Community empowerment of waste management in the urban environment: More attention on waste issues through formal and informal educations

Brotosusilo, A.; Utari, D.; Negoro, H. A.; Firdaus, A.; Velentina, R. A.

doi:10.22034/GJESM.2022.02.05

Document Type : ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

Authors

¹ Faculty of Law, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, West Java, Indonesia

² Faculty of Health Science, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta, Indonesia

³ Department of Economic, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia

⁴ School of Environmental Science, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia

https://doi.org/10.22034/GJESM.2022.02.05

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Indonesia's economic growth is estimated to be driven by high levels of consumption which lead to large amounts of waste. Education is required to raise environmental awareness among the population as it is one of the ways to overcome the waste issue, especially in urban areas, which are the engines of economic growth. This study aims to determine whether the higher levels of education have a greater impact on citizens regarding environmental concerns such as littering.
METHODS: The study took logistics regression on the primary data survey from 7 cities (Jakarta, Jambi, Muaro Jambi, Ambon, Padang, Surabaya, and Tasikmalaya) in Indonesia during 2019-2021. The survey includes 563 observations on the household level, involving a total of 2,349 respondents. The logistic regression predicts the likelihood of urban citizens to litter, given their socio-economic backgrounds and existing littering behavior and environmental awareness.
FINDINGS: This study found that education did not affect decreasing the value of littering behavior as expected since it is estimated that an increase of 1 year in school will increase the probability of littering by 0.0189. Formal education is not enough to decrease the probability of littering behavior on the individual level. In contrast, informal education taught on keeping a clean environment matters is better than conventional formal education. Besides that, having self-initiative on environmental caring and good habits from childhood will decrease the probability of littering on an individual level. An individual has a self-initiative, the probability of littering will be 0.1732 times lower than those who do not have self-initiative. This study also found that per capita income and per capita expenditure in big cities in Indonesia ranged between USD 156,903 and USD 116,857. These economic factors affect the behavior of citizens not to litter. The per capita expenditure increasing by USD 1 per person per day will decrease the probability of littering by -0.0468. However, these factors are not enough to minimize the littering behavior since the disposal place availability becomes another keys factor in decreasing littering behavior on urban citizens.
CONCLUSION: The government should also focus on building citizens' behavior regarding waste management awareness especially building good habits since childhood and individual initiative, simultaneously implementing the programs to reduce waste production.

Graphical Abstract

Highlights

The formal education level insignificantly affected the citizens waste behaviour;

The build of not waste littering awareness also influences by the self-initiative to keep clean and good habits since childhood, other than influences by infrastructure, education, and economic factors;

The future waste management program should emphasize building citizens' behaviour other than managing the waste produced.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Solid waste management

OPEN ACCESS

©2022 The author(s). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Publisher's Note

GJESM Publisher remains neutral concerning jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affliations.

Citation Metrics & Captures

Current Publisher

GJESM Publisher

References

Adzawla, W.; Tahidu, A.; Mustapha, S.; Azumah, S.B., (2019). Do socioeconomic factors influence households’ solid waste disposal systems? Evidence from Ghana. Waste Manage. Res., 37(1): 51–57 (7 pages).

Alessa, L.; Bennett, S.M.; Kliskey, A.D., (2003). Effects of knowledge, personal attribution and perception of ecosystem health on depreciative behaviors in the intertidal zone of Paciﬁc Rim National Park and Reserve. J. Environ. Manage., 68(2): 207–218 (12 pages).

Alexander, C.; Smaje, C.; Timlett, R.; Williams, I., (2009). Improving social technologies for recycling. Proc. ICE-Waste Res. Manage., 162(1): 15–28 (14 pages).

Alhassan, H.; Kwakwa, P.; Owusu-Sekere, E., (2020). Households’ source separation behaviour and solid waste disposal options in Ghana’s Millennium City. J. Environ. Manage., 259: 110055 (10 pages).

Alhassan, M.; Muhammad, J., (2013). Households’ demand for better solid waste disposal services: case study of four communities in the New Juaben Municipality, Ghana. J. Sustainable Dev., 6: 16–25 (10 pages).

Al-Khatib, I.A.; Aafat, H.A.; Daoud, R.; Shwahneh, H., (2009). Enhanced solid waste management by understanding the effects of gender, income, marital status, and religious convictions on attitudes and practices related to street littering in Nablus – Palestinian territory. Waste Manage., 29: 449–455 (7 pages).

Azizi, A.; Malakmohamadi, B.; Jafari, H.R. (2016). Land use and land cover spatiotemporal dynamic pattern and predicting changes using integrated CA-Markov model. Global J. Environ. Sci. Manage. 2(3): 223-234 (12 pages).

