World Bank Document

C',

Public Disclosure Authorized C,i a)J .... 0.

A 52

....~ . . . ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~1

. ~...... ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~AA

...... >

Public Disclosure Authorized . . ~...... ~ .. . ..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ? A

...... ~ ~ 4¼.

w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'sAAAX4A C' A ...... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Public Disclosure Authorized *5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

mu~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~olo/4-o)JO)JUOWF 1~P Public Disclosure Authorized

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Bln. Billion BOD Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand BTU British Thermal Unit CALABARZON Provinces of Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, Rizal, and Quez6n CCBPI Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. CDS City Development Strategies DA Department of Agriculture DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources DILG Department of Interior and Local Government DOH Department of Health DOST Department of Science and Technology DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways DTI Department of Trade and Industry EMB Environmental Management Bureau ESWMA Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 GHG Green House Gases GTZ German Agency for Technical Cooperation HW Hazardous Wastes IEC Information, Education, and Communication IRR Implementing Rules and Regulations ITDI Industrial Technology Development Institute IWEP Industrial Waste Exchange Program JICA Japanese International Cooperation Agency LLDA Laguna Lake Development Authority LGU Local Government Unit LOGOFIND Local Government Finance and Development Project Mln. Million MEIP Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Program MGB Mines and Geosciences Bureau MM Metro Manila MMDA Metro Manila Development Authority MRF Materials Recovery Facility MSE Micro and Small Enterprises MSW Municipal Solid Waste NCR National Capital Region NEDA National Economic and Development Authority NGO Non-Governmental Organization NIMBY Not In My Back Yard NSWMC National Solid Waste Management Commission PCG Philippine Coast Guard PET Polyethylene Terephthalate PhP/P Philippine Pesos PIA Philippine Information Agency PPCP Polystyrene Packaging Council of the Philippines SLF Sanitary Landfill SWM Solid Waste Management TDF Tire-Derived Fuel TESDA Technical Education and Skill Development Authority THW Toxic and Hazardous Waste TIRE Totally Integrated Recycling Effort WHO World Health Organization U The World Bank Group

1818H. Street,N.W. CountryOffice Manila WashingtonD.C. 20433 23rd Floor,The TaipanPlace U.S.A. EmeraldAvenue, Ortigas Center Tel.:(202) 477-1234 PasigCity, Philippines Fax: (202)477-6391 Tel.:(632) 637-5855 to 64 Fax: (632)637-5870 December 2001

TheEnvironment's Ilth hour!!!

As highlightedin the 2000 EnvironmentMonitor, the environment and naturalresources of the Philippinesis underincreasing presstre. The challengeis to act now to ensurea futurethat preserves the qualityof life, health,resources, and naturaltreasures of the country In the spirit of this challenge,a clockhas been chosenas the symbolof theMonitor.

Theclock shown in the 2001Monitor is in the 11thhour to representthis urgencyand the fact that time is nunningout. As theclock approaches midnight, the problem gets more critical In the case Df solid waste,the clockstands at 11:50indicating that time is runningvery short. The reasons for this are the lackof progresson developingsafe disposal facilities and visibilityof the effectsincluding the Manila gatbagecrisis, the Payatastragedy and the commonsight of garbagestrewn in rivers,streets and on privateand publicland in manyareas of the country.At the samnetime, solid wasteis beingproduced at increasingrates and withoutaction the problems in Manilawill become even more critical and thosein otherareas of thecountry will grow On thepositive side, several recent measures have preventedthe clock from creepingcloser to midnight,including the passageof groundbreakingframework legislation (Ecological Solid WasteManagement Act) and the successof citizen-led-initiativessuch as recyclingand awarenessprograms. In the future,careful implementation of the newlegislation represents the greatest hope for reversing theclock on this criticalissue facing the Philippines.

The Philippines Environment Monitor 2000 presented a snapshot of M: n X a f environmental¢ : : kq 50 0general trends in the country The 2002 edition, currently under preparation, will focus on air quality management.

