Public Disclosure Authorized

C', C,i

a)J ....
Public Disclosure Authorized

0.

52

.... . . .

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~1 ~~ ~
.

~
..

...

~ ~
..........

~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~

~AA
>

. . ..........

~ .. ... . . . ~ ........... ~

Public Disclosure Authorized

...

..

...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.... ~ ~ 4. ... .
'sAAAX4A C' A

*5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JO)JUOWF 1~P

losure Authorized

mu~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Bln. BOD BTU CALABARZON CCBPI CDS DA DENR DILG DOH DOST DPWH DTI EMB ESWMA GHG GTZ HW IEC IRR ITDI IWEP JICA LLDA LGU LOGOFIND Mln. MEIP MGB MM MMDA MRF MSE MSW NCR NEDA NGO NIMBY NSWMC PCG PET PhP/P PIA PPCP SLF SWM TDF TESDA THW TIRE WHO Billion Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand British Thermal Unit Provinces of Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, Rizal, and Quez6n Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. City Development Strategies Department of Agriculture Department of Environment and Natural Resources Department of Interior and Local Government Department of Health Department of Science and Technology Department of Public Works and Highways Department of Trade and Industry Environmental Management Bureau Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 Green House Gases German Agency for Technical Cooperation Hazardous Wastes Information, Education, and Communication Implementing Rules and Regulations Industrial Technology Development Institute Industrial Waste Exchange Program Japanese International Cooperation Agency Laguna Lake Development Authority Local Government Unit Local Government Finance and Development Project Million Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Program Mines and Geosciences Bureau Metro Manila Metro Manila Development Authority Materials Recovery Facility Micro and Small Enterprises Municipal Solid Waste National Capital Region National Economic and Development Authority Non-Governmental Organization Not In My Back Yard National Solid Waste Management Commission Philippine Coast Guard Polyethylene Terephthalate Philippine Pesos Philippine Information Agency Polystyrene Packaging Council of the Philippines Sanitary Landfill Solid Waste Management Tire-Derived Fuel Technical Education and Skill Development Authority Toxic and Hazardous Waste Totally Integrated Recycling Effort World Health Organization

The World Bank Group

1818H. Street,N.W. WashingtonD.C. 20433 U.S.A. Tel.:(202) 477-1234 Fax: (202)477-6391 December 2001
TheEnvironment's Ilth hour!!!

Country Office Manila 23rd Floor, The TaipanPlace Emerald Avenue,OrtigasCenter PasigCity,Philippines Tel.:(632)637-5855to 64 Fax: (632)637-5870

As highlighted the 2000 Environment in Monitor, environment naturalresources the the and of Philippines underincreasing is presstre.Thechallenge to act now to ensurea futurethatpreserves is the qualityof life, health,resources,and naturaltreasures the country In the spiritof this challenge, of a clockhasbeenchosen the symbolof theMonitor. as Theclockshownin the 2001Monitor in the 11thhourto represent urgency the factthat time is this and is nunning As theclockapproaches out. midnight, problemgetsmorecritical In the caseDf solid the waste,the clockstandsat 11:50 indicating timeis runningveryshort.Thereasonsfor this are the that lackof progressondeveloping safedisposalfacilities visibilityof the effectsincludingtheManila and gatbagecrisis,the Payatastragedy the common and sightof garbagestrewnin rivers,streetsandon privateand publicland in manyareasof the country. the samne solid wasteis beingproduced At time, at increasing ratesand without actiontheproblems Manilawillbecomeevenmorecritical in and thosein otherareasof thecountrywillgrow On thepositiveside,severalrecentmeasures have preventedtheclockfromcreeping closerto midnight, including passage the of groundbreaking framework legislation (Ecological SolidWaste Management and the Act) success citizen-led-initiatives as recycling awareness of such and programs. In the future,carefulimplementation the newlegislationrepresents greatesthopefor reversing of the theclockon this criticalissuefacingthe Philippines.

The Philippines Environment

Monitor 2000 presented a snapshot of

M:

X af

environmental trends in the country The 2002 edition, currently : : kq50 0general
will focus on air quality management.

under preparation,

This document preparedby a WorldBock Teemconsistingof1Messrs./Mfdmes. Acherya, BebetGozun,Patchamuthu wos Anjali Illangovan (Teem Leader),John Morton, end Meye Villeluz. Thedocumentwaspeer reviewedby Messrs.Cerl Bertone,Den Hoornweg,L. PanneerSelvam, Allen Rotmen,end Thomes Welton TheWorldBeck;end Mr N.C. Vesuki, E. of ChiefExecutive Officer,DelewereSolid Waste Authority, USA.Comments end suggestions offeredby thefollowing ore gratefully acknowledged: Ramon Mr. Paje, Undersecretary, Department Environmentand Natural of Resources (DENR); Mr. Julian D. Amador,Director/Officer-in-Charge, EnvironmentalManagement Bureau;Mr. Albert A. Magalang,Executive Director Office of theSecretariat,NationalSolid Waste Management Commission (NSWMIC); SoniaMendozaand MfrBert Guevara Ms. representing theNGOsand Leagueof Barangaysin theANSWMC, respectively. Comments werealsoprovided by thefollowing WorldBankstaff and consultants: Messrs./Mdmes. Joven Balbosa.BhuvanBhatnagarRob Crooks,GiovannaDare, Jack Fritz, Heidi Hennrich-Hanson, EmmaHooper Mary Judd, and KanchalikaKlad-Angkul. Ms. LuisaSambeliEspaflolacoordinated productionof this Monitor Ms.Agatha Anchetaassisted data collection. Mr Jeffrey Lecksellwas the in responsible preparing the map.Dissemination theMonitor iscoordinatedby Ms. LeonoraGonzales. cover wasdesigned for of The byVMr Brian Lu of Liquid Graphics.Thedocument printed at Inkwell PublishingCompany. was Theviewsexpressed the Philippines in Environment Monitor 2001areentirelythoseof the authors and shouldnotbe citedwithoutpriorpermission. They do not necessarily reflectthe viewsoFTheWorldBeckGroup,its Executive Directors,or the countries theyrepresent. materialcontained The hereinhasbeen obtained fromsourcesbelieved reliable it is notnecessarily but complete cannotbeguaranteed. and
'Printed on Recycled Paper

Table of Contents
Preface Abbreviations and Acronyms
. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - DOWN IN THE DUMPS! .

1-2

WASTE GENERATION MAP ......................................................

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE SOURCES AND GENERATION .4-5

Waste Sources Waste Generation Waste Composition

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE RECYCLING AND COLLECTION ...........

................6-7

Recycling Collection Transfer and Transport

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL ............. ................

8-13

Composting Open and Controlled Dumping Sanitary Landfills Landfill Gas Collection and Use
HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATION, RECYCLING,

TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL ..................................................................

14-17

Generation Recycling Treatment and Disposal

LEGISLATION, INSTITUTIONS, AND BUDGETS ...........................

18-22 23-26
27 .. 28

THE TEN CHALLENGES .....

....

.........................

Case Study: The Two Faces of Payatas ................................. Glossary of Terms ..... ..... ...... ............................ Philippines at a Glance

PREFACE
The Philippines Environment Monitor series, launched in 2000, presents a snapshot of key environmental trends in the country. It aims to engage and inform stakeholders on key environmental changes as they occur. The 2000 Monitor benchmarked trends in environmental indicators associated with water and air quality, and natural resources conservation. Unlike economic indicators, environmental changes, however, occur over a period of time, and therefore, annual variations are difficult to measure or assess. Thus, the series is designed to track changes in general environmental trends every five years. In the intervening years, the Monitor will focus on specific annual themes to highlight critical and emerging problems. The Philippines Environment Monitor 2001 focuses on solid waste management, which, triggered by the "garbage crisis" of Metro Manila, has emerged as one of the most pressing environmental concerns in the country. Population growth, rising living standards, and inadequate attention have caused many of the current waste problems. As wastes are dumped along roads, drainage canals and waterways, or in low-lying open fields, it is inevitable that the sheer volume of the wastes including the toxicity of its contaminants will endanger human health and safety by polluting water, air and land as well as threatening the food chain. The present garbage crisis in Metro Manila and other cities in the country has started to reverse the apparent indifference of the people towards the 'grime and dirt' of society. The seriousness of the human and environmental impact arising from the lack of a strategic approach to waste management was highlighted by the premature closure of the Carmona and San Mateo landfills due to environmental and social considerations, and the Payatas dumpsite tragedy in 2000. In the absence of a clear national framework on waste management, local governments who are duty bound to manage solid wastes in their areas of jurisdiction, have resorted to solid waste disposal practices, such as open dumps, controlled dumpsites, and open or curbside street piles, which are operationally inadequate and do not protect either public health or the environment. Both the Government and civil society should be complimented for the passage of the Republic Act 9003: Ecological Solid Waste Management Act, which was signed into law by the President on January 26, 2001. This law was a result of several years of sustained work by many committed elected representatives, environmentalists, and professionals. It promotes an integrated approach to solid waste management and sets out ambitious goals. The challenge now facing the country is its implementation. The Environment Monitor 2001 consists of six sections. The first three sections discuss the current status and trends in municipal solid waste generation; recycling and collection; and treatment and disposal. The fourth section discusses hazardous waste generation, treatment, and disposal. An analysis of the laws, institutions and budget is presented in the fifth section; and the Monitor concludes with an assessment of the major challenges faced by the Philippines in implementing an integrated solid waste management program. The Monitor also discusses the situation at the Payatas open dumpsite in Quezon City. The information presented here has been obtained from a variety of sources, including published reports of government agencies, universities and nongovernmental organizations, unpublished data from individuals, and documents of the World Bank. However, solid waste data in many countries is often times unreliable due to inconsistencies in data recording, definitions, collection methods, and seasonal variations. The Philippines is no exception. Given the diversity and timeliness of the sources of data used, the information in this report has been assessed for its reliability, and as needed estimates have been made. Data, information and support provided by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Environmental Mangement Bureau, Metro Manila Development Authority, Local Government Units and Non-Govermental Organizations are acknowledged. Robert V. Pulley Country Director, Philippines East Asia and Pacific Region The World Bank Zafer Ecevit Sector Director Environment and Social Development East Asia and Pacific Region The World Bank

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DOWNIN THE DUMPS! -

priority in the cities and OLID WASTE or basurahas emergedas the most visible environmental

municipalities of the Philippines. Generation of waste is increasing rapidly as consumption rises, while collection efficiencies are dropping as service levels deteriorate. Treatment and disposalfacilities are facing closure because of improper siting and management, and growing public opposition. The problem is most pronounced in Metro Manila, where it is a common sight to see uncollected garbage piling up on the streets or being burned. In the meantime, human health costs are rising because of improper handling and disposal of household, hospital, and industrial wastes.
Sources and Gener

a-a_
in SolidWaste Management the Philippines 2001 - At a Glance,
Indicator
(tons/year) Solidwastegeneratedby households by wastegenerated Toxicand hazardous

a smallportionis recycled.
The rest is disposed in open

generates tion. A Filipino between0.3 and 0.7 kilograms of garbage daily

in dumps.Carmona Cavite
Province and San Mateo in

dependingupon income levels. The current annual generation of 10 milliontons is expected to increaseby 40percent at the end of the decade.
The National

Value
10 million

sector industrial/commercial (tons/year)

by wastegenerated Hazardousand infectious hospitals (tons/year)

2.4 million
6,750

were RizalProvince thefirst landfillsto be constructed. Thesesiteshavesincebeen closed,whichtriggeredthe current garbage crisis in Metro Manila. In San Valenzuela, and Dumaguete, open dumpinghas by beenreplaced controlled dumping. onlysanitary The is landfillin the country lowhichis curcatedin Cebu, eu hc scr ctdi operatrentlyexperiencing
ing problems.
Fernando, La Union,

Region and Southern

TagalogRegionproduce the highest amount of waste,accounting 23 for and 13 percent of the country's production, respectively. * Recycling and Collection. Inadequatecollection vehiclesand lack of disposal sites have contributed to a reduction in

RegiNaand Southern

Capital

Share municipal of waste generated is that collected of as and Waste recycling re-use a percent (Metro Manila) total waste generated of Recycled material soldas a percentage
totalwastegenerated (Metro Manila) sites No. of propersolidwastedisposal dumps * Controlled No. of hospital wasteincinerators

Urban 70% Rural -40% 12%

5%

Landfills landfills Closed

1
17 43

the collectionefficiency of household waste.Sev-

waste treatment facilities No. ofhazardous solidwastedisposed landfills in Shareof municipal dumps andcontrolled to in with access incinerators Shareof hospitals wastetreatedor recycled Shareof hazardous (range PhP) allocation LGUs in Percapita in budget managementLGU Share solidwaste of
.

