1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTON Background of the Study Solid waste means any garbage, refuse, sludge from a wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded materials including solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous material, resulting from industrial, commercial, mining and agricultural operations, and from community activities, but does not include solid or dissolved materials in domestic sewage. In Simple Words - Solid wastes are any discarded (abandoned or considered waste-like) materials that can be solid, liquid, semi-solid or containerized gaseous material, such as waste tires, scrap metal, latex paints, furniture and toys, domestic refuse (garbage), discarded

appliances and vehicles, uncontaminated used oil and anti-freeze, empty aerosol cans, paint cans and compressed gas cylinders, construction and demolition debris, asbestos. a material is discarded if it is abandoned by being: disposed of; burned or incinerated, including being burned as a fuel for the purpose of recovering usable energy; or accumulated, stored or physically, chemically or biologically treated (other than burned or incinerated) instead of or before being disposed of.

A material is disposed of if it is: Discharged, deposited, injected, dumped, spilled, leaked or placed into or on any land or water so that such material or any constituent thereof may enter the environment or be emitted into the air or discharged into groundwater or surface water. One of the most serious problems that the country encounters today is pollution due to the improper handling and disposal of solid wastes. The problem occurs only in the urban areas where population density is high and human activities are continuous and intense but is also felt in the regional and rural areas; Seventy percent (70%) of solid waste comes from domestic sources and the rest or thirty percent (30%) from industries (Philippine Strategy for Sustainable Development, 1999). The consequences of environmental degradation are all around us. We do not need statistics to know that the world we live in today is very different from the world we know twenty years ago. The garbage problem in urban centers increases the risk of water-borne and air-borne decreases among the population. There is really a need to adopt changes and corrective measures to save the environment from total distraction (Soriano,1995). The Senate and House of the Representative of the Philippines enacted Republic Act No. 9003 known as the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act 2000 last January 26, 2001. The act provides for an ecological solid waste management program, creating the necessary

institutional mechanisms and incentives, declaring certain acts prohibited and providing penalties, appropriating funds therefore and other purposes. One of the extension programs of the Panay State Polytechnic College, Dayao Campus is on zero Solid Waste Management. The program is geared to the community improve the environmental conditions by conducting seminars, trainings, and demonstration about recycling, source of recovery and reduction, composting and waste segregation. The extension program has served several municipalities of the province of Capiz and has been recognized by the Roxas City Government, thereby making PSPC Dayao as the show window for Solid Waste Management during the Gawad Pangulo sa Kapaligiran

Evaluation last 2001. Here in Capiz, especially in our town the municipality of Dumalag the Local Government Units (LGUs) shall be primarily responsible for the implementation and enforcement of the Solid Waste Management Program within their respective jurisdiction with proper coordination in the private sector. But there are observations that solid waste management program was ineffective on its objectives to solve the solid waste problems due to lack of awareness and participation among people in the community. So, therefore there is a need to study the extent of

participation of the people in Poblacion Dumalag, Capiz on the solid waste management program implementation. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM This study will be conducted to gather information and answer questions about the solid waste management program in the Municipality of Dumalag, Capiz. Likewise to determine the level of awareness and, the level of participation of the people on the program. Specifically it sought answers to the following questions: 1. What is the respondents socio-demographic characteristic such as age, sex, educational attainment, number of household members, and monthly income? 2. What is the respondents level of awareness on the solid waste management program of the Municipality of Dumalag? 3. What is the respondents level of participation on the solid waste management program of the Municipality of Dumalag? 4. Is there a significant difference in the respondents level of awareness when they are group according to age, sex, educational attainment, number of household members, and monthly income? 5. Is there a significant difference in the respondents level of participation when they are group according to age, sex, educational attainment, number of household members, and monthly income?

HYPOTHESES There is no significant relationship between certain variables such as age, sex, educational attainment, and monthly income. In view of the preceding problems, the following hypotheses are advanced: 1. There is no significant difference in the respondents level of awareness when considered as whole and when classified as to their socio-economic characteristics? 2. There is no significant difference in the respondents level of participation when conduct as a whole and when classified as to their socio-economic characteristics?

THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK This study was anchored on the theory of Tchobanoglous et al., (2002), which state that waste are discarded tangible products of human activities that are regarded as unwanted and useless. However; despite such notions about these materials, wastes can be reused and can become sources of industrial production and energy regeneration if allowed to be managed appropriately. The managing however presents a challenge especially in our current era where numerous factors have added constraints and complexities to the process. The efficient managing of wastes has further turned into one of the most significant

problems of our time due to adjacent concerns regarding the preservation of lifestyles, protection of the environment and the promotion of public health. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Figure 1 shows that the study sought to determine if there is a significant relationship in the demographic characteristics and level of awareness and level of participation of the residents of Dumalag, Capiz toward Solid waste management program.

Independent Variable Demographic Characteristics: Age, Sex, Civil Status, Educational Attainment, Household Size and Monthly Income.

Dependent Variable

Level of Awareness

Participation in the Solid Waste Management

Level of Participation

Fig.1 Schematic Diagram showing the conceptual framework of the study

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The outcome of this study will help the following: People of Dumalag. They are the primary source of this data, for them to know the importance of proper waste disposal; it will also motivate them to join other projects in their town. To educate themselves about recycling and reusing old materials. Municipal Official. This study will help them evaluate their town of who among the people participated actively on the said program. This will also provide them vital info and data useful for planning and policy formulation for the progress of their town. Brgy. Officials. This study will help them encourage the people in their baranggay to be active members in the difference program of their town. This aides them to continue the programs for the development of their barangay. Teachers. They may gain insights on the conduct of the study and give suggestions to the researchers. Future Researchers. This study may servers as a guideline and may give information if they were to conduct a study research related to how people participate in programs.

