HOUSEHOLD BEHAVIOR ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT: A CASE OF

KATHMANDU METROPOLITAN CITY

Abstract

This paper tries to show the household behavior of Kathmandu residents towards solid

waste management. The paper is the outcome of a primary survey of 432 households

covering different parts of the city of Kathmandu. The daily per capita waste generation in

Kathmandu is 0.29 kg and is lower in the core zone than in the outer and middle zones.

This indicates that as there is more open space to throw the waste people usually generate

more waste. Household size and income are the major determining factors for the total

quantity of wastes generated in all the zones.

About 80% of the households are willing to pay for better management of waste. This

comes to about Rs. 72 per household per month. The willingness to pay is highest in the

outer zone and lower in the core zone. The main factor determining the “Willingness to

Pay” is income.

1. INTRODUCTION

Prior to 1950, there was hardly any problem of solid waste management in Nepal. The

solid waste was locally managed in all the urban areas of Nepal including Kathmandu

Valley. Almost all the wastes was organic in nature and was used as manure (Tuladhar

1996). Traditionally, only a special caste (i.e. Pode or Chyame) was involved in waste

management activities. In the past, these people collected the waste from settlements using

primitive tools such as buffalo ribs to lift the waste and shoulder baskets (Kharpan) to

carry the wastes (Tuladhar 1996). The wastes collected were dumped on nearby river banks

or in open fields. In those days, the flow of water in nearby rivers was capable in degrading

the dumped organic wastes which were small in quantity. But these traditional practices

could not continue due to the increasing population densities in urban areas. Increase in

1

population density has lead to the increase in the volume of waste. This has created a

massive threat to public health due to the lack of proper solid waste management.

Thus after the mid-1960s initiation started in the diagnosis of the problem and some short-

term as well as long term suggestions were given by different studies (Flinthoff1, 1970;

Tabasaran, 1976 and 1981; Croll 1978). These studies were basically meant for the smooth

functioning of the Solid Waste Management Project and quick collection and disposal of

the waste. Some other studies were on the possibility of pricing for garbage services

(Agrawal et al. 1982; Flinthoff, 1970; GTZ 1996; SWMB GTZ 1985).

1.2 Rational

Even with all these research and studies, the problem of solid waste management in

Kathmandu has been increasing over the years. Presently, the task of solid waste

management comes under the auspices of concerned municipalities. The service is

provided almost free of charge using funds available at the disposal of the municipalities.

Nearly 20-25% of the total budget of the Metropolis goes for solid waste management

(KMC, Department of Solid Waste Management, 1998).

One of the studies conducted by the Central Bureau of Statistics shows that unmanaged

waste disposal was considered the main cause of environmental problems in Kathmandu

followed by unmanaged sewage (CBS 1996, in CBS 1998 a). Thus solid waste

management is a growing issue in the context of urban environmental degradation of

Kathmandu. The rate of growth of population of the Kathmandu Valley is more than 6%,

which is the highest among the cities of Nepal. Due to the rapid increase in population and

increase in the consumption of packed goods, the amount as well as the quantum of non-

biodegradable waste is increasing over time. Among the total waste generated in Nepal,

80% is generated only from Kathmandu and only 30% of the total urban refuse is being

collected in containers and transferred to the landfill site (Thapa et al. 1999).

1.2. Studies on the Economics of Solid Waste Management

Solid waste management is also a non-excludable good as it is difficult to be protected by

the general market forces. One way of managing non-excludable goods or services is either

1 Mr. F. Flinthoff was from WHO Regional Office for South East Asia and stayed as a short-term consultant in Kathmandu about the end of 1970 for a period of two months. He gave a report named Assignment Report in the Solid Waste Management in Kathmandu Who-Project Searo. 0150, 1970.

2

by the internalization of costs (by levying charges for the use of the services) or by

following a command and control policy or a combination of both. Government

intervention is necessary for this. The rationality of the government’s intervention can be

judged when the costs of producing the good or service decline as more of the good or

service is produced and when production or use of the good or service results in

"externalities" such as environmental pollution (Macauley and Walls, 1995; Jenkins, 1993).

Thus, the major problem for solid waste management is the internalization of costs of

waste disposal.

In the early days economists discussed about the socio-economic factors influencing waste

generation by the households. Wertz (1976) discussed about the economic aspects of

household's decisions to produce more or less refuse. He mainly analyzed the theoretical

concept about household behavior on waste generation due to the changes in income, price

of refuse service, frequency of service, site of refuse collection and packaging. He also

discussed on resource implications of the local government policy, which refrains from the

pricing of public refuse service to households.

Economists also compared the composition and quantity of waste in terms of income level,

household size and age structure of the household. The household size, household income

and population were important factors affecting the quantity and composition of solid

waste. The study shows that grass, yard wastes and newspaper were positively correlated to

the level of income (Richardson et al. 1978). The present paper attempts to apply these

models in the context of developing country like Nepal with some modification.

1.3 Objectives:

The objectives of this paper are to discuss household behavior regarding waste generation

and management of waste; the relationship of the waste component in different zones

within the city; and the “willingness to pay” for changes in the provision of waste

management services.

1.4 Methodology:

The study was conducted using primary information. Information from households was

collected using a structured questionnaire. The Kathmandu Metropolis is divided into 35

3

wards. Wards are not homogenous but heterogeneous in terms of population density and

land use patterns.

1.4.1 Selection of Areas and size of the Sample:

All the wards can be categorized into three main groups i.e. Core, Middle and Outer

depending on population density, settlement and land use pattern. 5 wards (15%) out of the

35 were selected for field study. To make the sample more representative, wards were

selected in such a way that they covered all the zones i.e. Core, Middle and Outer. Thus, 3

wards from the core, 1 from the outer and 1 from the middle zone were selected. Table 1

shows the detail regarding the selected wards and size of the sample.

Table 1 Sample Households

Ward Total households (Nos.)

Sample households (Nos.)

Total Households (%)

Area Covered by sample (Sq. km.)

Total Population

Population Density per sq. Km

14 3460 173 05 3.03 18425 6080.9

18 775 41 05 0.19 8081 42531.6

19 1122 57 05 0.16 7588 47425.0

28 385 31 08 0.07 5077 72528.6

35 2486 130 05 3.95 12000 3038.0

Total 8228 432 05.25 7.4 51171 6915

Total population data is as per the census of 1991.

About 5% of the households were selected from among the households of the selected

wards. Thus in total 432 households were selected from the selected 5 wards. The

households were selected randomly with the help of the voters’ list. Attempts were made to

cover the entire locality within the ward.

1.4.2 Justification of the Sample Size:

To depict the reliability of the overall situation of the population, the selected sample

should contain a sufficient number of households. Therefore, to reduce costs, simplify

management and control of the quality of the interviews, the sample size was kept within

reasonable limits. In order to ensure representative views, each household was provided an

equal opportunity to be selected in the sample.

4

Sampling Error (SE): SE is the error inherent in making inferences for the whole

population from observing only some of its members. It is considered as a guideline as to

what the sample size should be, in order to guarantee a maximum given error when

estimating a proportion from the sample.

For a pure random sample drawn from an infinite population, the following formula has

been taken as the basis for computing the sample size;

n = k2 p (1-p)/e2

Where, p is the value of the proportion in the population, e is the acceptable error and k is

a coefficient dependent on the confidence level for = 0.95 ( i.e. " 95 % confidence level”)

k = 1.96. The term p(1-p) is maximum for p = 0.5. Then the formula becomes:

n = 0.9604/e2

Thus, to achieve a maximum error of 0.05 (5%) in the estimation of proportion, n =

0.9604/052 = 384. Therefore, a minimum sample size of 384 households is required.

1.4.3 Data Collection Method:

The name and number of the household head was collected from the final voters’ list of

2000 for the 5 selected wards. After preparing the list of the household head sample

households were selected randomly using the random Table. The information from the

household was collected with the help of a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was

finalized after a pre-test. The pre-test was made in ward no. 14 with 5% (25) of the sample

households. The result of the pre-test was presented in a closed door meeting with the team

of University Professors. The questionnaire was finalized incorporating all the suggestions

provided by the Professors. The questions were on demographic characteristics of the

households, information on waste generation by types, waste disposal practices (e.g.

throwing in street, river, burning etc.), door-to-door collection systems, monthly fee, and

willingness to pay for the better management of waste and causes for not willing to pay.

Family income, sources of income, education level, and possession of domestic amenities

were also among the questions asked.

The questions were filled by visiting the selected households from August to November

2001. The households were visited twice to complete the questionnaire. On the first day

socio-economic information were collected and households requested to deposit the wastes

5

in different plastic bags. On the next day the wastes were weighted. Three research

assistants (one from each zone) were employed for the work.

1.4.4 Analytical Method:

The data were entered in the computer and analyzed using different statistical tools. Data

were grouped for the Core, Middle and Outer zones. Some of the information was analyzed

using simple statistical tools and others analyzed econometrically. The econometric models

used for the analysis of household behavior and Willingness to Pay is given in the relevant

sections.

2. MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

2.1 Waste Generation in the Households:

The table 2 shows that average waste generation by the households is 0.29kg per capita per

day (0.26kg in the core zone, 0.32kg in the outer zone and 0.29kg in the middle zone).

