IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2017) 8-2

Research articleerd

Waste Characterization, Quantification and Residents’
Perception towards Solid Waste Management in Ubay,Bohol
CAROL J. PAYOT*Bood Elementary School, Ubay, Bohol, Philippines
Email: carolyneteodoro@yahoo.com

REGUCIVILLA A. POBAR
Bohol Island State University, Tagbilaran City, Bohol, Philippines
Received 1 January 2017

Accepted 29 October 2017(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract This study aimed to determine the percentage composition of the waste generated,
the per capita waste generated per day, perception towards solid waste management practicesof the residents of Ubay and the problems encountered in implementing the Solid Waste
Management during the year 2015. This study employed descriptive-survey methods indetermining the perception of the residents towards solid waste management and theproblems encountered. As to the percentage composition, the researcher conducted
documentary analysis from the data generated by the Solid Waste Management Office of theLocal Government Unit (LGU) of Ubay, Bohol. A first-income class municipality in theisland province of Bohol, Philippines. It is in the northeast of the province, and has an areaof 335.06 square kilometers (129.37 sq. mi.) with 61 km (38 mi.) of coastline. It has 44
barangays. The Local Government Unit (LGU) of Ubay. One of the mandates of thegovernment is to take care of the environment and protect the residents from various risks ofenvironmental degradation. Findings showed that over fifty percent (50%) of the waste
generated were biodegradable (organic) materials. The per capita waste generation was 0.065
kg. Residents had a moderately positive attitude towards solid waste management. The
researches recommended that the LGU-Ubay, together with the barangay units, schools,
NGO’s and other responsible persons, may find more effective and efficient ways ofincreasing residents’ participation level in solid waste management. The Solid Waste
Management Board of Ubay may prioritize in strengthening the area of education and training
to increase awareness of the residents regarding solid waste management. Further studies
may be conducted formulating models that will show the solid waste flow of Ubay, Bohol(or other municipalities). An impact analysis of the strategies employed by municipalities inaddressing problems of solid waste may be included.
Keywords attitude, biodegradable waste, Per Capita Waste Generation, perception,
waste characterization, waste quantification

INTRODUCTION
In the midst of rapid development and industrialization, proper solid waste management practices
play a vital role in maintaining the ecological balance of the country. Solid waste constitutes a major
problem in most developing countries. Garbage is becoming a big problem in many places of theworld and Ubay is no exception. Ubay, the research locale of this study, is a first-income classmunicipality in the island province of Bohol, Philippines. It is in the northeast of the province, andhas an area of 335.06 square kilometers (129.37 sq. mi.) with 61 km (38 mi.) of coastline. It has 44
barangays. Local Government Unit (LGU) of Ubay. One of the mandates of the government is totake care of the environment and protect the residents from various risks of environmentaldegradation.

Ⓒ ISERD25

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2017) 8-2

Waste management is one of the most intractable barrier in which administrators andenvironmental agencies are facing today. Ogwueleka (2009) reported that solid waste management
is by far one of the greatest challenges that the country is facing. Human activities generate wastes,
and the way these wastes are handled, stored, collected and disposed off can pose risks to theenvironment and to public health. Problems and issues of Municipal Solid Waste Management(MSWM) are of immediate importance. Ogunyanwo, (2014). This has been acknowledged by mostgovernments, however rapid population growth overwhelms the capacity of most municipal
authorities to provide even the most basic services Zurbrugg (2000). Due to their busy schedule, they
just want to dispose their waste out the house. Unfortunately, public agents and urban authorities do
not have adequate capacity to handle the increasing solid wastes mainly due to limited public budgets.
A consequence of failure to remove solid waste are healthy hazards like tetanus, water contamination,
sanitary and environmental problems such as pollution. In most developed countries, solid waste isdisposed off in sanitary landfills. The buffering capacity of soil makes it possible for landfills to holdwaste and prevent pollution of surrounding environment Carlson (1976); as cited by Kaluli (2011).It
was provided in Article 11 of the Philippine Constitution, that the State shall protect and advance theright of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony ofnature. Thus, the Philippine government takes into consideration the promulgation of various
Presidential Decrees and the enactment of several Republic Acts which took direct action on solid
waste management.
The most recent act is the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003) which
was signed into law on January 26, 2001. The law mandates all, and specifically the local government
units (LGUs) “to adopt a systematic, comprehensive and ecological SWM program”. RA 9003 adopts
a community-based approach. As an alternative, sanitary landfills should be developed as a final
disposal site but they should be operated in accordance with the guidelines presented in the act
Bernardo (2013).
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to assess the solid waste management practices of the residents of Ubay, Bohol,
Philippines, in the aspect of waste quantification and characterization, as well as their perception
towards their attitude in solid waste management practices during the year 2015.
METHODOLOGYThis study employed descriptive-survey method in determining the perception of the residents
towards solid waste management in terms of attitude, and the problems encountered. As to thepercentage composition, the researcher conducted documentary analysis from the data generated byLocal Government Unit of Ubay, Bohol, Philippines.
The instrument of this study is fivefold which consist the following aspects, namely: Percentage
Composition of Waste Generated, Per Capita Waste Generation per Day, Strategies in Reducing SolidWaste, Attitude of the residents towards waste management, and Problems Encountered During theImplementation of Solid Waste Management. This study was conducted in Ubay, Bohol, Philippines.
This is a first- class municipality in the northeast of the province of Bohol with an area of 335.06
square kilometers (129.37 sq. mi.) and 61 km (38 mi.) of coastline with 44 barangays.
There were the three hundred sixty four (364) randomly selected respondents who were official
residents of nineteen (19) randomly selected barangays of Ubay, Bohol. This number was the result
after using Slovin’s formula in determining the appropriate sample size.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1 shows the percentage composition of waste generated per day. It discloses that among thefour (4) classifications of solid waste, biodegradable materials generated got the highest weightⒸ ISERD

