unpresented by any organisations or bodies. Key element of the community’s depicted
in Figure 15.2.
Figure 15.2: Key Element of the Community.
Continuous engagement with community on environmental management is only possible
when the communities are interested and accept the partnerships exist within the
components of environmental management. This can take place when the information
on environmental management needs is attained, roles and responsibilities of agencies
and public/local communities are identified, and development and implementation of the
programme and the progress of the implemented environmental-related programmes
are monitored and evaluated as well as shared with the communities.
In addition, it is important to highlight and guide the communities along different forms of
participation, i.e., education, information dissemination, public advocacy, public hearings
and submissions, and litigation. Furthermore, strategic shift from consultation to shared
decision-making with respect to environmental management plans at the local level also
promotes and encourages community involvement (Figure 15.2).
350
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
Increased in Community Participation on Environmental Management is facilitated by:
Increased public awareness and Growth of human rights in legal
concern about the relationships and political systems that has
between environment health and heightened people’s expectations
human well-being. of participation in policy-making.
The prevailing concern of the
international community for
‘good governance’ and the
strengthening of civil societies.
Role of Communities
Community members play meaningful roles in deliberations, discussions, decisions on
environmental management. Empowering community members will provide in-depth
learning of environmental management issues, allowing them to see multiple sides by
tying different issues and increase the likelihood that projects and/or solutions will be
widely accepted. Community participation on environmental management are not limited
to the commitment of the government on multilateral environmental agreements, such
as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) or due to the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) or the Paris Agreement. Community are now equipped and able to voice
for their rights on the environment – as highlighted by the UNEP as well as described in
Agenda 21 (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1992). Environmental rights mean any proclamation
of a human right to the environmental conditions of a specified quality. Environmental
rights are composed of substantive rights (fundamental rights) and procedural rights
(tools used to achieve substantial rights).
Communities in Malaysia was initially exposed to awareness campaigns such as clean-
up activities known as “Gotong – Royong”. Later, these activities expanded to include
initiatives such as recycling initiatives, zero carbon, tree planting, river monitoring, air
and haze monitoring, forest catchment and logging monitoring, encroachment of forest
reserve, illegal hunting, poaching and many more. Activity-based initiatives started to
be part of the community lives, adapted as part of their livelihood through rainwater
harvesting, zero waste initiatives, drain clean up, used cooking oil collection, composting,
bring your own containers etc. Communities have also taken ownership to adopt and
monitor river pollution or water-related issues, to advocate for the environment, not only
highlighting pollution issues, but also issues on the illegal land clearance/encroachment.
As a result, we can now see more community-based organisations and civil societies
actively being the front-liners to educate, enhance the knowledge, promote community
engagement in environmental issues as well as playing proactive roles to initiate local
actions. In addition, the concept of Citizen Monitoring or Citizen Scientist is being widely
accepted in Malaysia by NGOs, governance and public. Community-Based Monitoring
Systems/ Citizen Science is a well-known concept to enhance local governance and
participatory decision making that promotes greater transparency.
351
Besides the initiatives undertaken by global players, federal and local government,
Environmental NGO (ENGO) also plays significant role to protect the environment.
ENGOs are committed towards enhancing the environmental sustainability agenda at
the local, national and international levels by nurturing and empowering stakeholders
to address the gaps related to environmental issues. The objectives are to create
awareness amongst the general public, research on environmental issues, promote
education in the schools and highlight best management practices, to facilitate policy
development, building institutional capacity, facilitating independent dialogue with civil
society to help people live more sustainable lifestyles among others are some general
environmental components. Some ENGOs look into specific issues related to the
environment, advocacy, community empowerment and some oversees environment
at the macro level by addressing climate change, sustainable lifestyles, green index,
technology and many more. Malaysian Environmental NGOs (MENGO) was formed
in November 2001, a coalition of the ENGOs in Malaysia to support and facilitate
interaction and network among the members and also with the government of Malaysia
on environmental policies. To date, there are more than twenty ENGOs in Malaysia
actively highlighting and addressing various environmental issues (Figure 15.3). The
ENGOs are also currently playing significant roles in providing inputs and sharing their
expertise on policy making, enhancing the framework and development of action plants.
Figure 15.3: Some Example of ENGOs in Malaysia.
Enabling Communities
Human experiences comfort and rejection at various situations and levels of physical,
emotional, psychological and socio-cultural. The interactions accompanied by physical,
352
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
psychological (intellectual and emotional) and socio-cultural are some of the influences
of perceived comfort or discomfort, enabling people to move out of their comfort
zone and address the issues. This is the key towards community engagement in
environmental management. The communities need to be aware of the changes around
them due to the deterioration of the environment and its impact to them in order to be
part of the action. Recognising citizens as the community’s most valuable resource, it
unleashes creativity and acknowledges that collaboration is the primary catalyst to move
forward. One of the identified and acknowledged reasons for the delayed advocacy
on environmental issues among Malaysians is the lack of skills to take actions on the
issues. The previous approach by many which mainly emphasises on awareness and
knowledge failed because the skill that matters the most was lacking. By ensuring that
people have the awareness, knowledge and skill, only then can they take action to fix
the problems at hand using Civic Science Approach (GEC, 2018).
This can be carried out by focusing on the Nature based Solution (NBS) to anchor
issues related to Environmental Management as NBS emphasises the followings:
i. Connect and reconnect to the nature;
ii. Use of natural approach & ingredient;
iii. Focus on usage, needs, holistic plan;
iv. Nature-based success model; and
v. Balanced achievement for all purpose/usage to include environment, economic,
social, religious.
NBS are defined by IUCN as “actions to protect, sustainably manage, and restore natural
or modified ecosystems, that address societal challenges effectively and adaptively,
simultaneously providing human well-being and biodiversity benefits”. NBS is globally
recognised as it works with nature instead of against it, providing platform for ecosystem
improvement besides hydrological efficiency and improving both quantity and quality
of water (for issues or management related to the hydrology issues). By infusing NBS
into environmental management, it can improve both ecological and cultural value of
ecosystem. A number of publications are available online to help the practiser to adopt
and implement the NBS in their environmental management initiatives. An example of a
handbook for practisers is by the European Commission (2021); Evaluating the Impact
of NBS. Besides, NBS is also seen as an important feature to attract and reconnect
people back to nature.
353
Engagement Strategy
There are a number of strategies being used to engage and empower community
participation in environmental management initiatives. Detailed approaches and
collaborations are explained in the following sections with supporting examples.
Civic Science Approach
The Civic Science Approach highlights the importance of awareness, knowledge and
most importantly, the skill to enable communities to take action. For the communities
to take action, they need to be empowered and equipped with sufficient information
and skills as depicted below.
354
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
The approach enables local actions by reconnecting people back to nature and
instil a sense of ownership. In previous generations, the health of the river, the
plants or the soil (environment) can be identified by physical observations, there
was no required laboratory test or technology available. It is known as traditional
knowledge (or backyard science) which was practiced, but forgotten over the time
mainly due to no scientific explanation or justification given to support the ‘theory’
or ‘concept’. However, with the components of the civic science, the action can be
justified and can now be explained to the next generations.
Example:
Ever wonder why the soil at our backyard or countryside homes are fertile? The
food peels and leftovers were buried into the soil providing nutrients. The chickens
roaming around the houses feed on the earthworms that are abundance on the soil,
which also circulate the nutrients in the soil cycle. A big container of water always
available around the house to collect rainwater which is later used to wash the
porch or water the plants. These are some of the traditional science practiced over
time and commercially known now as composting, organic fertilizers and rainwater
harvesting. In simpler terms, it is called circular economy.
Top down and bottom up Approach
Balanced “top down” and “bottom up” approaches are the key in ensuring engagement,
ownership and sustainability. The communities need to be entrusted and given
ownership to adopt and monitor the environment as well as to feel appreciated and
needed (in playing their roles as the stakeholders) in environmental management.
It is important to address this gap to improve the outcome of any initiatives to
ensure its sustainability. Thus, the key of the approach in building relationship
and trust with the government, need to highlight public, private partnership (PPP)
which emphasises collaboration mainly between government agency and a private
sector that benefits all. Furthermore, cross-agency involvement and support among
multiple agencies are crucial for impactful results (e.g. DID, DOE, Local Authorities,
other water related key agencies) as some issues require institutional reforms or
policy change (e.g. sullage issues, Water Quality Index, Fat Oil and Grease (FOG)
Trap, and solid waste issues), which requires significant time and detailed approach.
For the successful and suitable initiative, both top down and bottom up approaches
is vital and the secret relies on how to balance it.
355
Example:
Top Down Approach - The management of company A has decided for an
environmental programme – Citizen Science Leadership (CSL) programme to be
implemented as part of their CSR. The staffs will volunteer to monitor selected
stretch of a river within the vicinity of their office. The staffs were empowered with
the support from the management to actively be the eyes and the ears of the
environment. The staffs follow the requirement of the management and join in to be
part of the initiatives implemented by their management.
Bottom Up Approach - The communities living along river A, who live near to the
water intake have been observing pollution along the river and monitoring the river
condition. A number of complaints and reports were sent to the authorities with
support of photos to take action against the polluter that the communities has also
outreached to. The communities are pressuring the agencies to take action.
There is a need to balance the approach to ensure that the environment gets the
attention and being protected from both aspects.
Participatory and Practical Approach
This approach is focused on ensuring walk the walk through the engagement and
participation. Communities need to participate and be part of the actions. By being
part of the actions, more community members will be encouraged to support the
actions. The focus need to be action-oriented that produces notable changes, which
the communities can observe and relate to, rather than theoretical information
dissemination approach. The actions would also provide opportunity for targeted
groups to practise their skills and knowledge obtained from the project activities.
Example:
River Adoption and Monitoring Initiative. Community members need to be
empowered on the importance of the river (awareness) and its connectivity to water
resources as well as the impact of pollution (knowledge). In order for the community
to monitor and report issues related to pollution, the community members need to
draft pollution mapping and identify the source or pollution (skill). Furthermore, a
stretch of the river relatively near to the community’ vicinity or point of interest need
to be adopted for continuous observation and monitoring (action).
Integrated Approach (SMART Partnership)
SMART Partnership mechanism was established and promoted as the focal
approach to increase awareness and understanding. The goal is to establish and
share strategies to enhance involvement of various governmental agencies, other
relevant stakeholders with local communities, the public and media in rehabilitation
and monitoring activities, linking on-going programmes among different agencies,
information exchange and technical supports. SMART partnerships help to
strengthen the capacity of local stakeholders.
356
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
Example:
A good example of SMART Partnership is the network of Friends of Klang River
Basin (FOKRB) and other Friends of River groups which was established under
this mechanism. The outcomes include establishing partnership between various
local proactive community groups and government agencies for joint adoption,
monitoring, collaboration, information sharing, as well networking amongst
stakeholders as information exchange mechanism to share experience and related
lessons-learned.