Waste generation is higher in the outer zone and lower in the core zone. This may be due to

the sufficient open spaces available in the surroundings of the outer zone. In the core zone

people have no space and so they may be generating less waste.

Table: 2 Per Capita Waste Generation by the households

Zone Waste generation (Kg./ HH /day )

Std. Dev. Min Max Total waste ( Kg.)

Per capita waste generation in a day (Kg.)

All zone 1.91 1.27 0.33 9.15 824.14 0.29

Core

Zone

1.98 1.26 0.53 9.15 255.63 0.26

Middle

Zone

1.85 1.28 0.33 6.99 320.43 0.29

Outer

Zone

1.91 1.28 0.51 7.63 248.1 0.32

6

The percentage of people following the separation practice is also very high in the core

zone as compared to other zones (Table 4). This may also be responsible for the low waste

generation in the core zone.

Table 3 shows about the types and proportion of solid waste. Kitchen waste is the major

waste in terms of volume and quantity of the selected households. It accounts for nearly

85% of the total waste. Packing waste (7%) is next to kitchen waste. Plastic content is 3%

whereas paper waste is 2 % only. The remaining 2% are other wastes, which include

battery, dust etc.

Table: 3 Types of Waste and their Proportion in all Zones

Waste types Average per

HH per day

(Kg.)

Std. Dev Min Max Total waste

(Kg)

Per Capita

Waste per

day

(Kg.)

Kitchen

waste

1.63 1.01 0.30 8.5 703.8 (85) 0.24

Packing

waste

0.14 0.26 0 3.02 59.85 (7) 0.02

Plastic 0.14 0.26 0 2.05 22.71 (3) 0.01

Paper 0.04 0.13 0 2 16.27 (2) 0.01

Other Waste 0.05 0.22 0 3.02 21.57 (3) 0.01

Total Waste 1.91 1.27 0.33 9.15 824.14 (100) 0.29

Figure within brackets indicate percentage

7

2.2 Existing Waste Management Practices

2.2.1 Separation Practice

Table 4 shows about the separation practices of the sample households. Among the sample

households, only 31% of the households reported having separate bins for storage of

different types of waste and the remaining households do not have any separate bins. Thus

the majority of the households leave their mixed wastes at one place or in plastic bags.

Though only 31% households have separate bins, about 65% separate the reusable and

recyclable wastes. Among the zones the households having separate bins is the highest

(49%) in the middle zone, lowest (7%) in the outer zone and moderate (32%) in core zone.

The separation practice is the highest (81%) in the core zone, lowest (52%) in outer zone

and moderate (62%) in middle zone.

Table 4: Separation Practices of the Households

Zones Separate bin Separation practice

Yes No Yes No

All zones 135 (31) 297 (69) 280 (65) 152 (35)

Core 41(32) 88 (68) 105 (81) 24 (19)

Middle 85 (49) 88 (51) 107 (62) 66 (38)

Outer 9 (7) 121 (93) 68 (52) 62 (48)

Figures within brackets indicate percentage and absolute number indicate the number of

households

2.2.2 Door-to-Door Collection:

About 57% of the households are served by the door-to-door collection system. The

majority of them receive the service by paying the fee and few are receiving the service not

because of the fee but because of the location of their house along the road. Municipal

collectors provide the service without receiving any bonus since they are the employees of

the municipality.

Table 5: Door-to-Door Collection and Disposal of Waste

8

Zones Satisfied with the present collection

system

Environmentally safe disposal of the

collected waste

Total No. of HH

with Door to

Door Collection

Satisfied Not

Satisfied

Yes No Don't know

All

zones

245 (100) 207 (84) 38 (16) 18 (7) 46 (19) 181 (74)

Core 87 (100) 77 (88) 10 (12) 13

(15)

7 (8) 67 (77)

Middle 116 (100) 103 (89) 13 (11) 4 (3.4) 26

(22.4)

86 (74.2)

Outer 42 (100) 27 (64) 15 (36) 1 (2) 13 (31) 28 (67)

Absolute number indicate the number of households and Figure within bracket indicate

percentages

The perception of the households towards the present collection system was also captured

through the questionnaire. Table 5 shows that most households (86%) were satisfied with

the present door-to-door collection system. Only 14% were not satisfied. However, very

few households (25%) know where the collected waste is disposed. Only 7% feel that the

disposal of such collected waste is environmentally safe, 19% feel that the disposal of such

collected waste is not environmentally safe and the remaining 74% could not explain

whether it is environmentally safe or not (Table 5). Table 5 also shows the zone-wise

details regarding the knowledge on the disposal of the collected waste. The percentage of

unsatisfied households is higher in the outer zone relative to the core and middle zones.

2.2.3 Waste Collection and Collectors

About 56 % households are served by the door-to-door collection system. Among them 35

% use the municipal collection system and the remaining uses the private collectors

including community-based organizations. Table 6 shows the detail regarding the waste

collection and collectors in the sample households. Among the zones, municipal collectors

are collecting wastes in the core area whereas NGOs plays dominant roles in the middle

zone and a private firm is working in the outer zone. The majority of the private collectors

collect the waste 3 times a week and municipal collectors collect the waste every day.

9

Table 6: Waste Collectors and Collection Frequency

Zones Collectors Collection Frequency in a week

Municip

al

collector

s

Wage

Worke

rs

NGO CDC Pvt 0 2 3 4 6 7

All

zone

87 (35) 4 (2) 91

(37)

17

(7)

46

(19)

18

7

(43

)

4 (2) 142

(58)

4

(2)

10

(4)

85

(34)

Core 79 (91) 4 (4.5) 0 0 4

(4.5)

42

(33

)

3 (3) 2 (2) 0 9

(11

)

73

(84)

Middl

e

8 (7) 0 91

(78)

17

(15)

0 57

(33

)

0 99 (85) 2

(2)

1(1

)

14

(12)

Outer 0 0 0 0 42

(100)

88

(68

)

0 42

(100)

0 0 0

Where, CDC=Community Development Committee and Pvt.= Private, NGO= Non-

Government Organization

Absolute number indicate the number of households and Figure within brackets indicate

percentages

2.2.4 Management of Waste where no door to door collection

Among the households surveyed about 43 % do not have door-to-door collection system.

Table 7 shows the detail regarding management practices of sample households.

10

Households that are not practicing door-to-door collection are managing their waste in

different ways (e.g. burying in their own land, composting and burning).

Table 7: Waste Management in households, which have no Door-to-

Door Collection System

Management Practices Total Number

of HH

Core Middle Outer

Total No of HH with No door

collection system

187 42 57 88

Throwing in the Container 18 (4) 4 (8) 7 (5) 7 (3)

Throwing in the road 69 (16) 25 (50) 22 (14) 22 (10)

Throwing in open field 55 (13) 8 (16) 23 (15) 24 (11)

Burying in own land 92 (22) 4 (8) 36 (24) 52 (24)

Prepare the compost from waste 45 (11) 3 (6) 22 (14) 20 (9)

Cattle feeding 8 (2) 0 5 (3) 3 (1)

Burn 109 (25) 4 (8) 35 (23) 70 (32)

Throw in the river 28 (7) 2 (4) 3 (2) 23 (10)

Total no of HH with different

practices

424 (100) 50 (100) 153 (100) 221 (100)

Absolute number indicate the number of households and Figure within brackets indicate

percentage

2.3. Waste Generation and its Relationship with Socio-Economic Variables

This section, mainly discusses the empirical analysis of the relationships of quantity and

composition of household solid waste to selected social and economic variables. The

analysis is based on data for components of household wastes, by type of material judged

having recycling potential.

2.3.1 Model, Hypothesis and Data

Normally waste is a function of consumption. The relationship between waste and

consumption activities may be expressed as (Richardson et al. 1978):

11

W=C

Where,

W = vector of components of solid waste

= Vector of technical waste transformation coefficients relating the types and quantities

of solid waste to each consumption activity

C = is a vector of consumption activities selected by the household.

Any particular waste may be generated by the consumption of more than one commodity.

Here no attempt is made to identify the technical waste transformation coefficients

associated with the individual products. It mainly tries to compare the relationship between

different types of waste generation and socio-economic variables affecting the quantity of

waste.

The major determinants of household consumption activities are assumed to be household

monthly income (TOTI), size of the household (TOTPOP), educational status of the

household (GRAD) and extra land area in the house compound (EXTLA). The model for

the waste component is:

TOTW = 0 + 1TOTI + 2TOTPOP + 3 GRAD + 4 EXTLA+5 CS+e

Where:

TOTW = quantity of waste per household per day (Kg)

TOTI= Monthly income of the household (Rs.)

TOTPOP= Household size (numbers of persons)

GRAD= Educational status, (number of college graduates)

EXTLA = Extra land area within the compound of the selected household (ha.)

Here household is assumed as a production unit producing solid wastes.

The hypothesis is as follows:

1. Increase in income is expected to increase the demand for convenience factors and

services embodied in commodities. The sign of the coefficient is expected to be

positive for all types of waste.

12

2. A larger household size is expected to generate higher quantity of waste since more

households are included in the unit; thus, the sign is also expected to be positive.