26

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2017) 8-2

composition of 214.29 kg or 52.77%. This is marginally higher than the country’s average percentage
composition of organic waste (bio-degradable) which 50% (Gapuz, 2011). These wastes includefood/kitchen waste (vegetable and fruit residues, fish cleanings and animal carcasses) yard wastes(grass, twigs, and leaves) and agricultural waste.
Table 1 Percentage Composition of Waste Generated Per Day
Classification ofwaste
Biodegradable

Weight composition (kg)214.29Percentage
composition
52.77

Recyclable

82.07

20.21

Residual

60.99

15.02

Special

48.73

12.00

Total

406.08100.00%Samplesize

Per capita
waste

6,258

0.065

The least generated waste was the special waste with 48.73 kg or 12 %. This waste refers tohousehold hazardous wastes. This includes empty cans/containers of paints and thinners, household
batteries, spray canisters and the like. Wastes may be hazardous wastes if they exhibit any of the fourcharacteristics of a hazardous waste (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity) as defined in
Article 3 of Chapter 11 of the hazardous waste regulations (Sections 66261.21 to 66261.24). Thesefour characteristics are: Ignitability – Ignitable wastes can create fires under certain conditions,
undergo spontaneous combustion, or have a flash point less than 60°C (140°F). Examples include
waste oil and used solvents. The characteristic of ignitability is defined in section 66261.21 of thehazardous waste (Gyambrahg, 2016).
This agrees to the study of Oluwaleye (2012) that hazardous wastes which can stem from anyof the above sources. Therefore it will not be taken as a part of the classification of wastes by source,
rather as a cross-cutting character for all these wastes (UNESCAP, 1993). Moreover, the amount ofwaste generated in either developed or developing countries depends on the population, degree ofurbanization and industrialization, and intensity of agricultural activities.
Typical hazardous waste routinely generated at offshore facilities include waste oil, oilcontaminated rags, hydraulic fluids, used batteries, empty paint cans, waste chemicals and usedchemical containers, used filters, fluorescent tubes, medical waste and among others. All operatorsof fixed and mobile units must submit a Waste Management Plan (WMP) showing roles andresponsibilities, a list of expected waste streams generated and a Waste Location. (Gyambrahg, 2016)
Recycle/ Compost Recycling is a process to convert waste materials into reusable material to prevent
waste of potentially useful materials, reduce the consumption of fresh raw materials, reduce energy
usage, reduce air pollution (from incineration) and water pollution (from landfilling) by reducing theneed for "conventional" waste disposal and lower greenhouse gas emissions as compared to plasticproduction.
Table 2 Per Capita Waste Generation per Day of Ubay, Bohol
Total waste composition (kg)

