Available online at www.tshe.org/ea/index.html EnvironmentAsia AvailableEnvironmentAsia online at www.tshe.org/EA 10(2) (2017) 25-32 The international journal published by the Thai Society of Higher Education Institutes on Environment EnvironmentAsiaDOI 2 (2009) 50-54

Genotoxicity Assessment of Mercuric Chloride in the Marine Fish Therapon jaruba Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Solid Waste Open Burning in Nagarajan Nagarani, ArumugamTerengganu, Kuppusamy Kumaraguru, Velmurugan Janaki Devi and Chandrasekaran Archana Devi Mariani Ariffin and Wan Nor Amalina Wan Yacoob Center for Marine and Coastal Studies, School of Energy, Environment and Natural Resources, Department of EnvironmentalMadurai Management, Kamaraj FacultyUniversity, of Environmental Madurai-625021, Studies, India Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, UPM, Serdang,

Abstract Abstract The aim of the present study was to standardize and to assess the predictive value of the cytogenetic analysis by Micronucleus (MN) test in fish erythrocytes as a biomarker for marine environmental contamination. Micronucleus frequency With morebaseline than in 40 erythrocytes percent of wasthe world’sevaluated rubbish in and is genotoxic burned, open potential burning of a is common a significant chemical source was ofdetermined atmospheric inpollution fish experimentally globally and exposed remains in oneaquarium of the under main controlled environmental conditions. issues Fish and ( Theraponhealth concerns jaruba) forwere many exposed developing for 96 hrsnations. to a single Despite heavy having metal stringent (mercuric criminal chloride). penalties Chromosomal for illegal damage open burning, was determined Malaysia as encounters micronuclei increasing frequency trend in fishin open erythrocytes. burning incidents. Significant A better increase understanding in MN frequency of the knowledge,was observed attitudinal, in erythrocytes and perception of fish exposedtowards toopen mercuric burning chloride.would inform Concentration more effective of 0.25 ppmintervention induced theefforts highest towards MN frequency changing (2.95 this micronucleated trend. A questionnaire cells/1000 survey cells compared to assess toknowledge, 1 MNcell/1000 attitude cells and in controlpractice animals). of public The was study conducted revealed in that Kuala micronucleus . test, A as total an index of 384 of cumulativerespondents exposure,from various appears demographic to be a sensitive backgrounds model toparticipated evaluate genotoxic in the survey. compounds Descriptive in fish under analysis controlled was used conditions. to analyse the respondents’ socio-demographic profiles. Pearson correlation was used to uncover the relationship between Keywords:knowledge, genotoxicity; attitude and practicemercuric among chloride; the micronucleus respondents. Results showed that the respondents had good knowledge on open burning and showed positive attitude towards protecting the environment from the problem. However, they displayed lack of practice to tackle the problem in real life. The study also found a weak relationship between knowledge with attitude and practice on open burning. Policy-makers should, therefore, devise intervention programmes 1.that Introduction can encourage higher practice rather than merely focusinglaboratory on raising awareness. and field conditions. In 2006 Soumendra et al., made an attempt to detect genetic biomarkers Keywords: attitudes; knowledge; law; open burning; practice In India, about 200 tons of mercury and its in two fish species, Labeo bata and Oreochromis compounds are introduced into the environment mossambica, by MN and binucleate (BN) annually as effluents from industries (Saffi, 1981). erythrocytes in the gill and kidney erythrocytes Mercuric chloride has been used in agriculture as a exposed to thermal power plant discharge at 1. Introduction inadequate equipment used for waste collection, fungicide, in medicine as a topical antiseptic and Titagarh Thermal Power Plant, Kolkata, India. crude open dumping and burning and resource disinfectant, and in chemistry as an intermediate in The present study was conducted to determine More than 40 percent of the world’s rubbish is constraints (Saat, 2013). Similar problems of solid waste the production of other mercury compounds. The the acute genotoxicity of the heavy metal compound burned in open fires which emit polluting gases and management are faced by municipalities in many contamination of aquatic ecosystems by heavy HgCl in static systems. Mercuric chloride is toxic, particles into the atmosphere (Wiedinmyer et al., developing2 countries (Guerrero et al., 2013; Norbu and metals and pesticides has gained increasing attention solvable in water hence it can penetrate the aquatic 2014). For many developing countries where relatively Dilokwanich, 2010). In light of these problems, the in recent decades. Chronic exposure to and animals. Mutagenic studies with native fish species fewer trash disposal facilities like landfills and concern that people might resort to open burning as accumulation of these chemicals in aquatic biota represent an important effort in determining the incinerators available compared to developed nations, a way to dispose their solid waste is real. can result in tissue burdens that produce adverse potential effects of toxic agents. This study was open burning provides cheap alternative to more In Malaysia, between 2010 and 2012, open burning effects not only in the directly exposed organisms, carried out to evaluate the use of the micronucleus expensive and labour-intensive waste disposal methods cases used to primarily occur in forests, bushes, but also in human beings. test (MN) for the estimation of aquatic pollution (Ramaswami et al., 2016). In Malaysia, waste agricultural and plantation areas, (DOE, 2010; DOE, Fish provides a suitable model for monitoring using marine edible fish under lab conditions. generation and disposal has become a national concern 2012; DOE, 2013). However since 2013, the recorded aquatic genotoxicity and wastewater quality due to the steady increased generation of solid wastes. cases of open burning in the country are mainly from because of its ability to metabolize xenobiotics and 2. Materials and methods It was estimated that in 2020 would activities such as burning of garbage in residential areas accumulated pollutants. A micronucleus assay has generate 30,000 tonnes of solid wastes per day but and by roadsides as well as the burning of any article been used successfully in several species (De Flora, 2.1. Sample Collection by 2012 the country had generated 33,000 tonnes as part of religious rites (DOE, 2014; DOE, 2015; et al., 1993, Al-Sabti and Metcalfe, 1995). The of solid wastes per day (SWCorp, 2014). Malaysia DOE, 2016). In 2015 alone, almost 25% of the open micronucleus (MN) test has been developed The fish species selected for the present study still depends largely on landfills to dispose solid burning cases detected were from these activities (DOE, together with DNA-unwinding assays as was collected from Pudhumadam coast of Gulf of wastes. As the population of the country grows, land 2016). Accordingly, open burning becomes one of the perspective methods for mass monitoring of Mannar, Southeast Coast of India. Therapon available for landfills becoming scarce. On top of that, main health and environmental issues that concern the clastogenicity and genotoxicity in fish and mussels jarbua belongs to the order Perciformes of the solid waste management in the country also faces a Malaysian public (Haron et al., 2005). Open burning (Dailianis et al., 2003). family Theraponidae. The fish species, Therapon number of implementation problems including low of wastes is a significant source of air pollutants The MN tests have been successfully used as jarbua (6-6.3 cm in length and 4-4.25 g in weight) collection coverage, irregular collection services, and greenhouse gases (Shi et al., 2015). Fiedler a measure of genotoxic stress in fish, under both was selected for the detection of genotoxic effect M. Ariffin et al. / EnvironmentAsia 10(2) (2017) 25-32