3. Educated household members work in the office and stay outside of the house for a

long time. So the waste generation will be low. However, the generation of packing

waste may be higher in case of a fully employed family as they have less time to

prepare food. As such, they consume more packed food.

4. It is assumed that higher the extra land area within the compound (EXTLA) less the

waste generated by the household. It is also assumed that the household with extra

land area may dispose some of the waste in their land, which may not be counted in

the total volume of waste generated. Thus extra land area and the total quantity of

waste are inversely related and the sign of the coefficient of extra land area will be

negative.

Data for the analysis were collected from the 432 households in 2001. Attempt has been

made to cover all the area within the city i.e. the data will represent the core, middle and

outer settlements. To calculate the quantity of waste sample households were given plastic

bags and requested for the collection of waste in these bags and the waste was weighed the

next day.

2.3.2 Equation Results:

The estimated coefficients, coefficients of determination (R2), adjusted for degrees of

freedom (R¯2) and t and F values are shown in Table 8.

Table 8: Relationship of Waste and Socio-Economic Variables by Zones

Waste

Component

Interce

pt

Househo

ld

Income

(TOTI)

HH size

(TOTPO

P)

Extra

land

(EXTL

A)

Educatio

n

(GRAD)

D

W

R¯2 F

TOTW (all -2.70 0.26 0.49 0.08 - 1.8 0.25 38

13

zones) (7.6) (6.24) (8.5) (1.58) 0.14(2.7)

TOTW

(Core)

-2.19

(-3.8)

0.19

(2.79)

0.52

(5.8)

-0.84

(-1.9)

-0.03

(-0.37)

2.0 0.38 18

TOTW

(Middle)

-2.7

(-3.6)

0.26

(3.04)

0.50

(5.5)

0.04

(0.47)

-0.32

(-3.72)

1.7 0.27 16

TOTW

(Outer)

-3.87

(-6.2)

0.41

(6.08)

0.38

(2.79)

0.09

(1.04)

0.05

(0.58)

2.0 0.27 13

Figure within bracket indicate 't' value

Table 8 shows that generation of waste is related to the total income and total population of

the household. The elasticity of the household size is higher relative to the elasticity of the

total income in all the zones except outer zone. However, the elasticity of income is higher

than the elasticity of the household size in the outer zone. Extra land area has positive but

insignificant effect in all the zones except the core zone. In the core zone as there are very

few households with extra land area, the result will not be useful in the analysis.

2.4 Economics of Solid Waste Management

2.4.1 Willingness to Pay

One of the features of the questionnaire was to find out the "willingness to pay (WTP)" of

the residents for the management of waste. The majority of them do not care on the final

disposal of the waste. Table 9 shows about the participation in fee collection system and

their willingness to pay. About 49 % households participate in the fee based collection

system and are paying an average of Rs. 60 per month for collection of their wastes.

However, the participation rate is different for different zones. About 67 % are

participating in middle and core zone, while in the outer zone the participation is only 32

%. Forty seven percent households are ready to pay for the better management of waste and

the average amount of WTP is Rs. 57 per month.

Table 9: Participation in Fee collection system and willingness to pay

14

Zone People actually participating the fee collection system

People ready to pay and amount of willingness to pay

Total WTP which includes Willingness to additional pay and the monthly fee

Number of HH

Average fee in Rs.

Tot. Ave

Number of HH

Average wtp in Rs.

Tot Ave

Number

Average Amountin Rs.

Tot. Ave

All

Zone

213 (49) 60 30 202

(47)

57 27 336

(78)

72 57

Core 87 (67) 23 16 89 (69) 60 41 111(86

)

66 57

Middl

e

116 (67) 67 45 47 (27) 51 14 136

(79)

74 58

Outer 42 (32) 74 24 66 (51) 57 29 89 (68) 77 53

Figure within brackets indicate percentage

Here too the zone wise situation is different. The majority of the households who were

paying fees for the collection of waste were ready to pay only the amount, which they were

paying, as they did not find any problem regarding collection of their waste. Those who

were not participating in the fee collection system were also ready to pay only near about

the fee amount, which their neighbors were paying. The total willingness to pay is the

amount of the actual fee and the amount of willingness to pay since the question was about

the willingness to pay over and above the existing fee for the better management of the

waste. About 78 % of the sample households are willing to pay for the management of the

waste and the average amount is Rs. 72 while the amount is Rs. 66 in the core, Rs. 74 in

the middle and Rs. 77 in the outer zones.

The average value of the Total willingness to pay is not equal to the sum of the average

values of the fee and willingness to pay. The households who are willing to pay are mainly

those who are not participating in the fee-based door-to-door collection system. However,

they were questioned on the additional willingness to pay for the better management of the

waste and some have expressed the willingness to pay. Some expressed that they could not

15

pay more than the present fee. Thus, the average figure is calculated by dividing the

applicable number of households and not all the households. Table 10 shows the total

average. The average total willingness to pay is only Rs. 57. The average total fee is Rs. 30

and the average amount of willingness to pay is only Rs. 27.

While asking the question, the WTP amount was started from Rs.50 but some of the

households gave very low figures as their WTP for the waste management. In the core city

area the municipal collection system is regular but still the households are willing to pay

only a small amount for the collection of their waste. Normally, the municipal employee

themselves collect the waste and get nominal amount as tips from the house owners.

In the fee structure, households who are paying fees below Rs. 25 are mainly the residences

of the core city area. They pay a very small amount of fee for the collection of the waste to

the municipal employee. The municipal employees are also happy as they get an extra

bonus.

The number of the households having door-to-door collection system is slightly higher than

the number of households participating in the fee-based door-to-door collection system. It

is because the core city households have reported that they have door-to-door collection

system but are not paying any fee as they live very close to the collection point.

2.4.2 Willingness to Pay and its Relationship with Other Variables:

A regression analysis was made with the help of the SPSS window program. "Willingness

to Pay" was regressed with the Total Income of the household (TOTI), time required to

reach the municipal collection center (TTR), extra land area around the house (EXTLA),

and the collage graduate people (GRAD). Consciousness Training (COTR) was taken as a

dummy variable. Certain hypothesis was made regarding the coefficient of the independent

variable.

The hypothesises are:

1 TOTI will positively affect the Willingness to Pay (TWTP) i.e. higher the income

higher will be WTP for better management of the waste

2. TTR will also positively affect to WTP i.e. more the time needed for the disposal of

waste at the free collection center, higher the WTP for the collection and safe

disposal of the waste

16

3. COTR will also positively affect to WTP i.e. as people are more conscious

regarding the bad effects of haphazard disposal they are ready to pay more for

waste management.

4. EXTLA will be negatively related to WTP, i.e. higher the land area around the

house, lower will be the Willingness to Pay for waste disposal since people may

use their waste as a soil conditioner in the kitchen garden.

5. GRAD will also positively affect to the Willingness to Pay, i.e. educated people

will be cautious about the negative effects of haphazard waste disposal and are

ready to pay for better management of the waste.

6. The total quantity of the waste (TOTW) also has a positive relationship with WTP

i.e. higher the quantity of waste; higher will be the Willingness to pay for the

collection and management of the waste.

2.4.3 Willingness to Pay and its Relationship with Socio-Economic Variables

The regression results are presented in Table 10. The result of Equation 1 shows that

Willingness to Pay is positively related to the total income. The coefficient of income is

positive (0.28), which means that for a 100 % increase in income the WTP will increase by

28 % or to put it in another way, the elasticity of WTP with respect to income is 0.28. The

time needed to throw the waste in the public collection point has also a positive and

significant relationship with the Willingness to Pay. Greater the time required for throwing

the waste, greater the amount that people are willing to pay for better management of the

waste. The coefficient of time is .09, which shows that a 100 % increase in time will cause

9 % increase in the Willingness to pay for better management of the waste. Graduate

(GRAD) shows a positive relationship with WTP though it is very insignificant.

Households having extra land areas have positive but insignificant effects. During the

survey, it was found that the majority of the rich households have extra land area and they

mainly want to throw the waste even if the organic content is high (see Eq. No 1 in Table

10). Similarly, COTR is negative, which is also contradictory to the assumption

(hypothesis). It may be because of the low quality of the training. In the survey it was

considered that those who have attended any program, which simply discussed about the

waste management or environmental issues, was considered as consciousness training. The

training was mainly by NGO or clubs, which were mainly motivated to make the

17

households participate in the fee-based collection system. Thus the quality of the training

may not be as desired and as such, it may not be able to have a positive effect. The total

explained portion of the adjusted R2 is 0.31 and F value is above 8 and is highly significant.

The Durbin-Watson Test is 1.69.

Table 10 Willingness to Pay and its Relationship with other VariablesEq.No Dep.

VariableIndependent Variables R 2 F d

wConst Toti Grad Ttr Extla Cotr Totw1 TWTP 1.86 0.28 0.03 0.09 0.01 -0.17 - 0.31 8 1.

