Enhancing Solid Waste Management Capacity of Local Government Authorities: Review of Current Status in Thailand

Transcription

1 Proceedings of International Conference on Integrated Solid Waste Management in Southeast Asian Cities. Siem Reap, Cambodia, 5-7 July Thailand: Southeast Asia Urban Environmental Management Applications (SEA-UEMA) Project, Asian Institute of Technology. Enhancing Solid Waste Management Capacity of Local Government Authorities: Review of Current Status in Thailand Samonporn Suttibak 1* & Vilas Nitivattananon 2 * 1 Corresponding Author Urban Environmental Management Field of Study, School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology, P.O. Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand Samonporn.Suttibak@ait.ac.th 2 vilasn@ait.ac.th Abstract: This paper presents the status of strengthening the capacity of Thailand s local government authorities (LGAs) in solid waste management (SWM). It aims to review the SWM status, to evaluate existing problems relating to the capacity, and to recommend strategies for enhancing the capacity. A number of performance indicators have been used including technical and environmental, financial and economic, social and cultural, and institutional and organizational aspects. It has been found that the problems are related to decentralization, allocation of limited budget, and lack of trained staff while LGAs take several more responsibilities. Some of the strategies to enhance the capacity of LGAs in SWM that should be considered are: monitoring and evaluating project performances continuously; promoting recycling programs by supporting its budget, manpower and promotion of public participation; increasing number and skills of staff at different levels for required tasks in SWM; increasing efficiency of collection of solid waste fees; promoting and supporting privatization in collection and disposal of solid waste services; and reducing illegal dumpsites and supporting preparation of SWM information and database. Further studies should seek for effective indicators to measure the performance assessment of existing SWM with consideration of data availability and field investigation. Solid waste recycling that should contribute to reducing a large quantity of waste that goes to disposal sites should focus on how to convince LGAs to initiate and implement successful recycling programs. Keywords: Enhancing capacity, local government authorities, municipal solid waste management 1 INTRODUCTION Due to urbanization, rapid industrialization and economic development, population grows with the generation of large quantity of heterogeneous solid waste. Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) is increasing the magnitude of problem in many local government authorities (LGAs) of Thailand, especially the rapidly urbanizing cities. Many LGAs are facing both large quantities of waste that overloads their capacity, and shortage of land to dispose the waste. Zurbrugg (2003) describes that one to two thirds of the solid waste generation in developing countries is not collected. As a result, the uncollected waste, which is often mixed with human and animal excreta, is dumped indiscriminately in streets and in drains, contributing to flooding, breeding of insects and rodent vectors and spread of diseases. Furthermore, even the collected waste is often disposed in uncontrolled dumpsites and/or burnt, polluting water resources and air. Additionally, Suocheng (2001) indicates that a global solid waste crisis is emerging and the world s municipalities are affected most severely. Buenrostro and Bocco (2003) observe that economic and population growths have rapidly increased the generation of vast quantities of solid waste with high consumption patterns, and the property of solid waste has changed with the people s lifestyles.