(2007) found that open burning is one of the major burning for crops plantations and forestry sector in sources of polychlorinated dibenzo-para-dioxins and the effort to tackle transboundary air pollution (ASEAN dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs) in many countries Secretariat, 2003). At national level, countries also including Malaysia. The burning of wastes such as pass legislation to control open burning. Any plastics, tires, and electronic wastes in open air also open burning activities which contravene the law expose nearby residents directly to health hazards requirements are illegal. from these pollutants (Estrellan and Lino, 2010). It was In Malaysia, the Environmental Quality Act 1974 estimated that carbon dioxide emissions from open (“the EQA”) and its regulations provide the most burning of wastes worldwide contributes 5 percent comprehensive regulatory control of pollution and of reported human-related emissions (Wiedinmyer its abatement. Under the EQA, anyone that allows or et al., from2014). these In Malaysia,pollutants on(Estrellan top of andits hazardousLino, 2010) . Itcauses was estimatedopen burning that carbonon any dioxidepremises emissions including from land health impacts,open burning open burningof wastes has worldwidebeen partly contributeblamed scommits 5 percent an offence.of reported The maximumhuman-related penalties emissions for the for worsening(Wiedinmyer the recurrence et al., 2014). of haze In Malaysia, in the country on top of offenceits hazardous are quite health high impacts, namely opena fine burning of MYR has 500,000 been (Forsyth,partly 2014). blamed for worsening the recurrence of hazeand in fivethe country years imprisonment. (Forsyth, 2014) Furthermore,. the law is There is noThere specific is no internationalspecific internationa law onl lawopen on quiteopen strictburning in providing but several a legal environmental presumption treaties that where are burningrelevant but several to address environmental the problem . treatiesThrough are the Baselan illegal Convention open burning on the occurs, Control an of owner Transboundary or occupier relevantMovements to address ofthe Hazardous problem. ThroughWastes andthe TheirBasel Disposal,who has countries control over are therequired premise to istake presumed measures to have to Conventionensure the on management the Control of of wastes Transboundary including their committeddisposal is it,consistent unless the with contrary the protection is proved. of humanDespite Movementshealth of and Hazardous the environment Wastes and and Their be d isposedDisposal, of inthis, the stateas seen whe rein theyFig. were1, a generatedsteady increase. For Southeast in open countriesAsian are countriesrequired ,to they take have measures adopted to regionalensure the guidelines burning on caseszero open from burning various forsource crops including plantations burning and managementforestry of sector wastes in includingthe effort theirto tackle disposal transboundary is of bushes, air pollution forests, agriculture(ASEAN Secretariatareas, plantations, 2003). areas At consistentnational with level,the protection countries ofalso human pass healthlegislation and to andcontrol garbages open had burning. been recorded Any open in Malaysia burning sinceactivities 2010 the environmentwhich contra andvene be disposed the law requirementsof in the state are where illegal. before decreasing in 2015 (DOE, 2011; DOE, 2012; they were generated.In Malaysia, For Southeast the Environmental Asian countries, Quality ActDOE, 1974 2013; (“the DOE, EQA”) 2014; and DOE, its regulations 2015; DOE, provide 2016). the most comprehensive regulatory control of pollution and its abatement. Under the EQA, anyone that they have adopted regional guidelines on zero open allows or causes open burning on any premises including land commits an offence. The maximum penalties for the offence are quite high namely a fine of MYR 500,000 and five years imprisonment. Furthermore, the law is quite strict in providing a legal presumption that where an illegal open burning occurs, an owner or occupier who has control over the premise is presumed to have committed it, unless the contrary is proved. Despite this, as seen in Fig. 1, a steady increase in open burning cases from various source including burning of bushes, forests, agriculture areas, plantations areas and garbages had been recorded in Malaysia since 2010 before decreasing in 2015 (DOE, 2011; DOE, 2012; DOE, 2013; DOE, 2014; DOE, 2015; DOE, 2016).

