1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Solid wastes are referring to all discarded materials arising from animal and human activities as

unwanted and useless that resulted from day-to-day activities of the environment (Mishra et. al. 2014). It

flows from the economic system to the environment system that can be produced from residential, industrial,

and commercial. The solid waste is categorized based on material; such as plastic, paper, glass, metal, and

organic wastes that are generated simultaneously in every year. The Solid Waste Management (SWM) is

one of the disciplines that plays a big role on preservation and conservation to achieve the clean

environment and to control the generation of wastes. It provides existing practices that contributed to

environmental impacts, the practice of disposal methods such as composting on final disposal of solid

wastes and location or transportation of the landfill site (Vivar et. al. 2015; Hai and Ali 2005).

The Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) is a comprehensive waste collection method that

provide concept of Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP) and process of waste management as a whole

with application of technologies, it examine both physical components (collection, disposal and recycling)

and governance aspects (inclusivity of users and service providers, financial sustainability, coherent and

sound institutions). The ISWM is globally accepted as one of the effective and developed waste

management to promote sustainability in waste management especially in developing countries, this

principle is very helpful to policy makers for the formulation and establishment of ideas and strategies to

build effective SWM (Garcia 2017; Wilson et.al. 2013).

One of the major problems nowadays is the improper solid waste management, the Solid Waste

Management (SWM) is a big challenge and considered as the worldwide phenomenon (Chandra and Devi

2009). From a global perspective, current waste and resource management lacks of holistic approach

covering the whole chain of product design, raw material extraction, production, consumption, recycling and

waste management and there are lot of human activities that contribute to waste generation in which is also

failed to be disposed in the proper manner (Singh et.al. 2014; Vivar et.al. 2015). Effective solid waste

management is a major challenge in cities with high population density, as population grows and economic

activities become more intensive; the volume of solid wastes also grow (Ahsan et.al. 2014). There are few
 2

studies that have been done to assess the extent of problems in Municipal Solid Waste Management

(MSWM) and it turned out that the most contributors are prevailed into highly urbanized areas (Al-Khatib

et.al. 2007; Chandra and Devi 2009; Vivar et.al. 2015). The Philippines is considered as the ‘Tiger Economy’

of Asia together that have problems in SWM especially the MSWM that is considered as one of the serious

environmental issues in this country. There was an annual waste generation that estimated at 10.6 tonnes

million as of in year 2012 and hypothetically expected to double in year 2025 (Vivar et.al. 2015;

Premakumara et.al. 2014).

The Republic Act (R.A) No. 9003, otherwise known as the ‘Philippine Ecological Solid Waste

Management (ESWM) Act of 2000’, provides the required policy, framework, institutional mechanisms and

mandates to the Local Government Units (LGU) to establish a Local Government Solid Waste Management

Plan (LGSWMP). The R.A. No. 9003, addresses the different issues regarding to SWM and has obliged

municipalities and cities to dispose waste in sanitary and environmentally friendly manner, also it has to

achieved 25% waste reduction target through establishing ISWM plan that based on 3R’s; the Reduce,

Reuse and Recycle (Naz, A. and Naz, M. 2008; Premakumara et.al. 2014; Vivar et.al. 2015). The ESWM

has prompted in Higher Education Institutions including the States and Universities to encorporate this policy

in the following school system (Gequinto 2016).

The Hinatuan, Surigao del Sur which is found in Mindanao, Philippines, was known to be the first to

implement this alternative approach on solid waste management, that is the establishment of "No

Segregation, No Collection" Policy and Solid Waste Management (SWM) identification system. In 2016, the

National Solid Waste Management Commission and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources;

through the NSWMC Resolution No. 486 series of 2016 and DENR, approved the 10-year Solid Waste

Management Plan of the Municipality. The Hinatuan is one of the ten (10) winners of the inaugural

Climate-Adaptive and Disaster-Resilient (CLAD) Awards for Cities and Municipalities for the exemplary

programs, urging other local government units (LGUs) to adopt and replicate their best practices in order to

strengthen community resilience to disasters and climate change. At the term when Mayor Candelario

Jabagat Viola Jr. was the Mayor of the Municipality, he used foresight, creativeness and love for the

environment by the effective implementation of R.A. 9003. At the time when the award and pride was

achieved, Hinatuan became the favorite ‘Lakbay Aral Destination’ for the other LGU’s who aspires to

emulate the systems and the procedures of the Municipality (Timon 2012).
 3

The researchers find it interesting to assess the SWM practices in Hinatuan, Surigao del Sur to provide

a basis to the innovative implementation measures that can aspire other municipalities and cities. The local

government has implemented the use of paper bags in every establishments to reduce the generation of

wastes. The cooperation and participation of the citizens and the leaders are the main factor to determine

the household SWM practices, the problems encountered of SWM services and Willingness-To-Pay (WTP)

for the improvement of SWM in the community. The result of this study will serve as baseline information and

a guide for the legislative functions of the local officials for better and effective implementation of Solid Waste

Management System.

Objectives of the Study

The general objectives of the study are to estimate the willingness-to-pay (WTP) for the improvement of

Solid Waste Management in the Municipality of Hinatuan, Surigao Del Sur;

Specifically, this study aims to:

1) Ascertain the awareness of household communities with regards to solid waste management.

2) Determine the household solid waste management practices.

3) Identify the problems encountered on solid waste management services.

4) Compute the mean willingness-to-pay (WTP) of household towards the improvement of solid waste

management system.

Scope and Limitation

The study was conducted in the two (2) selected barangays in Hinatuan, Surigao Del Sur namely;

Barangay La Casa, Poblacion represented the urban and Barangay Bigaan represented the rural. The

representative for every household (i.e. household head, spouse or anyone who can describe the profile,

practices and perception for the household) for the selected barangays were the respondents. Further the

study, focuses in determining the solid waste management practices and the willingness to pay for the

improvement of solid waste management. The approach used for WTP estimation is the Contingent

Valuation Method (CVM) and has used the ‘bidding game’ approach.
 4

Significance of the Study

This study will provide an information to the community of selected barangays in Hinatuan, Surigao Del

Sur, regarding about the household’s willingness-to-pay for an improved solid waste management system.

The continuous practice of improper disposal of wastes will have great impact to the people and environment.

Enforcement of proper waste management can make the residents and the community contribute to lessen

the air and water pollution. The knowledge and training for recycling and reuse provided by the LGU and

government can provide income for the families.

 5

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Solid wastes are wastes that arising from human, animal and industrial activities regarded as useless

and/or unwanted, it flows from the economic system to the environment system. Solid waste management is

a practices and laws that created a positive impact on communities, health, environment and economy. The

willingness-to-pay (WTP) presents the value of a good to an individual as what they are willing to pay,

sacrifice or exchange for it and it is important for the application to the environment.

SOLID WASTES

The Environmental Protection Agency of Ghana (EPA, 1999), was defined the solid wastes as a

non-flowing solid wastes material generated by the following; households, institution, commercial

establishments and large industries. It has littered the streets and become one of the most frequent problem

faced by the government which caused clogged canals and drainage systems that eventually detrimental to

human health.

Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW)

The Municipal Solid Wastes covers the industrial, commercial, industrial and residential solid wastes

excluding the hazardous wastes (Vivar et.al. 2015). This waste are the undesirable materials consisting of

household wastes, they include the municipal services such as road wastes, parks and gardens’

maintenance and other recreational areas. The discharge of untreated MSW to the land is very widespread

especially in developing countries. This were contained a compound that can cause harmful effect to

humans and to the environment, it brought pollution that caused by significant changes in the

physicochemical characteristics of the soil (Mouhoun-Chouaki et.al. 2019).

Hazardous Wastes

According to Tolentino et.al. (1990), the hazardous wastes are the priority concern of the Philippine

government due to the increasing number of companies like the semiconductor industry and the local firms

that generated this type of wastes that detrimental to health and the environment. The enforcement of the

activities by the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) were the used of Environmental Impact

Assessments (EIA) to balance economic growth with ecological protection and providing baseline
 6

information for the development of standards for hazardous waste management, environmental monitoring

and the regulation of hazardous waste disposal.

Industrial Wastes

The Industrial wastes are slags, ashes, dust, and sludge that are essential parts of the environment and

the economic structure. This type of wastes can contain hazardous components that are harmful, but they

can also consist of valuable materials that can be a source for secondary raw materials. There is a reliable

knowledge for waste composition to assess the environmental risk and to calculate the economic benefit of

dumped material (Rasemann 2015).