Collective Approach
Highlights the power of individual and collective local actions where the community
engagement does not need any big goals or tasks that would require a lot of
support. Instead, it focuses on the actions of individual members on prevention and
protection and nearby local communities and schools. This is a unique approach as
it relates to the power of the people.
People can make a difference by changing their daily habits and this project invests
in this school of thought – by investing in people, the people will change. This
project will give in-depth impact of awareness to community/school to be aware
of the necessity of environment as well as directly perform a holistic concept of
maximise natural resources and minimise the waste or pollution in their daily life.
Example:
Zero Waste Initiative is a collective approach which considered a small personal or
behavioural change that leads to the collective improvement on the environmental
management. For example, recycling plastic, papers and other recyclables reduces
the wastes generated and ending up into the landfill or polluting the river. Similar to
the used cooking oil collection (UCO), where it can be reused for biodiesel, reduces
the dependencies on natural resources and enhances environmental management.
Other similar initiatives that lead to collective approach and impactful changes are
composting, rain water harvesting, solar power, reuse and recycle grey water.
These initiatives help to save and leads to long-term sustainable investment.
EEE (Environment Education and Engagement) Action Model
Education is the key for engagement and empowerment. By educating the
communities through various approaches, it can lead to changes in values, attitude
and behaviour toward the environment. Environmental education generates a
collective effort to recognise and break destructive social structures and practices
that threaten common environmental resources.
Education are not limited to classroom and study materials. Education model is wide
and covers a number of action plans – trainings of trainers, workshops, hands on
trainings, video, mobile applications, social media platforms, debates, community
consultation, webinars, online sharing as well as competitions via social media.
357
In addition to various mediums of engagement highlighted above, the old school
of printed materials or downloadable materials are still available and preferred by
many. The education materials can also be a tool to assist the communities to learn
and apply their knowledge into daily lifestyles. Changes in the lifestyles can lead
to behavioural changes. Therefore, resources and materials need be available in
abundance with different approaches. Example of information materials available
for local communities are freely available within the www.riverranger.my and other
government websites including DOE and SPAN.
Monitoring Tools
Providing the communities with the right monitoring tools is key to community
awareness, knowledge and skills. Community Monitoring Tools (CMT) is designed
to allow communities to use their knowledge, skills and experiences altogether to
record observations and present pollution-related evidence and complaints which
cannot be refused by the authorities or polluters. To empower the communities
on CMT, the communities must be exposed to pollution mapping, the capacity to
identify their river addresses and also exposed to documenting pollution issues with
photo evidence.
A pollution monitoring mechanism is exemplified by a sample form (reference:
https://storyofennore.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/cem-manual-f1.pdf) as shown
in Figure 15.4.
358
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
Documenting Water Pollution
Figure 15.4: Documentation and Reporting Water Pollution Issues
i. Department of Environment Malaysia (https://eaduan.doe.gov.my/eaduan/
index.php)
359
ii. Lembaga Urus Air Selangor (https://www.luas.gov.my/v3/index.php/my/hubungi-kami/
maklumbalas-aduan)
Role of Agencies
The government of Malaysia through the Economic Planning Unit (EPU), Prime
Minister’s Department is carrying out the Water Sector Transformation 2040 (WST
2040) to determine the strategic direction towards repositioning the water sector
as a dynamic growth engine while ensuring water security for all by 2040. The
objectives of WST 2040 are to ensure water supply is available for all and the
water sector as the dynamic growth engine that generates revenue, create job
opportunities and increase efficiency in water management. There are five (5)
identified focus areas and PEOPLE is one of the areas. The PEOPLE is the driver
to transform the water sector– empowered to Drive Water Sector Transformation
especially in Phase 1, i.e., 12th Malaysia Plan (2021 – 2025) by accelerating IWRM
implementation. The Twelfth Malaysia Plan (12MP) covers three (3) development
dimensions – economic empowerment, environmental sustainability and social
reengineering - which was developed to complement the Shared Prosperity Vision
(SPV) 2030 announced in 2019, i.e., economic growth through “equitability of
outcome”. Enabling environmental sustainability through green growth is one of
the pillars to embark on Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) number 6, 7, 12,
13, 14 and 15. Through WST 2040 and the 12MP plans, people can be the driver
for environmental management and they are the biggest resource that need to be
harvested and invested for sustainability approach.
The government of Malaysia and local government agencies are providing
significant importance to local communities through projects and initiatives related
to the environment and socio-economy. Some of the initiatives that emphasises on
community participation are People as Driver under the Water Sector Transformation
2040 Agenda, Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 and Environmental Quality Act’
360
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
1974, Local Agenda 21 by Local Government, Urban Garden and Community
Garden by PLAN Malaysia and many more. Agencies have roles to play in
supporting the communities to implement environmental management. The roles
played by the agencies varies according to their niche. For example, Department
of Environment (DOE) is currently implementing community engagement initiatives
through various awareness programmes, event-based initiatives, schools and
education awareness-based competitions, publication of materials, environmental
quality reports and awards. Table 15.1 highlights how the following agencies
support community involvement in environmental management.
Table 15.1: Initiatives Through Various Programmes
AGENCIES/DEPARTMENT INITIATIVES
Ministry of Housing and i. Local Government – Public & Surrounding Health Solid
Local Government (KPKT) Waste Management - Waste to Art Competition, Zero
Waste Community Initiative (ZeComm), National Recycling
Day Celebration; and
ii. Landscape Development - Urban Community Garden.
Ministry of Environment i. National River Trail Programme (Program Denai Sungai
and Water (KASA) kebangsaan - DSK);
ii. Wakaf Air;
iii. National Environment Day ; and
iv. Other outreach and awareness initiatives undertaken by
DID, SPAN, NAHRIM, IWK and Greentech Malaysia.
Department of i. National Environment Day;
Environment (DOE) ii. Earth Day;
iii. World Environment Day;
iv. Strategic Partnership Programme;
v. Friends of Environment (`Rakan Alam Sekitar’);
vi. Environmental Awareness Camp;
vii. Sustainable School- Environmental Award;
viii. Public Speaking Competition on Environment;
ix. Sustainable Pre-school;
x. Environmental Debate Between Institutions of Higher
Learning;
xi. Langkawi Award- Environmental Sustainability;
xii. DOE’s Awareness Publication; and
xiii. Environmental Knowledge Management Centre.
Government agencies play significant roles not only at the policy level but also
at the implementation level including at the ground/grassroots of environmental
programmes. The key to build relationship and trust with the government is
by highlighting smart partnership with all including local communities CBOS,
NGOs, medias, the public and other stakeholders. SMART Partnership is an
important focal mechanism to increase awareness and understanding between
361
stakeholders in order to establish and share strategies to enhance involvement
in rehabilitation and monitoring activities, linking on-going programmes among
different agencies, information exchange and technical support. SMART
partnership helps to strengthen the capacity of local stakeholders (with a focus
on NGOs/CBOs) to be more actively involved in the protection and conservation
of watershes. A good example of SMART Partnership is the network of Friends
of Klang River Basin (FOKRB) and other Friends of River Groups which
was established under this mechanism. The outcomes include establishing
partnership between various local proactive community groups and government
agencies especially DID and DOE for joint adoption, monitoring, collaboration,
and information sharing as well as networking amongst stakeholders such as
exchanging information to share experience and lessons learned.
To ensure the success and duplication of the SMART partnership mechanism
into all projects/programmes, it is crucial that the relevant government agencies
develop the skills and capacities of their staffs to engage and empower the
communities/stakeholders in environmental management and monitoring. Some
examples of SMART Partnership are the Local Agenda 21 initiatives, the Sg
Penchala River Restoration Project through the Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR) Funding since 2004 with continuous progress and expansion of initiatives
(http://www.waterproject.net.my) and through the Malaysian Government’s
biggest River Restoration and Beautification project, i.e. the River of Life Public
Outreach Programme (ROL POP).
Government agencies can also extend their support and acknowledge the
ongoing programmes or activities as well as collaborate with NGOs and
CBOs by providing technical support. Examples of government-supported
programmes are RIVER Ranger, SMART Ranger and DRH2O programmes
which were established by GEC (an environmental NGO) and acknowledged
and engaged by the DID Malaysia. One of the good example of collaboration
within a programme is the Community Flood-Proofing and Adaptation for Climate
Resilience Programme. Malaysian Water Partnership (MyWP) under the Global
World Partnership (GWP) where aims to create a platform and pathway for
the community to be flood-proofed and adapted for climate resilience. Various
agencies such as DID, NADMA, BOMBA, UPM, GEC and local Authorities join
hands to implement the programme.
Initiatives undertaken by any of the stakeholders, especially the public, local
communities and volunteers need to be appreciated, acknowledged, promoted
and recognised by the relevant government agencies. Some examples of
acknowledgement given are the ROLPOP Award, Sekolah Lestari, SGDs
Awards, World Water Day Award – National Level etc. These appreciations
need to be sustained and continued in order to establish platform(s) that
recognises the efforts of these target groups (players). In addition, financial
support, volunteerism and network among stakeholders and communities are
equally important. National River Care Fund (NRCF) by GEC, LA21 Community
362
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
Initiatives by the Local Authorities, Sekolah Lestari by DOE, Urban Community
Garden Technical Support by the Department of Agriculture (DoA), Friends of
Rivers (FoR) are some of the best available case studies on the roles of the
government agencies in supporting various initiatives being undertaken.
Key Component on Community Engagement
Continuous exploitation of natural resources, degradation of the environment, depletion
of natural resources, unsustainable development and pollutions are detrimental to human
being, flora and fauna. These issues change our ecology, hydrology, raining pattern,
climate change and biodiversity which lead to environmental problems. Those who are
educated on the issues can connect to the impacts faced (form of environmental issues).
However, those who are not well-educated on the issue like the local communities, may
not be able to relate and hence, lack of actions being taken. This is because there is
lack of integrated approach in community involvement. Therefore, it is important for
the community to be engaged in environmental management. There are two forms of
engagement which are TOP DOWN and BOTTOM UP approaches, led by the agencies
and led by the community groups respectively.
Agency Initiated Community Engagement
Key components on Community Engagement for Environmental Monitoring by
agencies focused on the following processes (see diagram and table below) which
significantly leads to successful community engagement.
STEPS DESCRIPTIONS
Site Assessment
Conducting an assessment of a particular area is important to
Appointment Of Desk identify an issue that needs community engagement. This process
Officer also helps in identifying the relevant stakeholders to be engaged.
Identify A Localised Appointing a dedicated desk officer who is not only knowledgeable
Issue but highly experienced in working with community groups is
important.
Identifying issue at targeted project area and providing possible
solutions is important. To identify a localised issue, you must conduct
a pre- assessment study, a survey and research via internet or by
paying attention to issues raised by the mass media and by any
other means of communication. Besides that, community mapping
is also helpful in identifying localised issue.