62

't' value 4.95* 0.4 2.46* 0.38 -2.35**

2 TWTP 1.59 0.28 0.02 0.07 -0.001 - - 0.27 8 1.45

't' value 4.75* 0.256 1.96**

-.036 - -

3 TWTP 1.62 0.35 - 0.06 0.05 - -0.11 0.14 7 1.54

't' value 5.31* - 1.31 1.33 - -1.91**

4 TWTP 1.45 0.25 0.39 0.11 -0.04 - - 0.32 4 1.55

't' value 2.44* 1.32 2.16**

-0.96 - -

* Significant at 99 % level of significance** Significance at 95% level of significance

If one variable is dropped i.e. variable COTR, the regression result is shown in Equation 2,

Table 10. The total income and time needed to reach the municipal collection center are

significant and land area other than house and education has an insignificant effect on the

Willingness to Pay.

An attempt was made to see the relationship of total waste and total willingness to pay. If

we look at the regression result after adding total waste (TOTW) as an independent

18

variable, it shows a negative relation with Willingness to Pay. This shows that the volume

and quantity of waste have a very low effect on the Willingness to Pay. It seems to be true

in this context since the ability to pay is very important for the Willingness to Pay. The rich

people may be generating low volume of waste and the poor may be generating high

volume of waste since waste volume/quantity is highly related with the size of the

population (Equation 3, Table 10).

An attempt was made to see the relationship between wealth and the Total Willingness To

Pay (TWTP). The possession of different assets was taken as the proxy for wealth. The

possession of only a TV is considered as a poor household and the possession of a car,

computer, motorcycle, refrigerator etc. by households were considered rich and households

between these are considered as middle-income groups.

Thus, regression was made with the households who possess only a TV. The Equation No.

4 (table 10) shows the relationship of TWTP and the independent variables in case of

those households, who possess only a TV.

The regression result shows that Total Income (TOTI) and Time required to dispose the

waste at the public collection center (TTR) have positive relations with TWTP as

hypothesized and are highly significant. Here extra land area has a negative coefficient,

which indicates that poor people use their waste in the kitchen garden as a soil conditioner

and are not willing to pay for waste management. The total explained portion of the

regression (i.e. adjusted R2) is 0.32. The value of F is around 4 and highly significant

(Equation 4, Table 10).

2.4.3 Relationship of WTP with Other Variables in Different Zones

The zone wise relationship of WTP with the variables is presented in table 11. The

regression results show that in the outer zone the extra land area has a negative effect on

TWTP. It shows that greater the extra land area, more the waste is used as compost and low

willingness to pay for waste management. Total income, time to dispose the waste and the

number of graduate members in the house have significant positive relations with the

willingness to pay which are as hypothesized. However, extra land area has a positive

relation with the willingness to pay in the core and middle areas. In the core area the

households with extra land area are very low in number (about 12 %). In the core area,

19

extra land area does not mean the availability of a kitchen garden. The land is for the car

parking or for the chouk2.

Table 11 Willingness to Pay and its Relation with other Variables by

Zones

Zone Dep. Var

Adj.R2

DW F Const Coefficient of Independent Variable

LEXTRA LTTR LTOT

I

LGRA

D

Total LTWT

P

0.27 1.4

5

8.6 1.59 -001 0.07** 0.28* 0.02

Outer LTWT

P

0.57 0.9

9

25 -0.12 -0.05 0.10 0.47* 0.03

Core LTWT

P

0.62 5 2.94 1.29* 0.34** 0.52* -0.73*

Middl

e

LTWT

P

0.25 1.9

5

2.85 2.77 0.01 0.03 0.16** 0.19**

* Significant at 99 % level of significance

** significance at 95 % level of significance

Thus, the waste will not be used in the extra land area and may not be true for our

assumption. In the middle area also, the coefficient of the variable extra land area possesses

the positive sign against the hypothesis. It may be because the area is very small and used

for other than kitchen garden purposes. As such the waste may not be used in the extra land

as compost, but rather prefer to through the waste out. The coefficient of the graduate

people has a positive sign in all cases except for one case of the core area. Though the

value is insignificant, it indicates that though people are college graduate they do not take

the case of waste management seriously. It also may be because the respondent may not be

a college graduate even if the house members are graduates. Thus, though many household

members are college graduates, they do not care about waste management. One of the

reasons of unwillingness to pay may be because they feel the waste management problem

2 Chouk is an open space between few houses in the core city area.

20

is not their problem. They may feel that it is the duty of the municipality, since the

municipality has managing it for a long time without any fee charged to the generator.

2.4.4 Causes of Not Willing to Pay

Questions were asked regarding the unwillingness of the households to pay. Households

have given more than one reason for not willing to pay for the management of the waste.

Table 12 shows that the majority of the households (53%) were not willing to pay as their

waste was collected and they do not have any problems from the waste. Some (21%) of

them do not feel the problem from the waste since they have sufficient space to throw the

waste either within their compound or outside. Few households were not ready to pay, as

their income was very low. They account for only 12 % among the unwilling households (8

% of the total surveyed households). They feel that their priority is hand to mouth survival

and not the waste. Very few households feel that it is the duty of the municipality and the

government and so they are not willing to pay.

Table: 12 Causes of not willing to pay

Causes Total Number of HH

Core Middle Outer

It is the duty of the Municipality 14 (5) 1 (2) 6 (4) 7 (8)

It is the duty of the government 2 (1) 0 2 (1) 0

Income is very low and could not

afford

35 (12) 6 (12) 7 (4) 22 (25)

My house's waste had not made any

problem to me

62 (21) 8 (17) 28 (17) 26 (30)

Waste collection is continue in one

or other way and no other problem

158 (53) 31 (65) 103 (64) 24 (28)

Volume and quantity is very low 7 (2) 2 (4) 1 (1) 4 (4.5)

Majority of waste is reusable and

applicable to own self

19 (6) 0 15 (9) 4 (4.5)

Absolute number indicate number of households and Figure within bracket indicate

percentage

3. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

21

The per capita waste generation is 0.29 kg./person/day in all the zones of the city. It seems

to be slightly lower than that of the earlier studies (0.46-0.5 kg./person/day) (Rai, 1990;

RESTUC, 2000) and higher than the recent study of the Municipality. Recent study by

Kathmandu Metropolitan City also shows the low rate of waste generation (0.225

kg./person/day) (KMC/KVMP 2001). The low per capita waste generation may be due to

the increase in household sorting of paper and bottles at the point of generation since they

are easily sellable. The per capita waste generation is found to be the lowest in the core

zone and highest in the outer zone. It was also found that segregation practices are the

highest in the core zone relative to other zones. Thus, the low per capita waste generation

in the core zone may be due to the household sorting of waste more intensively in the core

zone than in other zones. This may also be true because the core zone people have been

facing the waste problem since a long time whereas the outer and middle zone people have

open space and have no problem of waste disposal. Thus, as there is more open space

people usually generate more and vice versa.

About 57 % households are participating in the door-to-door collection by paying certain

fee. However, people are not much aware of the environmental problems and safe disposal

of the waste. It still shows that the households of Kathamndu have the feeling of NIMBAY

(i.e. not in my backyard). About 75 % of the city people do not know where the collected

waste is disposed. In terms of zones, people living in the core zone seem to be less aware

than in other zones. This shows that people are conscious regarding the waste problem

within their compound but they do not care where and how the waste is disposed. Few

people know about the disposal place of the collected waste. However, those who know the

disposal site do not know whether the disposal practice is environmentally safe or not.

More than 90 % of waste collectors are municipal workers in the core zone where as their

proportion in other zone is negligible. In the middle zone it is a NGO (SILT Environment),

which covers 78 % of the households practicing door -to-door collection, and a private firm

is collecting waste from the outer zone.

In the core zone households, which are not participating in the door-to-door collection

system, are managing their wastes mostly by throwing it on the streets. Whereas in the

middle and outer zones the majority households are managing their wastes either by

burying or burning on their land. They also prepare compost within the compound.

22

The waste component relationship shows that size of the household and income are the

major factor determining the total quantity of the waste in all the zones. It was also found

that education has a negative effect on waste generation.

About 80 % of the households are willing to pay for the better management of waste. The

average amount of only households who are Willingness to Pay is Rs. 72 per month.

However, it we take the average of all the households WTP is Rs. 57 per household. The

willingness to pay is highest in the outer zone and lowest in the core zone. It may be due to

the free3 collection by the municipality that the core people are not willing to pay.

However, in the middle and outer zones the municipality rarely collects the waste. Thus the

willingness to pay is higher in outer and middle zones and lower in the core zone. Again

the environmental awareness of the households seems to be very low and due to this they

are willing to pay for environmentally safe land filling. However, they simply want the

waste to be out from their house. They are ready to pay only for this. Thus, the average

willingness to pay seems to be lower than that of the cost required for the management of

the waste. The Willingness to pay is also positively related to the household income and

household size.