SCOPE AND DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY The main purpose of this study is to gather information and answer questions about the solid waste management program in the Municipality of Dumalag. Likewise to determine the level of awareness and the level of participation of the people on the program. The respondents of these study are the randomly selected from the Population Poblacion Dumalag, Capiz. They were asked to answer the Solid Waste Management Program Questionnaire. The data to be gathered were analyzed using the descriptive mean and standard deviation and the t-test for inferential statistics. DEFINITION OF TERMS For better and understanding of the study, the following are operationally defined as follows: Biodegradable. This refers to an object that can be acted upon by microorganism like bacteria and fungi (Botkin, 1998). In this study, this refers to food waste, garden waste, animal waste and other waste material that can be made into compost by mixing them with soil and water. Composting. This is a term referring to the controlled decomposition of organic matter acted upon by microorganisms, mainly bacteria and

fungi, into humus like product (Botkin, 1998). In this study, this refers to the placing of the biodegradable materials in a compost pit and set them aside for decomposition. Environment. This term refers to the sum of all external forces and conditions acting on an organism or a community of organisms (Deauna, 1996). In this study, it refers to the physical and biotic habitat that surrounds us that we can see, hear, touch, smell, and taste. Respondents. This term conceptually defines as a person who responds or makes reply (http://dictionary.reference.com). In this study, it refers to the head of the family who served as the participants of the study. Solid Waste. This is refer to anything that is thrown away, such as garbage, rubbish, trash litter, junk, and refuse from any source (homes, business, farms, industries, or institution; this is a discarded material with insufficient liquid content to flow (DENR AO no. 98-49 Series of 1998). In this study, it refers to all discarded commercial waste, non-hazardous institutional and industrial waste, street sweepings, construction debris, agricultural waste, and other non-hazardous/non-toxic solid waste. Solid Waste Management. The term refers to the discipline associated with the control of generation, storage, collection, transfer,

10

and transport, processing, and disposal of solid waste in a manner that is in accord with the best principles of public health, economics, engineering, conservation, aesthetics and other environmental

considerations, and that is also responsive to public attitudes (DENR AO no. 98-49, Series of 1998). The definition is used both conceptually and operationally. Zero Waste Management. Conceptually it refer to an ecological method of handling waste that does not degrade the environment nor pollute air, water, and soil, and facilitates their sanitary retrieval, re-use o recycling (DENR AO no. 98-49, Series of 1998). In this study, it refers to combination of waste into healthful, beneficial, productive and aesthetic purposes.

11

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The primary cause of ecological degradation is the fact that there are too many people living in too unequal societies who are making use of too many unsustainable technologies and are consuming too many resources, which eventually produce too much waste. Sustainability may be brought about through smaller populations living in relatively equal societies, making use of appropriate green technologies, consuming responsibly, reusing waste, and producing less waste. With the Earths human inhabitants being the way they are, however, environmental deterioration continues to increase. The rapid depletion of natural resources is happening in all nations and significantly straining the quality of the planets water, soil, and air. The pattern of production and consumption begs the question: can the Earths natural resources feed and sustain a growing and increasingly urbanized population? It is estimated that the Earths renewable natural resources has declined by over thirty percent over the last thirty years while the demands on them has increased by fifty percent (Strategies, 2001). This environmental deterioration is made worse by the indiscriminate disposal of waste materials. Whenever something is thrown out or is considered to be waste, resources are lost. This called for the extraction of

12

more natural resources to replenish our societys never ending need for more products. There is a further and more direct consequence to the continual accumulation of waste. The figurative term buried in garbage manifested itself literally in the Payatas tragedy in Quezon City. Payatas is a 12-hectare dumpsite that is inhabited by around 311,500 people who make a living from scavenging and selling trash. Two typhoons that hit Metro Manila loosened the mountain of garbage and in the morning of July 10, 2000, it eventually came crashing down on an estimated 300 shanties, killing 224 people. The dumpsite was temporarily closed. Six months after the disaster, having no alternative dump sites, the Payatas dumpsite was reopened (Bildan, 2003). Besides the threat to our lives, indiscriminate dumping has led to our streets being lined with trash and to the flooding of our urban dwellings. Our health is threatened when canals, clogged by garbage, become breeding grounds for insects that bring about diseases like cholera and dengue. Respiratory diseases are also brought about by the burning of garbage in our backyards. Landfills produce methane gas which is a potent greenhouse gas. As the primary contributor to solid waste in the world, how can man and his man made organizations contribute to the management of solid waste? Ecological solid waste management as defined by RA 9003 is the

13

systematic administration of activities which provide for segregation at source, segregated transportation, storage, transfer, processing,

treatment, and disposal of solid waste and all other waste management activities which do not harm the environment. Part 6, Rule 21, Section 2 of RA 9003 states that the DepEd, TESDA, CHED, DENR, and other concerned government agencies, shall aggressively incorporate ecological solid waste management in the school systems at all levels, emphasizing the involvement of school administrators, teaching and non-teaching staff, and studentry in school-wide and nearby community waste management actions, and in strengthening of the waste management content in the curricula. Due to the ever-increasing population, rapidly increasing urban setting, and the corresponding mountain of waste generated, it is a reality that local authorities lack the financial, technical and human resources to manage its own wastes. With such limitations they therefore become unable or unwilling to deliver and maintain this urban service. Faced with an overwhelming task, it is the practice of LGUs to seek assistance from non-government organizations (NGOs) and other public and private institutions in managing its solid waste. This collaborative approach also makes use of community involvement in waste segregation, storage, collection, and recycling. Responding to the call for a more environmentally responsible nation, the LGUs, in cooperation with various institutions and NGOs