363
STEPS DESCRIPTIONS
Pre-Consultation It is important to have consultations with stakeholders and
Process separately with community leaders. The relevant stakeholders
must be identified, enlightened and involved at the early stage
of implementation phase. You need to be supportive during the
consultation process (to hold a forum or dialogue with them)
and make sure to obtain community’s consensus before project
implementation begin.
Compilation Of It is important to keep record of and compile information obtained
Information And during the pre-consultation process with communities and other
Analysis stakeholders, a short and long-term action plans developed and
presented to the targeted group to kick start the initiatives.
Establish Task Force Or To Kick start an initiative, establish a formal working committee.
Working Group The committee members is responsible to plan and implement
the actions. All stakeholders need to be involved (government
agencies, private organisations, local politicians and leaders as well
as communities).
Identify Potential It is important to engage potential community group(s) by and filter
Community Group(S) in those who are most willing to participate and work together in the
project.
Consultation With Consult, share and highlight the issues with the identified potential
Potential Community group as well as enlighten them on the benefits (short and long
Group(S) term) to get their consensus.
Local Facilitator Appointing a local leader is important as the person will become the
focal point of communication with and who will ensure all activities
within the project are accomplished.
Empowerment Of Local Once a local leader has been identified, empower the leader via
Leaders capacity-buildings (e.g. trainings, workshops and site visits).
Examples of local leaders are Rukun Tetanga (RTs), Resident
Associations (RAs) and Community-based Organisation.
Support the community- Support community-based initiatives being carried out by providing
based initiative both the technical as well financially resources.
Recognition And Recognising and publicising the efforts of community groups are
Acknowledgement highly important. Such acknowledgement can be done by inviting
media to important events
Incentive Scheme The government agencies can also look into developing an incentive
or award scheme for the communities particularly to support and
recognise their efforts. Acknowledge the short-term successes as
these will indirectly boost communities’ confidence and commitment.
364
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
STEPS DESCRIPTIONS
Monitoring
Project monitoring is important to ensure the effectiveness and
Reporting sustainability. Post-project monitoring is also important to indicate
that the department/agency genuinely cares for the project and the
community.
It is important to establish and maintain open lines of communication
to report the project implementation to (i) the funders/donors (ii) to
the communities and public through progress or annual reports.
Another form of reporting project output is through the publication
of books/guides featuring project findings, pamphlets, posters,
manuals and audio-visual materials which can help to create and
increase community knowledge on environmental facts and issues.
Stories, photos and findings of the project can also be featured on
project website in forms of video or text.
It is also important to tap into social network platforms like Facebook
for reporting their project’s progress and garnering support from
the general public. This has been an effective method in building
awareness and momentum for project activities, while helping to
achieve project’s objectives.
SMART Partnership with government agencies opens up significant notions to
embark such as the advisory role. This role is important in generating ideas and
contributing resources towards project implementation as well as complementing
each other’s knowledge and technical skills. This way, agencies will have a better
understanding of what is required to manage a community based project sustainably
and how to enhance community participation effectively. The government officers
will also be directly exposed to the issues faced by the communities and able to
provide the relevant solutions in hand with the government/agency’s goal. It is also
an opportunity for the officers to build relationship and network with the community
members which in return, the communities will have direct access/contact with the
relevant government officers.
The SMART Partnership that highlights the engagement of multi-governmental
agencies are beneficial in many ays as follow (i) Establish focused sustainability
mechanisms (financial, human resource, institutional) which is cost-effective and
time-saving; (ii) Optimise resources enabling economies of scale and production
of common materials and joint activities across all; (iii) Avoid duplication of works
especially the designs, materials and activities; (iv) Enhance consistency in key
messages and principles where common and integrated messaging on common
issues across sub-catchments can be standardised; and (v) Ease of management
and administration under the guidance of one steering committee only.
365
Overall, SMART Partnership can lead to a better and longer lasting result,
whereby the integrated approach will enhance the quality of results and help
ensure sustainability through the development of long-term multi-stakeholder
partnerships. Governmental involvement and engagement are important and must
work together i.e. any hard approaches (elements) – construction-based initiative
needs maintenance and also buy-in as well the support from local communities.
By working together, a project can eventually turn to a long-term partnership,
ownership, win–win approaches that lead to project sustainability.
Community Led Engagement
The key components of Community Engagement for Environmental Monitoring
by community are focused on the following process which significantly lead to
successful community engagement as highlighted in Figure 15.5 below.
Figure 15.5: Key Components of Community Engagement
i. Active Consultation
Community Engagement is a team work, where a team of likeminded people join
hands to address and find solution for their issue. In order to get the support and
commitment from fellow community groups, it is important that the targeted groups
are well informed and their consensus obtained. The views of the local communities
in the targeted area should be taken into consideration before the implementation of
the project activities and the stakeholders need to be consulted for their consensus
and understanding.
366
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
ii. Rapid Assessment
It is important to prioritise target groups/actions based on the relative pollution
contributions to the respective area/sub catchments. Balancing the need of others
residing and utilising the resources in the targeted area/river basin is also vital.
Through rapid assessment, the key pollution sources will be highlighted and
documented. Then, the communities will have to engage and consult with the
relevant agencies as well as the polluters to solve key pollution problems and
encourage further action. It is important to tackle the pollution issues at grass root
level by tackling the main source of pollution. The baseline survey and assessment
includes land use and demographics survey, pollution source rapid inventory; water
quality sampling; biological indicator sampling; stakeholder perception survey and
the preparation of baseline survey report. The rapid assessment is crucial for the
design of project initiatives and its implementation.
iii. Stakeholder Engagement
Stakeholder consultation should be an important aspect for joint collaboration
and SMART engagement among the communities and governmental agencies.
Stakeholder consultation helps to understand their interests and analyse feedback
from local communities, to coordinate the needs of the local and relevant issues
and in the appointment of the local group leader. Local leader shall be appointed
based on the commitment show to participate in the initiative. Note: The initiative
must be from the communities addressing the issues affecting the environment
and to be supported/implemented together with fellow community members. Most
importantly, the local leader must be accepted by the community members.
Furthermore, good communication with the stakeholders is vital to:
» ensure all issues concerning/affecting stakeholders are addressed;
» stakeholders to understand the efforts being undertaken to resolve the issues;
» ensure that stakeholders’ feedback is utilised in improving the management
strategies;
» foster a sense of partnership amongst all stakeholders for sustainable approach.
The types of consultation may include (but not limited to):
» Stakeholder workshops
» One-to-one meetings with stakeholders
» Focus group discussions
» Questionnaire surveys
iv. Capacity Building
The communities need to be empowered via training and workshop to enhance their
knowledge and skills. Such empowerment will enable the communities to identify
the issues through the rapid assessment and pollution mapping in developing an
action plan. Further to the action plan, the communities will also be able to develop
proposed activities and the expected outcome.
367
Example:
v. Multi Stakeholder Partnership
Establishing a SMART partnership model between government agencies, private
sectors and local communities will enable effective implementation of a project
with each participating agencies have clear roles to play. This will also encourage
participation from the public/local community to support the project implementation.
The partnership will also provide opportunity for the public/local community to
practice their skill and knowledge, stimulate stakeholder contributions and co-
financing. It can also serve as a platform for project stakeholders to share the
available resources between agencies. This form of partnership also leads towards
volunteerism and outreach partnership.
vi. Action Plan (Implementation & Enhancement)
The communities are encouraged to develop small scale feasible initiatives to
minimise the pollution impact on the environment. The action plan should be focused
and manageable. There are two forms of engagement; individuals and collective
action. Individual action refers to practicable activities to be implemented at home
and related closely with behavioural changes. Examples of individual action include
recycling, composting, used cooking oil collection, rain water harvesting, installation
of water thimbles, reduce usage of air conditioning, opt for natural air circulation,
practice buying local products and foods with lower carbon and water footprint. The
same actions can be expanded to a community level by encouraging the community
members to form a collective action group at a bigger scale.
vii. Monitoring & Evaluation
It is important to monitor the actions undertaken by the communities. A joint
monitoring programme with the stakeholders and agencies will encourage the
communities to enhance their actions and come up with continuous action plan.
368
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
viii. Visibility
Visibility includes coverage from the mainstream and social media, which involves
newspapers, radio and television to promote events and feature stories. Project
visibility is important to attract attention of the public to join in on the initiatives.
Various platforms can be used to encourage and promote community initiatives.
Example:
https://www.facebook.com/friendsofklangriverbasin/,
https://www.facebook.com/groups/dagesrid3300,
ix. Recognition
Recognising the communities’ efforts and increase the publicity of community
initiatives are highly important. Several ways to enhance recognition are by
inviting the media to prominent events, develop an incentive or award scheme
for the community particularly for their support and efforts. It is also important to
acknowledge the short-term successes to boost the communities’ confidence and
commitment.
x. Acknowledgement
Acknowledging that community is the driver of environmental management in
Malaysia is important. By encouraging and highlighting their roles and recognising
their efforts, more communities will volunteer and significantly play their roles to be
part of the actions and solutions to address environmental management issues.
xi. Sustainability
Ensuring the sustainability of a project after it ends is not an easy task. This is very
important in order to ensure the local community’s interest remains. The following
actions can lead to environmental commitment/sustainability
» Create a sense of ownership amongst the targeted community members
» Secure sustainable funding through government agencies or private sponsors
beyond project period
» Facilitate the establishment of focused CSO groups
» Integrate actions with works of existing groups e.g. RAs, interest groups etc.
» Associate and collaborate with ongoing activities
Case Studies
There are two successful case studies shared by Global Environment Centre (GEC).
GEC acknowledges the importance and involvement of governmental agencies in the
watershed rehabilitation and restoration programmes. Some significant projects that
successfully recognise governmental involvement are the Sg Penchala River Restoration
and River of Life Public Outreach Programme (POP) Programme.
369
Sungai Penchala River Restoration Project
Sungai Penchala is one of many badly polluted urban rivers, located within the
Petaling Jaya Township. The source of the river is Bukit Kiara and the river flows
for approximately 12 km before joining Sungai Klang, near Puchong. Originating
from the top of the Kiara Hill, the source of Sungai Penchala is the only urban river
in the heart of Kuala Lumpur where the water is still Class 1 quality and can be
drunk without any treatment. Unfortunately, the condition of the source of Sungai
Penchala has deteriorated over the years and threatens the important and valuable
ecosystems of the river. Some of the major issues identified were river bank erosion,
excessive sedimentation and obstructions to the river flow. As such, the source
of Sungai Penchala was in dire need of restoration in order to sustain its natural
physical conditions and biodiversity.