Sample size

406.086,258

Per capita waste
0.065

Table 2 reflects the per capita waste generation per day of Ubay, Bohol. The per capita waste
generation per day was based on the total weight composition (in kilograms) divided by the six
thousand two hundred fifty eight (6,258) sample size of the solid waste characterization conductedby the Solid Waste Management Office of the Local Government Unit (LGU) of Ubay, Bohol. As
shown in Table 2, total waste composition is 406.08 kg with 6,258 sample size, the per capita waste
generated is 0.065. It is below the average waste generation which is 0.3 kg per person per day in therural areas (Atienza, 2011).
Table 3 manifests the residents’ perception towards solid waste management practices. It canbe noted that Item number 2 or “Environmental education should be taught in schools” ranked firstⒸ ISERD

27

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2017) 8-2

among the items. This means that the residents still need to be educated about the environment andhow to take care of it.
Table 3 Residents’ Perception on their Attitude towards
Solid Waste Management Practices (n=364)
Statements

WM

DVRank

1. I play an important role in the management of garbage in my community.
2. Environmental education should be taught in schools.
3. The purchase decisions that I make can increase or decrease the amount ofgarbage.
4. I’m concerned that burning garbage can be bad for my health and…others.
5. People who throw garbage on the streets and in the drains and gullies lackwillingness.
6. The government is doing enough to fix the garbage problems.
7. Correct garbage management should be taught in schools.
8. Other personal issues (like crime, unemployment, and cost of living) are
more important to me than a garbage-free community.
9. Regular collection of garbage is not the only solution to garbage problems.
10. Picking up garbage around my community is my responsibility as a citizen.
11. Public education about proper garbage management is one way to fix thegarbage crisis.
12. It is very important that the government of Philippines put recycling laws
and programs in place.
Composite Mean

5.30
5.57

STA
STA

41

4.87

MA

9

5.10

MA

7

4.14

SLA

12

4.27
5.12

SLA
MA

11
5.5

4.32

SLA

10

4.99
5.12

MAMA8
5.5

5.34

STA

3

5.37

STA2

4.96

MA

Legend:RangeDV
5.16 – 6.00 - Strongly Agree (STA)
4.33 – 5.15 - Moderately Agree (MA)
3.50 – 4.32 - Slightly Agree (SLA)
2.67 – 3.49 - Slightly Disagree (SLD)
1.84 – 2.66 - Moderately Disagree (MD)1.00 – 1.83 - Strongly Disagree (STD)

Level of Attitude
Highly Positive
Moderately Positive
Slightly Positive
Slightly Negative
Moderately Negative
Highly Negative

Item number 5 “People throw garbage on the streets and in the drains and gullies because oflack of education regarding proper solid waste management practices” obtained the lowest weighted
mean of 4.14 (slightly agree). In the absence of a basic facility of collection of waste from source,
citizens are prone to dumping waste on the streets, open spaces, drains, and water bodies in thevicinity creating unsanitary conditions (Kumar and Nandini, 2013). This mind set is primarily
responsible for the unscientific systems of waste management in the country. The relevance of thestudy has direct relation to the present environmental issues. There is a global awakening on the issue
by the world leaders. Most often the present efforts are disproportionate because all the stakeholders
want others to control the contamination.
Citizens assume that waste thrown on the streets would be picked up by the municipality throughstreet sweeping. In this wise, individual’s perception will influence the cultural values, responses,and success of the solid waste management system.
Table 4 shows a composite mean of 3.28 that implies very serious problem encountered during
the implementation of SWM. In particular, item number 12 “Health problems (presence of dengue)”got the highest weighted mean of 3.54 (very serious). Meaning, there is considerable potential for
health hazardous exposure that occurred during the implementation of solid waste management.
Therefore, the implementation of SWM takes into consideration through rigid process, monitoringand evaluation in order to lessen uneasiness about the potential health effects of waste management
processes, particularly within communities living in the proximity to relevant sites.

Ⓒ ISERD28

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2017) 8-2

On the other hand, item number 7 “Lack of trained personnel” obtained the lowest weighted
mean of 3.08 (serious). Without adequately trained personnel for solid waste policy making andimplementation, sustainable solid waste management planning and implementation is not realizable.
Table 4 Problems Encountered in the Implementation of Waste Management (N=364)
Statements

WMDVRank

1. Public indifference (public don’t care)
2. Inefficient collection of garbage
3. Lack of financial resources
4. Lack of authority to make financial decision

3.22
3.25
3.19
3.19

SSSS

98
11.5
11.5

5. Non-operation of good disposal
6. Lack of trained personnel
7. Lack of enforcement measure and capability
8. Foul odor of the dumpsites…
9. Lack of awareness among the people….
10. Lack of training on proper….
11. Health problems (presence of dengue)
12. Lack of collecting vehicle….
13. Open burning
14. Lack of leadership and commitment….
15. Lack of training and non-existence of SWM ….