14

throughout the Philippines, had engaged in solid waste management programs at the community level. A number of these activities focused on educating and training the Filipino youth about the proper solid waste management in their respective schools. By harnessing the idealism of the School-Based Solid Waste Management Initiative in the Philippines: Lessons and Experiences of the Toyota Auto Parts and Sta. Rosa City Partnership 210 4th Asian Rural Sociology Association (ARSA) International Conference youth, student leaders can influence their fellow students and parents to become catalyst for change not only in their schools but also in their communities. SBSWM is being practiced in varying degrees in a number of schools throughout Metro Manila. Quezon City had launched the Green School Brigade program where students from six public elementary schools were encouraged to bring recyclable wastes and take them to their schools in exchange for school supplies or grocery items (Reganit, 2008). Marikina City instituted the Eco Savers program in 2004, requiring students from 18 public elementary schools to bring recyclable garbage from their households to their schools (Best Practices, 2007). Thirty-six schools in Makati City had also been chosen to engage in waste segregation (Davis et al, 1991). One hundred students from five partner schools were chosen as participants to the training program. The partner-schools include: Emilio

15

Aguinaldo Integrated School, Isaac Lopez Integrated School, Bonifacio Javier National High School, Eulogio Rodriguez Vocational High School, and Rizal Experimental Pilot School for Cottage Industries. After the training, the schools waste management programs were monitored and evaluated for a period of six months, from August 2006 to April 2007. The LGUs in Bulacan, Nueva Vizcaya, and Sorsogon followed suit and had replicated the program. he program had also been implemented and privately financed by the Municipal government of Imus, Cavite, Samsung Electronics Philippines Manufacturing Corp. In Calamba, Laguna, and Toyota Autoparts Inc. in Sta. Rosa, Laguna (Pacey, 1990).

Classification of Waste The classification of waste varies and depends country by country. Waste can be divided into many different types. The most common method of classification is by their physical, chemical, and biological characteristics. 1. Solid Waste is broadly defined as including nonhazardous industrial, commercial and domestic refuse including

household organic trash, street sweeping, hospital and institutional garbage, and construction waste; generally sludge and human waste are regarded as a liquid waste problem outside the scope of MSW (Zerback, 2003). These are waste materials that contain less than 70% water. Example of this type of waste are the domestic or household garbage,

16

some industrial wastes, some mining wastes, and oilfield wastes such as drill cutting. 2. Liquid Waste these are usually waste waters that contain less than 1%. This type of waste contain high concentration of dissolved salts and metal. Liquid wastes are often classified into two broad types: Sewage and toxic wastes. Generally , there are various types of liquid waste generated in urban centers: human excreta, domestics wastes produced in households, hospital wastes, industrial effluents, agricultural liquid wastes and nuclear wastes. When improperly handled and disposed of, liquid wastes pose a serious threat to human health and the environment because of their ability to enter watersheds, pollute ground water and drinking water (US EPA, 2009).3. Sludge by lining and contouring the fill, compacting and planting the upper most cover layer, diverting drainage, and selecting proper soil in sites not subject to flooding or high groundwater levels. The best soil for a landfill is clay because clay is less permeable than other types of soil. Materials disposed of in a landfill can be further secured from leakage by solidifying them in materials such as cement, fly ash from power plants, asphalt, or organic polymers. Landfills can also be shifted to another use after their capacities have been reached. The city of Evanston, Illinois, built a landfill up into a hill and the now-complete Mt.

17

Trash more is a ski area. Golf courses built over landfill sites are also increasingly common (Sule, 2001). On the local or regional level, reducing wastes is accomplished through these methods by source separation and subsequent material recovery. Currently, the United States recycles about 10% of its glass and 25% of its paper wastes; in countries such as Switzerland and the Netherlands, the proportion in the glass recycled approaches to 50% while Japan recycles 50% of its paper wastes incineration some countries, on the other hand, manage most of their solid waste trough incinerators. Incineration, or the controlled burning of waste at high

temperatures to produce steam and an alternative to landfilling (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2009). Incinerators are designed for the destruction of wastes and are commonly employed in developed nations who could afford the costs of the burning facilities, plus its operation and maintenance ( Mc Cracken, 2005). This type of waste disposal is the second largest disposal method in most developed countries and ranks next to landfills in the United States and the United Kingdom. In the UK, approximately 5% of household waste, 75% of commercial waste and 2% of industrial waste is disposed of

through this method ( Buckner, 2002) in spite of its huge capital requirements, incineration presents to be a promising option for

18

developed island nations whose small land area makes land filling an unsuitable method for their waste disposal. Reduction by incineration, along with sanitary disposal of the residue, has been proven useful in nations such as Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands. A further benefit of incineration can be realized if the heat generated thereby is recovered. For years, European cities have generated electricity using wastedisposal incinerators as sources of heat (Montgomery, 2000). There are negative issues, however, in the use of this burning method and much of that circulate around its safety for the environment and to the human health. It is argued that the combustion process creates air pollution, ash, an common method of hazardous waste disposal in the area is through dumping. Results indicated that proper waste management is not fully implemented due to budget constraint ( Gilbert, 1998). Threats and Impacts of Improper Waste Management With the increase of population comes to the increase in consumption, and consequently, in the amount of wastes we generate. Through time, problems resulting from improper and irresponsible management of our wastes have arisen and continue to do so. Human and ecosystem health can be adversely affected by all forms of wastes, from its generation to its disposal. Over the years, wastes and waste management responses such as policies, legal, financial, and institutional

19

instruments; cradle-to-cradle or cradle-to-grave technological options; and sociocultural practices have impacted on ecosystem health and human wellbeing. Examples are evident in all countries. A popular example of how improper waste management and lack of coordination in policies can bring huge environmental and human impacts is the