Most households feel that the lack of stiff penalty and non-execution of law is the basic

problem for the effective management of waste. Thus, provision of strong penalties and

effective execution of the law will be the major tool to reduce the problem of solid waste

management in Kathmandu. It is found that environmental awareness is very low among

the residents of Kathmandu. Thus, stringent regulations with environmental awareness

programs for household sorting and composting can reduce the volume and quantity of

waste for land filling. It could be suggested that a fee be charged as per the electricity or

water bill to the households to cover the costs, since the willingness to pay is positively

related to the level of income. At the initial stage only regular direct cost should be covered

by the charge and fixed cost as well as environmental costs should be subsidized. Other

wise there will be the possibility of illegal dumping. After the successful implementation of

this scheme then only full cost pricing of the solid waste generation should be initiated and

3 In the core zone the area coverage by the ward is very small and the municipality with some subsidy collects the waste by its tractors along the road and majority of the households are covered. Where as in middle and outer zone the area coverage by the ward is high and municipality rarely collects the waste from the door of the households.

23

this will be the only sustainable way for the better management of waste of Kathmandu

Metropolis.

24

References

Agrawal, G. N. et al. ( September, 1982) "Report on Proposal for Solid Waste Disposal Fee

for Kathmandu/Lalitpur Town Panchayats" Report Submitted to Nepal Solid Waste

Management Project, His Majesty's Government/Nepal, Ministry of Works and Transport,

Department of Housing, Building and Physical Planning and Federal Republic of Germany,

German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ) LTD.

Beede, D. N.; D. E. Bloom (1995), "The Economics of Municipal Waste" The World Bank

research Observer , Vol. 10, No. 2, pp 113-150

Betts, Mitchel et al (1982) Report of an Evaluation of the Project " Solid Waste

Management in the Kathmandu Valley" GTX Project No. 76. 2051.1

Beukering, Piter Van et.al., ( 1999) Analysing Urban Solid Waste in Developing Countries:

a Perspective on Banglore, India, Working Paper No. 24, Collaborative Research in the

Economics of Environment and Development (CREED), London.

Enayetullah, Iftekhar and A. H. Maqsood Sinha (2000) 'Community Based Decentralized

Composting: Experience of Waste Concern in Dhaka' in Sinha A. H.Maqsood et al. (Eds.)

Community Based Solid Waste Management: The Asian Experience, Waste Concern,

Dhaka, Bangladesh

Flinthoff, F. (1970) Assignment Report in the Solid Waste Management in Kathmandu

Who-Project Searo. 0150,

GTZ (1996) 'Report on Fact Finding Mission for the Solid Waste Management in Nepal'

Prepared on behalf of GTZ.

KMC/KVMP (2002) Special Cleaning Program for SAARC Summit, Kathmandu

Metropolitan City/ Kathmandu Valley Mapping Project, Kathmandu

Lal, Mewa (2000) 'Profits from Waste: NGO Led Initiative for Solid Waste Management in

Lucknow' in Sinha A. H.Maqsood et al. (Eds.) Community Based Solid Waste

Management: The Asian Experience, Waste Concern, Dhaka, Bangladesh

25

Macauley, Molly K.; Margaret A. Walls (1995) Solid Waste Reduction and resource

Conservation: Assessment Policy, Resource for the Future Discussion Paper 95-32

Murtaza, Md. Gulam and Mohammad Abdur Rahman (2000) 'Solid Waste Management in

Khulana City and a Case Study of a CBO: Amader Paribartan' in Sinha A. H.Maqsood et

al. (Eds.) Community Based Solid Waste Management: The Asian Experience, Waste

Concern, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Nirmal, M.B. (2000) 'Community Based Solid Waste Management:: Experience of

Exnora' in Sinha A. H.Maqsood et al. (Eds.) Community Based Solid Waste Management:

The Asian Experience, Waste Concern, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Qureshi, Arjum Parvez (2000) 'Waste Busters: An Experience of Pakistan' in Sinha A.

H.Maqsood et al. (Eds.) Community Based Solid Waste Management: The Asian

Experience, Waste Concern, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Rai, Y.(1990) Statement on the Prospect of Further Vitalizing the Waste-Recycling concept

for Nepal, Report on the Workshop "Recycling of Waste in Nepal", SWMRMC,

Kathmandu.

RESTUC (2000) A Study of solid Waste and its Management in Kathmandu, Research and

Study Center (RESTUC); Kathmandu Nepal

Richardson, Robert A. (1978) Economic Analysis of the Composition of Household Solid

Wastes Journal of Environmental Economics and Mangement 5, 103-111, 1978

Sinha, A.H. Maqsood et al (eds.) (2000) Community Based Solid Waste Management: The

Asian Experience, Waste Concern, Dhaka , Bangladesh

Solid Waste Management Board (SWMB) and (GTZ) Gmbh (1984) Solid Waste

Collection Fee, SWMB and GTZ

SWMB and GTZ (1985) Report on Service Fee Collection, SWMB and GTZ.

Tabasaran, O (1976) Experts Report on the Reorganization of Solid Waste Disposal in the

Kathmandu - Valley especially in the Cities of Kathmandu, Patan and Bhaktapur; Report

submitted to German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ) and His Majesty's

Government of Nepal.

26

Tabasaran, O. et al. (1981) Report Regarding the Possibility of Composting of Municipal

Refuse in Kathmandu Valley Especially in Kathmandu, Patan and Bhaktapur, Report

submitted to the His Majesty's Government of Nepal and GTZ.

Thapa, Gopal B. and Surendra Raj Devkota (1999) " Managing Solid Waste in Metro

Kathmandu" Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology

Timilsina B. P. (2000) 'Reuse and Recycling: Options for Waste Diversion from

Landfilling- A Case Analysis in Kathmandu Valley' A Journal of Environment, Ministry of

Population and Environment, Nepal

Tuladhar, Bhusan (1996) ' Kathmandu's garbage simple solution going to waste', Studies in

Nepali History and Society Vol.1, No. 2, A Mandala Book Point Journal

Wertz L. Kenneth; 1976 Economic Factors Influencing Household’s Production of Refuse’

JEEM 2, 263-272 (1976)

Waste management refers to the collection, transportation, processing, recycling

and disposal of waste materials. These waste materials are solid, liquid, gaseous

and even radioactive substances. Managing these human-generated wastes

requires reducing their effect on health and the environment as well as recovering

resources from it. There are existing waste management methods that include

disposal methods, recycling methods and avoidance and reduction methods.

Despite the fact that waste handling and transport varies from region-to-region,

country-to-country, there are waste management concepts that are universally

accepted and implemented.

These are the waste hierarchy or the 3Rs (reduce, reuse and recycle), the extended producer responsibility (EPR) and the polluter pays principle. Consolidating the matter directed on the implementation of a solid waste management program in every region in every country. Solid waste management programs, in particular, are designed to better manage solid wastes for the purpose of protecting communities and enhancing the public health and the environment.

27

In Asia however, there are emerging waste management trends in respond

to daily generation of municipal solid waste at

760, 000 tonnes and therefore contributing to financial burden of the governments. The very premise is that though governments are responsible for

solid waste management by and large, these governments lack capacity to do such and thus requires the involvement of other levels of government, businesses and the general community. The rationale behind this qualitative research focuses on exploring how five Asian governments (to be sampled) ensure the protection of the public health and environment and how they utilize environmentally-sound

methods of managing solid wastes. The drive is to determine how these governments act on solid waste avoidance and volume reduction as well as minimizing waste measures. How these governments adhere to best environmental practices and encourage cooperation among various sectors will be also addressed. http://ivythesis.typepad.com/term_paper_topics/2008/08/solid-waste-man.html

Chapter 1THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTINGBackground of the StudyZero Waste is a philosophy that encourages the redesign of resource lifecycles so that all products are reused. In industry, this process involves creatingcommodities out of traditional waste product, especially making old outputs andnew inputs for similar or different industrial sectors. It can represent an economicalalternative to waste systems, where new resources are continually required toreplenish wasted row materials, (www.wikipedia.com).Recycling has become a national habit, a daily ritual practiced by over 100million people every day. Yet recycling alone will not end our dependency onlandfills and incinerators, nor reverse the rapid depletion of our natural resources.As world population and consumption continue to rise, it is clear that our one-waysystem of extracting virgin resources to make packaging and products that will later be buried or burned is not sustainable. Zero Waste is a new way of looking atour waste s t ream. Ins tead o f see ing used mater ia l s as garbage in need o f  disposal, discards are seen as valuable resources. A pile of "trash" represents jobs, financial opportunity, and raw material for new products. Other countriesaround the wor ld and some U.S . communi t ies have begun to eva luate andredesign their current systems to encourage resource recovery and to create amore materials-efficient economy. American companies who do business overseasare already redesigning their products and manufacturing processes to meet the

28

Zero Waste standards adopted by other countries. If they can do it there, they cando it here, (http://www.ecocycle.org/ZeroWaste/index.cfm).Spectrum Blue Steel Corporation announced the launch of the Blueprint for Zero Waste Philippines. Under the Arroyo administration, the Philippines haves e e n s o a r i n g e n e r g y c o s t s . T h e g o v e r n m e n t h a s c o m m i t t e d t o m o v i n g t o renewable energy under the Medium Term Development Plan for the Philippines.Spectrum Blue Steel has an exclusive license from the Global Environment EnergyC o r p o r a t i o n t o u s e t h e b i o s p h e r e p r o c e s s i n t h e P h i l i p p i n e s , (www.matternetwork.com/2008/8/philippines-move-toward-zero-waste.cfm)In Tagum C i ty , a f ter three years o f implementat ion o f the So l id WasteManagement Program, the City Government’s spending for garbage collection isnow P3 million less than its P17 million annual budget. At least seven of nine urbanbarangays are now earning from recyclable waste materials. Under the R.A. 9003or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, every barangay or cluster of barangays is mandated to put up its own material recovery facility (MRF). MRFis where waste segregation, recycling, composting of biodegradable waste andstoring of recyclable materials are supposed to be made. In 2006, the City Councilof Tagum passed Ordinance No.229”establishing the comprehensive Solid WasteM a n a g e m e n t o f t h e C i t y o f T a g u m ” . U n d e r t h e O r d i n a n c e , a S o l i d W a s t e Management board was created, composing the City Mayor, city councilors, non-g o v e r n m e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , b a r a n g a y f e d e r a t i o n p r e s i d e n t , manufacturing representative and recycling industry representative, (Pantaleon A.,2008).

