The Circular Economy In Asia

STARTING

WITH A

STRUCTURED RECYCLING COLLECTION SYSTEM

Working with Informal Recycling Collectors

3-Stage Micro-Pilot Project Jonker’s Area, Melaka, Malaysia November 2016 ~ March 2017

Copyright © Keep Asia Beautiful, Inc 2017

�2

�3

Introduction

In Asia, most people have not yet heard about the Circular Economy even though it first emerged as an idea from Dr. Walter R. Stahel who suggested circular thinking in 1976 when he wrote a report “Potential for Substituting Manpower for Energy” for the European Commission.

In 1989 two environmental economists, David W. Pearce and R. Kerry Turner moved the idea of circular thinking into the Circular Economy through their book “Economic Resources and the Environment”.

Simply explained it promotes a shift from the current linear economic model of ‘take, make, dispose’ to a circular system of keeping resources in use for as long as possible. To some the Circular Economy may not be the complete solution, however it does advocate a roadmap towards a more sustainable future and offers to bridge the divide between business and environmental groups.

One definition of the Circular Economy is:

“A key component of the ideal industrial ecosystem is to increase resource efficiency through circulating material.” 1

For resource efficiency to evolve in Asia one of the ingredients is to create a narrative that demonstrates the complete cycle from waste to new products. This would allow for a broader range of used consumer items to maintain some intrinsic value either for reprocessing, reusing, remanufacturing or repairing.

The lack of a cohesive waste cycle narrative means most people have no clue where their recyclables end up, resulting in a disincentive. In many parts of Asia recycling is still quite low, mostly carried out for economic reasons, and in some Asian countries recycling statistics are not reflective of the reality. Included into this narrative should be the people who collect most recyclables, generally informal recycling collectors, an often marginalised group of people living in their own communities.

For recyclable materials to be considered as a resource (as opposed to collecting purely for monetary gain), three components need to come together. One, recycling volumes must increase to reasonable levels in order for businesses to even begin contemplating investment into reprocessing factories.

Secondly, the quality of said volume of recyclable materials must meet a certain standard, with minimum amount of contamination and degradation, again for reprocessing purposes.

Third, as technology advances more and more used consumer products can be recycled economically given appropriate volumes. Establishing structured collection systems alongside global supply chains together with an in-depth knowledge of costs and / or investment criteria allows for a comprehensive circular industrial ecosystem to emerge.

The Circular Economy promotes new jobs, business opportunities and cost savings to industry. Just the simple fact of not having enough recycling collectors would equate to more employment opportunities. Coupled with investment into reprocessing factories, logistics and potential new materials also equals more jobs. Reduced cost to businesses by not having to extract and pay for virgin resources, thus alleviating pressure on the environment, all make the Circular Economy a very attractive proposition.

“Do We Have the Right Performance Indictors for the Circular Economy - Insight into the Swiss Waste Management System” 1

by Melanie Haupt, Carl Vadenbo and Stefanie Hellweg. Journal of Industrial Ecology, Volume 00, Number 0, 2016 �4

So now we have two narratives converging:

(1) A transparent waste cycle providing incentive in the development of a circular system; and

(2) The rationale for recycling, reprocessing, remanufacturing, refurbishing and repair is no longer only for environmental reasons by can also be good for the economy.

Out of this convergence new business models can flourish and our relationship with consumer products can begin to become more adaptive such as encouraging the shift towards products as a service. Perhaps ownership may become a thing of the past.

Finally as a large percentage of consumer goods are manufactured in Asia, the design of these products are usually completed in the developed world. If designing consumer products for reuse, repair or refurbishment is an imperative element of the Circular Economy, the opportunity to showcase circular design thinking in design schools across Asia should not be missed.

�5

Table of Contents

Introduction 4.........................................................................................................Chapter One - Background 7.................................................................................

Keep Asia Beautiful 7........................................................................................Informal Waste Collectors 8............................................................................The Rationale for this Initiative 9.......................................................................Keep Malaysia Beautiful 10...............................................................................Why Jonker’s Area? 11....................................................................................

Chapter Two - The Survey and Questionnaire 12.................................................Chapter Three - Survey Methodology 13..............................................................

Key Findings from Survey with Residential Households 14..............................Chapter Four - Tourism Sector 17........................................................................

Key Findings 20................................................................................................Chapter Five - Micro-Pilot Project: Jonker’s Area, Melaka 21...............................

Stage One: Amounts and Types of Waste Generated 21.................................Stage Two: Street Waste and Human Behaviour 22.........................................

Broken Windows Theory 23......................................................................Recoverable Waste: Public Areas vs Waste Separated-At-Source 25.....

Stage Three: Door-to-Door Recycling Collection Service 27............................Conclusion 30........................................................................................................Notes and Acknowledgements 31.........................................................................

�6

Chapter One - Background

In the early part of the 21st century, the Malaysian government commissioned a research report by the Japan International Cooperation Agency, to be conducted by Yachiyo Engineering Company, Ltd., titled ‘The Study on National Waste Minimisation in Malaysia’.

A total of 724-pages made up of three volumes and two supporting documents was published in 2006. It is the most comprehensive study, almost biblical in nature, on waste management in Malaysia. Although it is 10-years old, the details and dynamics of waste management have not changed making this report still relevant.

