management
Information System, 11(2), pp. 299-231.
Tobin, G. A. & Begley, C. M. (2004). Methodological Rigour within a Qualitative
Framework. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48(4), pp. 388-396.
Toikka, A. (2011). Governance Theory as a Framework for Empirical Research: A
Case Study on Local Environmental Policy-Making in Helsinki, Finland.
Helsinki: Unigrafia Bookstore.
253
Triassi, M., Alfano, R., Illario, M., Nardone, A., Caporale, O., & Montuori, P.
(2015). Environmental Pollution from Illegal Waste Disposal and Health
Effects: A Review on the “Triangle of Death”. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(2), pp. 1216-1236.
Uma, K. E., Nwaka, I. D. & George, E. (2013). Restructuring Urban Solid Waste
Management and Housing Problems for Economic Development: A Case of
Nigeria. Business System Review, 2(3), pp. 54-71.
UN, United Nations (1992a). The Rio Declaration on Environmental and
Development. Rio de Janeiro: United Nations Department of Public
Information.
UN, United Nations (1992b). United Nations Programme on Action for Sustainable
Development. New York: United Nation.
UN, United Nations (2008). Guidebook on Promoting Good Governance in Public-
Private Partnership. Geneva: United Nations.
UN, United Nations (2011). Handbook on Police Accountability, Oversight and
Integrity. Vienna: United Nations.
UNEP, United Nations Environment Programme (2012). Waste. New York: United
Nations.
UNEP-IETC, United Nations Environment Program-International Environmental
Technology Centre (1996). International Source Book on Environmentally
Sound Technologies for Municipal Solid Waste Management. Osaka:
International Environmental Technology Centre (IETC), United Nations
Environment Program (UNEP).
UN-HABITAT, United Nations Human Settlements Programme (2008). State of the
World’s Cities 2008/2009: Harmonious Cities. Nairobi: Earthscan.
United Nations Development Programme, UNDP (1997). Human Development
Report 1997. New York: Oxford University Press.
USEPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency (2002). Solid Waste
Management: A Local Challenge with Global Impacts. Washington DC:
United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Uttara, S., Bhuvandas, N. & Aggarwal, V. (2012). Impacts of Urbanisation on
Environment. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Applied
Sciences, 2(2), pp. 1637-1645.
Vasanthi, P., Kaliappan, S. & Srinivasaraghavan, R. (2008). Impact of Poor Solid
Waste Management on the Ground Water. Environmental Monitoring &
Assessment, 143, pp. 227-238.
254
Vergara, S. & Tchobanoglous, G. (2012). Municipal Solid Waste and the
Environment: A Global Perspective. Environment and Resources, 37, pp.
277-309.
Walker, S. (2007). Police Accountability: Current Issues and Research Needs. In
National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Policing Research Workshop: Planning for
Future. Washington DC: National Institute of Justice.
WCED, World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common
Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Werker, E. & Ahmed, F. Z. (2008). What Do Non-Governmental Organizations Do?.
The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(2), pp. 73-92.
Wilkin, S. (2011). Can Bad Governance be Good for Development?. Survival, 53(1),
pp. 61-76.
Willetts, P. (2002). What is a Non-Governmental Organization?. In UNESCO (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of life support systems. Oxford: Eolss Publishers.
Wilson, D.C. (2007). Development Drivers for Waste Management. Waste
Management & Research, 25(3), pp. 198–207.
Winter, S. C. (2003). Implementation. in Peter, B. G. & Pierre, J. (Ed.). Handbook of
Public Administration. California: Thousand Oak.
Wolfgang, H. R. (1998). Global Public Policy: Governing without Government?.
Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Wong, J & Li, H. (2006). Development of a Conceptual Model for the Selection of
Intelligent Building Systems. Building and Environment, 41(8), pp. 1106-
1123.
Woods, N. (2000). The Challenge of Good Governance for the IMF and the World
Bank Themselves. World Development, 28(5), pp. 823-841.
World Bank (1995). Stakeholder Consultation and Participation in Municipal Solid
Waste Management. United Kingdom: Planning, Social Development
Department, The World Bank.
World Bank (1999a). What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in Asia. Washington:
The World Bank.
World Bank (1999b). Technical Guidance Report: Municipal Solid Waste
Incineration. Washington: The World Bank.
World Bank (2012a). What a Waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste Management.
Washington: The World Bank.
255
World Bank (2012b). Designing the Franework for Achieving the Results: A How –
To Guide. Washington: The World Bank.
Yeung, F. Y. (2007). Developing a Partnering Performance Index (PPI) for
Construction Project- a Fuzzy Set Theory Approach. Hong Kong Polytechnic
University: Ph.D. Thesis.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Method. 3rd ed. London: Sage.
Yousif, D. F. & Scott, S. (2007). Governing Solid Waste Management in
Mazatenango, Guatemala: Problems and Prospects. International
Development Planning Review, 29(4), pp. 433-450.
Yusof, Z. A. & Deepak, B. (2008). Economic Growth and Development in Malaysia:
Policy Making and Leaderhsip.Working paper no. 27 for Commission on
Growth and Development. Washington: The World Bank.
Zahariadis, N. (1999). Ambiguity, Time, and Multiple Streams. in Paul A. S. (Ed.).
Theories of the policy process. Boulder: Westview.
Zamali, T., Mohd Lizam, A. & Abu Osman, M. T. (2009). An Overview of
Municipal Solid Waste Generation in Malaysia. Jurnal Teknologi, 51, pp. 1-
15.
Zanger, S. C. (2000). Good Governance and European Aid: The Impact of Political
Conditionality. European Union Politics, 1(3), pp. 293-317.
Zarmadi, M. (2006). 3R Initiative on Scheduled Waste Management in Malaysia.
Department of Environment in Management, Senior Officer Meeting on 3R
Initiative, 6-8 March 2006, Tokyo: Japan.
Zen, I. S. (2001). Issues and Problems on Privatising Municipal Solid Waste
Management in Malaysia. in Chamhuri, S., Hasnah, A., Abd Rashid, A. &
Mohd Zahir, A. H. (Ed.). Policies to Improve Municipal Solid Waste
Management. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Zurbrugg, C. (2003). Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries. SWM
introductory text on www.sanicon.net. Retrieved on January 14, 2014.