IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

Research article
erd

Assessment on the Solid Waste Management and Sanitation
Programs in the Municipality of Balilihan
RIAME T. TUICO
Bohol Island State University, Balilihan Campus, Bohol, Philippines
Email:catherine_napiñas@yahoomail.com

JOCELYN P. LUMACTUD
Bohol Island State University, Balilihan Campus, Bohol, Philippines

EVANGIELYN P. LUMANTAS
Bohol Island State University, Balilihan Campus, Bohol, Philippines

DHOREE MAY R. MARAVILLA
Bohol Island State University, Balilihan Campus, Bohol, Philippines

ROCELL S. SILAGAN
Bohol Island State University, Balilihan Campus, Bohol, Philippines

ERNESTO B. ALIJAY
Bohol Island State University, Balilihan Campus, Bohol, Philippines

VIRGILIA D. TEJADA, MAg. Dev.
Bohol Island State University, Balilihan Campus, Bohol, Philippines
Received 20 February 2015

Accepted 13 May 2015(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract The study was conducted to assess the sanitation and solid waste management(SWM) programs and its practices implemented by the Municipality of Balilihan, Bohol
during the Academic Year 2013-2014. This study used the descriptive-survey method withthe aid of a researcher’s made questionnaire which was administered to 1,152 respondentsrepresenting 31 barangays of Balilihan. Based on the result, it was found out that most of
the respondents oftentimes practice the proper SWM and the programs are oftentimes
observed. In terms of Sanitation, majority of the respondents always practice the proper
way and the programs are always observed. The conclusions revealed that SWM programs
and SWM practices have a consistent result of oftentimes observed and oftentimes
practiced. These simply explained that the programs and measures were known to some
respondents and some did not give attention to support the programs. Sanitation programs
and practices were also consistent of always observed and always practiced. The resultshows that the residents nowadays learned to care for sanitation unlike in the past wheresanitation was given less attention. It is recommended that the Local Government Unit ofBalilihan should collaborate with other stakeholders for public campaigns on proper
sanitation and SWM practices. Also, strict monitoring and evaluation should be developed
to provide clear strategic direction to Local Integrated Solid Waste Management andprocurement of additional vehicles to enhance the efficiency in the garbage collection.
Another, that activities such as Barangay Participatory Evaluation and Assessment, Houseto-House Campaign, convene the residents for an Orientation Seminar on solid waste
segregation, Posting of streamers, posters, house tags and bill boards should be undertaken
to raise awareness on solid waste management and encourage the public to recycle
recyclable items.
Keywords solid waste, solid waste management, sanitation, sanitation managementⒸ ISERD

126

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

INTRODUCTION
One of the problems confronting the country today is the solid waste disposal. The disposal ofwaste materials has become a race between education and catastrophe. Through man’s activities,
his own environment has been disturbed and so, degraded resulting to the disruption of theecological balance (Cunningham and Cunningham, 2008). It implies that future waste will pose
greater health and environmental risks. Meanwhile, in the present condition in Balilihan, it isevident that in the past ten years, municipality’s population, infrastructure facilities and businessactivities have been increasing. These socio-economic changes, however, have resulted in risingsolid waste generation and it is aggravated by improper SWM practices of waste sources. At
present not only the poblacion barangays are being served by the municipal waste collection
services, but the entire 31 barangays are included.
Recognizing the need to take steps in addressing this solid waste problem and pursuing thethrust to make Balilihan as an eco-tourism site, the Local Government of Balilihan has developed
the Ten-Year Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan (ISWM) for 2009-2018 (Municipality ofBalilihan, 2009). The town is implementing strategies to improve local solid waste management.
This plan was not made only to satisfy the mandate of the Ecological Solid Waste Management Actof 2000 or RA 9003, but also to guide the LGU to achieve its Vision, Mission, and Goals for aneffective ISWM Program that would aid in the LGUs general long term objective for a responsible
development in the municipality.
As for that basis, to show that BISU Balilihan Campus as an educational institution supports
the program of the local community, the faculty were motivated to conduct a study that determine
how far the local government unit of Balilihan have implemented their Solid Waste Managementand Sanitation Programs and to further assess the practices of the Balilinhon on solid waste
management and sanitation and in one way helped enrich the consciousness of the people andbecome responsible in their actions. Besides, this will serve as a guide in improving the well-beingof the town and could further upgrade the living standards through a clean and healthy environment(Austral, 2008; Bordador, 2005; Navarro, 2010).
OBJECTIVE
The study was conducted to assess the status of implementation of the sanitation and solid waste
management programs of the Municipality of Balilihan, Bohol and to assess further the practices of
the Balilinhon on solid waste management and sanitation during the Academic Year 2013-2014.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The study used descriptive survey method with the aid of a questionnaire. Its main purpose is toassess the implementation of the SWM and Sanitation Programs set by the Local Government of
the Municipality of Balilihan. This study was also designed to assess the practices of solid waste
management and sanitation in every household.
Sampling Procedure
The local of the study was the municipality of Balilihan. It was composed of 31 barangays with atotal household of 3840. 30% of the total household population which is 1152 was the sample size.
The respondents were chosen through random sampling in which, 30% of the population of every
purok in every barangay was randomly selected.
Methods of Data CollectionⒸ ISERD