Yet it has its weaknesses, not by intention or that the researchers have failed to offer actual operational details for implementation. In fact the study correctly identified the problems, for example the report states “…the change in the behaviour of the general public is still too slow.” However the report does not attempt to consider how to encourage changes in behaviours towards a more pro-active recycling regime.

Another key issue identified in the Japanese report is the ad-hoc nature of collection “A large number of players are involved in recycling: the waste generators, collection service providers, waste pickers, traders, recycling centre operators, NGOs and end-users to mention a few.

Proper networking and linkage amongst these players will contribute not only to increase efficiency of recyclables collection, but also to create new opportunities of recycling based on partnership among stakeholders. Such partnership is of great importance to realise the potential for recycling in Malaysia.”

Again, the Japanese researchers have not attempted to put forward ideas or suggestions as to how to facilitate networking or what model can bring the parties together to contribute to higher recycling rates. Therefore it will continue to be fragmented. To be fair, even if the report offered ideas and suggestions these would still need to be implemented into practical, functional working systems. Moving from research to reality is not always easy.

When we consider waste management in Asia, or anywhere for that matter, we delegate responsibility to government agencies and waste collection companies who, generally, do not have experience in human behaviour or alternative design models. In many countries, this component is often addressed by NGO’s, charities, academics and the private sector.

Keep Asia Beautiful

Keep Asia Beautiful incorporated in Victoria, Australia and the parent organisation of Keep Malaysia Beautiful, the first branch office, registered as a Society in Malaysia.

For the purposes of this report, we have used Keep Asia Beautiful (KAB) as the foundation for our philosophy and approach. Keep Malaysia Beautiful (KMB) is used specifically for work conducted in Malaysia.

The primary focus of Keep Asia Beautiful is in the promotion and development of the Circular Economy in Malaysia and the nine other Asian countries that make up ASEAN . It is our belief that Malaysia can be 2

a role model for the region.

ASEAN is made up of 10 countries: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand 2

and Vietnam. It formally came into being on January 1, 2016. �7

A major building block of KAB’s philosophy is in the necessity to expand the motivations for recycling outside of the environmental narrative. The world has been ‘flogging’ (for want of a better word) the environment for the last 20+ years and yet environmental degradation and global warming from human activity continues. We have, falsely, believed that awareness and education will change human behaviours.

In a recent article, “The Environment is Dead”, published on the social media platform LinkedIn, KAB puts forward the case for encouraging other narratives.

Informal Waste Collectors

Informal waste collectors or waste pickers can collect up to 80% of a developing country’s recycling material. While this may seem a large number, it often against a backdrop of a total recycling rate of only between 10 ~ 20%.

For most of Asia the informal recycling collector has filled the gaps left by government contracted waste collectors who are either ill-equipped or under-resourced to manage recycling effectively and efficiently or have inflexible business models that allow opportunities for collaboration. Poor government sponsored recycling management is a condition of a country’s development and not a criticism per se.

However informal recycling collectors also lack a proper recycling infrastructure further inhibiting substantial improvements to recycling rates, so investment into downstream processing factories is almost non-existent, and the lives of informal collectors remain unstable. Therefore any expanded range of used consumer items for reprocessing, remanufacturing or reusing remains dormant and valueless.

Although the informal recycling sector is unorganised, inefficient and generally dysfunctional, there is potential to create structure and improve incomes as volumes of recyclable materials should increase through an improved system.

Furthermore moving the informal recycling collection sector into the mainstream allows for a better flow and targeting of educational materials to businesses and residents thus increasing the quality of recyclable materials, allows the introduction to an improved occupational health and safety system for informal collectors, and lessens the capital required by government contracted waste collectors.

The first step KAB is taking towards the development of a resource efficient ecosystem is in shoring up the structural weaknesses within the recycling system by working with informal recycling collectors. As most recycling is managed by the informal sector and regardless of other’s opinions, they have a wealth of local knowledge together with recycling information. This is a huge asset that cannot be discounted.

We must find a way to make improvements via this sector regardless of the risks and difficulties involved. KAB’s philosophy is that unless we experiment, take risks and continually seek solutions to the problems that emerge we won’t get to where we want to be.

�8

The Rationale for this Initiative

This document is a report on the outcomes of Version #1, a three-stage micro-pilot project conducted between November 2016 ~ March 2017. The aim of the pilot is to formulate a 80/20 model specifically for the inclusion of the informal recycling collector into a structured collection system for urban and rural areas; to co-exist side-by-side with private and public waste collectors and one that is complementary of long-term environmental government policies.

An 80/20 model means it should be 80% suitable and acceptable for most Asian countries and 20% adjustable to suit local socio-economic, political and geographic conditions.

Prior to commencing the micro-pilot project, Keep Asia Beautiful (KAB) conducted a survey to ascertain attitudes and perceptions of Malaysians, plus a dive into the tourism industry - all included in this report. Part of our exploration is to begin to understand the human variables in recycling behaviours, and to check how a structured recycling collection could improve recycling out-comes if operated by the informal sector.

From the outset KAB purposely shied away from any education and awareness campaigns. Traditionally, programs to foster sustainability have relied upon information-intensive campaigns to encourage the adoption of environmentally friendly behaviors (McKenzie-Mohr, 2011; Schultz & Kaiser, 2012). These campaigns use advertising to disseminate information, and they are often based upon the mistaken assumption that if recipients simply knew or cared more, they would change their behavior. Although well meaning, these initiatives have been largely ineffective in fostering the adoption of sustainable behaviors (Geller, 1981; McKenzie-Mohr, 2011; Schultz, 2002; Schultz & Kaiser, 2012). 3

It is KAB’s firm opinion that wholesale ‘education and awareness’ campaigns are of little merit unless we recognise and pinpoint exactly where the gaps exist, thus ensuring better returns on educational and awareness investment.