Love Canal Incidents. The Love Canal is an area situated at Niagara Falls, New York. In 1953, the Hooker Chemical Company, then the owners and operators of the property, covered the canal with earth and sold it to the city for one dollar. In the late 50s, about 100 homes and a school were built at the site. Twenty five years after the Hooker Chemical Company stop using the Love Canal as an industrial dump, 82different compounds, 11 of them suspected carcinogens, have been percolating upward through the soil, their drums containers rotting and leaching their contents into the backyards and basements of 100 homes and a public school built on banks of the canal. What followed was a catastrophe that cause several deaths, birth defects and abnormalities, lawsuits and ultimately, the evacuation of the residents. Locally, here in the Philippines, the 2001 Smoky Mountain tragedy in the Payatas Dumpsite is a constant reminder of how disastrous the countrys waste management has been regarding the case of that open dumpsite. Collapse of that mountain of trash due

20

to the severe rainfall had claimed the lives of many people, both young and old. Aside from such disaster caused by the irresponsible management of a former dumping site, wastewater discharges, as shown by studies, can also bring harmful impacts to coastal areas and other bodies of

water. In Fiji Islands, for example, it has been concluded that the disposal of untreated human and domestic waste has been the major contributor to the degradation of the islands marine environment. Development to the island had brought a shift species dominance from hard coral to macro-algae (Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2005 as cited in the 2005 WHO Liquid Waste Monitoring Project). There is also no need to mention the numerous incidences of mine tail deposits and radioactive discharges in many rivers, lakes and shores that have undoubtedly caused detrimental effects to marine and even human life. The list goes on and on. Waste management practices and policies over the last three decade have resulted in positive responses in terms of improvement of ecosystems. Some positive impacts of the responses identified are: Waste recycling activities have been found to result in improve resource conservation and reduce energy consumption as well as reduction of heavy metal contamination of water sources; In the Baltic Sea, the

21

mercury levels of fish caught were reduce by 60% due to stringent pollution control measures; Phasing out of lead from gasoline has reduced lead emissions from vehicular sources. Wetlands have been widely reported to absorb significant amounts of anthropogenic

pollutants.(Wilkinson, et al, 1998)

22

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

Research Design The survey method will be used in this study. According to Fraeukel and Wallen (2005), survey is used as a descriptive method to further analyze the quality and accuracy of the study. Surveys can be useful when a researcher wants to collect data on phenomena that cannot be directly observed. This study will employ 50 heads of family of Brgy. Poblacion Dumalag, Capiz. The sample participants that can truly represent the entire population will be determined using the formula of Sloven. Random sampling was adapted in the selection of the participants. The Research Instrument To gather data to be needed the researcher will use a self-made Solid Waste Management Program Questionnaire accompanied with a Personal data sheet. The following arbitrarily scale with corresponding descriptions will be utilized in the interpretation of scores: Data-Gathering Procedure In the conduct of the study, permission will be secured from the office of the Municipal Manager. After the report will be granted, the

23

researcher then will asks permission from the Office of the Punong Baarangay of Poblacion Dumalag for the administration of the questionnaires. The instruments will be personally administer of the researcher to the participants. The retrieved questionnaires will be checked as to the completeness of the data requested. Accordingly, the pertinent data to be obtained will subsequently be classified, tabulated, computerprocessed, analyzed, and interpreted. Scoring the Variables The responses to the items in Part II were made by checking the columns with categories such as Aware, Moderately Aware, Slightly Aware, Least Aware, and Not Aware. The following responses were assigned with corresponding scores:

Fully Aware Moderately Aware Slightly Aware Least Aware Not Aware

= = = = =

5 4 3 2 1

While, the responses to the items in Part III were made through checking the columns with categories such as Fully Participated, Moderately Participated, Slightly Participated, Least Participated,

24

and Not Participated. The following responses were assigned with corresponding scores: Fully Participated Moderately Participated Slightly Participated Least Participated Not Participated = = = = = = 5 =4 =3 =2 =1 5 4 3 2 1

Statistical Tools The data to be gathered for this study will be subjected to certain computer processed statistics, as follows: Mean. Mean to the obtained from the instrument will be utilized to determine the level of awareness and level of participation on the solid waste management program of the Municipality of Dumalag. Standard derivation. Standard derivation will be used to determine the extent of dispersion of scores from the means to be obtained from the investigation. t-test. This will be used to determine the significance of the differences in respondents level of awareness and level of participation. The formula for t-test is (N.M. Downie and R.W. Heath, 1959): t=
( ) ( ) [ ]

25

where: n1 n2 X1 X2 s12 and s22 = = sample size of the variable 1 sample size of the variable 2 = = = mean of variable 1 mean of variable 2 variances

ANOVA or Analysis of Variance. This will be used to determine the significant difference between the attitudes and habits of the residents considering the age and the highest educational attainment. The formula for ANOVA by Downie and Heath (1959) is as follows:

where: MSbetween MSwithin =

=

Mean squares between Mean squares within

26

CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This Chapter shows data analysis and data interpretation. It presents according to the following order. 1.Distribution of the respondents in terms of sex, age, household size, monthly salary income and highest educational attainment. 2.Level of awareness by the respondents according to sex, age, monthly salary income and highest educational attainment. 3. Level of Participation by the respondents according to sex, age, monthly salary income and highest educational attainment. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS Distribution of Respondents by Sex Table 1 shows the distribution of samples by sex. Majority of the samples were female which is 28 or 56% while 22 or 44% were males. Data show that females outnumbered the males. TABLE 1 DISTRIBUTION OF THE RESPONDENTS BY SEX Sex Male Female Total Number 20 28 50 Percent 44 56 100

27

Age Table 2 shows the distribution of respondents by age. Majority of them came from mean & above age bracket while the rest who got the least number came from the age bracket which is below mean. Therefore, majority of the respondents came from elderly sector. TABLE 2 DISTRIBUTION OF THE RESPONDENTS BY AGE Age Mean and Above Below Mean Total Number 26 24 50 Percent 52 48 100

Household Size The distribution of respondents by household size is reflected on Table 3. The table reveals that there are 21 or 42% respondents who have a household size of 4 and below while 29 or 58% of the samples who belong to the 5 and above household size. Therefore the data supports the statement that majority of respondents came from small household size.