2 These huge quantities of heterogeneous solid waste become a complicated management task for the local government. This has surpassed their response capacity to provide adequate SWM services. In response to this deficiency, communities have built open dumpsites, resorted to uncontrolled open burning leading to environmental pollution, odor, and surface and ground water contamination. This situation presents a serious public health risk. In Thailand, LGAs comprise of the Provincial Administrative Organizations (PAOs), Municipalities (Nakorn, Muang and Tambon), and Tambon Administrative Organizations (TAOs) which are primarily responsible for MSWM. These LGAs are allocated about 20% of the budget, which may reach 35% by the year Therefore, the LGAs need to support themselves for overall SWM. This is the major driving force to find solutions to reduce SWM problems (Mongkolnchaiarunya, 2003). In order to enhance the capacity of LGAs in solid waste management, performance indicators are needed to assess the existing management systems. This assessment is useful to evaluate and monitor the performance of SWM services, decide how to improve a solid waste management system and develop an approach (Van de Klundert and Anschutz, 2001). There are tools that can evaluate various aspects including technical and environmental, financial and economic, social and cultural, institutional and organizational aspects. These indicators should cover the overall MSWM and have characteristics of effective ability that are relevant, easy to understand, reliable and accessible (Hart, 1998). This paper intends to review the current solid waste management of selected local government authorities by using solid waste performance indicators that relate to the LGAs capacity. Moreover, recommendations on the strategies for enhancing the capacity through consideration of ongoing and planned projects, and programs are also presented. 2 METHODOLOGY In this study, twenty municipalities were selected as representatives of the current solid waste management in Thailand. They consist of, and 6 Nakhon, 12 Muang and 2 Tumbon municipalities. Their locations are as given in figure 1. There are 3 in Northern, 6 in North-eastern, 6 in Central and Eastern, and 5 municipalities in Southern region,. The selection of the municipalities is based on the existing situation with different SWM problems, city size, challenges in SWM, and the availability of relatively satisfactory level of data. This study involved reviewing potential SWM performance indicators, evaluating the existing capacity, and recommending for enhancing SWM efficiency of LGAs. Its methodology includes five steps: Step1: This step involves a review of solid waste performance indicators for assessment of the capacity of the LGAs using published sources including: Concept of Integrated Sustainable Waste Management (Van de Klundert and Anschutz, 2001); Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-Income Countries (Schubeler, 1996); Success and Sustainability Indicators (Appleton et al., 2000); Sustainable Measures- Characteristics of Effective Indicators (Hart, 1998); Sustainable and Integrated Solid Waste Management (Cointreau, 2001); and Solid Waste Benchmarking Study of 13 Thai Municipalities (Thai University Consortium and US-AEP, 2004). 75

3 Figure 1. Location of selected local government authorities Step2: The review and compilation of data of existing municipal SWM focus on technical and environmental, financial and economic, social and cultural, and institutional and organizational aspects. The data have been obtained from related organizations such as the Pollution Control Department (PCD, 2004a), Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning (ONEP), the World Bank and US-AEP and others. Step3: This step focuses on the evaluation of existing SWM of selected LGAs by using performance indicators in order to describe their performances. Step4: It includes reviewing of on-going efforts, and planned and future actions to enhance capacities of LGAs in addition to the assessment of current situation according to the performance indicators. Step5: The recommendations can be made, based on the findings from the previous steps, in order to potentially enhance SWM capacity of LGAs in Thailand. 3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 3.1 Performance Indicators A set of performance indicators including various aspects - technical and environmental, financial and economic, social and cultural, and institutional and organizational aspects, as given in table 1 and figure 2, is considered. As mentioned earlier, these indicators cover the overall municipal SWM and have characteristics of effective indicators that are relevant, easy to understand, reliable and accessible. 76

4 Figure 2. The indicators used for assessment of the LGAs performance in SWM SWM Performance Indicators Technical and Environmental Recovery rate Disposal rate Collection rate Financial and Economic Capital investment cost Operational and maintenance cost Level of cost recovery Social and Cultural Activities of stakeholders Complaint mechanism function Institutional and Organizational Staff trained Strategies and plans in SWM Table 1. Description of the performance indicators Description Percentage of solid waste recycled. Recycling and reuse activity can be done through government or private sectors (formal and informal) Percentage of waste collected which is disposed in a sanitary or controlled landfill The amount of collected waste divided by total generation in term of percentage Capital investment cost of constructing SWM facilities and purchasing essential operating equipments Operational and maintenance (O&M) cost of SWM Revenues generated through waste collection fees and taxes as a percentage of total costs of waste management What type of activities do these stakeholders carry out? Does the complaint mechanism function well? (percent of complaints that are solved) Is there sufficient skilled staff for waste management? Is there a strategy or plan for waste management at the city level? Source: Adapted from Van de Klundert and Anschutz (2001), Schubeler (1996), Appleton et al. (2000), Hart (1998), Cointreau (2001), and Thai University Consortium and US-AEP (2004). 3.2 Performance results and on-going efforts to enhance capacities The amount of MSW disposed in Thailand is steadily increasing from million tons in 1992 to million tons in This is a 33% increase (PCD and World Bank, 2003). The average per capita solid waste generated in the Central, Northeastern, Eastern, Northern and Southern regions are 1.07, 0.81, 1.34, 0.91 and 1.07 kg/day, respectively. Bangkok has a per capita waste generation rate of 1.54 kg/day (PCD, 2004c) Performance The results of reviewing and evaluating the status of SWM in 20 selected municipalities are presented in table 2 with discussions in the following sections. Technical and environmental performance Recovery Rate: Most LGAs have recovery rate of less than 20%. However, some municipalities have had the success in promoting recycling. Phitsanulok and Rayong are well known for their 77