This documentwos prepared by a World Bock Teemconsisting of1Messrs./Mfdmes. Anjali Acherya, Bebet Gozun,Patchamuthu Illangovan (Teem Leader), John Morton, end Meye Villeluz. Thedocument was peer reviewedby Messrs.Cerl Bertone,Den Hoornweg,L. PanneerSelvam, Allen Rotmen,end ThomesE. Weltonof The WorldBeck; end Mr N.C. Vesuki,Chief Executive Officer, DelewereSolid WasteAuthority, USA.Comments end suggestionsoffered by thefollowing ore gratefully acknowledged:Mr. RamonPaje, Undersecretary,Department of Environmentand Natural Resources(DENR); Mr. Julian D. Amador,Director/Officer-in-Charge, Environmental Management Bureau; Mr. Albert A. Magalang,Executive Director Office of theSecretariat, National Solid WasteManagement Commission (NSWMIC); Ms. SoniaMendoza and MfrBert Guevararepresent- ing theNGOs and Leagueof Barangaysin theANSWMC, respectively. Comments were also provided by thefollowing WorldBank staff and consult- ants: Messrs./Mdmes.Joven Balbosa.Bhuvan Bhatnagar Rob Crooks,Giovanna Dare, Jack Fritz, Heidi Hennrich-Hanson,Emma Hooper Mary Judd, and KanchalikaKlad-A ngkul. Ms. LuisaSambeli Espaflola coordinatedthe production of this Monitor Ms. Agatha Anchetaassisted in data collection. Mr Jeffrey Lecksellwas responsiblefor preparing the map.Dissemination of theMonitor is coordinatedby Ms. LeonoraGonzales. The cover wasdesigned byVMr Brian Lu of Liquid Graphics.The documentwas printed at Inkwell Publishing Company.

The viewsexpressed in the PhilippinesEnvironment Monitor 2001 areentirely those of the authorsand shouldnot be citedwithout prior permission.They do not necessarilyreflect the viewsoF The WorldBeck Group, its ExecutiveDirectors, or the countriesthey represent. The materialcontained herein has been obtainedfrom sourcesbelieved reliable but it is notnecessarily complete and cannot be guaranteed.

'§Printed on Recycled Paper Table of Contents

Preface Abbreviations and Acronyms

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - DOWN IN THE DUMPS! . . 1-2

WASTE GENERATION MAP ...... 3

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE SOURCES AND GENERATION .4-5 Waste Sources Waste Generation Waste Composition

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE RECYCLING AND COLLECTION ...... 6-7 Recycling Collection Transfer and Transport

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL ...... 8-13 Composting Open and Controlled Dumping Sanitary Landfills Landfill Gas Collection and Use

HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATION, RECYCLING, TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL ...... 14-17 Generation Recycling Treatment and Disposal

LEGISLATION, INSTITUTIONS, AND BUDGETS ...... 18-22

THE TEN CHALLENGES ...... 23-26

Case Study: The Two Faces of Payatas ...... 27 Glossary of Terms ...... 28 Philippines at a Glance PREFACE

The Philippines Environment Monitor series, launched in 2000, presents a snapshot of key environmental trends in the country. It aims to engage and inform stakeholders on key environmental changes as they occur. The 2000 Monitor benchmarked trends in environmental indicators associated with water and air quality, and natural resources conservation. Unlike economic indicators, environmental changes, however, occur over a period of time, and therefore, annual variations are difficult to measure or assess. Thus, the series is designed to track changes in general environmental trends every five years. In the intervening years, the Monitor will focus on specific annual themes to highlight critical and emerging problems.

The Philippines Environment Monitor 2001 focuses on solid waste management, which, triggered by the "garbage crisis" of Metro Manila, has emerged as one of the most pressing environmental concerns in the country. Population growth, rising living standards, and inadequate attention have caused many of the current waste problems. As wastes are dumped along roads, drainage canals and waterways, or in low-lying open fields, it is inevitable that the sheer volume of the wastes including the toxicity of its contaminants will endanger human health and safety by polluting water, air and land as well as threatening the food chain.