28 2%
5%

Toxic and Hazardous Wastes.Justover5 percent hazardous of the estimated

*

waste generation of nearly

12 - 250 1%- 12%

-

tons is recycled 2.4 million Hospior treatedannually.

n;= enty percent of the garbage is collected in urban areas, while only 40 percent is collected in rural areas. Many of the poor neighborhoods in the country are under-served. Separate collection of segregated waste is still minimal. Thirteen percent of Metro Manila's waste is recycled, while it is much less in other areas. * Treatmentand DisposaL Nationally, only 2 percent of the waste generated is disposed in sanitary landfills or controlled dumps. Nearly 10percent is composted, and

tals in the country generate W 6,750 tons/year of hazardous and infectiouswaste. Some of this waste is incinerated. However,the Clean Air Act of 2000 prohibits the operation of all incineratorsafter November 2003. Waste recycling and disposal have always attracted wide attention in the Philippines. Many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been active since the early 1990s through recycling programs such as Zero WasteRecycling Movement and Linis Ganda. In recent times, many civil society and community orga-

T.M10

7i I I. li

Mi

nizations have opposed improper management of open dumps and landfills, the siting of future facilities, and incineration of waste. Their sustained efforts led to the drafting of RA 9003 also known as the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (ESWMA),which was signed into law early this year. This law replaces the piecemeal provisions previously covered in several laws, and for the first time, provides an integrated national framework for environmentally-friendly solid waste management. The Act has set very ambitious goals, and their achievement will be a major challenge for all sectors of the society. The finalization of the law's implementing rules and regulations need to be expedited. While public awareness has been growing, it is not yet sufficientlymature to support appropriate and suitable management practices. The "Not In My BackYard" (NIMBY) syndrome has compelledmany local governments to abandon or defer plans to establish compostimg plants, controlled dumps, and sanitary landfills.A case in point is the situation in Metro Manila. Since the publicly-demandedclosure of the Carmona and San Mateo landfills,the metropolishas been buried in its own waste with few altemativesaside from open dumping.This will likely exacerbatepublic sentimentagainst sanitary landfills, the most suitable and cost-effectiveoption for the safe disposal of Metro Manila's residual waste in the context of an integratedsystem. Except for a handful of Local Government Units (LGUs), the performance of cities and municipalities in the provision of services to collect and dispose solid waste has been poor. This can be attributed to LGUs' weak capacity, inadequate budget, limited understanding of appropriate and cost-effective practices, and weak enforcement of regulations. Further, the lack of a cost-sharing formula between the national government and LGUs for financing capital costs is also hampering the establishment of proper disposal facilities. The City Development Strategies being piloted by a few cities and municipalities provide an opportunity for LGUs to integrate solid waste management interventions in the overall investment planning and institutional development framework. There are ten key challenges that the country needs to address to achieve the goals of the ESWMA. These include:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9. 10.

Strengtheningenforcement and providing better incentives.The current lax enforcementsituationneeds to be improvedto make the ESWMAan effectivepiece of legislation.In addition,providing incentiveswould reduce waste generation at source and improve management of waste disposal facilities. Building the capacity of national and local institutions. Capacity building for LGUs and barangays and improving strategic planning at all levels of govemient will be necessary. Addressing the NIMBY syndrome. This has prevented the siting of solid waste management (SWM) facilities and could be addressed through better awareness and consultation, and the demonstration of safe landfill practices. Raising public awareness on the benefits of proper solid waste management. Support and participation of the people in SWM programs will be key to the successful implementation of the ESWMA. Increasing expenditures on SWM. A back-of-theenvelope analysis indicates that the Philippines will need to spend an additional PhP150 billion (US$3 billion) over the next 10 years for SWM. Mainstreaming the utilization of new funding sources and employing cost-effective approaches. New funding sources such as national government cost sharing; private sector participation; and user fees should be explored along with cost saving measures, such as shared facilities and producing power using landfill gas. Obtaining reliable information for national, regional, and local planning. Without proper data, long-term planning decisions cannot be made. Ensuring proper management of closed dumps and sanitary landfills.The environmental and health risks of closed dumps and landfills will need to be minimized. Protecting the vulnerable and the under-served.This includes scavengers and poor communities. Expanding coverage of infectious medical and hazardous waste treatment. Effective implementation of the law will require a concerted effort that focuses exclusively on the practicalities of establishing safe and effective disposal practices in the short and long term.

Most importantly, the Philippines should avoid another Smokey Mountain or Payatas open dump situation from re-emerging!

MAP WASTEGENERATION

~~~PHILIP>PINsES ~Waste
4p

t}

>

2tt

:',

tt

2001 ENVIRONMENTMONITO3R
G;eneration
~~ ~ ~
;' '.t
t;

1!MUNICIPAL i4
tt .AT,
t4'*

7t
, [N ItAl WlN > SWVt
t hw l;Y

~
t -

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Rs-;lrs t-

vlr
e

C -IINA

td.ii.~'-'

t&

l%

* tt
} ies4.s

~ ~ 1- ~ ~
t,* iSt u,

il IfNFtS'8
e=9

9
.ttSpef.tfA,^X

^ -

*'^'' '''t-_

'

~~~~IT4K Dls

6?

g---x1X$e-JNFECIOU

-~~~~~~~~~~AT w.a;FF R ' a- ,>,. .

+ *-

tttvL + -W

.
W. Nt-

*t#ST %

Ar~~~~~cm'

HAZADUSNDti*~. WA
TONVYt

''b-t

>'^tw

.2is+
'et.+v iT

v~~~OENEATIO J fJi' i : a

rh
}Ssit

1z1
<

{t v

tff~~~~~~~~~~~~~~imk il

;-

'

-**

... ^ 1

t;

. r +~~~~~~~~Al-. si Xt . .....................

.s4

A t

At

5 94

i!

,,,

AX,,

-.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
,

><^t

7. ,

ff

toti+.s$|s

Xrp

.s

>S
* ' W

wf

_2o~~~~~~~~~t

t ...

,.},,,j_

ti*P ....
i
^.r,vz_,

MMW40 N

,
, \

WA^E
# X

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~&0#3MA*K,

WA5TE~10LWA

1$S.'Stf{f4;Y S3$

EEtT 1t-i

Solid waste streams are generally characterized by their sources, generation rates, types of wastes, and composition.

Table1: Sourcesand Typesof SolidWastes

Source Residential wastes Types solid of texcardboard, plastics, paper, Food wastes,
tiles,leather,yard wastes,wood, glass,methazardouswaste. als, ashes,and household Housekeeping wastes, packaging, food wastes,constructionand demolitionmaterihazardouswastes,and ashes. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~als, Commercial Paper, cardboard, plastics, wood, food wastes, glass, metals,special wastes,and hazardouswastes.

WASTESOURCES
Solid wastes originate from a wide range of domestic munici(residential),industrial,agricultural,institutional, manuhouseholds, pal, and commercialsourcesincluding . * * **. r . facturers, hospitals, street sweeping activities, and markets. In the Philippines,the predominantsources of solid waste are household and commercialactivities.
WASTE GENERATION

Industrial

Institutional
Construction Municipal services
.

as Same commercial
Wood, steel,concrete,dirt, etc. Street sweepings,landscapeand tree trimand *1mings, general wastes from parks, beaches,sludge. offwastes, scrap materials, process Industrial specificationproducts,slag,tailings. and hazardous wastes.

Ten million tons of municipal solid waste was genaffected erated in 2000... Waste generation rates are affected by socio-economic development, degree of industriofindustri-Processes deelopment,degree by socio-eonomic alization, and climate. Generally,the greater a country's economic prosperity and the larger its urban population, the greater the amount of solid waste generated. It is estimated that in 2000, the 76 million Filipinos generated over,ten million tons of municipal solid
waste and this is expected to increase by 40 percent

Sector Source: What a Waste: Solid Waste Managementin Asia. Urban Development Asia and Pacific Region, World Bank, May 7999. Unit, East

during the current decade (see table 2). Metro Manila accounts for a quarter of the national waste generation... Metro Manila produces about 2.5 million tons/year or a quarter of the country's generated waste as a whole. The generation rate in Manila has grownannually in the last four years.t ~ percent annually in the last four years.' has grown 4.5 percent4.5 It has been estimated that people living in urban areas including Metro Manila produces between 0.5-0.7 kg/ day, while those in rural areas generate 0.3 kg/person/ 2 day. These values are comparable to other lower middle income countries. Metro Manila currently is a major contributor to national GDP, and therefore, has the highest consumption rates and consequent waste generation. Eventually, as the rest of the country deEventually, generation. of the country deas the rest velops, Metro Manila's share will begin to decline as other urban centers generate more waste.

2000-2010 Generation, Waste Table National 2:

2000 Min. % of total Min. 2070 % of total

T/yr.

T/yr.

2.45 Capital National AR Region 0.17 Cordillera

llocos Valley Cagayan Bicol WesternVisayas CentralVisayas EasternVtsayas WesternMindanao Central Luzon SouthernTagalog 0.50 0.32 0.96 1.42 0.54 0.82 0.74 0.43 0.40

23.0 1.6
4.7 3.0 9.0 13.3 5.1 7.7 7.0 4.0 3.8

3.14 0.21
0.63 0.40 1.32 2.11 0.65 1.00 1.01 0.51 0.53

22.3 1.5
4.5 2.8 9.4 15 4.6 7.1 7.2 3.6 3.8

Mindanao Northern Mindanao Southern

Mindanao Central ARMM Caraga National
Assumptions: Wasteproduction rates2:

0.37 0.70
0.33
0.26 0.26 10.67

3.4 6.6
3.1
2.5 2.4 100

0.47 0.97
0.41 0.39 0.31 14.05

3.4 6.9
2.9 2.7 2.2 100

2000. 'MMDA Survey,December ~~~December

2

GHK/MRM Study, and SolidWasteManagement UrbanEnvironment and IntemationalLtd. 1994;CALA UrbanDevelopment Environment Study,1996; JICA/MMDA, 1999.

~urban ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

capital region: 0.71 kg/person/day national

population: 0.5 kg/person/day

ruralpopulation: 0.3 kg/person/day

It was assumedthat the urban population would increasetheir waste productionrate by 1 percent per year due to rising income levels(based on GH-K/MRMInternationalReport). Urban and rural population, and growth ratesby region are basedon National Statistical Office, data for 2000.

ANDGENERATION SOLID WASTESOURCES MUNICIPAL

WASTE COMPOSITION Waste composition is influenced by factors such as location living standards, and weather. The composiationow,

in Comparisons 3: Table Country Rate WasteGeneration Municipal

Cityand Country
Industrialized countries:

tion of solid waste affectsthe selectionand operation

of collection and disposal equipment and facilities, the feasibility of resource and energy recovery, and the design of disposal facilities. Metro Manila's waste is highly organic and recyclable... Forty-nine percent of Metro Manila's municipal waste is biodegradable and includes large amounts of kitchen waste and to a lesser extent, garden waste. This high percentage of biodegradable waste indicates that it could be used as compost. There is also a great potential for recycling, as 42 percent of the waste is made of recyclable items such as paper, plastic, and metal.
SEGREGATION HOUSEHOLD

WasteGeneration Rate(kg/cap/day) 1.80 0.85

New York, USA Hamburg, Germany

Italy Rome,

countries: Middle-income Cairo, Egypt Kano, Nigeria Manila, Philippines Tunis,Tunisia countries: Low-income Calcutta, India Karachi, Pakistan
Region, World Bank.May 1999 Unit EastAsia and Pacific

0.69
0.50

0.46
0.60 0.56 0.51 0.60

Sector Developmnent in Asia. Source What a Waste: Solid WasteManagement Urban

in Composition Waste Chart1: Municipal MetroManila,1999

Paper
19% Plastic 17P/

Household segregation involves sorting garbage at its source according to its characteristics or re-use potential, where common kitchen waste, recyclables (paper, bottles, glass, etc.) and hazardous wastes (batteries, etc.), are placed in separate containers. Though waste in the country has high composition of organic matter and recyclables, household segregation is not
widely practiced. The ESWMA now mandates household segregation.

At/
Mta6
Kitchen Garden

42%

Waste 9%

Source: The Studv on Hazardouts WasteManagement in the Republic of the Philippines, JICA. June 2001.

of and Box 1: Environmental Health Impacts ImproperSolidWaste Management

The indiscriminatedumping of wastescontaminatessurfaceand groundwater supplies. In urban areas, solid wasteclogs drains, creating stagnant water for insect breeding and floods during rainy seasons.Uncontrolled burning of wastesand improper of incineration contributessignificantly to urban air pollution. Greenhousegasesare generatedfrom the decomposition organic wastesin landfills, and untreatedleachate pollutessurrounding soil and water bodies. Health and safety issuesalso arise from improper solid waste management.Humanfecal matter is commonlyfound in municipal waste. Insectand rodent vectorsare attractedto the waste and can spread diseasesuch as cholera and denguefever. Usingwater polluted by solid waste for bathing, food, irrigation, and drinking can also expose individuals to diseaseorganismsand other contaminants.Waste workers and pickers are seldom protectedfrom direct contact and injury, and the co-disposalof hazardous from disposal fumesfrom vehicles,duststemming and medicalwasteswith municipalwastesposesa serioushealth threat. Exhaust to overall health problems. practices,and open burning of waste also contribute
Source: What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in Asia, Urban DevelopmentSectorUnit, EastAsia and Pacific Region,World Bank, May

1999.