28

TABLE 3 DISTRIBUTION OF THE RESPONDENTS BY HOUSEHOLD SIZE Household Size 4 and below 5 and above Total Number 21 29 50 Percent 42 58 100

Monthly Income The distribution of respondents according to monthly income is shown in Table 4 below. There are 27 or 54% of the respondents who earn below the mean which is Php. 10,302.02 while there are 23 or 46% who earn mean and above. The table reveals that the respondents who earn below the mean outnumbered those respondents who earn mean and above. TABLE 4 DISTRIBUTION OF THE RESPONDENTS BY MONTHLY SALARY INCOME Monthly Income Mean and above Below mean Total Number 23 27 50 Percent 46 54 100

29

Highest Educational Attainment The table 5 below shows the distribution of the respondents according to their highest educational attainment. College graduates outnumbered the others with a number of 22 or 44%. Elementary undergraduate got 5 or 10%. The data therefore reveal that respondents possess high educational attainment. TABLE 5 DISTRIBUTION OF THE RESPONDENTS BY HIGHEST EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Highest Educational Attainment HighSchoolUndergraduate High School Graduate College Level College Graduate Total Number 5 11 12 22 50 Percent 10 22 24 44 100

Level of Awareness by the Residents towards Solid Waste Management Table 6 shows the level of awareness of the residents toward solid waste management. The highest mean is 3.82 with a verbal interpretation of moderately aware. The highest mean was attained by the item no. 1. On the other hand, the lowest mean is 2.74 on the item no. 6 with a verbal interpretation of slightly aware. The rest of the items obtained a slightly aware verbal interpretation.

30

The results revealed in the table simply show that the residents are slightly aware about solid waste management. The residents belong on the middle state where they barely know everything about proper waste management. The residents are not very well informed about the solid waste management thus resulting to improper practice of waste management.

TABLE 6 Level of Awareness by the Residents towards Solid Waste Management Statement 1.The waste segregation/sorting practices of the municipality. 2.The waste collection schedule by the municipality. 3.The recycling program of the municipality. 4.The composting method techniques of the municipality. 5.The use of municipal waste management facilities. 6.The dumping site of the Total Mean Verbal Interpretation

191

3.82

Moderately Aware

169

3.38

Slightly Aware

162

3.24

Slightly Aware

154

3.08

Slightly Aware

162 137

3.24 2.74

Slightly Aware Slightly Aware

31

municipality. 7.Th existing laws pertaining to solid waste management. 8.The municipal ordinance prohibiting acts against solid waste disposal. 9.The fines and penalties for the violations of the municipal waste management. 10.The bulletin of information, posters and other media, disseminating the campaign on solid waste management. 153 3.06 Slightly Aware

159

3.18

Slightly Aware

143

2.86

Slightly Aware

157

3.14

Slightly Aware

Level of Participation by the Residents towards Solid Waste Management Table 7 represents the level of participation by the residents towards solid waste management. The highest mean is 4.02 with a verbal interpretation of moderately participated while the lowest mean of 3.20 was garnered by item no. 8 with a verbal interpretation of slightly participated. Six out of 10 items has a verbal interpretation of moderately participated and the rest has a slightly participated verbal interpretation.

32

Table 7 shows that the residents of Dumalag moderately participate in the solid waste management program of the municipality. The residents dont fully participate in the solid waste managemnent which need a little more push and encouragement by the municipality for the residents to fully participate. TABLE 7 Level of Participation by the Residents towards Solid Waste Management Verbal Interpretation Moderately Participated Moderately Participated Moderately Participated

Statement 1.The waste segregation program of municipality. 2.The no littering campaign of the municipality. 3.The waste collection program of the municipality. 4.The no burning of plastics program of the government. 5.The Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle (3R)program of the government. 6.The Barangay Clean and Green program of the municipality.

Total 184

Mean 3.68

177

3.54

179

3.58

168

3.36

Slightly Participated

180

3.60

Slightly Participated

201

4.02

Moderately Participated

33

7.The clean-up drive/activities of the municipality. 8.The advocacies on solid waste management. 9.The meeting conferences of the Barangay Officials in the locality. 10.The education and awareness campaign on solid waste management.

194

3.88

Moderately Participated Slightly Participated

160

3.20

164

3.28

Slightly Participated

176

3.52

Moderately Participated

Difference in level of awareness between Sex Table 8 shows the t-test for the mean difference comparing between sexes of the sample respondents in terms of the level of awareness. The computed t-value is greater than the tabular t-value at 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis which states that there is significant difference in the attitudes in terms of sex is accepted. Meaning, the males had different attitudes toward solid waste management than females.

34

Table 8 T-test for the Mean Difference in level of awareness toward Solid Waste Management considering Sex Sex Male Female Mean 3.31 0.31 3.0 3.1 s MD Computed t Probability

Tabular t-vale = 2.0096 df = 49 Level of significance = 0.05 s significant Difference in level of participation considering Sex Table 9 is the t-test for the mean difference comparing between sexes in terms of the level of participation on solid waste management. It shows that the computed t-value is less than the tabular t-value. Therefore, reject the alternative hypothesis that states there is no significant difference in the level of participation towards solid waste management according to sex. In short, the females had similar habits compared to males.

