Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Waste Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman

Review

Policy implementation of the Republic Act (RA) No. 9003 in the Philippines: A case study of Cebu city Dickella Gamaralalage Jagath Premakumara a,⇑, Aloysius Mariae L. Canete b, Masaya Nagaishi c, Tonni Agustiono Kurniawan d a

Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Kitakyushu Urban Centre, Kitakyushu 805-0062, Japan A2D Project-Research Group for Alternatives to Development, Inc., Cebu 6000, Philippines Kitakyushu International Techno-cooperative Association (KITA), Kitakyushu 805-0062, Japan d United Nations University-Institute of Advanced Studies of Sustainability (UNU-IASS), Yokohama 220-8502, Japan b c

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Available online 23 November 2013 Keywords: Republic Act (RA) No. 9003 Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM) 3Rs Capacity building Integrated planning Partnership building

a b s t r a c t Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM) is considered to be one of the most serious environmental issues in the Philippines. The annual waste generation was estimated at 10.6 million tonnes in 2012 and this is expected to double in 2025. The Republic Act (RA) No. 9003, widely known as the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, provides the required policy framework, institutional mechanisms and mandate to the Local Government Units (LGUs) to achieve 25% waste reduction target through establishing an integrated solid waste management plan based on the 3Rs (reduce, reuse and recycling). Although the initial impact of the LGUs is still very limited in implementing the national mandate, this article highlights the successful experiences of Cebu, the second largest city in the Philippines, in reducing its MSW generation by more than 30% in the past three years. This study also explores the implementation process, innovative actions taken by the Cebu City Government in implementing the national mandate at local level and identifies the factors that influence the policy implementation. The findings suggest that the impacts of the national mandate can be achieved if the LGUs have the high degree of political commitment, planning and development of effective local strategies in a collaborative manner to meet with local conditions, partnership building with other stakeholders, capacity development, adequate financing and incentives, and in the close monitoring and evaluation of performance. Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents 1. 2.

3.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Materials and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1. Current SWM in the Cebu City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1. Location and population. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2. MSW generation and characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3. Waste collection and treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.4. Institutional and financing mechanism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1. Theoretical framework on policy implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2. Research method and data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1. Political commitment and development of effective institutional arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.1. Cebu City Ordinance No. 2017. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.2. Cebu City Ordinance No. 2031. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

⇑ Corresponding author. Address: International Village Centre, 2F, 1-1-1, Hirano, Yahatha Higashiku, Kitakyushu City 805-0062, Japan. Tel.: +81 93 681 1563; fax: +81 93 681 1564. E-mail address: [email protected] (D.G.J. Premakumara). 0956-053X/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.10.040

972 972 972 972 972 973 974 975 975 975 975 975 975 976

972

D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

3.2.

4.

Development of strategies and innovative programmes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1. Information and Education Campaigns (IEC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.2. Kwarta sa Basura (Cash from Trash) programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.3. Promotion of composting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.4. Financial and incentives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3. Cooperation with local and international agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1. Introduction In recent years MSWM has been considered to be one of the most serious environmental and public health issues confronting urban areas in developing countries. Rapid urbanisation, economic growth and development, changes in lifestyles and consumption patterns have resulted in a remarkable increase of waste volume and its diversity in recent decades (Minghua et al., 2009; Oliveira et al., 2013). To overcome these challenges, many developing countries with their counterparts in industrialised countries have developed appropriate national policies and strategies in implementing the 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) approach to reduce the amount of MSW generated at source, rather than later at the end-of-cycle (Premakumara et al., 2011). However, the implementation of these national policies and strategies meaningfully at a local level is a far challenging issue for many developing countries. This is not exceptional in the Philippines, the country which identified MSWM as one of the serious urban environmental issues (Aguinaldo, 2008). With an average per-capita waste generation ratio of about 0.5 kg per day, the annual waste generation in the Philippines is estimated at 10.6 million tonnes in 2012. This figure is expected to double in 2025 (World Bank, 2012). The National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC) reported that the country’s solid waste generation includes 73% of households, 26% of commercial establishments, institutions and industries, as well as 1% of healthcare facilities (NSWMC, 2007). Recognising the importance of taking immediate actions to address this fast growing urban environmental issue at national level, the country’s Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), established under the Office of the President, prioritised proper management of MSW in its 12-point environmental agenda. Through the passage of the 2000 Ecological Solid Waste Management Act, widely known as the Republic Act No. 9003 (RA 9003), proper MSWM has been institutionalised at LGU level. As a national policy, the RA 9003 adopts a systematic, comprehensive, and ecological solid waste management (SWM) programme that recognises the LGUs as the leader in its implementation. The policy mandates the creation of Solid Waste Management Boards (SWMB) from the national, provincial, city/ municipal, down to the barangay, the lowest-level political and administrative body in the Philippines. As a support system for establishing an integrated SWM system, the RA 9003 mandates the establishment of material recovery facilities (MRFs) in all barangays based on 3Rs in order to achieve its 25% waste reduction target by 2010. Consequently, instead of using open dumping or illegal burning, the RA 9003 advises LGUs to adopt sanitary landfills (Antonio, 2008). While the RA 9003 is a major breakthrough in reforming MSWM in the Philippines, its implementation at the LGU level is still very limited. However, Cebu, the second largest city in the Philippines with one million inhabitants, has successfully implemented the national policy of RA 9003. This article highlights Cebu’s experience in achieving 30% waste reduction target by