RECYCLING Box 2: RecyclingInitiatives Recycling opportunities are not fully harnessed... In the Philippines, only a small portion of the solid
waste is recycled or composted, despite the existence of a relatively large market for compost and used prodndss bottles,pscrap ucarmatdveyromrgecycledfplastpcs,tg ucts made from recycled pRecs, glass botles, scrap paper, and scrap metals. Recovery of recyclable materials occurs at three stages: at the household level, during collection time, and at open dumpsites. Junk dealers buy recyclable wastes from households, while waste pickers manually sort through waste at source, transfer stations, and dumpsites. Palero or garbage truck helpers also recover recyclables from the collecand Bottles (PET) Terephthalate Polyethylene

AluminumCans
To promote the recycling of PET plastics and reduce plastic waste, the Department of Science and Technology (DOST)-lndustrialTechnology Development Institute (ITDI) and PET manufacturers and TaskForce. The same users formed the PETRecycling efforts were also made by Coca-Cola Bottlers Phil-

tion trucks to augment their income. Recycling efforts in Metro Manila are on the rise..,
In 1997, only 6 percent of solid waste was recycled in Metro Manila.3 By December 2000, it increased to 13 percent due to the concerted effort by Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA)4 and NGOs to promote waste segregation at the source, composting, and recycling. Additional support was also provided with the passage of the MMDA Ordinance in 1999, which mandates source segregation. With the operation of two new recycling and composting facilities handling 200 tons/ day each, recycling is expected to further increase. A growing number of LGUs in the country are now implementing integrated waste management, which

Rotary Clubs and Now Tradippines, Inc. (CCBPI), ing Concepts, which manage 13 PETand aluminum can recovery centers. Emptycoke PETcontainers may be redeemed at fiftycentavos per container. In just eight months of operation, 1,100,337 PET bottles and 1,363,115 aluminum cans have been
recovered and re-used. Materials Based Polystyrene terial in fast food outlets, schools, and packing in-

dustries. Faced with an increasing PS generation, 20 PS manufacturers formed the Polystyrene Packaging Council of the Philippines (PPCP)and together set up a PS recycling plant in Sta. Maria, Bulacan. In 1996, PPCP,Ayala Foundation, Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Program
(MEIP), Department
ment agencies started of Environment the project and Natural

Resources (DENR),and some private and governat fast food out-

includes waste reduction, composting, recycling,

and re-use.5 Estimates had shown that trade in waste materials has increased in volume by 39 percent, and in value by 47 percent in 2000 compared to 1998
(see table 4)6.

letswithin the Makati Commercial Center. Between 1997 and 2000, the amount of PS packaging material recovered and recycled nearly doubled from 67,540 kgs to 123,001 kgs. : '

COLLECTION
The country-wide collection efficiency in the Philippines is estimated to be 40 percent, although major towns and cities show average collection rates of up to 70 percent.7 The poorer areas of cities, municipalities, and rural barangays are typically unserved or under-served.
3 4

Table 4: Waste Recovery in Metro Manila Material Purchased

69,400 95,600 101,850

Value pesos) (million

95.2 124.5 132.5

Year 1998 1999

JICA-MMDA 1999. MMDAOrdinance 1999. 5 PPSO Report of DENR Performance. Multi-Purpose of Federation Environment 6Report of the Metro Manila ac ,20Multi-Purpose BogTvs Cooepratie Cooperative, Bong Tevea, March 1, 2000. 7 Pasig River Rehabilitation Program, DENR/DANIDA, 1990-1991.

2000

of Source: Reportofthe MetroManilaFederation Environment BongTeves, March1,2001. Cooperative,

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE RECYCLING AND COLLECTION

Municipalities and cities have primary responsibility for collection... In the Philippines, LGUs are responsible for garbage collection. Municipal solid waste collection is done either by self-administration,through private contractors or by the residents themselves. The manner and frequency of collection and the choice of equipment depends on the size of roads, density of population to be covered, and affordability. In neighborhoods with narrow roads, household waste is dumped into communal receptaclesplaced strategically
on larger roads, which are then removed by trucks.

A quarter of Metro Manila's solid waste is not collected... In 1997, municipal waste discharged to collec-

tion points in Metro Manila was estimated to be 89.7 percent of the generatedwaste. Seventy-threepercent of 8 this amount or 3,500 tons/day was collected. The incomplete collection could be attributed to the limited number and inappropriate collection vehicles, absence
of transfer points, traffic congestion, and lack of enforce-

Box 3: LinisGanda: A Case Study in Recycling

In 2000, Metro Manila Linis Ganda, Inc., a NGO, purchased 101,850 tons of waste paper, corrugated boards,

32.5 million. These and cutlets,plastics, metalsworth PhP1 ment of and compliancewith, rules and regulations.With recyclablematerials were, in turn, sold to factories. Linis the closureof the San Mateo and Carmona sanitarylandof fills, and the difcultynsitingaewlandfillwasGandaorganized the Federation Multi-purposeCoopcooperatives of eratives,an association 17 environmental fills,and the difficultyin siting a new landfill, waste colwith 572 memberjunkshopsemployingmore than 1,000 lection has further decreased.

TRANSFER AND TRANSPORT

eco-aides.Membersof the cooperativeare granted loans are without collateral;eco-aides also givenseed moneyto buy recyclables.

Only 4.5 percent of waste generated in Metro Manila Transfer systems serve to reduce the hauling distances are recycled by Linis Ganda. The group hopes to infor collection trucks, thus enabling a lower collection cost. Suchstat s acrease its recycling activities to 15 percent. The expan| sionwould require 1000 additionaljunk shops and 2,500 cost. Such statlons are appropriate for large citles, | eco-aides. where thereare long haulingdistancesto the finaldisl_l posal site.

In Metro Manila, solid wastes collectedby dump trucks are taken to a transfer station in Las Pifias, where it was transferred to larger trucks before taken to the Carmona landfill. With the closure of the Carmona and San Mateo landfills, the Las Pifias transfer station has been converted into a materials recovery facility,
where compostable and recyclable materials are recovered. In addition, Marikina City also operates its own transfer station.

T Tae 5
City

i a pl fse Philippines
UserFees

IOlongapo City

Cagayande Oro City Commercialand Industrial: P15002000 (maximum) with Household'P10/month billed waLipaCity ~~~~~~ter supplyI | o y tl Huhl
Householod P30 -P40/month collected through electricity bills Commercial: P75-P500/month (de-

pendingon the kind of business, floor area, andwastegenerated Batangas City

|________________ 'The study of SWM for Metro Manila, Final Report, JICA/MMDA, March
1999.

Household: P10/month collected bills throughelectricity

Commercial: P300-P3000 collected through business permits

Source: Report from each city, August 2001.

AND DISPOSAL TREATMENT Treatment methods include composting, anaerobic digestion, incineration, and sanitary landfilling (see Box 4). Disposal only includes the final deposition of rejects from composting or digestion. Other materials will be land applied as a recovered resource. Composting and landfilling are the most suitable Box 4: Treatmentand Disposal Options for Municipal Solid Waste
Disoosal in controlled dump or sanitary landfill: The waste is placed, compacted and covered on an area of land in a controlled fashion. Controlled dumps have basic environmental amenities: site is fenced, scavenging is organized,
daily,

waste is covered by soil

and stormwater is re-

Household solid waste reaching technologies ........

mrouted waste rching thouePhodisolidpis tpechnolosites... shihnmis in the Pilippines open dumpsies ture and organic content, and low in calorific value, vsalu, tureiand torgi ontdvenand lowintriesic dfiin naries in Asa c nidevelop ato simpostiar most

around the site so it does not mix with the waste. They are more environmentally sound than open dumps but do not provide full protection against environmental and public health hazards. Sanitary
landfills are similar but built and operated with full

fires are extinguished

at.Te

oeevrnetlysudta

Composting and sanitary landfilling are thus the

most suitable technologies for treatment and disposal, while incineration (or burning) is relatively ineffective and expensive. Efficient and proper disposal systems for solid wastes are lacking... Illegal open dumping remains the most prevalent form of disposal in the country. Controlled dumps and sanitary landfills are few. Composting, though gaining in popularity,remains limited to only a few neighborhoods and local governments. Incineration is restricted to treatment of infec-

environmental

controls includinga liner, leachate

treatment, and the flaring of gas produced by the decomposition of the waste. Both methods of disposal
are cost-effective and relatively simple to operate. Compostina: The decomposition of organic wastes under controlled conditions to produce soil conditioners, compostor organic fertilizers. Generally done to reduce the amount of waste going into landfill. Necessi-

of of separation theorganicportion thesolid tatessource

waste and a market for the end products.

tious medical and hazardous wastes.

COMPOSTING

Anaerobic Digestion: The breakdown of organic matter by bacteria in the absence of oxygen, resulting in the production of biogas that can be combusted as a fuel source and a sludge that can be further composted for use as a soil enhancer. Generally done to reduce the amount of waste going into landfills. Necessitates source separation of the organic portion of the solid waste and residue should be re-used, treated or disposed. Incineration: Generally it allows unsorted, non- bulky solid wastes to be fed directly into the furnace and combusted. The process produces ash, which generally is landfilled as well as gas and liquid emissions Significantly reduces the that require treatment. of waste to be landfilled and requires very
little land.; However, high moisture content and low

acComposting has largely been a community-based tivity promoted by NGOs, people's organizations, and, through the in some instances, by local governments barangays. It can be done by households, homeowners'

associations or barangays. Composting systems can range from simple backyard compost pits to more mechanized processes. While many communities produce soil conditioners for their own use, others have opted to produce comcommercially. TheDepart-amount fertilizers commercially. post or organic post or organic fertilizers The Department of Agriculture is now actively promoting the use
Coupled with the growing of organic fertilizers. de-

calorific value makes the municipal solid waste in

lX

dmthe garor organicafertilzers.nCooupled,t oandfor fo rt tm grownfo , mand .f organically but postandorganic fertlizers IS alsogrowing, nodemand estimates are available nor is the quality of comost known and support encouragement postknown.Government supportand Govemmet encoragementway,

the Philippinestechnicallyunsuitable for incineration. In addition, the high capital and operating costs to
fully combust the waste in an environmentally sound

way makstcos poit

.make It cost prohibitive

e in

tatmn of
of

municipal solid waste in the Philippines.

for use in treatment

for composting activities is also limited.

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTETREATMENT ANDDISPOSAL

Table Municipal 6: Solid Waste Disposal Methods Selected in Countries, 1997

Land-filling Australia Korea Malaysia China India Indonesia Philippines* Pakistan Vietnam
Sri Lanka

Open Dumping 20 50 50 60 60 75 80
70 85

Composting 10 5 10 10 10 15 10 5
10 5

Incineration 5 5 5 2 5 2 -

Other5 10 5 8 10 13 5 10
20 10

80 60 30 30 15 10 10 5
-

Since7997, the amountof waste disposed in landfiltsin thePhilippines decreased about 2%. of has to :.lncludes animal feeding, dumping in water, ploughing into soil, and open burning. Tableadapted from UN-ESCAP/ADB. Stateof the Environment,n Asia and the Pacific,2000 Source: Ministry of Environment,Singapore, Annual Report, 1997.

OPEN ANDCONTROLLED DUMPING Uncontrolled open dumps have no environmental safeguards, pose major public health threats, and affect the landscape of a city. In contrast, controlled dumps have basic environmental amenities and place, compact, and

Box 5: CompostingFacilityof Barangay SunValley, Parahaque City

In 1997, the Barangay Council at Brgy. Sun Valley in Paranaque City established a composting facility for biodegradable waste collected from 800 households of the area. As of 2000, a total of 2,500 households (50 percent) were participating. About one ton of waste per day was being processed at the facility, resulting in a 35 percent reduction in the amount of waste that has to be collected and
disposed.

cover waste in a controlled fashion.

Until recently,the Metro Manila region, except for

Marikina and Malabon, which had its own disposal site, disposedof its waste in the Payatas open dump, and the Carmona and San Mateo landfills. With the
closure of the two landfills, Metro Manila now disposes its garbage in open and controlled dumpsites in Catmon, Malabon; RIO Vitas, Tondo; and Barangay Lingonan, Valenzuela.
Lingonan,

The Barangay

invested around

PhP500,000

to set

up and operate the facility,which has two compost

reactors, a mixer, a shredder, and four pedicabs
used for the collection of biodegradables. Aside

The Payatas dumpsite in Quezon City was partially reopened and only accepts waste generated in Quezon City (about 1,200 tons/day). There are also 12 small
open dumpsites in Metro Manila.

from using lactobacilli activators, vermi-composting

is also practiced.