Agricultural Wastes

The Agricultural wastes (agro-waste) are the residues from the growing and processing of raw

agricultural products such as fruits, vegetables, meat, poultry, dairy products and crops, this are the

non-products output of production and processing agriculture products that contained material that have

benefits to people but whose economic values are less than the cost of collection, transportation and

processing for beneficial use. This type of waste can manage properly through the application of 3R’s

(Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) that can transform into beneficial materials (Obi et.al. 2016).

IMPACTS OF SOLID WASTES

Solid waste management is a human obligation to fulfill, the inefficiency and failure to sustain proper

solid waste management considered having a great impact on health, societal, environmental, economic,

and political issues (Vivar et.al. 2015).

Economic

The diversion of solid wastes for economic impact than disposing it, the total sales and value-added

impacts more than double, output impacts and total income impacts nearly double and the job impacts

nearly double. The 3R’s engagement helped the businesses and governments to develop markets for

discarded raw and biodegradable materials because it has educated consumers and producers on waste

reduction method. To analyze the economic impacts, the total impacts of all revenues and spending of these

sectors on all sectors in the economy must be captured (Goldman and Ogishi, 2001). In some instances,

there are tendencies that the community will continually settle with present options owing to perceived
 7

economic dependence through employment and resources that results from negative impacts (Galarpe

2017).

Health

One of the major concerns for public health in developing countries are the rapid urbanization and

increase of consumption in most developing countries that caused high morbidity and mortality in numerous

ways, even with massive attempts to improve sanitation there were still 40% of the total population of the

world that has lack of sanitation (Emery et.al. 2007). Poor maintenance of the solid wastes can contaminate

the water and no sanitary facilities can cause pollution which increase the health risks such as malaria,

diarrhea, cholera, amoebiasis, etc. that acquired by both indirect and direct inhalation, skin contact, and

indirect means (Khatib et.al. 2010).

The implications of poorly managed wastes on health are numerous and depend on the nature of

wastes, individuals exposed, duration of exposures and availability of interventions for those exposed. The

stakeholders hold into actions to avoid adverse health outcomes of poor solid waste management by

understanding, prioritizing and addressing the issues to ensure that the environment and health are

preserved (Ziraba 2016).

Environment

Solid wastes damps are spoiling the environmental conditions in developing countries, most of these

countries are not able to provide proper facilities for collection and disposal of communal solid wastes

especially in the remote areas of the municipality that are mostly ignored by collection services because of

the location. The inefficient municipal solid waste management may create serious negative environmental

impacts like infectious diseases, land and water pollution, obstruction of drains and loss of biodiversity if not

taken into an action (Ejaz et.al. 2010).

Environmental impacts of food waste in landfills is five times more impact that of the packaging waste in

landfills, it can produce a methane gas that is more potent than carbon dioxide. The wastewaters are

generated from washing of food materials, utensils, floors, etc. that also considered as one of the major

environmental concern (Singh et. al. 2014).

 8

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

The municipal solid waste management is the discipline associated with the control of generation,

storage, collection, transfer, processing and disposal of solid waste in a way that it is governed by the best

principles of public health, economics, engineering, aesthetics and other environmental considerations

(Daskalopoulos et.al. 1997).

Awareness on Solid Waste Management

Majority of people who were aware of solid waste management strategies did not put them to practice

and there was decrease in people’s attitude towards social commitment to participate in solid waste

management (Twumasi 2017).

Solid Waste Management Practices

According to Bernardo (2008), the residents rely on garbage collection by the government, most of the

respondents said that garbage collection and disposal is the responsibility of the government. But there are

those residents who dumped their garbage in non-designated pick-up points, usually in a corner of the street;

it happened that the dumped garbage becomes a breeding ground for disease-causing organisms. Poor

solid waste management practices were found to be the land degradation that made the breeding grounds

for disease carrying vectors such as mosquitoes, rats and rodents (Mohsin and Chinyama, 2016)

Waste Characterization

The waste characterization determines the physical, chemical, and radiological properties of wastes; it

needs adjustments, treatments and storage disposal of wastes. It helps classifying quantities and

categorized disposed materials, identifying prospects suitable for program implementation, and assessing

efficiency of program variations (Miezah et.al. 2015). A solid waste can be divided into two classifications;

Biodegradable (wet) wastes and Non-biodegradable (dry) wastes. Biodegradable are composed of foods

such as vegetables and meats, while non-biodegradable are wastes that are comprises of bottles, papers,

plastic wrappers, High-density polyethylene (HDPE), and Linear low-density polyethylene (LLPDE) bags

(Singh et.al. 2014).

Waste Minimization
 9

The burden of wastes puts in the environment has widely publicized. Waste minimization and recovery

targets were introduced in order to address both earths’ decreasing resources and increasing of wastes

generated from many countries (Emery et.al. 2007). There was few of the examples of waste minimizations,

such as reusing of the materials directly by means of selling the bottles, plastics, cardboards, and papers to

intermediaries or commercial centers which pays for these materials (Chandra and Devi 2009).

There are methods for reduction and control of waste generation and minimization at source such as

segregation that is a useful method for preventing reusable material from being polluted from other types of

hazardous materials or wastes, and also reduces moisture content between wet and dry wastes, by

segregation of this wastes the time and effort for handling will be reduced (Mallak et.al. 2014). Another is the

aerobic composting is a bacterial conversion of organic present in MSW with the presence of air under

humid condition that eventually obtained after bacterial activity which was very useful in agricultural

purposes, composting process waste volume which can reduced to 50-85% (Sharholy et.al. 2008).

PROBLEMS IN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT/SERVICES

The solid waste management currently being supported by a full legal basis, but the economic and

social conditions are not yet in that level for a solid waste integrated management system (Alcani and Dorri

2013). The ultimate disposal of sanitary landfill in the Philippines could still be considered as not effective

and efficient in attaining a clean environment. The key to effective solid waste management is the political

will of the LGUs through mobilization and participation of community, private and informal waste sectors

towards minimizing solid waste and uplifting the economic status of the vulnerable groups of waste pickers,

buyers and scavengers (Castillo and Otoma 2013).

SWM Services in Urban Areas

According to the study of Gequinto (2016), Urban solid waste management considered as one of the

immediate and serious environmental problems in the developing countries. The urban domestic waste

collection services are often provided by local government authorities or by private companies for a fee and

get the better solid waste management services, communal container collection is the most commonly used

in urban but the solid waste situation was poor as compared to rural areas because of the rapid urbanization.

It is recommending a comprehensive policy approach such as sanitary inspection, infrastructure

development and community participation that rural areas also needed (Boateng et.al. 2016).
 10

SWM Services in Rural Areas

The solid waste management practices are differ significantly for developed and developing countries,

for urban and rural areas There are general assumption by various governments that the rural people do not

have the purchasing power to pay for the solid waste disposal services, that made the rural residents to

dump their solid waste on open dumping sites which was the common practice in the rural areas. The

current situation are very important to take into the action because as a result of tonnes of uncollected solid

wastes, there is undoubtedly pose serious environmental hazards (Boateng et.al. 2016).

CONTINGENT VALUATION METHOD (CVM)

According to Arrow et.al. (1993) as cited by Noonan, the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) was

proposed by Ciriacy and Wantrup in 1947. Since the first CVM study was published almost 40 years ago, it

has been applied to numerous environmental amenities and damages, as well as to other fields. The CV

method is based on the concepts of willingness-to-pay and willingness-to-accept in an attempt to elicit

information from respondents in order to determine the value of non-market goods, the attention has shifted

from valuation of the environmental damages to the valuation of environmental protection. It is widely used

as a policy tool particularly in protected area management and biodiversity conservation in general. The

CVM involves in using surveys to elicit a willingness to pay (WTP) from individuals for hypothetical changes

in some good or service, it is the most popular method in a family of alternative stated-preference techniques

(Noonan 2003). As informed by Mazzanti (2002) that the survey asks respondents to rate, rank, or choose

among alternatives described in terms of various levels of attributes (Schuster 2003).

The basic theoretical framework for CVM studies considers an individual or household utility function, as

a function of market goods, and the level of a public good or service provided (Noonan 2003). According to

Hoyos and Mariel (2013), given that value estimates obtained are contingent on the information previously

provided to the respondent in the survey, CV surveys are capable of directly obtaining a monetary measure

of welfare associated with a discrete change in the provision of an environmental good by substituting one

good for another or the marginal substitution of different attributes of an existing good. There are some other

terms that have been used for the value estimates format used namely; discrete choice experiment, bidding

game, open-ended question, choice-based conjoint analysis, contingent ranking, single- or double-bounded

dichotomous choice, paired comparisons, payment card, and so on.