35

Table 9 T-test for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Sex Sex Male Female Mean 3.87 0.02 3.89 0.15 ns MD Computed t Probability

Tabular t-vale = 2.0096 df = 49 Level of significance = 0.05 ns not significant Difference in level of awareness considering Monthly Income Table 10 shows that there is no significant difference in level of awareness on solid waste management with respect to monthly income since that the computed t-value is less than the tabular t-value. Therefore, reject alternative hypothesis. Meaning, person earning below mean had no different level of awareness on solid waste management than person who earned within the range of mean & above.

36

Table 10 T-test for the Mean Difference in level of awareness toward Solid Waste Management considering Monthly Income Monthly Income Below mean Mean & above Tabular t-vale = 2.0096 df = 54 Mean 3.4 0.5 3.9 1.30 ns MD Computed t Probability

Level of significance = 0.05 ns not significant Difference in level of participation considering Monthly Income Table 11 is the t-test for the mean difference in level of participation considering monthly income. The table shows that there is no significant difference since computed t-value is less than the tabular t-value @ 0.05 level of significance, hence, reject alternative hypothesis. Meaning, people earning below mean had same level of awareness compared to people earning within the range of mean & above.

37

Table 11 T-test for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Monthly Income Monthly Income Below mean Mean & above Mean 3.8 0.1 3.9 1.08 ns MD Computed t Probability

Tabular t-vale = 2.0096 df = 49 Level of significance = 0.05 ns not significant

Difference in level of awareness considering Household Size Table 12 shows the t-test for the mean difference in level of awareness on solid waste management in relation to the household size. The probability results to not significant since that the computed t-value is less than the tabular t-value, hence, alternative hypothesis that there is significant difference in level of awareness on solid waste management considering household size is rejected. In short, any household size had the same attitudes.

38

Table 12 T-test for the Mean Difference in level of awareness on Solid Waste Management considering Household Size Household Size 4 & below 5 & above Mean 3.87 0.13 4 1.30 Ns MD Computed t Probability

Tabular t-vale = 2.0096 df = 49

Level of significance = 0.05 ns not significant Difference in level of participation considering Household Size Table 13 shows the t-test for the mean difference in level of participation on solid waste management in relation to the household size. Using 0.05 level of significance it shows that the computed t-value is less than the tabular t-value, hence, alternative hypothesis that there is significant difference in level of participation on solid waste management considering household size is rejected. In short, household size 4 and less had same habits than with size 5 and more.

39

Table 13 T-test for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Household Size Household Size 4 & below 5 & above Mean 3.81 0.13 3.94 1.44 ns MD Computed t Probability

Tabular t-vale = 2.0096 df = 49

Level of significance = 0.05 ns not significant Difference in level of awareness considering Age Table 14 shows the t-test for the mean difference in level of awareness considering age. The computed f-value is greater than the tabular t-value. This means that the test for mean difference using t-test results significant difference and therefore accept the alternative hypothesis. In short, age affects the level of awareness of the respondents toward solid waste management.

40

Table 14 T-test for the Mean Difference in level of awareness toward Solid Waste Management considering Age Age Mean & above Below Mean Mean 3.90 385.1 3.89 1.0 ns MD Computed t Probability

Tabular f-value = 2.0096 Level of significance = 0.05 df = 49

ns not significant

Difference in level of participation considering Age Table 15 is the test for analysis of variance for the mean difference in the level of participation on solid waste management. The result shows that there is significant difference since that the tabular f-value is less than the computed f-value. Therefore, alternative hypothesis has to be rejected. It means that residents differ in the level of awareness on solid waste management considering age.

41

Table 15 T-test for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Age Age Mean & above Below Mean Mean 3.86 0.09 3.77 0.6 ns MD Computed t Probability

Tabular f-value = 2.0096 df = 49

Level of significance = 0.05 ns not significant

Difference in level of awareness considering Highest Educational Attainment Table 16 shows the result of f-test for mean difference in level of awareness considering Highest Educational Attainment. The computed fvalue is greater than the tabular f-value and so accept alternative hypothesis that states there is significant difference in attitudes toward solid waste management considering highest educational attainment, the ways of the residents on the level of awareness on solid waste

42

management could be affected too in terms of highest educational attainment. Table 16 ANOVA for the Mean Difference in level of awareness toward Solid Waste Management considering Highest Educational Attainment Source of Variation Variation between Variation within Variation Total Sum of squares 2.94 4.97 7.91 Df Mean Square 0.98 7.10 36 39 0.138 S Computed fvalue Probability

Tabular f-value = 2.87 Level of significance = 0.05 s significant

Difference in level of participation considering Highest Educational Attainment Table 17 shows the data for computing the f-value for the mean difference in level of participation considering Highest Educational Attainment. The computed f-value is greater as compared to the tabular f-value and that means to accept the alternative hypothesis that there is

43

a significant difference, thus, highest educational attainment of residents affects the level of participation on solid waste management by the residents.

Table 17 ANOVA for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Highest Educational Attainment Source of Variation Variation between Variation within Variation Total Sum of Squares 4.02 5.28 9.3 Mean Square 1.34 9.12 36 39 0.15 S Computed fvalue

Df 3

Probability

Tabular f-value = 2.87 Level of significance = 0.05 s significant

44

CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary This scientific paper was conducted on April 2012 at Brgy. Poblacion, Dumalag, Capiz to enable identify the socio demographic characteristics of the respondents, the level of awareness and

participation towards solid waste management so to be able to find out if there is a significant difference in the level of awareness and participation of the residents when grouped in terms of the demographic

characteristics such as to sex, age, monthly income, household size, and highest educational attainment. A questionnaire was used to gather the data on each families. Checking of the columns with corresponding questions both on the level of awareness and participation were made. On the level of awareness, data were interpreted as aware rated as 5, moderately aware rated as 4, slightly aware which is 3, least aware with the rate of 2, and not aware which is rated 1. On the other hand, the responses for the level of participation statements which was done also through checking the columns that corresponds the respondents answer were fully participated equivalent to 5, moderately participated equivalent to 4, slightly participated equivalent to 3, least participated equivalent to 2 and not participated equivalent to 1.