A less expensive scheme to compost the biodegradable waste from the poorer communities within the
barangay was recently implemented. Processing of

For the rest of the country, it was estimated in 1999 that each of the 1,607 LGUs operates and maintains its own temporary or permanent dumpsite. Of these, 226 open dumpsites have been identified by the NaCommission tional Solid Waste Management of July 2001. About 37 percent of (NSWMC) as these have been inspected by the NSWMC for, among other things, complaints by residents, requests for assistance by local chief executives, and environmental compliance with prescribed site requirements. According to Environmental Manage-

all the biodegradable waste is done in the community'sbasketball court. The processed materials are placed in sacks and transported to the barangay center. Harvested compost is sold at P5.00/kg or P120/ 50kg bag. Vermicastis sold at P35/kg. To get the most value from its compost, the barangay is now finalizing an agreement with the municipality of Maragondon in Cavite to use their farmlands for
growmg organic vegetables.

ment Bureau (EMB), 17 open dumps have been converted to controlled dumps (see Box 7). SANITARY LANDFILLS Environmental and social concerns caused the closure of two landfills in Metro Manila... In recent years, Metro Manila has been continuously grappling with a garbage disposal crisis. The two landfills operated by the MMDA-Carmona in Cavite Province and San Mateo in Rizal Province were designed as sanitary landfills but not constructed or operated as ones. These are now closed. Collectively, the two landfills accommodated between 40 and 50 percent of Metro Manila's daily garbage output. Since their closure, piles of uncollected garbage could be found throughout Metro Manila, threatening the health and safety of

in Table7: Status Dumpsites of Metro Manila, 2001

Type Dumpsite Location of
Open dumpsite Payatas, Quezon City

Status Catmon, Malabon In operation

ClosedJuly 10, 2000 but partly reopened

inFeb. 2001
R 10, Vitas, Tondo In operation Controlled dumpsite Sanitary landfill Brgy. Lingonan Valenzuela San Mateo, Rizal Carmona, Cavite ClosedDec. 2000 Closed Apr. 1998 In operation

8: disposed SanMateoand at Table Waste landfills 3 peryear) (m Carmona

Year 1991 1992
1993 1994 1995 1997 1998

SanMateo
258,880 344,562
572,715 1,259,792 1,799,300

Carmona*
133,871 552,935 957,518

residents. On the average, the San Mateo and Carnona landfills received daily 1,800 and 73010tons of solid waste, respectively.Both sites were closed due to environmental and social concerns' such as foul odor and contamination of adjoining ground water and surfacewater. Both sites contain over 23 million cubic meters of degrading waste. Leachate from the two sites continues to contaminate ground water. Recent studies" indicate that the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) quality of effluent from leachate treatment plants at both sites exceeded permissible standards (San Mateo 10,000 mg/l; Carmona - 3,500 mg/,' 2 "3 ). This indicates that the treatment systems employed at both sites are not functioning properly. No restoration plans are in place for the two sites... Normally when sanitary landfills are closed or capped, the facility owner is required to implement a post-closure program. This includes storm water drainage, leachate treatment and monitoring, and gas flaring or recovery and landscaping. Al-

2,174,942
2,965,007

1,761,429
293,631

1999
2000

2,734,347
3,270,090

Landfill in Note:CanrmonaMSaniary closed Apnl1998.

Box 6: Dangers of Controlled Dumps and Landfills: Leachate and Gas As water percolatesthrough the solid waste in landfills, it presentin the puabsorbs chemicalsand microorganisms trefying materials. The uncontrolleddischarge of liquid
formed in solid waste dumps or landfills,known as leachate,

though it is a regulatory requirement, such a pro-

"'Awaste density of 250 kg/m3 has been assumed.

"Environmental Management Bureau, 1998. "2Analysis of leachate quality in San Mateo 1999 and Carmona 1996-97. ' 3Monitoring data from EMB. Standards for effluents for Class C inland

contaminatesground and surface waters, and thus, pose environmental publichealth risksto the localarea. and Various gases are produced because organic matter in the landfilldecomposesthrough the action of anaerobic microorganisms-bacteria that flourishin the absence of air. While some of these gases are relativelyharmless, others, like methane, highly flammable. The migraare tion and emissionof these flammablegases should be controlledto preventexplosionsin the event of their build-up on or near the landfill. Methane, in particular, is commonlyflared or combustedfor energy in order to reduce the risk of explosion and mitigate its effectas a greenhouse gas. Source: AdaptedSolid Waste Management LocalGovernfor ments, DENR, 1996.

waterbodiesis 50 mg/1.

10

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL

gram is not in place at either of the sites.

While

these sites had landfill gas vents, there were no gas recovery facilities. The poor construction and faulty
operation of the sites resulted in a negative perception of sanitary landfills among the general public. This, combined with the NIMBY syndrome, has caused problems in the siting of landfills in the country, especially for Metro Manila, where the problem is particularly acute.

Dump Box7: Opento Controlled

Effortsof San Fernando, Pioneering
La Union
Thecity of San Femando,La Union is locatedin RegionI a of and has population 102,000. Itgeneratesan average is of 52 tonsof wasteper day of which45 percent currently a big issue, particularlyfor city collected. Disposal was

the council,which wantedto promote city as a viable inLuzon. area in Northern vestment Encouragedby a study tour on SolidWaste Management inthe USA,the Mayor and cityofficialsinitiatedthe shiftof their city'swaste disposalsystemfrom open dumping to controlled dumping, whilepreparing a full-fledged for sani-

The Cebu Landfill is facing operational difficulties... The only active sanitary landfill in the country which began operations in September 1998, is

located in Cebu. It receives 400 tons daily and was

tarylandfill. designed to have a life of 6-7 years. Technical probTo reduce the volume of waste to be disposed, collected lems have closed down its materials recovery facilsite. This sortingatthe disposal secondary undergoes nbtwaste ity deommcoeup ity due to mismatch of equipment between conlecrecoveryof recyclableand re-usablematerialsis underrevproviding themwithadditional takenby the barangay, in enue. Atthe same time,the residents thecityweretaught tion constrained recycling efforts and increased the to segregatetheirwastesat source. daily volume of waste disposed in the landfill. Landfill gas is vented through a series of horizontal and vertical pipes. However, the leachate treatment pond serves only as an impounding basin, wasteis first Thesite is managedin cellswherethe residual the compacted and then coveredwith soil. To improve of aesthetics the site, ylang ylang trees, known for its fratrees grantflowers,were planted all over. Bougainvillea
and other omamental plants were also planted along the of periphery the site. now serves as a Thecontrolleddumpsite in San Fernando

which discharges partially treated leachate to the

surrounding area, causing the adjacent communities to complain. Unless immediate corrective action is taken, this landfill could be closed.

It in modelforotherlocalgovemments thecountry. has been visitedby over9,000 representatives national of and local governments,NGOs, the private sector, and donor instituproof that wastemanagementcan be immetions. Itis living diately improvedif only there is political will to do so.
The constructionof the sanitary landfillwould be supported by a loan beingobtainedfrom the LandBankof the Philip-

AND LANDFILL GAS COLLECTION USE Landfills produce large quantities of greenhouse gases... Landfill gas, a gas similar to natural gas,
is produced during the decomposition of wastes in landfills and dumps and typically contains 50 percent of the potent greenhouse gas methane. Methane affects global warming 21 times more than carbon dioxide. Waste disposal sites are estimated to account for 12 percent (see table 9) of the methane released to the atmosphere in the Philippines. The methane produced by landfills can be effectively controlled by collecting and converting the gas to energy that can be sold profitably. Production of energy from landfill gas is a well-established practice in North America and Europe. A limited num-

LocalGovernment pinesthroughthe WorldBank-assisted Project. (LOGOFIND) and Development Finance

ber of facilities have also been established in other

countries. For example, in Mexico and Thailand, pilot demonstration projects are being implemented to encourage the development of similar projects nationwide and regionwide. 11

k
-

-.

;S

j iii

-1

.1

i;

The Philippines can harness opportunities to convert landfill gas to energy... Collection and utilization of landfill gas presents an opportunity to: (i) supplement LGUs' revenues from solid wastes; (ii) control localized emissions, such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), found in landfill gas; (iii) minimize the risks from explosion that may arise from the build-up of methane and other flammable gases; and (iv) reduce emissions of greenhouse gases as part of the Government's commitment to the Kyoto
Protocol.

in Table9: MethaneEmissions the in Philippines 1990

Source Agriculture Waste -wastewater Energy Land Protocol. Use and Forestry
Total

(Gg) Emissions 904

3273 151 1,474

61
122 10

228 18

15 1
100

During the next decade, wastes generated in

Metro Manila can generate 1,000 GWh of energy and power 8,500 homes... There are several options for the development of landfill gas facilities in the Philippines. For example, they could be developed as part of new disposal sites. These would be most suitable in sanitary landfills in urban areas, where large quantities of waste may exist. For example, if landfill gas facilities are installed in all of the disposal sites that would be accepting waste from Metro Manila, these facilities could collect approximately 500 million m3 of methane and produce 1,000 GWh of energy over the next 10 years.14 This amount of energy is enough to power 8,500 homes. Similarly, over the same period of time, a smaller city like Cebu could capture 35 million m3 of methane and power 600 homes.15 As landfills can produce gas for decades, landfill gas facilities could also be developed in closed disposal sites. This is a particularly attractive option for the closed landfills at Carmona and San Mateo. Rehabilitation of San Mateo and Carmona landfills could benefit from on-site power generation... Based on recent estimates, the waste contained in the San Mateo and Carmona landfills is capable of producing enough power to supply 5,500 homes (see Table 10). The use of landfill gas for energy could supplement the costs of implementing urgently needed rehabilitation plans for both sites. If designed and managed well, revenues could

ADB/GEF/ Philippines, Strategy, Gas Greenhouse Abaternent Asia Source: Least-cost

Gas of Table10: PotentialBenefits Landfill to Energy 4 1 Manila. in Projects DisposalSites in Metro

SanMateo Carmona Payalas

Facility capacity (MW) No. of houses powered

5.2 3,874 20

2.2 1,639 19

3.3 2,459 17

of Rate returnon
investment (%) Methane avoided

(millm3 /yr.)
Volatile Organic Compounds

17.0

6.0

8.0

(VOCs)emissions avoided (tons/yr.)

7999. Source: USEPA,

25.9

9.4

12.5

Calculated using the EPA E Plus landfill gas model with input by and parameters electricity price asdescribed USEPA1999. Assumption on electricity generation was taken from other feasibility studies of landfill gas projects. ' 5 bid

12

ANDDISPOSAL SOLID WASTETREATMENT MUNICIPAL

help mitigate current environmental problems, reduce future risks like explosions, and contribute to the socio-economic uplift of communities through the provision of electricity. A national strategy for landfill gas management... To investigate the potential of landfill gas utilization, the Government should formulate an appropriate national strategy. Such a framework could consider approaches for: (i) incorporating landfill gas management in the planning, design, and construction of future landfill sites, the operation of existing landfills, and the rehabilitation of

Box 8: Some InternationalExperiences Gas Utilization in Landfill

States:Thelandfill gas industryin the US United is the largest in the world. It grew rapidly from 86 operational projectsin 1990 to 330 today. With a combined capacity of 900 MW, approximately two-thirdsof those projects use landfill gas for electricitygeneration. Many of the remaining projects use the gas for a wide varietyof purposes including commercial fuel (high and medium BTU and liquefied natural gas), leachate evaporation,

closed landfills; (ii) introducing landfill gas man-

boilers,and greenhouses.

Chile: Chile currently has four facilities that colagement in the process of converting open dumps lect landfill gas and feed it into a gas distribution to sanitary landfills; (iv) targeting the most suitable networkfor its direct use as gas fuel. In Santiago, disposal sites and technological options considerlandfillgas is able to satisfy 40 percent of the deof operation and condition of the ing the quality mand of the city's gas distribution network, and is landfill, gas generation potential, and financial vialso sent to a nearby food processing plant for ability of different technological options; (v) deteruse as a fuel source for the plant's boilers. In the mining the most viable institutional arrangements, city of Valparaiso, the landfill gas is mixed with including public-private partnerships; (iv) minimizmanufactured gas for use by households and inlegislative and regulatory barriers; and (iv) ing the dustry. obtaining financing via the private sector or using climate change institutional mechanisms such as Mexico: Although open dumping is still prevaFacility i grants from Environmntal theGlobal Mexico's solid waste sector and the technologrants fo thGlblEvomnlent, gies used have gradually grown in sophistication the short term and credits from the global carbon in the last 15 years resulting in increased collectrade envisioned under the Kyoto Protocol in the tion efficiency and a larger proportion of waste long term. disposed in sanitary landfills. However,there are currently no landfill gas facilities in Mexico. To encourage the development of these facilities, the Government of Mexico is undertaking a project with the assistance of The World Bank and the Global EnvironmentFacility. The project will develop a demonstration site in Monterrey and dis- ,* J . ^ .>. X ; seminate the results to encourage its replication. National and local capacity will also be developed along with a national strategy and regulatory framework.