In order to achieve our goal of an structured recycling collection service using informal collectors KAB plans three pilots:

(1) Version #1 Micro (already completed);

(2) Version #2 Medium scale in an urban area;

(3) Version #3 Large scale - whole city.

Each time scale is introduced and, particularly, when working in different areas, new problems arise. Unless we continue to test and re-test our model we cannot be assured of long-term success or a sense of confidence that our model can be applied throughout Asia.

The informal recycling sector collects recyclables in many different countries. Brazil was the first country to create a policy that is inclusive of informal recycling collectors. Keep Asia Beautiful (KAB) has read the research coming out of South America, including the successes and failures the Brazilian government and NGO’s experienced. Whilst Brazil has come a long way in improving the conditions for informal recycling workers and increasing recycling rates, establishing structured collection remains crucial. For

“Choosing Effective Behaviour Change Tools” by Doug McKenzie-Mohr and P. Wesley Schultz, Social Marketing Quarterly, 3

2014, Vol. 20(1) 35-46.�9

example several informal collectors can descend on the same street on the same day which decreases the amount of recyclable materials collected and increases the number of unproductive routes and unnecessary physical efforts. 4

There is no doubt KAB has a long way to go. The goods news is we have started…

Keep Malaysia Beautiful

KAB chose Malaysia due to the newly enacted separation-at-source recycling legislation. Writing the legislation was easy, instituting a workable model that allows for the reprocessing of recoverable recyclable waste is a very different scenario. Malaysia is endeavouring to improve its recycling credentials while at the same time investing heavily into Waste-to-Energy incineration plants.

Unfortunately as recycling rates are quite low the business case for investing into downstream processing factories remains weak. Yet what happens when recycling rates increase? Will Malaysia continue to export recyclables to other countries, thereby exporting jobs and investment to see the Circular Economy develop elsewhere? Under the local entity, Keep Malaysia Beautiful (KMB), the three-stage micro-pilot was conducted to assess the following:

1. Malaysian’s Perception to Recycling and a Structured Recycling Service: • Receptiveness to an alternative recycling collection service • What’s more important - efficiency or convenience? • What do people know and how would they like to learn?

2. Waste Collectors: • Can collection be improved within the context of the Asian urban and rural environment, working with informal recycling collectors? • What will it take to make those improvements? • How can these improvements be incorporated in to current waste management systems?

3. Types of Waste: • What types of waste will be collected? • Volumes? • How much can actually be recovered for processing? • Differences in recyclables collected from public spaces from recyclables collected from businesses and residences that actively separate recyclable materials.

Recycling comes from four main places: a. Residential b. Businesses c. Industrial areas d. Public places

“Profile Survey of Waste Pickers in Brazil: Requirements for the Development of a Collection Vehicle and Optimized Routing” 4

by Naiara F. Ramos, Armando Borges de Castilhos Jr., Fernando A. Forecellini and Odacir D. Graciolli. Journal of Urban and Environment Engineering, V.7, N.2 p 231-246, 2013.

�10

KMB did not collect any recyclable from industrial areas and the number of private residences was minimal. The main areas of collection and participation was from businesses and public places.

Note on collected recyclables: Once all recyclable materials were collected it was sold. This required separating out the contaminated recycling and the recoverable recycling. For plastics KMB had been advised to sort soft plastic wrap from a less flexible plastic which can not be reprocessed in Malaysia.

Why Jonker’s Area?

The UNESCO World Heritage area of Jonker’s in Melaka, Malaysia is not only a unique historical site but presents itself with a difficult urban landscape. Narrow streets, density of buildings, high volumes of vehicular and human traffic especially on weekends.

Implementing an effective recycling management program using a small truck could be problematic as it would certainly hold up traffic. The system used by KMB was also not perfect mainly due to the limitations in volumes that could be collected during any one trip.

What we wanted to question was:

(1) Would a door-to-door recycling service be profitable? (2) Could it be operated by an informal recycling collector? (3) How would it actually work? Asia has many different types of urban environments, the Jonker’s area

is typical of many large areas in urban centres and cities across the region.

A map of Jonker’s area with the two streets: Heeren Street and Jonker’s Walk, part of the pilot project, marked in red.

�11

Chapter Two - The Survey and Questionnaire

The survey focused on two key areas within Melaka:

1. The local population, made up of Malaysia’s three main ethnic groups: a. Malaysians b. Chinese c. Indian

2. The tourism industry a. Tourists attitude to recycling b. Hotel’s understanding of tourist attitudes and their ability to become a recycling hotel.

The survey was reasonably broad in scope, including if an expanded range of ‘reasons’ why people should recycle can serve as motivations. KMB wanted to check directly if the case for the environment is losing traction. After all “Saving the Environment” is a very big request and most people feel very small and transfer responsibility to the government to fix whatever environmental problems there are. In return, the government believes local populations should make more effort.