976 976 976 977 977 977 978 979 979

involving innovative institutional and partnership strategies. It also presents reformation of the MSWM in Cebu and theoretical perspectives on policy implementation. Innovative actions taken by the Cebu Government and its cooperation with different stakeholders such as the local community and the private sector are also critically discussed. Key factors that have contributed to the implementation of the RA 9003 at the LG level are also analysed and elaborated.

2. Materials and methods 2.1. Current SWM in the Cebu City 2.1.1. Location and population As one of the highly urbanised centres in the Central Philippines, Cebu City is situated in the Central Eastern part of the Cebu Island, bounded by the Mandaue City in the North and the Talisay City in the South, while on the East is Mactan Channel and on its West is the municipality of the Balamban and the Toledo (Fig. 1). Historically, the city was a small fishing village. Since 1521, the Cebu City has grown into a highly urbanised metropolitan city in the Philippines. Currently, Cebu is the second largest of growth centre in the Philippines, next to the Metro Manila, the country’s capital. Due to its strategic location and easy accessibility by air and sea transport, service industries such as tourism as well as information and communication technologies (ICT) predominantly control the economic activities of the city. With a total land area of 326.10 km2, the Cebu city is divided into 80 barangays that consists of 50 urban barangays and 30 rural barangays. Urban area shares almost one-fourth of the city’s total land area, while the rest is rural areas. In terms of topography, the coastal areas that accounts to about 15% of the city’s total land area (50 km2), have a relatively flat terrain, while 85% has elevations ranging from 40 to 400 m above sea level (Cebu City, 2012). As of 2013, the Cebu City has a population of 866,171 inhabitants with 3% of annual growth rate. However, the city’s population rises to over a million during daytime due to the influx of the working force who commutes into the city daily. On average, the city has a population density of 2204 persons per m2. There are about 161,151 households in Cebu City with five (5) members per household on average (Ancog et al., 2012).

2.1.2. MSW generation and characteristics Due to the rapid urban and economic growth in the city in recent years, the daily MSW generation has increased almost 200% from 212 tonnes in 1982 to 420 tonnes in 2010. Most of the MSW in the city originates from households, which account for about 40%, while the rest come from commercial establishments, public markets, schools, hospitals, and industries. Fig. 2 indicates that almost 50% of the waste is biodegradable, while 40% is recyclable and the rest is hazardous (Cebu City, 2012).

D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

973

Fig. 1. Location of Cebu City in the Cebu Island (Cebu City, 2012).

2.1.3. Waste collection and treatment Waste collection in the city operates 24 h in three shifts and the service is provided by the Department of Public Services (DPS) in the form of garbage trucks and barangay trucks. Two popular collection methods are practiced for waste collection, including communal method where common waste receptacles are strategically located in public places, while the household collection is carried out by garbage trucks across the Cebu City.

The above two methods are supplemented with private initiatives, which collect MSW from commercial establishments such as shopping malls. Although DPS owned 29 units of garbage compactors and open dump trucks, consisting eight brands from donor countries (Japan, Korea and Sweden), only 62% (18 units) still works properly, while the rest are out of work due to mechanical breakdown (UNEP-IETC and HIID, 1996).

974

D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

Fig. 2. Composition of MSW in Cebu City (Cebu City, 2012).