The present garbage crisis in Metro Manila and other cities in the country has started to reverse the appar- ent indifference of the people towards the 'grime and dirt' of society. The seriousness of the human and environmental impact arising from the lack of a strategic approach to waste management was highlighted by the prema- ture closure of the Carmona and San Mateo landfills due to environmental and social considerations, and the Payatas dumpsite tragedy in 2000. In the absence of a clear national framework on waste management, local governments who are duty bound to manage solid wastes in their areas of jurisdiction, have resorted to solid waste disposal practices, such as open dumps, controlled dumpsites, and open or curbside street piles, which are operationally inadequate and do not protect either public health or the environment.

Both the Government and civil society should be complimented for the passage of the Republic Act 9003: Ecological Solid Waste Management Act, which was signed into law by the President on January 26, 2001. This law was a result of several years of sustained work by many committed elected representatives, environmental- ists, and professionals. It promotes an integrated approach to solid waste management and sets out ambitious goals. The challenge now facing the country is its implementation.

The Environment Monitor 2001 consists of six sections. The first three sections discuss the current status and trends in municipal solid waste generation; recycling and collection; and treatment and disposal. The fourth section discusses hazardous waste generation, treatment, and disposal. An analysis of the laws, institutions and budget is presented in the fifth section; and the Monitor concludes with an assessment of the major challenges faced by the Philippines in implementing an integrated solid waste management program. The Monitor also discusses the situation at the Payatas open dumpsite in Quezon City.

The information presented here has been obtained from a variety of sources, including published reports of government agencies, universities and nongovernmental organizations, unpublished data from individuals, and documents of the World Bank. However, solid waste data in many countries is often times unreliable due to inconsistencies in data recording, definitions, collection methods, and seasonal variations. The Philippines is no exception. Given the diversity and timeliness of the sources of data used, the information in this report has been assessed for its reliability, and as needed estimates have been made. Data, information and support provided by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Environmental Mangement Bureau, Metro Manila De- velopment Authority, Local Government Units and Non-Govermental Organizations are acknowledged.

Robert V. Pulley Zafer Ecevit Country Director, Philippines Sector Director East Asia and Pacific Region Environment and Social Development The World Bank East Asia and Pacific Region The World Bank EXECUTIVESUMMARY - DOWN IN THE DUMPS!

S OLID WASTE or basurahas emergedas the most visible environmentalpriority in the cities and municipalities of the Philippines. Generation of waste is increasing rapidly as consumption rises, while collection efficiencies are dropping as service levels deteriorate. Treatment and dis- posalfacilities are facing closure because of improper siting and management, and growing public opposition. The problem is most pronounced in Metro Manila, where it is a common sight to see uncollected garbage piling up on the streets or being burned. In the meantime, human health costs are rising because of improper handling and disposal of household, hospital, and industrial wastes.

Sources and Gener a-a_ a smallportion is recycled. tion. A Filipinogenerates Solid WasteManagement in the Philippines The rest is disposed in open between 0.3 and 0.7 ki- - At a Glance,2001 - dumps.Carmona in Cavite lograms of garbage daily Province and San Mateo in dependingupon income Indicator Value RizalProvince were the first levels. The current an- Solidwaste generated by households(tons/year) 10 million landfillsto be constructed. nual generation of 10 Toxicand hazardouswaste generated by Thesesites have since been milliontons is expected industrial/commercialsector (tons/year) 2.4 million closed,which triggered the to increaseby 40 percent Hazardousand infectiouswaste generated by current garbage crisis in at the end of the decade. hospitals(tons/year) 6,750 Metro Manila. In San The National Capital Shareof municipalwaste generated that is Urban- 70% Fernando, La Union, Regi Naand Southern collected Rural-40% Valenzuela, and Duma- Region and Southern Wasterecycling and re-use as a percentof TagalogRegion produce totalwaste generated (Metro Manila) 12% guete, open dumping has the highest amount of Recycledmaterial sold as a percentageof beenreplaced by controlled waste,accounting for 23 totalwaste generated (Metro Manila) 5% dumping.The only sanitary and 13 percent of the No. of propersolid waste disposal sites landfillin the countryis lo- country's production, Landfills 1 catedin Cebu,which is cur- Closedlandfills 2 ctdi eu hc scr respectively. * Controlleddumps 17 rently experiencingoperat- No. of hospitalwaste incinerators 43 ing problems. * Recycling and Collec- No. ofhazardous waste treatment facilities 28 tion. Inadequatecollec- Shareof municipalsolid waste disposed in landfills * Toxic and Hazardous tion vehiclesand lack of andcontrolled dumps 2% Wastes.Just over 5 percent disposal sites have con- Shareof hospitalswith accessto incinerators in of the estimatedhazardous tributed to a reduction in Shareof hazardouswaste treated or recycled 5% waste generation of nearly the collectionefficiency Percapita allocation inLGUs (range PhP) 12 - 250 2.4 milliontons is recycled of householdwaste. Sev- Shareof solidwaste management inLGU budget 1%- 12% or treatedannually. Hospi-