7000

6000 6083

5000 4611 4000 3544 3459 3000 3027 3177 2000

1000

0 NUMBER OF OPEN BURNING CASES 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 YEAR

Source: Department of Environment Malaysia (DOE) Annual Reports

Figure 1. Numbers of detected open burning cases

The EQA gives exclusion from open burning prohibition for 15 instances of declared activities. Apart from campfire, worshipping activities and cremation, such declared activities also include the burning to control plant disease and animal or bird infection; the burning of paddy stalks prior to replanting; the burning of sugar cane leaves prior to harvesting in an area that does not exceed 20 hectares during the harvesting period; the burning of plants for land clearing to plant crops by 26 smallholders in an area that does not exceed 2 hectares per day; the burning of agricultural plant for land clearing to plant or replant crops by subsistence farmers in rural areas which is not carried out at any peat soil area; and the burning of leaves or tree branches in rural areas which is not carried out at any peat soil area. There are certain specified conditions attached to these declared activities like how and which hours the open burning should be conducted but no permit or license is required; though a few of the activities require prior written notification to be given to the Director General of

M. Ariffin et al. / EnvironmentAsia 10(2) (2017) 25-32

The EQA gives exclusion from open burning respondents’ attitude and practice in addressing open prohibition for 15 instances of declared activities. burning problem. All items were measured using Likert Apart from campfire, worshipping activities and scale. Pilot test was conducted and the reliability of cremation, such declared activities also include items in the questionnaire was estimated using the Alpha the burning to control plant disease and animal or Cronbach method and reliability for each section was bird infection; the burning of paddy stalks prior to greater than 0.7 which indicated that the questionnaire replanting; the burning of sugar cane leaves prior to was reliable. Respondents’ knowledge of open burning harvesting in an area that does not exceed 20 hectares were measured by to what extent they knew what open during the harvesting period; the burning of plants for burning is as well as its health and environmental land clearing to plant crops by smallholders in an area impacts. The respondents’ attitudes were examined that does not exceed 2 hectares per day; the burning of through their perception towards responsibilities to agricultural plant for land clearing to plant or replant address open burning, while their practices were gauged crops by subsistence farmers in rural areas which is by their individual measures and engagement with not carried out at any peat soil area; and the burning others to tackle open burning. Some 384 respondents of leaves or tree branches in rural areas which is not were selected through convenient sampling to carried out at any peat soil area. There are certain participate in the study. The context of the study, which specified conditions attached to these declared activities focused on open burning of solid waste by individuals like how and which hours the open burning should be against the laws, was explained to the respondents conducted but no permit or license is required; though prior to answering the questionnaire. The term waste a few of the activities require prior written notification in the study refers to “solid waste” as defined under to be given to the Director General of Environment. the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act Researches have looked at the environmental 2007 (Act 672) which includes any scrap material or and health impacts of open burnings, but less effort to other unwanted surplus substance or rejected products examine the public’s knowledge, attitudes and arising from the application of any process; any practices towards the issue has been made (Wood and substance required to be disposed of as being broken Tsu, 2008; Vandamme, 2009). KAP surveys have or otherwise spoiled but excluding hazardous wastes been widely used to measure public`s knowledge, and radioactive wastes. Results of the study provides attitude and practice on topics related to environmental inputs for policy-makers in developing programme to awareness (Besar et al., 2013). Public knowledge, improve the existing public’s awareness and compliance attitude and practice (KAP) are very important with open burning laws. aspects because each individual has the right to live in a healthy environment and holds the responsibility to 3. Results and Discussion protect the environment. 3.1 Socio-demographic 2. Materials and Methods Descriptive analysis was used in this study Surveys were conducted in , to describe the socio-demographic profiles of the Terengganu. Terengganu is located at latitude 5°19′48″N respondents. As seen in Table 1, most of the respondents and longitude 103°08′26″E in the northeastern in this study were female (64.3%) and about one-third . The state is bordered on the (35.7%) were male. In term of races, the majority northwest by the state, southwest by the of them were Malay (78.6%), followed by Chinese state, and east by the . Kuala (14.3%) and Indian (7%). Approximately 32% of the Terengganu was chosen because open burning has been respondents aged between 18 to 27 years old, about identified as one of the primary source of pollutants 26.8% aged between 28 to 37 years, 20% were between affecting air quality in the district (Abdullah et al., 2015) 38 to 47 years old and the rest were older. With regard and that daily generation of municipal solid waste in to education level, about one-third (33.3%) of the Kuala Terengganu had increased steadily since 1970 respondents were degree holders and 15.4% had (Agamuthu and Fauziah, 2011). diploma. About 27% of them had the Malaysian A set of self-completed questionnaire that had Certificate of Education, a national examination taken four sections was developed. Section A intended to by fifth-year secondary school students in Malaysia gather respondent`s demographic information, Section and the rest had Malaysian Higher Certificate of B tested the respondents’ knowledge on open burning, Education (21.6%), taken by sixth-year secondary Section C and D respectively aimed at evaluating the school students.