5 recycling programs. Most recycling activities in Thailand are carried out by the informal sector, which bring recyclables to facilities that exchange them for money. Collection Rate: The collection efficiencies, in the 20 selected municipalities, are in the range of %. Disposal Rate: The percentage of collected waste that is disposed of in sanitary landfills or controlled dumpsites is 50. Municipal sanitary landfill: Ten of the 20 municipalities disposed the waste in sanitary landfills. The environmental problems at disposal sites are leachate generation, inadequate collection and insufficient treatment lagoons. Other problems are: absence of groundwater monitoring; seriously endangered health of waste pickers by exposure to unsanitary conditions; absence of separation of hazardous waste; and risk of contamination of landfill area and water resources in the vicinity by hazardous wastes. Figure 3. Outdated waste bins and a collection truck common in municipalities Open dump disposal method: The disposal method in ten of the selected municipalities is open dumping. It can generate environmental problems like leachate contamination, odor, insects and scattering of dry solid waste. In five of the municipalities, disposal is by controlled dumping and some of the sites face opposition by the public, and hence could not be built and operated. Hatyai and Surat Thani proposed new sites but have not been able to construct them. Incinerator: Only Phuket incinerates its solid waste, but the city still employs an engineered landfill to serve as a secondary disposal site for scrap and a reserve in case problems arise with its incinerator. Figure 4. MSW is uncontrolled burning and open dumped in many municipalities 78

6 Financial and economic performance The average capital cost of MSW is 100-1,000 Baht/ton, O&M expenditure is 400-1,600 Baht/ton, and level of cost recovery is less than 0.2. Thai University and US-AEP (2004) indicates that the cost of SWM service is high but the revenue from waste collection is low. Social and cultural performance Some of the selected LGAs have high participation by privatization and school waste bank programs. In terms of mechanism of complaint, it is grater than 80%. Institutional and organizational performance Most of the municipalities have less than 25% trained staff, which indicated that most local governments lack trained personnel and might be the cause of inefficient operation and maintenance of disposal system, especially sanitary landfill operations. In terms of the number of strategies/plan in solid waste management, each of LGAs has its own plans and strategies. However, most plans focus only on collection and disposal systems and ignore recycling facilities On-going efforts to enhance capacities of LGAs On-going efforts for enhancing the capacity of LGAs in Thailand according to the problems of SWM aspects and planning for environmental quality management in Thailand, which can be provided to support some of SWM indicators are as follows: Public awareness of waste management planning Most of the on-going efforts to enhance capacities of LGAs in Thailand attempt to encourage LGAs and communities for public awareness on SWM. The following summarizes some crucial activities. Local Government Authorities Training: This on-going effort aimed at enhancing the capacity of LGAs for learning about environmental participation principles, SWM in their communities, and environmental law involving waste management of the LGAs. They have also shared experiences through exchanging site visits. This activity has been implemented during 2000 to 2005 (DEQP, 2000). Project of Formulating the Local Authorities Role and Pilot Project of Local Authorities Management of Natural Resources and Environment: This project has the goal to enable LGAs to manage efficiently their natural resources and environment in accordance with the Environmental Quality Management Framework (EQMF) It is also to respond appropriately to local needs and in line with the local authorities potential to befit their new mandates as promulgated under the Decentralization Act, It was based on the concept of learning-by-doing, through in service training in the intended fields comprising 26 LGAs across three classifications; 5 PAOs, 10 municipalities, and 11 TAOs (ONEP, 2002). Campaign of Waste Reduction in Community and School Projects: The project has been implemented since 2001 in 54 municipalities. It has established waste recycle banks in each municipalities in least 500 schools to support recycling promotion in municipalities (Tabucanon, 2004). Project of Enhancing Solid Waste Minimization and Reuse Efficiency of Local Government Agencies, Nam Ping River Basin: The Pollution Control Department carried out this project in 2004 to enhance the capacity of local governments in recycling and reuse. It was found that 20% solid waste could be reduced in Moreover, some LGAs have little participation, as they cannot convince communities to join and participate in the project. Budget and time limits for operation leads to lack of expansion to other communities or LGAs (PCD, 2004b). Monitoring and prevention planning The Project of Enhancing Environmental Management: The project objective is to establish information for the authorities management of solid waste and wastewater in 44 municipalities under Chaiyaphum and Burerum Province (Environmental Office Region 5, 2000). In addition, the capacity building for the local authorities in monitoring and assessing the performance of central wastewater and solid waste treatment facilities has been initiated by ONEP in the year