 11

Environmental Valuation

Environmental Valuation is the process of putting monetary values on environmental goods and

services, many of which have no easily observed market prices. Market is a place where buyers and sellers

come together to exchange some product or goods (Swinton et.al. 2015). Environmental goods and services

include scenic views, coral reefs, mountain vistas, biodiversity, watersheds and water supply, forest and

carbon sequestration or erosion control, ecosystem conservation and maintenance of genetic material

(Dixon 2008). The environmental evaluation or environmental impact assessment is the formal process used

to predict the environmental consequences (positive or negative) of a plan, policy, program or project prior to

the decision to move forward with the proposed action (Minolta, 2014).

Contingent Valuation Questions

A typical willingness-to-pay (WTP) question in a contingent valuation study must focus on specific

environmental goods and services and a specific context that is clearly defined and understood by the

survey respondents. It is also important to make sure that respondents do not inadvertently assume that one

or more related improvements are included; WTP questions can be asked using both open-ended and

close-ended formats. In addition to the hypothetical question that asks for WTP, the survey must specify the

mechanism by which the payment will be made (Birol et.al. 2009).

WTP - The ‘Bidding Game’ Approach

According to Boateng et.al. (2019), the success and financial sustainability of waste management

companies relies to the ability to collect revenue and clients’ willingness-to-pay for SWM services. It is

generally believed that if the households will pay more, the waste management companies and service

providers can increase, review, and improve service delivery. The WTP are influenced by income, education,

age and total disposal methods available to the households. The main reason for having more willing to pay

by men can be attributed to the fact that they have more say in monetary expenditures (Sumukwo et.al.

2012).

Majority of the households were willing-to-pay for MSWM services (Khati 2015). The mayor unofficially

agreed with the collection fee ordinances 30 pesos/monthly with caution depends on place because there

are households that cannot afford with solid waste management services fee (Marchand 1998).
 12

CHAPTER III

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Area

The Municipality of Hinatuan is a second-class municipality in the province of Surigao del Sur carrying

the zip code of 8310. It has a location coordinate of 8°21'59.99" N and 126°19'60.00" E. The municipality is

located at approximately 44 kilometers (27 miles) north of Bislig City. The study was conducted in selected

barangays in Hinatuan namely; the Barangay La Casa and Barangay Bigaan which represented the urban

and rural barangays, respectively.

Figure 1. The Map of Barangay La Casa and Bigaan found in Hinatuan, Surigao Del Sur

Target Population

Barangay La Casa, Poblacion which represents the urban area has 1,023 household population,

while Barangay Bigaan which represents the rural area has 726 household population.

Sampling Design and Sample Size Distribution

The two-stage cluster random sampling design was used and using sample size formula for estimating

proportion 316 participants were duly selected from the two barangays. A household survey was conducted
 13

to ascertain and evaluate the solid waste management practices and willingness-to-pay for improvement

solid waste management system. The first survey was conducted in rural area study and done on November

10-11, 2018. The second survey was conducted in urban area and done on February 2-3 2019.

The table 1 shows the distribution of households of each selected urban and rural barangay.

Table 1. Sample size distribution

Barangays Total Number of Households, N Sample Size, n

La Casa Poblacion 1,023 185
Bigaan 726 131
Total 1,749 316

Survey Instrument

This study provided a questionnaire to gather relevant information needed. It comprised with five (5)

parts which is given as the following: (1.) Demographic Profile, (2.) Household Solid Waste Management

Practices, (3.) Perception of the Household at the Solid Waste Management Production in Community, (4.)

Problems Encountered of Solid Waste Management Services and (5.) Willingness-to-pay for the

Improvement of Solid Waste Management Services.

Data Analysis

In order to analyze the solid waste management system in the municipality, all the pertinent information

on the solid waste management system were studied, compiled, analyzed and presented into the various

aspects of the solid waste management. Descriptive statistics such as the mean, standard deviation,

frequency, and percentage were used in presenting the types of wastes produced and the solid waste

management practices of households in the selected barangays of Hinatuan, Surigao Del Sur.

The table 2 indicates the scoring and quantification for the interpretation of the problems in solid waste

management services.

Table 2. Scoring and quantification

Average Score Interpretation

3.5 - 4.0 Very Serious
2.5 - 3.4 Serious
1.5 - 2.4 Not so Serious
1.0 - 1.4 No Problem
 14

Willingness-to-Pay Elicitation

The Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) is a method that value an environmental good is elicited

directly, as answer to a question about willingness-to-pay (WTP) to have more of good. Among the possible

bidding mechanisms, we chose the the ‘bidding game’ in which it asks a sequence of questions until

maximum is found. There are eight (8) designated amount that was used; the 10, 30, 50, 80, 100, 300, 500

and 1,000 pesos (PHp).

Model Specification and Procedures

The CVM-WTP estimates and a logit model were done. The mean WTP was estimated using the

following equation.

ß𝒐 +(Ʃß𝒏𝑿𝒏)
Mean WTP =
―ß₁

Where; ßo = estimated constant, ßn = parameters of the coefficients, Xn = the mean value of the explanatory

variables and ß₁=coefficient of the bid price.

 15

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Solid Waste Management (SWM) is important to be well implemented and practiced with the fact that

humans are one of the contributors of wastes as well as to open up the minds of the people especially in a

community on how improper waste disposal affect the whole country. The willingness-to-pay for the

improvement of the solid waste management services is one of the methods that may help to lessen the

problems and improve the solid waste management services.

The awareness of solid waste management of the residents in the municipality was positive because all

of the chosen respondents in each urban and rural barangay were aware of the proper segregation of

wastes, and aware of the possible effects of improper solid waste management to the people in terms of

healthy, environment and economy.

Demographic Profile

The table 3 shows the demographic profile of the household participants. The female has the highest

number of participants with the percentage of 65.8% while the male participants has the lowest with 34.2 %

because most of the male citizens was not around because they were in their respective jobs and duties.

The married participants have the highest number with the 80.7% because most of them were the mother of

Table 3. The demographic profile of the household participants.

Sex Frequency Percent (%)

Male 108 34.2
Female 208 65.8
Total 316 100
Civil Status
Single 40 12.7
Married 255 80.7
Separated 2 0.6
Widow 19 6
Total 316 100
Educational Status
No Education 2 6
Elementary Level 37 11.7
Elementary Graduate 46 14.6
High School Level 74 23.4
High School Graduate 79 25.0
College Level 49 15.5
College Graduate 29 9.2
Total 316 100.0
 16

the house, while the single participants were the lowest with 12.7%. The majority of the educational status of

the participants were high school graduate (25%) and high school level (23.4%), while the lowest were the

no education (6%) and college graduate (9.2%).

Household Solid Waste Management Practices

Most of the household respondents doesn’t separated their waste because there were only 17.3 % who

separated their waste which is the reflection of what happen in most African cities (Yoada et.al. 2014).

Meanwhile, the college students in MSU Maigo School of Arts and Trades have a good practice on solid

waste management in terms of segregation with 50.99% (Paghasian 2017).

The table 4 shows the households’ segregation of wastes in the municipality. The participants of urban

and rural areas were majority practiced the daily segregation of waste was daily with the highest percentage

of 59.5% because they were used to follow the barangays’ solid waste management ordinances. However,

there were participants that practiced the monthly segregation of waste due to the lack of time and

cooperation of the members of the household.

Table 4. Households’ segregation of wastes in the municipality.

Segregation of wastes Frequency Percent (%)

Daily 188 59.5
4 times a week 3 0.9
3 times a week 3 0.9
Twice a week 23 7.3
Weekly 97 30.7
Monthly 2 0.6
Total 316 100

The table 5 shows that types of waste that are commonly found in the household. In the selected

communities of Ejisu-Juaben, Ghana, the types of wastes that were identified in the waste streams in the

were the food waste which was considered and recorded as highest, metals, papers, batteries, plastics, tins

and cans, woods, textiles, fine residue, fruits, seeds and nuts and yard trimming (Asare et.al. 2015).

Meanwhile, in the two selected barangays in Hinatuan, the types of waste that are commonly generated in

the household are the recyclable wastes (cans, plastics, cellophane wrapper (with silver), cellophane

wrapper (without silver) and bottles). However, types of waste are not commonly generated are the
 17

biodegradable wastes (food wastes, papers and card boards) except for glass that belong to special wastes.

The diapers are generated in the particular household of the participant that raised and infant since it

utilized this type of waste.