We are motivated to conduct the study about the Student’s Perception of the Zero Waste Management to enable us to determine the students’ different reactions towards the implementation of such policy, and as well as to evaluate theeffectiveness of Zero Waste Management among the student’s of the differentdepartments from elementary to college.Statement of the ProblemThis study aims to determine the relationship of Student’s Perception andZero-Waste Management implementation in St. Mary’s College.Specifically, this answers the following questions:1.What is the extent of Student’s Perception?2 . W h a t i s t h e e x t e n t o f Z e r o - W a s t e M a n a g e m e n t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n i n S t . Mary’s College in terms of:2.1Information Dissemination2.2Processing/ Implementation of the Project2.3Policy and Enforcement?3.Is there a significant difference on the extent of Student’s Perception whenanalyzed according to department and gender?4.

29

Is there a significant difference on the extent of Zero-Waste Managementi m p l e m e n t a t i o n i n S t . M a r y ’ s C o l l e g e w h e n a n a l y z e d a c c o r d i n g t o department and gender?5.I s t h e r e a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e e x t e n t o f Z e r o W a s t e Management implementation and the extent of student’s perception.Hypotheses1.There is no significant difference on the extent of student’s perception whenanalyzed according to department and gender.2.There is no significant difference on the extent of Zero-Waste Managementimplementation when analyzed according to department and gender.3 . T h e r e i s n o s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e e x t e n t o f Z e r o W a s t e Management implementation and the extent of student’s perception.Review of Related LiteratureThis present furthers information that is relevant to the present study. Theseare facts taken from books, journals, internet, and different authorities that will strengthen the validity of results.Zero Waste Management.According to the study conducted by James Lactao(2008), unlike the garbage of long ago, our present rubbish includes syntheticmaterials that keep piling up unlike natural ones that degrade and eventually returnto earth. Thus, disposal becomes a problem. Aside from this, garbage is also ahealth hazard- being a melting pot of all sorts of disease. As today’s throwawaysociety consumes more and more products, we also generate more and morewaste. Much of this waste gets burned in incinerators or buried in landfills, causinga series of environmental problems including water pollution and loss of openspace,Sheehan (2000), According to the latest concepts, waste is a visible face of inefficiency in terms of material utilization. Waste handling is a major concern,e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e i m p r o p e r w a s t e t r e a t m e n t c a u s e s i n c r e a s e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l deterioration. The last few decades have seen the emergence of new measures tohandle waste effectively, but most of them are not flawless. “Zero waste”, aninnovation of the 1990s in waste handling, emphasizes planning for the eliminationof waste rather than managing waste.According to Carolyn Allen (2006), the Zero Waste International Alliance,means that zero waste is the designing and managing products and processes toreduce the volume and toxicity of waste and materials, conserve and recover allresources , and not burn or bury them. The s imple techno logy and methods required to achieve Zero Waste exist in every community around the world.Zero Waste Management Group (2008), Environmental sustainability andwaste management are the most important issues of our time. An important stept o w a r d s a c h i e v i n g e n v i r o n m e n t a l s u s t a i n a b i l i t y a n d r e s p o n s i b l e w a s t e management involves reducing our impact on the environment. It is through thesuccessful implementation of our waste management and diversion programs thatwe commit ourselves to continually satisfy our client's needs. The main principalst h a t a r e e m p l o y e d b y Z e r o W a s t e M a n a g e m e n t G r o u p i n v o l v e r e s o u r c e preservation and waste reduction. These are the core fundamental

30

components of the 'Zero Waste Philosophy'. This is done by means of recycling all potential wasteand reusing those materials in different ways, creating a circular system of use andre-use. Implementing this philosophy, bring solutions to all segments of society.Th is i s demonst rated by our commitment to work w i th and prov i de e f f i c ientsolutions to individuals, groups and municipalities.Zero Waste is a critical stepping-stone to other necessary steps in theefforts to protect health, improve equity and reach sustainability. Zero Waste canbe linked to sustainable agriculture, architecture, energy, industrial, economic andcommunity development. Every single person in the world makes waste and assuch is part of a non-sustainable society. However, with good political leadership,everyone could be engaged in the necessary shift towards a sustainable society.Good political leadership in this matter involves treating citizens as key allies toprotect human hea l th and the env i ronment and in mak ing the t rans i t ion to a sustainable future. Governments need to “govern” rather than attempt to “manage”th is change to susta inab le resource conservat ion pract ices . Th is inc ludes asignificant investment in public outreach and education so that citizens can helpc o m m u n i t i e s m a k e t h e m o s t i n f o r m e d c h o i c e s . (http://www.zwia.org/main/index.php? option=com_content&view=article&id=51&Itemid=58).Over the last few decades, the dumping and burning of garbage generatedin cities, towns and villages in wetlands and waterbodies, have resulted in seriousa i r , s o i l a n d w a t e r p o l l u t i o n . Z e r o W a s t e M a n a g e m e n t i s a n e w s y s t e m o f   manag ing so l id waste , wh ich s t r ives fo r max imum waste recovery throughrecycling and reuse, aiming at ‘zero’ waste to be disposed onto dump yards andlandfills. All over the world, Zero Waste Management has been accepted (and isbeing practiced) as the best solution to the problem of waste, for the followingreasons. Waste is segregated and resources are recovered through composting of organic waste and recycling of inorganic waste. Compost generated through ZeroWaste Management is used to promote organic farming, bringing down the use of chemicals in agriculture. Zero Waste Management helps reduce the rate of virginr a w m a t e r i a l e x t r a c t i o n a n d r e s o u r c e d e p l e t i o n . Z e r o W a s t e M a n a g e m e n t minimizes waste disposal at dumpsites and reduces pollution of air, ground water a n d s o i l t h a t r e s u l t f r o m d u m p i n g . ( http://www.exnoragreencross- vellore.org/zero.html ).Studies have shown that waste disposal directly contributes to climatechange with the discharge of GHGs such as methane from dumps and landfills and carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide from incinerators. Waste disposal also indirectlyd r i v e s c l i m a t e c h a n g e b y d e p r i v i n g t h e e c o n o m y o f r e u s e d , r e c y c l e d a n d composted materials.“By adopting Zero Waste, we cut greenhouse gas emissionsf rom waste d isposa l s i tes as we l l as f rom the energy- in tens ive

31

ext ract ion ,processing and transportation of virgin materials to replace the buried or burneddiscards,” Manny Calonzo, Co-Coordinator of the Global Alliance for Incinerator A l t e r n a t i v e s ( G A I A ) , a n o t h e r m e m b e r o f t h e E c o W a s t e C o a l i t i o n . (http://ecowastecoalition.blogspot.com/2009/06/green-groups-urge-shift-from- waste.html )Zero waste is a philosophy of waste management that aims to reduce totalamount o f waste to zero by redes ign ing resource-use systems. Rather thanmaintaining a linear waste system – you throw something away, it ends up in alandfill – zero waste initiatives work toward extending current practices of recyclingand reuse in to a c i rcu lar waste system.This stra tegy “maximizes recycling,minimizes waste, reduces consumption and ensures that products are made to ber e u s e d , r e p a i r e d o r r e c y c l e d b a c k i n t o n a t u r e o r t h e m a r k e t p l a c e . ” (http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/08/footprints-waste-management-taking- steps-toward-zero-waste.php ).Information Dissemination.A s e d u c a t i o n b e g i n s i n t h e h o m e , z e r o w a s t e management groups will initiate programs that will raise awareness of recyclingand environmental issues that families can implement together. One such methodwill be the distributions recycling guides with tips on recycling and composting tohouseholds, schools and business in local communities. These easy-to-guides will inc rease awareness about the impor tance o f be ing env i ronmenta l ly f r iend lyhighlight the importance of reducing, reusing, and recycling the resources withoutcompromising daily routine, (http:/zerowastemg.com/communityinvolvement.ph/)Environmental education is an essential tool for achieving effective resourcemanagement and susta inab le deve lopment . Env i ronmenta l educat ion in i t sbroadcast sense encompasses awareness raising, acquiring new perspectives,values, knowledge and skills and both the formal and informal process that lead toc h a n g e d b e h a v i o r i n s u p p o r t o f s u s t a i n a b l e e n v i r o n m e n t , (http//www.crra.com/zerowaste/links/education.htm).Environmental information has been described as central to the issues of solid waste management and disposal. This study investigated the availability andaccessibility of environmental information to the solid waste policy formulators andi m p l e m e n t o r s w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e m e d i a / c h a n n e l s u s e d f o r d i s s e m i n a t i n g environmental information to the public. A descriptive survey design was adoptedfor the study. A purposive sampling technique was used to select the sample andthe method produced 205 respondents that consisted of 185 Policy Implementorsand 20 Policy Formulators. A total of 147 cases were finally analyzed, whichincluded 16 Policy Formulators (80% of total sample) and 131 Policy Implementors(71% of total sample). Data collected were analyzed using descriptive statisticssuch as percentages and f requency counts . F ind ings show that the