7 Proceedings of International Conference on Integrated Solid Waste Management in Southeast Asian Cities. Siem Reap, Cambodia, 5-7 July Thailand: Southeast Asia Urban Environmental Management Applications (SEA-UEMA) Project, Asian Institute of Technology. Treatment and recovery planning A Project for Enhancing Environmental Management Efficiency of Local Government Agencies in Thailand Solid Waste Management Facilities: The project has aimed at enhancing management efficiency for construction and improvement of SW management facilities implemented by 15 local governments. The scope included review of pre-construction documents with recommendations for improvements; providing advice for problem solving during the implementation; monitoring and preparation of monthly progress reports; evaluation of key issues with recommended actions to enhance the efficiency; and providing training to staff of both central and local agencies (OEPP, 2001). 3.3 Planned and future actions Policy on solid waste management The Pollution Control Department (2000) developed this policy which aims to control the rate of waste generation and provide technical and human resources to local administrations so that they can implement a proper package of waste management system. It encourages local administrations to work together to manage the solid waste problem especially establishment of common waste disposal centres. It facilitates the endorsement of appropriate laws, regulations and rules related to solid waste management. It helps promote and support involvement of private sector and community sector in solving waste-related problems. This policy supports a number of performance indicators, such as recovery rate, disposal rate, stakeholder participation and percentage of staff trained. National Municipal Waste Management Policy This policy supports the recovery rate indicator, which has been designed to cope with problems occurring in waste management cycle from the origin at waste generation to the end - waste disposal. Additionally, it aims to decrease waste generation rate not exceeding 0.4 to 1.0 kg/capita/day by 2006; to increase utilization of organic wastes and recycled materials up to 15% by 2006; and to encourage LGAs for establishing a network of waste treatment and disposal center in each province (PCD, 2004d). National strategic plan for municipal general and hazardous solid waste management Some of the goals are to increase the efficiency of LGAs in SWM and determination of the performance indicators; decrease in proportion and amount the uncollected waste; decrease conflicts in waste management across the region; and decrease the number of complaints concerning waste management issues in each LGA (ONEP, 2005). Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning s initiatives on community environmental management The plan to enhance the capacity of LGAs as a pilot project comprising of: (1) A Master Plan for community environmental management and community environmental quality indicators; and (2) The Pilot Project on participation of local authorities and private sectors in the management of community wastewater and solid waste. 3.4 An example project for enhancing local government s efficiency in SWM This section presents a sample project, aimed to enhance LGA s capacity in the management of solid waste disposal sites. The methodology and recommendations have also been provided. A project for enhancing environmental management efficiency of LGAs in Thailand was carried out in the years It covered landfill sites of 15 LGAs that aimed at strengthening the LGAs in directing and evaluating construction of SW disposal systems.