When we asked the question “Why Do You Recycle?” or “Recycling Can Do Two Things: (a) Good For the Environment; (2) Create Jobs & Investment. What’s More Important To You?” most respondents did not know of any other reason other than recycling for the environment.

In fact a lot of time with respondents was spent discussing the economic opportunities available when recycling is done properly. Due to the confusion over this question, we have chosen not to include any survey statistics in this report. If the Circular Economy is to develop across Asia, this confusion needs to be unravelled.

In addition, KMB was interested in the attitudes of local residents, their complaints and ideas. When the survey was first put together it was revised twice simply because respondents felt the questions did not fully allow their opinions to be expressed.

It proved to be a very valuable lesson. By not remaining fixed in our questionnaire, we listened to the respondents and realised they knew more of what they wanted out of a recycling system than we gave them credit for and were lucky to change our questionnaire very early on in the process.

The second component for consideration is alternative bin designs. Households are changing. Some of the respondents were single or elderly couples, as their children live elsewhere. The waste generated is not the same as larger households yet there is a very limited selection on the types of recycling bins available to accommodate different household sizes. While conducting the survey photos of different bin designs were shown to respondents to gauge their interest, especially designs for recycling bins suited to small living quarters.

The tourism industry proved much more straightforward and no revisions to the questionnaire was required. There is an enormous range of accommodation options in Melaka. KMB covered as much as possible, from very inexpensive guesthouses to 6-star resorts.

�12

Chapter Three - Survey Methodology

For the survey KMB undertook a mixed-method approach comprising qualitative research to explore current knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of separation-at-source and the barriers to increasing recycling, and quantitative research to establish measures for each of the objectives.

Overall, the qualitative research provided a detailed understanding of:

• General perceptions of recycling and the current collection system • Motivations to recycle • Explored other possible reasons to recycle • Tourist perceptions • Hotel’s ability to recycle and motivations to do so

Research comprised;

• 112 door-to-door or at large shopping malls and local markets • 100 foreign and local tourists • 80 hotels (ranging from inexpensive guest houses to 6-star hotels)

The survey was conducted in Melaka, a state with a population of 872,900 . Melaka, like the rest 5

of Malaysia, has three main ethnic groups, and in 2015 the statistics are:

1. Malay 552,700 (63.3%) 2. Others Bumiputera 11,500 (1.3%) 2. Chinese 215,000 (24.9%) 3. Indian 51,400 (5.7%) 4. Others 4,800 (0.5%) 5. Non-Malaysian Citizens 37,600 (4.3%)

The KMB survey covered this ethnic mix of households.

Population by States and Ethnic Groups: https://web.archive.org/web/20160212125740/http://pmr.penerangan.gov.my/5

index.php/info-terkini/19463-unjuran-populasi-penduduk-2015.html �13

26%

47%

16% 11%

Ethnicity

Malay ChineseMalay IndianMalay Other

Key Findings from Survey with Residential Households

48% recycle via 120L grey wheelie bin while 52% either sell or give to an informal collector or donate their recyclable materials to a local charity, Tze Chi, a Taiwanese NGO that derives a portion of its income from selling donated recycling materials.

It’s important to note that almost all respondents were critical of the ‘grey bin’ collection system. Currently Malaysian’s are asked to drop their separated recyclables into or next to the grey bin on a certain day for collection.

The problem lies in the actual collection truck that looks like a standard waste collection truck. As well there is little transparency and trust that the effort made to separate waste materials is of real value.

Here we asked two questions: The act of separating vis-a-vis purchasing three bins. If people are prepared to separate their recyclables, how do they expect it to be suitable for reprocessing? The waste cycle narrative become crucial for extending motivation.

Trust and transparency, once again, played a key factor if a respondent was prepared to purchase three bins. Most of the time people asked if they had to buy three bins or if the government will give them the bins for free.

Of course people complained when it was explained they would have to purchase the bins. The overriding factors towards purchasing three bins are:

(1) Current legal requirement to separate-at-source (2) Separating recycling materials is good for the environment and / or contributes to reprocessing.

Note: KAB is not advocating the purchase of three bins, only the distinction between wanting to separate into three recycling groups, then following through with the action of buying three bins if it was more convenient for a collector.

�14

48%

27%

25%

WhatRecyclingServiceDoYouUse?

Greybin InformalCollector Donate

21%

21%

2%

10%

46%

WouldYouBuy3BinsIfThereWasaProperRecyclingService?

Iwon'tbuythebins

Notenoughspace

I'mnotreallyinterested

Idon'treallyknowwhatcanberecycled

I'mOKwithbuying3bins

88%

12%

WouldYouSeparateYourWasteInto3Bins?

Yes No

After conducting the survey, KMB became aware of the Malaysian government’s request that separating into three different coloured bags could be more effective, less expensive and address the complaints of lack of space.

Green: Glass and Metals White: Plastics Blue: Paper and Cardboard

To date KMB has no knowledge on the success of this initiative.

Regardless if you live in a rural or urban area people are busy and a new collection service would need to operate like any business by accepting people who recycle are customers and should be treated as such.

Although it may seem like ‘Convenient’ is the same as ‘Efficient and Reliable’, it is not. Optimally they should be the same, however in real life these two concepts do not always exist in tandem.

The main focus here is in providing a recycling service that fits into busy lifestyles and not assuming that because recycling and separating-at-source is environmentally important or legally mandatory, but that people are engaged because it is easy to do so!