enty percent of the gar- n;= . - tals in the country generate bage is collected in ur- W 6,750 tons/year of hazard- ban areas, while only 40 percent is collected in rural ous and infectiouswaste. Some of this waste is inciner- areas. Many of the poor neighborhoods in the country ated. However,the Clean Air Act of 2000 prohibits the are under-served. Separate collection of segregated operation of all incinerators after November 2003. waste is still minimal. Thirteen percent of Metro Manila's waste is recycled, while it is much less in Waste recycling and disposal have always attracted other areas. wide attention in the Philippines. Many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been active since * Treatmentand DisposaL Nationally, only 2 percent of the early 1990s through recycling programs such as the waste generated is disposed in sanitary landfills or Zero WasteRecycling Movement and Linis Ganda. In controlled dumps. Nearly 10 percent is composted, and recent times, many civil society and community orga-

I i I T.M10 7i I I. li Mi

nizations have opposed improper management of open 1. Strengthening enforcement and providing better in- dumps and landfills, the siting of future facilities, and centives. The current lax enforcement situationneeds incineration of waste. Their sustained efforts led to the to be improvedto make the ESWMA an effectivepiece drafting of RA 9003 also known as the Ecological Solid of legislation.In addition, providing incentiveswould Waste Management Act of 2000 (ESWMA),which was reduce waste generation at source and improve man- signed into law early this year. This law replaces the agement of waste disposal facilities. piecemeal provisions previously covered in several 2. Building the capacity of national and local institu- laws, and for the first time, provides an integrated na- tions. Capacity building for LGUs and barangays tional framework for environmentally-friendly solid and improving strategic planning at all levels of gov- waste management. The Act has set very ambitious emient will be necessary. goals, and their achievement will be a major challenge 3. Addressing the NIMBY syndrome. This has pre- for all sectors of the society. The finalization of the vented the siting of solid waste management (SWM) law's implementing rules and regulations need to be facilities and could be addressed through better expedited. awareness and consultation, and the demonstration of safe landfill practices. While public awareness has been growing, it is not yet 4. Raising public awareness on the benefits of proper sufficientlymature to support appropriate and suitable solid waste management. Support and participation management practices. The "Not In My BackYard" of the people in SWM programs will be key to the (NIMBY) syndrome has compelled many local govern- successful implementation of the ESWMA. ments to abandon or defer plans to establish compostimg 5. Increasing expenditures on SWM. A back-of-the- plants, controlled dumps, and sanitary landfills. A case envelope analysis indicates that the Philippines will in point is the situation in Metro Manila. Since the pub- need to spend an additional PhP150 billion (US$3 licly-demandedclosure of the Carmona and San Mateo billion) over the next 10 years for SWM. landfills, the metropolishas been buried in its own waste 6. Mainstreaming the utilization of new funding with few altemativesaside from open dumping.This will sources and employing cost-effective approaches. likely exacerbatepublic sentiment against sanitary land- New funding sources such as national government fills, the most suitable and cost-effective option for the cost sharing; private sector participation; and user safe disposal of Metro Manila's residual waste in the fees should be explored along with cost saving mea- context of an integrated system. sures, such as shared facilities and producing power using landfill gas. Except for a handful of Local Government Units 7. Obtaining reliable information for national, regional, (LGUs), the performance of cities and municipalities and local planning. Without proper data, long-term in the provision of services to collect and dispose solid planning decisions cannot be made. waste has been poor. This can be attributed to LGUs' 8. Ensuring proper management of closed dumps and weak capacity, inadequate budget, limited understand- sanitary landfills. The environmental and health risks ing of appropriate and cost-effective practices, and of closed dumps and landfills will need to be mini- weak enforcement of regulations. Further, the lack of mized. a cost-sharing formula between the national govern- 9. Protecting the vulnerable and the under-served.This ment and LGUs for financing capital costs is also ham- includes scavengers and poor communities. pering the establishment of proper disposal facilities. 10. Expanding coverage of infectious medical and haz- The City Development Strategies being piloted by a ardous waste treatment. Effective implementation few cities and municipalities provide an opportunity of the law will require a concerted effort that fo- for LGUs to integrate solid waste management inter- cuses exclusively on the practicalities of establish- ventions in the overall investment planning and insti- ing safe and effective disposal practices in the short tutional development framework. and long term.