27

M. Ariffin et al. / EnvironmentAsia 10(2) (2017) 25-32

Table 1. Socio-demographic profile of the respondents

Table 1. Socio-Variablesdemographic profile of the respondentsFrequency Percentage (n=384) (%) Variables Gender FemaleFrequency 247Percentage 64.3 Male (n=384) 137 (%) 35.7 Gender RaceFemale Malay 247 302 64.3 78.6 Male Chinese137 55 35.7 14.3 Race Malay Indian 302 27 78.6 7.0 EducationChinese SPM 55 104 14.3 27.1 Indian STPM 27 83 7.0 21.6 Education SPM Diploma104 59 27.1 15.4 STPM Degree 83 128 21.6 33.3 Diploma Master/ 59 15.4 Degree PhD 128 4 33.3 1.0 Master/ Others 6 1.6 Age PhDlevel 18-27 4 123 1.0 32.0 Others 28-37 6 103 1.6 26.8 Age level 18-27 38-47 123 77 32.0 20.1 28-37 48-57 103 59 26.8 15.4 38-47 >58 77 22 20.1 5.7 48-57 59 15.4 3.2 K>58nowledge, attitude and22 practice towards5.7 open burning issues

3.2 Knowledge, attitude and practice towards open also (90.4%) knew that open burning can form smog 3.2 Knowledge, attitudeTable and 2 practindicatesice towards the respondents’ open burning knowledge issues on open burning and its impacts. Generally, burning issues which can damage crops and other vegetation. Besides they were aware and concern about the problem of open burning. For example, when asked about the that, 84.6% of the respondents agreed that open burning Tableimpact 2 indicates of open the burning, respondents’ 97.7% knowledgeof the respondents on open agree burningd that and open its impactsburning. threatensGenerally, human health Table 2 indicates the respondents’ knowledge contribute to acid rain and can worsen haze situation they were awarewhereby and concernit can trigge aboutr asthmathe problem attacks of andopen other burning respiratory. For example, problems. when The asked majority about of the them (75.8%) on open impactburning of and openalso its burning, concurredimpacts. 97.7% Generally,that ofopen the burning respondentsthey is(97.7%). hazardous agree Ind addition, thatto ecosystems open the burning results and threatens showed84.1% thatbelieved human 78.9% healthit ofexpose s nearby were awarewhereby and concern it canproperty triggeabout tor theasthma fire problem hazard attacks. ofMost andopen of other themthe respiratory alsorespondents (90.4% problems.) knewknew thatthat The openopen majority burningburning of refersthemcan form (75.8to any smog%) which can burning. Foralso example,concurreddamage when that askedocropspen burning aboutand other the is hazardousimpactvegetation. fire, to Besides ecosystems combustion that, 84.6%and or smouldering84.1% of the believed respondents that itoccurs expose agreed in thes nearby thatopen open burning of open burning,property 97.7% to firecontribute of hazard the respondents . toMost acid of rain them agreed and also thatcan (90.4% worsenair )and knew haze which that situation is open not directed burning(97.7%). through can In formaddition stack smog or, the chimney.which results can showed that open burningdamage threatens crops78.9% humanand otherof healththe vegetation. respondents whereby Besides itkne canw thatthat,About open84.6% 70.6% burning of theof them refersrespondents were to anyalso agreed fire,aware combustion thatthat open open burning burningor smouldering that trigger asthmacontribute attacks to occursand acid other rainin therespiratory and open can air worsen problems.and which haze issituationis not an directed offence (97.7%). throughin Malaysia In additionstack and or ,82%chimney the resultsknew. About that show burning 70.6%ed that of them were The majority78.9% of them of the (75.8%)also respondents aware also that concurred kne openw that burning that open open is burning an offence leaves refers in and Malaysiato otherany fire, wastes and combustion 82% is considered knew or that smouldering an burning illegal ofopen leavesthat and other burning isoccurs hazardous in the towastes ecosystemsopen air is consideredand and which 84.1% isan notbelieved illegal directed open burning throughburning activity, stackactivity or except ,chimney except for for. people About people living70.6% living in of ruralin the rural mareas. were areas . it exposesalso nearby aware property that open to fire burning hazard. is anMost of fenceof them in Malaysia and 82% knew that burning of leaves and other wastes is consideredTable 2. Knowledgean illegal open about burning open burning activity and, exceptits impacts for people living in rural areas.

