Garbage Generation To Gold

International Experience and Economics
of Solid Waste Management

A Thesis Presented
To the Faculty of the
College of Social Sciences

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements of the Degree
Bachelor of Arts in the Social Sciences

Rimpillo, Marian Guille G.

February 2014
College of Social Sciences
University of the Philippines Baguio
Approval Sheet
This is to recommend the approval of the thesis of Marian Guille Garcia
Rimpillo entitled International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste
Management. This is in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Bachelors of Arts in Social Sciences.

Arturo C. Boquiren
Thesis Adviser
Noted:

Nimreh L. Calde
Chairperson, Department of Economics and Political Science (DEPS)
Approved:

Lorelei C. Mendoza
Dean, College of Social Sciences
ii | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

Acknowledgement

This thesis would not be possible first and foremost to my thesis adviser, Sir
Arturo Boquiren: for being open-minded and listening to my ideas which would
normally be deemed unconventional and for giving me an upstart on how my ideas
could be heeded and developed.
I thank my parents who do everything just for my comforts: my father Mario
Rimpillo who ventured away to give us a life of ease at the expense of his own, most
especially for his unica ija, because you herald me as a princess it pushes me to not
waste time, opportunity and other blessings that come my way; and my mother
Elma Rimpillo who continuously checks up on my progress, reminds me to eat and
sometimes even closes the lights down for me to sleep already, but most of all I find
it fantastic the way she hushes everyone down because she knows I need my odd
wee hours to myself. I also appreciate that my younger twin sisters for the time-
being that I request I would need concentration, tried their best to be in their good
behavior: not making kulit first to their ate.
I am grateful for the ones who stark up inquisitiveness that betters my
formulations and analytics: Mr. Bernard Okubo for intellectual discussions while
drinking hot beverages and also for supporting me like a father. I am most grateful
to my co-abalone: Teroji Okubo for being my greatest motivator and acolyte!
Without you I could not have finished, with keeping my serenity at that.
iii | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

Abstract
Trash can be treasure if managed effectively. The study presented each top
countrys SWM profile ranging from production, transformation and disposal.
Revenues from taxes per ton are as follows: Austria, Netherlands and US make use
primarily landfill tax which yield $120, $177.80 and a base fee of $32.19 with
increase of $1.62 per ton per year respectively; while Japan has a more
sophisticated taxation with appropriation to type of industry and elasticity of
product but basically an increase of a 1% reduction in final waste would yield saving
of about $9.40. On recycling, Austria and Netherlands earn per ton $70 on glass,
$210 on paper, and $420 on plastics; Japan earns per ton $107.48 on glass, $312.45
on furniture and appliances, and $200-$400 on plastics; US earn per ton $4.890 on
glass, $235.300 on paper, $448.335 on steel, $1050.000 on plastics, and $2730.000
on aluminum. On organic waste/composting, per ton the European countries incur
$70-1,400, US is $123, and Japan has developed coefficients of how many tons per
sector can incur $10million. Lastly, savings are made in WTE on non-petroleum
substitute fuels, oil and electricity. With the actualized methods and results, the
study analyzed applications for the Philippines. With investigation to the
Philippines waste context, viable strategies have been proposed to improve the
nations current state: implementation of policies and economic instruments are
immediately applicable and could cause earnings for development in technology to
not be dependent on just partnerships but long-term betterment and sustainability
of the Philippines ISWM.
iv | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

Table of Contents

Title Page...i
Acknowledgement.........ii
Abstract.......iii
Table of Contents...iv
I. Introduction
A. Background of the Study..1
B. Significance of the Study...7
C. Statement of the Problem and Research Objectives.10
II. Review of Related Literature..12
III. Methodology
A. Framework of Analysis...31
B. Data Gathering and Analysis...32
C. Scope and Limitations..35
D. Definition of Key Terms.42
E. Abbreviation and Acronyms44
IV. Results and Discussion
A. Identification of Countries with Most Advanced Experience in SWM...45
B. Narration of Most Advanced Countries ISWM Profiles.........51
C. Recognition of Returns from Effective ISWM.......68
D. Possible Application of Advance Country Experiences to Philippines.........83
V. Conclusions and Recommendations
A. Conclusions95
B. Recommendations.100
1 | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

I. Introduction

A. Background of the Study
The generation of waste is a mirror image of economic growth since as ISWA
relays on the account of their observing of the best Waste-to-Energy, products
create waste during raw material extraction, production, trade, shipment, and when
being used before ultimately becoming waste themselves (ISWA, 2010). For both
developed and developing nations, there is similarity in demand trend: populations
continue to increase and so does consumption patterns thus resulting to waste
management becoming an issue of global concern, however, the growth of the
solid-waste market, increasing resource scarcity and the availability of new
technologies are offering opportunities for turning waste into a resource (UNEP
GEAS, 2013).
Hence besides concerning with maximum profit retrieved on consummation,
other within-operation-based maximization is a sought of transition to which the
goal of maximum returns aims at sustainable development already. The World Bank
recognizes sustainable development and that this may have many definitions. The
landmark surfacing on 1987 is that it is "development that meets the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs" (WCED, 1987, p. 43).

Later on, the International Institute for Sustainable Development was
established and it adheres to the Brundtland Report of the World Commission on
Environment and Developments definition but just further standardizing that
sustainable development must contain two key concepts: the concept of needs, in
particular the essential needs of the worlds poor, and the idea
of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the
environment's ability to meet present and future needs (IISD, 2013). Besides then
looking after sustainable growth, there is a seeking of appropriation of context: to
look after which sectors or areas have difficulty in attaining their needs and then
how to go about it with the available and/or could be acquired capital (like by IISD
mentioning social organization an technology, emphasizes the vitality of people
resource management and pragmatics workability).
Nations are indeed seeing a value in sustainable development as observable
with almost each establishing a millennium (or varying time-period) development
plan which is not only geared to achieving economic development but finding more
ways of sustaining it. The congregation of UN is one which pushes for millennium
development goals (MDGs) most persistently and its efforts have resulted to the
MDGs having been the most successful global anti-poverty push in history (UN,
2013, p. 3) but UN admits in their 2013 report that the achievement of the MDGs has
been uneven among and within countries (UN, 2013, p. 3). It has enlisted eight goals
with which the top seven is Ensure Environmental Sustainability'.

But not just the supposed most cautious allocator which is the government
which has a big role in upholding sustainable development as part of its nations
future orientation but even profit-oriented sectors are highly integrating
sustainable development to their working mechanisms. As one of the world's largest
professional services firms, Pricewaterhouse Coopers in 2006, foresees that
sustainable development will steadily advance over the next decade, with six major
trends influencing industry world-wide (Kate Alexander, 2006): growing influence
of global market forces, consumerism not limited to government policy; revisions in
the financial model draw on to set corporate and government strategy; innovation,
particularly in core industries; globalization where international institutions will be
responsible for formulating global policies and the role of national or local
institutions will be limited to implementation; evolution, not revolution so progress
toward sustainable development will be largely incremental and barriers to rapid
change will cease to exist, but specific catalysts may cause spurts of great change;
communication such that the global media may influence which issues governments
and industries focus on and accelerate the speed of changes in policy and behavior.
Not only has sustainable development been an increasing concern in the
government and public sector, but it is also an increasing priority on income
generating and other private sectors. The global society is really integrating
between sectors so we can say sustainable development shall be furthered in future
economic undertakings where we see that there is a rising dynamism in the public
and private sectors to care for making ends meet now and in the years to come.

More particularly, there is a new lobbied specific transition which is Green
Economy. UNEPs publishing on a synthesis for policy makers entitled Towards a
Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication
shows magnanimous rewards of greening the worlds economies are tangible and
considerable, that the means are at hand for both governments and the private
sector, and that the time to engage the challenge is now (UNEP, 2011, p. 1). To
establish how young this new wave is, the report paints out how it is developing in
terms of integration it observed prior to the reports publishing in 2011 wherein the
last two years have seen idea of a green economy float out of its specialist
moorings in environmental economics and into the mainstream of policy discourse:
It is found increasingly in the words of heads of state and finance
ministers, in the text of G20 communiqus, and discussed in the context
of sustainable development and poverty eradication
1
.
(UNEP, 2011, p. 1)
UNEP defines a green economy as one that results in social equity by
improving human well-being, while significantly reducing environmental scarcities
and ecological risks. The concept of a green economy does not replace sustainable
development, but there is now an emerging recognition that achieving sustainability
rests almost entirely on getting the economy right (UNEP, 2011, p. 2). Having a
green economy then is a great component for being sustainably developed.

1
The Rio+20 agenda has adopted green economy as a key theme in the context of sustainable
development and poverty eradication nearly 20 years after the Earth Summit was held also there.

Status quo is that we are living in an era of capital misallocation. As UNEPs
green initiative characterizes several concurrent crises have either sprung up or
accelerated during the last decade: crises in climate, biodiversity, fuel, food, water,
and of late in the financial system and the economy as a whole (UNEP, 2011, p. 1).
Our heavily industrialized world has promulgated the highest production and
consummation ever and it is logical how there are these backlashes. The Industrial
Revolution marked a major turning point in Earths ecology and humans
relationship with their environment such that it dramatically changed every aspect
of human life and lifestyles: the impact on the worlds psyche would not begin to
register until the early 1960s, some 200 years after its beginnings (McLamb, 2011) -
from human development such as health and life longevity then to social
improvements of such and the impact on natural resources such as energy usage
and sanitation then to their economic repercussions, the effects were profound.
Susan Strasser author of the book Waste and Want: A Social History of
Trash, spoke at Harvards Geological Lecture Hall as part of the Peabody Museum of
archaeology and Ethnologys fall lecture series, Trash Talk and in her lecture
entitled Rags, Bones, and Plastic Bags: Trash in Industrial America she claims, In
all cultures, people reuse stuff. Thats what the Industrial Revolution interrupted
(Powell, 2011) so she tracked the evolution of refuse from the 19th century to the
present. Before the Industrial Revolution, Strasser said trash was virtually
unknown. Without widespread mechanization and absent a ready supply of
consumer goods, people developed the skills to make and maintain the things they
owned. The household functioned under a cultural framework that saw worth in

individual handiwork and the maintenance of a familys possessions for years and
even generations as she encapsulates, People used to be stewards of things, and
their reuse was a fundamental skill of life (Powell, 2011)and by the end of the 19th
century and early in the 20th, it was altered by the rise of new manufacturing
methods that made mass production of goods possible, lowering their cost just to
make commodities available throughout the masses. But the subsequent effect to
the masses is that the lowered cost also lessened incentives to care for things as
diligently as in the past (Powell, 2011). New line of products meant new wastes
generated as Strausser identifies: disposables, made with the express purpose of
eventually being thrown away, with industrialization came the idea of affordable
luxuries, an increased emphasis on fashion, style, and acquiring the latest
technological innovations and what arose was an association of poverty with
mending things and reusing them (Powell, 2011). She recounts, Through the early
part of the Industrial Revolution, there were no landfills, no incinerators. There just
simply wasnt that much trash (Powell, 2011) and attributes it so from production
and disposal being part of the same processes much like how households
traditionally operate. As consumer society took hold, cities began to institutionalize
the easy creation of trash through garbage pickup. For the first time, families could
drop things they no longer wanted into a trash can, cart it to the curb, and never see
the trash again (Powell, 2011). The government did not curb the unsustainable
practices then and just catered to a linear profitability: of how industries could
produce more to cater to more consumers, thus only concerning itself to waste

collection and not much of the intrinsic practices on waste generation and extrinsic
process of possibly waste transformation.
The most rapidly generating type of waste was determined by UNEP in 2009
were solid and hazardous waste which is attributed to continuous economic growth,
urbanization and industrialization, is becoming a burgeoning problem for national
and local governments to ensure effective and sustainable management of waste
(UNEP-DTIE, 2009, p. 2). It was estimated that in 2006 the total amount of
municipal solid waste (MSW) generated globally reached 2.02 billion tones,
representing a 7% annual increase since 2003 (Key Note, 2007). It is further
estimated that between 2007 and 2011, global generation of municipal waste will
rise by 37.3%, equivalent to roughly 8% increase per year (UNEP-DTIE, 2009, p. 2).
Waste management does not only reflect societies utilization of resources
available therein but their general relationship with the environment. My input-
output analysis and theorizing interest has been vested on the deemed greatest
component of those incurred in society which is management of solid waste.

B. Significance of the Study
1. Importance and timeliness of the issue:
Urbanization has increased in speed and scale in recent decades, with more
than half the worlds population now living in urban centers ( DESA, 2012). By 2050,
urban dwellers probably will account for 86 per cent of the population in developed
countries and for 64 per cent of the population in developing countries ( DESA,

2012). Rapid urban population growth has resulted in a number of land-use and
infrastructural challenges, including municipal solid-waste management. Not just
with the upkeeps, but with the culmination of an effective SWM, it is said that
national and municipal governments often have insufficient capacity or funding to
meet the growing demand for solid-waste management services (Tacoli, 2012).
Solid-waste management is the single largest budget item for many cities (UN-
Habitat, 2010) which goes to show how important SWM is. According to World
Banks estimation, urban authorities in Asia spend an estimated 50-70% of their
revenues on waste management and the effect of neglecting the environment is said
to cost an average 5% of the GDP. There must not be just spending allocated to
waste management but conceptualizing it to the most sustainable way that it could
be so there would not be further losses and for possible gains.
2. Contribution to the Issue:
Although rich in empirical detail, studies in environmental history and
economics often strike world system analysts as theoretically underdeveloped. They
generally do not address the fact that landscape changes in core areas have been
recursively connected with those in peripheral areas. Although several books claim
to deal with global environmental issues (e.g. McNeill, 2000
2
; Hughes, 2001
3
;
Richards, 2003
4
; Radkau, 2008
5
; Simmons, 2008
6
), they are rarely global in this
sense (Hornborg, 2010). SWM studies with cross-comparison on different locations

2
Something New Under the Sun
3
An Environmental History of the World
4
The Unending Frontier
5
Nature and Power: A Global History of the Environment
6
Global Environmental History 10,000 BC to AD 2000

tend to offer a series of national and local case studies, focusing more of the
environmental records of individual nations and groups rather than on the global
and historical experiences and material flows that have generated their problems as
well as their options. In this study:
Not only stages of operation was looked into, but also economic
instruments used to induce sustainability within the operation and
participation as a whole;
Not only gain showcasing happened, but also prying for savings that
can be obtained from effectively mitigating trade-offs like environmental
harms other externalities that may add up to costs.
Considering that many of these authors use words such as global and
world in the titles of their books, it is remarkable that so few of them really
consider the world as a system (Hornborg, 2010). The framework considered in the
study was:
Not just determining the statistically/pioneering best countries
But moreover, including respect of representation across differently
acclaimed geopolitical arenas
Most of all, bearing in mind not only materializations in place-setting
but also economic considerations and values inculcated that brought rise
to success in SWM.

The award-winning book of Pomeranz makes a useful distinction that most
of these global narratives treat different regions in terms of comparisons rather
than connections (Pomeranz, 2009, p. 25). Analyses, conclusions and
recommendations made in this study from successes of the most advanced
countries were not just parallelized to the Philippines but are appropriated. This
study is more of a connection-building than merely comparing: primarily addressing
to exhibit the integration of sectors that give rise to waste management and how the
efficiency of these sectors yields economic benefits.
Thus the ultimate contribution is showing that the real triumph on
management is learning, and not just copying, how to turn what is considered trash
into beneficial turnover for the state. The desired result would be shown possible
via first giving consideration to the socio-economic situation and then how utmost
utilization of owns economical advantages may be plausible for both the short run
and the long run.

C. Statement of the Problem and Research Objectives
The main purpose of the study was to examine the economics and international
experience on garbage, specifically the most generated which is on Solid Waste Management to
observe how garbage has been profitable to successful nations in integrated solid waste
management and to culminate effective actions for an ISWM that would profit also the Philippines
and also to which it could gain sustainable development.


The research was aimed at achieving the following objectives:
1. Identify the countries with the most advance experience in waste management
2. Narrate the details of the experiences of the countries focusing on:
a) SWM Policies and Economic Instruments
b) Circulation of Waste Composition
c) Approach and Facilities
d) Budget Allocated or Funding
e) Returns and By Products
3) Identify the experiences applicable in the Philippines in the immediate or long
term and the economics


II. Review of Related Literature

A. Waste Management
1. Origins of Managing Waste:
The necessities of waste management goes back as early as the 7
th
century
B.C. primarily catching intellectuals eyes due to the health concerns it raised and the
abnormality it caused lands and public spaces, primarily where urbanization was to
be found. The Romans capture their creation of sewage systems capturing refuse
and materials from latrines to be drained into the Tiber. But as each society
prospered and expanded, they develop new waste systems according to certain
economic trends of their times. We could take Middle-Ages latter disuse of the
Roman style of sewerage was replaced it with Urban brooks and moats, having
surface run-off rainwater and drainage waters, to suit the artisan activities of the
time due to the professions mechanical value of water. But, as time progressed,
certain societies in the Middle-Ages till the Renaissance rather turned to creating
privies and later underground reservoirs under dry latrines which even developed a
new profession of cesspool emptier
7
. By the 13
th
century human waste was
prohibited to be dumped in sewers and river due to its contamination of surround

7
a vacuum truck which removes contaminated water from hollows (cesspools and sewage tanks)
and carries it to a disposal point.

water bodies take the case of Paris where the Grand Egout or the Great Sewer had
its back water at Right Bank (Barles, 2010, pp. 1-4). By the 18
th
century the role of
environment to health was emphasized primarily by the medical sector. The state of
the environment was then taken to account an areas morbidity and mortality. Cities
were subject to a negative natural balance but also it general population having
shorter life span, in comparison to its neighboring countryside. Many of the doctors
then detected the airs degradation furthered diseases due to the accumulation of
human waste and contamination of grounds. This led to the establishment of better
policies, such as airing cities and reducing human and urban waste, through which
was further developed throughout the 19
th
century integrating industrialization,
urbanization and recycling (Barles, 2010, p. 5).
2. Relationship of Waste Management to Economic Growth
Throughout the development of worlds industries and communities, a trade-
off between high standards of sustainable economic growth and of environmental
quality has been a fragile and extensive issue. Different independent organizations
and nations have been tireless in their pursuit of balancing the scales. Firstly, let us
focus on economic activities; wherein a higher prerequisite of energy and raw
materials results to a high waste production.
An economic survey done in Europe at 2003 tried to define the varying scales
of economic-environmental relationships. Panayotous study which primarily
delved on the inverted U relationship between environment quality and economic
growth with the use of Kuznets curve in inquiring on (Panayotou, 2003, pp. 45-72):

level of per capita income on the turning point, gravity of damage that would have
taken place and ways it can be avoided, also violations on ecological thresholds and
degradation of the environment if irreversible damage is not circumvented,
correlation of environmental improvement to income level and other factors such as
conscious institutional and policy reforms and approaches to accelerate
development process so that developing and transition economies can attain the
same improved economic and environmental conditions enjoyed by developed
market economies (Panayotou, 2003, p. 52).
Notice that the questions of income, damage and ecological factors are
phrased generally. This is due the Kuznets model changing results caused by the
varying variables used through its focus (population growth, income distribution,
international, trade and time-and-space-dependent etc.). Various studies made
using this model although concede to a general fact that if the variables compared
are from the income environment relationship the EKC or the environmental
Kuznet curve may prove useful.
The simplest explanation as to understanding the EKC was introduced by
Adreoni and Levinson (Panayotou, 2003, p. 49) by having the variables of good and
bad: whereas a rising income was attained by the consumption of good but at the
cost of generating the bad. The consumer is then faced with a trade-off wherein to
reduce the ill effects of the bad the consumer must sacrifice part of his income to
abatement programs rather than a focused spending on the good. The inverted U-
shape is then presented first on the increase of returns when it is characterized by
the abatement technology the consumer can avail of. Having a high income

consumer, compared to a low income consumer, then can easily achieve more
consumption and less pollution where an abatement technology can only be
characterized by its increasing returns when it requires a lumpy investment or
when lower marginal cost requires larger fixed costs. Essentially low income
consumers are not large enough or polluted enough to obtain a positive return.
Hence, low income consumers tend to invest more on low fixed cost or high
marginal cost technologies. Conclusively, only a high income consumer gets to be
effective on the usage of high fixed cost, low marginal cost technologies. In respect,
those different pollutants have different abatement technologies. Khan then
substantiates the said study by producing results of his own having a study in
California, Chauhudri and Pfaff proving the relationship between carbon emissions
and household income and in Pakistan, the relationship of indoor waste and
household income (Panayotou, 2003, p. 49). By conclusion of the EKC, having no
scarcity of microfoundations in proving the inverted U-shape be it via income and
pollution, abatement technology and customer preferences let us proceed to further
substantiation of the economic growths relationship to pollution.
By the 1990s the EKC studies boomed to test a variety of pollutants. But
more importantly Panayotou focuses on studied the income environment
relationship. One of the studies reviewed by Panayotou was an EKC focus on
environmental degradation which had samples of 149 countries during the 1960
1990 using functional specifications of log linears, log quadratics and logarithmic
cubic polynomial forms. This study concluded that although deforestation was
independent from income, the lack of clean water and sanitation, water pollution,

municipal waste and carbon emissions increased uniformly with income having
their turning points between the income levels of $300 to $4000. Panayotou
however with the use of cross section data and a translog specification found
turning points of the pollutants at $3000 to $5000 income levels in observance of
the raise of exchange rates. Furthermore, Panayotous EKC application on
deforestation then proved a turning point at $ 800 per capita. Deforestation as he
claims is significantly greater in tropical and densely populated countries. The
studies mentioned may only provide a net effect between income and environment
providing that income may have several factors involved but a study by Panayotou,
Islam and Vincent further clarify how the inverted U within the EKC model is
attained by having three distinct structural forces that affect environmental quality,
these are: the scale of economic activity, the composition or structure of economic
activity, and the effect of income on the demand and supply of pollution abatement
efforts (Panayotou, 2003, p. 52).
These result in naming respective effects on the environment, the scale of the
said effect and the pure income or abatement effect. With an established formula
(Panayotou, 2003, p. 52):
[Ambient pollution level] =
[GDP per unit of area] x [composition of GDP] x [Abatement efforts]
This suggests that having a large scale of economic activity per unit of area,
pollution levels higher having all else equal. The structural change within economic
activity and environmental quality is dictated by the economic activitys veering
towards lower or higher pollution intensity. Subsequently, at lower levels of income

the increase of pollution intensity is a result of a dominant shift of agriculture
towards industry. In comparison, high level incomes in an industry avail services
which lower pollution intensity. The composition effect, therefore, results to be a
non-monotonic function of the GDP (an Inverted U). If the income is stripped of its
scale and composition effects, having a pure income, to derive income effect on
demand and supply of environmental quality results show that a low income
country is focused more food and shelter and has little effect on environmental
quality demand. But, at high income countries, the rising income led to the demand
of environmental quality since food and shelter is already at a normative good if not
superior state.
International trades explanation though on the other hand may vary on its
sloping segment of the inverted U shape between pollutants and income. A certain
hypothesis to this is high income countries tend to trade or invest pollution
intensive products to poorer countries due to lower environmental standards.
Grossman and Kreuger (Panayotou, 2003, p. 53) states that developing countries
may then not find poorer countries to serve their production of pollution intensive
goods, thus, an indication that the past may not be a good predictor of the future.
International trade may have its blurry lines in the income environment
relationship that other economist shifted their style of approach by focusing on
countries consumption rather than its production. However, a study by Ekins that
negated the EKC hypothesis proved still to be faulty at its methodology having the
aggregation of so many dissimilar indicators that the systematic co-variance with
income was eliminated. Conclusively, International trade needs more studies to

clarify its role in an income environment relationship. Although, a growing
number of studies provide evidence that open economies tend to be cleaner than
closed ones.
Being that an inverted U-shaped relationship between income and
environment established. It suggests that a country can outgrow environmental
problems with a normal economic growth. This is due to results dictating that an
environment eventually gets worse before it gets better. The strategy proposed by
this is a quick economic growth to surpass the environmentally bad stage of the
EKC. Now, the step to be observed next is the countrys policy intervention. A policy
factors in this relationship by whether it delays or advances, weakens or
strengthens either the environmental variable or the economic one. Taking to
account low income countries, it may take decades to outgrow the bad
environmental stage in the EKC this suggests that the accumulated damage done to
the environment maybe too high for the present value of higher future growth.
Consequently, an active environmental policy that mitigates pollution and resource
depletion may be justifiable under the grounds of economics. In the same context, a
present prevention may in turn be more cost effective than a future one taking for
example safe disposal of toxic wastes. Economic inefficiency and unnecessary
environmental degradation, therefore, are deemed consequences of market and
policy failure which results to a far more critical ecological threshold thus
irreversible change occurs. Examples of such events are the loss of biodiversity,
extinction of species and irrecoverable depletion on natural resources. In support
Munasighe (Panayotou, 2003, p. 55) suggests that while economy wide reforms in

poor countries are aimed at accelerating economic growth the environmental
impacts it produces may cause it to exceed a safe ecological threshold. In conclusion,
he suggests policies to have adjustment of the timing and sequencing of policy
reforms and complementary measures to address specific distortions and tunnel
through the EKC, while cautioning against the temptation of making major changes
in economy-wide policies merely to achieve minor environmental (and social)
gains (Panayotou, 2003, p. 55).
Similarly, Arrow et al, suggests bettering off ecosystem dynamics vis--vis
signals to economic agents by providing right incentives for protecting ecological
systems.

B. Industrial Growths and Demands
1. Agriculture:
There is an increase of demand and land aggregation. On a global scale of
assessment, the agricultural sector has significantly increased in land use and
production, in a trade-off, so as rates of soil degradation, nutrient pollution,
biodiversity loss and the likes have increased as well.
High yielding crop-varieties, fertilization, irrigation and pesticides have
factored in to increasing food production. These few decades alone primary crops
have triple with only a 12% increase in cropland. While the total production has had
significant increase this cannot be said on a person to person basis having only an
increase of a third. Agricultural intensification however, if compared between high-
income regions to low income regions have significant differences both in its

economic production and waste production. While a dramatic increase in food
production in Western Europe is observed it must be noted that its agricultural land
has in effect been reduced. This result is attained by the high income region to avail
high technological farming. Compared to Western Africa with a low technology scale
have increased production via agricultural land expansion. Similar cases could be
said on the 60% majority of global farmers. In correlation, the industrialization of
agriculture has shifted from a state centered national agricultural development into
a privatized system structured to service the international demand. Evidence
suggests that by 2005 alone 50% of all commercial seed are controlled by 10
corporations; and 75% of the market is controlled by only 5 grain trading
companies (IRP, p. 36) . With this degree of intensification the usage of fertilizers
may have increased food production the degradation of environmental quality has
been significant as well. Consequently, this has led to a high nutrient pollution not
only within land areas but extends itself to marine ecosystems as well.
By 2005, a study by Lepers et al suggests that agricultural expansion as well
as conversion of natural habitats have been the two key causes in degradation
within the biodiversity and ecological systems. Not only does this affect animal and
plant species it, as well, degrades soil quality. By 2009 Van Vuuren and Faber (IRP,
p. 34) have noted that in order to halt the biodiversity loss, agricultural lands must
be stabilized. The priority of the international community in a sense is not only to
protect and maintain natural ecosystems but also to address the increased demand
of agricultural products.

Other vital products of agriculture are climate change and food security. The
IPPC has concluded that fossil-fuel combustion and land use changes has had
significant emissions which attribute to climate change. Land use, particularly, and
land cover change emit GHGs (greenhouse gases) to the atmosphere via the
degradation of land which increases carbon dioxide inland. The main driver for such
damage however is intensified by the sequence of deforestation followed by
agriculture. Other GHG emissions trail after with the inclusion of methane from
altered hydrologies; wetland drainages and rice paddies, cattle grazing. Also, the
input of inorganic nitrogen fertilizers alongside nitrogen fixing plants and biomass
combustion has led to nitrous oxide presence within agriculture.
Food security though is another important factor to understand agricultural
booms. Not only that 70-80 % (IRP, p. 37) of income by the affected population goes
to food, the consequences such as increased infant and child mortality of those
already undernourished and those who live in poverty must be taken note of.
Although food prices have had a long term decline due to the massive
increase in agricultural production this too has in turn been raising production costs
such as fuel, fertilizer, and more recently the demand for bio fuels which
conclusively offsets the downward trend of price. This trend would then also be
attributed to population growth and diet change caused by modernization and
urbanization of areas.
While the average food price of today linger below their peak in 2008 a
similar level is attained this 2011 although are higher in many developing countries.
These crises of food and energy would then set new pressures on the global

economic system as a whole. Countries with a high share of food imports and
limited fiscal spaces would then result to a net increase in extreme poverty, having
44 million people in developing countries (IRP, p. 37). The demand for food
however would still increase towards 2050 still as a result of population growth and
new demands, increased incomes and growing consumption of meat and dairy
products according to a projection by the OECD-FAO.
Despite the harms of agricultural intensification to the environment, it may
present benefits as well in the form of agricultural products in export to support a
national economy. In the case of Argentina, whose exports rose from 23.3 to 68.1
billion USD, innovation within the agricultural sector was made during the rising
demand of its cash crops making the country maximize its opportunities in terms of
environmental taxes to create programs from poverty alleviation to external debt
payment.
2. The Urban Sector and its Problems:
The urban sector may be by far the most complex of sectors when it comes to
waste production having the agreed UN term of Municipal Solid Waste or the MSW.
MSWs then are subdivided within 4 categories of waste: Residential, Commercial,
Institutional and Municipal Services, each waste is primarily produced by the
aforementioned respectively. MSW on the current global scale rakes at about 1.3
billion tons a year and is projected to increase to 2.2 billion by 2025 according to the
urban development series (Hoornweg & Bhada-Tata, 2012, p. 1). But to be more
accurate MSW production must be seen on higher specificities such as by region,
country or city. Urban consumers though produce twice as much compared to rural

consumers. This is due to factors become more intensified in urban areas. We
encounter degree of industrialization, public habits, local climate and the degree of
urbanization itself, as standards of living increase the consumption of goods and
services increase correspondingly.
Viewing by region, the case of sub-Saharan Africa leads waste production
with an approximate of 62 million tons per year. This varies though upon a person
to person basis, having a 0.09 to 3.0 kg person per day averaging to a
0.65kg/capita/day. Similarly island countries read the highest per capita rates due
to the waste generated by its tourism industry augmented by it general waste.
Comparatively East Asia and the Pacific Region result to 270 million tons per year
having China responsible of the 70% generation with a person to person average of
0.44 to 4.3 kg per day. Eastern and Central Asia generates 93 million tons a year
having 8 countries without data. Latin America and the Caribbean had the most
consistent data results to 160 million per year having capita values at 0.1 to
14kg/capita/ day, these averages to a 1.1kg/capita/day. In comparison to Africa, the
Caribbean generates more waste per capita. Middle East and North America
generates 63million tons per year. Per capita generation is 0.16 to 5.7kg/capita/day
which average to 1.1kg/capita/day. OECD countries generate 572million tons per
year with a capita range of 1.1-3.7kg per person which averages to 2.2
kg/capita/day. Finally the South Asia region generates 70 million tons per year with
a capita range of 0.12 to 5.1 kg per person with an average of 0.45kg/capita/day.
Comparatively high income countries produce most waste per capita while
low income countries produce the least. In the case of India and China, the urban

waste produced by these countries is disproportionate to its overall economy due to
their population (Hoornweg & Bhada-Tata, 2012).
Inconsistent data on solid waste generation in some Asian countries prove to
be the main setback in the improvement of its management (Agamuthu, Fauziah,
Khidzir, & Aiza, 2007, p. 19). Urban population in Malaysia, for example, has
produce 8million tons per year in 2000 alone having 25% of the waste generated
from Klang Valley independently. The case of Kuala Lumpur reached a generation
rate of 3000tons in 2001 and is expected to increase by 2017 to 3200. In
comparison, Malaysia is estimated at a generation rate of 25,800tons a day.
Katmandu, similarly, produces a staggering 80% of Nepals total waste while Chinas
medium sized cities produce 60% of its waste (Agamuthu, Fauziah, Khidzir, & Aiza,
2007, p. 19).
The problems faced in urban areas seem to have chain reactions, from poor
collection systems resulting inappropriate disposing methods such as dumping in
isolated areas. In the city of Phnom Penh the problem of inadequate waste
collection has resulted into garbage being dumped into rivers, burnt or left
uncollected (Agamuthu, Fauziah, Khidzir, & Aiza, 2007, p. 20). In contrast, Malaysia
waste collection maybe at 100% but only 70% of the collected waste is disposed
properly leaving the 20-30% disposed illegally into rivers or burnt (Agamuthu,
Fauziah, Khidzir, & Aiza, 2007, p. 20). Although the amount of waste generated may
also cause a problem it must also be taken to account that its composition play a
factor to how a country responds to waste management. Waste composition in Asia
has an estimate of having 75% organic except for Japan. The organic waste seems to

root from kitchen and food waste. This trend, however, varies by the change in
consumption of the countries having the gradual practice of paper and plastic due to
packaging materials. Which leads to the other problems faced by the recycle reuse
sectors; despite door to door collection and segregation is practiced, recycling is
hindered by the poor management and lack of recycling infrastructures. Despite
these efforts problems with energy resourcing may add as well, having that
emission levels from incineration and Bio fuels be strictly regulated to avoid added
pollutions (Agamuthu, Fauziah, Khidzir, & Aiza, 2007, p. 23).
3. External Problems in Waste management:
Asian developing countries may have rising MSW generation but in order to
put a strong foundation policies must be forwarded. In the case of Malaysia though,
the constant debate between solid management law and related issues has hindered
the countrys progress in the waste management sector. As policies are being
developed to facilitate and standardize waste management an integral part of
forwarding is to consider the technological capacity of countries as well. The varying
geography and culture alone in a country may hinder an industry that may present
scientific or technological progress. Local capacity development must be taken
priority over the import of technology.

C. Waste Management for Sustainable Development
1. Attaining Sustainable Development:
To delineate urban waste from rural waste we must consider first Non
controlled and controlled wastes. Agricultural, which is highly rural, alongside

radioactive and explosive waste fall under the uncontrolled sector while MSWs
Special and non-special waste are all classified to be highly urban.
In order to manage waste generating factors a process of resource recovery
is a widely accepted model wherein materials to be reused in their original form
must undergo a controlled process of sterilization and recovery. This process
however must be designed to suit a disassembly and ecology friendly. One of the
waste management process is the return of products to their manufacturers this
process being called the product takeback. Product takeback prioritizes the
reverse of logistics. Take for example Canons toner cartridges or the return of Xerox
machines. Another strategy called waste exchange wherein waste producers sell
their waste to outside organization capable of using the waste for their own
production. The UK Governments Advisory for Business and Environment take eco-
efficiency a necessary prerequisite to achieving a sustainable consumption (CIPS,
2009, p. 12). Eco-efficiency was coined in respect to the produce more from less or
the use less resource to produce the same amount ideology.
To understand Sustainable waste management a paper by P.Agamuthu, S. H.
Fauziah, K.M Khidzir and A. Noorazamimah Aiza done in Asia observes the different
factors or drivers, as they say to attaining sustainability. Agamuthu et al first
discuss upon the Human drivers involved in the process of sustainability. Firstly, by
focusing on the health and wellbeing of a population, claiming that elected
governments must provide first healthcare. This involves waste management and
disposal policies which reduces risks on health such as diseases. This however must
go hand in hand with information dissemination of state policies via Education. For

the citizens or the population to participate effectively and cooperate they must first
be informed of benefits (Agamuthu, Fauziah, Khidzir, & Aiza, 2007, p. 3). On an
economic standpoint consumers and producers alike respond better on incentives.
A case presented on a Malaysian middle-class municipality by Chenayah, et al
(2007) found that recycling within the municipality have an increase of 20% if
provided by auxiliary facilities. The same study found that the development of
landfills within residential areas is attained smoothly and efficiently if only provided
simple literature and explanation which in turn raises awareness within
communities.
The second drivers presented within the study involve the economic factors.
Fundamentally, we must consider the present Socio-Economic Condition of a
country. Take to account the financial capacity of the nation to make any waste
management policy forwarded. In this case high-income countries are able to spend
more on the said policies. World Bank estimated that New York spent 0.48% (106
USD per capita) of its capita on solid waste management alone comparing to the 15
USD per capita expenditure of Malaysia which is 0.38% of its GDP. Vietnam although
using 0.8% of its GDP, amounts only to a 2USD per capita expenditure on solid waste
management. Therefore, percentage allocation varies from the actual dollars spent.
Waste recovery plays a vital factor as well in the interplay of a countries economics.
Modern manufacturing not only save in production to the minimal processing of
salvaged goods but also goes hand in hand in preserving the integrity of the disposal
systems. The case of Japan, in a study conducted by Contreras et al (2006), reports
that the effective segregation of paper and plastic resorts to an export product as

raw materials to its target markets, primarily developing economies such as China
and India which use recycled products as a secondary source of raw materials for
development. Japan, in course of 1990 to 2005, has exported 21.9 to
3108.5thousand tons of paper and 41.4 to 1053.2thousand tons of plastic.
Environmental Drivers factor in waste management in policies forwarded to
protect environment. Trends in policies and research are driven by environmental
issues. This in turn results to environmental integration to economic plans.
2. Responses to MSW Generation:
Waste generation has doubled its rate in some industrial countries
(Agamuthu, Fauziah, Khidzir, & Aiza, 2007, p. 19) while developing countries waste
production are also increasing at drastic levels. This is caused by rapid urbanization,
rural-urban migrations, increase of per capita income as well as the consumption
patterns brought by development (Agamuthu and Khan, 1997).
Although various technology and policies have been developed to cope with
waste generation increase and diversity, primarily on cities, open dumping or Land
filling alongside composting and incineration has been the main disposal process of
most low income countries. This process, however, poses not only waste to
environment but extends to the scarcity of land and results to the loss of recyclable
resources (Shapkotta et al 2006). Composting of MSWs indicate a rather large
amount of organic waste while open dumping indicates high disposal of recyclable
waste. A well-managed composting method has great potential to mitigate
ecological imbalances due to the loss of nutrients from ecosystems and disposal of

organic wastes. If proper composting were to be introduced to Asian countries, per
se, it could enhance both economic and environmental sustainability.
Recycling and Reuse in the Asian countries has been a method ultimately
increased by the presence of scavengers. In 1990 1998 the recycling rate was
double over from 10% - 22% by the scavenging bodies through segregation and
effective collection. In the case of Sri Lankas Ministry of Forestry and Environment,
the encouragement given to segregation in household effectively reduce the amount
of the total waste disposal. Thailand took the private sector to developing high end
recycling centers which trade internationally. China alone recorded 3.6 billion USD
in recycling. In the less developed parts, Cambodia 12% of their total waste is sorted
out prior disposal in households. Meanwhile, the insufficient availability of recycling
plants in Nepal and Bhutan made countries resort to direct exports to India.
3. Business in Waste Management:
MNCs represent the overall shift of a society to consumerism (WB: Urban
and LGU Working Papers, 1999, p. 14). Their global marketing programs have
factored in greatly in waste generation and composition. But on a lighter note have
addressed the waste stream as well with progressive programs that integrate
recycling. In the case of Brazil, local governments have partnered with these
marketing bodies to achieve comprehensive waste management programs. The ERP
or the extended product responsibility as well has improved a countries response to
MSW generation, though voluntary in nature, by involving manufacturers, suppliers,
retailers, consumers and disposers of various products. Germany or parts of Europe
as well developed the Ecocycle Waste Act of 1994 which sets environmental goals

for manufacturers. It provides the necessary guidelines for goods regarding
reusability and recyclability; by using secondary materials as a source for
production. Sweden developed ordinances to increase return and recycling of
consumer packaging from papers to used tires. Waste exchanges between industries
as well have been developed to decrease MSW generation, increase profit and raw
materials. This suggests that Asian countries must be cooperative in establishing
secondary materials markets and promote a consistent product and package design
amongst their countries (WB: Urban and LGU Working Papers, 1999, p. 18).


III. Methodology

A. Framework of Analysis
IETC recommends inclusion of the following elements which was taken
account in the analytical framework of this study (IETC/UNEP, 2005):
Integrated Waste Management
Stakeholders
Cost Recovery
The key concern is to find out the economic value of what is usually called
waste. Although economic benefit-cost analysis is a strategy closest to find out real
values that can be recovered from wastes, the focus instead of this study is finding
out how much financial value can still be recovered from one ton of garbage.
For appropriation of learnings to our context, other important strategies that
nuance are incorporated in the framework of analyzing such as (IETC/UNEP, 2005):
Understanding characteristics of waste generated
Major differences between industrialized and developing countries
8

Improving management capabilities
Public Involvement

8
Discussed in Scope and Limitations of the Study

Proper handling of special wastes
Understanding characteristics of waste generated is the attunement of
pragmatics and its complementing technologies to the character of the waste that is
generated in a particular location i.e. if wastes are wet and dense, as they are in
most developing countries, buying compactor trucks will often be a waste of money;
if wastes have low calorific value, it will not be possible to incinerate them without
using supplementary fuel; if considerable amounts of toxic waste have entered the
general municipal solid waste stream, leachate from dumps will be particularly
dangerous. On the other hand, if a portion of the waste stream consists of organics
or can be easily separated into organics and non-organics, composting may become
a viable waste management strategy (IISD, 2013, p. 15).

B. Data Gathering and Analysis
The approach is to identify first countries having most advanced experience
in SWM, herein is the gage in the platforms for socio-economic standards.
Municipal solid waste (MSW) is a term usually applied to a heterogeneous
collection of wastes produced in urban areas, the nature of which varies from region
to region. The characteristics and quantity of the solid waste generated in a region is
not only a function of the living standard and lifestyle of the region's inhabitants, but
also of the abundance and type of the region's natural resources. On a global scale of
comparison of Solid Waste Management, IETC makes it clear that, The primary
difference between wastes generated in developing nations and those generated in

industrialized countries is the higher organic content characteristic of the former
(IETC/UNEP, 2005, p. 1). Therefore a more specific way of approaching how to
identify the best countries is that we compare from continental/region based
studies first before having been able to filter which are the countries prospect for
study. When there has been an established representation of geopolitical areas, we
can say so that we are comparing in fair grounds.
After which, profiling the countries proven to be best in turning their trash to
treasure can be pursued: the best ones were those which have a sustainable
circulation, but moreover exhibits efficiency in their management like having least
cost possible and having profitable or cost-lessening by-products.
Like in the determining of which are the best, there is also a hurdle in
narrating the experiences and economics of the deemed countries. IETC/UNEP sees
the lack of cross-comparison in the global scale is because of localized changes in
degree of development within each country, it is difficult to apply a single
developmental category as far as solid waste management is concerned. For
example, a large urban community (typically the capital city and surrounding area)
in a developing nation may be in a stage of development that is well above that of
the rest of the nation. On the other hand, these communities are not totally immune
to the limitations imposed by the status of the nation ( IETC/UNEP, 2005, p. 1).
The solution is adaptation of a parallel approach to the AIT/UNEPs study
that presented the status-quo of the different aspects of Municipal Waste
Management in 14 SEA and East Asian countries. To narrate having regions with not
only different economic statures but let alone have differing definition on what

SWM is: they made use of inclusion of economic instruments, technologies,
partnerships, informative measures and awareness raising efforts, informal sector,
stakeholder participation and capacity building. (AIT/UNEP: Regional Resource
Center for Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP), 2010, p. 20). The real dynamics in the
national state is an integrative solid waste management in work and thus the
approach must also be an integrative analysis in sight.
All in all, data needed in accomplishing the approaches that aimed to uphold
international connecting of SWM experiences and economics were sources that
would represent globally which continent/regions are in supremacy in SWM and
also sources that would reflect the national state of those countries in terms of their
finest practices in recent times or any important point in time where effective
transition happened. Only by virtue of these could learnings from the most
established currently in SWM could be integrated to the Philippine setting.

The methodology of data gathering includes the following activities:
Crystallizing established international comparisons (e.g. international
publications, international bodies agency reports, global news that have
been affirmed through studies and other reports from relevant
international economics-oriented organizations such as World Bank,
Asian Development Bank, UNEP International Environmental Technology
Centre, UNEP Asian Institute for Technology and others to determine
which regions are leading in the global arena.

Reviewing Municipal Waste screening/assessments/questionnaires
already conducted by continental bodies soliciting comments/additional
inputs from regions member countries and member partners to
determine most excelling country in the determined region such as EU,
EEA and European Commission.
Gathering of existing information and data of targetive sources to our
context such as those collected by 3RKH
9
, to have relevant analysis and
have appropriation of application of the status-quo and issues on
municipal waste management we are facing.

C. Scope and Limitations of the Study
Thus the scope of the profiling of countries was derived to integrate the
experiences from pre-waste generation up to the post which are:
Waste Composition
Waste Generation and
Waste Transformation
Along with the vital elements of ISWM:
SWM Policies and economic instruments -This describes joint projects with
partnerships between stakeholders. AIT includes national government and key
players on Municipal waste management ( AIT/ UNEP: Regional Resource Center for

9 The purpose of 3RKH is to capture and share knowledge on 3Rs (reduce reuse and recycle)
applications and good practices in waste management. This has been established through the Project
Preparation Support for Livable Cities in Asia of the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP), 2010, p. 24) and this is also what was looked into
each determined country: it describes in a condense manner the economic
instruments related to Municipal waste e.g. incentive subsidies, low-interest
finance, tax exemption; disincentive fees, charges/fines at the national/local level (
AIT/ UNEP: Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP), 2010, p.
20). Charges and fees can also be used as incentives to encourage good behavior
and to discourage bad behavior. For example, the price of disposal can be
increased and the cost of materials recovery subsidized to give people incentives to
source separate. In some instances, fines can be used to discourage illegal dumping (
IETC/UNEP, 2005, p. 13). Indirect charges in some locations, charges for waste are
linked to other public services that people are willing to pay for, such as water or
electricity. Including waste charges in water and if present, sewer charges allows
some cost recovery; studies have shown that water and electrical energy
consumption are rough indicators of waste generation (IETC/UNEP, 2005, p. 12).
Circulation of Waste Composition- As mentioned earlier, although the
amount of waste generated may also cause a problem it must also be taken to
account that its composition play a factor to how a country responds to waste
management (Agamuthu, Fauziah, Khidzir, & Aiza, 2007). This section would show
not only how much waste is produced but what comprises the total waste
generated. Also it was delved on what kind of industries are the prime there so we
can have an understanding of what is the economical context, therefore to derive
easier which are applicable to our context.

Facilities and Budget allocation Whenever there is available data on the
existing technologies in the countries, it was mentioned along with the pragmatics.
As in AIT it further illustrates the type of technologies used for municipal waste
collection, segregation, treatment and disposal, and briefly discuss the level of
technology: Imported, Local, Capacity (rate), etc. the municipalities have
(AIT/UNEP: Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP), 2010, p.
22). There is no costs breakdown from private companies since there is no data
available but the ways in which SWM are funded and the prioritization given to it
per nation is attempted to be depicted. Also processes, plants and other
manifestations of the nations choice in waste management would also reflect costs
and investments put into its holistic workability.
By-products -ISWM is the application of suitable techniques, technologies
and management programs covering all types of solid wastes from all sources to
achieve the twin objectives of (a) waste reduction and (b) effective management of
waste still produced after waste reduction (MUD, 2010, p. 9). Management of
municipal solid waste involves (a) development of an insight into the impact of
waste generation, collection, transportation and disposal methods adopted by a
society on the environment and (b) adoption of new methods to reduce this impact
(MUD, 2010, p. 5). Effective solid management systems are needed to ensure better
human health and safety. They must be safe for workers and safeguard public health
by preventing the spread of disease. In addition to these prerequisites, an effective
system of solid waste management must be both environmentally and economically
sustainable.

Environmentally sustainable: It must reduce, as much as possible, the
environmental impacts of waste management. Economically sustainable: It must
operate at a cost acceptable to community. Clearly it is difficult to minimize the two
variables, cost and environmental impact, simultaneously. There will always be a
trade off. The balance that needs to be struck is to reduce the overall environmental
impacts of the waste management system as far as possible, within an acceptable
level of cost. The section of by-products of SWM could be begotten from an effective
waste management system which includes one or more of the following options
(MUD, 2010, p. 11):
Waste collection and transportation.
Resource recovery through sorting and recycling i.e. recovery of
materials (such as paper, glass, metals) etc. through separation.
Resource recovery through waste processing i.e. recovery of materials
(such as compost) or recovery of energy through biological, thermal or
other processes.
Waste transformation (without recovery of resources) i.e. reduction
of volume, toxicity or other physical/chemical properties of waste to
make it suitable for final disposal.

The limitation is that analyses of the study may not be in Toto parallel
because of some particular context differences but to acknowledge limit of
comparative grounds is also a way of seeing what is to be specialized in our own
milieu especially with the resources and economical condition we are in. At the

same time, there are scope of meeting grounds in which no matter where the
context is, are economically and environmentally valuable for stakeholders to have
successful and sustainable SWM.
Major Differing Points of Developing countries often:
One theme that appears consistently throughout IETCs book is the
enormously different conditions in which industrialized and developing countries
must work to solve MSWM problems (MUD, 2010, pp. 15-16):
Low labor costs and extreme shortages of capital, which together call
for low-tech solutions to MSWM problems;
A waste stream dominated by organic waste, which means that:
a) Incineration is difficult unless undertaken in conjunction with a
program that achieves source separation of organics, and
b) Composting is especially important if large amounts of waste are to be
diverted from landfills; a complex informal sector that is very active in
the collection, separation, and recycling of waste;
Significant mixing of industrial hazardous wastes with MSW;
Few people who are adequately trained in solid waste management
activities, and a high proportion of the urban population with low levels
of education; and
Inadequate physical infrastructure in urban areas, which makes
collection of waste particularly difficult.


At the same time, it should be recognized that there are also similarities
between industrialized and developing countries with regard to MSWM issues:
In neither case does the public want MSWM facilities near residential areas
and, in both cases, the amount of waste being generated is increasing. In both
industrialized and developing countries, adopting an integrated approach to waste
management is important. Related to this, people throughout the world are
recognizing the importance of waste reduction as the first stage of the waste
management hierarchy and as an essential element of MSWM. (Ministry of Urban
Development, 2010, p. 16)
The following are externalities especially for developing contexts:
Improving management capabilities -In many instances, particularly in
developing countries, the greatest impediments to efficient and environmentally
sound handling of MSWM issues are managerial, rather than technical (MUD, 2010,
p. 16).
Public involvement -The public can play a role in promoting efficient,
financially sound, technically competent management of waste issues by demanding
accountability from the MSWM system. Although in many countries the public has
long grown accustomed to having low expectations of government, the pressing and
very visible problems brought about by the absence of effective MSWM systems may
inspire stronger demands for good performance from public managers and any
private companies with whom they work. Information dissemination is important in
achieving the goal of public involvement (MUD, 2010, p. 16).

Special wastes -Special wastes are those types of solid waste that require
special handling, treatment, and/or disposal. The reasons for separate consideration
include (MUD, 2010, pp. 16-17):
Their characteristics and quantities (either or both may render them
difficult to manage if they are combined with typical municipal solid
waste); or
Their presence will or may pose a significant danger to the health and
safety of workers and/or the public, to the environment, or both.
These wastes are very different from each other, so they should be managed and
handled separately if feasible. Typically, in developing countries, special wastes are
set out for collection, collected, and/or disposed along with wastes from commercial
businesses and residential generators. Ideally, these wastes should not enter the
municipal solid waste stream, but quite frequently they do, particularly in
developing countries (Ministry of Urban Development, 2010, pp. 16-17).
In terms of the approach, there were no mathematical computations made
although exemplars such as: EKC, ODIN-WR model, graphs and others were all
utilized for effective deducing and deeper analyses when applicable. The key
concern is to find out the economic value of what is considered waste already.
Although economic benefit-cost analysis would be closer to find real net values
recoverable from waste, this study focused instead on finding out how much
financial value can still be recovered from one ton of garbage. The profits of the
most successful countries have been standardized to USD. The last segment

understood the Philippine solid waste circumstance and to promulgate what is
applicable to our context.

D. Definition of Key Terms
Waste Generation -The first of the six functional elements in the SWM system
encompasses activities in which materials are identified as no longer being of value (in their
present form) and are either thrown away or gathered together for disposal (IGES, 2005, p.
13). There is not much control of its incurring but could be influenced in the future by
orientations such as IGES pointing reduction of waste at source, though not controlled by
solid waste managers, is now included in system evaluations as a method of limiting the
quantity of waste generated.
Waste Handling, Sorting, Storage, and Processing at the Source -This is the next
functional elements in the SWM. Waste handling and sorting involves the activities
associated with management of wastes until they are placed in storage containers for
collection. Handling also encompasses the movement of loaded containers to the point of
collection. Sorting of waste components is an important step in the handling and storage of
solid waste at the source (MUD, 2010, p. 13).
Collection -The functional element of collection, includes not only the gathering of solid
wastes and recyclable materials, but also the transport of these materials, after collection, to
the location where the collection vehicle is emptied. This location may be a materials
processing facility, a transfer station, or a landfill disposal site (MUD, 2010, p. 15).
Sorting, Processing and Transformation of Solid Waste -The recovery of sorted
materials, processing of solid waste and transformation of solid waste that occurs primarily
in locations away from the source of waste generation (can be MRF, transfer stations,

combustion facilities and disposal sites) are encompassed by this functional element.
Sorting often includes the separation of bulky items, separation of waste components by
size using screens, manual separation of waste components, and separation of ferrous and
non-ferrous metals. Waste processing is undertaken to recover conversion products and
energy. The organic fraction of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) can be transformed by a
variety of biological and thermal processes. The most commonly used biological
transformation process is aerobic composting. The most commonly used thermal
transformation process is incineration. Waste transformation is undertaken to reduce the
volume, weight, size or toxicity of waste without resource recovery. Transformation may be
done by a variety of mechanical (eg shredding), thermal (e.g. incineration without energy
recovery) or chemical (e.g. encapsulation) techniques (MUD, 2010, p. 15).
Transfer and Transport -The functional element of transfer and transport involves two
steps: the transfer of wastes from the smaller collection vehicle to the larger transport
equipment and the subsequent transport of the wastes, usually over long distances, to a
processing or disposal site. The transfer usually takes place at a transfer station (MUD,
2010, p. 15).
Disposal -The final functional element in the solid waste management system is disposal.
Today the disposal of wastes by landfilling or uncontrolled dumping is the ultimate
destination of all solid wastes, whether they are residential wastes, residual materials from
Materials Recovery Facilities (MRFs), residue from the combustion of solid waste, rejects of
composting, or other substances from various solid waste-processing facilities. A municipal
solid waste landfill plant is an engineered facility used for disposing of solid wastes on land
or within the earths mantle (MUD, 2010, p. 16). The highest rank of the ISWM hierarchy is
waste minimization or reduction at source, which involves reducing the amount (and/or
toxicity) of the wastes produced.

E. Abbreviations and Acronyms
ADB -Asian Development Bank
AIT -Asian Institute of Technology
CIPS -Chartered Institute of Purchase
& Supply
CIWM -Chartered Institution of
Wastes Management
DESA -Department of Economic and
Social Affairs
DTIE -Division of Technology,
Industry and Economics
EEA -European Environment Agency
EKC -Environmental Kuznets Curve
ETB -Economics and Trade Branch
FAO -Food and Agriculture
GEAS Global Environment Alert
Service
GEC Global Environment Center
IETC -International Environmental
Technology Centre
IISD -International Institute for
Sustainable Development
IRP -International Resource Panel
MDG -Millennium Development Goals
MSW -Municipal Solid Waste
MUD -Ministry of Urban Development
OECD -Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development
REAP -Resource Efficiency Action
Plan
SDS -Sustainable Development
Strategy
SWM -Solid Waste Management
UN United Nations
UNEP -United Nations Environment
Program
WB -World Bank
WCED -World Commission on
Environment and Development
WRAP Waste & Resources Action
Program


IV. Results and Discussion

A. Identification of Countries with Most Advanced Experience in SWM
The only cross-continental comparison that has been reported (and the most
recent attempt) is that of the newsletter by EcoMENA
10
stating that, Currently, the
European nations are recognized as global leaders of the SWM and WTE movement.
They are followed behind by the Asia Pacific region and North America respectively
(Zafar, 2014). The intentionality of the organization was to witness real activity in
waste-to-energy sector in the Middle East but before looking specifically at Middle
Easts scenario, they scoured over the global scenario and the following were the
findings: In 2007 there are more than 600 waste plants in 35 different countries,
including large countries such as China and small ones such as Bermuda. Some of
the newest plants are located in Asia. The United States processes 14 percent of its
trash in WTE plants. As at the end of 2008, Europe had more than 475 WTE plants
across its regions more than any other continent in the world that processes an
average of 59 million tons of waste per annum. In the same year, the European WTE
industry alone as a whole had generated revenues of approximately US$4.5bn
(Zafar, 2014).

10
EcoMENA's primary mission is to create mass awareness on renewable energy, sustainability,
waste management, environment protection, energy efficiency and resource conservation in the
Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Their major objective is to promote sustainable
development worldwide.

Most researches concentrated on waste management that analyze across
continents just give out their data by clustering nations according to their level of
income. The current status of waste management is by no means uniform in
different parts of the world. For the purpose of showing these differences, it seems
sensible to divide the globe into the following four geo-political areas ( ISWA, 2002):
the European Union, the United States, other high and medium income countries
and economically developing countries.
Superimposing the element of representation from the different geopolitical
areas to the identified top regions for SWM cross-continentally, we now can filter
that the best countries would come from:
Europe
Asia
United States
BBC found interest in the big divide in Europes waste disposal performance.
The UK gets one red flag for the category "existence of ban/restrictions for the
disposal of municipal waste into landfills", a medals table for waste management
shows red flags -the worst scores -dominating the results for Bulgaria, Cyprus,
Greece, Lithuania, Malta and Romania, and the best performing countries - Austria,
Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden - resort to landfill for less
than 5% of their waste (BBC News Europe, 2012). Its most viable finding: The UK's
overall score is 32, while Austria and the Netherlands top the table with 39 points
each must be verified through other studies.

Figure 1. Municipal waste recycling rates in 32 European countries, 2001 and 2010
(Rozenberg, 2013)

Figure 1 shows the recycling rates of MSW in the European Union in 2010 compared
with 2001. A line further from the centre in the radar chart signifies better waste
management. As the figure indicates, recycling performance has improved in most
European countries. The general increase in recycling of municipal waste reduced
the percentage of municipal waste landfilled (European Environment Agency (EEA),
2013).
The European Commision conducted the Screening of Waste Management
Performance of EU Member States which validates Austria and the Netherlands top
the table with 39 points each.

Table 1. Overview of scoring of each criterion and overall score for each Member State of EU
(order according to achieved overall score) (European Commission, 2012)

With the rapid economic growth and urbanization that is taking place in Asia,
solid waste generation and management is becoming a major social, environmental
and economic issue. Complicating the picture, each country and region has its own

background and characteristics in relation to solid waste management and material-
cycles policy, even though they share the same global region (IGES, 2005). When
countries or regions have laws governing waste management, solid waste and MSW
are usually given specific definitions and IGES conducted a study on Waste
Management and Recycling in Asia where the definitions in selected countries in
Asia
11
were exhibited. In its year of publication 2005, Indonesia, Malaysia, and
Thailand have no laws on waste management thus do not have official definitions of
solid waste and MSW; India and Taiwan have definitions of MSW only (IGES, 2005).
There was an already conceded general definition of MSW before which can be
referred back set in a United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
held in Rio de Janeiro in June 14, 1992, Solid wastes include all domestic refuse
and non-hazardous wastes such as commercial and institutional wastes, street
sweepings and construction debris (IETC, 2008). MSW primarily comes from
households, but also includes wastes from industries, municipal services such as
street cleaning and maintenance of recreational areas ( AIT/ UNEP: Regional
Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP), 2010, p. 6). There is a collection
of the recent working definitions of the 14 member countries in Southeast and East
Asia which was collected by AIT
12
.
However different the answers that Southeast and East Asian countries
provided, Asian countries all have the common goal of 3Rs. The 3R Initiative was
officially launched at the 3R Ministerial Conference hosted by the Government of
Japan in April 2005, with an aim to promote global action on 3R. In March 2006, a

11
For further reading, a table of that can be found in the said IGES study
12
For further reading, a table of that can be found in the said AIT/UNEP study

Senior Officials Meeting on 3R was organized in Japan resulting in strong
commitment of governments and other stakeholders to implement 3R at local,
national, and regional level (Visvanathan, Adhikari, & Anant, 2007). Besides Japan
being the initiator of the template waste management is Asia, it is also the leader
which was established by AIT Thailand.

Legend:

Table 2. Status in 3R implementation in developed Asian countries (Visvanathan, Adhikari,
& Anant, 2007)

The identified best countries with the most advance experience in waste
management are the following:
Austria
Netherlands
Japan
United States of America


B. Narration of the Most Advanced Countries ISWM Profiles
1. Austria
Waste Composition:
Consumption of different materials result in products which later result to
waste generation. Austria in the span of 2000-2007 has had its strongest material
consumption of non metallic minerals which ranges at around 80 90 million tons
(50.5%) compared to biomass, fossil energy and metal ores which ranges are 40
50 (26.7%), 20 30 (17.2%) and 10 15 (5.6%) million tons respectively (EEA,
2011, p. 4).

Figure 2. Austrias Vital Consumptions
Conclusively by 2009, the sectors which hold the highest contributions to the GDP
are its Services sector which holds 69.1%, the Industry sector which holds 29.4%
and the Agriculture sector having 1.5% (EEA, 2011, p. 3). Household wastes result
from product to waste consumption which would result to:
Material Consumption
non metallic minerals
biomass
fossil energy
metal ores

NATIONWIDE QUANTITIES BY INDIVIDUAL
FRACTION
QUANTITY
(TONS)
Residual waste 1 402 100
Biogenic waste and green waste 752 100
Waste paper 677 000
Bulky waste 259 100
Waste glass 211 600
Waste wood 183 200
Light fraction 148 100
Scrap metal household scrap (bulky waste
collection) 86 800
Waste electrical and electronic equipment 72 600
Waste metals 30 600
Waste textiles 26 000
Hazardous household waste 23 200
Other recoverables 22 600
EST TOTAL 3,895,000
Table 3. Austrias Household Waste Components (EEA, 2011, p. 6)

Waste Generation:
Production in its process consumes both energy and raw materials to
produce certain products which results to waste. This means that a direct
relationship between energy and material consumption and waste generation is
established. Austria at an average has a GDP of 1100 USD per ton of Domestic
Material Consumption (EEA, 2011, p. 5)having the trends of materials and energy
similar in terms of its increases and decreases within 1970 2009 in an indexed
development (EEA, 2011, p. 6). This all results to 48.6 million tons of waste per year
by 2001 having construction residues a major part at 7.5 million t/a. At a more
specific premise of MSWs, Austria in the span of 2001 to 2010 has had a 7%
increase in MSW generation from 4.63 million tons to 4.96 tons respectively.

Policies:
With growing demands for production; energy and resource policies are
made to regulate and increase efficiency. Voluntary agreements between economic
sectors and government ministries are examples of these. By 2009 the Austrian
Resource Efficiency Action Plan (REAP) along with several other strategies was
drafted by 2009. These go by five core strategies to raise: awareness on resource
efficiency in production, public procurement, development of secondary materials
in an economy that circulates and synergies between stakeholders cooperating
(EEA, 2011, p. 7).By 2010, the Austrian (SDS) was adopted with sustainable
consumption and production patterns as its focus. This policy would then take a 4
year working program period from 2011 2015 (EEA, 2011, p. 8).
Thus having regulated production and consumption, the next step for the
Austrian government was to address the waste produced by both areas. Hence, the
Waste Prevention program was published in 2011 as part of the Federal Waste
Management Plan. This would then focus on the nations primary waste drivers
(EEA, 2011, p. 8): the construction sector, industries and households, food sectors
from food industries to households, and the reuse sector.
These policies are then strengthened through the Austrian Strategy for the
Education for sustainable development. This was made possible through the
governments agreement among federal regions to inform consumption patterns in
the educational programs.

As early as 2005 the Austrian Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and
Technology initiated the Austrian Program on Technologies for Sustainable
Development which focuses achieving economic use of natural resources on
buildings, energy systems and factories. The initiative would then promote
financing of development projects to implementation of pilot projects (EEA, 2011, p.
10). Three program lines would then emerge these are: the Building of Tomorrow,
which is aimed at using environmentally friendly and renewable materials in
construction, the Factory of Tomorrow, aimed at zero-waste, zero-emission
production and produces, and the Energy System of Tomorrow aimed at efficient,
decentralized and renewables based energy technologies and systems (EEA, 2011,
p. 11).
With the REAP dealing with all material types the 2011 Waste Prevention
would focus on construction materials, food and products with high pollutant and
critical material contents (EEA, 2011, p. 9).
In lieu of the economic policies given, Austria had to take into account
producing environmental protection and preservation laws. Austrian policies
regarding the environment are often characterized by the separation of
responsibilities between the federal, regional and local levels. The REAP would then
be developed to taking to account recommendations from different government
sectors and other private stakeholders as well. This action is in regards to the large
Industrial sector of the nation. This would then highlight the initiatives of the
Ministry of Economy, the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment

and Water Management and the Ministry of Transport, Innovation and technology
as to achieving resource efficiency. The National Action for Sustainable Public
Procurement of 2010 was then created to insure land buyers and owners would
have a requirement of a minimum lifespan or a minimum share of 5% in recycled
construction materials. The Ministry of Environment would then create the
Masterplan Environmental Technologies to increase market shares in efficient,
environmental friendly and environmental protecting technologies.
Consequently with the economic policies regulating efficiency in the
production sector this would result to higher MSW generation. Austria would first
deal with landfills wherein all main legislations were to divert biodegradable MSW
from landfills through banning and high tipping fees or tax and by its full
implementation in 2004, land filled waste would be at an almost zero state by 2008
(EEA, 2013, p. 9). To avoid consequences from the landfill bans Austria, in
accordance to the Federal Waste management plan of 2011, would extensively use
16 plants to treat waste which would result in 57.8% of biological waste treated,
40% incinerated, and 2.2% metal recycled (EEA, 2013, p. 10).
Waste Transformation:
At 2001 the Sei g scheit vermeid was launched, by the Federal Ministry of
Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water management, to avoid and reduce
waste. The project would provide information and guidelines to extending material
durability. Waste collection for paper, glass, packaging waste and biogenic materials
were set up country wide (UN, 2004, p. 4). This would soon extend to avoidance,

collection and utilization of wastes as well including hazardous wastes from
electrical and electronic equipment.
With waste collection policies on the rise Austria moved forward to its
management. The Plastics Labelling and PCP regulation for example, facilitates
waste separation for recycling (UN, 2004, p. 3). This would apply to biogenic wastes
as well. Waste transformation however must still be regulated. The Clean Air
Regulation for example subjects thermal treatment plants to regulate its emissions.
Landfills as well are obligated to be built accordingly by the Landfill Regulation (UN,
2004, p. 3). Legislations have been passed by Austria to minimize pollution in the
waste streams transformation which scales from labor to sector-specific strategies.
Enterprises for example with more than 100 employees are required to appoint
waste management officers. A similar policy applies to larger companies which are
required to draft their own waste-management plans in accordance to the Waste
Management Act. To strengthen the institutional capacity in waste management
sectors the policy is revised every three years (UN, 2004, p. 3).
2. Netherlands
Waste Composition:
With a high percentage of its GDP composition to services, at 73.2%,
seconded by industry, at 24%, and agriculture at 2.8% (Index Mundi, 2013). The
Netherlands would have the bulk of its occupational force to its services. Taking to
account Netherlands material extraction which has fossil fuels shares at 41% by
2012 (European Comission, 2011, p. 12), which heavily relies on import trades

within the EU, natural resources within the country cannot meet domestic demand.
Despite its physical trade deficit the Netherlands still creates a monetary trade
surplus. The Dutch economy could therefore be characterized for its ability to turn
cheap bulk materials into expensive products (European Commision, 2012, p. 5)
with the costs of high imports of energy carriers via fossil fuels holding up at around
200 billion kilograms by 2011 (European Commision, 2012, p. 7). Conclusively,
waste composition, in comparison to other countries, would be by products of
producers and manufacturers. Household waste compositions however would
result to:

Figure 3. Netherlands Household Waste Components

Waste Generation:
By 2011, the Netherlands would have produced 9 930 000 tons of municipal
waste which would be 600kgs per capita (OECD, 2013). However, it must be taken
to account that Europes forerunner in recycling is the Netherlands having recycled
51% of the MSW generated (EEA, 2013, p. 7).

Policies:
In accordance to the EU Landfill Directive, member states are required to
reduce, if not avoid, amounts of biodegradable MSW with certain percentages of
reduction by 2006, 2009 and 2016 (EEA, 2013, p. 9). As early as 1995 the
Netherlands would have banned over 35 waste categories for land fill disposals
which includes all combustible and biodegradable waste. Over the course of 2006
2010 the Netherlands would have significantly reduced land filling to 8% surpassing
the EU standards of 2016 by 2006 alone.
By 1997 the Dutch government would have shifted waste management
responsibility from provincial levels to central the change would have come into
force by 2002 via the Environmental Management Act amendment (EEA, 2013, p. 5).
By 2009, the National Waste Management Plan, which has a period of 2009 2015,
would have a focus of (EEA, 2013, p. 5):
Limiting growth in waste generation (decoupling from the economic
growth)
Reducing the environmental impact of waste (optimizing recovery
and reuse)
Minimizing environmental impacts from product chains (raw material
extraction, production, waste management)
Division of responsibilities is still present though. Provincial level examples
are the licensing and monitoring of waste treatment facilities both incineration and
landfills alongside regulation of waste prevention in individual licenses (EEA, 2013,

p. 6). Municipalities on the other hand are obligated to collect organic household
wastes at a door to door level within jurisdictions (EEA, 2013, p. 6).
A strong driver in MSW diversion from landfills has come from the
Netherlands policies concerning land fill banning and taxation having high tipping
fees for combustible wastes and lower taxing for wastes which have no other
alternatives for recovery (EEA, 2013, p. 12) .Other drivers such as the first National
Waste management plan of 2002- 2012 which bans mixed MSW from landfill
disposal have also increased reduction. On a regional level though, organic recycling
has had big differences. Drenthe as the best performer compared to South Holland,
the worst performer, would have a 20% discrepancy. But an explanation could be
derived taking to account that Drenthe, mainly a rural area, where organic wastes
are expected to arise therefore organic waste management policies have been better
developed comparing to South Holland, an urban region (Netherlands MSW pg10).
It must be observed however that there are only two methods heavily enforced and
instituted in the Netherlands; recycling and incineration.
As early as 1993 the Waste Incinerators Decree regulated incinerating plants
for domestic waste and commercial waste of similar composition. The said act
regulated atmospheric emissions, combustion processes, monitoring and record
keeping. The same year the Building Materials Decree created standards for quality
secondary raw materials produced from waste. Same standards to regulate organic

fertilizers and organic halogen content were legislated. Landfill despite banning
dumping on them had its own Soil Protection Act (CIWM, 2005, p. 3).
By 2000 92% of local households had separation collection for organic waste
which resulted to 1.57m tons to be processed into 600 000 tons of compost..
National policies would have been legislated to collect organic components
separately and to directly convert them, if possible, to energy. By 2001 26
composting plants for bio wastes would be operational having 1.577 tonnes
capacity. In accordance to the Environmental Management Act, waste management
would be derived from the Lansinks Ladder which mechanisms operate on 7 levels
(CIWM, 2005, p. 3):
Prevention
Design for prevention and design for beneficial use
Product recycling
Material recycling
Recovery for use as fuel
Disposal by incineration
Disposal to landfill
3. Japan
Waste Composition:
Japan, being the largest consumer of paper in global standards consequently
has its MSW composition at 50% paper seconded by their food wastes, plastics,

others and waste at 20%, 15%, 4%, 2%, 1% respectively. Waste composition in
Japan is heavily influenced by their lifestyle as well which is the primary cause of
their high paper consumption which makes them the only Asian country whose
waste composition isnt dominated by organic waste (Agamuthu, Fauziah, Khidzir, &
Aiza, 2007, p. 19).

Figure 4. Japans MSW Composition
Waste Generation:
By 2003, Japan would have produced 52,000,000 tons where 19.6% are MW
( AIT/ UNEP: Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP), 2010, p.
8). The composition of MW in advanced countries is highly inorganic and non-
recyclable while cities of developing Asian countries, MW is generally organic and
recyclable ( AIT/ UNEP: Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP),
2010, p. 8). Waste composition in Asian countries except Japan is dominated by
organic waste, comprising approximately 75% of the total waste stream (Agamuthu,
Fauziah, Khidzir, & Aiza, 2007, p. 20).
Waste Compostion
Paper
Food Wastes
Plastics
Other Waste

Policies:
By 2000, Japans introduction of the soundmaterialcycle society which by
2008 would have been finalized and enacted. With the approval of the Central
Environment Council and the public the Sound Material Cycle Society Plan would
focus on 7 key elements (GEC, 2012, p. 10):
Create a sound material-cycle society on the premise of
environmental protection.
Make an integrated effort to create a sound material-cycle, low-carbon
and eco-friendly society.
Construct a local recycling zone that contributes to local community
revitalization.
In addition to enhancing numerical targets, introduce auxiliary and
monitoring indicators.
Pursue the 3R approach to ensuring collaboration among
stakeholders.
Improve the levels of 3R techniques and systems.
Ensure Japans leading role in internationally creating a sound
material-cycle society.
Having undergone 4 major revisions from 1976 2000 the Waste
Management Law was institutionalized to (GEC, 2012, p. 13):
Prevent waste generation

Promote proper waste management (transportation, disposal and
recycling)
Maintenance of clean living environment
In strengthening the reduction of waste, by June 2000, the Law for Promotion
of effective Utilization was revised since its effect on 1991. The Law forwards the
responsibilities of stakeholders and the government in attaining the Sound Material
Cycle objectives. These responsibilities would be (GEC, 2012, p. 13):
Consumers to expand product use before disposal and to facilitate the
use of reusable parts and resources and to help national and local
governments in enacting the law.
Businesses are encouraged to use secondary raw materials recovered
in waste plants and to recover reusable parts with their goods.
National government shall take all necessary measures of funding for
facilitation and efficient resource consumption. Promote research and
development activities and to improve information dissemination
amongst the citizens.
The beauty of Japans policies is not only its reactive nature, but pre-emptive
nature as well. The Waste Management Law for example regulates Industries as well
to reduce its pollution and increase productivity in its waste treatment and
transformation. Resource reutilizing industries for example are regulated for their

paper, glass, construction and copier manufacturing. The same regulation would
apply to products as to assure increased use and decreased pollution in its recovery
and repair (GEC, 2012, p. 18). This would extend to retailers and manufacturers;
that the products they sell and distribute will have their extended responsibilities
from transportation to its recycling (GEC, 2012, p. 25). Food industries however are
divided in the sizes of production they make. Large industries would have more
processes to undergo to assure resource recovery and material efficiency. The same
would apply to construction related materials. Under the Construction Material
Recycling Law, constructions and demolitions must first meet standards before
proceeding with their operations; constructions or demolitions must have standard
sizes for example thus they are required to classify and transport any waste
materials yielded from their said operation. Concretes for example must be
transported to crushing facilities to recover raw materials (GEC, 2012, p. 33).
Waste transformation has led to two primary results; alternative energy and
secondary raw materials. Austrias energy consumption has its recyclables produce
25.3% of its total. This results from their national objectives to increase total
efficiency on industries and buildings in accordance to the 2007 Austrian Climate
Change Strategy (EEA, 2013, p. 10). Same strategies have been seen in the
Netherlands, USA and Japan. Although, it is only in Japan that material recovery and
energy recovery is developed extensively.


4. United States
Waste Composition:
By 2009, the USA has generated 243 million tons of MSW; this is broken
down by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) into two categories: material
and product based categories (EPA, 2009). Paper and paperboards make 28.2%
having it the largest followed by food scraps at 14.1%, yard trimmings at 13.7%,
Metals, plastics and wood had 6 13%, rubber, leather and textiles at 8.3%, Glass at
4.8% having the remaining 3.5% composed of miscellaneous waste (EPA, 2009, p.
7).

Figure 5. US MSW Composition
Product categorized waste in 2009 would be largely composed of containers
and packaging holding 29.5% of the total product categorized MSW, seconded by
Nondurable goods at 22% and durable goods at 19.2% (EPA, 2009, p. 8). Material
categorized MSW however are composed largely by food scraps at 14.1% seconded
Waste Composition
Paper and Paper
Boards
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Metals, Plastics and
Wood

by yard trimmings at 13.7% letting the remaining 1.5% be composed of other
wastes (EPA, 2009, p. 8).
Waste Generation:
Although studies prove higher GDP means higher waste generation. The USA,
however, compared to other developed countries, clearly generates more waste
(Themelis & Mussche, 2013, p. 2).
Waste generation has had a steady increase since the 1960s, from 88 million
at a 2.68 pound generation per person per day, by 1980 it had increased to 3.66
pounds ppppd reaching its peak at 4.72 ppppd in 2000 thus decreasing to 4.67
ppppd in 2005 (Themelis & Mussche, 2013, p. 5). It has been on the decreasing
trend ever since. By 2009, generation rate would be at 4.34 ppppd.
Policies:
It must be taken to account that the USA handles waste management policies
on a state level rather than on a federal level (Themelis & Mussche, 2013, p. 2). This
is due to (Themelis & Mussche, 2013, p. 23):
The variation in climate
Differences in scope of waste streams
Variance in per capita of products
Levels of commercial activity
Variations of economic activity in residential, commercial and
industrial sectors

However, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to
standardize a national police has institutionalized the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) in order to standardize types of waste to be landfilled, treated,
or recycled. The EPA policies would then have 4 major focuses in waste
management strategy that state policies adhere to, these are (EPA, 2009, p. 148):
Source reduction or prevention, including reuse of products and on-
site composting of yard trimmings
Recycling, including off-site or community composting
Combustion with energy recovery
Disposal through landfilling
These would ultimately reduce MSW generation.
EPA would align its policies on waste prevention by regulating product
design, manufacturing, purchase, or use of materials including packaging to reduce
their amount of toxicity before becoming MSWs (EPA, 2009, p. 150). Other actions
taken would include redesigning products to use lighter materials in its
manufacturing and to lengthen product lifespan, reduction of product and packaging
amount used in modifications to change current practices of producers and
consumers etc.
On a more specific detail, the Composting Council as well as other sources in
1992 report 12 states (28% of USAs population) had in effect legislations to
regulate yard trimmings which, by 2009, has increased to 23 states (50% of USA)
(EPA, 2009, p. 155).

Before treatment of recyclables, waste must first be collected. In legislative
terms the USA has developed the Curbside Recyclables Collection (EPA, 2009, p.
156), which has over more than 9000 collection programs. However, to regulate
collected waste a Pay-As-You-Throw policy is in effect as well which requires higher
fees for higher volumes of waste generation (EPA, 2009, p. 155). In development of
the Curbside collection programs, which traditionally require residents to sort
materials before it is collected, would soon trend toward a single stream program
which would result to avoiding sorting of citizens. By 2007 the American Forest and
Paper Association found that around 50% of the collection programs have shifted to
a single stream. The programs however require materials to be taken to a
materials recovery facility (MRF) for processing.

C. Recognition of Returns from Effective ISWM
1. Revenues from Policies on Waste Collection and Transportation and/or
Policies on Waste Transformation without Recovery of Resources: Taxes
Austria
On the span of 1995 to 2010, Austrias profit from the revenue of landfill
taxes have increased steadily. Although the peak of taxation was at 2010 having
$120 per ton of land fill waste the peak of revenues occurred at 2003 reaching a

peak high of 96.8 million estimating to almost $125 million. From 1995 to 2010
Austria has earned a staggering $1.2 billion in landfill taxes alone (UV & P, 2012).
Netherlands
In the same trend with Austrias decline within landfill disposal has been the
steady trend in the recent years. The Netherlands, however, has had its peak at
2001 being the first to integrate such policy having to collect over 180 million by
that year alone collecting at an estimate of 127 per ton or $177.80 having 1 euro:
1.36968 USD or around 1.40. On a cumulative note from 2000 to 2010, the
Netherlands would have amounted to 1.504 billion or around $2 billion (ETC/SCP,
2012, p. 60).
Japan
Waste management policy on the Japanese economy of Okushima and
Yamashita used a multi-sector applied general equilibrium model named ODIN-
WR
13
which structured based on the Harberger-Scarf-Shoven-Whalley model. This is
because the analysis considers the introduction of a nationwide industrial waste tax
that serves to promote waste reduction and recycling with which the scope is on the
industrial waste. The tax revenue is assumed to be recycled to the government
expenditure. The condition before the policy which is called the Business-as-Usual
or BaU Case represents the situation of the Japanese economy in the base year, 1995
wherein the tax is imposed on industries in proportion to their waste discharge

13
The multifactorial mathematical models structure can be found at the journal for further studies
on page 114

(recovery) per unit (Okushima & Yamashita, 2005, p. 119). In primary industries
(primary goods), lower production leads to reduced waste discharge but for
secondary industries (secondary goods), increased production contributes to
increased waste recovery (negative waste discharge) hence, production has
opposite effects on waste discharge in primary and secondary industries (Okushima
& Yamashita, 2005, pp. 119-120). Their waste tax is defined by making efficient of
holding the waste tax levied on primary industries in proportion to their waste
discharge per unit and recycling subsidy (negative tax) given to secondary
industries (secondary goods) in proportion to their waste recovery (negative waste
discharge) per unit (Okushima & Yamashita, 2005, p. 120). Japans tax rate is more
sophisticated than other countries then that impose tax as blanket scale to
industries as general; they understand difference in scale of different industries.
Figure 6 indicates that, for a xed elasticity, the higher is the reduction rate, the
higher the tax rate needed. As an example of depiction by Okushima & Yamashita:
given an elasticity of 0.3, the tax rate needed to achieve a 1% reduction in nal
waste disposal is 290. For reductions of 4% and 8%, respectively, tax rates of 940
and 1,460 are needed (Okushima & Yamashita, 2005, p. 120). Yen to dollar is
0.00983 or near 0.01, 1% reduction in final waste would yield saving of about $9.40.

Figure 6. Relationship between the Waste Tax Rate, the Elasticity of Substitution and the Final Waste
Disposal Reduction Rate

It is important to include the authors note that studies like that of Washida
on 2004 that is able to regard that the tax is levied on nal waste disposal and not
simply on waste discharge (Okushima & Yamashita, 2005, p. 120). The more
industries reduce, reuse and recycle then, the less they get taxed.
USA
USA has variations on their landfill taxes due to the different states
legislations about the said tax. But on the average considering both private and
public sectors in charge of tipping fees in landfills, the USA in the course of 1985
1995 has had a steady increase of $2.40 per ton each year. In the initial 1985 fee
which was at 8.2 dollars it has reached $32.19 per ton at 1995 before hitting its first
decline in a 10 year trend. This increasing trend was credited to the implementation
of the Resource Conservation Act which regulated each states landfill fees. By 2000
the average tipping fee would have been $32.19 which again had a similar trend in
the 8595 timeframe increasing at $1.62 per ton per year. But this trend would be
already credited to rising fuel costs (NSWMA, 2008, p. 3). In totality of its earning in
2009, the 50 states of US would have amassed 45 396 870 tons of waste in landfills
which would have been cumulatively generated $ 1 997 008 311 in 2009 alone.
2. Revenues from Resource Recovery through Sorting and Recycling
Austria and Netherlands
European Statistics gives the most recent prices of the top recyclables in
their area which are the following:

Glass -The highest monthly price was observed in April 2008 at approximately 54
/tones while the most recent reported prices from January / February 2009 were
still above the previous years, with prices of 49-51 /tons (European Commission,
2011). $70/ton then can be earned from glass as of 2009.
Paper and Board - From October 2008 the price declines from approximately 122
/tons to 74 /tons in February 2009 and since then, the price has increased
dramatically (doubling in just over a year) and has reached over 150 /tons since
September 2010 (European Commission, 2011). $210/ton then can be earned from
paper and board as of 2009.
Plastics - The price of plastic waste depends on two factors: the supply and demand
of plastic waste material and on the crude oil price which strongly influences the
price of the virgin (primary) material (European Commission, 2009). From a high of
approx. 375 /tons in October 2008 a sharp decline to a price of approx. 230 /tons
in January 2009 is observed and since then, recovered steadily to 300 /tons by the
end of 2010 wherein finally, the trade volume appears to recover very quickly but
the price much more slowly (European Commission, 2009). $420/ton then can be
earned from plastics as of 2010.
Japan
Recycled resin or recycled plastic goods are produced from 2.17 million ton
of waste plastics and around 1.6 million ton of waste plastics are exported which are
considered to go to mechanical recycling, meaning the difference of 600,000 ton is
the feedstock for recycled resin in the domestic market (Kodera, 2012, p. 210).

Many Japanese manufacturers avoid the use of recycled resin, especially from mixed
waste plastics of containers and packaging because of the low quality such as
strength, color and smell so the selling price of recycled resin pellets (typically, a
mixture of polyethylene and polypropylene) from the mixed waste plastics is
generally very low, 20-40,000/ton or $200-$400, whereas the recycling cost of
mixed waste plastics is 72,000/ton or $720 in average due to the contamination of
various components (Kodera, 2012, pp. 210-212). The recyclers convert the
separated portion of mixed waste plastics into recycled pellets or recycled products
such as transportation pallets and imitation wood at about 45 wt%, and the rest
goes to incineration with heat recovery or solid fuel production with paying gate
fees (Kodera, 2012, p. 212).
More than plastics, Japan favors recycling metals. The breakdowns of the
general scrap metal rates are as follows:
Scrap Metal Value in Yen/kg
14

Aluminum wire

169
Brass rollers 509
Cans 133
Car Batteries 65
Copper Bottom 621
Cutting Copper 690
Electroytic Cathode
Copper
796

14
Move values to thousandths for USD valuation since a yen is equivalent to 0.00983 or 0/.01

Gun metal cutting powder

525
Gunmetal (bronze) 534
Gunmetal included (brass) 519
Includes Copper 629
Lead 136
Ordinary copper 530
Pig Lead 283
Printing plate 158
Reduction of copper
powder
636
Sash - A (refers to scrap of
window)
152
Secondary Aluminium
Ingot 99 Perc.
219
Tin Metal 2480
Wheels - A 181
Yellow Brass Red Turning 482
Zinc alloys 54
Zinc Metal 247
MEAN VALUE 467
Table 4. Japans General Scrap Metal Rates (RecycleINme, 2014)

Lastly, Japan is exclusively the one who is most efficient in furniture and
appliances recycling. These are the top recycled and their respective fee equivalent:

Table 5. Governments General Income per unit Furniture/Appliance Recycled (Tokyo Lease
Corporation, 2013)
USA
The organization As You Sow conveniently combines different EPA data on
municipal solid waste and presents the predetermined industry averages available:
MATERIAL WEIGHT
RECYCLED
(in million
tons)
15

$ AVERAGE
MARKET
VALUE/TON
16

$ TOTAL AVERAGE MARKET VALUE
16
Paper 9.87 $235.300 $829,760,000.00
Glass 6.66 $4.890 $52,680,000.00
Steel 0.77 $448.335 $345,217,950.00
Aluminum 1.15 $2730.000 $3,139,500,000.00
Plastics 10.81 $1050.000 $11,350,500,000.00
TOTAL 29.26 $15,717,657,950.00
(Total market value would be at least

15
As You Sow cites Statistics taken from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)s most
recent report on Municipal Solid Waste issued in January 2011.
16
The commodity prices used were the most current, available U.S. prices for the lowest and highest
valued material within a class of materials as of March 31, 2011. Where industry averages were
available, such industry averages were used. For more details on each materials average market
value/ton, it is cross-referenced at As You Sows research page 2.

$23,851,840,000.00 if considering only
the highest valued materials amongst
paper, glass, steel, aluminum, and
plastics)
Table 6. US Commodity Market Value of Discarded Recyclable Waste (As You Sow, 2011, p. 1)
It is important to note that among the plastics recycled, plastic bags are a
major contributor yet plastic bag recycling programs in the US remain an
underdeveloped area with great potential growth as every year, Americans use
approximately 1 billion shopping bags annually creating 300,000 tons of landfill
waste (Clean Air Council, 2009). In California alone, plastics represent 9.5% by
weight, or 3.8 million tons, of the total solid waste disposed in California, and plastic
trash bags alone represent 1%, or 390,460 tons, of the total solid waste disposed in
California (California Department of General Services, 2011). The state of California
spends about 25 million dollars sending plastic bags to landfill each year, and
another 8.5 million dollars to remove littered bags from streets (Californians
Against Waste, 2013).
3. Resource Recovery through Waste Processing: Organic Wastes
(Composting/Fertilizers)
Austria and Netherlands
Around 2 million tons of compost was commercially produced in 2005-2006
in European region wherein approximately half was sold to end users, a third was
used on the site of production and the remainder was distributed free of charge and

despite the rapid growth in the production of compost over the past five years, these
proportions do not appear to have significantly changed (WRAP, 2008, p. 4).
The multi-sectorial organic waste usage is encouraging evidence that the
markets for higher value composting products have grown in line with the rapid
growth in composting, but on the other it points to an ongoing reliance on gate fees
and a continued perception that compost has little value (WRAP, 2008, pp. 4-5). For
those products that are sold, prices vary according to the grade of compost: ex-
works prices for loose compost typically range from around 3 per m3 for 0-40 mm
grade composts to 12 per m
3
for finely graded (0-5mm) composts and having an
average bulk density of compost around 500kg/m
3
implies a price range of 6 to
over 20 per tone (WRAP, 2008, p. 5). The value of compost as a replacement for
inorganic fertilizer is estimated to be around 5 per ton which is a key to massive
savings since chemical fertilizers and soil improvers are known to have historically
high levels of price and in the second half of 2007, prices in that area rose by almost
50 percent (WRAP, 2008, p. 5)!
Waste and Resources Action Programme traced the increase to have been
driven in part by the increase in the prices of natural gas which is the main
feedstock for ammonia-based fertilizers but it also reflects strong world demand
for fertilizers because it foresees, although new ammonia capacity is expected to
become operational in the year ahead, prices are expected to remain strong
(WRAP, 2008, p. 5). Therefore against this backdrop, higher usage of compost in
agricultural applications as an alternative source of nitrogen has the potential to

offer significant cost savings as evidently shown in those that already believed and
pursued making waste fertilizers: bagged retail composts range in price from
around 50 per ton for multipurpose compost to over 1,000 per ton for specialty
blends (WRAP, 2008, p. 5)!
Japan
The aforementioned ODIN-WR model which Okushima and Yamashita
followed to have a general equilibrium analysis of waste management in Japan
is able to take account of the different industrial and energy sectors of the country
which are abbreviated for convenience:

Table 7. Industrial and Energy Sectors in ODIN-WR model (Okushima & Yamashita, 2005, p. 115)

They are able to compute how many tons per sector recycled yield 0.1
billion which is amassing to almost $10 million per different sectors of waste they
recycle:

Table 8. Waste Discharge and Recovery Coefficient by ODIN-WR model (Okushima & Yamashita,
2005, p. 119)
US
The market for compost is increasing in demand. The University of Georgia is
able to determine that 16 million tons of commercial organic waste may be
composted which are produced by just by the sectors of supermarkets, restaurants,
and schools. Source separated food scrap compost is generally higher in nutrient
value and lower in contamination than most other types of compost, thus making it
more valuable in the market that reflects composts from source-separated
feedstocks having the highest average revenue per ton at nearly $40 and others
such as compost from yard trimmings has a value of $32 a ton and municipal solid
waste compost has a value of $3 a ton (University of Georgina: College of
Agricultural and Environmental Science; College of Family and Consumer Sciences,
2012, p. 7).

Resource Recycling Journal is cited by the University of Georgina in mapping
out different strategies in organic waste recycling/composting and the revenues and
profits that could be attained from each:

Table 9. US Organic Waste Recycling/Composting Strategies Revenues and Savings (University of
Georgina: College of Agricultural and Environmental Science; College of Family and Consumer
Sciences, 2012, p. 8)
4. Resource Recovery through Waste Processing: Energy
Considering the top sources of converted energy sources an obvious
valuation could be achieved. Oil for example has a potential of generating 42 MJ/kg
but is seconded by Plastics having a potential energy generation of 40 MJ/ kg.
Considering the transformation of these sources to proper energy, plastics seem to
be more efficient sources for energy. Oil, taking to account all kinds of burning oil
plants, it achieves an energy utilization of 60% at best comparing to the Co
generation Incineration plants which averages at 80% energy utilization. But to take
on a broader perspective on how renewable energy sources from wastes are far
more efficient that conventional sources we must standardize the terms within the
global arena (UV & P, 2012).

Popular forms of energy such as coal and oil have had a steady hold of the top
energy kinds used within the global arena but ever since its rise in the 80s the
renewables exclusive of the biofuels have held an increasing trend. Although oil has
remained the top consumed fuel around the globe having 33.1% of the global energy
consumption (BP, 2013, p. 42) it must be taken to account that its market share has
had a declining trend for 13 years now. In a breakdown within the four discussed
countries oil would have these percentages in world consumption under the
standards of stock changes, non petroleum additives and substitute fuels
17
(BP,
2013, p. 6):
Austria 0.3% at 1 883 810kg/day by 2012
Netherlands 1.1% at 6 838 890kg/day by 2012
Japan 6.3% at 34 553 620gk/day by 2012
USA 19.9% at 136 008 150kg/day by 2012
Compared to renewable energies including biomass and waste under the standard
conversion of thermal energy at a 38% conversion efficiency in a modern thermal
station, assuming the terms in its oil equivalent (BP, 2013, p. 39):
Austria 0.7% at 1.6 million tons by 2012
Netherlands 1.2% at 2.7 million tons by 2012
Japan 3.4% at 8.2 million tons by 2012

17
Converted from barrels to kilograms

USA 21.4% at 50.7 million tons by 2012
Comparatively, having a ton of oil produce 12 megawatt-hours (BP, 2013, p. 44),
assuming it is at 100% efficiency, the renewable sources could achieve the same
output at 38% efficiency. Therefore, the savings provided by thermal stations or
treatment plants rate at 62% relative to the price of electricity per country.
Therefore the savings of any WTE can be computed as follows: Price of electricity in
the country x .62 = savings. If they would shift their primary source of energy to
renewable, we were able to stage how much the four countries save in terms of
energy these would be at:
Austria - 0.197 /kWh electricity rate as of latest data which is on
December 2013 (Eurostat, 2012) so they save USD 122.14 cents or
around $1.22/kWh
Netherlands - 0.184 /kWh rate as of latest data which is on December
2013 (Eurostat, 2012) so they save USD 114.08 cents or around
$1.15/kWh
Japan - around USD 19 cents/kWh electricity rate as of 2013 in average
(Wilson L. , 2013) would save USD 11.78 cents/kWh.
USA - USD 11.72 cents/kWh is the average electricity rate of its states
(Wilson L. , 2013) so they save about USD 7.2 cents/kWh.


D. Possible Application of Advance Country Experiences to Philippines
1. Philippine Scenario and Efforts on Waste and Waste Management
Philippine economic standpoint today is a society in transition: the
dominance of agriculture is giving way to an merging semi-commercial, semi-
industrial country; feudal relations of production are giving way to a semi- capitalist
society and the following are some indications of this transition: media penetration
of the most rural areas, capitalist intrusion into the countryside, replacement of
subsistence economies by the cash economy, land conversion to non-agricultural
uses, the shift by farmers to non-farming jobs, urban migration and the spread of
corporate farming (Philippine Greens, 1999, pp. 24-25). Because the Philippines is
going through a transition process from semi-feudalism to semi-capitalism, it is
beset with a complex web of old and new problems. The following basic problems
are the key links in this complex web: malgovernment, concentration of wealth,
nature-abuse, toxic capitalism, chronic violence, culture-aggression and
globalization (Philippine Greens, 1999, pp. 26-27). We can observe that these
problems have monetary and power interplay cause and its effects are not just of
societal backlash on stability in welfare but also in its basic environmental
conditions.
In its economic structure it is similar to the public sector in many developing
countries that are unable to deliver services effectively, regulation of the private
sector is limited and illegal dumping of domestic and industrial waste is a common
practice. In general, solid waste management is given a very low priority in these

countries. As a result, very limited funds are provided to the solid waste
management sector by the governments, and the levels of services required for
protection of public health and the environment are not attained. The problem is
acute at the local government level where the local taxation system is inadequately
developed and, therefore, the financial basis for public services, including solid
waste management, is weak (UNEPs ETB, 2001).
EKC principles can be used to determine turning points in the Philippines.
The solid waste problem is most serious in urban centers, particularly in Metro
Manila as data shows. This coincides with EKC analysis that those with the high
population density and the high consumption rates are likely to have a downturn on
environmental measures. Additionally, it being the capital city it is the concentration
of packaged goods, some of which are made with raw materials that are toxic and
non-biodegradable.

Figure 7. Projection of Waste Generation in the Philippines (EMB-DENR, 2010)

The 2007 figures showed that the National Capital Region (NCR) has the highest
waste generation at 2.86 million tons per year, followed by Southern Tagalog and
Central Luzon at 1.69 million tons and 1.21million tons, respectively.

In terms of conceiving economic instrument to culminate a sound waste
management, there is an act providing for an Ecological Solid Waste Management
Program
18
which more specifically aims to create necessary institutional
mechanisms and incentives, declaring certain acts prohibited and providing
penalties, appropriating funds therefore and for other purposes. Its general
provisions are (EMB, 2000):
(a) Ensure the protection of public health and environment;
(b) Utilize environmentally-sound methods that maximize the utilization
of valuable resources and encourage resources conservation and
recovery;
(c) Set guidelines and targets for solid waste avoidance and volume
reduction through source reduction and waste minimization measures,
including composing, recycling, re-use, recovery, green charcoal process,
and others, before collection, treatment and disposal in appropriate and
environmentally sound solid waste management facilities in accordance
with ecologically sustainable development principles;
(d) Ensure the proper segregation, collection, transport, storage,
treatment and disposal of solid waste through the formulation and
adoption of the best environmental practices in ecological waste
management excluding incineration;
(e) Promote national research and development programs for improved
solid waste management and resource conservation techniques, more

18
R.A. no. 9003

effective institutional arrangement and indigenous and improved
methods of waste reduction, collection, separation and recovery.
(f) Encourage greater private sector participation in solid waste
management;
(g) Retain primary enforcement and responsibility of solid waste
management with local government units while establishing a
cooperative effort among the national government, other local
government units, non-government organizations, and the private sector;
(h) Encourage cooperation and self-regulation among waste generators
through the application of market-based instruments;
(i) Institutionalize public participation in the development and
implementation of national and local integrated, comprehensive and
ecological waste management programs; and
(j) Strengthen the integration of ecological solid waste management and
resource conservation and recovery topics into the academic curricula of
formal and non-formal education in order to promote environmental
awareness and action among the citizenry.

In 2004, a total of 103 cities representing 94% of the total 109 had organized
their SWMBs in accordance with the provisions of RA their SWMBs in accordance
with the provisions of RA 9003. Of this number, however, only 49 cities or 44% had
effective SWMBs (Torres, 2004) . The problem is enactment for its implementation
is not felt on a national scale. It is not known whether it is because of lack of
information dissemination or lack of concrete sanctioning and/or incentivizing.

Although carrying over the decree was practiced more on barangay/
municipality prerogative or private institution-initiated projects. Example of a
municipality that applied the act was the Municipality of San Francisco in Cebu.
They provided logistics for operation. They then created a clear structure of
operation and also duly appointed corresponding manpower. And most importantly,
information dissemination they call Information Education Campaign (IEC)
(Municipality of San Francisco, 2000):
An IEC team conducted IEC in schools pertaining to the proper
segregation of solid waste in all elementary schools
IEC at the barangay and made a barangay ecological SWM team to
help spread the campaign
Education campaign in the purok during monthly meeting where Solid
Waste Management IEC team delivered the Information Campaign about
the implementation of the municipal comprehensive solid waste
management ordinance.
Flyer distribution to public market distributed flyers, leaflets, to
vendors at the municipal public market during market day to insure that
garbage will be properly segregated and recorded at municipal Public
market every Sunday, a market day of the municipality for the purpose of
awareness of the citizenry.
A house to house distribution of leaflets, flyers on solid waste
management regarding the proper segregations of garbage generated in
households.

Conduct orientation of the violators at Purok Mahaba Brgy. San Isidro.
There are 21 households cant segregate their wastes, out of 62
households. The said violator are subject to render a community service
at the area.
And putting SWM signage.

Photo 1. Putting up large SWM signage in municipalitys dialect (Municipality of San Francisco,
2000)

If only the government would push more proactiveness centrally or with
each municipality then the Philippines could make significant profit from solid
wastes.

Figure 8. Institutional Waste classification as per DENR Administrative Order 2001-34 (EMB-DENR,
2010)
First benefit is savings from 3Rs since it has been shown that in our context,
over the years, the use of plastics has been stagnating, indicating a change in the
packaging materials for goods.

Figure 9. CompositionComparison of Results of Composition of Municipal Solid Wastes Generated
(Composition, % wet weight) (EMB-DENR, 2010)

Second the facilities and other technologies can have more gains not just by
virtue of funding but if SWM collection is bettered so that those in figure 9 can be
recycled, recovered or transformed in the following facilities:


Table 10. Existing Solid Waste Facilities in the Philippines (EMB-DENR, 2010)

Commodification of garbage highly happens in the Philippines. Open
collection vehicles, in particular, offer easy access for the recovery of recyclables
from collected mixed wastes. Sorting of recyclable materials also exists when
compactor trucks are used, prior to the compacting of the refuse. This activity is
particularly common in Mexico, Colombia, Thailand, and the Philippines. Collection
crews later sell the materials on their way to transfer or disposal facilities, and
divide the proceeds among them. While some time is wasted in the process, strong
monetary incentives encourage collection crews to sort recyclables, since engaging
in this activity can double their income. A more socially desirable alternative exists
in some Mexican cities, where volunteers retrieve the recyclables, so that the sorting
does not distract the collection crew from performing their duties (Gonzalez &
Suremain, 1993, p. 11).

The dominant view of scavenging, which still prevails in many developing
countries, sees scavenging as inhuman, a symbol of backwardness, and a source of
embarrassment and shame for the city or country. Based on this, scavenging has
been declared illegal and punished in many Third World cities, such as in several
Colombian, Indian, and Philippine localities. Restrictions and a hostile attitude
towards waste pickers typify repressive policies (Gonzalez & Suremain, 1993, p. 25).
But what majority of the countrymen do not know is that majority of the
turnovers of garbage come from the informal sector. IWB The was able to formalize
some informal recyclers (termed as eco-aides) and organize cooperatives from
waste dealers. Specifically, it is dedicated to formalizing the collection and disposal
of recyclables from households back to its source or recycling facilities by
coordinating with waste dealers, recycling institutions, waste pickers and
government (Metro Manila Linis-Ganda, 2008) wherein their key initiatives include:
Improving and strengthening link between middle dealers and
itinerant buyers
Organizing recycling groups into cooperatives
Formalizing scavenging and encouraging participation among schools
and households in waste segregation
Extensive information campaigns supporting their movement
Providing funding assistance for the informal sector
The Philippines need not to make technology as an alibi for a not so efficient
solid waste management but it must strengthen our traditional way of organization
which is by neighborhood ties via information dissemination to grass roots

especially household to household since the Filipinos honing of habits is derived and
actualized from families and then extending to networks such as tying up with not
only barangay/municipal based approaches but moreover, really reach out to the
informal sector which comprises not only the most active sector, but the most
income-generating as well.
2. Applications from SWM Advanced Countries Appropriated to the
Philippines
Immediate applicative mechanism are Promulgating policies, Recycling and
Organic Waste Transformation/Composting
The policies besides having to be enacted must have information
dissemination and strict implementation such really sanctioning those who do not
follow (can be monitored per locality). This study draws the following applications
for the betterment and sustainability of the Philippines ISWM:
Household level:
Collection Strategies Segregation although encouraged in status quo
must be a strict practice. From the advanced countries, it is seen that
segregation before collection lowers operational cost and makes
transportation also easier to even transportation cost is lessened.
Tipping fees Imposing commensurate fees to actions are effective
economic tools in curbing behavior. Taxing must be higher in organic
waste since most of our wastes are organic. This would encourage homes
to have compost, also recycling those inorganic wastes.

Commercial level:
Corporate Responsibility must be strengthened. Like EU countries which
inculcate sustainable paradigms in their companies and Japans government being
the main watchman of corporate, the Philippines can start with:
Waste Recall for material recovery
Policies encouraging and enforcing material recovery
Industries:
Production regulation Industry must have wise estimations of
demand so products are not left unsold or expired because that
phenomenon has two effects: losses for the industry and more wastes.
Proportional production within facilities This is also in line with the
first but more with sustainability within the operation of facilities. There
would not only be less waste but lesser expenses on energy and
packaging materials if production is proportional.
Product design and durability It was shown that there is a differing
trend in packaging in the Philippines already and industries must take
advantage of this and also the government can make this a standard
whence attributing quality ratings. Minimalism can be encouraged for
lesser packaging costs and wastes but durability could have a long term
benefit for costumers such that they can reuse those product packages as
containers.

Waste transportation Like households, industries could be imposed
of segregation and taxation. Not only now liable to liquid or toxic waste
but solid waste produced can be under economic instruments.
Long term applicative factor is developing technology
The Philippines may tie up with international organizations or other
countries but in terms of sustaining its own, it may use the collected and saved
money from sanctions in policies, taxations and other economic instruments and
resource recovery from recycling and composting to form a solid waste contingency
fund which can give rise to the following:
Household level:
Storage and collection centers
Storage and collection centers
Proper MRFs
Behavioral changes due to policies
Commercial level:
Energy recovery due to presence of high organic wastes
Industrial level:
Partnerships between private and public sectors for waste
transportation and transformation


V. Conclusions and Recommendations

A. Conclusions Drawn Out
Key Findings:
The Philippines ISWM profile in status quo: its economical sectors
composition, waste generation, current policies and ways of waste transformation
reflects the Philippines cannot develop waste-to-energy plants yet that is why it
must concentrate and maximize first, policies on waste without resource recovery
like on waste collection, transportation and final disposal and second, resource
recovery through recycling and organic waste transformation/ composting.
General conclusion:
Solid Waste generation reflects the economic scenario of a nation and in turn,
solid waste management affects the welfare of the stakeholders both in economic
and environmental ripple effects. The goal of all nations is towards sustainable
development wherein wastes incurred may be put into good use, thus building a
green economy. The most profitable aspects of solid waste management is via
economical instruments such as taxations and on energy recovery.
Specific conclusions:
Each locality has its set of assets and limitations so equaling the playing
field with the pragmatics of SWM may be difficult but it is internationally
transcending. Pragmatics of SWM to be adopted focus is supposed to be

capitalizing on the countrys economic advantage so waste composition must be
looked into to determine what approach and facilities are need. Developed countries
can process industrial wastes more, developing countries can profit more in
agricultural waste and trade externally the other wastes they cannot process yet to
have the following benefits: direct profit that can be saved for bettering our
technology, less landfill for less pollution and more space for productivity, and
circulation of raw materials so production cost of what we are buying also lessens.
Societal repercussions are by-products of economic superstructure. A
progressive legislation institutes participation amalgamating smart economic
instruments in their SWM policies. At the same time since we are concerned with
sustainable development, must look into harms and mitigation. Effective
materialization of this involves:
A multi-stakeholder course of action to identify and implement
economic instruments in the solid wastes management sector,
(like that of Japans dialogues to grassroots level of clearing up what can
be disposed off and what can be of profit that is why it may be puzzling
for others why they leave TVs, air conditioners and other deemed
valuable electronic solid waste but for them it is clear that the instruction
is a centralized picking to maximize profit)
Stimulation of decision makers to take a proactive role in formulating
country and sector specific economic instruments to help achieve
sustainable development, (like that of regions in Europe not merely

relying on technology but creating economic instruments such as taxation
and paying as you throw that effectively curbs behavior of all
stakeholders whether private or public individuals and is a
commensurate mechanism for their action: what they contribute
economically is appropriated to what they contribute to the
environment what could be more of a promotion of sustainable
development as that!), and
Strengthening human and institutional capacity in the assessment,
selection, planning and implementation of economic instruments in the
solid waste management sector (Europeans have producer mitigations
and also let company subscribe to a working mechanism which is for
sustainable development through workshops and seminars, they
harmonize already pragmatics of industry to environmental orientedness
which is what a green economy aims for. Japan encourages creation of
green products more than others proving that not only must you work
intrinsically in the industry but must also curb consumerism side).
Percepts and values formed on wastes is a reflection of the economical
needs of the terrain. By products are rooted not just from operational pragmatics
but traces back to goals of the key stakeholders which are: the household level,
commercial level and industries. Commodification and other values formed are
unique as per experience of stakeholders.
In the end we realize that treasuring of trash ties back to the nature of
waste generated in that context. Industrialized countries would value garbage

more on what could be extracted from them so as to serve as new input materials
for their future operations and the only direct commodification of garbage is those
that they cannot readily process or are costly with their facilities and these are the
electronic solid wastes. Constituents of the countries which are best in SWM have
great awareness of garbage and its ripple effects so they have come to embrace
green propagandas of industry and also paying for the public good of waste
collection. In the developing countries however, willingness to pay for garbage
collection is not promulgated in a major scale as a household expenditure as
opposed to other public services such as electricity and water (there are exemptions
in some municipalities who require to their own area). Commodification stems from
two things in the developed countries: because there is not much regard to waste
collection, there is not much that venture into it and the second reason is that there
is a large portion of the masses that find it difficult to earn for their basic needs. The
result is that an informal sector would be active in SWM and among it would be
comprised more of those in poverty. The informal recovery of materials from waste
represents an important survival strategy for disadvantaged populations
throughout the developing world. Waste pickers are looked down as the poorest of
the poor and only as a marginal sector to mainstream economy and society. In many
cases, they are subject to not only discrimination but exploitation by middlemen and
by local and federal government policies. Prejudice may highly be present in the
Philippines for those who venture into garbage packing, but they are slowly being
addressed by the government and hopefully programs that pertain to informal
sectors flourish, and also that for the entire information dissemination for the

masses so these prejudices can be watered down. Currently we may not measure up
with the global leaders on SWM with technology at hand but we may have our own
sound sustainable development if we go through extensive lengths of reaching the
grassroots like some municipal-initiated projects and also private ones have done
and are doing.
The key ideas for Philippines garbage generation into gold:
1. Garbage in the Philippines can be readily profitableThis has been proven in
related literatures. On this study it was found that the EU, Japan and World Bank are
willing to tie up. But for its own sustainability this study has presented that
Philippines waste generated has components which are readily biodegradable,
readily combustible and those that are inert components therefore not much
technology is needed and return of gains are bountiful. Even food scraps can be
utilized since those are highly anaerobic.
2. Household levels must be prioritized Majority of waste generated in the
Philippines come from households and so the budget on collection and
transportation goes much in this. Aside from it benefits health and the environment,
so does it have economic benefits in not only collecting and transporting but also in
sorting, processing and transformation.
3. Regulate production with industries and commercial level Policies must not
only look after the consumers but also the producers if it wants to have a green
economy. Corporate responsibility is not only ensuring proportional input-output

mechanism but also bettering its quality that will instigate a habit of reusing to their
consumers.
4. Taxing on landfills were effective Successful countries in SWM valued their
lands in such a way that there have been not only policies but economic instruments
imposed. Actually the Philippines can use its land as an economic advantage.
5. Exporting trash is an option the currently established countries on facilities
have the willingness to import trash most especially those with WTE technology.
With the income generated from exporting and the solid waste contingency fund
derived from policies and economic instruments, the Philippines can develop its
facilities and it is not impossible that we may have our very own waste-to-energy
processing.

B. Recommendations of the Study and for Furthering
Our world will increase in population and be more and more interconnected.
EKC may be used as the compass to know whether we are able to balance economic
development to environmental development. The defining challenge of the 21st
Century will be that humanity shares a common fate: that which is already
demanding new forms of global connecting. The paradox of a unified global
economy and divided national societies poses the single greatest threat for our
planet... Although there are appropriate waste management solutions, the chief
concern is the global framework that should put them in place where they are most
needed. Ways on proactive participate in the creation and upholding of it of a green

economy would be a good topic to develop (i.e. what have been the best economic
instruments that curb excessive consumerism or on the other side, weak corporate
responsibility). There is foremost though a recommendation of garnering more
data especially in developing terrains.
Interest in garnering more data base but also making quantitative studies on
SWM in which EKC can be used to correlate to national economics of waste
management. A further recommendation would be using EKC to international
welfare in waste trade. ODIN-WR efficacy and application is worthwhile to dig into
since the highly sophisticated model of Japan is able to analyze equilibrium of
waste management since it encapsulates the countrys different industrial and
energy sectors.
Specifically for the Philippines:
Data and information on waste generation and waste management
particularly of solid wastes in the Philippines should be explored further since it is
part of the regions that deemed to have poor data and information. Awareness
raising and capacity building in waste and waste management should be developed
and effectively enforced. Participation of various stakeholders in waste and waste
management should be enhanced in the provision of resources for the effective
implementation of the 3Rs.
Education will create awareness and support the development of a new
frame of mind in a mid-term perspective. Legislation, however, has to lay out the
rules, to enforce them and to prevent violations as a short term measure.

In view of the variety and complexity of products and consequently of
wastes, byproducts, and residues, there is no single solution to the waste treatment
demands of today. An appropriate mix of technologies is needed in order to meet
the a range of technical, ecological and economic requirements of integrated waste
management on a regional level.
As long as industry and consumers produce waste, we need an infrastructure
that allows for their proper treatment and detoxification and for the safe long-term
disposal of residues. This system may become less extensive once we achieve good
results in the fields of waste detoxification and waste minimization. The concept of
producers responsibility was realized by shifting the financial burden for the
proper treatment or recycling of end-of-life products (products near to expiration
date) to manufacturers. This has established a new line of communication between
the environmental sector and manufacturers. Waste managers relay information
regarding the design for recycling and the design for disposal upstream to
producers and manufacturers, thus advocating the cause of the environments
capacities and environmental constraints. This communication will still be
developed and further improved, but it can be regarded as a first step to be taken by
the waste management sector.
Two main challenges for the future are the task of decoupling waste
generation from economic growth by increased eco-efficiency as well as the
problems caused by the trend of rapid urbanization. Given our present production
and consumption patterns, waste generation is closely tied up with population
growth and economic development. Many of the most rapidly growing conurbations

and mega-cities are located in developing countries where funding is still a critical
issue so if further studies are made about the link of waste management other
economic indicators, this concern might be put into greater attention not only by
awareness to people but hopefully funds either from the outside: more program
integration or giving investments for the country to create their own programs and
from the national scale: easier loans or better grants-program may be promulgated.
While the introduction of fees for waste collection and treatment services
raises peoples awareness, it may push consumers and businesses to illegal
practices. This makes information dissemination an even more important factor in
this context.
Today, the waste management industry is well aware of the economics it
could benefit from and the importance of social aspects. These include, among
others the sitting of facilities and the introduction of new collection schemes,
training workers and staff and educating consumers, establishing and promoting
business, business relations and international dialogue, etc. Since the waste
management sector of today has a wider scope, an increased potential and a sense
of growing responsibility, it needs to create trust in its management approaches,
business practices and technical operation. Trust as a long-term commitment will be
supported by high standards, transparency, documentation, and an honest policy to
fight offenders. Qualitative studies on how managerial aspects such as trust affect
participation of stakeholders in waste management can be looked into. These
recommendations are made because not only are there material problems, but
deeper are managerial problems.
a | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

Bibliography

AIT/ UNEP: Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP). (2010).
Municipal Waste Management Report: Status Quo and Issues in South East and East
Asian Countries. (G. B. Okumura, Ed.) Klong Luang, Pathumthani, Thailand: United
Nations Environment Programme.
Agamuthu, P., Fauziah, S., Khidzir, K., & Aiza, A. N. (2007). Sustainable Waste
Management - Asian Perspectives. Institute of Biological Sciences of University of
Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Faculty of Science. Chennai: International
Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management.
Asuamah, S. Y., Kumi, E., & Kwarteng, E. (2012). Attitude towards Recycling and
Waste Management: A Survey of Marketing Students in Sunyani Polytechnic, Ghana.
Science Education Development Institute , 2.
As You Sow. (2011).
Commodity Market Value of Discarded Recyclable Packaging Waste. Retrieved
February 2014, from As You Sow:
http://www.asyousow.org/sustainability/EPR_Lost_Pckg_Value_Chart.pdf
Bakas, I., Sieck, M., Hermann, T., Andersen, F. M., Larsen, H., & Reichel, A. (2011).
Projections of Municipal Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases. Copenhagen,
Denmark: ETC/SCP.
Baltzly, D. (2010). Stoicism. Retrieved 2013, from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism
Barles, S. (2010). History of Waste Management and the Social and the Cultural
Representations of Waste. In M. AGNOLETTI, E. JOHANN, & S. NERI SERNERI, World
Environment History. Oxford: UNESCO-Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems
(EOLSS).
BBC News Europe. (2012, August 8). BBC News. Retrieved January 2014, from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19177470
BP. (2013). Statistical Review of World Energy. BP.
Bundesabfallwirtschaftsplan (BAWP). (2011). Federal Waste Management Plan (Vol.
1). vienna: The Ministry of Life: lebensministerium.
b | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

California Department of General Services. (2011). Plastic Bags. Retrieved February
2014, from Green California:
http://www.green.ca.gov/EPP/building/PlasticBags.htm
Californians Against Waste. (2013). The Problem of Plastic Bags. Retrieved from
Californians Against Waste:
http://www.cawrecycles.org/issues/plastic_campaign/plastic_bags/problem
Center for Sustainable Systems. (2013). Municipal Solid Waste Fact Sheet. University
of Michigan.
CIPS. (2009). How to develop a wastemanagement and disposal strategy. UK.
CIWM. (2005). Energy from Waste. Northampton.
Clean Air Council. (2009, May). Waste and Recycling Facts. Retrieved February 2014,
from Clean Air Org: http://www.cleanair.org/Waste/wasteFacts.html
Climaco, T. (2013). How a Pinay garbage collector became a millionaire. My
Puhunan. (K. Davila, Interviewer, & V. P. Garcia, Editor)
Cooper. (2004). Moral Theory and Moral Improvement: Seneca . Princeton:
Princeton University Press .
Cooper, J. (. (2008). Japan's Waste Situation. Retrieved January 2014, from Waste
Management World: http://www.waste-management-
world.com/articles/print/volume-12/issue-2/regulars/iswa-comments/japans-
waste-management-situation.html
Corstena, N., Worrella, E., Rouwb, M., & Duin, A. v. (2013). The potential contribution
of sustainable waste management to energyuse and greenhouse gas emission
reduction in the NetherlandsMarille. Resources, Conservation and Recycling (77),
13-21.
Daniel Bronstein, Y. K. (1947). The Basic Problems of Philosophy. New Jersey: USA:
Prentice-Hall Inc.
Deflem, M. (2003). The Sociology of the Sociology of Money: Simmel and the
Contemporary Battle of the Classics. Journal of Classical Sociology , 67-96.
DESA. (2012). World Urbanization Prospects, the 2011 Revision. Population Division.
New York: United Nations.
Dixit, A. (2012). Paul Samuelson's Legacy. Annual Reviews of Economics .
c | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

EEA. (2002). Biodegradable municipal waste management in Europe. EEA (European
Environment Agency).
EEA. (2011). Survey of resource efficiency policies. European Environmental Agency.
EEA. (2013). Managing municipal solid waste - a review of achievements in 32
European countries. European Environment Agency (EEA).
EEA. (2013). Municipal waste management in Austria. European Environamental
Agency.
EEA. (2013). Municipal waste management in the Netherlands. European
Environmental Agency.
Eijk, F. v. (2012). Sustainable Waste Management. Dutch Waste Management
Association. Rotterdam: Dutch Waste Management Association.
EMB. (2000). Congress of the Philippines [ REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9003 ]. Retrieved
January 2014, from EMB Government LAws:
www.emb.gov.ph/laws/solid%20waste%20management/ra9003.pdf
EMB-DENR. (2010). State of the Philippine Environment: Solid Wastes. Department of
Environment an Natural Resources.
EPA. (2009). Municipal Solid Waste in the Unites States. US Environmental Protection
Agency.
EPA. (2013). Introduction to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. In F.
Register, Code of Federal Regulations. US EPA.
ETC/SCP. (2009). Country Fact Sheets on waste policies. Retrieved January 2014,
from European Topic Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production:
http://scp.eionet.europa.eu/facts/factsheets_waste/2009_edition/factsheet?countr
y=NL.
ETC/SCP. (2012). Overview of the use of landfill taxes in Europe. ETC/SCP.
European Commision. (2011). KET: Industrial Biotechnology/ European comission.
European Commision. (2012). Material Flows. European Commission .
European Comission. (2012). Member States reporting to the Commission according
to Council Directive 1999/31 of 26 April 1999Landfill Directive and Commission
Decision 2000/738/EC concerning a questionnaire for Member States reports on the
implementation of Directive 1999/31/EC on . EEA.
d | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

European Commission. (2012). Screening of Waste Management Performance of EU
Member States. Brussels: Beratungsgesellschaft fr integrierte Problemlsungen
(BiPRO).
Eurostat. (2012). Energy price statistics. Retrieved from European Commission
Statistics Explained:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Energy_price_stati
stics
Eurostat. (2012). Waste database municipal waste. Retrieved January 2014, from
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/waste/data/database
Eurostat Regional Data. (2012). Generation and treatment of municipal waste (1 000
t) by NUTS 2 regions. Retrieved from Eurostat:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/search_database
Fischer, C., Lehner, M., & McKinnon, D. L. (2012). Overview of the use of landfill taxes
in Europe. ETC/SCP.
Frisby, D. (2002). Key Sociologists: Georg Simmel (Revised Edition ed.). New Fetter
Lane: Routledge.
GEC. (2012). Laws and Support Systems for Promoting Waste Recycling in Japan.
Osaka.
Gonzalez, J. M., & Suremain, M. (1993). Waste Picker Cooperatives in Developing
Countries. Mexico: UNAM.
Grech, H. (2012). Waste Management in Austria. Federal Ministry of Agriculture,
Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Division VI/3. Wien: The Ministry of
Life: lebensministerium.
Green Economy Group. (n.d.). Green economy definition. Retrieved 2013, from
http://greeneconomygroup.com/company/green-economy-definition/
Hall, D., & Nguyen, T. A. (2012). Waste Management in Europe: Companies, Structure
and Employment. Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU). European
Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU).
Hogg, D. (. (2001). Costs for Municipal Waste Management in the EU. European
Commision, Directorate General Environment. Brussels: EU.
Hoornweg, D., & Bhada-Tata, P. (2012). What a Waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste
Management. World Bank, Urban Development and Local Government Unit of the
e | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

Sustainable Development Network. Washington: World Bank: Urban Development &
Local Government Unit.
Hornborg, A. (2010). Global Environmental History. Journal of the Fernand Braudel
Center , XXXIII (2).
IETC. (2008). Newsletter and Technical Publications. Retrieved January 2014, from
UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics:
http://www.unep.or.jp/Ietc/ESTdir/Pub/MSW/
IETC/UNEP. (2005). In U. N. Programme, Solid Waste Management (Vol. 1).
California: CalRecovery, Inc.
IGES. (2005). Waste Management and Recycling in Asia. In I. f. (IGES), International
Review for Environmentai Strategies (Vol. 5, pp. 477 - 498). Tsukuba: Institute for
Global Enivironmental Straitegies (IGES).
IISD. (2013). What is Sustainable Development? Retrieved 2013, from
http://www.iisd.org/sd/
IRP. (2014). A Report of the Working Group on Land and Soils of the International
Resource Panel. International Resource Panel (IRP), Working Group on Land and
Soils. UNEP.
ISWA. (2002). Waste Management: Industry as a partner for. United Kingdom: UNEP.
Index Mundi. (2013). Netherlands Economy Profile. Retrieved February 2014, from
indexmundi: http://www.indexmundi.com/netherlands/economy_profile.html
Investopedia. (n.d.). Green Economics. Retrieved 2013, from
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/greeneconomics.asp
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). (2009). Our Islands, Our Waste, Our
Future. Global Environment Department. Hokkaldo: Japan Official Development
Assistance.
Kate Alexander. (2006). Six Trends Will Drive Sustainable Development. Copenhagen,
Denmark: PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Key Note. (2007). Global Waste Management Market Assessment. UK: Key Note
Publications Ltd.
Kleemann, F. (2010). Solid Waste and Waste Water Management in Austria and its
Possible Application in Resources Oriented sanition Systems in East Africa. University
f | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences , Department of Water, Atmosphere
and Environment (WAU). Vienna: BOKU.
Kodera, Y. (2012). Plastics Recycling Technology and Business in Japan. In Waste
Management An Integrated Vision . InTech.
Lacewing, M. (n.d.). Philosophers, knowledge and virtue. Retrieved 2013, from
http://cw.routledge.com
/textbooks/alevelphilosophy/data/A2/Plato/PlatoPhilosopherKnowledgeVirtue.pd
f
McLamb, E. (2011, September 18). The Ecological Impact of the Industrial Revolution.
Retrieved January 2014, from Ecology Communications Group, Inc. (ECG):
http://www.ecology.com/2011/09/18/ecological-impact-industrial-revolution/
Mead, G. (1900-1). Review of Philosophie des Geldes by Georg Simmel. Journal of
Political Economy , 616-9.
Metro Manila Linis-Ganda. (2008). Best Practices - "Linis Ganda" Program: Recyling
Household Waste in Metro Manila. MAnila: IGES.
Milios, L. (2013). Municipal waste management in the Netherlands. ETC/SCP.
European Environmental Agency (EEA).
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan (METI). (2007). Towards a 3R-
Oriented, Sustainable Society: Legislation and Trends 2007. METI.
MUD. (2010). Principles of Municipal Solid Waste Management. In M. o.
Development, Solid Waste Management Manual. India: Department of Information
Technology, Government of India.
Municipality of San Francisco. (2000). The implementation of Solid Waste
Management: The San Francisco Experience. San Francisco, Cebu: Municipality of San
Francisco.
NSWMA. (2008). Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Facts. Washington: National Solid
Waste Management Association.
OECD. (2013). Country statistical profiles: Key tables from OECD . Retrieved February
2014, from OECD : http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/country-statistical-
profile-netherlands_20752288-table-nld
Okushima, S., & Yamashita, H. (2005). A General Equilibrium Analysis of Waste
Management. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics , 46 (1), 111-134.
g | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

Panayotou, T. (2003). Economic Growth and the Environment. In U. N. (UNECE),
Economic Survey of Europe (pp. 45-72). Cambridge: Center for International
Development.
Paul Hagey. (2011). From Trash to Cash: Small Business Turns Profit with Waste
Recovery. (M. V. Dusen, Editor, & GE) Retrieved 2013, from
http://www.ecomagination.com/from-trash-to-cash-small-business-turns-profit-
with-waste-recovery
Philippine Greens. (1999). Society, Ecology and Transformation (2nd ed.). (R.
Verzola, Ed.) Quezon, Philippines.
Pomeranz, K. (2009). The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the
Modern World Economy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Powell, A. (2011). The return to recycling. Harvard Staff Writer, Environment &
Sustainability. Washington: Harvard Gazette.
RecycleINme. (2014, January). Japanese scrap prices. Retrieved February 2014, from
RecycleINme:
http://www.recycleinme.com/scrapresources/japan_scrap_prices.aspx
Rozenberg, A. (2013). Municipal solid waste: Is it garbage or gold? UNEP, Global
Environment Alert Service (GEAS). Toronto: Munk School of Global Affairs.
Seattle Times. (2013, October 4). About 40 Percent Of All Food In The United States
Is Thrown In The Garbage. the sleuth journal .
SWER. Demographics and Materials: Generation and Recovery Levels. In E. P. (EPA),
Waste Prevention, Recycling and Composting Options: Lessons from 30 US
Communities. (EPA), Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste Emergency Response. Demographics and Materials: Generation and
Statistics Austria. (2006). Continued Development of Municipal Waste Management
until 2015 in Upper Austria. ECONUM.
Statistics Austria. (2007). ko-Steuern 1995 2006. Vienna: Ministry of Agriculture,
Forestry, Environment and Water Management.
Tacoli, C. (2012). Urbanization, Gender and Urban Poverty: Paid Work and Unpaid
Carework in the City. London: International Institute for Environment and
Development: United Nations Population Fund.
h | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

Themelis, N. J., & Mussche, C. (2013). Municipal Solid Waste Management and Waste-
to-Energy in the United States, China and Japan. 2nd International Academic
Symposium on Enhanced Landfill Mining.
Tokyo Lease Corporation. (2013). Disposal of Furniture, Appliances and Garbage.
Retrieved February 2014, from Furniture Japan:
http://www.furniturejapan.com/tllaw_recycle.php
Torres, E. O. (2004). Solid Waste Management in the Philippines. Bayawan: Bayawan
City Government.
UN. (2004). Sanitation Country Profile: Austria. United Nations.
UN. (2013). The Millennium Development Goals Report. New York: UN.
UNEP. (2011). Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development.
France: UNEP.
UNEP-DTIE. (2009). Developing Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan.
International Environmental Technology Centre, Division of Technology, Industry
and Economics. Osaka/Shigah: UNEP.
UNEP ETB. (2001). Selection, Design and Implementation of Economic Instruments in
the Solid Waste Management Sector. UNEP.
UN-Habitat. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries.
Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements.
UN-HABITAT. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries.
Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements.
University of Georgina: College of Agricultural and Environmental Science; College
of Family and Consumer Sciences. (2012). Food Waste Composting: Institutional and
Industrial Applications. The Cooperative Extension Service.
US Environmental Protection Act (EPA). (2002). Solid Waste Disposal Act. SOLID
WASTE DISPOSAL ACT . US.
UV & P. (2012). Energy Recovery from Residual Municipal Wastes and Residues from
Sewage Treatment (including significant bio wastes). Bulgaria: UV & P:
Environmental Management and Engineering.
Vader, Hans. Competition Law, Environmental Policy and Producer Responsibility.
(2002). Retrieved January 2014, from Producer Responsibility in Dutch Waste Law:
http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~avosetta/netherlands.pdf
i | International Experience and Economics of Solid Waste Management

verkeerenwaterstaat. (2012). The Dutch answer of 18th June 2012 to the Eionet
review of assumptions in the EEA and ETC/SCP model on municipal waste submitted
to member countries. ETC/SCP.
Visvanathan, C., Adhikari, R., & Anant, A. P. (2007). 3R Practices for Municipal Solid
Waste Management in Asia. Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand, Kalmar ECO-
TECH 07 and The Second Baltic Symposium on Environmental Chemistry. Kalmar,
Sweden: Asian Institute of Technology.
Vogt, K. (2011). Seneca. Retrieved 2013, from SRetrieved from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/seneca/
WB: Urban and LGU Working Papers. (1999). What a Waste: Solid Waste
Management in Asia. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development,
Urban Development Division. Washington: The World Bank.
WCED. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, D. C., Velis, C., & Cheeseman, C. (2006). Role of informal sector recycling in
waste management in developing countries. Habitat International , 30 (4), 797808.
World Bank: Urban and Local Government Working Papers. (1999). What a Waste:
Solid Waste Management in Asia. The International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, Urban Development Division. Washington: The World Bank.
WRAP. (2008). Market Situation Report: Realising the value of organic waste.
Banbury: Waste and Resources Action Programme.
Zafar, S. (2014, January 8). Insights into WTE Industry. Echoing Sustainability.
EcoMENA.

Garbage Generation To Gold

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Garbage Generation To Gold

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

International Experience and Economics

of Solid Waste Management

Potrebbero piacerti anche