Bahri, R.; Rachmaniyah; Darjati, (2020). Evaluation of Waste Management Facilities Through Land-Based Marine Litter Data: Case Study of Kenjeran Beach, Surabaya. J. Environ. Sci. Sustainable Dev., 3(1): 156–176 (21 pages).

Bamberg, S.; Moser, G., (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behavior. J. Environ. Psychol., 27: 14–25 (12 pages).

Bator, R.J.; Bryan, A.D.; Schultz, P.W., (2010). Who gives a hoot? Intercept surveys of litterers and disposers. Environ. Behav., 43: 295 (21 pages).

Brotosusilo, A.; Handayani, D., (2020). Dataset on waste management behaviors of urban citizens in large cities of Indonesia. Data Brief, 32: 106053 (11 pages).

BPS, (2020). Statistical yearbook of Indonesia 2020, BPS.

Carpenter, E.; Wolverton, S., (2017). Plastic litter in streams: The behavioral archaeology of a pervasive environmental problem. Appl. Geog., 84: 93–101 (9 pages).

Cialdini, R.; Reno, R.; Kallgren, C., (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Resysling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public place. J. Personality Social Psychol., 58(6): 1015–1026 (12 pages).

Cruz, J.E.; Emery, R.E.; Turkheimer, E., (2012). Peer network drinking predicts increased alcohol use from adolescence to early adulthood after controlling for genetic and shared environmental selection. Dev. Psychol., 48(5): 1390–1402 (13 pages).

Cuc, M.C., (2014). The influence of media on formal and informal education. Proc. Social Behav. Sci., 143: 68–72 (5 pages).

Dodds, R.; Holmes, M.R., (2018). Education and certiﬁcation for beach management: Is there a diﬀerence between residents versus visitors? Ocean Coastal Manage., 160: 124–132 (9 pages).

Eastman, L.; Nunez, P.; Crettier, B.; Thiel, M., (2013). Identiﬁcation of self-reported user behavior, education level, and preferences to reduce littering on beaches. A survey from the SE Paciﬁc. Ocean Coastal Manage., 78: 18–24 (7 pages).

Finnie, W.C., (1973). Field experiments in litter control. Environ. Behav., 5(2): 123–144 (22 pages).

Folke, C.; Gunderson, L., (2002). A kaleidoscope of change. Conserv. Ecol., 6(1): 19: (7 pages).

Fraj, E.; Marinez, E., (2006). Inﬂuence of personality on ecological consumer behavior. J. Consum. Behav., 5: 167–181 (15 pages).

Fransson, N.; Garling, T., (1999). Environmental concern: Conceptual definitions, measurement methods, and research findings. J. Environ. Psychol., 19: 369–382 (14 pages).

Gunderson, K.; Barns, C.V.; Hendricks, W.W.; McAvoy, L.H., (2000). Wilderness education: An updated review of the literature and new directions for research and practice. USDA For. Serv. Proc., 4: 253–259 (7 pages).

Hilburn, A.M., (2015). At home or to the dump? Household garbage management and the trajectories of waste in a Rural Mexican Municipio. J. Latin Am. Geog., 14(2): 29–52 (24 pages).

Hoomweg, D.; Bhada-Tata, P., (2012). What a waste: A global review of solid waste management. Urban development series, knowledge papers, No. 15. World Bank, Washington, DC.

Jefferson, M., (2019). Whither plastics? Petrochemicals, plastics and sustainability in a garbage-riddled world. Energy Res. Soc. Sci., 56: 101229 (8 pages).

Kedzierski, M.; Frere, D.; Le maguer, G.; Bruzaud, S., (2020). Why is there plastic packaging in the natural environment? Understanding the roots of our individual plastic waste management behaviours. Sci. Total Environ., 740: 139985 (9 pages).

Keizer, K.; Lindenberg, S.; Steg, L., (2013). The importance of demonstratively restoring order. Plos One, 8(6): e65137 (7 pages).

Kollmus, A.; Agemyeman, J., (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to proenvironmental behavior? Environ. Edu. Res., 8(3): 239–260 (22 pages).

Kompas, (2020). Indonesia Hasilkan 64 Juta Ton Sampah, Bisakah Kapasitas Pengelolaan Tercapai Tahun 2025? (Indonesia Produces 64 Million Tons of Waste, Can Management Capacity Be Reached By 2025?).

Kumara, A.S.; Pallegedara, A., (2020). Household waste disposal mechanisms in Sri Lanka: Nation-wide survey evidence for their trends and determinants. Waste Manage., 114(1): 62–71 (10 pages).

