An International Journal

Transcription

1 Waste management practices in schools in Malaysia: P a g e 104 HATAM Publishers An International Journal J. Ind. Res. & Technology 2(2), , 2012 Journal of Industrial Research & Technology (ISSN ) Journal homepage: Waste management practices of urban and rural school pupils in Malaysia Norizan Esa a *, Mahamad Hakimi Ibrahim b, Hashimah Mohd Yunus a, Nooraida Yakob a, Mohd. Ali Samsudin a, Aswati Hamzah a and Hasnah Mohd. Jais c 1 School of Educational Studies, UniversitiSains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia; 2 School of Industrial Technology, UniversitiSains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia; 3 School of Biological Sciences, UniversitiSains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia *Corresponding author, norizanesa@gmail.com, norizanesa@usm.my ARTICLE INFORMATION Article history Received 18 December 2011 Revised 08 January 2012 Accepted 18 January 2012 Available online 01 August 2012 Keywords Waste disposal, Waste management, Composting, Vermicomposting, School pupils ABSTRACT Solid waste management is fast becoming a problem. In Malaysia, most of the waste sent to landfills is generated from households, particularly in the urban areas. This study explores the waste disposal and waste management practice of 351 urban and rural secondary school pupils. The questionnaire used in this survey consists of 30 items referring to waste disposal, waste management, composting and vermicomposting. Certain environmental friendly practices appear to occur more frequently among rural pupils compared to urban ones. Such practices include composting, vermicomposting which are being used in planting and to increase soil fertility. However, the rural pupils demonstrate more indiscriminate waste disposal practices compared to their urban counterpart. There are also more rural pupils who burn or bury their waste compared to urban pupils. Nevertheless the majority of each of the two groups generates a lot of waste and less than half of them practice separation and reduction of waste HATAM: Publishers. All rights Reserved. 1. Introduction Environmental safety and balance of nature is closely linked to waste generation and management. Solid waste generation has been increasing over the years. With more than seven million tons of waste generated in Malaysia (Siraj, 2006; in Saeed et al., 2009) and landfill as the major waste management system used in this country (Latifah, e al., 2009), solid waste management (SWM) is fast becoming a problem. Major contributors are residential areas that mainly generate waste from food, paper and plastic (Kathirvale et al., 2003; Saeed et al., 2009). The solid waste generated in cities is much higher than that generated in other areas. Municipal solid waste generated in Kuala Lumpur, the capital city of Malaysia, was 3478 tons/day in The solid waste generated in Kuala Lumpur alone is predicted to increase from 3799 tons/day in 2008 to 9768 tons/day in Based on an estimate, 48% from residential areas, the solid waste generated from these areas of solid waste is generated from

2 Waste management practices in schools in Malaysia: P a g e 105 residential areas and is expected to increase from tons/day in 2008 to tons/day in 2024 (Saeed et al., 2009). Of this amount, 56.8% is food waste, 16.5% paper, 15.3% plastic while other types of waste make up the remainder 11.4%. A study of the components of solid waste generated in residential areas of Kuala Lumpur showed that low income areas contribute the highest component of food waste (54.04%) compared to high income and medium income areas (30.84% and 38.42% respectively). However, the percentage of plastic in waste from residential areas decreases as the economic status of the areas decrease (Kathirvale et al., 2003). These differences are explained by the practices of residents in the different income groups. Low income residents tend to cook and eat their meals at home. Conversely, the higher income groups eat more outside and tend to buy more packaged products in plastic which they throw and contribute in solid waste. The management of solid waste continues to be a huge problem, especially in developing countries. This is due to the increasing population, lack of infrastructure, lack of knowledge etc. Today, SWM systems around the world are reoriented towards sustainability. This is also evident in the Malaysian government s five year plans, beginning from the eighth Malaysia Plan (Latifah et al., 2009). The National Waste Management Policy declared its goals of focusing on a holistic SWM that is sustainable, giving importance to environmental conservation and waste reduction (Latifah et al., 2009). As such, landfill is the last resort to be aimed for, after all measures of SWM have been used. This is possible in the developed nations and their final goal is to eliminate landfill (Shekdar, 2009). On the other hand, landfill is the only method used currently in Malaysia (Latifah et al., 2009). Waste disposal and waste management practices have been found to vary between communities. There are rural communities that practice burning of waste (Miallem et al, 2010). In other communities, their choice of waste disposal practice depends on the availability of facilities (Omran & Gebris, 2011; Davis et al., 2005) and distance from such facilities (Tadesse et al., 2008). In Malaysia, the urban poor of Kuala Lumpur demonstrated environment friendly waste disposal management practices. These include recycling, reuse and waste reduction activities (Murad & Siwar, 2007). However, in another part of the country more than half of the residents do not recycle their waste. Some of the reasons given were collection bins located too far away, inconvenience and lack of time (Omran et al., 2009). In this study, the waste disposal and waste management practices of school children is investigated. The differences between the habits of children living in the city and those living in the villages are compared. 