8 There are typical problems in pre-construction stage that some municipality miss key documents included in the operational and maintenance (O&M) manual, personnel training manual, design notes, construction specifications and standards, feasibility study and detailed design report(s), topographical/survey map and geological survey report. It is required that these documentations be approved before construction. It leads to proper planning for the construction stage. In the construction stage, there are key activities that lead to enhancement of LG s efficiency in controlling and supervising construction such as; preparation of construction progress reports and documents, personnel, quality control/inspection problems and solving them during construction. These are important key issues that have to be cleared and properly supervised. The post-construction stage is based on a review of documents for project evaluation, major problems particularly are during installation and operation stages of most sites which do not properly follow regulations, guidelines and sanitary disposal characteristics. The results of the system efficiency evaluation indicated that the actual capacity and operating lifetime of most sites were much lower than estimated due to poor compaction techniques. The disposed waste from the existing landfill areas might not have been not taken into account. Moreover, environmental protection components need to be implemented, for example, daily cover plan, storm water drainage and leachate control measures, health and safety measures for operators and landfill gas collection systems and monitoring gas concentration. In order to meet the successfulness of SWM, sufficient on-site personnel, administration and security staff should be provided for every area at least one chief per site (Nitivattananon and Kulpradit, 2004). Figure 5. Installation of landfill liners and a completed landfill site without storm water controls 3.5 Recommended strategies for enhancing the capacity The recommended strategies have been developed according to the SWM problems that are found from the assessment of LGAs performance. The following strategy is recommended in areas where ongoing activities and future actions do not support the building capacity of LGAs in SWM. Public awareness of waste management planning Most on-going efforts focused on encouraging community activities such as waste bank, waste market and campaigns. Communities discontinued their recycling program due to lack of monitoring leading to unsustainable actions and did not encourage awareness of the people. Therefore, the monitoring and evaluation of project performance should be carried out continually after implementing the project in order to evaluate its functioning. Monitoring planning To support the concept of monitoring and evaluation of the project, provision for a potential tool for assessing effectiveness of SWM policy as a guide for local MSW authorities should be developed, which would include setting criteria, indicators and detailed data on those factors that influence successful implementation of sustainable waste management strategies. 75

9 Treatment and recovery planning The government has supported setting up solid waste central disposal site among small municipalities. At present, there is no investment because it is hard to set up central disposal sites in small municipalities, due to the lack of budget for investment, ambiguous association for joint SWM and location of disposal site constrained by Not-In-My-Back-Yard (NIMBY) syndrome. Privatesector participation should play an increasing role in construction and operation of MSW disposal facilities under lease and concession contracts, along with enhancing the LGAs to contact with private sector. Tools such as guidelines for LGAs to contact and supervise private company should be provided. In addition, SWM recycling strategy should be active through supporting budget, human resources on recycling projects, promoting public participation, and educating residents. At the same time, increased number of skilled staff at different levels for required tasks in SWM should be made possible. Increase of efficiency and sufficiency of solid waste fee collection must be encouraged and supported. The research and development planning The on-going effort in solid waste management plan lack adequate preparation of SWM information and database for helping LGAs to base their decision-making on SWM. Therefore, providing useful information for all LGAs should be included. In addition, the solid waste recycling issue must be seriously considered to contribute to the reduction of a large quantity of waste that goes to disposal sites. 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The results revealed that the major causes of problems in solid waste management of local government authorities (LGAs) in Thailand are related to four types of performances. For technical and environmental aspects, open dumpsites without supervision are found to create health and environmental risks, and recovery rate is low. In terms of financial and economic aspects, investment and O&M costs are high while revenue as collection fees is low. Social and cultural aspects include lack of community participation. Institutional and organizational aspects indicate that planning of strategies without sufficient number of skilled staff to operate, and most plans focus on disposal systems and recycling is ignored. These problems are related to decentralization with limited budget allocation while LGAs take many responsibilities with a small number of trained and skilled staff. Therefore, LGAs are unable to adequately manage SWM holistically. Furthermore, these problems become a crucial issue in future due to ineffective strengthening of LGAs. Some of the strategies for enhancing the capacity of LGAs that should be considered include: monitoring and evaluating project performance continuously; promoting recycling program by providing supporting budget, manpower and public participation; increasing number and skills of staff at different levels for required tasks in SWM; increasing the efficiency of collection of solid waste fees; promoting and supporting privatization in collection and disposal of SWM services; reducing illegal dumpsites; and supporting preparation of solid waste management information and databases. It is recommended that further research should focus on: (1) finding effective indicators for assessing the existing SWM, with consideration of data availability and field checking; (2) full evaluation of successes and failures of the existing SWM of LGAs; (3) design and development of appropriate indicators for assessing the performance of SWM services; (4) application of indicators to find the potentials for strengthening SWM; and (5) solid waste recycling programs that can contribute to the reduction of large quantity of waste going to disposal sites by focusing on the methods and/or tools for convincing the LGAs to initiate and implement recycling programs. 76

