Management of municipal solid waste (MSW) in a scientific manner is one of the biggest challenges faced by Southeast Asia (SEA). For decades, provision of services for managing and handling solid waste has been neglected. Rapid population growth, urbanisation and steady economic growth have resulted in increased disposable incomes and changed lifestyles. With this, there has been a significant change in the quantity and quality of waste. The composition of waste has changed over the years with a continuous increase in the share of plastics, paper and metal in waste.

With migration into cities from rural and semi-rural areas and the continuing expansion of city limits, the challenge of delivering solid waste management services is growing rapidly. Current waste management practices, despite some promising initiatives, are far from satisfactory. Barring Singapore and a few large urban areas in the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia, solid waste management infrastructure in most cities in the SEA region is characterised by the absence of door-to-door collection, inadequate transportation infrastructure, dumping of waste at unapproved sites, unscientific disposal of waste, and inadequate treatment capacity.

Presently, there is a marked variation among Southeast Asian economies regarding the rate of waste generation, as well as the systems they have instituted for waste management. Singapore has the highest per capita rate of waste generation (1.49 kg per capita per day), followed by Malaysia (0.85 kg per capita per day) and Indonesia (0.8 kg per capita per day).

Further, there is also significant diversity in the nature and characteristics of solid waste generated in the region. About 50 per cent of the waste generated in Singapore comprises paper, cardboard and metal waste. The organic waste component is less than 20 per cent. Bangkok, on the other hand, has a high organic waste component (over 40 per cent), followed by plastic and paper waste (24-29 per cent). The moisture content in the waste generated in Bangkok is as high as 50-60 per cent. Likewise, Indonesia also has a high organic waste component that constitutes 60 per cent of its domestic waste, with another 20 per cent comprising paper, plastic, and metal.

Given the diverse nature of waste generated, the cost of managing MSW is huge. Most countries in the region spend heavily on collection and transportation of solid waste. In most countries, including the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia, the responsibility for waste management and disposal lies with the local government. Of late, in some of these countries including the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore, the private sector has begun to play a prominent role in solid waste management, particularly in the areas of construction of facilities, operation and maintenance of treatment plants, disposal of waste, and waste-to-energy (WtE) conversion facilities.

Different countries in the region have adopted different methods of managing solid waste. Southeast Asia Infrastructure provides a review of the current state of waste management in some of the leading economies in the region, arranged in the order of waste generation.

Singapore

Singapore has adopted an integrated solid waste management system to ensure the collection and disposal of all non-recycled waste at WtE plants, or in the case of non-incineratable waste, the offshore sanitary landfill. One of the biggest challenges for the city-state is the acceleration in waste generation and the amount of waste disposed of.

The strategy that the city has so far adopted includes stringently enforced standards, fee-for-service refuse collection, and recycling, as well as voluntary agreements (with industry associations) for waste reduction at source. Waste collection, using rear-end loaders and compactors, is fully mechanised. In addition, in some areas, the more advanced pneumatic refuse conveyance system has been deployed for the collection of refuse. The city-state has also adopted the WtE route to meet the twin goals of waste management and energy production.

With regard to the institutional set-up, the National Environment Agency (NEA) manages WtE plants and landfills (that are government-owned). Waste collection services, on the other hand, have been fully privatised since 2001. Appointed public waste collectors carry out  waste collection. Residential and trade premises pay a refuse removal fee to the NEA-appointed public waste collectors. The cost of waste disposal is fully recovered through the disposal gate fee charged at disposal facilities.

Malaysia

In Malaysia, waste segregation and sorting is widely practised. A number of urban centres have entered into arrangements with private players for management of solid waste. The private sector players are primarily involved in collection, transportation and transfer services.

The government has also enforced Act 672 that calls for the privatisation of solid waste management services at the local and state levels. In response, some urban centres have engaged private players in the management of waste recovery facilities. The Kota Kinabalu City Council has engaged a private company to manage a 500 tonne per day (tpd) material recovery facility in Kota Kinabalu district. Likewise, the Kajang Municipal Council has engaged a private company to manage a 1,000 tpd resource recovery centre. Typically, the payment mechanism for private players is based on key performance indicators that emphasise the quality of services.

Besides, the Malaysian government is also undertaking initiatives to reduce dumping of solid waste at landfill sites by 40 per cent and greenhouse gas emissions by 38 per cent.

Indonesia

In Indonesia, management of solid waste is the responsibility of the municipality or the local body. However, in larger urban centres such as Jakarta, local bodies have entered into arrangements with private players for management of solid waste.

Common technologies used for treating waste include composting, sanitary landfills and landfill gas extraction are deployed for the disposal of waste. The Indonesian government has been actively incentivising the import of technology for waste management by local bodies and private players through tax exemptions, subsidies, and other forms of reward and recognition.