Agreed Not sure Disagree Table 2. KnowledgeNo. about open burning andItems its impacts (%) (%) (%) 1. Open burning causes health problems to Agreedhuman Not97.1 sure Disagree1.0 1.0 No. Items 2. Open burning can trigger asthma attacks and(%) (%)88.1 (%)9.1 2.9 1. Open burningother cause respiratorys health problems problems to human 97.1 1.0 1.0 2. Open burning3. Open can trigger burning asthma can form attacks smog and which damage88.1 9.190.4 2.93.9 5.7 other respiratorycrops problems and other vegetation 3. Open burning4. Open can form burning smog exposes which surroudamagending properties90.4 to 3.984.1 11.55.7 4.4 crops and otherfire vegetation hazard 4. Open burning5. Open exposes burnin surroug isnding hazardous properties to ecosystem to 84.1 11.575.8 20.64.4 3.6 fire hazard6. Open burning contributes to acid rain 84.6 11.7 3.6 5. Open burnin7. gOpen is hazardous burning to can ecosystem worsen haze problem 75.8 20.697.7 3.61.3 1.0 6. Open burning8. Open contribute burnings to refersacid rain to any fire, combustion84.6 or 11.778.9 10.43.6 10.7 7. Open burningsmouldering can worsen hazethat occursproblem in the open air and97.7 which 1.3 1.0 8. Open burningis refers not directed to any fire, out combustionthrough a stack or or chimney78.9 10.4 10.7 smouldering9. thatOpen occurs burning in the is anopen offence air and in whichMalaysia 70.0 20.6 9.4 is not directed10. Burning out throughs of leaves a stack and or chimneyrubbish are illegal open 82.0 13.0 5.0 9. Open burningburning is an offence activities in Malaysia 70.0 20.6 9.4 10. Burnings of leaves and rubbish are illegal open 82.0 13.0 5.0 burning activities

28

Overall, the respondents showed positive perception on the need to address open burning issues. Table 3 shows that almost all of the respondents (97.1%) believed every individual is responsible for protecting the environment from open burning. They also agreed that people should recycle their household waste instead of burning them (97.1%). Over 93.7% of the respondents did not agree that open burning problem should be tackled by the government alone and most of them (95.8%) consented that the government should be stricter in enforcing environmental rules and regulations on open burning. The respondents’ perceived everybody should contribute and make effort to reduce open burningM. Ariffin incidences et al. / EnvironmentAsia (97.1%). 10(2) (2017) 25-32

Table 3. Attitude on open burning

Agree Not sure Disagree No. Items (%) (%) (%) 1. Everyone is responsible for protecting the 97.1 2.9 0.0 environmentOverall, the respondents showed positive perception on the need to address open burning issues.2. WeTable should 3 showsall do our th atpart almost to reduce all open of the respondents97.1 (97.1%)2.9 believed0.0 every individual is burning incidences responsible3. Community for protecting should recycle the environment their household from open 97.1burning. They2.9 also agreed0.0 that people should recycle wastetheir insteadhousehold of burning waste them instead of burning them (97.1%). Over 93.7% of the respondents did not4. agreePeople that shouldopen burningbe made awareproblem of the should danger be of tackled94.0 by the government6.0 alone0.0 and most of them (95.8%)open consented burning that the government should be stricter in enforcing environmental rules and regulations5. Government on open should burning be more. The stringent respondents in ’ perceived95.8 everybody2.9 should1.3 contribut e and make effort toenforc reduceing open environmental burning incidences rules and reg (97.1%)ulation . on open burning Table6. 3. LetAttitude the government on open burning handles the open burning 3.4 2.9 93.7 problem alone 7. Immediate action to tackle open burning is A95.8gree Not4.2 sure Disagree0.0 No. Items necessary (%) (%) (%) 1.8. EveryoneProtecting is the responsible environment for fromprotecting open burningthe 97.1 2.9 0.0 environmentshould be one of our priorities 2. We should all do our part to reduce open 97.1 2.9 0.0 burningWith regard incidences to practices, as seen in table 4, more than half (56.5%) of the respondents admitted3. Community that they shouldhad done recycle open their burning household before and 97.154.1% suggested2.9 that they0.0 were not ready to stop burningwaste insteadtheir trash of burning in open them fire as a way to dispose them. Furthermore, when asked about their Overall,action4. the inPeople respondentsaddressing should beopen made showed burning, aware positiveof just the dangera little of more With than94.0 regard half to of practices, 6.0the respondents as seen0.0 in(52.1 table% )4, took more an initiativeopen to adviseburning people to avoid open burning. Other than that, 50.5% of the respondents were not perception 5.on theGovernment need to shouldaddress be moreopen stringent burning in than half 95.8(56.5%) of the2.9 respondents 1.3 admitted that they issues. Tablesure 3 showswhetherenforc that ingto almost environmentalreport all any of theillegal rules respondents openand reg burningulation had activities done open in theirburning areas. before Respondents and 54.1% also suggested disclosed (97.1%) believedthat they onevery wereopen individual burningnot sure (48.2%)is responsible if they for had thattalked they to were friends not aboutready toother stop options burning that their they trash could in protectingchoose the6. environment Letin theorder government fromto dispose open handles burning.their the opengarden They burning wastesopen firerather 3.4as a thanway toburn 2.9dispose ing them. them.93.7 WhenFurthermore, asked aboutwhen also agreedcomposting that peopleproblem their should alone wastes recycle as alternative their household to open burningasked about, only their 18.7% action of inrespondents addressing wereopen burning,doing it. just waste instead 7. of burningImmediate them action (97.1%). to tackle Over open 93.7%burning is a little more95.8 than half4.2 of the respondents0.0 (52.1%) took Table 4. Practices on addressing open burning of the respondentsnecessary did not agree that open burning an initiative to advise people to avoid open burning. 8. Protecting the environment from open burning 97.1 2.9 0.0 problem should be tackled by the government alone and Other than that, A50.5%gree of Notthe respondentssure Disagree were not sure No. should be one of our prioritiesItems most of them (95.8%) consented that the government whether to report(%) any illegal(%) open burning(%) activities in should be stricter1. inI Withhave enforcing adviseregard denvironmental peopleto practices, to avoid rules committingas seen and in opentheirtable burningareas. 4, m Respondents ore 52.1than half also (4.256.5 disclosed %) of43.2 thethat respondentsthey were regulationsadmitted on2. open I haveburning.that donethey The open had respondents’ burningdone open activities perceived burning beforenot sure and (48.2%) 54.1% 56.5ifsuggested they had15.6 talkedthat they to friends were27.8 aboutnot ready other to everybodystop should3. burningI contribute talks totheir my and trashfriends make in about open effort the fire tothings reduceas a that way they optionsto candispose do that to them. they20.8 could Furthermore, choose48.2 in w orderhen 31.0asked to dispose about their their dispose their garden wastes rather than burning them open burningaction incidences in addressing (97.1%). open burning, just a littlegarden more wastesthan half rather of thanthe respondentsburning them. (52.1 When%) tookasked an 4. I will not dispose my rubbish by burning themabout composting36.2 their wastes9.6 as alternative54.1 to open initiative5. I usually to advise compost people organic to avoid material open including burning. leaves, Other than that18.7, 50.5%20.6 of the respondents60.7 were not sure whethergrass clippings, to report vegetable any illegal and othersopen burningburning, activities only in 18.7% their areas.of respondents Respondents were alsodoing dis it.closed that6. theyI will were report not any sure illegal (48.2%) open burningif they activities had talked in my to friends44.1 about other50.5 options5.5 that they could choose areasin order to the authorityto dispose their garden wastes rather than burning them. When asked about composting their wastes as alternative to open burning, only 18.7% of respondents were doing it.