3.18
3.08
3.16
3.36
3.37
3.34
3.54
3.31
3.35
3.26
3.21

SS
S
VSVS
VSVS
VSVSVS
S

13
15
14
32
5
1
6
4
7
10

Composite Mean

3.28

VS

Legend:Range
3.26 – 4.00
2.51 – 3.25
1.76 – 2.50
1.00 – 1.75

-DV/Level of Seriousness
Very Serious(VS)
Serious(S)
Not so Serious(NS)
Not a Problem(NB)

CONCLUSION
There is an increased organic materials generated, with less per capita waste a day. This means that
residents had moderately positive attitude towards solid waste management. As the result community
awareness and mobilization is important in addressing problem and appropriate plan of action todirect the goal on solid waste management.
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that the local government unit (LGU), together with the barangay units, schools,
NGO’s and other responsible persons, may find more effective and efficient ways of increasing
residents’ participation level in solid waste management. Individual household in barangay level andall other sources such as markets, commercial buildings, institution, schools, hospitals andagricultural industry must implement multi-stream waste-sorting and collection of garbage. TheSolid Waste Management Board may prioritize in strengthening the area of education and training
to increase awareness of the residents regarding solid waste management. The community shallcontinue designing and implementing strategies to reduce the generation of waste and to promoteawareness among people.

Ⓒ ISERD29

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2017) 8-2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The researchers would like to express their thanks to the administration of BISU for the approval toconduct the study, the local government units of Ubay for allowing them to conduct the study in theirlocality, to the administrators of three districts of Ubay for giving the researchers enough time tofinish the study, to the respondents for honestly answering the questionnaires, to all who helped
them in this study, they would like to thank for the support given to them, for without them thisresearch study would have been in vain.
REFERENCES
Atienza, V. 2011. Review of the waste management system in the Philippines, Initiatives to promote waste
segregation and recycling through good governance. In M. Kojima, and E. Michida, Economic Integration
and Recycling in Asia, An Interim Report (65-97), Institute of Developing Economies.
Carlson, C. 1976. Land application of waste material. Soil Conservation Society of America.
Ebikapade Amasuomo, 2015 (Corresponding author) SEBE, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens
Road, G4 0BA Glasgow, UK. Analysis of Public Participation in Sustainable Waste Management Practicein Abuja, Nigeria Environmental Management and Sustainable Development, ISSN 2164-7682 2015, Vol.
4, No. 1.
Gapuz, E. 2011. Workshop on waste plastics management in developing countries. AIST Tsukuba. Director,Environment Management Office, Center for Sustainable Human Development. Development Academy ofthe Philippines.
Gyambrah, R. 2016. Disaster and risk management, hazardous waste management in Ghana, University ofCape Coast, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Geography and Egional Planning, MISQEM, IOSH,MIIRSM, IRCA, Jan 27, 2016.
Kaluli, W., Mwangi, H., and Sira F.N. 2011. Sustainable solide waste management strategies in Juja, Kenya.
Department of Biomechanical and Environmental Engineering. Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture
and Technology, Nairobi.
Kumar, M. and Nandini, N. 2013. Community attitude, perception and willingness towards solid waste
management in Bangalore city. International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 4 (1), Department ofEnvironmental Science, Bangalore University, Jnanabharathi campus, Bangalore-560 056, Karnataka,India.
Ogunyanwo, O.O. and Soyingbe, A.A. 2014. Determinants of solid waste collection and disposal, Differentials
of high and low density areas of Sango-Ota Metropolis, International Journal of Development Research, 4(10), 2005-2009.
Ogwueleka, T.C. 2009. Municipal solid waste characteristics and management in Nigeria. Iranian Journal ofEnvironmental Health Science & Engineering, 6 (3), 173-180.
Zurbrugg, C. and Ahmed, R. 2000. Enhancing community motivation and participation in solid waste
management. SANDEC News, No. 4, Department of Water and Sanitation in Developing Countries(SANDEC) at the Swiss Federal Institute for Environmental Science and Technology (EAWAG).

Ⓒ ISERD30