45

All in all, there were 50 numbers of respondents from Brgy. Poblacion, Dumalag, Capiz. The technique used for rating the samples was a purposive sampling. There were also statistical tools being used such as t-test, ANOVA, and the likerts ranking method. Mean frequency and percentages were likewise computed from the data.

Significant Findings Based on the results of the study, the following findings were arrived. The level of awareness of the residents were slightly favorable and the traits of the respondents in regards to the level of participation reveals that people are moderately participating in the beautification of their place towards solid waste management. The respondents level of awareness toward solid waste

management is dependent on their sex and highest educational attainment and the respondents level of participation on solid waste management is dependent only to the highest educational attainment.

Conclusion Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn. The residents of Barangay Poblacion, Dumalag, Capiz has shown a slightly favorable traits on the level of awareness toward solid waste management.

46

The residents exhibited moderately favorable behavior in terms of the level of participation towards solid waste management. The dumping site on the municipality must be considered by the local government units to be implemented at Brgy. Poblacion, Dumalag, Capiz. The demographic characteristics of the residents are independent from the level of awareness toward solid waste management except for their sex and highest educational attainment, and the demographic characteristics of the residents are independent from the level of participation towards solid waste management except only for the highest educational attainment. Recommendations Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are set. 1. There must be a dumping site in the locality since it is the most common problem encountered by the residents of Barangay Poblacion, Dumalag, Capiz. 2. Since awareness is a significant factor on the extent of participation of the people in the community, the municipality should increase the level of awareness which requires an intensive information dissemination not only of the direct and indirect benefits of proper solid waste management to their immediate family but with emphasis on three

47

pillars of sustainable development : equitable access to resources, economic growth and environmental protection. The people should understand that failure to satisfy these here pillars of development, sustainable development is difficult to attain. The people should be

taught how to convert solid wastes into something useful. 3. Similar studies must be advanced with wider scope of survey area and increased number of respondents which should include additional relevant variables in the prediction on the extent of participation of the respondents. There might be other factors which may have significant effect on participation in the solid waste management program. 4. The LGUs being the frontliners in the solid waste management program in their jurisdiction must have a strong commitment in the implementation of the program. Despite their limited resources they should allocate some funds to procure solid waste facilities to encourage people to process their own solid wastes. 5. The LGUs in their own capacity should look for financial and technical assistance from foreign agencies/organizations. A good solid waste management plan is a must for this purpose.

48

Bibliography

Strategies for Sustainable Development. (2001). The DAC Guidelines, November 28, 2007. Bildan, L. (2003). Disaster Management in Southeast Asia an Overview. Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, January 20, 2008. Davis, M. L., and Cornwell, D. 1991. Introduction to Environmental Engineering. 2d ed. New York, New York. McGraw-Hill. Buckner S 2002, Controlling odours during grass composting, Biocycle, September, pp 42-47. Gilbert E J 1998, Health & Safety at Composting Sites: A Guidance Note for Site Managers, The Composting Association, Wellingborough, UK. Wilkinson K, Tymms S, Hood V and Tee E 1998, Guide to Best Practice Composting Green Organics, EcoRecycle Victoria, Melbourne. Pacey, A. 1990. Hygiene and Literacy, in Kerr, C(ed), Community Health and Sanitation, Intermediate Technology Publications, Nigeria. Karley, N.A. 2003. Solid Waste and Pollution Peoples daily graphic October 9, 1993, pp.5. Sule, O.R.A 2001. Management of Solid Wastes in Nigeria towards a Sanitary Urban Environment. Quarterly journal of Administration, Lagos vol. 15, Nigeria. Brauer, John. 2006. "Wastewater Treatment: Back to Basics." Brewers' Guardian 135 Internet Resources http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/8732.html http://www.academicjournals.org http://dictionary.reference.com

49

Appendix A

Formula: t-test for mean difference t= ( ) ( ) [ ]

Computation for Table 8 using t-test T-test for the Mean Difference in level of awareness toward Solid Waste Management considering Sex

= 3.1

)(

)(

Computation for Table 9 using t-test T-test for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Sex

= 0.15

)(

)(

50

Computation for Table 10 using t-test T-test for the Mean Difference in level of awareness toward Solid Waste Management considering Monthly Income

= 0.5

)(

)(

Computation for Table 11 using t-test T-test for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Monthly Income

)(

)(

= 1.08
Computation for Table 12 using t-test T-test for the Mean Difference in level of awareness on Solid Waste Management considering Household Size

= 1.30

)(

)(

51

Computation for Table 13 using t-test T-test for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Household Size

= 1.44

)(

)(

Computation for Table 14 using t-test T-test for the Mean Difference in level of awareness toward Solid Waste Management considering Age

= 1.0

)(

)(

Computation for Table 15 using t-test T-test for the Mean Difference in level of participation on Solid Waste Management considering Age

= 0.60

)(

)(

52

Computation for table 16 using Analysis of Variance

Level of awareness toward Solid Waste Management considering Highest Educational Attainment