Table 4. Practices on addressing open burning

Agree Not sure Disagree No. Items (%) (%) (%) 1. I have advised people to avoid committing open burning 52.1 4.2 43.2 2. I have done open burning activities 56.5 15.6 27.8 3. I talks to my friends about the things that they can do to 20.8 48.2 31.0 dispose their garden wastes rather than burning them 4. I will not dispose my rubbish by burning them 36.2 9.6 54.1 5. I usually compost organic material including leaves, 18.7 20.6 60.7 grass clippings, vegetable and others 6. I will report any illegal open burning activities in my 44.1 50.5 5.5 areas to the authority

29

3.3. Relationship between public’s knowledge, attitude and practice towards open burning

Spearman correlation test was used to observe the strength of the relationship between knowledge and attitude as well as practices respectively. As seen in table 5, there was a weak positive correlation between publics’ knowledge and attitude (r = 0.211, n=384, p<0.001). This result suggests that better knowledge about open burning and its negative impacts is insufficient to induce higher positive attitude towards open burning. This result was consistent with the finding of De Pretto et al. (2015)M. in Ariffin their studyet al. / relatedEnvironmentAsia to attitude 10(2) and (2017) practices 25-32 towards atmospheric pollution in Malaysia.

Table 5. Correlation test between knowledge and attitude

Knowledge Attitude Knowledge Correlation coefficient 1 .211** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 N 384 384 Attitude Correlation coefficient .211** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 N 384 384 **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