In addition, an incinerator that cost PHP 10 million (US$ 0.2 million) was built in 1997, thanks to the loan (US$ 4.5 million) from the Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund for the sanitary landfill under the Metro Cebu Development Project. Despite it was acquired to dispose of the hospital and hazardous waste, the city was unable to use the incinerator because local community and environmentalists strongly opposed its operation when the Clean Air Act was enacted in 2009. As a result, the Cebu City disposes of its collected waste daily in the Consolacion, an adjacent municipality of the Cebu City, by paying PHP 700 (US$ 14) per tonne as a tipping fee.

Fig. 3. The condition of Inayawan Sanitary Landfill in 2010.

The Inayawan Sanitary Landfill (ISL) with 15 ha land area, is located in Barangay Inayawan. It was constructed in 1998 under the financial and technical assistance of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). The ISL, which is commissioned to receive 400 tonnes of MSW daily, is estimated to have a life span until 2005. As it was built based on semi-aerobic design, the landfill gas is vented through a series of horizontal and vertical pipes. However, due to the lack of adequate expertise in utilising and maintaining the equipment and facilities, insufficient financial resources for operation and maintenance coupled with the increasing volume of MSW disposed in the landfill daily, after having operated for a few years, the landfill almost reaches its maximum capacity (Fig. 3). Although its lifespan was limited to seven years only, the Cebu City Government still continues to operate the landfill by using a compactor machine for levelling and pushing the garbage disposed of at the landfill until it was decommissioned in March 2012. Inside the ISL, there was a PhilBio biogas reactor for collecting sewage and leachate. However, due to technical problems, the reactor was closed. Hence, leachate treatment pond served as an impounding basin. It discharges untreated leachate to the surrounding areas, causing land and water contamination issues (UNEP-IETC, 2009).

2.1.4. Institutional and financing mechanism The city is headed by a Mayor. Under the RA 7160, the city government is empowered within its jurisdiction to design and implement its own organisational structure and staffing pattern. By taking into accounts the city’s service requirements and financial capability, staff recruitment is subject to the minimum standards and guidelines prescribed by the city’s Civil Service Commission. The DPS of the Cebu City Government is responsible for providing SWM and disposal, street cleaning, street lighting, potable water supply as well as operation and maintenance of garbage trucks. There are three department divisions within the DPS for carrying out its functions, including Street Cleaning Division, Garbage Collection and Transport Operation Division, and Administrative Division. Territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays. The barangay is the smallest unit of local government. A group of barangays constitutes a city or municipality. A publicly elected council, led by a captain heads each barangay in the city. Barangay council is involved in local planning and governance as well as in charge of passing and enforcing laws, especially those pertaining to SWM. Further, waste segregation and collection at the barangay-level, particularly biodegradable and reusable wastes, are carried out by barangays respectively. The collection of residuals and hazardous waste is the responsibility of the DPS. The Cebu City collects service fees for waste collection that is incorporated in local real estate and business taxes. In addition, various economic tools are available in the Cebu City to support the SWM operation. These include annual SWM appropriations, fees, fines, subsidies from provincial and national governments,

D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

grants from international organisations and funding agencies. In the past years, the Cebu City has been subsidising the cost of waste collection, transportation and disposal amounting to about PHP 47 million (US$ 1 million) annually. This subsidy does not include the costs of supervision, fuel, lubricants and aid to the different barangays (Ancog et al., 2012). 2.2. Methodology 2.2.1. Theoretical framework on policy implementation The implementation of public policies has become one of the major issues in developing countries including the Philippines. The difficulty in turning policy into practice had been identified by scholars since 1970s. A pioneering work, entitled ‘‘Implementation’’ authored by Pressman and Wildavsky (1973), recognised the importance of implementation as a key element of policy making and public administration. Public policy is a set of interrelated decisions taken by a political actor or group of actors concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving them within a specified situation where those decisions should, in principle, be within the power of those actors (Howlett and Ramesh, 1995). Literally, implementation is defined as ‘carrying out, accomplishing, fulfilling, producing or completing a given task’. Pressman and Wildavsky (1973) defined it with respect to its relationship to policy as laid down in official documents. According to them, policy implementation might be viewed as a process of interaction between goals-setting and actions that need to be taken to achieve them (Pressman and Wildavsky, 1973). When implementation subject was initially studied, there was an assumption that the implementation would be happening automatically once the appropriate policies were established. However, when this did not take place, research was undertaken to explain the causing factors of implementation failure, either due to a combination of bad execution, or to inappropriate policy and/or bad luck, and it was concluded that the implementation was a political process similar to policy formulation (McLaughlin, 1987). Recent work tried to understand how the implementation works in general and how its prospects might be improved (O’Toole, 1995). As research on implementation gradually evolved, two schools of thought were developed for describing the implementation processes, such as top-down and bottom-up approaches. On one hand, those who support top-down approach view policy designers as the main actors and policy implementation processes as flowing downwards from the state structures. On the other hand, those who favour bottom-up approaches argue that the target groups and those who deliver the services should be seen as central to the process (Matland, 1995).