127

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

The researchers asked permission from the office of the Municipal Mayor to conduct this study.
Barangay Captains of the different barangays were also informed before the questionnaires weredistributed.
The prepared questionnaires were validated through pilot testing to neighboring town. The
final copy of the questionnaire was translated into Mother tongue language for the respondents tofully understand each statement.
The validated copy of the questionnaire was distributed personally to the respondents.
Retrieval was done immediately after answering. It was tabulated and interpreted when all the data
were gathered.
Hundred percent of the respondents answered all items in the questionnaire. Since theresearchers personally distributed the questionnaire to the respondents, they will be able toemphasize the importance of their responses.
Analytical Procedures
To determine whether the programs are properly implemented by the Local Government ofBalilihan, the average weighted mean was used.
∑ 𝑓𝑤

Formula: WM = ∑(1)𝑓

where WM = weighted mean, f = frequency, w = weight
The means were interpreted and given the scale values for Programs and Practices.
Weighted Mean
3.25 – 4.00
2.50 – 3.24
1.75 – 2.49
1.00 – 1.74

Description
Always Practiced/ Always Observed(Habitual-Above the median)
Oftentimes Practiced/Oftentimes Observed (A little above the median)Seldom Practiced/Seldom Observed(A little below median)
Never Practiced/Never Observed

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1 Assessment on solid waste management programs
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Waste Management Programs
Full waste segregation of wastes into biodegradable, recyclable, residualand special wastes;
No segregation, no collection policy;
Information dissemination campaign through general assemblies, stickers
are posted in public areas and leaflets for the use of biodegradable
environmental friendly materials.
Livelihood programs for recyclable materials
Prohibition of burning and dumping of waste in an open area or vacantpublic lots.
Give incentives at the Barangay level for greater implementation on Solid
Waste Management and Environmental clean-up.
Requiring local farmers to practice organic fertilizer.
Promote the following waste practices: waste reduction, recycling andcomposting.
Prohibition of dumping of waste in an open area or vacant public lots.
Average Weighted Mean

WM

Description

3.23

Oftentimes Observed

3.15

Oftentimes Observed

3.20Oftentimes Observed

3.14

Oftentimes Observed

3.16

Oftentimes Observed

3.07

Oftentimes Observed

3.11

Oftentimes Observed

3.18

Oftentimes Observed

3.19
3.15

Oftentimes Observed
Oftentimes Observed

Table 1 shows the Solid Waste Management Programs in the household sector. This shows thatmost of the programs are “oftentimes observed” with an average weighted mean of 3.15 in spite ofits strict implementation.
The government is one of the agencies that take a very critical rule in conserving theenvironment since they have the full authority to control the massive negative effect against thedestructive environmental practices.
Ⓒ ISERD128

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

Likewise, the government is doing a massive campaign on the use of biodegradable
environmental friendly materials. However, the result indicates the need to further empower thecampaign to elevate their responses as shown in item no. 3 with an WM of 3.20. On the other hand,
one way of motivating residents to promote proper implementation on Solid Waste Management isto give incentives to those who are good followers to the imposed policy. However, therespondents revealed that there is a need to initiate “gimmick” to encourage the residents toparticipate in such program. This item has a WM 0f 3.07.
Furthermore, the responses of the remaining items fall into “oftentimes practiced”. These areitem number 4 and 7 which is an indication that there are still SWM programs which are not fullyrecognized by the people within the area.
On the other hand, hundred percent of the respondents answered all items in the questionnaire.
Since the researchers personally distributed the questionnaire to the respondents, they will be able
to emphasize the importance of their responses.
Table 2 Actual solid waste management practices
Solid Waste Management Practices
A. Disposal of Waste
1. Biodegradable Waste
a. No burning
b. Used as fertilizer
c. Placed in the compost pit
d. Practice segregatione. Leave it to decompose elsewhere
Average Weighted Mean
2. Non-biodegradable such as plastic, cellophane, bottles, styroforea. No burningb. Placed in the garbage can for non-biodegradable waste.
c. Send to the garbage collector
d. Self recycling to those that can be utilizede. Market sellable waste
Average Weighted Mean
3. Breakablea. Put/throw to garbage container intended for delicate and fragile.
b. Market sellable wastes
c. Recycle and utilize
d. Sent to the garbage collector.
Average Weighted Mean
B. Other Practices
1 . Comply waste collection schedule.
2 . Refrain from using disposable plastic materials.
3 . Participate community clean-up activities

WM

Description

3.03
3.07
3.58
3.03
2.30
3.14

Oftentimes Practiced
Oftentimes Practiced
Always Practiced
Oftentimes PracticedSeldom Practiced
Oftentimes Practiced

3.03
3.12
3.05
3.3
3.75
3.25

Oftentimes Practiced
Oftentimes Practiced
Oftentimes Practiced
Always Practiced
Always Practiced
Oftentimes Practiced

3.03
3.28
3.25
2.99
3.13

Oftentimes Practiced
Always Practiced
Always Practiced
Oftentimes Practiced
Oftentimes Practiced

2.94
2.45
3.85

Oftentimes Practiced
Seldom Practiced
Always Practiced

Table 2 indicates the SWM Practices of the respondents. It shows that item “Placed it in thecompost pit got the highest mean response of 3.58 with the qualitative response of “AlwaysPracticed”. The result implies that the respondents often practiced to decompose theirbiodegradable waste and placing it in the compost pit. Item on “Leave it to decompose elsewhere
got the lowest weighted mean of 2.3. The respondents are cognizant of the possible health andenvironmental problems if their wastes are scattered anywhere.
In terms of non-biodegradable wastes, it shows that item “Market sellable wastes and self
recycling to those that can be utilized” got the mean of 3.75 and 3.3 respectively with a descriptive
rating of “Always Practiced. The respondents observe thrift and even make money out of theirwastes. While on the other hand, items, “Placed it in the garbage can for non-biodegradable waste,
no burning, and sending it to the garbage collector were rated as Oftentimes practiced by therespondents. This means that there are still respondents who are not fully aware of the negative
outcome of their activities.
Table 2 also indicates the SWM practices in terms of fragile/breakable and hazardous wastes.
The practices that always perform by the respondents are the marketing of sellable waste andⒸ ISERD

129

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

recycling and utilizing wastes. Other important practices are leaved behind. It means that majorityof the people are not so careful of the probable accidents or other problems which their acts maycause.
On the other hand, other practices aside from waste disposal waste are shown on the table. As
manifested, participating community clean-up activities were always practiced by the respondents.
This is a manifestation that the people are cautious in maintaining the cleanliness of theirsurroundings. However complying collection schedule and refraining from using disposable plastic
materials were oftentimes practiced.
Table 3 Assessment on sanitation programs
Sanitation Programs
Municipal ordinance requiring all household to use water sealed toilet.
Regular checking of water supply by sanitary inspector.
Municipal ordinance requiring all household to create safety septic tank.
Conducting symposium, lectures, forum or campaign about sanitation.
Regular monitoring of commercial water refilling station and private water
sources by sanitary inspector.
6 . Ordinance prohibiting the dumping of solid waste, toxic materials andgarbage in canals and drainage.
Average Weighted Mean
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