A
y - .,> .~ v *< -':/~i , n

- t . Sources: US: Introduction to Landfill Gas Use and the US Landfill

|
|

6
|

$ 0
| *:

LMOPJune25, 2001. GasIndustry,USEPA1Chile: Bartone and Ahmed, Landfill Gas and Composting

z .,

Recovery 2001.Biogas WorldBank, for Strategy LCR,

from Sanitary LandFillSites in Santiago, Chile: A Case Study, Julio Monreal, September 1998 and personal communication with Francisco Zapeda.

13

WASTES HAZARDOUS Hazardous wastes are wastes which, by themselves or after coming into contact with other wastes, have characteristics, such as chemical reactivity, toxicity, corrosiveness or a tendency to explode, that pose a risk to human health or the environment. Hazardous wastes are generated from a wide range of industrial, commercial, agricultural, and to a much less extent, domestic activities. They may take the form of solids, liquids or sludges, and can pose both acute and chronic public health and environmental risks.
GENERATION

Chart 2: HazardousWaste Generation, by Type

Oil 8% Putrescible/ organic wastes

11%

Other 27%
Acid Waste

10%

Inorganic chemical wastes 24%

Alkali Wastes 20%

The Source: Studyof SWM for MetroManila, FinalReport,JICA/MMDA, March 1999.

There are several thousand potential hazardous wastegenerating industries nationwide, which in total, produce an estimated 2.4 million metric tons of hazard6 ous waste per year.' So far, only 1,079 of these hazardous waste genera20 tors are registered with the EMB. These industries produce 278,393 tons of hazardous waste per year. The major waste classes include inorganic chemical wastes,
alkali wastes, putrescibles, acid wastes, and
oils.
1

Thirty-four percent of the estimated hazardous waste production is in the National Capital Region (NCR),
while 27 percent is in Region IV

WASTES MEDICAL RECYCLING The 18,500 hospitals (with 90,000 beds) in the country generate about 6,750 tons of infectious wastes an8 nually or 18 tons daily.' Forty-seven percent of this waste is generated in the NCR, while Region IV accounts for 12 percent. About 25 percent of the total registered hazardouswaste generated is recycled. 56 percent of the recycledwastes are oils and 49 percent are inorganic chemicals.
AND DISPOSAL TREATMENT

There are currently 28 hazardous waste treatment facilities registered with DENR-EMB nationwide, 21 of
which are operating full-time.
' lhe Study on Hazardous Waste Management in the Republic of the Philippines, JICA, June 2001. 7 " [bid 5 Team computation, 2001.
6

About half of the registered hazardous waste generated each year (or approximately 140,000 tons/year),
,14

AND DISPOSAL TREATMENT RECYCLING, WASTE GENERATION, HAZARDOUS

Box 9: Cebu Common Treatment Facility, Inc.

Locatedinside the lnayawan SanitaryLandfill, this facilityfor toxic treatment common meter 2,781-square electroplating Cebu-based from waste and hazardous in is industries thefirstin thecountryand second Asia. of by and It is co-owned managed theCebuChamber and Commerce Industryand the CebuElectroplaters Association. plant is colThewastewater from the electroplating plant. Afto and lected thentransported thetreatment sludge the and ter neutralization precipitation, resulting Funded and mineralrecovery. is storedfor recycling the between Philippines under a bilateralagreement of and the DENR) the FederalRepublic Ger(through Cofor the many (through GermanAgency Technical in started Ocoperations commercial operation-GTZ), from of tober1999 withthetreatment wastewater seven firms.

is treated off-site, and 3,600 tons or 2.5 percent of that is recycled. Five thousand tons of the waste treated on-site is reportedly incinerated. There is, however, a need to change this treatment process given the provisions of the Clean AirAct of 1999. By November 2003, incinerators will be prohibited. Non-bum technologies are thus being studied for the disposal of hazardous wastes
from hospital and industrial sources.

There are currently no landfill facilities for hazardous waste in the Philippines. As a result, hazardous waste sources store their wastes, or dispose of them partially treated or untreated. Approximately 50,000 tons or 36 percent of all hazardous waste treated off-site, is stored on-site or off-site due to the lack of proper treatment and landfill facilities.

Hazardous Waste. There are 13 industrial waste incinerators in the country: 7 in Region IV, 5 in
Metro Manila, and 1 in Cebu. Plans for the construction of a centralized disposal facility for haz-

Box 10: Govemment and

ardous

waste

to service

the Cavite,

Laguna,

IndustryPartnership
of (IWEP) the Program WasteExchange TheIndustrial the matches diffor Business the Environment Philippine with recyclingand industries ferent waste-producing This wastetreating companies. leadsto considerable More in involved theexchange. for savings bothparties are producers in theirdatawaste than 1,200 industrial for have exchanges beenbrokered varibase.Successful coolant, such ouswastes asscrapfabric,silicagel,used used oil, used drums,used paper,used plasticsacks, and plastic, sawmoldrunner waste, solder cutlets, glass dihavebeennegotiated dust. Manyotherexchanges a nalaunched It industries. hasrecently rectlybetween creatingmini-indusnetwork tionwidewasteexchange centersin Cebu, Laguna,and trial waste exchange de Cagayan Oro.
2001. for Business the Environment, Philippine Source:

Batangas, Rizal, and Quezon (CALABARZON)

areas are also being discussed.

Medical Waste. There are currently 43 operational

hospital incinerators in the country. Of this num-

ber, 22 are located in Metro Manila. Fifty percent

of the medical waste generated is incinerated, while At present, the rest is disposed of improperly. MMDA is finalizing the establishment of a central-

ized hospital waste treatment facility to service

Metro Manila.

Technology solutions and policy direction are ursoluti onsa policy irc tion Tenoly wresose ther inc ne ion in eeded gently n ban.. For the past few years, there has been intense debate in the Philippines over the use of incinerators in waste management, leading to a pro-

hibition on their use imposed by the Clean Air Act. The provision of the Act is to take effect in November 2003.

15

StI.

:e

lla g

l m-

MedicalWaste Optionsfor Infectious and Disposal Box 11: Treatment

Combusts the waste under controlled conIncineration: ditions. To be effective and safe, it must be operated at specific temperatures and under specific conditions. Advantages include its ability to eliminate the health risks associated with all types of hazardous medical wastes, and reduce the volume of the waste. Its disadvantages include high costs, sophisticated operation and production of air pollution, including dioxins, that become more severe if properly operated at an insufficient temperature. The capital costs of such facility range from US$120,000- 200,000 for each ton/day of capacity. Autoclaving: Steam heats the waste in an enclosed container at high pressure. The output is non-hazardous material that can normally be landfilled with municipal waste. The main advantages are the ease and familiarity of its operation. Its disadvantages include the high cost of operation, production of air emissionsand wastewater, and its inability to treat special medical waste such as tissues and body parts. The capital costs range from US$40,000-i 25,000 for each ton/day of capacity. Microwave and radiowave irradiation: Waste is disinfected using a high energy electromagnetic field that causes high frequency oscillation of the liquid portions of the cell material. The output is considered non-hazardous and can be disposed in a landfill with municipal waste. Its main advantages are the reduction in volume
achieved and its minimal production Its disadvantages of toxic pollutants. and include cost and sophistication,

its ineffectivenessin treating special medical waste such as tissuesand body parts. The capital costsrange from

20,000-200,000 for each ton/day of capacity. US$1

Chemical disinfection: The waste is shredded and chemicalsare added to waste to kill or inactivate pathogens. The output has to be disposed of using techniques such as safe landfilling. The advantage of this process is the reduction of waste volume resulting from shredding. However, chemical disinfection requires a skilled operator,is costly, does not treat wastes such as tissues and body parts, and produces a toxic waste stream. Safelandrilling:The waste is placed in a pit excavatedin maturemunicipalwaste or in a special area constructedin the landfill and coveredimmediatelywith soil or fresh municipal waste. For added health protection and odor suppression, lime can be spread over the waste. The area by shouldalso be fenced off to preventaccess waste pickers or scavenginganimals. The capital costsare low as it of an uses existingmunicipal landfill. Theadvantages these simplicity and low-cost. Theseare the methodsare their next bestoption to incineration for the treatmentof body the parts and tissues. However, waste remains infectious, and therefore,can be very dangerous if not managed extremelycarefully.
WasteManetal., Healthcare Source:AdaptedfromJohannessen, a9ement Guidance Note, TheWorld Bank, 2000.

Incineration is not an effective option to dispose of municipal solid waste in the Philippines because of the unsuitable technical characteristics of the waste (high moisture and organic content and low calorific value), high construction and operating costs, and attendant environmental risk due to weak monitoring and enforcement. However, many countries, including the Philippines, use incinerators as an option to completely destroy certain in-

fectious medical waste such as syringes, body parts and tissues, and treat certain classes of hazardous waste such as insecticides, pesticides, waste solvents, types of hydraulic fluids and some oily sludges. The broad-based ban on incineration will influence the way that infectious medical and hazardous wastes are disposed, and may well present risks to health and the environment if it encourages unsafe and unregulated treatment and disposal practices.

16

HAZARDOUSWASTE GENERATION, RECYCLING, TREATMENTAND DISPOSAL

At the same time, allowing unregulated operation of incinerators in the Philippines for infectious medical and hazardous wastes is potentially dangerous. The country currently has limited capacity to operate incinerators and monitor their emissions. Without proper operation there is a danger that they could not only ineffectively treat the waste but produce significant quantities of pollutants such as dioxins. Effective implementation of the law will require a concerted effort that focuses exclusively on the practicalities of establishing safe and effective disposal practices in the short and long term. If the ban is fully implemented, then there will need to be a shift to alternative technologies (see Box 11). Some could take years and some technologies could potentially have a lower order of treatment effectiveness. The choice of technology is dependent on environmental and safety considerations and commercial viability. Experience from Latin America suggests that microwaving or autoclaving options

could be used to treat infectious medical wastes at prices equivalent or slightly higher than incineration, but not all waste streams could be effectively treated. Similarly, cleaner production and chemical precipitation have been used to reduce the generation of hazardous waste in manufacturing processes. Assuming viable treatment technologies are identified soon, then it will have to be ensured that such facilities are properly operated and environmentally sound. Alternatively, in the event that the incineration ban is stayed or delayed for infectious medical and hazardous wastes, the government should ensure that the incinerators are operated as designed and regulated closely by DENR, and their performance disclosed to the public. This would require substantial capacity building of DENR's monitoring and oversight capability. Also, existing incineration capacity should be optimized to encourage the use of shared facilities in order to minimize operational and environmental risks.

.%.~~~V

"''-

~j

Wo

17t

17v.

&

1-ii

i S

S i

I -

LEGISLATION

The Philippine Constitution (Article II Section 16) stipulates that "the state shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature." From the first antidumping law in 1938 to the most recent ESWMA, every piece of enacted legislation has emphasizedproper collection and safedisposal of household garbageand industrialand hospitalwastes.A summaryof the differentpieces of legislation and their salient features follow. It is obvious that actions on the ground have not kept pace with policy and legal pronouncements, and every effort should be made to ensure that the ESWMA succeeds where previous legislation failed. Salient features of the ESWMA are also summarized.

of Box12: Summary SWMLegislation

is into Prohibitsdumping of refuse, waste matteror other substances rivers. Punishment imprisonmentof not more than six months fine of not more than P200. and/or a

Law Act Commonwealth No. 383 - Anti-Dumping (1938) Law Licensing (1965) Act Republic 4226, Hospital GeneralOrderNo. 13 (1972)

appropriate to itslevel of health care. guidelinesto protectand promote public health by ensuringquality hospitalservices Provides Orders all residentsto undertake the cleaning of their surroundings and prohibits anyone from throwing garbage in public places. All lot owners must maintain the cleanlinessof idle lots. If they are unable to do so, the Governmentwill undertake the same at the owner's expense.

Law(1975) No. Decree 825, GarbageDisposal Presidential Code(1975) No. Decree 856, Sanitation Presidential

Penaltiesinclude imprisonment for beProvidespenaltiesfor improper disposal of garbage and other forms of uncleanliness. tween five days and one year and/or fines between P100 and P2000. for cities and municipalitiesto provide an adequate and efficientsystem collection,transportation,and disposalof refuse Requires in their areas of jurisdiction in a manner approved by the local health authority,

of ControlDecree 1976 (1976) by No. Decree 600; as amended PD979, MarinePollution Presidential Law of and No. Decree 984, Rules Regulations theNationalPollutionControl Presidential Policy(1978) Environmental No. Decree 1151,thePhilippine Presidential

and Prevents controls the pollution of the seasby prohibiting dumping of waste and other matter,which createshazardsto human health or harms living resourcesand marine life. Providesguidelinesfor the prevention and control of pollution from solid, toxic, and hazardous wastes. Recognizesthe right of the people to a healthy environment,and the duty of everyone to contribute to the preservation and enhancementof the environment. Section 4 requires the preparation of Environmental Impact Statementsfor any project or undertaking that may significantly affect the environment.

Code(1978) Environmental No. Decree 1152, Philippine Presidential Order No. 432 (1990) Executive (OP)

the Requires preparation and implementationof waste managementprograrns by all provinces,cities, and municipalities. Orders the strict implementationof PD825 by all law enforcementagenciesand officers. Enjoinsthe Metro Manila Development Authority to do so for Metro Manila. or as MandatesLGUsto exercisepowersand discharge functionsand responsibilities necessary appropriate and incidentalto the effective provision of servicesand facilities related to general hygiene and sanitation, beautification, and solid efficient and waste collectionand disposalsystems.

CodeRA7160 (1991) LocalGovernment

and Rules ControlActof 1990,and itsImplementing and and Substances Hazardous NuclearWaste Act Republic 6969- Toxic
Regulations (DAO 29) (1992) Regulatesthe importation, use,movement,treatment and disposal of toxic chemicalsand hazardous and nuclear waste in the Philippines. Providestechnicalguidelines for municipal solid waste disposal, and adoptsthe landfill site identification and screeningcriteria for municipal solid waste disposal facilities.

Order (DAO)No. 98-49and 98-50 Administrative Department Air Clean Act of 1999 Act Republic 8749 - The

air Providesa comprehensive pollution managementand control program to achieve and maintain healthyair. Section20 bans communityburning. incinerationof municipal,bio-medical, and hazardouswastesbut allowsthe traditional methodof small-scale

Act Management of 2000 SolidWaste Act Republic 9003 - Ecological

and ecologicalsolid waste managementprogram as a policy of the State. Declaresthe adoption of a systematic,comprehensive, Adopts a community-basedapproach. Mandates waste diversionthrough compostingand recycling.

18

AND INSTITUTIONS BUDGETS LEGISLATION,

Box 13: Key Featuresof the EcologicalSolid Waste Management Act of 2000 (ESWMA)
RA 9003- TheEcological Solid Waste ManagementAct of 2000 was passedby Congressin December2000 and signed into and ecological comprehensive, of law by the President the Philippineson January26, 2001 with the aim of adopting a systematic, waste managementprogram. The ImplementatingRulesand Regulationsare currently being finalized. solid Institutional Arrangements: The Act provides for the establishmentof a National Solid Waste Management Commission the (NSWMC) to oversee implementationof solid waste managementplans, and prescribepoliciesto achievethe objectivesof from the following agencies: Department the Act. Thecommissionwill be headed by DENRand composedof representatives of Scienceand Technology(DOST), Departmentof Health (DOH), Departmentof Agriculture (DA), TechnicalEducationand Authority (TESDA),Departmentof Interior and Local Govemment(DILG),Departmentof Public Works and Skill Development Authority (MMDA), PhilippineInforHighways (DPWH),Departmentof Trade and Industry (DTI),Metro Manila Development mation Agency (PIA), Leagueof Provincial Governors, Leagueof City Mayors, Associationof Barangay Councils,and one each from NGOs, recycling, and packaging or manufacturingindustries.A similar multi-sectoral SWM Board representative for will be primarily responsible the implemenwill also be created in each Provinceand LocalGovernmentUnit (LGU).LGUs of biodegradable, tation and enforcementof the Act within their respectivejurisdictions.Similarly,segregationand collection compostable, and re-usable solid wastes should be conducted at the barangay level, and the collection of non-recyclable materials and handling of specialwasteswill be the responsibilityof the municipality or city. Strategic PlanningFramework: A National Solid Waste ManagementStatus Reportfeaturing an inventory of existing solid waste facilities, waste characterization, waste generation projections, and other pertinent information should be regularly updated and published.Based on such report, a National Solid Waste ManagementFramework, which will include medium and long-term plans, should be formulated and implemented. The Act also requires each province, city or municipality to prepare ten year plans, which should include the re-use, recycling, and compostingof wastes generated in their respective jurisdiction, using the National Frameworkas their guide. Re-use:The Act requires all LGUsto divert at least 25 percentof all solid wastesfrom wastedisposal facilitiesthrough re-use, recycling, composting, and other resourcerecovery activitieswithin five yearsfrom the effectivityof the Act, Similarly, segregation of solid wastesat sourceis made mandatory. of Recycling: The Act mandatesthe Department Tradeand Industryto prepare an inventory of existing marketsfor recyclable compost. The Act also stipulatesthat procedure, standards, incentivesand strategiesshould be specified to materials and develop local market for recyclablematerials and compost. The Act also placesrestrictionon the useof environmentallynonacceptable packaging material.

will need * Sanitary Landfillsand Controlled Dumps: The Act prohibits new open dumps for disposal. Existingopen dumpsites with sanitary landfills in a span of five years after to be converted into controlled dumpsiteswithin three years, and replaced of the Act has becomeeffective. The Act providesguidelines for the establishment sanitary landfills. *
*

Participation: To encourage popular participation, the Act also allows Citizen Suits, where anyone can file a civil, criminal, and administrativeaction against any person,governmentagency or official who violates or fails to comply with the law. Fees:The Act specifiesthat fees should be levied on all waste generatorsfor SWM services. Finesand penaltiesfor any from the implementationof the law shall accrueto a SWM Fund (both national violation of the law were also set. All revenues and and local) earmarkedto support researchand development,provide awardsand incentives,provide technicalassistance, conduct information, education,communication,and monitoring activities.

* Incentives: The Act catalogues the incentivesthat are to be offered to LGUs, enterprises,private entities, and NGOs to encourage their active participation. These include: tax and duty exemptions,tax credit on domesticcapital equipment, provision of grants to LGUsto build their technical capabilities and incentivesto communitieshosting sharedtreatment and disposal facilities. of * Appropriations: For the initial operating expenses the NSWMC, National EcologyCenter,and the LGUs,the Act approprithe ates PhP20million for 2001. Thereafter, expenseswill be financed through the regular budget. For 2002, PhP10million has been appropriated to support the NSWMC.

19

I I

i 0

I *

ARRANGEMENTS INSTITUTIONAL Over the years, successive laws and issuances mandated different agencies to manage solid and hazardous wastes. This has resulted in overlapping responsibilities. The Local Government Code of 1991 re-affirmed the primary responsibility of local governments to plan and implement solid waste management programs within their locality. The ESWMA reinforces this responsibility and defines the national oversight mandate of the National Solid Waste Management Commission. The new structure and the responsibilities of the different agencies are explained below:

Mandated by the ESWMA Arrangements Chart3: Institutional Office of the President

National Sold Waste Management Commission

* * * * * * DENR Chairedby the Secretary, Outlinespolicies PreparesNationalSWMFramework of Overseesimplementation the ESWMAct ApprovesSWM Plansof local governments PreparesNationalSWM StatusReport Secretariat of the NSWM
* *

NationalEcologyCenter * Chairedby Director,EMB * Providestechnicalsupportto LGUs and * Establishes managesSWM database

Locatedat EMB Director Headedby an Executive management for Responsible day-to-day

* * *

ProvincialSolidWasteManagementBoards SWMplansinto the SWM planthe Reviewand integratecity and municipal ESWMA implementing citiesand municipalities effortsof component Coordinate the Encourage clusteringby LGUswith commonproblems

* * *
*

* * *

Boards Solid WasteManagement City/Municipal local 10 year SWM plans Prepare,submitand implement Reviewplan every2 years measuresto promotesupport Adoptrevenuegenerating support logisticaland operational Providenecessary effortsof its componentbarangays Coordinate the Manage collectionand disposalof residualand specialwastes Cooperatives Environmental settingup of Multi-purpose Encourage

I
Barangays wastes and * Handlethe 100%collectionof biodegradable reusable MaterialRecoveryFacility * Establish campaigns and education * Conductinformation

20

AND INSTITUTIONS BUDGETS LEGISLATION,

Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). Sets standards, criteria, and guidelines for all aspects of solid waste management. Performs regulatory as well as monitoring and enforcement functions with regard to air emissions and effluent of solid waste management systems. Chairs the National Solid Waste Management Commission, which sets the overall policy, prepares the national framework, and approves local action plans. EnvironmentalManagement Bureau (EMB). Chairs the National Ecology Center composed of multisectoral and multi-disciplinary experts tasked to facilitate training and education on the ESWMA. Establishes and manages an information database. Provides secretariat support to the Commission. EMB is a line agency of DENR.

Local Government Units (LGUs). Responsible for preparation and implementation of local SWM plans together with other stakeholders within their area. Principally responsible for proper waste management - ensuring segregation at source, composting, recycling, setting up of material recovery facilities, efficient collection, and environmentally sound disposal. Department of Health (DOH). Regulates the storage of refuse in food establishments with respect to construction, maintenance, and placement of storage containers within their establishments. Provides guidelines for proper management and disposal of hospital wastes, and other infectious wastes. Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). Formulates and implements a coding system for packaging materials and products to facilitate recycling and re-use. Publishes study on existing markets for recyclables and recommends steps to expand these markets. Department of Agriculture (DA). Publishes an inventory of markets and demands for compost. Assists compost producers to ensure compost produced conform to standards. Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA). Enforces pollution laws in Laguna de Bay region including illegal dumping of garbage. Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA). Coordinates collection, transport, and disposal of solid wastes in Metro Manila. Responsible for daily operation of its transfer stations, composting facilities, and landfills. OversightCommittee. MoniJoint Congressional
tors the implementation of the ESWM and oversees

Strategy(CDS)Box 14: CityDevelopment solid a promisingapproachto mainstream waste management

The CDSaims to assistcity govemments and their stakeholders in formulating a commonvision for their future, to identifying strategies attainthisvisionand priority promobilization gramsand projects,andfacilitatingresource to finance the implementationof these programs and projects. Guided by the principles of livability,competithe tiveness,bankability and good governance, CDSfolwhich involvesall the stakelows a participatory process, holders in the entire planning and decisionmaking probuilding process. In so doing, it developsa consensus cess within the city and buildsthe city's capacityfor more

urbangovernance. effective
Based on the experience of the first seven pilot cities in the Philippines, solid waste was identified by the various sectors as one of their priority issues.Having gone through the process together, it was easier to

of to agreeon what needs be done. Theissue NIMBY

was thus addressed. In the case of San Fernando, La Union, the CDS process facilitated the acquisitionof

an additional lot for sanitary landfill. It also paved

the way for the people's acceptance of the city's integrated SWM program. With the upscaling of the CDSin the Philippines(with 30 additional cities participating), it is expectedthat a more solutionto the issueof solid waste mancomprehensive agementwill be developedand implemented.
Team Source: Philippines CDSProject

the functions of the Commission. Philippine Coast Guard (PCG). Responsible for preventing ocean dumping of

solid wastes.

Private Sector. Serves as the Vice-Chair of the NSWMC, and plays a major role in the provision of collection, treatment and disposal services.

21

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~S

BUDGET AND EXPENDITURE Cities in both developing and industrialized countries generally do not spend more than 0.5 percent of their per capita gross national product on urban waste services. This does not include costs directly paid by businesses and residents, beyond the normal municipal taxes and fees." Expenditures in solid waste management also serve as a reliable proxy to service levels for collection and disposal. However, in the Philippines, most LGUs do not correctly or fully account for their solid waste costs.
No national data is available making it difficult to es-

Table11: MMDA SWM Expenditures (in millionpesos)

Year
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 2000

expenditures Actual
73.4 136.5 303.7 405.9 296.9

24324.

Source: PMO-MMOA

Note:'budget allocation

timate the current share of solid waste expenditures in the national accounts. The budget for solid waste management as a percentage of total LGU budget varies greatly. Data from some cities outside the NCR indicates that in 2001, it ranges from 1.2 percent to 11.7 percent. Current data for three cities within Metro Manila show Marikina at 10.8 percent, Muntinlupa at 9.8 percent, and Valenzuela at 3.9 percent. The per capita allocation varies between less than a dollar (Iloilo and Roxas) to nearly US$5 (Muntinlupa). Generally, a substantial portion of the budget for solid waste management is allocated for collection and transport. Only a small portion is provided for the management of the disposal site. MMDA's solid waste management budget is primarily for disposal, since collection is the mandate of LGUs. The 1997 Asian economic crisis led to a reduction in MMDA's expenditures on solid waste management. However, by 2000, expenditures increased, amounting to PhP424 million, more than five times

for Allocated Table12: CityBudgets

Per capita allocation % of Total2001 Budget 4.1 11.6 7 1.2
3.4

City
Dagupan Antipolo Ililo Tagaytay
Island Garden City of Samal

(Pesos) 87.17 148.66 12.50 151.51

85.39

Dipolog San Fernando, La Union

Marikina Valenzuela

162.97
192.55 76.84

60.69

2.1
7.0
10.8 3.9

Muntinlupa Roxas
Source:Reportfrom, eachcity, August 2001.

250.45 23.21

9.8 1.4

Tablery mmonly Usedwide Measue W sr Reo (also seeTable5)

Type Description

the 1994 levels.

User fees are not widely used by LGUs. Those levying such fees are able to cover part of the operation and maintenance costs. None, however, are using the fees as a means for financing capital investments.

UserFees

Direct: Paid by waste generators according to levelof serviceprovided of Indirect: Regardless serviceslevel, generators pay a flat fee. fee Incremental leviedon property tax tariffs.Thisdoes or water or electricity not take into accountservicelevels. Fee collected by landfill operator from waste hauler or local government. MMDA levies between
PhP150-430 as tipping fee

Surcharge

Tipping Fees

depending on the truck size. "'What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in Asia - World Bank (1999).

22

THE TEN CHALLENGES...

With the passage of RA 9003: Ecological Solid WasteManagement Act of 2000 (ESWMA), the Philippines now has a comprehensive and integrated solid waste managementpolicy and legal framework. The implementingrules and regulations are currentlybeing finalized. The next step for the Philippines is to implement the law and ensure its sustainable impact. In doing so, the following challenges need to be addressed: Table14: ESWMAGoals
Action
Generation and Collection

Goal
*

Status
Unknown

* Recycling and Composting * * Disposal * * Medical Waste Disposal National SWM Status Report * * *

acceptable productswithin one year of Listingof non-environmentally effectivity of the law with phaseout period to be set by Commission upon effectivity of the law Segregationof waste in all households At least 25 percentof waste recycledand recoveredwithin five years of effectivity of the law Inventory of marketsfor recyclablesand compostwithin 6 monthsof effectivity of the law All open dumps convertedto controlled dumpswithin three years of effectivity of the law All controlled dumps convertedto sanitary landfills within five years for Non-burn technologies treatmentand disposal (CleanAir Act) by 2003 Within six monthsof effectivity To be updated every two years

12 percent in Metro Manila; 6 percent nationally (estimate) 17 controlled dumps 2 closedlandfills 1 sanitary landfill 43 incinerators Incompletereport

Strengtheningenforcement and providing better incentives... The Philippines has a poor record of enforcing environmentallegislationdue to lack of political will, institutionalcapacity and incentives. It is important the politicalintent that was demonstratedwhen framing the ESWMA should be continued through its implementation by fully enforcing the differentprovisions of the Act. Otherwise,the intent of the Act will be compromised and the achievement of the above goals will remain a distant dream, further exacerbating the current situation. At present, incentives for effective delivery of SWM services are limitedto recognitionprograms, such 25 as the Clean and Green and the Galing Pook Awards. Additional incentives shouldbe put into place including: (i) provision of financial incentives for capital investment (e.g. matching grants); (ii) imposition of user fees and tipping fees to encourage waste reduction and increase accountabilityof service delivery; and (iii) introduction of product standards for composting and granting incentives to encourage market development.In addition, the ESWMA also stipulates the granting of certain concessions and tax exemptionsforimproving solid waste managementpractices.
2

Building the capacity of national and local institutions... The implementatingrules and regulations will detail the institutional roles and responsibilities of different organizations. However, the primary responsibility for implementing the ESWMA lies with local governments, which include 77 provinces, 114 cities, 1,495municipalities,and over 42,000 barangays. Strateg-icPlanning. As required by the ESWMA, over the next few years, strategic plans at the national, provincial, LGU, and barangay levels need to be prepared. This will require the strengthening of technical capacity in the country to prepare such plans and guide their implementation. National Government.The National Ecology Cen* ter and the Secretariat of the National Solid Waste Management Commission will need to be strengthened to provide advisory and extension services to LGUs and barangays. Their capacity for obtaining, maintaining, and analyzing data on solid waste in the country should alsobe enhanced. * Local Governments. LGUs will need to upgrade their technical and managerial capacity to expand their role beyond the current responsibility of
mainly household collection. Also, LGUs need to

eTheGaling Pook Award, was first given in 1993, which recognizes and replicates exemplary programs of LGUs that have effectively addressed

put in place financial systems to fully account for solid waste management expenditures, which will

pressingproblemsin theirareas.

enable them to benchmark service efficiency and

23

fulfill contractual obligations in a transparent manner. Barangays. Communities need to be made aware of the benefits of proper waste disposal, as well as their responsibilities in waste avoidance, segregation, collection, recycling, and composting.

3 Addressing the NIMBY

syndrome... This perspective is creating a major barrier to the siting of regional or local landfills and materials recovery facilities. Public awareness and support for solid waste management facilities can be encouraged through better consultation and more widespread implementation of programs, such as the current information, education, and communication campaigns. Additionally, the es( Mainstreaming the utilization of new funding tablishment and promotion of landfills or demonstrasources and employing cost-effective approaches... tion landfills that are properly managed from an enviwill give the pubronmental and social point of view National Govcrnment Cost Sharing. The Philiplic greater confidence that landfills can be safely conpine Government will need to revisit its current structed and operated in their locality. 22 policy of not providing any cost-sharing grants I] to LGUs to address pollution-related or "brown" Raising public awareness on the benefits of environmental issues such as solid waste. There proper SWM... The success of the ESWMA largely are environmental externalities associated with Solid waste is depends on the support of the people. waste disposal and treatment, which go beyond a often perceived as a purely government function, while local government's jurisdiction. These often aspublic consultation on landfill siting and solid waste sume a regional or national dimension, and theremanagement programs is often lacking. This discourfore, LGUs need assistance. In many countries, ages citizens from playing their role in SWM, such as national governments offer various incentives and participating in recycling programs. to local authorities to invest in proper /< Increasing expenditures on SWM... The LGUsubsidies waste disposal facilities. These take the form of bD Increasing expenditures on SWM..n The LGU matching grants provided by the national governbudgets for solid waste management have been typi ments for capital investments only. Local govcally limited to household collection, transportation ernments usually assume responsibility for operato open dumpsites, and minimal operational expendition and maintenance costs through their own requires additional tures for disposal. The ESWMA budgets or user fees. the new financing for: building capacity to implement Private Sector Participation. The encouragement * institutional arrangements; conversion to and operaof private sector participation can provide investtion of controlled dumps and sanitary landfills; shift ment to supplement or replace government fundrecycling proto environmentally-friendlypackaging; grams; materials recovery facilities; and infectious

next five years (Chart 3). The average annual costs of 21 implementing the law amount to 0.5 percent of the 2000 gross domestic product (GDP). If this would be funded solely by the Government, it would require the programmed public expenditure in the national budget to increase annually by 3 percent from its current level, and the local government programmed expenditure to increase by at least 15 percent. It is therefore important for the Government to increase the budget for solid waste management and to supplement that funding by encouraging the involvement of the private sector through the establishment of a functional regulatory system, ensuring financial transparency in the sector, and introducing user fees.

wastenon-burntreatmentand medicaland hazardous

disposal technologies. Preliminary estimates (excluding investments by businesses) indicate that additional l spending will have to inon solid waste management

'Source:

National Income Accounts, DBM

GDP 3170 Billion PhP

2Budget refer 2

crease by PhP150billion (Table15) over the nextten per years, or additional capitacost of PhP200per year.
Currently, LGUs annually spend between PhP 12 and 250 per capita. Much of the incremental expenditure will be dedicated to infrastructure investments in the

For Information on programmed public expenditure in National to Philippines-at-a-Glance section. The Investment Coordinating Committee (ICC) of the Nationl Economic and DevelopmentAuthority (NEDA) has adopted a policy of cost sharing between the national govemment and local govemments for projects that have social and environmental benefits. While this is being implemented for green projects (forest management, protected areas, and wildlife) and blue environment (coastal and marine resources),there is no cost sharing for capital investments in the brown environment (urbanissues).

24

THE TEN CHALLENGES...

the for Costs Implementing ESWMA Incremental 15: Table Estimated 2002 and 2011 (in real terms)' between
Item
and for Arrangements Planning,Monitoring,Enforcement, Evaluation' and Regulatory Institutional and Recycling to Required ImproveWaste Collection Investments 3 * EnhancedCollection for Complete Coverage 4 * Waste Separation at Household(4 bins) and collection 5 * Collection Vehiclesand Haulage Trucks * Material RecoveryFacility' and Disposal for Required Treatment Investments 7 * Shift to Controlled Dumps- Construction,Operation, and Maintenance to Sanitary Landfills- Construction,Operation, and Maintenance7 * Shift 8 for * Non-burn Technologies InfectiousMedical Waste Treatment Total

Cost(PhPbillion)
20 58 5 13 30 10 72 4 67 1 150

packaging and treatmentand disposalof industrialhazardous waste. that This excludesinvestments need to be made by the private sectorto shift to environmentally-friendly Secretariatat EMB,an EcologyCenter,ProvincialSolid WasteManagementBoard and [GUICity Solid Waste Technical The ESWMA requires theestablishmentof a National Commission, recyclablesneed to be in place and ManagementBoard. In addition, a national framework, provincial plans, LGUplans, an annuat report, eco-labelingschemeand market mechanismfor regularly updated. poor areas. 'Incremental costsfor achieving 100 percentcollectioncoverage including under-served level and will be replaced every thre or TheAct requires that households gesup of householdsto have four different bins. For purposes of costingthis is assumedto be at the barangay years. Incrementalcostsfor modernizing the collection neet in LGUs. Thecost of an urban MRFis TheActs goal is to achieve 25 percentwaste diversion, and this is to be realized through material recovery facilities (MRF)to be set-up in each barangay. approximately PhP500,000, while that of a rural MRFis assumedto be PhP75,000. conceptualdesigns (for sanitarylandfills in Lagunaand Cavite). I Theunil costcoefficientsare basedon actual costs(conversionof San FernandoDisposalSiteto controlled dump) and from are metby the construction Assumesall existing open dumps and controlled dumpsare convertedand the additional disposal needsfrom enhancedcollectionmandated under the ESWM of LGU-Ievelsanitary landfills. Thisis mandated by the Clean Air Act. Source: TeamEstimates,2001

ing. Currently, the private sector is only involved as contractors for hauling, while the informal sector has a small role in material recovery enterprises. Private sector participation can be encouraged through a regulatory environment that ensures private operators are able to recover their investments through garbage and tipping fees, and avoid graft and corruption through improved and transparent contractual practices based on performance standards. User Fees: Investment and/or operational costs can be recovered by LGUs or the private sector by charging residential, industrial, and commercial users for garbage disposal. Successful fee programs require political support, a quality service with consumers who understand the value of the service and are willing to pay for it, and an efficient fee collection system. Shared Facilities. Substantial cost savings can be achieved through the establishment of regional facilities that service multiple LGUs. These include material recovery facilities and sanitary landfills. The latter shouldbe served by LGU-specific transfer sta-

tions, which can optimize waste haulage. It will also be important for barangays to establish shared materials recovery facilities, as these will be prohibitively expensive (50 percent of all barangays have annual incomes of less than PhP500,000). Establishment of these facilities could be encouraged through demonstration projects and national or regional programs that provide an instrument for coordination of the LGUs. Revenues from Landfill Gas Recovery. The gas produced by landfills can be recovered and either used as a gas fuel source or combusted to produce electricity. These facilities can be installed in operating and closed landfills, and can provide an LGU or landfill operator with an additional source of funds to supplement other methods to cover the costs of solid waste management.

Obtaining reliable information for national, There are many regional, and local planning... gaps in the data available from the local and national-levels. Without proper data, long-term planning decisions cannot be reliably made, and the risk

25

2002-2011 between the of Costs Implementing EWSMA Annual Chart4: Incremental

2520
Chr rmeap. I
t. x

S 3e)

c -15
0 3

E~ 2002
CD --

~
2003

~
2004

~
2005

YA 2006 2007
A

2008
3

2009

2010

2011

ments Arrange and Institutional Regulatory and Collection Recycling _2 _- Improved

ent - - - - Treatm and Disposal Costs 42. TotalIncrernental

of crises such as that being experienced by Metro Manila is higher. A comprehensive information management system along with the establishment of local, regional, and national monitoring databases linked to decision support systems would greatly help governments at all levels in making informed, and sound long-term decisions. (<> e Ensuring proper management of closed dumps The and sanitary landfills ........ poor management practices at Carmona and San Mateo landfills caused adverse public reactions and the landfills' closure. The landfill in Cebu is also experiencing major difficulties. Landfill operators should put in place better management practices that are closely monitored by LGUs and DENR. Further, the Carmona and San Mateo landfills, and the Payatas and Smokey Mountain open dumps continue to pose significant environmental risks to adjacent communities, especially the poor. There is an urgent need to properly contain these sites and the numerous open dumps to prevent leachate contamination of water bodies. Methane gas generated by closed landfills could be collected and converted to power to reduce the risk of methane gas explosions, while providing electricity to local communities. mA m2 Protecting the vulnerable and under-served.. ,. Poor communities are most likely to be adversely affectedby, ordonotadequatelybenefitfrom, solidwaste management strategies. In particular, the poor are currently under-served in terms of collection. Some live on or near garbage disposal sites (e.g. Payatas and Smokey Mountain) and thus, are exposed to unsani-

tary conditions and environmental risks (contaminated groundwater and air pollution) and safety risks (explosions and the collapse of garbage piles). Active interventionsby Government will be needed to help these communities, including opportunities to expand their role in waste recycling. For example, social assessments could be required as part of the development closure of any disposal ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~and site. Programs to help the communities on operational and closed landfills could be developed. Equity considerations can be incorporated into the development of collection systems.
.

il ({) Expanding coverage of medical and hazardous waste treatment. .. The main challenges include expanding on-site and off-site treatment facilities and addressing the issues posed by the implementation of the ban on incineration by the Clean Air Act. Globally, incineration remains a common means of treating infectious medical waste and hazardous waste. Implementation of the ban will require adoption of alternate technologies, which will take time. In the intervening period, every effort should be made to ensure that disposal measures, would not result in widespread unsafe and unreguIated practices. The government, civil society and private sector will need to collaborate to develop ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~the ................ and pragmatic approaches that are costworkable effective and environmentally sound. In the event, the incineration ban is stayed or delayed for infectious medical and hazardous wastes, the government should ensure that incinerators are carefully operated, closely regulated, and function in the context of an integrated waste management system. 26

CASE STUDY: THE

Two FACES OF

PAYATAS- POVERTYAND ENVIRONMENT

The Payatas open dumpsite, located in Quezon City,has been receivingMetro Manila'sgarbage, hospital waste, and industrial waste for over 20 years. Rightfrom the beginning, it attracted waste pickerswho earn a livingby scavenging. The waste pickersthen became illegalsettlersin the same location, in appalling, unsanitary livingconditions.The adverse environmental and health conditionscreated by the dump meant that the sitewas always under threat of closure, Thoughplans to close down the area began in 1999, the attemptwas thwarted by both the settlersand middlemenwho depended on the dump for their livelihoods. In July2000, tragedy struckat Payatas, when heavy rains caused part of the dump in the northernarea to slide carrying with it 60,000 cubic meters of waste. The slide killed250 people belonging to 700 poor families.Thiscase study discusses the two sides of Payatas: the effortsto rehabilitate illegal squatter elsewhere; and the organized approach of the scavengers to improve their lives.

EFFORTS REHABILITATION The accident highlighted the need to improve the living conditions of the people in Payatas. Local communities, with the help of NGOs, the private sector, and local governments are undertaking three relocation projects in the area: * 200 families living in the danger zone are being relocated to Bagong Silangan, Quezon City-a two-hectare plot not far from Payatas donated by the private sector.Atotal of 342 housing units will be provided at a cost of about PhP70,000 per unit. A training center would also be constructed. * Another relocation site is a three-hectare lot in San Isidro, Montalban bought by the waste pickers at PhP150/sqm. All developments in the area are being undertaken by the relocatees, including the design and construction of roads, drainage systems, and the houses. So far, 16 shell houses have been constructed. * The Golden Shower Homeowner's Association, formedin 1993,started a savingsprogram,mapped, enumerated and surveyed their settlements,and arranged to put their land titles in order.Plans include the purchase of 3.2 hectares of land which association members alreadyoccupy They plan to improve their homes, build new houses,and establisha community recycling center.After the Payatas incident, the Asian Development Bank, through the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction,provided a US$1 million grant to help people with home ownership and on-site improvement.
WORKING TOGETHER TO BUILD BETTER LIVES

value to their products and stabilize their incomes. Activities supported include: Promoting home-based solid waste related micro* enterprises, by encouraging investments in recycling processes that enhance the value of their products, and transform recycled materials into new/exportable products. Mobilizing savings through a regular savings program open to all members of the communities and collected daily by community members. The savings of their 6,115 members from June 1995 to September 2000 amounted to PhP14.2 million. Through these funds, they were able to purchase land, expand their businesses, pay for their children's tuition fees, buy medicines, and meet emergency needs. Loans disbursed within the same period amounted to PhP61.5 million-indicating that the total amount of money had been loaned out and paid back four times, creating assets and increasing wealth for households with an average income of only PhP3,500 per month. Encouraging the acquisition of land and construction of their own houses, and accompanied improvements in living conditions. Aside from these activities, the association also has programs for children including a center cooperatively managed by mothers. The center offers working children a place to play, obtain first-aid, sleep, shower, and get something to eat. Alongside the center is a day care school where mothers take turns teaching and feeding children nutritious meals cooked in the courtyard outside. The children themselves have initiated a savings scheme for those who are on their own. The
savings scheme is aside from their families'. These

In 1993, the community living in Payatas organized themselves into the Payatas Scavengers Association with the support of the Vincentian Missionaries Social Development Foundation. Through this association, they work to secure their economic future by accessing the resources and opportunities that will add 27

experienceshave shown that making savings and credit the building block of a people-driven community development movement, helps individuals understand their own situationand needs. It develops and promotes community strength, creates the bargaining chip of collective assets, and truly turns poor communitiesinto potential development partners.

Leachate: Wastewater that collects contaminants as it trickBarangay: Pilipino term used to describe a community or villes through MSW disposed in a landfill. Leaching may result lage; also the smallest political unit in the country. Capable of decompinhazardous substances entering surface water, ground water Biodegradable: 1ol or Biodegradable: Capable of decomposition by microorganisms or -oil. under natural conditions. Most organic materials, such as food Market wastes: Primarily putrescible MSW, such as leaves, skins, scraps and paper, are biodegradable. and unsold food, discarded at or near food markets. Collection: Theprocess of picking up wastes from residences,busiMaterials recovery facility: Facility that processes residentially nesses, or at a collectionpoint,loading them intoa vehicle, and transcollected mixed recyclables into new products. or landfill. porting them to a processing site, transfer station Medical waste (hospital waste): Any MSW generated in the diCommercial waste: All municipal solid waste emanating from agnosis, treatment or immunization of human beings or animals. business establishment such as stores, markets, office buildings, Methane: A colorless, non-poisonous, flammable gas created by centers. restaurants, shopping centers, and entertainment anaerobic decomposition of organic compounds. Composting: The controlled biological decomposition of the puMoisture content: The fraction or percentage of a substance that trescible fraction of MSW in the presence of air to form a humusis water. material. like Municipal solid waste (MSW): Includes non-hazardous waste Controlled dumps:A non-engineered disposal site at which MSW generated in households, commercial and business establishments, prescribed standards of is deposited in accordance with minimum p . . . site operation. It has minimal site infrastructure. Basic operational institutlons, andnon-hazardous ndustral process wastes, agriculcontrols include: control over size of waste tipping area with waste tural wastes, and sewage sludge. spread and compaction, stormwater management, and supervision NIMBY: Acronym for "Not In My BackYard"; an expression of site operations by trained staff. of resident opposition to the siting of a municipal solid waste chemiDecomposition: The breakdown of matter, changing the management facility based on the particular location proposed. or cal makeup and physical appearance of MSW in landfills Open dumps:A site used to dispose of municipal solid waste withcomposting facilities. out management and/or environmental controls. Disposal: The final placement of MSW that is not salvaged or Putrescible: A fraction of MSW which can decompose under aerorecycled. bic or anaerobic conditions, used as a feedstock for composting. Energy recovery: Obtaining energy from MSW through a variety Recycling: Physical/mechanical separation process by which secof processes (e.g. combustion). ondary raw materials (paper, metal, glass, plastics) are obtained and recovery system: A system designed to collect control from MSW. The process could be accomplished manually, or uscnrladrcvrsytmAsytmdsgetoclet GasGas pment. the ing source. landfill gases for treatment or for use as an energy ing sophisticated equipment. Resource recovery: The process of obtaining matter or energy Generation rate: The amount of MSW generated over a given from MSW. period of time by a given source. Sanitary landfill: This is a disposal site designed, constructed, Groundwater: The supply of freshwater that is found beneath the operated, and maintained in a manner that exerts engineering consurface, which supplies wells and springs. Since groundearth's trol over significant potential environmental impacts arising from water is a major source of drinking water, there is a growing conthe operation of the facility. It has comprehensive site engineering about contamination from pollutants leached from dumpsites cern and/or badly managed landfills... and exhibits containment, treatment, and management of leachate and landfill gas. that can pose a substantial or Hazardous waste: Waste generated Solid waste: MSW composed of solid matter from household, compotential hazard to human health or the environment when immercial, institutional, and industrial sources. properly managed. Tipping fee: A fee for unloading MSW at a landfill, transfer staHousehold waste (domestic waste): MSW composed of garbage tion or recycling facility. and rubbish, which is generated as a consequence of household activities. In developing countries, up to two-thirds of this catToxic waste: A waste that can produce injury if inhaled, swalegory consist of putrescible wastes. lowed, or absorbed through the skin. Incineration: A treatment technology involving destruction of Transfer station: A facility at which MSW from collection veMSW by controlled burning at high temperatures. The main obhicles is consolidated into loads that are transported in larger trucks is to reduce the volume of MSW and to jective of this process or other means to more distant disposal sites. make waste innocuous. Waste picking: A process of extracting recyclables and reIndustrial waste: A heterogeneous mixture of different materials usable materials from a mixed MSW for further use and/or generated during an industrial operation. Infectious waste: Hazardous waste with infectious characteristics, including contaminated animal waste, body parts, human blood, and blood products, isolation waste, pathological waste, and discarded needles and medical instruments. Institutional waste: Waste originating from schools, hospitals, prisons, research organizations, and other public buildings. processing. Source:Adaptedfrom Planning Guidefor StrategicMunicipal Solid WasteManagement in Major Cities in Low-income Countries,Draft Planning Guide, February 1998, Environment Resources Management, London.

28

AT THE PHILIPPINES

A GLANCE

Society
Manila ................ Capital 76.5 Mc ............... . Population .............. 2.32%c . . Population growth rate 28 births/l ,000 populationoi ... Birth rate .. 6.5 deaths/1,000 population,i Death rate ............ Net migration rate ...... 1.03 migrants/ 1,000 populationcI 0.99 male/femalec Sex ratio ............ 3.6 children bom/womanc Total fertility rate ............ 375/e ......................... line). Poverty (% below poverty ....... 56.9%ci Urban population (% of total population) 32 deaths/1,000 Infant mortality rate .............. live birthsc (1998) 44 deaths/l ,000 Under-five mortality rate .................. live birthsc (1998) .......... 68.3 yearsch Life expectancy at birth (both sexes) Child malnutrition (% of children below 5)........ 28%, k Access to safe water .......... 83 %f . . (% of population) Adult literacy rate ................. 94.8%'i (% of population age 15+) .

Economy
GDP-real growth rate ............... .............. . GDP GDP-composition by sectora .. Agriculture .. Industry .. Services 3.9%1 PhP3,322.6 Bb

........................ 16% ........................ 31% ........................ 53%

GNP per capita..US$1,016.0' 2% ............. GNP-real growth rate . .PhP3,302.6Bb GNP. (In percent)b 18.8 ..................... Gross domestic investmentlGDP . 51.3 Exports of goods and services/GDP . .................... 14.6 Gross domestic savings/GDP . .................... 20.7 Gross National Savings/GDP . 4.4%d . . Inflation rate (consumer prices 48.4 Md ...... . Labor force 64.3%d .. . Participation rate Employment by sector (In % total employment)b

Geography
Location: Southeastern Asia, archipelago between the Philippine Sea and the South China Sea, east of Vietnam Area 300,000 sq km Total........... 298,170 sq km Land ........... 1,830 sq km .......... . Water 0 km .......... . Land boundaries 36,289 km .......... . Coastline Climate: Tropical marine; northeast monsoon (November to April); southwest monsoon (May to October) Elevation extremes Philippine Sea: 0 m ..... Lowest point: ... Mount Apo: 2,954 m ..... Highest point: ... Natural resources: timber, petroleum, nickel, cobalt, silver, gold, salt, copper Land use 19% ....... .. Arable land: ..... 12% ....... .. Permanent crops: ..... 4% ............. . Permanent pastures: ............ 46% . . and woodland: Forests 19%s .. Other: Environmental issues: Solid waste management; deforestation; air and water pollution in Metro Manila; marine and coastal pollution.
Sources: 'World Development Indicators 2000,
b

Agriculture

....
.

40.1%
... 19.5% 44.2% 9.5% 5.3%
JlAMd

Government and social services . ..... Services .... . Manufacturing . Construction .............. . Unemployment Unemployment rate

............. ..............

11.1 %d

Budgetg Programmed public expenditure (2001)..... PhP700B Local government programmed expenditure.. PhP I 28B Industries: Textiles, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, wood products, food processing, electronics assembly, petroleum refining, fishing Industrial production growth rate ....................... 0.5%b Agriculture-products: Rice, coconuts, corn, sugarcane, bananas, pineapples, mangoes; pork, eggs, beef, fish Exports of goods and services ................. PhP1,648.2 Bb Imports of goods and services ................. PhP1,342.6 Bb Currency conversion average ..... US$1=PhP44.1938 Bb US$52.06 Bb ........ . Debt-external Currency ......... I Philippine Peso (PhP) = 100 centavos

Human Development Report 2000, B National Income Accounts, Department of Budget and Management (DBM).

Board (NSCB),'National Economicand DevelopmentAuthority(NEDA),f National Statistics Office (NSO),'Nat ional Statistical Coordination

Selected Philippine Economic Indicators - Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (SPEI-BSP),

29