2. Materials and Method A survey was conducted using a questionnaire designed by the research team. This study reports findings from part of the questionnaire. This section consists of 30 items referring to practices related to waste disposal and waste management. The first ten questions were designed to identify actual practice about waste disposal. The next ten questions relate to composting activities while the remaining ten questions refer to vermicomposting activities. A reliability analysis of the 30 items produces a Cronbach alpha value of This means that the questionnaire has high reliability. The survey was conducted among secondary school pupils aged between 14 and 16 years. A total of 351 pupils participated (164 from rural schools and 187 from urban schools). Pupils from the rural schools live in the surrounding villages while pupils from the urban schools live in and around the city. 3. Results and Discussion The score of all items in the questionnaire was summed up to provide a score for practice. The mean practice score of urban pupils appear to be slightly higher than the practice score of rural pupils (M = 63.86, SD = and M = 63.71, SD = respectively). A comparison between the mean score of rural and urban pupils was made based on the independent samples t-test. The analysis revealed no significant difference between the two pupil groups (t = -.104, df = 349, p =.92). The two groups demonstrated similar levels of practice that is favorable to the environment. However, both groups showed a mean score that is about 53 percent of the total score, which is a moderate level. This suggests that not all of the pupils practices are environment friendly. A closer look at the actual practices of these pupils requires analysis of each item of the questionnaire. Individual items of the questionnaire were analyzed using crosstabs. The findings show that although the two groups of pupils were similar about certain practices, but they differ significantly on several counts. The lifestyle of at least half of the pupils can lead to the generation of excessive waste. For example, slightly more than 50% of pupils from both rural and urban areas use paper plates and cups for functions organized by them. About the same percentage also throw away rotting material in their homes. Both rural and urban pupils do not differ significantly in their habits for both activities. Thus in both regions, excessive waste is generated and there is insufficient attempt to reduce waste, as more than half of them simply throw away rotting waste. Use of paper utensils lead to the accumulation of waste in landfills and other places

3 Waste management practices in schools in Malaysia: P a g e 106 where waste material is dumped. This practice is bad for the environment as it increases the physical volume of waste generated. Furthermore, the increased demand results in greater supply, causing more deforestation to provide the raw material for the industry. Although the item refers to paper plates and cups, many of the disposable utensils available in the market are made from polystyrene and are much cheaper than their paper versions. The problem can be further aggravated by the chemical effect of such utensils, especially from the polystyrene products. Table 1: Pupils waste disposal action Location Item Never Seldom Often Very Pearson p Urban I throw waste out of a moving vehicle Rural Urban I will throw away waste even though a waste disposal bin is not available Rural Urban I throw leftover food in the waste bin Rural Urban I burn the waste that I have at home Rural Urban I bury the waste in my home Rural Table 2: Composting activities of pupils Location Item Never Seldom Often Very Pearson p Urban At home, I produce compost from waste Rural Urban I produce compost from leftover food at home Rural Urban I produce compost using compost heap Rural Urban I advise the canteen operator to produce compost from leftover food Rural Table 3: Pupil use of compost Location Item Never Seldom Often Very Pearson p Urban I use compost to make the soil around my home more fertile Rural Urban I use compost by digging it into the soil Rural Urban I mix plastic material with the compost Rural