WM
3.91
3.62
3.86
3.21

Description
Always Observed
Always Observed
Always Observed
Always Observed

3.61

Always Observed

3.73

Always Observed

3.66

Always Observed

Table 3 shows the various sanitation programs formulated by LGU Balilihan. Based on theresults, the implementation of the programs and measures was always observed by its constituents.
It garners an average weighted mean of 3. 66. Based on the results, item 1 which is “Municipal
ordinance requiring all household to use water sealed toilet” got the highest rating of 3.91 whichmeans always observed. Authorities strictly implemented, evaluated and monitor the program.
They also provide free water sealed toilet for the less fortunate just to ensure full implementation ofthe program.
In addition, the item 3 which is “requiring all households to create safety septic tank” and item
6 “The ordinance prohibiting the dumping of waste in canals and drainage” got second in the rank.
Based on the result, majority of the respondents are already disposing their wastes in a septic tank.
However, there are still few, especially those who are situated far from their neighbors, who justthrow their wastes in their yard or drainage. They believed that as long as they cannot bring any
problem to other people, it is just fine to throw their garbage anywhere.
The Municipality of Balilihan has abundant water supply. Based on the result, the residents ofBalilihan always observed that these sources of water (water refilling stations, private water
sources and other water supply) were regularly checked by the public sanitary inspector. In fact,
there were only rare cases of health problems among the residents which is caused by contaminatedwater supply.
Table 4 presents the Sanitation Practices related to toilet facilities; water supply; sewage,refuse container, laboratory, canals and drainage system in the household area. Based on the result,
the respondents were always using clean water sealed toilet with the average weighted mean of3.96, functional septic tank with 3.93, adequate supply of water for toilet maintenance with 3.93.
The respondents are educated already of these proper sanitation practices.
In terms of water supply, majority of the respondents answered “always practiced” thatbottled drinking water from a supplier is handled, stored and protected from contamination with thehighest average weighted mean of 3.73. This means that the respondents were very cautious of thewater they drink. It’s a good sign that they are protecting their health against illnesses and diseases.
It also revealed in the table that the respondents always dispose sewage discharge in a proper
receptacle, make use of functional lavatory, provide tight fitting lids to refuse container, and makesure that drainage are in good working condition with an average weighted mean of 3.92, 3.90,
3.86 and 3.74 respectively. The respondents have responded positively the programs of themunicipality.

Ⓒ ISERD

130

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

Table 4 Actual sanitation practices
Sanitation Practices
Toilet1 . Use of clean water sealed toilet.
2 . Make use of adequate supply of water for maintenance.
3 . Utilize functional septic tank.
Average Weighted Mean
Water Supply
1 . Make use of drinking water from a source (pipe) that passed the requirementsof sanitary inspection.
2 . Bottled drinking water from a supplier is handled, stored and protected fromcontamination.
3 . Regular checking of water stored in the container against contamination andinsects.
Average Weighted Mean
Refuse Container, Lavatory, Canals and Drainage
1 . All sewage discharge are disposed in a proper receptacle.
2 . All refuse containers are provided with tight – fitting lids or cover andmaintained to be vermin (pests, rats, mice, cockroach, etc.) proof.
3 . Make use of functional lavatory.
4 . Make sure that canals and drainage are in good working condition that allow
the flow of water and free from vermin (pests, rats, mice, cockroach, etc.)
Average Weighted Mean

WM

Description

3.96
3.93
3.93
3.94

Always Practiced
Always Practiced
Always Practiced
Always Practiced

3.39

Always Practiced

3.72

Always Practiced

3.68

Always Practiced

3.60

Always Practiced

3.92

Always Practiced

3.86

Always Practiced

3.90

Always Practiced

3.74

Always Practiced

3.85

Always Practiced

CONCLUSION
1. Solid Waste Management Programs were not fully enforced in the Municipality of Balilihanas supported by the Solid Waste Management Practices in the household.
2. Lack public awareness and information campaign of the significant impact of the proper solid
waste management.
3. Decomposed waste is not properly used for fertilizer by the farmer.
4. There are still residents who dispose biodegradable waste within their compound.
5. Irregular schedule of garbage collection result to dumping of garbage in the roadside.
REFERENCES
Austral, L.P. 2008. Awareness on environmental issues, college students, university of Bohol, Tagbilarancity: Proposed Enhancement Program. University of Bohol, Phillipine.
Bordador, M.C.V. 2005. College biology. Anvil Publishing, INC.
Cunningham, W. and Cunningham M. 2008. Principles of environmental science, inquiry and applications.
Published by McGraw-Hill, USA.
Navarro, V.N. 2010. Biodegradable waste management in duero vermi composting model. University ofBohol, Phillipine.
Salgados, J.M. 2010. Solid waste awareness, practices, problems and issues of households in Tagbilaran
City: Intervention Program. Unpublished Dissertation, Cebu Normal University, Cebu City, Phillipine.
Municipality of Balilihan. 2009. Ten (2009-2018) years integrated solid waste management plan.
Municipality of Balilihan, Phillipine.

Ⓒ ISERD131