Fig. 4. The reduction of MSW in Cebu City (2005–2012).

975

2.2.2. Research method and data collection This study focused on the implementation of RA 9003 at LGU level. Based on the above theoretical discussions, it examines both top-down and bottom-up approaches. In the top-down approach, the study reviews the policy itself and the extent to which objectives of the national policy are achieved at LGU level. By using the bottom-up approach, it focuses on the implementation process and innovative actions taken by the Cebu City at local level building partnership and cooperation among different stakeholders, including citizens and private sector to achieve the key policy targets set in the national policy, such as reduction of waste to be landfilled by 25%, introduction of separated waste collection, establishment of MRF and composting facilities for waste recycling at barangays and stop of open dumping (see Fig. 4). This research applied a single case study method based on qualitative approach. According to Palumbo and Harder (1981), a case study represents an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context. A case study illuminates a decision or set of decisions, why they were taken, how they were implemented, and what results were attained (Yin, 2003). As pointed out by (Creswell, 2003), qualitative research is exploratory and it takes place in natural settings. In this study, primary data were collected by the authors through field visits, semi structured interview with key stakeholders, and direct involvement in on-going project activities in the Cebu City, while secondary data were obtained from relevant institutions. An assessment of policy and institutional arrangements was carried out by reviewing the Cebu City’s ordinances and legislations that came into effect in 2000. Data related to SWM and financing arrangements were analysed based on the volume, collection schemes, garbage fees and monitoring done by the Cebu City’s DPS and Office of the Chair of Environmental Committee. In addition, semi-structured interviews were also conducted with members of the Cebu City Council and department heads of the city government, Cebu Environmental and Sanitation Enforcement Team (CESET), Barangay Environmental Officer (BEOs), private sector and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in Cebu.

3. Results and discussion 3.1. Political commitment and development of effective institutional arrangements Under the leadership of the City Mayor and the Chair of the Environmental Committee, who was a barangay captain in the city, the municipality has promulgated several proactive legislative measures to strengthen the policy framework at the LGU level and to implement the RA 9003.

3.1.1. Cebu City Ordinance No. 2017 Under this Ordinance which passed on October 6, 2004, the SWMB was established to prepare, submit and implement working plans for a safe and sanitary management of MSW generated in the city. The SWMB was headed by the Mayor with the relevant representatives from other sectors. One of its mandates is to provide a long-term vision for SWM in the city, which includes the development of a solid waste management plan (SWMP). A 10-year plan for Solid Waste Reduction in Cebu City was drafted in 2005 with the technical assistance provided by the Fort Collins (Colorado, USA) under the Resource Cities Program of the International City/County Management Association. The SWMP, resulting from consultations with the various sectors of the community, integrates the various solid waste management plans and strategies of the barangays.