4 Waste management practices in schools in Malaysia: P a g e 107 With the large amount of waste generated, the question of disposal arises. Table 1 shows some of the actions students take with respect to waste disposal. A number of pupils will advise their friends who were seen to throw waste indiscriminately. Both urban and rural pupils attest to this action, and they make up about 46 59% of the pupils. Some pupils regularly throw waste indiscriminately, such as throwing waste from a moving vehicle. In some cases, research showed that there are pupils who throw waste in open dumping sites (Krnel & Naglič, 2009). In this study, a significantly larger percentage of rural pupils do so compared to urban pupils. This is a habit that should be arrested. Pupils should understand the bad effect of indiscriminate waste disposal on the environment. However, it is heartening to note that there are other pupils who will advise their friends against such practice. Could it be a result of few or no waste disposal bins made available in rural areas? Similarly, a significantly larger percentage of rural pupils tend to throw away waste even if there is no waste disposal bin provided compared to urban pupils. It is possible that these rural pupils burn or bury their waste, as this is normal practice of many residents in rural areas. In Malaysia, only areas designated under local municipal councils have waste collection services provided for their homes. For areas outside the jurisdiction of these councils, large waste collection bins are provided in certain places. Residents have to bring their own waste and throw them in these bins. A study by Tadesse et al. (2008) suggested that type of waste facility available significantly affects choice of waste disposal method. This finding may be applicable in Malaysia. Sometimes the waste collection bins are seen to be overflowing, especially during festive seasons when excess waste is generated. Waste is also commonly scattered around the bins, partly due to insufficient bin volume. There are also residents who throw their waste on the ground near the bins, and do not bother to ensure the waste is safely deposited in the bins. Stray cats and dogs, and sometimes scavengers rummage through the waste causing more dispersion of the waste around the bins. The exposed waste may also attract rats and other disease bearing organisms, increasing the health threat of such open dumps (Tadesse et al., 2008). Less than 40% of pupils from both areas regularly separate their waste. This probably includes those pupils who throw away rotting waste, rather than use it in composting. However, about the same percentage reuse their used material to reduce the amount of waste they generate. Thus the practice of reusing waste material is quite prevalent among the pupils, although less than half of them make this claim. There is no significant difference between the practice of urban and rural pupils (χ 2 = 1.62, p =.65). This is different from pupils in Nigeria where many do not recycle and do not seem to realize this is an alternative way to manage waste that is not detrimental to the environment (Ifegbesan 2010). This is also different from the study by Martin et al. (2006) where although people with low income are willing to recycle, their low income is a factor that hinders waste reducing activities. Conversely, 76% of residents in a region of Sweden did not separate their waste (Vencatasawmy et al., 2000). These residents were reluctant to send paper and glass for recycling when the collection centre is a distance away from their homes. It is also possible that people who do not separate waste consider recyclable material as garbage (Knussen &Yule, 2008), thus throw them away. There are significant differences in the way urban and rural pupils dispose their waste. Most pupils throw their leftover food in the dustbin but a significantly larger percentage of rural pupils (62.6%) do this compared to urban pupils (52.4%) (χ 2 = 6.43, p =.04). This may imply that urban pupils probably separate their waste, or that there is someone at home who does it for them. Many urban households have domestic help. In some families, the children do not help with household chores and so do not take action on their leftover food. On the other hand, rural pupils probably help their parents in the kitchen and help clear the leftover food. However, in most rural homes, the leftover food is thrown into the dustbin. This waste may be collected by the municipality or disposed by other means. Compared to urban pupils (18.5%), a significantly larger percentage of rural pupils burn their waste (58.7%) (χ 2 = 90.1, p =.00). Similarly, it is also true with respect to the practice of burying waste in their homes (urban pupils, 24.1% and rural pupils, 29.4%) (χ 2 = 14.38, p =.00). Some rural communities in other parts of the world also practice burning of waste (Miallem et al., 2010, Ifegbesan, 2010). Both the practice of burning and burying waste reflect the minimal or non-existent waste removal services in the rural areas. The waste collection bins are probably insufficient or too far away to be of convenience to these pupils. Consequently they resort to burning or burying their waste. Organic waste that is burned or buried can eventually be used as fertilizer in their home gardens. This is the normal practice of rural residents, especially where waste collection service is not provided. However, the health hazard of burning waste cannot be overlooked. Education is seen as a means to raise awareness about waste disposal and waste management. In this study, more than one third of all pupils (30.5 % urban and 37.2 % rural pupils) have attended composting activities to increase their environmental awareness. However, education does not necessarily translate into action. For example, the study by Grodzińska-Jurczak et al. (2003)