Table 5. Types of waste that are commonly found in the household.

Frequency Percent (%)

Types of household wastes
Food wastes 216 68.4
Papers and Cardboard 213 67.4
Plastics 282 89.2
Cans 279 88.3
Bottles 268 85.1
Cellophane wrapper (with silver) 291 92.1
Cellophane wrapper (without silver) 246 77.8
Glass 80 25.3
Diapers 19 6.0

In the study of Zagozewski et.al. (2011), it was identified the past and the present waste disposal

practices. One of the elder stated that the past waste disposal of wastes was they used to ‘dig a hole and

burn it, go in there and light a match, and then cover it’. The generated wastes weren’t thrown around but it

was always kept. In the present waste of disposal of waste, the household wastes were disposed into the

respective residential bins.

The table 6 shows the storage of waste before the disposal. The participants from both urban and rural

areas utilized the polythene bag or sacks as the waste storage with 68.4%, because it is more convenient to

used and cost effective. The participants don’t hold the favourable used of the open container because there

are instances that it may turn to a stinky smell that can affect the sanitation of the household and to the

barangay.

Table 6. The households’ storage of waste before the disposal.

Households’ storage of wastes Frequency Percent (%)

In closed container 97 30.7
In an open container 3 0.9
In a polythene bag or sack 216 68.4
Total 316 100

The table 7 shows the households’ schedule in washing the waste storage/container bins. According to

the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, in order to maintain the cleanliness of waste
 18

disposal/storage bins, it need to be cleaned in every four (4) months, because the storage/waste disposal

bins will become toxic if it is wait too long to be dirty. This will vary on how much food that was added, how

many worms you started with and etc. The weekly schedule of washing the waste storage/containers bin in

the municipality of Hinatuan has the highest percentage of 65.7% because the collection of the wastes

especially in the urban areas is once a week/weekly. However, in the rural areas, even if their collection of

garbage is monthly, there were household participants practiced the weekly washing of storage/containers

bins because of the fact that it will create bad odor that can disturb the sanity of the house and can be a main

factor of diseases especially to the children in the household. They put their wastes into the Material

Recovery Facility (MRF) in order to wash the bins. There were participants who answered the monthly of

washing the waste bins because they utilized either the open or closed containers that can be reusable and

doesn’t require weekly washing (Table 6). There were few of the participants who answered three times a

week and twice a month because they lived in the remote places/areas, it has the lowest percentage with

0.3%.

Table 7. Households’ schedule of washing the waste storage/container bins.

Households’ schedule of washing containers/bins Frequency Percent (%)

Daily 9 2.9
4 times a week 20 6.3
3 times a week 1 0.3
Twice a week 20 6.3
Weekly 207 65.7
Monthly 57 18.1
Twice a Month 1 0.3
Total 315 100
***there was 1 respondent who has no response

Several studies showed that the collection, storage, transportation and final disposal of solid wastes are

major problem in urban cities and areas. The widely used to dump varieties of garbage as source of

domestic organic and inorganic waste are the canals and drains. The other problems in disposal of wastes is

the incineration, throwing the garbage on the well and lack of garbage collection. As stated by Minghua et.al.,

in order to increase the recycling rates, the local government must encourage the markets for the recycle

materials and increase of professionals in recycling companies (Abdel-shafy and Mansour 2018; Flores et.al.

2018).
 19

The table 8 shows the types of waste disposal methods in the municipality. The participants from both

urban and rural areas majority stated that the common method they usually have is the collection (98.7%)

provided by the municipality and their respective barangays. The participants also practiced recycling in their

respective households (Table 10) and compost pit/composting especially in the rural areas (Table 14).The

burning, burying, vacant lots and canals has the lowest percentage because it is not allowed in the

municipality to use this methods but if given a chance to use this method that no one can see them, they

burned their wastes especially the papers.

Table 8. Types of waste disposal methods in the municipality.

Types of wastes disposal methods Frequency Percent (%)

Burning 99 31.3
Burying 51 16.1
Recycle 277 87.7
Compost pit 267 84.5
Collection 312 98.7
Vacant lots 3 0.9
Canals 1 0.3

The attitudes toward recycling are positive. Given that the majority of respondents do recycle, these

results suggest that attitude is playing a role in motivating recycling bahevior, rather than discouraging or

impeding recycling (Roan 2017). The coordination done by the LGU with the recovery and recycling systems

plastic and polystyrene industries (Castillo and Otoma 2013).

The table 9 shows the participants’ practiced in reuse and recycle of household wastes. Most of the

participants have always practice of reuse/recycle (47.2%) of the household generated wastes every day.

Meanwhile there were participants answered that they never done practice reuse/recycle before in the

household because of lack of time and knowledge to provide recycled products.

Table 9. The participants’ practiced in reuse/recycle of household wastes.

Practiced of reuse/recycle of wastes Frequency Percent (%)

Always 149 47.2
Sometimes 139 44
Never 28 8.9
Total 316 100
 20

The waste plastics are recovered when they are diverted from landfills or littering. The amount of

material going into the waste management system can be reduced by actions that decreases the use of

materials in products (Hopewell et.al. 2009).

The table 10 shows the sources of wastes for households recycle practices. Majority of the participants

from both urban and rural areas answered that they practiced recycling and they utilized their generated

wastes in the households and they even made their own recycle products.

Table 10. Sources of wastes for households recycle practices.

Source of wastes for recycle practices Frequency Percent (%)

Own generating wastes in home 264 83.5

Wastes disposal area 52 16.5

Total 316 100

According to the analysis of the EPA data, the type of wastes that were recycled are 99% of lead-acid

batteries, 88.5% of corrugated cardboard boxes and 67% of newspapers as of 2013. There were 28.2%

high-density polyethylene containers, 13.5% of plastic bags/wraps and 6.2% small appliances (Desilver 2016).

In Manila, Philippines, the recycling implement/expand recycling programs for following materials; the office

papers, corrugated cardboard, food and beverage containers and toner cartridges (The Institute for Local

Self-Reliance Washington, D.C. 2000).

The table 11 shows the types of households’ wastes that utilized for recycling. Most of respondents from

urban and rural areas have answered that cans, cellophane (with silver), cellophane (without silver) and

papers were the types of wastes that was utilized for recycling. But the plastics wastes are the most

numerous among the type of waste with 77.5%, because this waste is typically utilized as raw products for

recycling to make new products such as flower pots, and the municipality have specialized treatment to the

plastics for the creation of the recycled products such as chairs for the community. On the other hand,

unused papers are usually burned (Table 8) as what the participants added this were occupy the lowest

percentage (14.6%) among the types of waste that were commonly found.
 21

Table 11. Types of households’ wastes that utilized for recycling.

Types of wastes for recycle Frequency Percent (%)

Cans 105 33.2
Plastics 245 77.5
Cellophane wrapper (with silver) 221 69.9
Cellophane wrapper (without silver) 137 43.4
Papers 46 14.6

The critics point out that there were almost 80% of those greenhouse-gas benefits comes from the

paper and paperboard recycling (Desilver 2016).

The table 12 shows the households’ benefits get from the recycled wastes. The participants from both

urban and rural areas utilized and benefit the households’ recycled products by making it a decoration

(79.7%) as the home decorations especially in their balconies. There were participants who sell it to the

buyers (10.4%), they were few of them because they seldom seen the buyers in the community.

Table 12. Households’ benefits get from the recycled wastes.

Benefits get from the recycled wastes Frequency Percent (%)

Used it again in another way 132 41.8
Make it a decoration 252 79.7
Sell to the buyers of reuse/recycle wastes materials 33 10.4

The households that have children were specified that food was wasted due to behaviors and

preferences of kids and teenagers. The effectiveness of economic incentives such as raising value-added

tax rates for the prevention of food waste were estimated to be low. In order to reduce the food wastes, small

packaging sizes was selected. The advice required on how to share or donate food, how to store food

correctly and recipes for how to use leftovers (Jorissen et.al. 2015).

The table 13 shows the households’ disposal of kitchen food wastes. Most of the participants from both

urban and rural areas answered that they feed the households’ kitchen food wastes to the pigs and the dogs

(71.8%) especially in the rural areas, because most of them are farmers and they are far from the urbanized

places. The participants raised pigs as their livelihood so that they can fulfill their economic needs and they

raised dogs to make them as pets in their household. The lowest was to feed the food wastes to the chickens

(1.3%).
 22

Table 13. Households’ disposal of kitchen food wastes.

Disposal of kitchen food wastes Frequency Percent (%)

Leave it away to decay 32 10.1
Feed them to the house pit 95 30.1
Feed them to pigs and dogs 227 71.8
Feed them to Chickens 4 1.3

The organic compost and processed organic fertilizer have been in the Philippine market for more than

20 years (Lapid et.al. 1996). According to the survey done in the household respondents in Sri Lanka, most

of the compost bin owners use the compost bin in different ways. Most of the owners used the compost bins

once a day, there were once a quarter year and there were respondents that obtain fertilizer for their home

gardening (Lekammudiyanse and Gunatilake 2009).

The table 14 shows the present of households’ compost/disposal pit. The majority of the participants

especially in the rural areas have their own compost pit because the distance between the houses of the

residents is far from each other in which it gives enough space for providing a compost pit, compared to the

urban areas where composting are not common because of the unavailability and doesn’t have enough

space for compost pit.

Table 14. Present of households’ compost/disposal pit.

Present of Compost/Disposal pit Frequency Percent (%)

Yes 264 83.5
No 52 16.5
Total 316 100

Perceptions of the Household in the Community Services

The household participants in the municipality of Mymensigh, Bangladesh were generally satisfied with

the waste collection services by NGO and they were satisfied with the cleaners of solid wastes. The effective

solid waste collection was achieved because it is properly maintained and the NGO’s showed increase

manpower, labor cost and transport. The improvement of the services is also the step towards recycling and

eco-friendly environment (Khanom et.al. 2015).

 23

The practice of good governance can improve the efficiency of LGUs because they can gain trust and

confidence of the stakeholders and private sectors that are willing to invest (Pagunsan and Shimada 2012).

The table 15 shows the level of satisfaction in solid waste collection services in the municipality. Majority

of the participants gave and excellent remark (54.1%) in terms of the solid waste collection in the

municipality. Meanwhile, there were only few (0.6%) gave a poor evaluation in terms of solid waste collection.

It means that the solid waste collection in the selected barangays in the municipality of Hinatuan is

sustainable and effective.

Table 15. Level of satisfaction in solid waste collection services in the municipality.

Level of satisfaction in solid waste collection Frequency Percent (%)

Poor 2 0.6
Unsatisfied 5 1.6
Neutral/ Fair 18 5.7
Satisfying/ Good 120 38
Excellent/ Very Good 171 54.1
Total 316 100

In the study of Azuelo et.al. (2016) in the province of Camarines Norte, Philippines, there were only four

(4) municipalities that was identified to have more highly effective solid waste management strategies out of

12 municipalities. It is recommended that the better solid waste management may be attained through the

involvement and commitment of the implementation of ordinances.

In the municipality of Colombo area, there was 67% of the participants who were satisfied with the

current waste management in the municipality. The public perception of the various solid waste

management strategies was positive and they were willing to support for the implementation of proper solid

waste management and disposal strategies in the area (Nuzrath and Ruzaik 2017).

The table 16 shows the level of satisfaction in solid waste management process in the municipality.

Majority of the participants were strongly satisfied (48.1%) with the solid waste management process and

services in the municipality. This means that the participants are fully aware of the policies, rules and

regulation pertaining to the consequences of improper solid waste management and

involvement/participation in solid waste management activities. Only few of them answered dissatisfied

remark (0.6%).
 24

Table 16. Level of satisfaction in solid waste management process in the municipality.

Level of satisfaction in SWM process Frequency Percent (%)

Strongly dissatisfied 9 2.8
Dissatisfied 2 0.6
Neutral 52 16.5
Satisfied 101 32
Strongly satisfied 152 48.1
Total 316 100

According to the study of Morar and Bucur (2017), the study revealed that the students have more

knowledge regarding of the organic waste, selective collection and their responsibility as citizens in the

waste collection services.

The table 17 shows the awareness as to where the waste collected go. Majority of the participants

answered ‘Yes’ (73.4%) which means both urban and rural areas were aware as to where the collected

wastes was disposed and they said the same location which was in the respective Ecopark or Dumpsite in

the municipality. Meanwhile there were participants who answered ‘No’ (26.6%), which means they weren’t

aware about as to where the waste collected go and disposed.

Table 17. Awareness as to where the waste collected go.

Awareness in waste collection services Frequency Percent (%)

Yes 232 73.4
No 84 26.6
Total 316 100

In the state of Lagos, Nigeria, there was 73% of interviewed contractors reported that the collection was

done once per week but they admitted that most of the collection depends on the mechanical condition of the

collection trucks and agreement between the contractors and residents of the area (Anestina et.al. 2014).

Also, in the municipality of Winneba, Ghana, the frequency of collection was usually done once or twice

a week (Twumasi 2017).

The table 18 shows the municipalities’ schedule of the waste collection. The two selected barangays

have different schedule of waste collection. The La Casa Poblacion (urban) that have more participants in
 25

this study stated that they have weekly collection of waste (56%) which is the highest. Meanwhile, the

Bigaan (rural) stated that they have monthly collection of wastes (42.1%), but eventhough their collection is

Table 18. Municipalities’ schedule of the waste collection.

Schedule of the waste collection Frequency Percent (%)

Once a week 177 56

Monthly service 133 42.1

Twice a month 6 1.9
Total 316 100
monthly, their segregation of wastes is daily and for the washing of waste containers is weekly (Table 7).

There were few who answered twice a month (1.9%) because some of them answered that they can’t throw

their waste of the schedule time because they were busy with their respective jobs.

The household wastes recovered most of the old newspapers and glasses were either sold or given

away by the collectors and junkshops for recycling. The food wastes in the Paranaque were recovered for

composting but the Mandaluyong discarded most of these wastes. The plastic wastes had the highest reuse

value for households (Bennagen et.al. 2002).

The table 19 shows the types of wastes that are collected regularly. Majority of the commonly generated

wastes of the participants that was collected were the plastics, cellophane wrapper (with silver), cellophane

wrapper (without silver), cans and bottles which were the highest percent. Meanwhile, the food waste, paper

and card boards, glass and diapers have the lowest percent.

Table 19. Types of wastes that are collected regularly.

Types of wastes that are collected Frequency Percent (%)

Food wastes 41 13
Paper and Cardboards 180 57
Plastics 301 95.3
Cans 300 94.9
Bottles 296 93.7
Cellophane wrapper (with silver) 303 95.9
Cellophane wrapper (without silver) 281 88.9
Glass 150 47.5
Diapers 13 4.1
 26

Problems Encountered of Solid Waste Management Services

In the Philippines, the LGU’s with higher income and good environmental governance can obtain better

performance. The bigger number of barangays can worsen the LGU’s performance. The cost efficiency and

economic effectiveness in providing solid waste services were triggered by the budget restriction, increasing

cost of solid waste (Pagunsan and Shimada 2012).

The table 20 shows the awareness of the problems in solid waste management services in the

municipality. The results revealed that both urban and rural areas revealed that the average of all the

problems of solid waste management services turned out to be a ‘Not so serious’ for the respondents which

means that not all problems here doesn’t fully understand by the residents or they tendencies to have the

perspective to depend it to the official by those stated problem of solid waste management services.

Table 20. Awareness of the problems in solid waste management services in the municipality.

Problems in SWM services Mean Std. Deviation Interpretation

1.1 Inadequate service coverage (some people 1.67 0.56 Not so serious
not given service)
1.2 Lack service quality (not frequent enough, 1.70 0.58 Not so serious
spill, etc.)
1.3 Lack of financial resources 1.67 0.60 Not so serious
1.4 Old vehicle/equipment frequent breakdown 1.71 0.62 Not so serious
1.5 Lack of capability to maintain/repair 1.69 0.66 Not so serious
vehicle/equipment
1.6 Lack of enforcement measure and capability 1.69 0.68 Not so serious
1.7 Lack of planning (short, medium, and 1.84 0.79 Not so serious
long-term plan)
1.8 Rapid urbanization outstripping service 2.17 1.03 Not so serious
capacity
1.9 Difficult to locate and acquire landfill site 2.24 1.02 Not so serious
1.10 Poor cooperation by government agencies 2.03 0.86 Not so serious
1.11 Poor public cooperation 1.93 0.80 Not so serious
1.12 Poor response to waste minimization 1.87 0.75 Not so serious
(reuse/recycling)
1.13 Lack of qualified private contractors 1.83 0.73 Not so serious
1.14 Lack of equipment 1.76 0.73 Not so serious
1.15 Lack of vehicles 1.74 0.69 Not so serious
Over-all Mean 1.84 Not so serious
 27

Willingness to Pay for the Improvement of Solid Waste Management Services

In the study of Fuentes (1998), the WTP was solicited using dichotomuos choice iterative bidding

question format. There were 94% of the respondents were willing to pay. The expected WTP value was

62.37 PHp per month of each household.

There were about of two thirds of the household owners was willing to pay a service charge for effective

solid waste collection services (Khanom et.al. 2015).