Returning briefly to education and awareness, unfortunately recycling is complex, especially when it comes to plastics. Other recyclable materials such as liquid / beverage cartons have very low collection rates simply because many informal collectors do not collect them due to lack of economic incentive or

volumes that encourage recycling depots to buy and then on-sell to processing factories.

Effective recycling is a continual discussion between the giver and the collector supported by online and offline sources such as websites, brochures, advertising, word-of-mouth and community groups.

A multi-pronged approach from a range of different platforms is imperative to both the giver and the collector, requiring continual updates when any changes occur, especially technological improvements, that see an expansion in the types of recyclable materials.

�15

85%

15%

InformalCollectorsCouldHelpYouwithRecycling,WouldThisBenefit

You?

Yes No

43%

41%

16%

IfThereWasANewRecyclingCollec7onService,WhatWouldBe

ImportanttoYou?

Efficient&Reliable Convenient Don'tCare

The good news still lies in the question of ‘education and awareness’. It is not that Malaysians require any more general education and awareness campaigns to encourage recycling, only how to equate that education and awareness into practical and positive behaviours that are convenient to practice.

Nations promote a sense of national pride and encourage nationalism. For Malaysia this is particularly important given the three major ethnic mixes.

In regards to recycling, besides the overwhelming response that Malaysian’s care about their status in the international rung of recycling nations, the physical body language and emotional responses confirmed the statistics.

Unfortunately most of the respondents transferred responsibility to the government and the lack of a recycling system they could trust and which fitted into their busy lifestyles.

This question was aimed specifically at the development of the Circular Economy in Malaysia. The Circular Economy competes against incineration, Waste-To-Energy (WTE) an easy alternative to growing solid waste problems across Asia.

If industry can provide added incentive, the ‘pull’ factor, and policy makers see the benefits through economic growth, jobs, entrepreneurial opportunities coupled with fulfilling their international environmental obligations and treaties then the Circular Economy (through structured recycling systems) can sit alongside WTE. After all there will be residual waste left to incinerate as not everything can be recycled or recycled infinitely.

�16

92%

8%

CurrentlyMalaysiaHasVeryLowRecyclingRates-DoYouCare?

Yes No

2%

87%

11%

DoesitMa*ertoYouIfRecyclingMaterialsAreMadeIntoNew

ProductsorIncinerated?

Incinera.onOK MadeIntoNewProducts Don'tCare

Chapter Four - Tourism Sector

KMB also included the Tourism Industry in order to consider a Recycling Standard that could be used as leverage in the tourism sector. Once again, most hotels and tour operators see recycling as a cost and not part of a broader positive image that could improve occupancy or tour rates.

The insights gained from many conversations with hotel staff was exceptional helpful in considering how a Recycling Standard could work.

In 2013 Trip Advisor initiated a Green Leaders program which, at this stage, does not include Asia. Another group is The International Centre for Responsible Tourism, who appears to be more of an advocacy organisation for sustainable tourism.

The Global Sustainable Tourism Council has developed a certifiable criteria along the lines of 43 Suggested Performance Indicators, a document available in 16 languages. Version 3 (dated 21 December 2016 made up of 12 pages) is very comprehensive. Major hotels, tour operators, online accommodation sites (such as Airbnb) are to be commended for supporting this certification model for more responsible and sustainable tourism.

Our concerns are mainly about the complexity and perceived cost by the many thousands of small operators. KAB’s ideation is to simplify the whole process by focusing only on one one criteria: Recycling and a collection service operated by informal recycling collectors. The certification process can be built into the collection system and verified via KAB’s proprietary methods.

The tourism sector is very big business for Malaysia. In 2015, tourism accounted for 14.4% of GDP and 6

in the same year Tourism Malaysia recorded a total number of arrivals at 25,721,251 made up of: 7

− 23,361,016 Asians (Singaporeans made up the largest number at 12,930,754); − 1,078,953 Europeans − 547,794 Oceania / Pacific − 325,593 Americas

Note: Adding the total number of tourist equals 25,313,356, a shortfall of 47,895 from the total number. This shortfall could be made up by tourists from the Middle East and Africa, a number too low to statistically include into the dataset.

During August ~ September 2016, 100 tourists were surveyed to ascertain their overall awareness and interest to recycle whilst on holidays and the importance of online bookings and reviews. Our survey is not reflective of the inbound tourism nationality spread.

Most Asians indicated they not speak enough English to participate, appeared wary or stated they were just too busy. Therefore our survey is primarily made up of Europeans, with a small sampling from Malaysia, other parts of Asia, the America’s, Oceania, and the Middle East.

The Department of Statistics Malaysia: Tourism Satellite Account 2015 https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/6

cthemeByCat&cat=111&bul_id=ekpONHlVZllyN001YzJNYjBGVmtzQT09&menu_id=TE5CRUZCblh4ZTZMODZIbmk2aWRRQT09

Tourism Malaysia http://www.tourism.gov.my/ / Statistics: http://www.tourism.gov.my/statistics7

�17

�18

For Melaka , in 2015 the total number of hotels, resorts, homestay, chalets, apartment, townstays 8

and guesthouses was 473 providing a total of 20,082 rooms. Tourists come from all over the world, however the largest number of tourists into Melaka are Malaysians:

Data Asas Negeri Melaka 2015, pages 32 ~ 39, Melaka State Government website: https://www.melaka.gov.my/en/media/8

publications/basic-data/basic-data-2015 �19

Key Findings

Tourism is big business in Malaysia, after all it accounts for nearly 15% of GDP. Therefore including a structured recycling program should include the tourism sector. Domestic tourism is very vibrant and herein lies the first barrier.