Levels of Highest Educational Attainment High School High School Undergraduate Graduate Q1 2.8 3.73 2 2.4 3.18 3 2.2 3.09 4 2.6 3.18 5 2.6 3.27 6 3.5 2.82 7 2.8 3.0 8 2.4 3.36 9 2.0 3.0 10 3.0 3.18 Total 26.3 31.81 Mean 2.63 3.18 Grand Total : 122.27 Grand Mean : 3.13 Solution: Questions College Level 3.75 3.25 3.0 2.83 3.0 2.58 3.0 3.08 2.58 3.42 30.49 3.05 College Graduate 4.14 3.77 3.68 3.27 3.18 2.64 3.18 3.32 3.17 3.0 33.67 3.67

total sum of squares

SStotal = ( SStotal = 381.66 373.75 SStotal = 7.91

53

sum of squares between

SSbetween =

SSbetween = 376.69-373.75 SSbetween = 2.94

sum of squares within

SSwithin = ( SSwithin = 381.66-376.69 SSwithin = 4.97

mean square between

MSbetween

= 0.138

mean square within

MSwithin=

= 0.98

f-test value f= = 7.10

54

Computation for table 17 using Analysis of Variance

Level of participation toward Solid Waste Management considering Highest Educational Attainment

Levels of Highest Educational Attainment High School High School Undergraduate Graduate Q1 2.6 3.72 2 3.5 3.55 3 3.0 3.64 4 3.6 3.82 5 3.6 3.91 6 4.0 4.09 7 2.8 4.0 8 2.4 3.09 9 2.6 3.18 10 3.2 .64 Total 31.3 36.64 Mean 3.13 3.37 Grand Total : 137.69 Grand Mean : 3.29 Questions College Level 3.5 3.17 2.67 3.08 3.08 3.58 3.33 2.67 3.0 3.25 31.33 3.13 College Graduate 4.0 3.77 4.18 3.23 3.23 4.23 4.23 3.73 3.64 3.68 38.42 3.84

Solution:

total sum of squares

55

SStotal = ( SStotal = 483.26 473.96 SStotal = 9.3

sum of squares between

SSbetween =

SSbetween = 477.98-473.96 SSbetween = 4.02

sum of squares within

SSwithin = ( SSwithin = 483.26-477.98 SSwithin = 5.28

mean square between

MSbetween

= 1.34

mean square within

MSwithin=

= 0.15

56

f-test value f= = 9.12

57

Appendix B Survey Question on Peoples Participation in the Solid Waste Management Program

Part I: PERSONAL DATA SHEET

Name (Optional) ____________________________________________________ Age (as of last birthday)______________________________________________ Sex (please check) [ [ ] Male ] Female

Highest Education Attainment [ [ [ [ [ [ ] Elementary Undergraduate ] Elementary Graduate ] High School Undergraduate ] High School Graduate ] College Level ] College Graduate

Number of Household members: _____________________ Estimated Monthly Salary Income: ____________________

58

PART II :

LEVEL OF AWARENESS

Please indicate your response by checking the column which corresponds to the answer of the statements. Statement The people are aware of: 1. The waste segregation/ sorting practices of the municipality. 2. The waste collection scheduled by the municipality. 3. The recycling program of the municipality. 4. The composting method techniques of the municipality. 5. The use of municipal waste management facilities. 6. The dumping site of the municipality. 7. The existing laws pertaining to solid waste management. 8. The municipal ordinance prohibiting acts against solid waste disposal. Aware Moderat ely Aware Slightly Aware Least Aware Not Aware

59

9. The fines and penalties for the violations of the municipal ordinance or solid waste management. 10. The bulletin of information, posters and other media, disseminating the campaign on solid waste management.

PART III:

LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION

Please indicate your response by checking the column which corresponds to the answer of the statements. Statement Fully Moderat Slightly Least Not Participat ely Participat Participat Participat The people ed Participat ed ed ed participate on: ed 1. The waste segregation program of municipality. 2. The no littering campaign of the municipality. 3. The waste collection program of the municipality. 4. The no

60

burning of plastics program of the government. 5. The Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle (3R) program of the government. 6. The Barangay Clean and Green program of the municipality. 7. The clean-up drive/activities of the municipality. 8. The advocacies on solid waste management. 9. The meeting conferences of the Barangay Officials in the locality.

61

PERSONAL BACKGROUND NAME: DATE OF BIRTH: PLACE OF BIRTH: HOME ADDRESS: SEX: CIVIL STATUS: CITIZENSHIP: ANDREW JOHN FAMA FAELDONEA DECEMBER 1, 1990 DAO, CAPIZ POBLACION ILAYA DUMALAG CAPIZ MALE SINGLE FILIPINO EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ATTENDED: SMA YEAR GRADUATED: 2002-2003 SECONDARY SCHOOL ATTENDED: SMA YEAR GRADUATED: 2007-2008 TERTIARY SCHOOL ATTENDED: COLEGIO DELA PURISMA CONCEPCION COURSE: BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN COMPUTER ENGINEERING YEAR GRADUATED: 2011-2012

62

PERSONAL BACKGROUND NAME: DATE OF BIRTH: PLACE OF BIRTH: HOME ADDRESS: SEX: CIVIL STATUS: CITIZENSHIP: JOEDHEL LLOYD EYAO OBORDO APRIL 22, 1991 MANINANG, SAPIAN, CAPIZ MANINANG, SAPIAN, CAPIZ MALE SINGLE FILIPINO

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ATTENDED: SAPIAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL YEAR GRADUATED: 2002-2003 SECONDARY SCHOOL ATTENDED: SAPIAN NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL YEAR GRADUATED: 2007-2008 TERTIARY SCHOOL ATTENDED: COLEGIO DELA PURISMA CONCEPCION COURSE: BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN COMPUTER ENGINEERING YEAR GRADUATED: 2011-2012