The table 21 shows the probability of willingness-to-pay. During the interviewed with the participants,

they responded that they were willing-to-pay every month for the improvement of solid waste management

system and services in the municipality. The study revealed that the respondents are willing-to-pay

depending on the bid price; the higher the bid price, the lower the number of the participants were

willing-to-pay. However, most of the respondent is willing-to-pay for a lower bid price for the improvement of

solid waste management in which estimated WTP (The Economic Theory).

Table 21. Probability of Willingness-to-Pay.

No Yes
Bid Sample Percentage Percentage Probability of
Price Frequency Frequency Frequency Yes (%)
(relative to
(relative to n)
n)
10 39 3 0.01 36 0.11 92.31
30 39 14 0.04 25 0.08 64.10
50 39 16 0.05 23 0.07 58.97
80 39 19 0.06 20 0.06 51.28
100 39 19 0.06 20 0.06 51.28
300 40 33 0.10 7 0.02 17.50
500 40 37 0.12 2 0.01 5.00
1000 41 40 0.13 1 0.00 2.44
Total n=316 22.625 0.07 16.75 0.05

The households’ WTP were positive and significantly influenced by the sex, age, marital status and

education of the household head and household income (Alhassan, 2017).

The table 22 shows the logit model for the willingness-to-pay. The p-value with the one significant (*) =

10%, two significant (**) = 5% and three significant (***) = 1%. The average no. of years of residency with
 28

30.43 years (α=0.10) and the age variable was 45.09 years old (α=0.05). In terms of average income have

11,769.34 pesos (α=0.05). The perception of the respondent was satisfied with the waste management on

Table 22. Logit Model for the Willingness-to-pay.

Variable Coefficient, B St. Error Wald statistic p-value Exp(B)

Age .022 .011 3.949 .047** 1.023

Monthly Income .000 .000 4.040 .044** 1.000
WTP Amount .010 .002 18.196 .000*** 1.010
Perception: Respondent is .122 .138 8.326 .377ns 1.129
satisfied with the Waste
Management
Perception: How often the -.764 .265 0.780 .004*** .466
respondent segregates their
wastes?
No. of years of residency -.014 .008 3.103 0.078* .986
Constant -2.163 .796 7.304 .007 .116
Number of Observation: n=316; Nagelkerke R2 = 0.264; Percentage of Correctly Classified = 68.4%

4.22 and also the respondent often segregates their waste have 1 reference category daily. By given data,

the computed mean WTP of households for the improvement of the solid waste management system in the

area was 184.64 pesos.

 29

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary

Solid wastes can be solid, liquid, or gaseous and each type has different methods of disposal and

management, solid waste management are the activities and actions required to manage waste from its

inception to its final disposal. The Hinatuan, Surigao del Sur was known to be one of the effective and active

participation, implementation of solid waste management policies and laws was highly implemented their

practices and experiences to achieve this efficient implementation was to give a public awareness through

information, education campaign on proper solid waste management through storage, collection, processing,

disposal, reusing and recycling of generated waste additionally encourage composting from production of

organic fertilizers. The willingness-to-pay for the improvement of solid waste management services was

determined to estimate the participation and cooperation of the residents.

The results provide the supported facts about the innovative implementation of good solid waste

management practices and services, the level of awareness to the solid waste management process, waste

collection services, dumping of wastes, and the scheduled waste collection services. The willingness-to-pay

particular to the ‘bidding game’ approach that provide the respondents a will of what they can give to the

solid waste management services by giving specific values to estimate its probability which is the mean WTP

was 184.64 pesos. The households’ willingness-to-pay for an improved solid waste management system in

the municipality of Hinatuan, Surigao del Sur provide a basis for legal improvement of facilities and policies.

Conclusion

The results of the study prove that the respondents in Hinatuan Surigao del Sur are actively aware and

engaged in active participation with the solid waste management practices. This work revealed that most of

the respondents were willing to pay for the improvement of solid waste management services in which

estimated WTP is one of the services and participation involve of the residents in the municipality. According

to the survey, majority of the respondents were very much satisfied with their waste practices and solid

waste management in the area. They are proud enough to promote the place and the implementation and

enforcement of R.A 9003 which made them as one of the awardees of having good governance.
 30

Recommendation

The researchers highly recommend that the municipality of Hinatuan, Surigao del Sur must continue to

implement the good household waste practices, enforcement of excellent solid waste management services

with the cooperation of each of the residents. The households’ proper solid waste management should be

quarterly monitore and evaluate by the LGU.

 31

LITERATURE CITED

Abdel-shafy, H.I. and Mansour, M.S.M. (2018). Solid waste issue: Sources, composition, disposal, recycling,

and valorization. Egyptian Journal of Petroleum, 27(4):1275-1290.

Ahsan, A., Alamgir, M., El-Sergany, M., Shams, S., Rowshon, M.K. and Nik Daud, N.N. (2014). Assessment

of Municipal Solid Waste Management System in a Developing country. Chinese Journal of Engineering

11pp.

Al-Khatib, I.A., Arafat, H.A., Basheer, T., Shawaneh, H., Salahat, A., Eid, J. and Ali, W. (2007). Trends

and Problems of Solid Waste Management in developing countries: A case study in seven Palestinian

districts. Waste Management, 27(12):1910-9.

Alcani, M. and Dorri, A. (2013). Problems related to current situation of Solid Waste Management in Alba

nia. International Journal of Ecosystem and Ecology Sciences, 3(4):697-704.

Alhassan, H., Donkon, S.A. and Boateng, V.F. (2017). Heuseholds’ WTP for Improved Solid Waste

Management in Tamale Metropolitan Area, Noethern Ghana. UDS International Journal of Development

(UDSIJD), 3(2):70-84. http://www.udsijd.org.

Anestina, A.I., Adetola, A. and Odafe, I.B. (2014). Performance Assessment of Solid Waste Management

following Private Partnership Operations in Lagos State, Nigeria. Journal of Waste Management 8pp.

Asare,W., Andrews, A. and Asare, R. (2015). Household Waste Generation and Disposal in some Selected

Communities in Ejisu-Juaben Municipality, Ghana. Journal of Scientific Research and Reports,

6(5):371-382. www.sciencedomain.org.

Azuelo, M.C.C., Barbado, L.N. and Reyes, L.M.L. (2016). Assessment of Solid Waste Management

Strategies in Camarines Norte, Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 4(4):

44-53. www.apjmr.com.

Bennagen, M.E.C., Nepomuceno, G. and Covar, R. (2002). Solid Waste Segregation and Recycling in Metro

Manila: Household Attitudes and Behavior. Resources, Environment and Economics Center for Studies

(REECS) 50pp.
 32

Bernardo, E.C. (2008). Solid Waste Management Practices of households in Manila, Philippines. Annals of

the New York Academy of Sciences, 6(3):420-424. www.uplb.edu.ph.

Boateng, K.S., Agyei-Baffour, P., Boateng D., Rockson, G.N.K., Mensah, K.A. and Edusei, A.K. (2019).

Household Willingness-to-pay for improved Solid Waste Management Services in Four Major

Metropolitan Cities in Ghana. Journal of Environmental and Public Health 9pp.

Boateng, S., Amoako, P., Appiah, O., Poku, A.A. and Garsonu, E.K. (2016). Comparative Analysis of

Households Solid Waste Management in Rural and Urban Ghana, Journal of Environmental and Public

Health 10pp.

Castillo, A.L. and Otoma, S. (2013). Status of Solid Waste Management in the Philippines 677-678pp.

Chandra, Y.I. and Devi, N.L. (2009). Studies on Municipal Solid Waste Management in Mysore City - A

case study. Report and Opinion, 1(3):15-21. http://www.sciencepub.net.

Daskalopoulos, E., Badr, O. and Probert, S.D. (1997). Economic and Environmental Evaluations of Waste

Treatment and Disposal technologies for municipal solid waste Applied Energy, 58(4):209-255.

Desilver, D. (2016). Perceptions and Realities of recycling vary widely from place to place. Pew Research

Center.