10 Local Government Agency (Municipality) Total (tons) Table 2. Performance of SWM in selected local governments Indicators* General (1) Data Technical-Environmental Financial-Economic Socio-Cultural Daily solid waste generation Recovery (1) Collection (2) Disposal (2) Capital (2) O&M (2) Level Activities (2) Per capita Rate (%) Rate (% ) Rate (%) cost cost of cost of (kg/capita) (Baht/ton) (Baht/ton) recovery stakeholders 1.Phitsanulok > Complaint (2) mechanism (%) Staff (2) trained (%) Institutional- Organizational No. of plan in SWM (2) 10 school waste banks Phichit N/A 100 (3) 1,309 (3) 123 (3) N/A LG operated N/A N/A N/A 3.Lampang Fully-privatized 98 N/A 3 4.Khon Kaen LG operated Loei N/A 100 (3) 275 (3) 58 (3) N/A LG operated N/A N/A N/A 6.Ubon Rachathani Open dump school waste banks Srisaket N/A 100 N/A N/A N/A School waste banks N/A N/A JBIC&SAPI 8.Chaiyaphum (5) Open dump (4) 390 (4) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.Roi-et (6) Open dump (5) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 (7) 10.Rayong > LG operated Kanchanaburi Open dump LG operated N/A 20 3 School 12.Pakred,Nonthaburi (6) Open dump (6) N/A N/A N/A waste banks N/A N/A N/A 13.Banglen (6) Open dump (6) N/A N/A N/A LG operated N/A N/A N/A 14.Thaluang,Ayutthaya > (6) Open dump (6) N/A N/A N/A LG operated N/A N/A N/A 15.Kukod (6) 100 (6) N/A N/A N/A LGs operated N/A N/A N/A 16.Hatyai Open dump Schools waste bank Surat Thani Open dump LGs operated Phuket , % privatized Yala (7) 100 N/A N/A N/A LGs operated N/A N/A 1 (7) 20.Takuapa (9) Open dump (9) N/A N/A N/A LGs operated N/A N/A 1 (9) N/A : - not available (*) Based on Van deklundert and Anschutz (2001), Schubeler (1996), Appleton et al. (2000), Hart (1998), Cointreau (2001), and Thai University Consortium and US-AEP (2004) (1) PCD, (2004a); (2) Thai University Consortium and US-AEP, (2004); (3) Nitivattananon and Kulpradit, (2004); (4) Environmental Office Region 5, (2000); (5) Environmental Office Region 7, (2001) (6) Environmental Office Region 1, (2001); (7) Mongkolnchaiarunya, (2003); (8) Intharawongchot, (2004); (9) OEPP, (2000) 77