There are ten key challenges that the country needs Most importantly, the Philippines should avoid another to address to achieve the goals of the ESWMA. Smokey Mountain or Payatas open dump situation from These include: re-emerging!

2 WASTEGENERATION MAP

§ ~~~PHILIP>PINsES t} > 2tt :', tt ENVIRONMENTMONITO3R 2001 1!MUNICIPAL i ~Waste G;eneration i4 7t

4p ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tt .AT, , [N ItAlWlN >SWVt

;' '.t t; t - Rs-;lrs t- - - t4'* vlr t hw l;Y

C -IINA td.i¢i.~'-' t& e l%

* ~tt ~ 1-~ ~ H il IfNFtS'8 9 +

} ies4.s t,* iSt u, e=9 .ttSpef.tfA,^X

X ^ - *'^'' '''t-_ ' ~~~~IT4KDls

¢6? g---x1X$e-JNFECIOU HAZADUSNDti*~. ''b-t -~~~~~~~~~~ATw.a;FF tttvL *t#ST WA R ' a- ,>,. . + - W . | % . t Ar~~~~~cm-

>'^tw . .2is+ J fJi ' i : av~~~OENEATIO TONVYt

+ r h W. 1z1 r {t v ' tff~~~~~~~~~~~~~~imkil

*- }Ssit Nt- < * . i ;- * ^ ' -** ... 'et.+v . r ^ 1 L iT ^ + t; ¢ Xt ...... si+~~~~~~~~Al-.

.s4 A t At 5 94 i! . ,,, AX,, . -.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~iA

§ t ><^t 7. , ff tot£i+.s$|s Xrp , .s ,

> S * wf _2o~~~~~~~~~t

* ' r t ... ,.},,,j_ ti....*P W - . I N D 0 MMW40N 5 i ^.r,vz_,

; , WA^E WA5TE~10LWA , \ # X ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~&0#3MA*K,

1$S.'Stf{f4;YEEtT1t-S3$i Solid waste streams are generally characterized by their sources, generation rates, types of wastes, and Table 1: Sourcesand Typesof Solid Wastes composition. Source Typesof solidwastes

SOURCES Residential Foodwastes, paper, cardboard, plastics, tex- WASTE tiles,leather, yard wastes,wood, glass, metals, ashes,and householdhazardous waste. Solid wastes originate from a wide range of domestic (residential),industrial, agricultural, institutional, munici- Industrial Housekeeping wastes, packaging, food pal, and commercialsources including households, manu- wastes,construction and demolitionmateri- r . * . * * * - . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~als,hazardouswastes, and ashes. facturers, hospitals, street sweeping activities, and markets. In the Philippines,the predominantsources of solid Commercial Paper, cardboard, plastics, wood, food wastes, glass, metals, special wastes,and waste are household and commercial activities. hazardouswastes.