976

D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

The SWMB is also required to adopt measures to promote and to ensure the viability and effective implementation of the SWMP in its component barangays by forging cooperation with private sector and local NGOs. In addition, it adopts specific revenue-generating measures to promote the viability of the SWMP. To ensure an effective planning and implementation of the SWM programs in their respective barangays, the barangay solid waste management committee (BSWMC) was established in each barangay. Under the Kitakyushu Initiative Network for Clean Environment (2000/2010), which was initiated by the Kitakyushu City and the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) and assisted by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), the Cebu City has set a target to reduce waste disposal into local landfills by 50% by 2015. 3.1.2. Cebu City Ordinance No. 2031 The Cebu City Ordinance No. 2031 has passed in November 2004 aiming to promote solid waste segregation at its source with penalties for violations and facilitates the creation of a special fund for incentives. Since April 2011, the city has strictly enforced segregated waste collection. The implementation of ‘No Segregation, No Collection policy’ educates citizens to separate waste at source into different categories: biodegradable, recyclable and residual. According to the Ordnance 2031, barangay officials, designated barangay residents, academic institutions, civic groups, community-based organisations (CBOs), NGOs and representatives from the private sector may represent the Mayor to apprehend any person or entity caught violating any provision of the same Ordinance. To ensure the enforcement of the Ordinance, the Cebu Environmental and Sanitation Team (CESET) was established to issue citation tickets to its violators. As a result of violations, about PHP 1.5 million (US$ 0.3 million) was generated by the City since its implementation in March 2008. Any person, who has been found guilty of violating Ordinance 2031, shall be punished by a fine that ranges between PHP 1000 (US$ 20) and PHP 5000 Peso (US$ 100) or by imprisonment (between one month and six months), or combination of both fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court (Ancog et al., 2012). If the violator cannot pay the fine, the person has to render community service from one day to fifteen days at any barangay, as determined by the Monitoring/Enforcement Unit of the Cebu City SWMB. Fig. 5 shows that the number of violations since the CESET enforcement program has gradually decreased until the end of 2011. This indicates that the environmental awareness of the people has improved. About 50% of collecting fine from the barangay shall proceed to the city treasury, while 30% shall go to the barangay where the apprehension is made and the rest shall go to the apprehending person. The City Government provides incentives to barangays and the apprehending persons on a semi-monthly basis.

Fig. 5. The total number of violations recorded during April–December, 2011.

3.2. Development of strategies and innovative programmes Recently the Cebu City has introduced several innovative programmes and strategies in order to improve its MSWM system based on the integrated resource recovery approach. These strategic programmes include information and education campaign (IEC), cash back from trash programme, composting of organic waste, finance and incentive mechanisms, local and international partnership in implementing SWM programmes. They started with the development of pilot models experimenting innovative methods (simple, cost-effective, user-friendly and creating economic benefits) as an evidence base to influence both community members and local decision makers. Once the community has acquired enough experiences in pilot model in terms of its applicability and effectiveness, programmes are scaled up and developed accordingly to ensure political commitment, develop effective strategies, institutional arrangements, budget allocation, capacity building and continuous monitoring and evaluation of the performance among relevant stakeholders. 3.2.1. Information and Education Campaigns (IEC) The Cebu City Government, especially the Office of the Environmental Committee has recognised that the implementation of the SWM programme depends on the level of environmental awareness among its community to ensure their active participation. The environmental committee has carried-out various information and education campaigns to improve their understanding on the need to comply with the laws and ordinances on MSWM. A system was established by recruiting at least five volunteers from each barangay with community-leadership elements, known as BEOs, to serve as the main initiator of these education campaigns. For this reason, BEOs have become an important medium through which the Cebu City government can communicate its policies to citizens at the barangay level. Both CESET and BEOs encourage not only participation of household members, information sharing, but also implementation of new waste management system and monitoring and evaluation system using communication channels, such as meetings, discussions, and seminars (Fig. 6). The IEC activities in the barangays were complemented with recycling education programmes at schools and aimed at increasing the level of environmental awareness and participation among students. 3.2.2. Kwarta sa Basura (Cash from Trash) programme To highlight the economic value of wastes, the office of the environmental committee, which was assisted by the CESET and the BEOs, has organised women’s organisations to conduct a buy-

Fig. 6. Public seminar on MSWM in Cebu City.

D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

ing day of all recyclable waste, called ‘Cash from Trash program’. Once a week, local communities gather recyclable waste and bring it to the collection site for sale. Every barangay has been assigned to have a buyer of recyclable materials using seed money given by the Cebu City Government. This programme was first piloted in the barangay Luz and eventually expanded to other barangays. These women’s organisations represent a driving force to improve the lives of its members, as they are gradually turned into cooperatives which would eventually become an avenue for addressing other environmental, economic, and social issues in the community. Furthermore, a number of NGOs in the city have implemented programmes that contribute to waste reduction and recycling, while providing alternative sources of income to other family members. These organisations help housewives to be skillful in handicraft making and provide an initial capital as a grant to implement their programmes. Members make various types of handicrafts such as bags, slippers and wallets using recyclable materials and then sell them in the market. Two biggest malls of Cebu City, namely the SM City Cebu and the Ayala Mall, have created their Waste Market programs in partnership with the barangays under their corporate social responsibility (CSR) program. 3.2.3. Promotion of composting With over 50% of municipal solid waste includes organic materials, composting programmes helped the city to reduce the volume of organic waste being disposed to the sanitary landfill. Model composting facilities are established at different levels. At the household level, composting baskets are distributed to make compost using kitchen waste. BEOs have educated housewives how to use the compost basket in collaboration with the women’s organisations, homeowners associations and NGOs (Fig. 7). To date, city government has freely distributed about 2350 baskets across the city. However, it is important to note that the success of this composting programme depends on the commitment of the users, the level of education and the extent of follow-up mechanisms. In addition, barangay composting facilities are established at a small-scale operation. These composting schemes, which have a receiving capacity of less than one tonne per day, relied on segregated waste collected from local community. The BEOs collect the waste separated from households and make compost at existing facility using a vermicomposting (special organisms such as red worms, African night crawler and the European crawler). In addition, the other seminal method using fermented microorganism, known locally as ‘‘Takakura Method’’ which is introduced by the Kitakyushu City also works very well in Cebu,

977

Fig. 8. Takakura composting in barangay Kalunasan.

the same as in Surabaya (Indonesia) (Kurniawan et al., 2013) (Fig. 8). The compost products are mainly used as fertilizers for beautifying the barangays. In addition, they are commercially sold within the barangay although potential customers are limited within the personal network of the collectors and core members of the association. Compost, which is sold from PHP 8 (US$ 0.16) to PHP 20 (US$ 0.4), targets middle and high-income groups in the areas, where these schemes are located. This scheme encounters a number of challenges such as cooperation level of residents, suitable location, bad odour complaints by nearby residents due to vermicomposting facilities, and the lack of capacity, interest and willingness of barangay officials and staff to tackle these issues. 3.2.4. Financial and incentives The City Government has introduced supportive financial measures to encourage the barangays to establish recycling and composting programmes. The annual municipal budget of PHP 20,000 (US$ 400) for each barangay is allocated based on the demand-driven approach. This budget can be used not only to cover the construction costs of MRF and composting, but also to acquire necessary equipment and community education programmes. In addition, the City Government through its BEO volunteers and CESET conducted project-demonstration on composting activities. In 2012, about 58 barangays have established MRF and composting programmes. The City Government allocated a budget for purchasing the compost fertilizers at PHP 5/kg (US$ 0.1/kg) that could be used for greening the parks and playgrounds across the city. To promote environmental awareness, competition among local barangays under the urban and rural categories is conducted annually to award and recognise the best environmental barangay in the city. 3.3. Cooperation with local and international agencies

Fig. 7. Community training on household composting.

To improve environmental protection, the Cebu City also has developed a strong networking with local and international groups and institutions. Educational institutions such as the South-western University, the University of Cebu and the St. Theresa College have implemented in-house solid waste management initiatives program including IEC among their students. The St. Theresa College has implemented a school-wide SWM program particularly in integrating environmental concerns in its curriculum and instruction. It has established a model composting facility to demonstrate the practical process in making compost. Lihok Filipina, which is a network of Filipino women, has also carried out an education campaign programme in the Cebu City re-

978

D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

Table 1 Job opportunities through composting and material recovery facility in barangay Luz (Premakumara, 2012a,b). No. of new job opportunities are created Direct job opportunities at the composting facility and the material recovery facility Waste separation, collection and transport to the facility 15 Composting facility 6 Eco centre assistant 2 Indirect job opportunities created through the program Collection of recyclable materials Production of handicrafts from the recyclable materials Household composting and making worms for selling Total

40 75 200 338

Average monthly income in PHP

Total monthly income generated in PHP

6000 (US$120) 6000 (US$120) 3000 (US$60)

90,000 (US$1800) 36,000 (US$720) 6000 (US$120)

1500 (US$30) 1500–3000 (US$30–60) 500–1000 (US$10–20)

60,000 (US$1200) 112,500 (US$2250) 100,000 (US$2000) 404,500 (US$8090)

have undertaken several programmes, including a communitybased wastewater treatment facility for solving the SWM issue in the Guadalupe River, a major river system in the Cebu City. In its recent partnership, the Kitakyushu City has been involved in providing technical assistance for promoting organic waste composting using the Takakura Home Composting Method. Both cities are building a partnership to implement a plastic material recycle programme. During 2000–2005, Fort Collins (Colorado, USA), a sister city of Cebu, provided the technical assistance to draft its solid waste management framework and to enhance the capability of local officials with respect to SWM. Furthermore, Haarlemmermeer (The Netherlands), another sister city, helped Cebu in educating waste scavengers at the ISL on how to make organic compost as an alternative source of income. 4. Conclusions Fig. 9. Central recycling facility in Inayawan.