The ultimate goals of GEC, DID Selangor and Willayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
are to restore the source of Sungai Penchala and its biodiversity, maintain the
integrity of the river’s environment and ensure that the source of Sungai Penchala
remains a pristine water resource through local community and private sector
engagement. Besides that, rehabilitation works are also being carried out at mid
and downstream. To restore the natural environment and enhance the river’s
biodiversity, GEC initiated restoration works for the source of Sungai Penchala
in 2010. The restoration works were carried out in partnership with the National
Landscape Department and Federal Territory Drainage and Irrigation Department,
funded by GAB Foundation and supported by Kuala Lumpur Municipal Council and
Friends of Bukit Kiara.
The project demonstrated some practical local actions which can be implemented by
community members and the establishment of networking and partnership between
stakeholders. With the support from the indigenous people, it took 4 weeks to
complete the restoration works using materials found naturally in the environment,
which included creating habitat within and around the river, bank stabilisation using
fallen trees and sand removal in certain areas to create pools. Activities were also
focused on improving the quality of polluted water entering the river, removal of
solid waste, improving habitats for aquatic animals and improving access to the
river bank.
Stakeholders Engaged under the Sungai Penchala Restoration Programme
i. Local authorities: Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) & Majlis
Perbandaran Petaling Jaya (MPPJ).
ii. Government agencies: JPS Selangor, Daerah Petaling, and Wilayah
Persekutuan, Jabatan Alam Sekitar Selangor, and Wilayah Persekutuan
370
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
iii. Community based organizations; Friends of Bukit Kiara, Friends of Bukit
Gasing and Friends of Taman Aman.
iv. Private sector: Indah Water Konsortium (IWK), Alam Flora Sdn Bhd (AFSB),
Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM), KL Golf and Country Club
(KLGCC), Pengurusan Pasar Moden TTDI,
v. NGOs: Centre for Environmental Technologies (CETEC), Yayasan Anak
Warisan Alam (YAWA) and ATHMA
vi. Resident groups: Persatuan Penduduk Taman Tun Dr Ismail, Jawatankuasa
Penduduk Perumahan Awam Panjang Bukit Kiara, Persatuan Penduduk Kiara
Condominium, Persatuan Penduduk Section 17, 19 dan SS2, Flat Petaling
Utara and Flat PKNS
Achievements
This project was able to:
i. Increase awareness and understanding of river environment issues, the
importance of improved management of rivers, and options for community
participation among relevant government agencies, private sector, NGOs and
public at national level;
ii. Develop strategies to enhance involvement of local communities in river
rehabilitation and monitoring activities, such as rive management strategies,
linkages to on-going “One State – One River Programme”, online-based
information exchange and river monitoring mechanisms;
iii. Strengthen the capacity of local stakeholders (with a focus on NGOs/CBOs)
to be more actively involved in protection and conservation of rivers. The
outcomes include the establishment of local proactive community groups -
Friends of Sungai Penchala;
iv. Establish a formal mechanisms to support joint activities and networking
amongst stakeholders, information exchange mechanism to share experience
and related lessons learned; and
v. Improve river/lake water quality and biodiversity in an urban area (Sungai Penchala).
Outcomes
GEC engaged with various government agencies through regular meetings and
discussion proposed actions. As a result, GEC has been able to forge a strong
partnership built from the understanding of each other’s needs and limitations
through the followings:
i. Participation in project steering committee;
ii. Creating Smart Partnerships;
iii. Partnership in training workshop; and
iv. Balancing between hard approach (infrastructure) and soft approach (human
factor).
371
How to overcome gaps?
The project organised lots of meetings, trainings and provided various resource
materials to encourage community participation. It is necessary to educate the
communities that environmental problems originate from the people and that
infrastructure cannot solve all these problems. The followings are the common
challenges:
» Getting the message across to relevant government agencies - It is
necessary to inform relevant agencies of the gaps in current approach.
GEC has held many meetings with various agencies to promote our
approach and to help them understand that these issues are caused by
the human factor;
» Funding - Funding is a key issue with most government agencies. Budget
is always not enough and the government agencies also do not see the
benefits of providing funds to communities/NGOs. However, positive
results in the long-run can be achieved by demonstrating the outcomes of
the projects. Prevention is cheaper than rehabilitation and that is what the
project promotes; and
» Balance between the “top down” and “bottom up” approaches – Projects
usually run using top down approach. While this may get the job done, it
does not provide a sense of ownership to the community and therefore,
little chance for sustainability to be achieved. This project, however,
allow the communities to run the project – a ‘bottom-up’ approach. This
approach allows the community to feel as if they are being listened to and
this is important for sustainability.
Case Study 2: River of Life Public Outreach Programme (POP)
The River of Life (ROL) project was one of the Malaysian Government’s Economic
Transformation Programmes and aims to transform the Klang and Gombak River
into a vibrant and liveable waterfront with high economic value by 2020. One of the
key targets is to improve the quality of the river water from Class III – IV to Class
II. The ROL project, to achieve its objective, consists of three components, i) River
Cleaning; ii) Planning and Beautification; and ii) Commercialisation and Tourism.
River of Life Public Outreach Programme Phase 5 (ROLPOP5) along with 13 other
key initiatives are part of the River Cleaning Component. The 13 other key initiatives
include the construction and installation of infrastructure, such as, detention ponds,
wastewater treatment plants, pollutant/rubbish traps and water filters.
The ROLPOP was initiated under the river cleaning component by the DID Malaysia
in 2012 and was expanded to five (5) phases over the years (2012 -2020). GEC
372
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
as the implementer for the ROLPOP Phase 1, Consolidation Phase 1 and Phase
5 concludes that ROLPOP has played a significant role in informing various target
groups about the ROL initiative and empowering them to take action to contribute to
the achievement of the initiative. Furthermore, the “hard” (infrastructure) approach
implemented by most of the ROL elements needs to be complemented by a “soft”
or “heart” approach to ensure the project is sustained and ensure the sense of
ownership is shared among all the target groups, and not only the project proponent.
Under the ROLPOP, GEC has worked closely with key agencies especially with
Kementerian Wilayah Persekutuan (KWP), DID Malaysia, DID WPKL and Pejabat
Lembangan Sungai Klang (PLSK), Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL)
Infrastructure Planning Department, Civil Engineering and Drainage Department,
Infrastructure Planning Department, Licensing & Petty Traders Development
Department, Enforcement Department and others to engage and support the target
groups in the programmes hosted by the government via awareness programmes,
information sharing, training modules and events. The other agencies include and
not limited to the followings: The Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing
Corporation (SWCorps Malaysia), DOE, Department of Fisheries (DoF), Ministry
of Education (MOE), State Education Department (SED), Indah Water Konsortium
(IWK), Department of National Unity and National Integrity Alam Flora Sdn Bhd
(Alam Flora).
The lessons learned on the project management and coordination of ROLPOP
Phase 5 indicates that building relationship and trust with government agencies,
private sectors, NGOs, medias and community stakeholders require significant time
and an intimate approach. Cross-agency involvement and support among multiple
agencies is crucial for impactful results (e.g. DOE, Local Authorities, ROL Key
Initiatives Stakeholders). Some issues require institutional reforms or policy change
(e.g. sullage, WQI, FOG and solid waste). There is a need to expand and replicate
these lessons learned to other areas and aspects of structural river management by
the relevant agencies into a model.
Some key findings on the support and involvement of the governmental agencies are;
i. Enforcement is the key factor in business engagement especially with the food
establishments, wet markets, industries, corporations and developers;
ii. SMART partnership is equally important to ensure all relevant agencies and
department can support and complement each other to achieve their objectives.
During POP implementation, agencies and target groups supported and
complemented each other through cross cutting events without compromising
their objectives or project requirements;
373
iii. Policies and Sustainability goals need to be well defined in their respective
company agenda and milestone of the Industries, Corporates and Developers
(ICD) players. It is important for the respective players to recognise the
importance of environment, community engagement and sustainability which
can be tied in as part of their long –term sustainability and corporate social
responsibility. This, in addition, enable them to achieve their SDGs or the
Green recognition schemes;
iv. Recognition is very important for each target group including private and
commercial players as well as local communities and the general public. The
recognition includes but not limited to rewards, awards, incentives, media
coverage and celebrations which can be carried out through various platforms
and within the existing agenda or program/projects. Recognition ensures
engaging results, build stronger relationship between the organisations,
the project and the environment. All the respective target groups have their
highest level of recognition either within their organisation, international award
or localised which will boost their commitment and continuous initiatives; and
v. Acknowledgement/Support is required by all, either in the form of monetary
fund or technical expertise. Target groups’ level of knowledge and awareness
about the available platforms and funding sources are still relatively low. It is
important that the relevant agencies play their roles and provide support to
ensure that target groups are not deprived of support. Hence, target groups
should be made aware of the possible support and funding or partnership that
they can look forward to.
Conclusion
Community engagement in environmental management is vital. Any initiatives
from the government should also involve the community. Both parties must work
together, combine hard approach with soft and hearth approach. By working
together, it can lead to long term partnership, ownership, win – win approaches and
sustainability. The public need to be acknowledged and given the recognition and
ownership to protect their environment and surroundings while blending well with
ongoing urbanisation and development along with the government/agencies goal.
It is crucial that relevant government agencies develop the skills and capacities for
their staff to engage and empower the communities into environmental management
and monitoring.
Involvement of agencies in the Public Outreach engagement is also important for
the benefits of both the environment and relevant agencies’ goals. By incorporating
SMART Partnership and complementing all the relevant partners and agencies, the
impact is wider and significant.
374
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
REFERENCES
Copyright © 2008, Friends of Albuquerque’s Environmental Story : https://www.
albuqhistsoc.org/aes/s4p1prof.html.
Lessons in Conservation, Vol 7, Stakeholder Analysis in Environmental and Conservation
Planning, official journal of the Network of Conservation Educators and Practitioners
(NCEP). https://www.amnh.org/.
MacQueen, K. M., McLellan, E., Metzger, D. S., Kegeles, S., Strauss, R. P., Scotti, R.,
Blanchard, L., & Trotter, R. T., 2nd (2001). What is community? An evidence-based
definition for participatory public health. American journal of public health, 91(12), 1929–
1938. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.91.12.1929.
Brennan, Mark. (2019). IFAS Community Development: The Importance of Local
Community Action in Shaping Development 1. EDIS. 2005. 10.32473/edis-fy729-2005.
https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-fy729-2005.
Framework Principles to the UN Human Rights Council, March 2018.
Commission Staff Working Document (2020) Best Practices In Citizen Science For
Environmental Monitoring https://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/reporting/pdf/best_
practices_citizen_science_environmental_monitoring.pdf.
https://www.thestar.com.my/metro/metro-news/2020/10/16/more-support-needed-for-
environmental-preservation.
Vink, Peter & Bazley, Conne & Jacobs, Karen. (2016). Modeling the relationship between
the environment and human experiences. Work. 54. 1-7. 10.3233/WOR-162374.