Ejaz, N., Akhtar, N., Nisar, H. and Uli Naeem, U. (2010). Environmental Impacts of Improper Solid Waste Ma

nagement in developing countries: A Case Study of Rawalpindi city. WIT Transactions on Ecology and

the Environment, 142(?):379-387. www.witpress.com.

Emery, A., Davies, A., Griffiths, A. and Williams, K. (2007). Environmental and Economic modelling: A case

study of Municipal Solid Waste Management scenarios in Wales. Resources, Conservation and

Recycling, 49 (?):244-263. www.elsevier.com/locate/resconrec.

Flores, R.M., Feratero, V.J., Soneja, S.K.C. and Gonzales, R.P.A.R. (2018). A Case Study about Improper

Waste Disposal in Barangay Mojon Tampoy, Philippines. ResearchGate.

 33

Fuentes, M.A.V. (1998). Estimation of household WTP for solid waste collection and disposal service in

Poblacion, Davao City, Philippines. University Library, University of the Philippines at Los Banos.

http://www.uplb.edu.ph.

Galarpe, V.R.K. (2017). Review on the Impacts of Waste Disposal sites in the Philippines. Sci. Int. (Lahore),

29(1):379-385.

Garcia, A.M.L. (2017). A Technological approach towards Integrated Solid Waste Management in

developing countries. Jyvaskyla University School of Business and Economics, MSc Thesis.

Gequinto, A.C. (2016). Solid Waste Management Practices of select State Universities in CALABARZON,

Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 5(1):1-8. www.apjmr.com.

Goldman, G. and Ogishi, A. (2001). The Economic Impact of Waste disposal and Diversion in California. A

Report to California Integrated Waste Management Board. University of California, Berkeley 94pp.

Hai, F.I. and Ali, M. (2005). A Study on Solid Waste Management System of Dhaka city corporation: Effect of

Composting and Landfill location. UAP Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 1(1):18-26.

http://no.uow.edu.an/scipapers/677.

Hopewell, J., Dvorak, R. and Kosior, E. (2009). Plastic recycling: challenges and opportunities. Philos Trans

R Soc Lond B Biol Sci, 364(1526):2115-2126.

Hoyos, D. and Mariel, P. (2010). Contingent Valuation: Past, Present and Future. Prague Economic Papers,

2010(4): 329-343.

Jorissen, J., Priefer, C. and Brautigam, K-R. (2015). Food Waste Generation at Household Level Results of a

Survey among employees of Two European Research Centers in Italy and Germany. Sustainability,

7(?):2695-2715). www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability.

Khanom, T.F., Farjana, T., Al Mamun, A., Hossain, A. and Baten, Md.A. (2015). Household satisfaction on

solid waste collection services concluded by NGOs in Mymensigh Municipality, Bangladesh. International

Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 2(4):14-22.

Khati, P. (2015). Municipal Solid Waste Management in Kalimpong Town: An Economic Analysis. Degree of

Master of Philosophy 0127pp.

 34

Khatib, A., Abu Zahra, A.S.F., Monou, M. and Shaheen, H. (2010). Solid Waste Characterization,

Quantification and Management practices in developing countries, A case study: Nablus

District-Palestine. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(5):1131-8.

Lapid, D.G., Ancheta, C.C. and Villareal, T.J. (1996). Case-Study Report Composting. Urban Waste

Expertise Programme (UWEP) 1-184pp.

Lekammudiyanse, L.M.M.U. and Gunatilake, S.K. (2009). Efficiency of the Household Compost bin as a

Waste Management Technique in Sri Lanka - A Case Study in Gampaha Municipal Council Area.

International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 10(01):89-94.

Mallak, S.K., Kasim, M.R.M., Ishak, M.B. and Samah, M.A.A. (2015). Assessing the effectiveness of Waste

Minimization methods in Solid Waste reduction at the source by Manufacturing firms in Malaysia. Polish

Journal of Environmental Studies, 24(5):2063-2071.

Marchand, R. (1998). Marketing of Solid Waste Management Services in Tingloy, the Philippines. A Study

on Affordability and Willingness-to-pay. IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre. UWEP Working

Document 9 96pp.

Miezah, K., Obiri-Danso, K., Kádár, Z., Fei-Baffoe, B. & Mensah, M.Y. (2015). Municipal Solid Waste

Characterization and Quantification as a measure towards effective waste management in Ghana.

Waste Management, 46(2015):15–27.

Mishra, A.R., Mishra, S.A. and Tiwari, A.V. (2014). Solid Waste Management - case study. International

Journal of Research in Advent Technology, 2(1):396-399.

Mohsin, M. and Chinyama, A. (2016). Impacts of Solid Waste Management Practices on Environment and

Public health: A Case of Bahawalpur city, Pakistan. Journal of Environmental and Agricultural Sciences,

9(?):69-79.

Morar, F. and Bucur, B. (2017. Raising Awareness on Waste Generation and Collection. Procedia

Engineering, 181(?):452-458. www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia.

 35

Mouhoun-Chouki, S., Derridj, A., Tazdait, D. and Salah-Tazdait, R. (2019. A Study of the impact of

Municipal Solid Waste on some Soil Physicochemical Properties: The case of the Landfill of

Ain-El-Hamman Municipality, Algeria. Applied and Environmental Soil Science 8pp.

Naz, A.C.C. and Naz, M.T.N. (2008). Ecological Solid Waste Management in Suburban Municipalities: user

fees in Tuba, Philippines. The Environment, Climate Change, and Natural Resources in Southeast Asia:

Issues and Challenges, 25(1):70-80.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Bureau of Waste Reduction and Recycling

32pp. www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/294.html.

Noonan, D.S. (2003). Contingent Valuation and Cultural Resources: A Meta-analytic Review of the Literature.

Journal of Cultural Economics, 27(3-4):159-176.

Nuzrath, A.N.N. and Ruzaik, F. (2017). Public Perceptions on Effectiveness of Solid Waste Management in

Colombo Municipality Area. Research Gate 13pp.

Obi, F.O., Ugwuishiwu, B.O. and Nwakaire, J.N. (2016). Agricultural waste Concept, Generation, Utilization

and Management. Nigerian Journal of Technology, 35(4):957-964. www.nijatech.com.

Paghasian, M.C. (2017). Awareness and Practices on Solid Waste Management among College Students in

MSU Maigo School of Arts and Trades. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities

Research, 128(?): 5-12.

Pagunsan, J. and Shimada, K. (2012). Efficiency Evaluation of Philippines Waste Management Sector: A

Two Stage Approach. Research Gate 23pp.

Premakumara, D.G.J., Canete, A.M.L., Nagaishi, M. and Kumiawan, T.A. (2014). Policy implementation of

the Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9003 in the Philippines:A case study of Cebu city. Waste Management,

34(6):971-979.

Rasemann, W. (2015). Industrial Wastes and Waste dumps, Sampling and Analysis. Environment: Water

and Waste. Wiley Online Library.

Roan, E. (2017). A Case Study of Motivating Factors Related to Recycling in the Workplace. Environmental

Studies Undergraduate Student Theses. 208. http:// digital commons.unl.edu/envstudtheses/208.

 36

Schuster, J.M. (2003). Valuation in Cultural Economics. Journal of Cultural Economics, 27(3/4):155-158.

www.jstor.org/stable/41810821.

Sharholy, M., Ahmad, K., Mahmood, G. and Trivedi, R.C. (2008). Municipal Solid Waste Management in

Indian cities-A review. Waste Management, 28(?):459-467. www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman.

Singh, J., Laurenti, R., Sinha, R. and Frostell, B. (2014). Progress and Challenges to the Global Waste

Management System. Waste Management and Research, 32(9):800-812.

Sumukwo, J., Kiptui, M. and Cheserek, G.J. (2012). Economic Valuation of Improved Solid Waste

Management in Eldoret Municipality. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management

Sciences, 3(6):962-970. jetems.scholarlinkresearch.org.

The Institute for Local Self-Reliance Washington, D.C. (2000). Wasting and Recycling in Metropolitan Manila,

Philippines. Greenpeace Southeast Asia 17pp.

Timon; The official newsletter of DILG Region XIII. January-May 2012. Volume 2, Number 1.

Tolentino, A.S., Brabante, A.T. and David, M.V. (1990). Toxic Chemicals and Hazardous Waste

Management in the Philippines. Waste Management and Research, 8(2):123-127.

Twumasi, A.K. (2017). Awareness and Practice of Solid Waste Management in the Winneba Municipality of

Ghana. European Journal of Earth and Environment, 4(1):39-47. www.idpublications.org.