WASTE GENERATION Institutional Sameas commercial Construction Wood, steel,concrete, dirt, etc.

Ten million tons of municipal solid waste was gen- Municipal services Street sweepings,landscape and tree trim- affected . and*1mings, general wastes from parks, erated in 2000... Waste generation rates are affected beaches,sludge. by socio-economicby socio-eonomic deelopment,degreedevelopment, degree ofindustri-Processesof industri- Industrialprocess wastes, scrap materials,off- alization, and climate. Generally,the greater a country's specificationproducts, slag, tailings. economic prosperity and the larger its urban population, the greater the amount of solid waste generated. and hazardous wastes. It is estimated that in 2000, the 76 million Filipinos Source: What a Waste: Solid Waste Managementin Asia. Urban DevelopmentSector generated over,ten million tons of municipal solid Unit, EastAsia and Pacific Region, World Bank, May 7999. waste and this is expected to increase by 40 percent during the current decade (see table 2). Table2: NationalWaste Generation, 2000-2010

Metro Manila accounts for a quarter of the national 2000 2070 waste generation... Metro Manila produces about 2.5 Min. % of Min. % of million tons/year or a quarter of the country's gener- T/yr. total T/yr. total ated waste as a whole. The generation rate in Manila N 4.5annually in the last four years.t~ NationalCapital Region 2.45 23.0 3.14 22.3 has grown 4.5has percent grown annually in the last four years.' CordilleraAR 0.17 1.6 0.21 1.5 It has been estimated that people living in urban areas llocos 0.50 4.7 0.63 4.5 including Metro Manila produces between 0.5-0.7 kg/ CagayanValley 0.32 3.0 0.40 2.8 Central Luzon 0.96 9.0 1.32 9.4 day, while those in rural areas generate 0.3 kg/person/ SouthernTagalog 1.42 13.3 2.11 15 day.2 These values are comparable to other lower Bicol 0.54 5.1 0.65 4.6 middle income countries. Metro Manila currently is a Western Visayas 0.82 7.7 1.00 7.1 Central Visayas 0.74 7.0 1.01 7.2 major contributor to national GDP, and therefore, has EasternVtsayas 0.43 4.0 0.51 3.6 the highest consumption rates and consequent waste Western Mindanao 0.40 3.8 0.53 3.8 generation. Eventually, as the rest of the country de- NorthernMindanao 0.37 3.4 0.47 3.4 generation.as the restEventually, of the country de- SouthernMindanao 0.70 6.6 0.97 6.9 velops, Metro Manila's share will begin to decline as CentralMindanao 0.33 3.1 0.41 2.9 other urban centers generate more waste. ARMM 0.26 2.5 0.39 2.7 Caraga 0.26 2.4 0.31 2.2 National 10.67 100 14.05 100

Assumptions: Wasteproduction rates2: 'MMDA Survey,December 2000. nationalcapital region: 0.71 kg/person/day ~~~December ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~urban population: 0.5 kg/person/day 2UrbanEnvironment and Solid WasteManagement Study, GHK/MRM rural population: 0.3 kg/person/day IntemationalLtd. 1994;CALA Urban Developmentand Environment It was assumedthat the urban population would increasetheir waste productionrate by 1 percent per year due to rising income levels(based on GH-K/MRMInternational Report). Study,1996; JICA/MMDA, 1999. Urban and rural population, and growth ratesby region are basedon National Statistical Office, data for 2000.

4 MUNICIPALSOLID WASTE SOURCESAND GENERATION

WASTE COMPOSITION Table3: CountryComparisons in Waste composition is influenced by factors such as lo- MunicipalWaste Generation Rate cation living standards, and weather. The composi- WasteGeneration ationow, Cityand Country Rate (kg/cap/day) tion of solid waste affects the selectionand operation Industrialized countries: of collection and disposal equipment and facilities, the New York, USA 1.80 feasibility of resource and energy recovery, and the Hamburg, Germany 0.85 design of disposal facilities. Rome,Italy 0.69 Middle-incomecountries: Cairo, Egypt 0.50 Metro Manila's waste is highly organic and recy- