Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
DOI 10.1007/s10163-008-0231-3
Springer 2009
Introduction
The increase in the worlds population has resulted in a
tremendous amount of solid wastes being generated. In
2000, the estimated global waste generation was 318 million
tonnes.1 With an annual increase of approximately 6%,
global solid waste generation is expected to reach about 518
million tonnes in 2008 and 585 million tonnes in 2010.
However, due to the lack of proper data collection, the
actual figures for worldwide waste generation are not available. Data from developed countries are more accessible
due to their well-established policies and proper waste manP. Agamuthu (*) S.H. Fauziah K. Khidzir
Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of
Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel. +603-7967-6756; Fax +603-7967-4178
e-mail: agamuthu@um.edu.my
agement systems that make continuous improvement feasible. In contrast, weak enforcement, lack of technology,
and ineffective policy implementation make the management of waste in developing countries inefficient with a very
low possibility of improvement. Various factors contribute
toward the status of waste management in a given country.
Being a rapidly developing country, Malaysia faces similar
problems: technologies and facilities are insufficient to cope
with the ever-increasing rate of waste generation.2 This
article discusses trends and the current waste management
system in Malaysia, presents critical views on the impacts
and implications of the newly approved solid waste Bill
2007, and compares the future waste management scenario
in Malaysia with those of three other Asian countries.
97
Table 1. Generation of municipal solid waste in major urban areas in Peninsular Malaysia
(19702006)
Urban centre
Kuala Lumpur
Johor Bharu (Johor)
Ipoh (Perak)
Georgetown (P. Pinang)
Klang (Selangor)
Kuala Terengganu (Terengganu)
Kota Bharu (Kelantan)
Kuantan (Pahang)
Seremban (N. Sembilan)
Melaka
a
1970
1980
1990
2002
2006a
98.9
41.1
22.5
53.4
18.0
8.7
9.1
7.1
13.4
14.4
310.5
99.6
82.7
83.0
65.0
61.8
56.5
45.2
45.1
29.1
586.8
174.8
162.2
137.2
122.8
121.0
102.9
85.3
85.2
46.8
2754
215
208
221
478
137
129.5
174
165
562
3100
242
234
249
538
154
146
196
186
632
Estimated figures
Table 2. Waste composition (percentage of wet weight) in Malaysia from 1975 to 2005
Waste composition
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Organic
Paper
Plastic
Glass
Metal
Textiles
Wood
Others
63.7
7.0
2.5
2.5
6.4
1.3
6.5
0.9
54.4
8.0
0.4
0.4
2.2
2.2
1.8
0.3
48.3
23.6
9.4
4.0
5.9
NA
NA
8.8
48.4
8.9
3.0
3.0
4.6
NA
NA
32.1
45.7
9.0
3.9
3.9
5.1
2.1
NA
4.3
43.2
23.7
11.2
3.2
4.2
1.5
0.7
12.3
44.8
16.0
15.0
3.0
3.3
2.8
6.7
8.4
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
198 5
1 99 5
Year
200 0
2 0 03
20 07
trend decreased slightly from 1990 to 1999 due to the economic downturn, but shot up again in 2000 with the introduction of more hygienic types of plastic- and paper-based
packaging materials into the market. This resulted in a
decreasing percentage of organic waste in the MSW stream.
However, in 2007, putrescible waste contributed approximately 46%, followed by paper waste (14%) and plasticbased waste (15%).2,6
Solid waste management programs in Malaysia have
developed in phases. Municipal solid waste management
was quite primitive until the late 1970s. The local district
health offices cleaned only the streets and hauled away
household wastes to municipal disposal sites assigned as
authorized dumping grounds. However, with the rapid
increase in MSW generation, the collection frequency
improved slightly to prevent detrimental health impacts to
the community. At this phase, the waste management
system was still unsatisfactory. In order to increase efficiency further, the government delegated waste management to four private consortia. The privatization of urban
solid waste management in Malaysia was initiated in 1993
with the objective of providing an integrated, effective, efficient, and technologically advanced solid waste management system. It was also expected to resolve the problems
of solid waste management faced by the local authorities
(LAs) such as finance, lack of expertise, illegal dumping,
open burning, and a lack of proper solid waste disposal
sites. However, privatization did not really solve the issues,
but only transferred the problems from LAs to the private
companies.
98
Table 3. Methods of waste disposal in Malaysia10
Treatment
Recycling
Composting
Incineration
Inert landfill
Sanitary landfill
Other disposal sites
Total
2006
Target 2020
5.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
90.0
5.5
1.0
0.0
3.2
30.9
59.4
22.0
8.0
16.8
9.1
44.1
0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99
Payment
Punitive measures are provided in the Bill to tackle the
problem of consumers who refuse to pay waste disposal
fees. The failure to settle the collection fees will allow the
licensed concessionaire to take the case to the Tribunal for
Solid Waste Management. A fine of up to RM5000
(US$1316) and RM50 (US$13) for each day of the continuation of the offence is proposed. Charges will be imposed
on the owners of facilities, the occupiers of residents,
LAs, or any individual who receives solid waste management services.
Enforcement
Enforcement is improved by the enforcement provision
clause in part IX of the SWPCM Bill. According to the
clause, an authorized officer has the right to:
Yes34,35
Incineration, recycling, landfills.
Waste minimization is
extensively practiced
3 (1989)34
16.8 (2003)36
Yes21,22
Incineration,19 recycling, landfills.
Waste minimization is extensively
practiced
48.0 (2004)23
49.0 (2005)23
51.0 (2006)23
Increasing recycling rates are
positive indicators of successful
education campaigns
Yes. Encouraged by conveniently
located waste separation bins
Yes
Landfills, recycling
5.0 (2002)
5.5 (2006)
3R issues addressed
Options used in solid
waste treatment
Rate of recycling
(stated % of total
solid waste
generated)
Waste separation
practiced?
Encourage producer/
manufacturers
responsibility?
Yes
Yes
Yes32
Yes
Distinction between
various types of solid
wastes
Education campaigns
200042
National Solid Waste Management
Commission (NSWMC)42
197030
Ministry of Environment31
March 2009
Solid Waste Management
Corporation
10.7 (2001)40
10.0 (2003)41
Ecological Solid Waste Management Act
(Republic Act 9003)42
52.4 (2000)28
54.9 (2001)29
Waste Treatment and Public
Cleansing Law24
2.5 (2001)17
5.2 (2006)18
a. Environmental Pollution Control
Act, Cap. 94A19
b. Environmental Public Health
Act, Cap. 95A19
c. Hazardous Waste (Control of
Export, Import and Transit) Act,
Cap. 122A19
Various dates
Ministry of the Environment and
Water Resources and the
National Environmental Agency
of Singapore19
Yes
6.0 (1998)
8.0 (2000)
Solid Waste Management and
Public Cleansing
Management Bill
330039
33 80027
49 00016
14 400
300 00039
91.039
Philippines
377 835
127.427
27
700
4.516
Japan
329 750
24.8
Singapore
16
Malaysia
Date of implementation
Authority responsible
Size (km )
Population (2007, in
million people)
GDP (2007, in US
dollars)
Solid waste generation
(in million tonnes)
Name of legislation
100
Effectiveness of waste
management policy
Plight of scavengers
addressed?
Enforcement
Implementation expected in
March 2009
Deterrence options
Outsourcing of
operations?
Source of funding
None existing
Effective
Existing
Yes
101
102
Under the control of the waste generation clause, unauthorized persons are not allowed to deposit, transport, separate, or store MSW, or to allow the escape of solid waste
from their possession. A fine of between RM10 000
(US$2632) and RM100 000 (US$26 320) or a jail term for up
to 5 years can be imposed on offenders. This clause has
removed the role of scavengers in increasing the rate of
recycling in the country. Positively, this would prevent the
adverse impacts related to the unsanitary conditions faced
by scavengers and curb the theft of materials such as aluminum- and iron-based components that can be sold as
scrap metal.
In general, the Bill is postulated in a manner such that it
should tackle the main issues attributed to inefficient solid
waste management in Malaysia and allow drastic improvement in the current solid waste management system.
However, implementation of the Bill has been postponed
March 2009. It is hoped that improvements in the integrated
waste management system will drive the current Malaysian
scenario to emulate the success stories achieved in Japan,
Singapore, and Denmark.
Table 4 compares the SWPCM with the solid waste management policies of three Asian countries. This shows the
current scenarios in Malaysia, Singapore, Japan, and the
Philippines. In Malaysia, there is no incineration of MSW
except on selected islands, and there is also currently no
waste segregation. Although the solid waste Bill specifically
mentions waste minimization with a recycling target of
22% by 2020, the current rate of recycling in Malaysia is
only 5%.
Conclusion
Generally, the SWPCM has many similar traits to the successful waste management policies of Asian countries
such as Japan and Singapore. However, the SWPCM does
lack two important measures: incentives for waste separation and the pay as you throw approach. The inclusion
of these measures is essential if any integrated waste management strategy is to be successful. Low levels of legislative enforcement and administrative inefficiencies are
important issues that must be avoided. This may be possible because the Malaysian Solid Waste Management
Corporation is a private business that expects to operate
profitably. While the SWPCM is expected to have serious
implications on waste management in Malaysia, it remains
to be seen what kind of changes will evolve in the Malaysian waste management scenario when the Bill is
implemented.
References
1. United Nations Environmental Programme (2002) Waste generation how many million tonnes, really? http://www.vitalgraphics.
net/waste/html_file/08-09_waste_generation.html.
Accessed
January 19, 2009
103
23. Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (2007) Key
environmental statistics 2007. http://app.mewr.gov.sg/data/images/
KES_2007_Final.pdf. Accessed April 7, 2008, pp 6
24. Bergman J (2008) A vision from Singapore. Waste Management
World 9(1) htp://www.waste-management-world.com/display_
article/321575/123/CRTIS/none/none/1/A-vision-from-Singapore.
Accessed April 16, 2008
25. Yan YH (2002) Recycling as a sustainable waste management
strategy for Singapore: an investigation to find ways to promote
Singaporeans household waste recycling behaviour. Masters
Thesis, Lund University, p 4
26. Bai R, Sutanto M (2002) The practice and challenges of solid waste
management in Singapore. Waste Manag 22(5):557567
27. Central Intelligence Agency, United States of America (2008) The
world factbook: Japan. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/
the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html. Accessed April 8, 2008
28. United Nations Statistics Division (2007) Environmental indicators and selected time series: municipal waste collection. http://
unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/qindicators.htm. Accessed February 25, 2008
29. World Health Organization (2005) Environmental health country
profile: Japan. http://www.wpro.who.int/NR/rdonlyres/3B2DC7496C0D-4B6D-8C7D-70851B7ADDE4/0/JapanEHCPEHDS.pdf.
Accessed April 5, 2008, p 5
30. Ministry of the Environment, Japan (2006) Waste Management
and Public Cleansing Law 1970. www.env.go.jp/en/laws/recycle/01.
pdf. Accessed September 3, 2008, p 1
31. Matsumoto K (2001) Solid waste administration reform. Japan
Society of Waste Management Experts: Q Newsl 37. www.jswme.
gr.jp/international/pdf/News37.pdf. Accessed April 7, 2008
32. Yamamura K (1983) Current status of waste management in Japan.
Waste Manag Res 1(1):115
33. Moriguchi Y (2006) Establishing a sound material cycle society in
Asia. Presented at: The Asia 3R Conference, Tokyo, October 30
to November 1, 2006. http://www.env.go.jp/recycle/3r/en/asia.html.
Accessed April 1, 2008
34. National Renewable Energy Laboratory USA (1993) Integrated
solid waste management in Japan. CSI Resource Systems Incorporated, Boston, pp 26
35. Tanaka M (1992) Reduction of and resource recovery from municipal solid waste in Japan. Waste Manag Res 10:453459
36. United Nations Statistics Division (2007) Environmental indicators and selected time series: municipal waste treatment. http://
unstats.un.org/unsd/ENVIRONMENT/wastetreatment.htm.
Accessed February 25, 2008
37. Japan Containers and Packaging Recycling Association (2008)
What is the Containers and Packaging Recycling Law? www.jcpra.
or.jp/association/pamph/pdf/guide_eng_02.pdf. Accessed April 16,
2008
38. Kawagoe K (2003) Privatization of public services: agenda and
expectations. Nomura Res Inst Pap 70(1):112