In Jakarta, the city government has endorsed a new waste management by-law to regulate technology use and producer responsibility, and encourage community involvement and co-ordination with private operators to manage waste. In addition, citizens have been directed to segregate organic and non-organic waste at source. Manufacturers are required to use only organic packaging. Furthermore, the city government promotes the reduce-reuse-recycle (3R) programme and advanced technologies such as incineration and mechanical biological treatment and intermediate treatment facilities to reduce the burden on landfills.

Vietnam

The urban areas in Vietnam have better MSW management services than its rural areas. The national average waste collection in Vietnam is over 70 per cent in urban areas. In fact, in most of the large urban centres, waste collection exceeds 75 per cent. However, in rural areas, the collection is less than 20 per cent.

Barring large urban areas, almost all municipal waste generated in Vietnam is taken to landfills. Open and controlled dumps are the predominant form of waste disposal. Incinerating waste is also not a common practice in Vietnam. On the other hand, the rates of recovery and recycling are high, particularly in urban areas like Hanoi. In Hanoi, approximately one-fifth of the municipal waste is recycled.

A number of urban centres have undertaken notable initiatives to improve waste management services. The Hanoi Urban Environment Company, with assistance from the Japan International Cooperation Agency, started waste segregation at source at the household level about six years ago. The waste, particularly bio-waste, is segregated for recycling. Similarly, Ho Chi Minh City has piloted the 3Rs and source segregation in their respective areas.

Cambodia

There are wide disparities in waste management practices among the urban and rural areas in Cambodia. Waste collection is limited to urban areas. At present, three waste collection systems are used in Cambodia – curb-side collection, stationary container collection, and leased container collection.

The involvement of the private sector is limited to only large urban areas. In the capital city of Phnom Penh, two private companies are responsible for waste management. Cintri (Cambodia) Limited is responsible for waste collection and transportation, as well as cleaning services. The other private agency, Sarom Trading Company Limited, collects, transports and disposes of hazardous waste at Ang Snoul in Kandal province.

The rural areas, on the other hand, do not have a waste collection mechanism. Waste management practices in rural areas include burning waste; burying near houses; disposal in rice fields, on public roads and free land; and disposal into waterbodies.

Myanmar

Traditionally, waste collection and disposal in Myanmar have been the responsibility of city development committees or local municipal authorities. In Yangon, Mandalay and Nay Pyi Taw, autonomous city development committees and pollution control and cleansing departments are responsible for waste collection and disposal.

In other parts of the country, the respective township development committees under the local government manage municipal waste collection and disposal.

The municipal waste collection systems used by these committees/authorities can be characterised as labour intensive, requiring both manual workers and non-specialised vehicles. Solid waste is collected through primary and secondary collection methods. The primary collection methods include door-to-door collection, block-level collection and container collection. The waste is collected in push carts and tri-bicycles. The secondary collection is performed mainly through tipper trucks/dumpers.

Philippines

Collection of MSW in the Philippines is primarily managed by the local government. At the national level, the collection efficiency ranges from 40 per cent to 70 per cent. For larger urban centres, on the other hand, the collection efficiency is over 80 per cent.

At present, three different techniques are used for waste collection – door-to-door collection, stationary collection and waste collection by trucks. A number of urbanised areas in Quezon City and San Carlos City practice the “no segregation, no collection” policy.

The nature of technology deployed in waste management is low cost and indigenous in nature.  In urban areas, plastic drums and garbage containers usually supplied by the local body are most commonly used for temporary storage of waste prior to collection. For transportation, local authorities or contractors use motorised collection vehicles including compactors and non-compaction trucks. The waste is compacted, and then loaded into larger vehicles for transport to a final disposal site, such as a sanitary landfill.

Conclusion

Rapid population growth and accelerated urbanisation and industrialisation in Southeast Asia will continue to drive the rate of MSW generation. At present, most countries in the SEA region lack adequate infrastructure to provide efficient waste collection, transportation and treatment services to all its residents. Although the federal as well as local governments have constantly been extending monetary support and making efforts to improve waste management practices, it must be understood that waste management is a shared responsibility and any effort will be unsuccessful without support from citizens.

Among the challenges being faced by city governments in waste management, the biggest challenge is the absence of adequate and accurate data and information on waste generation from specific sources, which is crucial to identify the areas that need intervention and the establishment of realistic targets. One of the key factors responsible for the poor quality of data is the limited cooperation between agencies at the national and local levels.

The 3R strategy, though promising, is still in its early stages. Education and dissemination of information related to technical guidelines and waste management practices at the local level are needed on a regular basis. There is also an absence of dumping sites, particularly for toxic and hazardous waste. In fact, at present, most countries have not laid down technical guidelines for constructing dumping or landfill sites. Another targeted area of improvement is waste collection and segregation at source, which will reduce the quantity of waste dumped at landfill sites.

A positive sign is the growing acceptance of private sector participation in waste management. Even though it is currently limited to a few large urban areas, governments need to encourage private sector participation. That said, the successful execution of even a handful of projects will provide the much-needed impetus for MSW management in the SEA region.