With regard to the relationship between public’s knowledge and practice, the spearman’s correlation showed a positive but weak correlation between the two variables (r= 0.195, n = 384, 3.3. Relationship between p<0.01 public’s). This knowledge, indicates attitudethat high environmentalknowledge of open knowledge burning doeswas significantnot necessarily and result in high and practice towards tendencyopen burning to practice more responsiblecorrelated acts to positively, address open though burning. weakly, Similar with findingpublic’s was made by Besar et al. (2013) in relation to generalattitudes, environment behaviour-friendly and practices participation among public in in Malaysia. Spearman correlation3.3.Haron Relationship test et was al. used(2005) between to observealso public’sfound the environmental knowledge,environmental attitude knowledge causes. and p racticewas signif towardsicant openand correlatedburning positively, though weakly, with public’s attitudes, behaviour and participation in environmental causes. strength of the relationship between knowledge and Several past studies have offered some explanations attitude as well as practices Spearmanrespectively. correlation As seen intest wason this used issue to observeof lack ofthe practice. strength Ramaswami of the relationship et al. between knowledgeTable 6. Correlation and attitude test betweenas well asknowledge practices and respectively practice . As seen in table 5, there was a weak positive table 5, there was a weak positive correlation between (2016) found that social and infrastructural difficulties correlation between publics’ knowledge and attitude (r = 0.211, n=384, p<0.001). This result publics’ knowledge and attitude (r = 0.211 , n = 384, faced byKnowledge the people are amongPractice the reasons open burning p<0.001). This resultsuggests suggests that that better better knowledge knowledge about continues open burning to occur and itsdespite negative people’s impacts knowledge is insufficient of to induce higherKnowledge positive attitudeCorrelation towards coefficient open burning. This1 result was.195** consistent with the finding of De Pretto about open burning and its negativeSig. impacts (2-tailed) is the health risks associated0.00 with it. Therefore, better et al. (2015) in their study related to attitude and practices towards atmospheric pollution in Malaysia. insufficient to induce higher positive attitudeN towards infrastructure384 and service384 for waste disposal might open burning. This resultPractice was consistentCorrelation with coefficientthe have a significant.195** impact1 in reducing open burning Table 5. Correlation test between knowledge and attitude finding of De Prettoet al . (2015) in theirSig. study (2-tailed) related practice at the0.00 local scale. Ghani et al. (2013) also found N 384 384 to attitude and practices towards atmospheric that people’sKnowledge participation Attitude in environmental-friendly pollution in Malaysia.**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 practicelevel (2-tailed). is conditioned upon several factors including Knowledge Correlation coefficient 1 .211** With regard to the relationship between public’s adequate facilities and situational factors like storage Several Sig.past (2 -studiestailed) have offered some explanation0.00 s on this issue of lack of practice. knowledge and practice, Ramaswami the spearman’s et Nal . (2016) correlation found thatconvenience social384 and and infrastructural collection384 times. difficulties Another faced primary by the people are showed a positive butAttitudeamong weak thecorrelation reasonsCorrelation betweenopen burning coefficient the continuescause of.211** opento occur burning despite 1is people’slack of enforcement.knowledge of For the health risks two variables (r = 0.195 associated, n = with384, Sig. itp<0.01. (2Therefore,-tailed)). This betterinstance, infrastructure0.00 Indonesia and has service legislation for wasteat various disposal levels might have a indicates that high knowledge significant of open impact burningN in reducing does not open of burning the government384 practice at whichthe384 local explicitly scale. Ghani prohibit et al . open(2013) also found **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). necessarily result in highthat people’stendency participationto practice more in environmental burning and-friendly provide practice imprisonment, is conditioned licenseupon several factors responsible acts to addressincluding open adequate burning. facilities Similar and situationalwithdrawals factors and heavylike storage monetary convenience fines as andpenalties collection times. With regard to the relationship between public’s knowledge and practice, the spearman’s finding was made byAnother Besar et prim al. ary(2013) cause in ofrelation open burning (Tan, is2015). lack However,of enforcement. the lack For of effectiveinstance ,enforcement Indonesia has legislation correlation showed a positive but weak correlation between the two variables (r= 0.195, n = 384, to general environment-friendlyat various levels practices of the government among of which these explicitly laws makes prohibit widespread open burning open burning and provide to recur imprisonment, p<0.01). This indicates that high knowledge of open burning does not necessarily result in high public in Malaysia. Haronlicense et withdrawals al. (2005) andalso heavy found monetary in the finescountry. as penalties (Tan, 2015). However, the lack of effective tendency to practice more responsible acts to address open burning. Similar finding was made by enforcement of these laws makes widespread open burning to recur in the country. Besar et al. (2013) in relation to general environment-friendly practices among public in Malaysia.

Haron et al. (2005) also found environmental knowledge was significant and correlated positively,

though weakly, with public’s attitudes, behaviour and participation in environmental causes.

Table 6. Correlation test between knowledge and practice

Knowledge Practice Knowledge Correlation coefficient 1 .195** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 N 384 384 Practice Correlation coefficient .195** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 N 384 384 **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Several past studies have offered some explanations on this issue of lack of practice. Ramaswami et al. (2016) found that social and infrastructural difficulties faced by the people are among the reasons open burning continues to occur despite people’s knowledge of the health risks associated with it. Therefore, better infrastructure and service for waste disposal might have a significant impact in reducing open burning practice at the local scale. Ghani et al. (2013) also found 30 that people’s participation in environmental-friendly practice is conditioned upon several factors including adequate facilities and situational factors like storage convenience and collection times. Another primary cause of open burning is lack of enforcement. For instance, Indonesia has legislation at various levels of the government which explicitly prohibit open burning and provide imprisonment, license withdrawals and heavy monetary fines as penalties (Tan, 2015). However, the lack of effective enforcement of these laws makes widespread open burning to recur in the country.