Evaluating the impact of nature-based solutions : A handbook for practitioners https://
geonardo.com/news/38/nature-based-solutions-a-handbook-for-practitioners.
https://op.europa.eu/s/uwGk.
375
AUTHOR
Dr. Kalithasan Kailasam is currently the Manager of the River
Care Programme where he coordinates GEC’s work on lake and
river management, pollution control and environmental education
programme. He attained his PhD from National University of
Malaysia in 2001 and joined Global Environment Centre in 2002.
Dr. Kalithasan has more than 20 years of working experience in river
ecosystem management, particularly on stakeholder engagement
and environmental education. He is pioneer on Civic Science and Community
Participation in River Management in Malaysia. He has developed a number of key
projects related to river basin, water, wetlands and solid waste management through
innovative especially nature based approach, as well has vast experience in river
basin management, river auditing exercise and community based flood preparedness
in Malaysia. He has developed number of programme like RIVER Ranger, SMART
Ranger, Flood Ranger and DRH2O. Currently he is project leader for various project like
River Protection, Riverine biodiversity, green living, WATER STEWARDSHIP, Forest
management, community empowering including Orang Asli on sustainable resource and
alternative livelihood initiatives.
He is recognized as a key expert in water resource and ecosystem management esp.
community engagement and has been continuously appointed as advisor, trainer or
panel in a wide variety of initiatives, committees and activities by varies government
departments, local authorities, private sectors and civil society. He has also developed
guidelines, modules, handbook and published more than 50 technical reports, scientific
papers. Dr. Kalithasan can be contacted through email: [email protected].
376
CHAPTER 15
Community Participation in Environmental Management
Ms Jagedeswari Marriapan is a River Care Programme Senior
Programme in Global Environment Centre (GEC) with working
experience and knowledge on local community, educational
institutions, corporates and food establishment as well as with local
agencies on river monitoring and environmental education as well
as CSR programmes. She has 13 years of work experiences with
the last 11 years with GEC. Her work experience and area include
Environmental Impact Assessment, Environmental Monitoring
Plan, Environmental Audits as well as on River Monitoring, Environmental Education,
Community based River Management, Water Conservation and Flood Preparedness,
and Project Proposal/Development.
She is also a facilitator for trainings in GEC on RIVER Ranger, SMART Ranger, Dr.H2O
as well as on the Flood Resilience among local communities. She is also responsible for
supporting the implementation of GEC’s RIVER CARE project river basin management
and water resources with particular emphasis on ensuring that biodiversity and wetland
conservation and community considerations through Protection & Conservation,
Restoration & Rehabilitation, Education & Awareness, River Monitoring and Capacity
Building programmes.
She have supported GEC to enhance the training modules, to develop and run some
environmental related events such as River Carnivals, River Walk, River Game and
River Hunt as well as support for inputs for modules and training materials related to
River, Water, Resources as well as community engagement on IRBM. Jagedeswari can
be contacted through email: [email protected].
377
Nature is painting for us, day after day,
pictures of infinite beauty.
- John Ruskin
Kubah National Park, Sabah.
Chapter 16
Issues and
Challenges of
Municipal Solid
Waste Management
in Malaysia:
Current Trends and
The Way Forward
MANAGISESMUEENSTAINNDMCAHLAALYLSEIAN:GCEUSRORFEMNTUNTRICEINPDASL SAONLDIDWWAYASFTOERWARD
P. Agamuthu & J. Baraserathi
INTRODUCTION
Malaysia is an upper-middle class country with a population of approximately 32.7
million people. Generation of municipal solid waste (MSW) is estimated to be nearly
14 million tonnes annually (MHLG, 2019) with per capita generation is 1.17 kilogram
per day. Approximately 80% of MSW generated end up in landfills and open dumps.
This practice being the absolute opposite of sustainable waste management. Waste
collection is on par with developed nations, and almost all urban MSW is being collected
for disposal. However, illegal dumping and illegal burning still occurs sporadically, and
it can accounts for 10% of the total MSW generated. Hence, Malaysia is facing a stiff
challenge in reducing the amount of waste sent to landfills and adopting sustainable
waste management. National Solid Waste Management Department of Malaysia
targeted to divert 40% of MSW from landfills by 2020, however currently only 28% of
waste is recycled. There are a total of 296 landfills in Malaysia, and only 116 landfills are
currently functional of which 21 are sanitary landfills.
Definition and Classification of Solid Waste/MSW in Malaysia
According to the Malaysia Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007,
MSW is defined as “any scrap material or other unwanted surplus substance or rejected
products arising from the application of any process; any substance required to be
disposed of as being broken, worn out, contaminated or otherwise spoiled; or any other
material that according to this regulation or any other written law is required by the
authority to be disposed of” (NSWMD, 2012).
Solid waste can be classified into municipal solid waste (MSW), industrial waste,
hazardous waste, agricultural waste and electronic waste (E-waste). MSW is also
known as trash or garbage and mainly consist of items that we use daily such as
product packaging waste, food waste, bottles, clothing, batteries, paper and many more.
According to Agamuthu et al (2011), solid waste is defined as inevitable by-products
which is solid or has no use to anyone and is unneeded. MSW basically consists of all
waste produced, collected, transported and discarded off within the right of municipal
authority.
Types and Sources of MSW
Types and sources of MSW are important aspects in MSW management. MSW is
heterogeneous and the source of MSW is categorized based on the land use and
380
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
zone. It is categorized into residential, commercial, institutional, industrialization and
street sweeping. Residential waste is one of the major sources of MSW in developing
countries and it consist mostly of food waste while commercial and institutional waste
mainly generates paper, plastic or packaging material waste. The sources of MSW in
Malaysia vary with the size of locality and economic standards. The individual type of
waste and its source is tabulated in Table 16.1.
Table 16.1: Different Types and Sources of MSW (World Bank, 2012)
TYPE SOURCES
Organic Food scraps, yard (leaves, grass, brush) waste, wood, process residues
Paper Paper scraps, cardboard, newspapers, magazines, bags, boxes, wrapping
paper, telephone books, shredded paper, paper beverage cups
Plastics Bottles, packaging, containers, bags, lids, cups, Glass Bottles, broken
glassware, light bulbs, colored glass
Metal Cans, foil, tins, non-hazardous aerosol cans, appliances (white goods),
railings, bicycles
Others Textiles, leather, rubber, multi-laminates, e-waste, appliances, ash, other inert
materials
MSW GENERATION AND COMPOSITION EVOLUTION (INCLUDING
PLASTICS AND MICROPLASTICS)
Current Status of Generation and Composition of MSW in Malaysia
The generation of waste is continuously increasing due to population growth, high
living standard, urbanization, urban migration and industrialization. According to the
Waste Atlas report, current global waste generation from 164 countries is 1.9 billion
tonnes annually (Waste Atlas, 2016; AWMO, 2017). It is expected to increase by 2.2
billion tonnes in year 2025 (World Bank, 2012; AWMO, 2017). The generation of MSW
increased at 3% annually in Malaysia (Agamuthu, 2001). Malaysians on average produce
an estimate of 40,000 tonnes of MSW daily or 14 million tonnes annually (MHLG, 2019).
The composition of MSW in Malaysia is shown in Figure 16.1. The highest portion of
MSW generated is food waste which is estimated to be about 44.5%. Plastic waste
represents 13.2% of the total MSW but it can range between 13.2 – 24% (MHLG, 2019).
Paper is the second highest dry recyclable that is generated in Malaysia at 8.5%. Figure
16.1 is a typical composition of MSW that is available in literature and national reports.
381
Figure 16.1: Composition of MSW in Malaysia (AWMO, 2017).
According to the National Solid Waste Department of Malaysia each Malaysian generates
1.17 kg of MSW every day. In 2019, an approximate amount of 14 million metric tons
of MSW was generated in Malaysia. It must be noted that this value is estimated (an
increase of 2~3%) from the previous year. The availability of reliable data on MSW in
Malaysia is a matter of concern and therefore the latest data is not accessible every
year in Malaysia unlike in member states of EU, Japan, USA and others. Table 16.2
represents the summary of MSW generation and disposal.
Table 16.2: Summary of MSW Generation and Disposal
INDICATORS DATA UNIT YEAR REFERENCE
MHLG, 2019
Total MSW 14.0 Million Metric Ton/ 2019
Generation year
MSW Generation 1.17 kg/capita/day 2019
per Capita
Generation of MSW according to the states is illustrated in Figure 16.2. Whereas
the amount of solid waste generated from 1970 to 2012 by major cities of Malaysia
is demonstrated in Figure 16.3. As it can be seen the highest amount of solid waste
is generated by Kuala Lumpur every day. Urbanization, annual per capita increase
and sharp increment in population are the three factors that have increased waste
generation in Kuala Lumpur. The Malaysian urban population of 14,429,641 people
generates 21,918 metric tons of MSW every day where each city dweller is responsible
for producing 1.52 kg of MSW per day (World Bank, 2014).
382
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
Figure 16.2: Percentage of Solid Waste Generated by States in Malaysia.
Figure 16.3: Generation of MSW in Major Urban Areas in Peninsular Malaysia (1970-2012).
About 1.8 million tonnes of waste from MSW are estimated to be plastic waste.
Environmental problems related to plastic waste have become a major issue in Malaysia
such that Malaysia has been ranked 8th among the top ten countries with mismanaged
plastic waste in the world (UNEP, 2018). Malaysia is also known to be a global plastic
player in the plastic industry with around 1,300 plastic manufacturers in the country
383
(MPMA, 2019). Malaysia’s exports are about RM30 billion (USD 7.5 billion) which
saw 2.26 million metric tonnes of resin being used to manufacture plastics in 2016
(MESTECC, 2018). Plastic pollution is prevalent throughout the world which makes
plastic waste a big issue globally. Besides that, plastic can take almost 400 years to
degrade in the environment. If no serious action is taken to combat or reduce the usage
of plastics in our daily life, by year 2050 it is estimated that the amount of plastic waste
could reach 12 billion metric tonnes. Furthermore, it is estimated that 8.5 million metric
tonnes of plastic waste end up in the sea. Figure 16.4 shows the MSW flow in Malaysia.
The major portion of the waste is food waste and the second highest is plastic waste.
MSW entering the river is another issue that cannot be neglected in Malaysia. More than
1, 000 rivers are accountable for 80% of plastic waste found in the ocean, with the Klang
river listed as among the top contributors. An environmental research than reported that
more than 1, 000 rivers account for 80% of global annual emissions in plastic, ranging
between 0.8 million and 2.7 million metric tonnes per year. The study also found that
small urban rivers are among those which are most polluting, put Klang River as the
second highest riverine emitter of plastic into the ocean at 1.33%.Most of the waste
found is plastics in the Klang River and sourced from domestic waste, which are from
urban areas where people do not dispose their trash responsibly into bins and during
rain, these items are washed into drains that flow into the Klang river. (The star, 2021).