Surveying local hotels produced a mixed result. Some hotels are interested to improve their recycling rates, which some believe is linked to staff morale. Whilst other’s only see it only as an additional expense and a time consuming inconvenience for housekeeping.

The implementation of a Recycling Standard, with easy to follow guidelines supporting the informal sector offers a positive Corporate Social Responsibility image with minimal costs and outlays for all small and medium size hotels and tourism related operators. It can also be applied to all the large chains if requested.

Most Asian tourists from China, Japan, Korea and Singapore indicated to KMB they would prefer to see visible recycling options. Tourists from western countries are dismayed at the lack of recycling choices and often carry around their recyclable waste (usually beverage containers) in the hope of finding proper receptacles to deposit the beverage containers. Or wish their hotel offered easy-to-find bins either in the room, on the floor or at the very least in the lobby.

Local tourists are much more complacent. Cleaning up after Malaysian’s is someone else’s job, usually the army of migrant workers from Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar and other countries, who work for local municipal contractors.

This has become a deterrent against improved responsible behaviours. Costs to local councils and state government’s will, eventually, determine different policies and the ‘Keep Malaysia Beautiful’ name will go along way towards being an appropriate slogan.

Finally, currently online booking sites do not offer any guidance as to the recycling credentials of any establishment. As mentioned earlier while there is a big push towards a common sustainability certificate that is all encompassing, it will be difficult to include the majority of smaller hotels, bed & breakfasts, guesthouses, homestays and serviced apartments. Hence our argument that a Recycling Standard could be a positive first step towards sustainability and the social inclusion of the informal recycling collector.

�20

Chapter Five - Micro-Pilot Project: Jonker’s Area, Melaka

Stage One: Amounts and Types of Waste Generated

The first stage was to ascertain the amounts and types of waste generated on a daily basis. A total of 35 businesses agreed to participate in a two-week check of the amount of waste generated. Businesses included small boutique hotels, restaurants, service type businesses, souvenir shops, art galleries and cafés.

Due to certain sensitivities access to some sections of a business were limited, however what was accessible provided enough general information to be worthwhile. Furthermore these limits were, in itself, typical of what an informal recycling collector may encounter.

This photo is indicative of a lot of potentially very good recoverable recyclable materials. Yet due to the internal systems of this particular business it is quite difficult for staff to consider separation especially during busy times.

In other establishments, efforts are made to separate recoverable recyclable materials. In these cases, the recyclables are either donated to Tze Chi or are accumulated with other materials and then sold to an informal collector or taken to a recycling depot where higher prices can be gained.

�21

The image below is from a souvenir shop that uses large plastic bags to drop recyclables materials into. Once several bags are full, it is donated to Tze Chi, who on-sell to a recycling depot.

Due to space constraints, this restaurant uses what ever space is available to store crushed plastic bottles. These are accumulated until there is enough volume for sales to either an informal collector or a recycling depot.

Stage Two: Street Waste and Human Behaviour

Many years ago anthropologists wrote that human survival depended on looking out across the African plains. Threats did not come from the sky or from the ground, but at eye level from larger animals that existed on the same horizon. If humans respond better to visual cues at eye level could the same principals apply to waste management?

Furthermore if KAB discounts further general ‘education and awareness’ programs, how responsive are Malaysian’s to placing recyclables into the correct bin?

KMB purchased six used large wide-mouth bins from a local recycling center for 5MYR each (approximately US$1.15). This particular bins was chosen as they offered the added benefit of a visual cue to the general public. After all, if the signage on the bins failed could visual cues of what was actually in the bin offer extra guidance?

The control group consisted of three bins with signage around the side providing a comparison to the three bins placed in a frame with the signage at eye level.

For a two-week period KMB placed these six bins in different locations around Jonker’s Walk for a period of 4 hours during the day or 6 hours in the evening on a Friday, Saturday and Sunday, peak tourist time around Jonker’s. The bins were also monitored for the whole time to observe the bins effectiveness.

Initially Stage Two, was supposed to be only a check on human behaviour. However it proved to be much more than understanding human behaviour vis-a-vis different bin types.

The different bins types can be seen by the photos, left and below and the results were astounding. The framed bins achieved a success rate of between 80 ~ 90% of people depositing their recyclables into the correct bin.

The ‘standard’ type bin where people are required to look down to check where to place their recyclables only achieved a success rate of between 40 ~ 50%.

The visual cues worked very well but, generally, only for the framed bins. The first visual cue came from the signage at eye level, but nearly all the people looked into the bin to confirm their action.

This meant it was as two-step process. (1) See the bin and respond to the signage; (2) Before depositing the recyclable material double check by looking into the bin thereby confirming the action is correct.

�22

The analysis given to this behaviour is a suspected belief of risk-aversion and environmental education actually working. People know about recycling, know about environmental problems, however planet earth is inhabited by humans who prefer to ‘follow’ not lead. We double-check to make sure our behaviour are correct and so the confirmation process ensures that we will not receive any kind of penalty from our peers in case we are being observed.