lated to SWM at household level. The NGO has encouraged housewives to participate in a ‘‘Cash from Trash’’ programme that produces homemade crafts that could be sold in the market. Alyansa sa mga Lumulupyong Kabus Alang sa Pagpalambo (ALCAP) or Alliance of the Urban Poor for Development has also engaged its member for producing and selling paper products to generate additional income and/or job opportunity for their family members. Table 1 shows the average income from recycling activities in the barangay Luz. The private shopping malls in the city are also involved in supporting the community initiatives in implementing recycling programmes. Ayala Mall has organised the Cebu Business Park and Neighbouring Barangays Altruistic Alliance Inc. (CBPNBAAI) to build partnerships among all tenants and the surrounding barangays to implement a recycling programme. Ayala Mall tenants sell their recyclables to enable them to be bought and reused by other potential buyers. Likewise, the SM City Cebu has designated every Saturday as Waste Market day, where Cebu barangay residents can bring in their recyclable waste. Two central waste treatment facilities were established by private ventures near the ISL to treat plastic and organic wastes. A plastic recycling facility managed by the Cebu Solid Waste Management Inc. can treat about 100 tonnes of MSW per day collected within the city, while the Composting Plant Bio Nutrient Waste Management Inc. operates a central composting plant to treat about 10–20 tonnes per day of organic waste collected from shopping malls and public markets in the city. Both the plants created job opportunities for over 150 people, who worked at the landfill site (Fig. 9). Apart from local collaboration, international partnership has strengthened the MSWM programmes and initiatives of the city. The Cebu city is one of the most active members of the Kitakyushu Initiative Network for Clean Environment. Since 2000, both cities

The RA 9003 has set guidelines on proper MSWM among LGUs in the Philippines and aims at protecting public health, ensuring environmental sustainability and economic efficiency. In this regard, the recent experience of the Cebu City in MSWM has clearly demonstrated that establishing a supportive institutional framework at the local level would have improved SWM in terms of waste separation and reduction. It is conclusively evident from our survey that about 60% of barangays in the Cebu City have been involved in waste separation at source in recent years and most importantly, its 30% waste reduction target by 2012 has been achieved. The environmental condition in local areas has substantially improved by establishing appropriate waste collection and treatment methods and increased environmental awareness and public participation among residents. In addition, treating solid waste at source have minimised transportation costs, reduced the amounts of waste to be landfilled, and prolonged the life of landfills, thus saving municipal expenditure for landfill operation and its management. There has also been a considerable reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) generated in the ISL through organic waste composting across the Cebu City. This suggests the potential of creating job opportunities and additional incomes for the urban poor and scavengers through the implementation of the MRF, and composting programmes. Furthermore, lessons learned from these programmes not only create economic opportunities within the local neighbourhoods, but also promote public green spaces for community involvement, building partnerships and social capital for achieving sustainable development goals at the local level. Nevertheless, these national policies were effective when they were accompanied by strong political commitment at local government level in establishing a supportive institutional framework and ensuring political will. Both of them are necessary to carry out innovative, strategic programmes when financial and organisational resources are available.

D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

Needless to say, community participation is essential to implement the SWM programme successfully. This can be achieved when the programmes provide economic incentives coupled with a strict enforcement. For this reason, active participation and partnership among different stakeholders such as businesses, nongovernmental organisations, and barangay councils need to be established to ensure the programme’s sustainability. International partners might also have played major roles not only in providing technical know-how and capacity building opportunities, but also in facilitating research and best practices, thus providing development assistance to improve the city’s waste management system. This case study highlights that the policy planning or formulation in developing country like the Philippines is merely a topdown approach where policies are set at higher levels in a political process and are then communicated to the local level for implementation purpose. However, policy implementation is a bottomup approach which requires more interactive process involving different stakeholders and complex partnerships that reflected in a wide range of decision-making process. Successful policy implementation therefore involves not only just a common agenda and long term joint commitment, but also a degree of political commitment, supportive institutional structure, appropriate local legal frameworks and availability of adequate resources (financial, human and technological). Acknowledgements The authors greatly acknowledge Hon. (Ms.) Nida Cabrera, Chairperson, Committee of Environment, Cebu City, Mr. Amancio S. Dongcoy, Regional Solid Waste Management Committee, Environmental Management Bureau (EMB), Regional Office VII, Eng. (Mr.) Gualiza, Director, Department of Public Services (DPS), Cebu City and all those who provided valuable information for this study. This paper is based on the experience of implementing the Community-based Solid Waste Management System Development Project in Cebu City under the financial assistance of the Japan Fund for Global Environment (JFGE) during 2010/2012. In addition, Dr. Kurniawan thanks the Japan Society for Promotion of Sciences (JSPS) for the support of his fellowship. The authors would also like to thank all anonymous reviewers for their inspiring and constructive comments on the paper. References Aguinaldo, E., 2008. National and Local Initiatives on Solid Waste Management and Implementation of 3Rs in the Philippines. Environment and Livable Cities 08, Manila, Philippines.