11 REFERENCES Appleton, J., Ali, M. and Cotton, A. (2000). Success and Sustainability Indicators- A Tool to Assess Primary Collection Schemes, UK: Water, Engineering and Development Center, Loughborough University. Buenrostro, O. and Bocco, G. (2003). Solid Waste Management in Municipalities in Mexico: Goals and Perspectives, Resources Conservation & Recycling, Vol.39, pp Cointreau, S. (2001). Declaration of Principles for Sustainable and Integrated Solid Waste Management, Available in the website: (March 2006). DEQP (2000). Environmental Training, Department of Environmental Quality Promotion, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Available in the website: (June 2005). Environmental Office Region 1 (2001). Solid Waste and Wastewater Management, Municipalities Level, Bangkok, Thailand: Ministry of Science Technology and Environment. Environmental Office Region 5 (2000). Project of Enhancing of Environmental Management, Chaiyaphum and Burerum Province, Bangkok, Thailand: Ministry of Science Technology and Environment. Environmental Office Region 7 (2001). Solid Waste Central Disposal Approach, Bangkok, Thailand: Ministry of Science Technology and Environment. Hart, M. (1998). Sustainable Measures-Characteristics of Effective Indicator, Available in the website: (June 2005). Intharawongchot, P. (2004). Srisaket Municipality Solid Waste Management, Paper presented at the Challenges: Solid Waste Management Problem, 29 th -30 th April, Bangkok, Thailand. Mongkolnchaiarunya, J. (2003). Developing Alternative Solid Waste Management Practices in Local Government: A Case Study of Yala Municipality, Thailand, (Doctoral dissertation No. UE-02-05, Asian Institute of Technology, 2003), Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology. Nitivattananon, V. and Kulpradit, A. (2004). Management of Solid Waste Disposal Sites in Thailand. Paper presented at the Proceedings 2 nd, Bangi World Conference on Environmental Management, Bangi, 13 th -14 th September, University Kebangsaan Malaysia. OEPP (2000). Feasibility Study and Detailed Engineering Design, Takuapa, Phang-nga Province, Thailand: Ministry of Science Technology and Environment. OEPP (2001). Enhancing Environmental Management Efficiency of Local Government Agencies - Solid Waste Management Facilities Report, Bangkok, Thailand: Office of Environmental Policy and Planning (OEPP), Ministry of Science Technology and Environment. ONEP (2002). Project of Formulating the Local Authorities Role and Pilot Project of Local Authorities' Management of Natural Resources and Environmental, Bangkok, Thailand: Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE). ONEP (2005). National Strategic Plan for General and Hazardous Municipal Solid Waste Management, Executive Summary, Bangkok, Thailand: Office of Natural Resources & Environmental Policy and Planning (ONEP), Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE). PCD (2000). Integrated Municipal Solid Waste Management, Pollution Control Department, Bangkok, Thailand: Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. 78

12 PCD (2004a). Domestic Waste Minimization& Utilization from Municipalities, Pollution Control Department, Available in the website : (June 2005) PCD (2004b). Enhancing Solid Waste Minimization and Reuse Efficiency of Local Government Agencies - Namping River Basin, Pollution Control Department. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Bangkok, Thailand. PCD (2004c). Final Report the Exploration and Analysis Municipal Solid Waste Composition, Thailand. Bangkok: Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. PCD (2004d). The National Solid Waste Management Plan. Paper presented at the Challenges: Solid Waste Management Problem,29 th -30 th April, Bangkok, Thailand. PCD and World Bank (2003). Thailand environmental monitor 2003, Pollution Control Department and World Bank, Bangkok, Thailand. Schubeler, P. (1996). Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-Income Countries, Switzerland: Swiss Center for Development Cooperation in Technology and Management. Suocheng, D. (2001). Municipal Solid Waste Management in China: Using Commercial Management to Solve a Growing Problem, Utilities Policy, 10, Tabucanon, S. M. (2004). Community Participation in Solid Waste Management, Paper presented at the Challenges: Solid Waste Management Problem,29 th -30 th April, Bangkok, Thailand. Thai University Consortium and US-AEP (2004). Final Report of Solid Waste Benchmarking Study of 13 Thai Municipalities, Thailand: Thai University Consortium and US-Asia Environmental Partnership (US-AEP). Van de Klundert, A. and Anschutz, J. (2001). Integrated Sustainable Waste Management-the Concept, Tools for Decision-Makers, Experiences from the Urban Waste Expertise Programme ( ), Available in the website: (June 2005) Zurbrugg, C. (2003). Urban Solid Waste Management in Low-Income Countries of Asia, How to Cope with the Garbage Crisis, Available in the website: (June 2005) 79