The standard bins did not appear to warrant this double-check action. People only saw a bin to deposit their waste regardless of whether it is recyclable or not. When people did notice the sign and had a recyclable material to deposit they did not always look inside the bin to confirm their action, just made the deposit.

Broken Windows Theory

Several weeks prior to commencing Version #1 Micro-Pilot Project, this bin configuration was noticed near Kuala Lumpur Sentral train station. It is located about half-away along a 500 metre one-way street surrounded by low-rise apartment buildings, street food stalls and small businesses. Local residents walk up to this bin to drop off their recycling.

That behaviour, in itself is not abnormal, after all it is a recycling bin. What is peculiar is in the effort of walking half the length of a street to deposit recycling and once arrive not care where the recycling ends up. It appeared emotionally contradictory and illogical.

�23

Could Broken Windows theory explain this contradiction? In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s a criminological theory called Broken Windows emerged. The philosophy behind Broken Windows is based on a fundamental link between our perception of the world around us and our behaviours.

Broken Windows theory has been widely credited for reducing crime rates in New York and Los Angeles during the 1970’s and 1980’s. It is summed up nicely in these two paragraphs:

“Consider a building with a few broken windows. If the windows are not repaired,

the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows. Eventually, they may even break into the building,

and if it's unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside.

Or consider a pavement. Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates.

Eventually, people even start leaving bags of refuse from take-out restaurants there or even break into cars.”

Social psychologists and police officers tend to agree that if a window in a building is broken and is left unrepaired, all the rest of the windows will soon be broken. This is as true in nice neighborhoods as in run-down ones. Window-breaking does not necessarily occur on a large scale because some areas are inhabited by determined window-breakers whereas others are populated by window-lovers; rather, one unrepaired broken window is a signal that no one cares, and so breaking more windows costs nothing. (It has always been fun.) 9

Broken Windows has many supporters and a number of critics. However in 2009, researchers from the Max Plank Institute for Research on Collective Goods in Bonn, Germany published a paper “First Impressions Are More Important than Early Intervention - Qualifying Broken Windows Theory in the Lab” 10

The researchers stated “In a series of lab experiments we put two components of the theory to the test. We show that first impressions and early punishment of antisocial behaviour are independently and jointly causal for cooperativeness. The effect of good first impressions and of early vigilance cannot be explained with, but adds to, participants’ initial level of benevolence. Mere impression management is not strong enough to maintain cooperation. Cooperation stabilizes if good first impressions are combined with some risk of sanctions. Yet if we control for first impressions, early vigilance only has a small effect. The effect vanishes over time.” 11

In conclusion the researchers offer this advice to policy makers “We can even be more specific. While good first impressions raise overall contributions in the voluntary contribution mechanism, and while they flatten the characteristic negative trend of contributions over time, they are not strong enough to reverse

“Broken Windows” by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling. Atlantic Monthly, March 19829

“First Impressions are More Important than Early Intervention - Qualifying Broken Windows Theory in the Lab” by Martin 10

Beckenkamp, Christoph Engel, Andreas Glockner, et al. Preprints of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn, Germany, 2009/21.

Ibid, page 111

�24

the trend. As many others have shown, both in the lab (Selten et al. 1997) and in the field (Ostrom 1990), for cooperation to be sustainable, vigilance and enforcement are inevitable. 12

It is difficult to categorically surmise that visual cues of unkempt recycling bins leads to the peculiarity of walking 250 metres in the hot tropical heat of Malaysia to dump recyclable materials into any section just because everyone previously did not care without further in-depth investigation.

Yet for some reason the clean, framed bins in Stage 2 of Version #1 Micro-Pilot Project worked exceptionally well. Whereas the bins in Kuala Lumpur offer no hope for improvement.

The conclusions drawn from this experiment is ‘bins are not bins’. Signage, placement of signage, type of bin, first impressions, visual cues and an emotional intuition that society cares all contributes to positive behaviours towards better recycling practices.

Recoverable Waste: Public Areas vs Waste Separated-At-Source

If bins are not bins, then recyclable materials from a variety of sources are also not equal. We want to assume that persuading people to recycle is the hard part, but in KMB’s opinion this is not so. Remember the focus is on the development of the Circular Economy, which relies on recyclable materials being recoverable and free from as much contamination and degradation as possible.

In our Jonker’s Walk experiment people responded appropriately by depositing their recyclables into the right (usually framed) bin, however the requirement to prepare the recyclable material for sale was a vastly different matter and quite time consuming.

Most plastics were contaminated by food waste and around 10% of the plastic materials had to be thrown into general waste as it was not considered suitable for reprocessing. Plastic drink cups with lids and straws all had to be separated by hand. In many cases plastic drink cups included fresh fruits which also required emptying out.

As for paper, 98% of all the paper collected during this experiment could not be accumulated for sale to a recycling deport as it was contaminated by food. What was not directly contaminated by food, people who did not follow the sign thus depositing their drink container (with residual liquids or fresh fruits) into the paper bin would contaminate any ‘clean’ paper.

Aluminum metal cans, which constituted the majority of the metal cans collected in these public bins, was also not free of problems except from a different angle. Most aluminum cans simply disappeared taken by itinerant informal recycling scavengers . 13

Whilst this may not be surprising, it’s important to note that all these bins were monitored for the duration of their time on the street. If KMB staff were distracted, went to the bathroom, or looked away for even a few moments, the aluminum drink cans were gone.