Figure 16.4: MSW Flow in Malaysia
384
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
MSW Composition Based on Income Level
The composition of the MSW generated in Malaysia can also vary with the economic
status of the household (Table 16.3). The percentage of dry recyclables such as glass,
plastic and paper increases with increase in socio-economic status. On the other hand,
food waste decreases with the increase in socio-economic status because affluent
households purchase processed products in greater quantity as compared to less
affluent households.
Table 16.3: Composition of Household Waste Based on the Economic Status of the Household
(Agamuthu & Mehran, 2020, Agamuthu & Tanaka, 2014)
WASTE COMPOSITION SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS
(%) HIGH INCOME MIDDLE INCOME LOW INCOME
Paper products 19.79 15.73 13.04
Plastic and rubber 21.05 18.61 13.01
Glass and ceramics 14.99 9.42 7.57
Food waste 24.13 29.77 31.86
Metals 8.80 12.75 9.15
Textiles 1.57 3.87 3.08
Garden waste 5.50 6.95 15.56
Wood 3.45 2.90 6.72
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00
MSW TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES IN MALAYSIA
MSW generated in Malaysia is managed by using three main technologies namely
landfilling, recycling and composting. About 71% of MSW is landfilled (including
unspecified and sanitary landfills), whereas 28% of MSW is recycled and only 1% is
composted. Generally, recycling is focused on the waste such as inorganic materials,
while green waste is composted.
Landfilling
A landfill is defined as a carefully engineered depression in the ground into which waste
is buried. The wastes need to be buried to avoid the hydraulic connection between the
wastes and the surrounding environment, especially protecting the groundwater from
getting in contact with the wastes. MSW landfill retains commercial and household solid
waste, which is the most widely used and preferable method due to technical feasibility,
ease of operation, need minimum supervisions, require less technology, as well as low
operation expenditure.
385
Presently, landfilling is the most deployed technology for MSW disposal in Malaysia.
There is a total of 296 landfills, where only 116 are currently operating and 21 of those
are sanitary landfills, which caters for about 70 % of MSW, whereas only 28 % of waste
is recycled. According to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government in Malaysia,
around RM430m (US$100m) has been spent on closing just 17 out of 165 existing
dumpsites and promoting the disposal of solid waste to sanitary landfill. Local authorities
responsible for the management of solid waste are outsourcing the collection and
disposal of solid waste to private companies.
It is worth noting, that most of the landfills are classified as open dumped and semi-
sanitary landfill, only a small number is considered as sanitary landfill. Due to rapid
increase in population, industrialization and waste generated, we are short of space
for landfills, while about 80% of the existing dumps are nearly saturated in capacity
and are expected to be shut down soon. Waste disposed in landfill cause greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions such as methane and carbon dioxide. According to World Bank
statistics, in 2010 Malaysia produced 42.2% more methane, 250.5% more carbon
dioxide, 10.4% more nitrous oxide and 99.9% other type of GHG than the previous 10
years (1990-2010). These statistics of Malaysia’s environment are alarming. On the
other hand, as landfilling remains the most widely used option for managing waste in
Malaysia, the leachate produced from the landfill also needs to be considered. Leachate
is rich in organic compounds, ammonia, heavy metals, and other hazardous chemicals.
COD, color, and NH3-N, and are among the problematic parameters that are difficult to
be completely removed. Treatment depends on leachate characteristics, operation and
capital costs, and regulations. The development of holistic solutions to leachate-related
problems also needs to be promoted.
Recycling
Recycling according to Act 672 definition is collection and separation of solid waste
with the intention of creating new products, whereas it defines recycling centers as the
venues for dropping or selling recyclables. The Malaysian government, as part of the
10th Malaysia Plan (2011-2015), adopted waste recycling as a long-term strategy for
municipal waste management. Recycling has been widely accepted as a sustainable
solid waste management method because of its potential to reduce disposal costs
and waste transport costs and to prolong the life spans of landfill sites. Regardless of
the type of recyclable materials, awareness toward waste recycling is poor and most
individuals are not able to translate their concerns to act upon the matter in Malaysia. The
recycling rate in Malaysia is considered low, about 28% as compared to countries such
as Singapore (59%), Korea (90%), Taiwan (54%) and Germany (52.8%). The estimated
value of Malaysian recycling industry in 2005 was MYR 476 million (114.24 million USD)
from where in 2011 it increased to MYR 600 million (144 million USD. High variability
in recyclables’ prices due to the dependency on market and prices of commodities
that are seasonal, result in the absence of incentives for the end customers. Plastics
are probably the most common recyclable materials with high potential for recycling in
Malaysia as this material is widely used and is being disposed indiscriminately to the
landfills. The latest data on total amount of MSW recycled in Malaysia from year 2017 to
386
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
2021 is tabulated in Table 16.4. It shows an increasing trend where the highest recycling
rate of MSW (31.52%) was reached in 2021. In a year, Malaysia “gains” an estimated
US$1 million (RM4.14 million) in value for PET bottles collected for recycling, but “loses”
US$2 million (RM8.3 million) in value to landfills and another US$1 million in value to
leakage (The Star, 2019). Malaysia targeted 40% of recycling by year 2020 however,
the current recycling rate shows only 31.52% of recycling rate. However as compared to
previous years, the rate of recycling can be seen to show a good increase.
Table 16.4: Total of MSW Recycled in Malaysia (2013 – 2021)
YEAR AMOUNT OF MSW RECYCLED PERCENTAGE OF MSW RECYCLED
(MILLION MT/YEAR) (%)
2013
2014 - 10.5
2015
2016 - 13.2
2017
2018 - 15.7
2019
2020 - 24.6
2021
2.86 21
3.36 24.6
3.88 28.06
4.29 30.67
4.40 31.52
Table 16.5 indicates recycling in Malaysia according to MSW stream. Paper is the most
recycled material, followed by plastic. It is estimated that about 1.56 million metric tonnes
(40.34%) of plastic waste were recycled in the year 2019 (MHLG, 2019).
Table 16.5: Recycling in Malaysia According to Type (2017 – 2019)
MSW 2017 2018 2019
STREAM QUANTITY PERCENTAGE QUANTITY PERCENTAGE QUANTITY PERCENTAGE
(TONNES) (TONNES) (TONNES)
Aluminium 248,744 8.68 18,521 0.01 499,944.49 12.88
Glass 180 0.01 51,630 1.54 41023.50 1.06
Iron 59,333 2.07 118,513 3.52 NA NA
Paper 1,450,000 50.98 1,620,000 48.45 1,750,000 45.3
Plastic 1,090,000 38.19 1,560,000 46.4 1,560,000 40.34
However, one of the most serious problems that hinder the success of a recycling
program in Malaysia is the meek and shallow regulations and guidelines. As an example,
the program in Japan is carried out both through private and public systems, recycling
is carried out through retailers’ trade-in, barter system activities and community-based
systems. While, Germany has in place regulations on deposit system, waste disposal tax
387
and amount of waste to be utilized in production. Municipal waste recycling in Malaysia
has a long way to go. Besides, another pre-requisite for a successful recycling program
is the accurate data on waste generation and composition. Currently no systematic
documentation of waste generation and composition is being carried out and it is almost
impossible to get reliable data from the authorities. As recycling only exists as private
transactions between waste generators and private enterprises, there are no detailed
data and information on the volume, composition, waste sources, and characteristics of
wastes within municipalities, which also hinders effective and economic recycling.
Composting
Composting is one of the important and economical methods of recycling organic waste
in MSW, which can be used to substitute peat, fertilizers and manure in agricultural and
horticultural activities. The advantages include improving soil and facilitating the growth
of plants, as well as, alleviating the organic waste from landfill. However, composting
might have negative impacts to the environment due to the consumption of fossil fuel
during transportation and use of processing equipment, as well as the fugitive emission
of GHG. Depending on the scale and operating mode, composting facilities also varies in
capital, operation and maintenance cost in Malaysia. Highly heterogenous MSW makes
composting a real challenge. This is further aggravated by the presence of hazardous
material (about 2%) in MSW which will contaminate the compost.
Waste-to-Energy
Incineration is one of the most effective means of Waste-to-energy strategies dealing with
various types of wastes, which is also being considered in Malaysia. This technology is
mainly deployed in Malaysia to dispose off hazardous waste. Despite being an attractive
technological option for waste management, this type of combustion-based process
for municipal solid waste treatment is a subject of intense debate in Malaysia. In the
absence of effective controls, harmful pollutants such as dioxins may be emitted into
the air, land and water which may affect human health and the natural environment.
Although incineration of municipal waste coupled with material and energy recovery can
form an essential part of an integrated waste management system, yet strict controls are
required to prevent its negative impacts on human health and the natural environment.
Therefore, the country has no WTE plant but only 5 mini-incinerators under various
stages of implementation in Labuan, Langkawi, Tioman and Pangkor Island plus one in
Cameron Highlands at this stage.
In considering alternative technology to be used for managing waste, Malaysia has to
take into consideration the risk, sustainability, impact on environment and commercially
proven technology and reliability for long term solution. Emerging technology, such as
thermal plasma treatment method that employs pyrolysis and gasification, are available
and looks promising. A thorough viability study of the method needs to be conducted
rather than focusing on building new incinerators. The development of pyrolysis and
gasification technologies has been successfully deployed in large-scale plants in
Europe, North America and Japan (Gomez et al., 2009). Similar setup can be developed
388
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
in this country especially in the area where hazardous gases are emitted such as in
the petrochemical industrial area. Any political and social issues can also be avoided
if such setup can be realized because there are many evidences to indicate that the
MSW can be treated by this type of facility in the developed countries. The difference
between capital cost and operating cost of various types of disposal methods that were
considered by the National Solid Waste Management Department of Malaysia are given
in Table 16.6. As can be seen, landfilling is the most economical mode of waste disposal
in Malaysia, costing less than MYR 50 per tonne (12 USD) compared to other methods.
Table 16.6: Costs of Various Types of Treatment and Disposal Methods Used in Malaysia
One USD = 4.19 MYR (as at 27/10/2021)
Source: (NSWMD, 2012)
DISPOSAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE OPERATING EXPENDITURE
METHOD
MYR MILLION USD MILLION MYR PER TON USD PER TON
Landfill 30 7.2 28.80 – 6.9 – 11.7
49.00
Waste to Energy 250 60 101 24.2
Plasma gasification 650 156 202 48.5
Mass burn stoker 550 132 124 29.7
REGULATION AND STANDARDS IN MSW MANAGEMENT
The History of Solid Waste Management in Malaysia
Due to the onset of industrialization and development, generation of waste is increasing
faster than urbanization. Nevertheless, there has been a dramatic evolution in solid
waste management in Malaysia since 1970s, despite having low population at that time
and manageable amount of waste generated. MSW generated in Malaysia used to be
managed by state and local governments before the enforcement of the Solid Waste and
Public Cleansing Management Act (Act 672) in 2011. Local authorities, by hiring small
contractors, used to provide solid waste management services. Then the Solid Waste
and Public Cleansing Management Act was enacted by Parliament in 2007, followed by
enforcement of the Act on 1st September 2011 which granted executive authority to the
federal government on solid waste management of eight states and federal territories.