5 Waste management practices in schools in Malaysia: P a g e 108 revealed little difference after participation in an environmental education program. On the other hand there are certain situations where positive behavior changes do occur. One example is participation in eco-clubs resulted in pupils continuing composting activities at home and in school and reduces the incidences of littering (Roberts, 2009). Furthermore, research has shown that although education plays a role in shaping the views of children about the environment, this role becomes less important as they become teenagers (Korhonen & Lappalainen, 2004). Although at least 30% of pupils have attended composting activities as part of their educational experience, only a small percentage of urban (13.5%) and rural (23.9%) pupils produce compost from waste at home. This difference is significant (χ 2 = 0.20, p =.03). There is a greater tendency for home composting to be carried out by rural pupils compared to urban pupils. This difference may be due to the nature of the environment that exists in rural and urban areas. Many houses in the rural areas are single, kampong houses with a large lawn space that can be used to provide space to make compost. On the other hand, houses in urban areas are generally built close together with a smaller lawn space. Some home owners also cover up these spaces leaving very little or no land exposed. By doing this, composting is less feasible without resorting to using special composting containers. The composting practice of pupils is shown in Table 2. Significantly more rural pupils produce compost from leftover food compared to urban pupils (χ 2 = 9.7, p =.02). This suggests that either more of the rural pupils eat at home compared to urban pupils or that composting activities are greater among rural pupils compared to urban pupils. Such difference is a reflection of the lifestyle of pupils living in the two different areas. Rural pupils tend to have home cooked food while urban pupils probably eat outside more. The difference between these numbers and those that produce compost from waste seems to suggest that there are other types of waste used to make compost, apart from leftover food. Significantly more rural pupils are involved in this activity compared to urban pupils (χ 2 = 9.2, p =.03). This difference may reflect the rural environment that has more land area for composting compared to urban areas. Houses in rural areas have trees and other plants in the vicinity. 23% of rural pupils and 27% of urban pupils produce compost to reduce the waste that is disposed in landfills. The data seem to suggest that even though there are pupils involved in composting activities, only a small number know why they do so (namely to reduce the amount of waste in landfills). Table 4: Pupil s vermicomposting activities Locatio Item Never Seldom Often Very Pearson p n Urban I produce vermicompost at home Rural Urban I do not use meat in the vermicompost mixture that I make Rural Urban I make sure that organic material added to make vermicompost has started to rot Rural Urban I use any type of worms to make vermicompost Rural Urban I use vermicompost as fertilizer for my plants Rural A small number of urban (19.7%) and rural pupils (30.2%) also invited their friends to take part in composting activities (χ 2 = 0.62, p =.10). A significantly larger percentage of rural pupils (28.6%) compared to urban pupils (15.7%) invite their school canteen operators to produce compost from leftover food (χ 2 = 9.31, p =.03). This seem to suggest that pupils exposed to education about composting actively spread the idea and encourage others to be involved in composting activities. However, it does not seem to translate into practice in reducing waste, as shown by the low percentage of pupils producing compost from waste.

6 Waste management practices in schools in Malaysia: P a g e 109 Pupils use compost in different ways (Table 3). Although there are pupils who practice making compost, significantly more rural pupils use compost for the plants around their homes (χ 2 =17.49,p=.00). More rural pupils use the compost by digging it into the soil compared to urban pupils (χ 2 =18.28,p=.00). This difference suggests that the pupils are involved actively in using compost in different ways at home, reflecting the practice of rural residents who generally grow plants around their homes. However, there are also more rural pupils who add plastic material into the compost they use compared to urban pupils compared to urban pupils (χ 2 = 17.49, p =.00). Such a practice suggests that these pupils are not aware of the need to separate nonbiodegradable material from bio-degradable material. There is thus a need to relook into the education that they have experienced with regards to managing and disposing waste. Apart from making compost, more rural pupils produce vermicompost in their homes compared to urban pupils (χ 2 = 6.61, p =.04). However, almost half of the pupils take the initiative to learn about making vermicompost. This suggests that even when pupils were exposed to vermicomposting, they did not necessarily practice it. Table 4 shows vermicomposting related activities of the pupils. When preparing vermicompost, both urban and rural pupils know that adding eggshells can reduce the acidity of vermicompost. However, more rural pupils know that meat should not be used in vermicompost compared to urban pupils (χ 2 = 15.99, p =.00). Similarly, more rural pupils compared to urban pupils know that the organic material to be used in vermicompost production is best rotting material (χ 2 = 7.88, p =.05). However, more rural pupils compared to urban pupils state that any kind