Ibid, page 2012

KMB uses the word ‘scavenger’ in this instance to define a particular type of informal recycling collector who roam the streets 13

sorting through garbage bins looking for recyclable materials. Due to the high monetary value of aluminum cans, scavengers usually only collect this one item leaving all other types of recyclables, as they do not have the physical means to carry or store large amounts of plastic, paper, cardboard or food cans and then take them to a recycling depot.

�25

Initially KMB believed recyclables from public places could add to an informal recycling collector’s income if their given specific geographical area to manage included public spaces. So two questions emerged:

(1) How to co-exist with itinerant informal recycling scavengers? (2) How to make recycling from public spaces profitable given the amount of work required to ensure

this waste is reprocessable?

�26

Stage Three: Door-to-Door Recycling Collection Service

Under the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act, 2007 the Malaysian government included the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management (Scheme for Household Solid Waste and Solid Waste Similar to Household Solid Waste) Regulations, 2011. This piece of legislation created the legal framework for Malaysians to separate-at-source recyclable materials for collection.

For Stage 3, KMB provided a daily door-to-door recycling service for 30-days within two streets in the Jonker’s area: Heeren Street and Jonker’s Walk comprising of approximately 150 mostly businesses and a few residences.

Heeren Street is a very quiet one-way street with some residential houses, small boutique hotels, a few souvenir shops, antiques, arts and crafts galleries. Below is a photo of the types of architecture and narrow road in Heeren Street ,. 14

Jonker’s Walk is the exact opposite to Heeren Street. Although it shares similar architecture, Jonker’s Walk is much wider with substantially more vehicle and human traffic. There are a couple of boutique hotels located in the top end of the street. Otherwise the remainder are souvenir, antique, mobile phone, clothing and convenience shops, restaurants, cafés, and stores selling local Melakan food delicacies.

This is the urban environment KMB worked a door-to-door collection service and below is a photo of the Jonker’s Walk streetscape.

Image from ‘Heritage Architecture: Shophouses’, http://www.channibal.com/Shop/Heeren.php 14

�27

Every day between 3:30pm and 7:00pm, with three bins strapped to a trolley KMB walked along the two streets to check if there was any recycling to collect. Of course not all premises had recycling every day, and around 50% of businesses / residences did not participate at all.

�28

However after one week it was easier to start predicating which premises had recycling, the type, estimated volumes and quality. After all businesses do not want to be bothered every day to check if there is any recycling to collect. By the second week KMB began to establish trust and so could enter a business and go straight to the, often now new recycling, bin for collection.

Technically this service could have been operated every second day during the week and every day on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Yet we chose not to do this, we chose to keep up the daily routine. Part of the objective was to create a recycling presence and to build community relationships. Despite the overall recycling volume collected being quite low considering 1000kgs of waste is generated everyday in this area, our community relations was very high. It was through this positive community interaction that KMB could begin to persuade businesses to participate and they responded accordingly.

By the third week local businesses felt comfortable enough to ask questions about some of the more complex recycling items, such as the different kinds of plastics.

Being a foreign white woman had certain advantages and each day it was important to pretend how would a local informal collector be perceived? How easy would it be for an informal collector to enter a business to collect recyclables? Could or would they develop community relations? What kind of recycling support system could be established that worked for both the informal collector and community - low and high tech?

�29

Day 1: Collection Day 30: Collection

Conclusion

This pilot project was exactly as stated ‘micro’. It could not have been otherwise. It would be almost impossible to build structure for informal recycling collectors without starting from a very small position. Not only is the actual art of recycling complex, there are many variables, different actors and competing agendas.

KMB must win over an entire country, 31 million people must, somehow, begin the process to participate in the Circular Economy sooner rather than later. Credibility in our ideas, methods and processes is crucial.

All we know is our choices to develop the Circular Economy is limited. We either recognise the value in the informal recycling sector and thereby work to increase efficiencies and structure or we forget about the Circular Economy for the immediate future whilst we contemplate alternatives and then seek ways to implement whatever alternatives we come up with.

Do we have time? Can we afford to by-pass an existing system, regardless of our opinions as to its viability, to build in new systems? Should government waste collection agencies change their business models, make the necessary investments into collecting recyclables for reprocessing?

The answer to all of the above questions is NO! Well not until we have exhausted all methods to improve what we already have.

�30

Notes and Acknowledgements

These examples of bins designs were shown to residences during our survey (bin design images taken from the internet)

Photos and Images: Front cover: Photo of informal recycling collector having a sleep, Bangkok, Thailand. All other images except where noted are from Keep Asia Beautiful.

Acknowledgements: This initiative could not have been possible without the support and cooperation of:

- The Melaka State Government, Y.B Datuk Ar. HJ. Ismail Bin HJ Othman, Exco of Housing, Local Government and Environment

- Y.B Datuk Wira HJ. MD. Yunos Bin Husin, Exco of Education, Higher Education, Science and Technology, Green Technology and Innovation.

- The Mayor of Melaka, Datuk Zainal Bin Hussin - HJ, Mansor Bin Sudin, President Hang Tuah Municipal Council - Ir. Zulkifli Bin Tamby Chik, Director Negeri Melaka, SW Corp - The Malaysian Chinese Chamber of Commerce, Jonker’s Walk Branch

�31

120L Grey bin used by residences in landed houses in Melaka. Photo: SW Corp