Leonidou, L.; Coudounaris, D.N.; Kvasova, O.; Christodoulides, P., (2015). Drivers and outcomes of green tourist attitudes and behavior: Sociodemographic moderating effect. Physchol. Marketing, 32(6): 635–650 (16 pages).

Maki, A.; Raimi, K.T., (2016). Environmental peer persuasion: How moral exporting and belief superiority relate to efforts to influence others. J. Environ. Psychol., 49: 18–29 (12 pages).

Mcllgorm, A.; Campbell, H.; Rule, M., (2011). The economic cost and control of marine debris damage in the Asia-Paciﬁc region. Ocean Coastal Manage., 54: 643–651 (9 pages).

McNicholas, G.; Cotton, M., (2019). Stakeholder perceptions of marine plastic waste management in the United Kingdom. Ecol. Econ., 163: 77–87 (11 pages).

Ningrum, Z.B.; Herdiansyah, H., (2018). Environmental awareness and behavior of college students in regards to the environment in urban area. E3S Web of Conferences, 74: 10004 (6 pages).

Oosterhuis, F.; Papyrakis, E.; Boteler, B., (2014). Economic instruments and marine litter control. Ocean Coast. Manage., 102: 47–54 (8 pages).

Permana, E., (2019). Indonesia hasilkan 67 juta ton sampah pada 2019 (Indonesia produced 67 million tons of waste in 2019). Anodolu Agency.

Rai, R.K.; Bhattarai, D.; Neupane, S., (2019). Designing solid waste collection strategy in small municipalities of developing countries using choice experiment. J. Urban Manage., 8(3): 386–395 (10 pages).

Ruliana, V.; Soemantojo, R.W.; Asteria, D., (2019). Assessing a community-based waste separation program through examination of correlations between participation, information exposure, environmental knowledge, and environmental attitude. ASEAN J. Community Engagement, 3(1): 2 (27 pages).

Saphores, J.; Nixon, H.; Ogunseitan, O.A.; Shapirro, A.A., (2006). Household willingness to recycle electronic waste: An application to California. Environ. Behav., 38(2): 182–208 (27 pages).

Schultz, P.W.; Bator, R.J.; Large, L.B.; Bruni, C.M.; Tabanico, J.J., (2011). Littering in context: Personal and environmental predictors of littering behavior. Environ. Behav., 20(10): 1–25 (25 pages).

Slavin, C.; Grage, A.; Campbell, M.L., (2012). Linking social drivers of marine debris with actual marine debris on beaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 64: 1580–1588 (9 pages).

Suleman, Y.; Darko, E.; Agyemang-Duah, W., (2015). Solid waste disposal and community health implications in Ghana: Evidence from Sawaba, Asokore Mampong Municipal Assembly. J. Civ. Environ. Eng., 5(6): 202 (6 pages).

Ten-Brink, P.; Lutchman, I.; Bassi, S.; Speck, S.; Sheavly, S.; Register, K.; Woolaway, C., (2009). Guidelines on the use of market-based instruments to address the problem of marine litter. IEEP, Sheavly consultants.

Timlett, R.; Williams, I.D., (2011). The ISB model (infrastructure, service, behaviour): A tool for waste practitioners. Waste Manage., 31(6): 1381–1392 (12 pages).

Tobing, I.S.L., (2005). Dampak Sampah terhadap Kesehatan Lingkungan dan Manusia (Impact of Waste on Environmental and Human Health).

Varotto, A.; Spagnolli, A., (2017). Psychological strategies to promote household recycling. A systematic review with meta-analysis of validated field interventions. J. Environ. Psychol., 51: 168–188 (21 pages).

Viscusi, W.K.; Huber, J.; Bell, J.; Cecot, C., (2013). Discontinuous behavioral responses to recycling laws and plastic water bottle deposits. Am. Law Econ. Rev., 15(1): 110–155 (46 pages).

Weaver, R., (2015). Littering in context(s): Using a quasi-natural experiment to explore geographic inﬂuences on antisocial behavior. Appl. Geog., 57: 142–153 (12 pages).

Wichels, A.; Harth, B.; Gerdts, G., (2016). Linking Education and Science to Increase Awareness of Marine Plastic Litter—Distribution of Plastic Waste on Beaches of the German Bight. Fate Impact Microplastics Mar. Ecosyst., 162–163 (8 pages).

World Bank, (2018). What a waste: An updated look into the future of solid waste.

Letters to Editor

GJESM Journal welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in GJESM should be sent to the editorial office of GJESM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.
[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.
[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.
[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.
[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.
[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.
[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.