32

Po l i cy I m p l e m e n t o r s p r e f e r r e d t h e u s e o f p e r s o n a l c o n t a c t a s t h e c h a n n e l f o r   disseminating environmental information, whereas the Policy Formulators relied onthe use of posters, radio/TV talks, and professional meetings. Some barriers to disseminating information to the public included: lack of access to informationsources, lack of standards for acquisition of information, and lack of funds top u b l i s h i n f o r m a t i o n m a t e r i a l s . ( http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/ueec/2009/00000008/00000001/a rt00007 ).This individual achievement however would remain individual had it notbeen shared with the community. As soon as the use of fire was shared, the scopefor its future use and development was widened. Throughout time, other membersof the community would discover or come up with new practical application for it,l i ke cook ing and product ion o f too ls and i tems. These assoc ia te innovat ionsreinforced the initial idea, contributed to its use and were at least as significant asthe primary innovation. But the question remaining is what could have prompted allother communities to adopt the use of fire too? One can only speculate, but it maybe that fire with all its derivative uses gave communities that used it a competitiveadvantage. Better fed, better equipped, as these communities prospered over timeand migrated they simply either spread the knowledge of fire to others or triggeredtheir extinction. Perhaps some neighboring villages even stole fire, in an attempt toe v e n t h e o d d s .( http://www.kazakhstudents.org/all/other_topics/effects_of_environment_informatio n_dissemination_and_competition_on_the_pace_of_innovation_and _progress/)Information collection and storage involve the day-to-day processes of g a t h e r i n g a n d s t o r i n g d a t a f r o m o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s , p a r t n e r s , a n d stakeholders. More sensitive information being managed is usually personal i n f o r m a t i o n s u b j e c t t o t h e v a r i o u s s t a t e a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l p r i v a c y l a w s o r   information that is proprietary to a corporation or other organization. The variousstate and international privacy laws Information provisional impact levels aredocumented in the Personal Identity and Authentication information type. Suchinformation will often be assigned a moderate confidentiality impact level. Wherea n y o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n t o b e m a n a g e d c a n b e e x p e c t e d t o h a v e a h i g h confidentiality, impact level, then the information management information must beass igned a h igh confi dent ia l i ty impact leve l . When the data be ing managedb e l o n g s t o o n e o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n t y p e s d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s g u i d e l i n e , t h e confi dent ia l i ty impact ass igned to the sys tem is tha t o f the h ighest impact information type processed by the system.

33

Depending on the organization and themission being supported, the sensitivity of the information can range from none( p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n) t o h i g h .(http://www.unifiedcompliance.com/it_compliance/systems_info_class/information_   technology_managem/information_management.html)At Basingstoke and Deane we firmly believe in integrating environmentali ssues and act ion in to the cu l ture o f our borough . One o f the key fac to rs inachieving this is education with schools and colleges and working with businessesand the community. Another essential element is the enforcement of environmentallegislation. As part of our drive to make the borough of Basingstoke and Deane ac leaner and greener env i ronment we in tend to ta rget off enders who commitenv i ronmenta l c r ime . We work c lose ly w i th }cny externa l o rgan izat ions onenforcement rang ing f rom the Env i ronment Agency and t le Po l i ce to loca l landowners. Basingstoke and Deane also employs12two Dog Wárdens who arep p o v i f e d b y a c o n t r a c t or . (http2//www.bas)ngstoke.gov.uk/environment/envawareness/envenforcement.htm)Whilst ráising awareness, promoting a more responsible approach to our environment and educating youngsters are all means of reducing instances of l i t te r ing and dog fou l ing there w i l l a lways be those who re fuse to a l ter the i r  behavior. The enforcement powers of the wardens enable them to prosecuteindividuals for littering and dog fouling. Fixed penalty notices can also be issued tooffenders who are caught allowing their dogs to foul and not removing the waste or fa i l ing to d ispose o f the i r l i t te r in a cor rect manner . The amounts o f the fixed p e n a l t i e s a r e s e t b y t h e W e l s h A s s e m b l y . ( http://www.wrexham.gov.uk/english/env_services/community_services/amenity_wa rden.htm )Processing/ Implementation of the Project.I t typ ica l ly descr ibes the act o f   taking something through an established and usually routine set of procedures toc o n v e r t i t f r o m o n e f o r m t o a n o t h e r , a s a m a n u f a c t u r i n g o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e d u r e ( www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process(science); R e t r i e v e d , 2 0 1 0 ) T h e barangay i s respons ib le fo r the segregat ion o f waste at source , co l lec t ion o f  biodegradable and recyclable components and setting up of a materials recoveryfacility (MRF). There are about 976 MRFs nationwide. The municipality or cityg o v e r n m e n t s a r e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e c o l l e c t i o n a n d d i s p o s a l o f r e s i d u a l nonbiodegradable and hazardous waste, except inMetro Manilawhere disposal is w i t h i n t h e m a n d a t e o f t h e Met ro

34

Mani la De ve lop me n t Author i ty (MMDA).(http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php? title=National_Solid_Waste_Management_Commission)To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, The City has committed to the goalof closing the Albuquerque landfill by 2030 by diverting all material out of the wastestream or into a system to convert the waste to energy. In order to achieve theZero Waste goal for Albuquerque, aggressive steps need to be taken now. ZeroWaste can be achieved by recycling existing waste and reducing the need for r e c y c l i n g b y r e d u c i n g a n d r e u s i n g e x i s t i n g m a t e r i a l s . ( http://www.cabq.gov/cap/strategies/recycling-and-zero-waste/recycling-and-zero- waste )There are multiple solutions that Zero Waste Management Group providesto ach ieve env i ronmenta l susta inab i l i ty and waste management . The mainprincipals that are employed by Zero Waste Management Group involve resourcepreservation and waste reduction. These are the core fundamental components of t h e ' Z e r o W a s t e P h i l o s o p h y ' . O u r t e a m o f e x p e r i e n c e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s understands and lives by the Zero Waste Philosophy. Through rigorous researchand development we have created the"Zero Waste Solution". This is done bymeans of recycling all potential waste and reusing those materials in differentways, creating a circular system of use and re-use. Implementing this philosophy,we br ing so lu t ions to a l l segments o f soc ie ty . Th is i s demonst ra ted by our  commitment to work with and provide efficient solutions to individuals, groups andmunicipalities.(http://www.zerowastemg.com/about.php)Policy and Enforcement. En forcement as a mot ivat ing fac tor shou ld not beoverlooked. Behavior studies have shown that monetary incentives, both positive(rewards) and negative (fines) are effective motivators, especially if combined withother motivating factors, such as education (De Young, 1985-6). Furthermore,enforcement of requirements for adequate recycling collection and storage areas inmulti-family buildings can actually eliminate barriers to participation. Indeed it is inthe C i ty ’ s in terest to use a l l o f the too ls ava i lab le to encourage and enab le residents to recycle, reuse and compost properly. Only by doing so can we ensurethe success of a zero waste program. However, we should not overlook the factthat enforcement fine can be a valuable revenue enhancement tool that can helpt o f i n a n c e a z e r o w a s t e p r o g r a m . ( http://www.consumersunion.org/other/zero- waste/enforcement.html )Manchester is working hard to ensure that the city and it's wards are cleanand safe. Like any city, Manchester suffers from it's own share of environmentalcrime, perpetrated by the irresponsible few. Environmental Crime blights our city,causing eyesores, and more often than not a health or safety hazard. Our Teamsare working hard to

35

prosecute these offenders that damage, spoil and pollute thecommunity we live in.Manchester City Council takes a very strict enforcement approach againstp e o p l e w h o c o m m i t t h e s e c r i m e s . W o r k i n g t o g e t h e r , t h e E n v i r o n m e n t a l En forcement fami ly are respons ib le fo r invest igat ions to secure success fu lp r o s e c u t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o e n v i r o n m e n t a l c r i m e (http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/500012/environmental_enforcement/912/envir   onmental_crimes_and_enforcement/1 A local environmental enforcement program is a program that your localc o u n t y o r c i t y g o v e r n m e n t c a n i n i t i a t e t o c o m b a t i l l e g a l d u m p i n g i n y o u r   community. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources encourages localcommunities to start their own enforcement program to combat illegal dumping.The department retained the services of a consultant to produce a manual entitledHow to Establish and Operate an Environmental Enforcement Program. This is anin depth manual that is designed to help local governments start an enforcementprogram or improve an existing enforcement program to combat illegal dumping.From 2000 through 2002, twelve workshops held throughout the state explainedh o w t o s t a r t a n d i m p l e m e n t t h e p r o g r a m o u t l i n e d i n t h e m a n u a l .(http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/swmp/pubs-reports/litter.htm)Our Environmental Health Officers (EHOs) are local authority inspectors,who want you to meet all of the necessary requirements. If your organization ishigher risk (a factory, a building site, a mine, an offshore chemical plant and/or nuclear installation), then the Health and Safety Executive will be responsible for m o n i t o r i n g y o u .( http://www.eea.europa.eu/pressroom/speeches/information- dissemination-and- climate-change )