Vivar, P.C., Salvador, P.P. and Abocejo, F.T. (2015). Village-level Solid Waste Management in Lahug, Cebu

city, Philippines. Center for Research and Development, 3(1):96-108.

Wilson, D.C., Velis, C.A. and Rodic, L. (2013). Integrated sustainable waste management in developing

countries. Proceedings of the Institution of Civic Engineers: Waste and Resource Management,

166(2):52-68. ISSN 1747-6526.

Yoada, R.M., Chirawurah, D. and Adongo, P.B. (2014). Domestic Waste Disposal Practice and Perceptions

of Private Sector waste management in Urban Accra. BMC Public Health, 14(?):697.
 37

Yukalang, N., Clarke, B. and Ross K. (2018). Solid Waste Management Solutions for a Rapidly Urbanizing

Area in Thailand: Recommendation Based on Stakeholder Input. Int J Environ Res Public Health,

15(7):1302.

Zagozewski, R., Henry, I.J., Nilson, S. and Bharadwaji, L. (2011). Perspectives on Past and Present Waste

disposal Practices. A community-Based Participatory Research Project in Three Saskatchewan First

Nations Communities. Environmental Health Insights, 5(?):9-20.

Ziraba, A.K., Haregu, T.N. and Mberv, B. (2016). A Review and Framework for understanding the Potential

Impact of poor Solid Waste Management on health in developing countries. Archieve of Public Health

11pp.
 38

APPENDICES

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

A.Demographic Profile

1.)Name of Respondent: 3.)Age:

2.)Sex: ( ) 1 Male ( ) 2 Female

4.)Address:

5.)Civil Status: ( ) 1 Single ( ) 2 Married ( ) 3 Separated ( ) 4 Widow

6.)Educational Level: ( ) 1 No Education ( ) 2 Elementary Level ( ) 3 Elementary Graduate ( ) 4 High

School Level ( ) 5 High School Graduate ( ) 6 College Level ( ) 7 College Graduate

7.)Years of Residency:

8.)Total Members of the Household:

Stages of the Family M F Total Number of Each Stages

Infant (0-2 yrs.old)
Preschool (3-5 yrs.old)
School age (6-12 yrs.old)
Adolescent/Teenager (13-19 yrs.old)
Young adult (20-30 yrs.old)
Middle adult (30-50 yrs.old)
Old (51 yrs.old above)

9.)Occupation/Monthly Household Income:

Member Primary Occupation Secondary Occupation Others Monthly Income

B.Household Solid Waste Management Practices

Directions: Please indicate check (√) to the following choices of solid waste practices.

1.How often do you segregate wastes?

 39

( ) 1 Daily ( ) 2 4 times a week ( ) 3 3 times a week ( ) 4 Twice a week ( ) 5 Weekly ( ) 6 Others_____

2.Check that apply the item(s) that are commonly found in your household.

( ) 1 Food wastes ( ) 2 Papers and Cartoons ( ) 3 Plastics ( ) 4 Cans ( ) 5 Bottles ( ) 6 Cellophane w/

silver ( ) 7 Cellophane w/out silver ( ) 8 Glass ( ) 9 Others____________________

3.How do you store your waste before disposal?

( ) 1 in closed container ( ) 3 in a polythene bag or sack

( ) 2 in an open container ( ) 4 others (specify):______________

4.How often do you wash your waste containers? ( ) 1 Daily ( ) 2 4 times a week ( ) 3 3 times a week

( ) 4 Twice a week ( ) 5 Weekly ( ) 6 Others______

5.Check that apply how you disposed your wastes?

( ) 1 Burning ( ) 2 Burying ( ) 3 Recycle ( ) 4 Compost Pit ( ) 5 Collection ( ) 6 Vacant lots

( ) 7 Rivers ( ) 8 Canals ( ) 9 Other methods, please specify:_____________________

5.1. If not through collection, why do you dispose your wastes by this method?

( ) 1 I have no wastes collection service ( ) 2 I cannot afford service fee

( ) 3 Other reasons, specify:___________________________

6.How often do you practice reuse/recycle?

( ) 1 Always ( ) 2 Sometimes ( ) 3 Never

6.1.Check that apply where do you get the wastes for recycle practices?

( ) 1 Own generating wastes in home ( ) 2 Wastes disposal area ( ) 3 Other sources, specify:_______

6.2.Check that apply what kind of wastes do you recycle? ( ) 1 Cans ( ) 2 Plastics

( ) 3 Cellophane w/ silver ( ) 4 Cellophane w/out silver ( ) 5 Papers ( ) 6 Others, specify:__________

 40

6.3.Check that apply how do you utilize the recycled wastes? ( ) 1 Used it again in another way ( ) 2

Make it a decoration ( ) 3 Sell to the buyers of reuse/recycle wastes materials

7.Check that apply how do you dispose your kitchen food wastes?

( ) 1 Leave it away to decay ( ) 2 Feed them to the house pit ( ) 3 Feed them to pigs and dogs

( ) 4 Others, specify:________________________

8.Do you have a compost pit or disposal pit in your home? ( ) 1 Yes ( ) 2 No

C.Perceptions of the Household at the SWM production in Community

1.How do you evaluate the solid waste collection in your area?

( ) 1 Poor ( ) 2 Unsatisfied ( ) 3 Neutral/Fair ( ) 4 Satisfying/Good ( ) 5 Excellent/Very good

2.How satisfied are you with the waste management process of Hinatuan, Surigao del Sur?

( ) 1 Strongly dissatisfied ( ) 2 Dissatisfied ( ) 3 Neutral ( ) 4 Satisfied ( ) 5 Strongly satisfied

3.Are you aware of the proper segregation of waste?

( ) 1 Yes ( ) 2 No

4.Are you aware of the possible effects of the improper solid waste management to the health of the

people?

( ) 1 Yes ( ) 2 No

5.Are you aware of the possible effects of the improper solid waste management to the environment of the

people? ( ) 1 Yes ( ) 2 No

6.Are you aware of the possible effects of the improper solid waste management to the economy of the

people? ( ) 1 Yes ( ) 2 No

7.Are you aware as to where the waste collected go?

( ) 1 Yes ( ) 2 No

7.1. If Yes, where do you think will this waste go/stored? ( ) 1 Sanitary Landfill
 41

( ) 2 River ( ) 3 Dumpsite ( ) 4 Others________________

8.How frequent the collection of garbage services? ( ) 1 Twice a week ( ) 2 Once a week ( ) 3 Monthly

services ( ) 4 Other,Specify:

8.1.Check that apply what types of waste did they collect? ( ) 1 Food wastes ( ) 2 Papers and Cartoons

( ) 3 Plastics ( ) 4 Cans ( ) 5 Bottles ( ) 6 Cellophane w/ silver ( ) 7 Cellophane w/out silver

( ) 8 Glass ( ) 9 Others_____________

D.Problems Encountered of Solid Waste Management Services

Problem in SWM Services Very Serious Not so No problem

serious serious
1.1 Inadequate service coverage (some people
not given service)
1.2 Lack service quality (not frequent
enough,spill,etc
1.3 Lack of financial resources
1.4 Old vehicle/equipment frequent breakdown
1.5 Lack of capability to maintain/repair
vehicle/equipment
1.6 Lack of enforcement measure and capability
1.7 Lack of planning (short, medium and long
term plan)
1.8 Rapid urbanization outstripping service
capacity
1.9 Difficult to locate and acquire landfill site
1.10 Poor cooperation by Government agencies
1.11 Poor public cooperation
1.12 Poor response to waste minimization
(reuse/recycling)
1.13 Lack of qualified private contractors
1.14 Lack of equipment
1.15 Lack of vehicle

E. Willingness-to-Pay for the Improvement of Solid Waste Management Services

Introduction:

Solid waste management is all about how solid waste can be changed and used as a valuable resource.

Enhanced solid waste management practices create positive impact on community, health, environment,

and economy in Hinatuan, Surigao del Sur, Its establishment is one of the effective mechanisms
 42

implemented to achieve clean environment. But in some cases, municipality cannot provide the needs of all

barangay’s ecosystem services. The LGU need some more budget for maintaining, for improvement,

provide more facilities, and provide more priority for these ordinances. The question is;

1.Are you willing to pay Monthly for the improvement of Solid Waste Management Services?

( ) 1 Yes ( ) 2 No

1.1.If Yes, would you like to pay_____ pesos for solid waste management services improvement?

Maximum Amount:________

1.2.If No, would you like to pay lower price for solid waste management services improvement?

Minimum Amount:_________
 43

DOCUMENTATION

The Interview with the Participants

44