979

Ancog, R.C., Archival, N.D., Rebancos, C.M., 2012. Institutional arrangements for Solid Waste Management in Cebu City, Philippines. Journal of Environmental Science and Management 15 (2), 74–82. Antonio, L.C., 2008. Study on 3R Policy and Waste Exchange in the Philippines. In: Michikazu, K., Enri, D., (Eds.), 3R Policies for Southeast and East Asia. ERIA Research Project Report, Tokyo. Cebu City, 2012. Cebu City’s Community-Based Composting and Solid Waste Management. In: Premakumara, D.G.J., et al. (Eds.) A Follow-up Seminar on KitaQ System Composting in Asia, 17-20 July 2012, JICA, IGES, Kitakyushu, Japan, pp. 15–16. Creswell, W.J., 2003. Research Design, Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. London, Sage. Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., 1995. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Sub systems, second ed. Oxford University Press. Kurniawan, T.A., Oliveira, J.P., Premakumara, D.G.J., Nagaishi, M., 2013. City-to-city level cooperation for generating urban co-benefits: The case of technological cooperation in the waste sector between Surabaya (Indonesia) and Kitakyushu (Japan). Journal of Cleaner Production 58, 43–50. Matland, R.E., 1995. Synthesizing the implementation literature: the ambiguityconflict model of policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART 5 (2), 145–174 (April 1995). McLaughlin, M.W., 1987. Learning from experience: lessons from policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 9 (2), 171– 178. Minghua, Z., Xiumin, F., Rovetta, A., Qichang, H., Vicentini, F., Bingkai, L., Giusti, A., Yi, L., 2009. Municipal solid waste management in Pudong New Area, China. Journal of Waste Management 29, 1227–1233. National Solid Waste Management Commission, 2007. Top 15 cities solid waste generators in the Philippines, NSWMC, Manila, Philippines. Oliveira, J.P., Doll, C., Kurniawan, T.A., Yong, G., Kapshe, M., Huisingh, D., 2013. Promoting win-win situations in climate change mitigation, local environmental quality and development in Asian cities through cobenefits. Journal of Cleaner Production 58, 1–6. O’Toole, L.J.R., 1995. Rational choice and policy implementation. American Review of Public Administration 25 (1), 43–57. Palumbo, D.J., Harder, M.A. (Eds.), 1981. Implementing Public Policy. Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass. Premakumara, D.G.J., 2012. Best Practices and Innovations in Community-Based Solid Waste Management in Cebu, KITA, IGES, A2D, Kitakyushu, Japan. Premakumara, D.G.J., 2012. Establishment of the Community-Based Solid Waste Management System in Metro Cebu, the Philippines. In: KITA & IGES (Eds.), The Report for the Establishment of the Waste Management System in Metro Cebu, Philippines, Kitakyushu, Japan. Premakumara, D.G.J., Abe, M., Maeda, T., 2011. Reducing municipal waste through promoting integrated sustainable waste management (ISWM) practices in Surabaya City, Indonesia. In: Villacampa, Y., Brebbia, C.A. (Eds.), Eco System and Sustainable Development VIII. WIT Press, pp. 457–470. Pressman, J.L., Wildavsky, A., 1973. Implementation, First ed. University of California Press, Bekeley. UNEP-IETC and HIID, 1996. International Source Book on Environmentally Sound Technologies for Municipal Solid Waste Management. UNEP, International Environmental Technology Centre, Osaka. UNEP-IETC, 2009. Technology for Waste Management/Infrastructure – Cebu, Philippines, Osaka. World Bank, 2012. What a Waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste Management, Washington DC, USA. Yin, R.K., 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Third ed. In: Applied Social Research Method Series. vol. 5, Sage Publications, Inc.