M. Ariffin et al. / EnvironmentAsia 10(2) (2017) 25-32

4. Conclusions Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia. Department of Environment 2011 annual report. 2012; Available The current study found that the public in Kuala from: https://enviro.doe.gov.my/ekmc/digital-content/ Terengganu knew what open burning is and had good 84251/ knowledge about its adverse impacts to human health Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia. Department of Environment 2012 annual report. 2013; Available and the environment. They also indicated positive from: https://enviro.doe.gov.my/ekmc/digital-content/ attitude towards individual roles in tackling open 84251/ burning and were supportive of stricter enforcement Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia. Department of laws in this regard. Despite these, similar to of Environment 2013 annual report. 2014; Available previous studies on KAP in environmental area, the from: https://enviro.doe.gov.my/ekmc/digital-content/ existing study established a weak relationship between 87605/ knowledge and attitudes as well as between knowledge and Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia. Department practices. Practical impediments especially of Environment 2014 annual report. 2015; Available infrastructural facilities have been identified by from: https://enviro.doe.gov.my/ekmc/digital-content/ previous studies as the major hindrances to better 88272/ Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia. Department practices despite high knowledge and positive attitude of Environment 2015 annual report. 2016; Available towards environmental protection. Therefore, efforts in from: https://enviro.doe.gov.my/ekmc/digital-content/ Malaysia should also look at the infrastructural needs laporan-tahunan-2015/ to increase environmental-friendlier practices among De Pretto L, Acreman S, Ashfold MJ, Mohankumar SK, the public in tackling open burning problem. Malaysia Campos-Arceiz A. The link between knowledge, has strict national environmental law on open burning. attitudes and practices in relation to atmospheric haze However, without adequate enforcement, the law has pollution in Peninsular Malaysia. PLoSONE 2015; failed to encourage better environmental practices to 10(12): e0143655. address open burning problem in the country. Environmental Quality Act 1974. The commissioner of law revision, Malaysia. Under the Authority of the Revision of Laws Act 1968. Acknowledgements Estrellan CR, Lino F. Toxic emissions from open burning. Chemosphere 2010; 80(3): 193-207. The authors would like to express their gratitude to the Fiedler H. National PCDD/PCDF release inventories under community of Kuala Terengganu for their participation in the Convention on Persistent Organic this study. Pollutants. Chemosphere 2007; 67(9): S96-S108. Forsyth T. Public concerns about transboundary haze: a References comparison of Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia. Global Environmental Change 2014; 25: 76-86. Abdullah S, Ismail M, Fong SY, Ahmed AN. Principal Ghani WA, Rusli IF, Biak DRA, Idris A. An application of Component Regression (PCR) for PM10 forecasting the theory of planned behaviour to study the influencing in Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu. Proceedings of factors of participation in source separation of food National Conference on Wood based Technology, waste. Waste Management 2013; 33(5): 1276-81. Engineering and Innovation. 2015; 82-88. Guerrero LA, Maas G, Hogland W. Solid waste management Agamuthu P, Fauziah SH. Challenges and issues in moving challenges for cities in developing countries. Waste towards sustainable landfilling in a transitory Management 2013; 33(1): 220-32. country-Malaysia. Waste Management and Research. Haron SA, Paim L, Yahaya N. Towards sustainable 2011; 29(1): 13-19. consumption: an examination of environmental ASEAN Secretariat. Guidelines for the implementation of knowledge among Malaysians. International Journal of the ASEAN Policy on Zero Burning. ASEAN Consumer Studies 2005; 29(5): 426-36. Secretariat; Jakarta. 2003. Norbu, Dilokwanich S. Municipal solid waste management Besar TA, Hassan MS, Bolong J, Abdullah R. Exploring in Phuntsholing City, Bhutan. EnvironmentAsia 2010; the levels of knowledge, attitudes and environment- 3(1): 111-16. friendly practices among young civil servants in Ramaswami A, Baidwan NK, Nagpure AS. Exploring social Malaysia. Pertanika Journals of Social Science and and infrastructural factors affecting open burning of Humanities 2013; 21: 21-38. municipal solid waste (MSW) in Indian cities: A Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia. Department comparative case study of three neighborhoods of of Environment 2010 annual report. 2011; Available Delhi. Waste Management and Research 2016; 34(11): from: https://enviro.doe.gov.my/ekmc/digital-content/ 1164-72. 84236/

31 M. Ariffin et al. / EnvironmentAsia 10(2) (2017) 25-32

Saat SA. Solid waste management in Malaysia and ecological modernization theory perspective. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management 2013; 8(2): 268-75. Shi Y, Matsunaga T, Saito M, Yamaguchi Y, Chen X. Comparison of global inventories of CO2 emissions from biomass burning during 2002-2011 derived from multiple satellite products. Environmental Pollution 2015; 206: 479-87. SWCorp Malaysia. SWCorp Strategic Plan 2014-2020. SWCorp, . 2014: 11-12. Tan AK. The haze crisis in : assessing Singapore’s transboundary haze pollution Act 2014. NUS-Centre for Asian Legal Studies Working Paper No.15/02, 2015. Available from: http://dx.doiorg/10.2139/ ssrn.2547379 Vandamme E. Concepts and challenges in the use of knowledge-attitude-practice surveys: Literature review. Department of Animal Health. Institute of Tropical Medicine. Antwerp, Belgium. 2009 Wiedinmyer C, Yokelson RJ, Gullett BK. Global emissions of trace gases, particulate matter, and hazardous air pollutants from open burning of domestic waste. Environmental Science and Technology 2014; 48(16): 9523-30. Wood S, Tsu V. Advocacy, communication and social mobilization for TB control: A guide to developing knowledge, attitude and practice surveys, WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data. 2008.

Received 1 April 2017 Accepted 28 April 2017

Correspondence to Mariani Ariffin Department of Environmental Management, Faculty of Environmental Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, UPM, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia Tel: 03-8946-6771 E-mail: [email protected]

32