The MSW collection was privatized in Peninsular Malaysia. Three companies were
awarded concessions to provide waste collection in three different regions. Southern
Waste Management Pvt Ltd (SWM) Enviro was assigned the southern region including
Johor, Malacca, and Negeri Sembilan. On the other hand, E-Idaman Pvt Ltd was given
Perlis and Kedah and Alam Flora Pvt Ltd was assigned Kuala Lumpur, Putrajaya,
and Pahang. The timeline in Figure 16.7 summarizes the solid waste management
history of Malaysia. The National Solid Waste Management Department has set a goal
of reducing 40% of landfilling and 38% of greenhouse gas emissions from landfills by
2020. Consequently, it would lessen the burden on landfills and reduce generation of
greenhouse gas emissions from landfills in Malaysia.
389
Figure 16.5: The Timeline of Solid Waste Management History
The department of National Solid Waste Management to collaborates with Solid Waste
and Public Cleansing Cooperation as required by Solid Waste and Public Cleaning
Management Act 2007 (SWPCMC Act 2007). The responsibility of the department of
National Solid Waste Management is to propose policy, plan and strategies for the
nationwide management of solid waste. Additionally, their responsibilities also include
setting standards, specifications, and codes of practices, along with plan formulations
for solid waste management facilities. Concurrently, the responsibility of Solid Waste
and Public Cleansing Corporation (SWCorp) is to implement the department’s policy
and plans. In addition to monitoring, the compliance of codes of practice and standards,
promotion of public participation and improvement of public awareness of solid waste
management is carried out by SWCorp. From 1st September 2012, the National Solid
Waste Management department has been implementing a “2+1 collection system” in eight
states of Malaysia, where residual waste is collected two times a week and recyclable,
bulky and green wastes are collected once a week. Additionally, new standards were also
implemented on waste bins and garbage collection trucks. Moreover, Key Performance
Index (KPI) was also prescribed to garbage collection schedule.
Policies or Standards in Malaysia
Starting from the 8th Malaysian Plan, the government has included “waste minimization”,
“promotion of reuse”, “developing a recycling-oriented”, and “implementation of pilot
projects for recycling” as some of its main policy goals. In the 9th Malaysian Plan (2006-
2010) further emphasis was given to the continuation of reducing, reuse, recovery, and
recycling of waste as well as greater use of environmentally friendly products. Because of
this plan, a new department, known as the National Solid Waste Management department
has been set up under the Ministry of Housing and Local Government. A new bill has
been issued to implement the new SWPCMC Act 2007. All matters relating to municipal
waste management will be under the jurisdiction of this new department. The focus area
of this department is Solid Waste Management. This Act also provides executive power
390
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
to the Federal Government to implement municipal solid waste management and public
cleansing activities throughout Peninsula Malaysia, Federal Territories of Putrajaya and
Labuan. Through the SWPCMC Act 2007, the Federal Government of Malaysia has
taken over the responsibility of the Master Plan on National Waste Minimization (MWM)
from state local authorities (LA) and privatized them to concession companies.
MWM which was devised by Ministry of Housing and Local Government, can provide
visions, strategies and roles for stakeholders, as well as promote awareness of waste
reduction among the public. The Solid Waste Management Corporation Strategic plan
was also initiated to increase public awareness for establishment of environmentally
sustainable solid waste management. Moreover, the Malaysian government also
instituted the National Policy on climate change in 2009 to promote climate resilient
development in Malaysia with the aim of reducing 2005 greenhouse gas emissions
by 50%. Furthermore, various campaigns and programs were also introduced by the
government, aiming at creating awareness of 3R (reduce, reuse and recycle). The
reception of these campaigns by the public had been disappointing as 3R campaigns
were launched in 1996 and 2000. Alam Flora Pvt Ltd, being one of the main players
in the solid waste management scene in Malaysia, has recently worked together with
the Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing Corporation to promote awareness
program in a bid to minimize waste generation and indiscriminate waste disposal.
Community programs involving recycling center and mobile recycling centers exist in
the cities, along with the recycling banks that were promoted in schools in Putrajaya.
Congruently, Alam Flora Pvt Ltd also set successful 3R programs from neighboring
countries as a benchmark of its performance. While under the 9th Malaysia Plan, waste
treatment facilities such as transfer stations, thermal treatment plants, and waste to
energy production facilities (WtE) were also earmarked as alternative treatment methods
of municipal waste management potentially to be adopted soon.
In general, based on the new Act, MWM in Malaysia involves the participation of various
Government agencies from federal to state and down to LA. Local authority’s role will be
limited to receiving a delegation of power from the Federal Government. Nevertheless,
LA will be directly engaged with municipal solid waste. The decision to determine
whether MSW collection is implemented either by local authority or private contractor is
the LA’s responsibility. Similarly, the decision to determine the area for MSW collection
will be based on the number of population by the LA.
CIRCULAR ECONOMY AND EPR IN MSW MANAGEMENT
Circular Economy in Malaysia
Circular economy (CE) is a concept that aims to improve resource efficiency by slowing,
closing, and narrowing material and energy loops to minimize overall resource and energy
input and as well as waste generation (Ghisellini et al., 2016). Circular economy can be
implemented at three levels; in a single enterprise or a group of enterprises, in a group
of collocated firms or at city or municipal level. Circular economy in Malaysia is still an
unofficial long-term goal as the legal framework is lacking. But there have been sporadic
391
practices of cleaner production at firm levels in Malaysia. The Waste Management
(SWM) Act introduced in Malaysia (Fauziah & Agamuthu, 2012). Emphasing has source
separation and recycling in MSW. On the contrary, the practice of 3R and/or decoupling
of resource consumption from economic development is not part of the legislation on
hazardous waste in Malaysia. There are some sections in two environmental acts and
in scheduled waste regulation that promote 3R and can establish the foundation for
implementation of circular economy. Malaysia incorporated sustainable production and
consumption in the 11th Malaysian Plan and aims to take a holistic approach towards
waste management in the country. Under the umbrella of 11th Malaysian Plan, Malaysia
targets to reduce 40% of GHGs emission intensity from GDP compared to 2005 level
and reach 22% of recycling of MSW with a long-term goal of becoming a zero waste
nation.
However, there are proposals and programs for initiation of industrial ecology and eco-
waste parks in government agencies like Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia
and Malaysian Investment Development Authority (MIDA) respectively. There have also
been practices of waste exchange and reuse of hazardous waste in Malaysia, but it is
not widely practiced among the majority of the industries. DOE Malaysia has also been
promoting co-processing, especially in cement manufacturing plants since May 2015.
As circular economy is not implemented at the national or municipal level in Malaysia,
the benefits of circular economy are only confined to the enterprises that are practicing
circular economy. Due to the implementation of circular economy at firm level, the impact
on GDP is not significant. Based on circular economy by the selected enterprise, the
following benefits are, reduction in resource consumption, reduction in waste generation,
economic benefit, identified reduction in energy consumption, and environmental
protection.
EPR in Malaysia
Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is fundamentally an environmentally protection
strategy which follows the ‘polluter pays principle’. EPR assigns greater responsibility
to the producer and extends it further to the post-consumer stage of the life cycle of a
product or packaging. EPR policy has been widely implemented in most of the developed
countries to manage packaging waste. Packaging usually has a short lifespan once it
reaches the consumers, and it can be composed of a variety of materials including
plastic, paper, glass, metal and others. In Malaysia, the EPR policy is adapted by selected
companies based on voluntary basis. Environmental problems related to plastic waste
have become a major issue globally and in Malaysia as well, which has been ranked
as 8th among the top ten countries with mismanaged plastic waste in the world (UNEP,
2018). EPR is seen as a key strategy in managing packaging waste. By following the
principles of EPR in legislations and policies, several positive outcomes can be achieved
which include efficient waste management and increasing resource circulation through,
392
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
stable financial sources to support the waste management system and improve recycling
infrastructure and environment friendly or eco-designing of products or packaging. The
core principles of EPR include manufacturers or importers paying a disposal fee for
the packaging of their goods that are placed on the market, where that fee is utilized
for collection, recycling and disposal of their packaging waste, as well as on creating
awareness and research and development of packaging designs. The functionality of
EPR system depends on explicitly assigning the roles and responsibilities to respective
stakeholders of the EPR system and legally applying the EPR fee to the designated
stakeholder clearly (Buhnemann et al., 2018).
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION FROM WASTE TREATMENT
The main contributing factor to climate change is the emission of greenhouse gases
(GHG) such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrous
oxide (N2O). MSW management is a big issue facing the world today, for it contributes
approximately 5% of GHG to the environment. Growth in urban population is credited to
be the main cause of increase in GHG emissions. The sharp rise in CO2 emissions from
1990 onwards is associated with high increase in urban population in the same period.
Despite the rapid industrialization in Malaysia, combustion of fossil fuels in order to
generate power for industrial processes is also credited to be the main cause of increase
in emissions of carbon dioxide (Devadoss et al., 2021).
According to MESTEC (2018), there has been an increase of 29% in GHG emissions
from waste sector from the years 2005 to 2014 and in 2014 Malaysia emitted net
50,479,060 tons CO2-eq of GHG. Whereas waste sector is only the second biggest
contributor of national GHG emissions (9%) after the energy sector which emits 80% of
GHG. Approximately 31% of GHG emissions from waste sector is contributed by solid
waste disposal sites (SWDS) that makes up 3% of national GHG emissions. Methane
which has global warming potential (GWP) of 25 emittes 18% from the waste sector in
Malaysia (MESTEC, 2018). The management of MSW in Malaysia has been focused
only on collection, transportation and final disposal in disposal sites for the major part
of four decades. Consequently, it would have been emitting GHG from disposal sites
as they are the major source of GHG emissions. Table 16.7 lists the emissions of GHG
from the waste sector in Malaysia.
Table 16.7: Summary of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Waste Sector
INDICATORS DATA UNIT YEAR REFERENCE
Total GHG Emissions from 2.17×105 Gg of CO2-eq 2010 World Bank, 2014
Malaysia
Methane Emissions from 318.0 Gg of CO2-eq 2011 Ministry of Housing and
landfill Local Government, 2009
393
There are about 212 dumpsites, and these disposal sites are the major contributors of
methane emissions in the waste sector, except sanitary landfills with gas capture landfill.