of worms can be used in producing vermicompost (χ 2 = 14.18, p =.00). These findings suggest that the pupils probably learnt about these facts during the vermicompost class that they attended. However, they have not acquired some of the necessary knowledge in vermicomposting, as demonstrated by their knowledge about the type of worms used in vermicomposting. Both urban and rural pupils add vermicompost to soil to increase the fertility of the soil. However, more rural pupils use vermicompost as fertilizer for their plants compared to urban pupils (χ 2 = 11.24, p =.01). These indicate that pupils who practice vermicomposting know how to benefit from its use. 4. Conclusion The findings from this study suggest that education about waste disposal practices that do not endanger the environment should be made available to pupils at school. Effective means of disseminating such knowledge should be employed to ensure that pupils understand and change their waste disposal practice to more environmentally positive ones. Successful waste management is only possible when there is awareness and participation among the residents (Hasan, 2004). This is further supported by the environmental service learning project carried out with Mexican pupils where there is sustainability of pro-environmental behavior like composting, abstaining from littering and open burning (Schneller, 2008). However, the significant differences between rural and urban pupils suggest different approaches in their education about waste management may be necessary. Since the rural pupils are more involved in composting, their education can proceed with ways to manage waste including waste separation, composting and vermicomposting. On the other hand, education of urban pupils may start with the need to reduce waste and the awareness of waste mismanagement. This can be followed by education on separation, composting and vermicomposting of waste. Second, municipal waste collection services should be improved and coverage be enlarged to include a greater area. Third, waste disposal bins available in areas without waste collection services should be of a suitable volume and located at places within easy reach of the local residents. There is a need for concerted effort of different agencies to educate about and support desirable waste disposal and waste management practices. Acknowledgement This research is funded by Universiti Sains Malaysia, Research University Grant, 1001/PGURU/ References Davis, A., Taylor, D., Fahy, F., Meade, H. & O Callaghan-Platt, A Environmental attitudes and behavior: values. Action and waste management.final Report. Environmental RTDI Programme Grodzińska-Jurczak, M., Bartosiewicz, A., Twardowska, A. & Ballantyne, R International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 12, no. 2: Hasan, S. E Public awareness is key to successful waste management. Journal of Environmental Science and Health A39, 2: Ifegbesan, A Exploring secondary school students understanding and practices of waste management in Ogun State, Nigeria.International Journal of Environmental and Science Education 5, 2: Kathirvale, S., Muhd Yunus, M.N., Sopian, K. & Samsuddin, A.H Energy potential from municipal solid waste. Renewable Energy 29, Krnel, D. & Naglič, S Environmental literacy comparison between eco-schools and ordinary

7 Waste management practices in schools in Malaysia: P a g e 110 schools in Slovenia.Science Education International 20, no.1/2: Knussen, C. & Yale, F I m not in the habit of recycling. The role of habitual behavior in the disposal of household waste. Environment and Behaviour 40, 5: Korhonen, K. & Lappalainen, A Examining the environmental awareness of children and adolescents in the Ranomafana region, Madagascar.Environmental Education Research 10, 2: Latifah, A.M., Mohd. Armi, A.S. & NurIlyana, M.Z Municipal solid waste management in Malaysia: Practices and challenges. Waste Management 29, Miallem, I., Garb, Y. & Cwikel, J Environmental hazards of waste disposal patterns A multimethod study in an unrecognized Bedouin village in the Negev area of Israel. Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health 65, no. 4: Murad, W. & Siwar, C Waste management and recycling practices of the urban poor: A case study of Kuala Lumpur city. Waste Management Research 25, no. 1: Omran, A. & Gebris, A, Study of household attitude toward recycling of solid waste: A case study. ActaTechnicaCorviniensis Bulletin of Engineering, Tome IV, pdf Omran, A., Mahmood, A., Abdul Aziz, H. & Robinson, G. M Investigating households attitude toward recycling of solid waste in Malaysia: A case study.international Journal of Environmental Research 3(2): Roberts, N. S Impacts of the National Green Corps Program (Eco-Clubs) on students in India and their participation in environmental education activities. Environmental Education Research 15, no. 4: Saeed, M. O., Hassan, M. N. &Mujeebu, M. A Assessment of municipal solid waste generation and recyclable materials potential in Kuala Lumpur. Waste Management, 29, Schneller, A. J Environmental service learning: outcomes of innovative pedagogy in baja California Sur, Mexico. Environmental Education Research 14, no. 3: Tadesse, T., Ruijs, A. & Hagos, F Household waste disposal in Mekelle city, Northern Ethiopia.Waste Management 28, no. 10: Vencatasawmy, C. T., Öhman, M. & Brännström, T A survey of recycling behavior in households in Kiruna, Sweden.Waste Management Research18,