Theoretical and Conceptual FrameworkThis study is anchored on the theory of Florence Nightingale EnvironmentalTheory on which she linked health with five environmental factors: pure or fresh air,pure water, efficient drainage, cleanliness and light specially direct sunlight, (Kozier and Erb’s, 2008)

Significance of the Study

36

This study aims to determine the effectiveness of implementation of ZeroWaste Management to the student nurses at St. Mary’s College. Moreover theresult of this study will inspire the following:Students.T h e d a t a o f t h i s s t u d y w i l l p r o v i d e s t u d e n t s ’ a w a r e n e s s o f t h e i r   responsibility to the said project which is zero waste management.Teachers.The outcome will help the school teachers to promote the zero wastemanagement implementation towards the students, specifically the student nurses.School Administrators. The resu l t o f the s tudy can prov ide in format ion andfeedback to the administrators for them to know if the zero waste management iseffective or been improved.Definition of TermsFor easy unders tand ing , the major term used in th i s s tudy i s de f inedconceptually and operationally.Zero Waste Management. Is literally the process of managing waste materials(normally those produced as a result of human activities). It involves the collection,t r a n s p o r t , p r o c e s s i n g a n d / o r d i s p o s a l o f w a s t e m a t e r i a l s (www.wordiq.com/waste_management; Retreived,2010) . In th is s tudy i t re fers to the schools imperative method in the use of strategies to creating a garbage-freecampus, with the participation of every individual in the school who’s responsiblefor generating their own wastes. This includes proper segregation/disposal of garbage and enforcing disciplinary actions against those who violates.Information Dissemination.This is the process of distribution or spreading of information to the people or to the public to educate them about a specific issues,events, or facts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information;retrieved, 2010 ). In thisstudy, it refers to the massive and continuous information and education to alldepartment and offices, and all waste generators in which they are encouraged topractice reduction, reuse, and recycling of waster generated at source as ane f f e c t i v e m i n i m i z a t i o n t e c h n i q u e . I n t h e c o n d u c t o f i n f o r m a t i o n e d u c a t i o n campaign, waste generators will be educated on the proper method of compostingas an environment friendly way of disposing waste.Processing/Implementation of the project.T h i s i s t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f a n application, or execution of aplan, idea,model,design, specification,standard, algorithm, or policy.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implementation) .

37

In this study thisre fers to the es tab l i shment o f MRF for recyc l ing and compost ing o f garbagematerials. This also refers on establishing marketing linkages with potential buyersfor recyclables. MRF consists of; Botanical and Ecological Garden, where inorgan ic vegetab les garden sha l l be p lanted w i th h igh va lue c rops , i t sha l l beestablished in vacant space after Marian Hotel; Warehouse, the existing carpentrys h o p c a n b e c o n s t r u c t e d i n t o a M R F w i t h r o o f o u t o f e x i s t i n g r e c y c l a b l e construction materials; shedder (for garden and kitchen wastes), the shedder can

produce humus or fertilizer which can be sold by sack or use in botanical andecological garden as fertilizer.Policy and Enforcement.A policy is typically described as a deliberate plan of action to guide decisions and achieve rational outcome(s). The term is not normallyused to denote what i s ac tua l ly done, th is i s normal ly re fer red to as e i ther  procedure or pro toco l . Where as a po l i cy w i l l conta in the 'what and the why 'procedures or protocols contain the 'what' the 'how' the 'where' and the 'when'.Enforcement is a term that refers to the process by whichlegislation, o r par t o f   legislation, andtreatiescomes to havelegalforce and effect. The term is closely related to thedateof this transition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy; retrieved; 2010). In this study it refers to the policies and implementation of disciplinaryactions or sanctions to facilitate obedience of all waste generators. in this study,The DSA and D isc ip l ine Coord inators w i th the he lp o f the SCEB, SEC, GABofficers including administrators, teaching and non-teaching personnel have themora l duty to he lp by l i s t ing down names o f the v io la tors , ID ’s can a lso beconfiscated if necessary.

38

Chapter 2METHODSP r e s e n t e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r a r e t h e r e s e a r c h d e s i g n , t h e s u b j e c t a n d respondents, the instrument, the data gathering procedure, and the statisticaltreatment of the data.Research designA Descriptive-study Method of research will be employed in this study. It is amethod that tries to reveal patterns associated with specific phenomena without ane m p h a s i s o r p r e - s p e c i f i e d h y p o t h e s i s . S o m e t i m e s t h e s e s t u d i e s a r e c a l l e d hypothesis generating studies (to contrast them with hypothesis testing study),(www.children.mercy.org./stats/definition/descriptive.htm: retrieved, 2010)This design is adopted since the main problem of the study is to determinethe extent of student’s perception and zero waste management implementation inSt. Mary’s College.Research SubjectT h e r e s p o n d e n t s o f t h i s s t u d y w i l l b e t h e s t u d e n t s i n t h e d i f f e r e n t department of St. Mary’s College enrolled in the school year 2010-2011.T h e y w i l l b e c h o s e n o n t h e b a s i s o f s t r a t i f i e d r a n d o m s a m p l i n g . T h i s s a m p l i n g t e c h n i q u e w i l l b e u s e d i n o r d e r t o g e t t h e e x a c t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f   respondents of this study.

Using the Slovin’s Formula, a sample of 223 student-

respondents weretaken. The sample size of the population and the

distribution of respondents bygender and section using stratified random

sampling.St rat i f ied random sampl ing w i l l be used in th is

s tudy as samples aregathered f rom the d i f fe rent

depar tment to the used sampl in g techn ique andSlovin’s

Formula.

39

40

Research Instrument

The instrument used in this study was the researcher made

aquestionnaire using a Likert scale. The questionnaire was used

to assess theeffectiveness of the implementation of Zero-waste management

among the nursingstudents in St. Mary’s College. The statements of

sentences were made simple,brief, and concrete to provide the

respondent’s basic understanding about thepurpose of the study.The

five scale scoring has the following qualitative description:S c a l e

D e s c r i p t i v e

E q u i v a l e n t D e s c r i p t i o n

5 V e r y e x t e n s i v e T h i s m e a n s

t h a t t h e Z e r o W a s t e Management

implemented in St. Mary’sCollege was very much evident or

alwaysobserved.

4 E x t e n s i v e T h i s m e a n s

t h a t t h e Z e r o

W a s t e Management implemented in St.

Mary’sC o l l e g e w a s m o s t o f t e n e v i d e n t

o r   observed.

3 M o d e r a t e l y e x t e n s i v e T h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e

z e r o w a s t e Management implemented in St. Mary’sCollege was very much

relatively evidentin most cases.

2 L e s s e x t e n s i v e T h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e Z e r o W a s t e Management implemented in St. Mary’sCollege was acknowledged to be presentbut only slightly felt.1 N o t e x t e n s i v e T h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e Z e r o W a s t e Management implemented in St. Mary’sCollege was almost non-evident.

41

Data Gathering ProceduresThe following steps will be observed in the gathering of data:Seek Permission to conduct the Study.The researcher will send a letter to thep r e s e n t s c h o o l a d m i n i s t r a t o r , a s k i n g p e r m i s s i o n t o a l l o w t h e r e s e a r c h e r s t o conduct the study at St. Mary’s College, Tagum City.Administration and Retrieval of Questionnaire.The researcher will personallydistribute and administer the questionnaire. They will be instructed no to leave anyitem unanswered. The students will also be given enough time to answer all thei t e m s . A n d a f t e r a n s w e r i n g t h e r e s e a r c h e r w i l l r e t r i e v e t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e immediately.Checking, Collating and Processing of Data.The researcher will gathered allt h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w e r e c h e c k e d t h o r o u g h l y i f a l l i t e m s w e r e a n s w e r e d a n d collated of score followed. It was checked, collated and processed appropriatestatistical tools.Statistical TreatmentTo answer the questions proposed in this study, the data were subjected tostatistical treatment. The following statistical operations were used: Average Weighted Mean.It is a method used by multiplying each of the scores byt h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g f r e q u e n c y . T h i s w a s u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t o f t h e implementation of Zero Waste Management among Nursing Student in St. Mary’sCollege. This answered question 1.

Mean. I t i s t h e a v e r a g e o f t h e s e t o f d a t a u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t o f t h e implementation of Zero Waste Management among Nursing Students in St. Mary’sCollege. This answered question 1.Z- test . It is a statistical tool used in comparing the difference between two means.This was used to test the significant difference on the extent of the implementationof Zero Waste Management implementation in St. Mary’s College. This answeredquestions 2 and 3.

42