Methane emissions from landfills and dumpsites in Malaysia is demonstrated in Figure
16.6.
Figure 16.6: Methane Emissions from Landfill and Dumpsites (UNCRD, 2017)
Higher emission of methane for the southern and eastern regions is probably due to
absence of sanitary landfills for final waste disposal. Open dumpsites do not have
proper linings and gas capture system to avoid methane emission into the atmosphere.
While, sanitary landfills have proper linings and gas capture system, the containment
and collection of landfill gas is inefficient in Malaysia. On the other hand, greater number
of sanitary landfills in the northern and central regions (four in each region) results in
collective higher amount of methane emission.
According to 2011 emissions (as shown in Figure 16.7), developed states including
Selangor, Penang and Johor, are the major contributors of methane emissions. The
cause of high emissions from these states is higher rate of urbanization thereby leading
to increased rate of waste generation. As reported by Ministry of Housing and Local
Government, Labuan state in Malaysia does not have data on methane emission as no
landfill is established in this state.
394
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
Figure 16.7: Methane Emissions in Malaysia for Year 2011
At present, the average per capita generation of MSW in Malaysia is about 0.85 kg/
person/day depending on the economic and geographical status of an area. In major
cities, such as Kuala Lumpur, it is estimated that the generation of waste is about 1.5
kg/person/day. Authorities in most major cities in Malaysia are seeking for an alternative
waste management approach as the landfill approach currently adopted becomes
unsustainable due to rapid development and lack of new landfill spaces. Nevertheless,
Malaysia has pledged that by 2030 it will reduce GHG emissions intensity of gross
domestic product (GDP) by 45% (as compared to the emissions intensity of GDP in
2005) (MESTEC, 2018). While there are policies and national plans set for reducing GHG
emissions, it is of paramount significance to examine the environmental performance (in
terms of GHG emissions) of MSW management periodically.
To reduce GHG emissions from MSW management, Solid-Waste-Management
Greenhouse-Gas (SWM-GHG) calculator was used to compare different scenarios
including recycling approach, incineration approach and integrated approach by
researchers in Malaysia. The results indicated that 16,571,569 tons CO2eq of GHG
emissions were released by MSW management in Malaysia that included 17% recycling,
1% composting and 82% final disposal in landfills and open dumps. The best strategy
to reduce GHG emissions is integrated approach towards MSW management whereby
targeting 39% recycling and 32% incineration by 2050 would result in 62% reduction
in GHG emissions (5,664,445 tons CO2-eq in 2050). The second suitable approach is
if Malaysia strives towards improving their recycling rate to 22% in 2020 (target set by
11th Malaysian Plan), 25% in 2025 and 50% in 2050. Recycling approach could reduce
GHG emissions by approximately 49% (7,509,321 tons CO2-eq in 2050) in 30 years
(from 2020 to 2050). The least favorable strategy is if Malaysia relies only on incineration
for managing MSW. With approximately 32% incineration rate and 17% recycling rate
GHG emissions would only be reduced by 37% (10,276,113 tons CO2-eq in 2050) from
emissions 2020.
395
SDGS PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE WASTE MANAGEMENT
Malaysia has adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (2030 Agenda) at
the United Nations General Assembly in New York on 25 September 2015 together with
192 global leaders. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development provides a shared
blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future
with 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The goal of SDGs is to recognize and
end poverty and other actions that need to take place to improve health and education,
reduce inequality, and spur economic growth and also to tackle climate change issues
and working to preserve our oceans and forests. The SDGs is a universal set of goals,
targets, and indicators that UN member state will be expected to use to frame their
agenda and political policies over the next few years (2016 – 2030). With its 17 Goals,
169 Targets and more than 200 Indicators that cover 5 dimensions namely People,
Planet, Prosperity, Peace and Partnership. Figure 16.8 highlights the three relevant
SDGs to waste management namely SDG 8, 11 and 12. The aims of sustainable waste
management is to address the long term pressures through the recovery, recycling, and
reuse of resources, and minimization of waste streams.
SDGs 8 goal highlights sustained, and inclusive economic growth can drive progress,
create decent jobs for all and improve living standards. The economic growth should be
a positive force for the whole planet. The financial stability with the economic growth will
generate more decent and fulfilling jobs and this must be carried without bringing harms
to the environment. The progress in economic growth will also assure labour rights
is protected and the modern slavery and child labour completely stoped.Job creation
promotion with expanded access to banking and financial services, we can make sure
that everybody gets the benefits of entrepreneurship and innovation.
Target 8.4 indicates progressive improvement, through 2030, in global resource efficiency
in consumption and production and endeavor to decouple economic growth from
environmental degradation, in accordance with the 10‑Year Framework of Programmes
on Sustainable Consumption and Production, with developed countries taking the lead.
The goal of SDG 11 is to “Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” and
the relevant target is 11.6. The goal of Target 11.6 are, by 2030, reduce the adverse
per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air
quality and municipal and other waste management aspects. The target of 11.6 basically
comprise two indicators; Indicator 11.6.1: Proportion of municipal solid waste collected
and managed in controlled facilities out of total municipal waste generated, by cities and
11.6.2 “Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g. PM2.5 and PM10) in cities
(population weighted)”
Indicator 11.6.1 suggest the use of zero waste cities as an example to overcome
environmental impacts issue. The use of “zero waste” cities can be useful to implement
within cities as it suggests the concept of recycling 100% of waste to mitigate the harmful
waste produced by the city. As waste management systems are political, environmental,
396
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
socio-economic, and technological, there may be challenges faced achieving indicator
11.6.1 as these factors create interrelated and dynamic inherited features.
Indicator 11.6.2: “Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g. PM2.5 and PM10)
in cities (population weighted)”. This is reference to the Particulate matter (PM) in the air
and how it could affect the cardiovascular system and other major organs.
The other SDGs that indirectly promote Sustainable Waste Management with the
explanation is tabulated in Table 16.8. Sustainable development goals definitely play
an important role not only to improve the quality of life but together in term of economic
growth, reduce poverty and inequality but also to preserve the environments and and
tackle existing environmental issues through various approaches.
Figure 16.8: SDGs Related to Waste Management
Table 16.8: SDGs that may Indirectly Promote Sustainable Waste Management
SDGs TARGET & DESCRIPTION WASTE MANAGEMENT
DYNAMICS
1 No Poverty Target 1.1 By 2030, reduce the By formalizing Informal sector will
poverty in half the population. create jobs & provide significant
income for more than 15 million poor
Target 1.4 By 2030, protect poor people in developing Countries
from environmental, disaster and
resilient (Navarrete-Hernandez et al., 2018)
2 Zero Hunger Target 2.4 By 2030, ensure Every year, 1.3 billion tonnes of food
sustainable food production; improve waste is generated globally
land and soil quality Composting over landfilling may
improve land and soil quality
397
SDGs TARGET & DESCRIPTION WASTE MANAGEMENT
DYNAMICS
3 Good Health Target 3.9 By 2030, reduce number By reducing landfilling, respiratory
and Well-being of deaths and illnesses from diseases and annoyance could be
avoided diseases Cancer (pancreas,
hazardous chemicals and air, water larynx, liver, kidney), and non-
and soil pollution and contamination Hodgkin lymphoma is also suspected
due to landfilling although more
research is needed(WHO, 2016)
4 Quality Target 4.4 By 2030, increase the By successful implementation of 3R,
Education number of youth and adults who have the demand for skilled people will
relevant skills,b entrepreneurship increase in recycling industry. In US
alone, 1.25 million people employed
by recycling industry vs 0.25 million
people by SWM industry
6 Clean Water Target 6.3 By 2030, improve water Reduction in generation of waste
and Sanitation quality by reducing pollution, may eliminate dumping of waste into
eliminating dumping………increasing rivers.
recycling and safe reuse globally
7 Affordable Target 7.4 By 2030, enhance waste-to-energy i.e. from organic
and Clean international cooperation to…… waste could contribute to achieving
Energy renewable energy, ……clean energy this goal
technology
9 Industrial Target 9.4 By 2030, upgrade resource efficiency can only be
Innovation and infrastructure and retrofit industries achieved by 3R and/or circular
Infrastructure to make them sustainable, with economy
increased resource-use efficiency
and greater adoption of clean and
environmentally sound technologies
and industrial processes, with all
countries acting in accordance with
their respective capabilities
13 Climate Target 13.2 Integrate climate change 5% of GHG is contributed by Solid
Action
measures into national policies, waste globally
strategies and planning
398
CHAPTER 16
Issues and Challenges of MSW Management in Malaysia: Current Trends and Way Forward
MALAYSIA INITIATIVES TO MANAGE MSW
The launch of the Malaysia Plastics Sustainability Roadmap 2021-2030 is the
government’s effort to address waste pollution. The roadmap is to take a phased,
evidence-based and holistic approach by involving all stakeholders in jointly addressing
single-use plastics pollution in Malaysia. This is mainly to overcome the issues of severe
plastic pollution in Malaysia, low recycling rate, absence of uniform policy network on
plastic and the absence of environmentally friendly and cost-effective alternatives. This
roadmap is aimed to reduce the usage of single use plastic and embark on sustainable
pathway towards a cleaner and healthier environment by 2030. Figure 16.9 demonstrates
the different phases involved to achieve the vision of zero single use plastic by 2030
(MESTECC, 2018). This also complements the solid waste circular economy initiative
developed by the Ministry of Housing and Local Government. Besides that, expansion of
the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Scheme was an important element that will
be in the framework that would change the local plastic waste management ecosystem.
In the EPR scheme, manufacturers are not only responsible for treating and disposing
of plastic waste that has been marketed by their respective brands, but they also have
to consider the design components as well as the use of recycled resins. The EPR
scheme will be implemented voluntarily by year 2026, by considering the readiness of
the industry, before making it mandatory later (Malay Mail, 2021).
Malaysia’s ten leading fast-moving consumer good companies which is a member of
The Malaysian Recycling Alliance (MAREA), has targeted to recycle an initial 5,000
tonnes of plastic waste by year-end 2022 and pledged to reach a minimum recycling
rate of 25% or 20,000 tonnes of plastic waste of members’ packaging volumes by
2025. MAREA intends to create awareness on the circular economy approach for more
efficient packaging waste management. The 10 member companies comprise Coca-
Cola Malaysia, Colgate-Palmolive Malaysia, Dutch Lady Milk Industries, Etika Group
of Companies, Fraser & Neave Malaysia, Mondelēz International (Malaysia), Nestlé
(Malaysia) Bhd, Spritzer, Tetra Pak Malaysia and Unilever Malaysia. The alliance also
collaborated with government agencies and other stakeholders to jointly drive a common
goal to improve collection and recycling rates for a greener, cleaner Malaysia and a
more sustainable, waste-reduced future (News Strait Times, 2022).
399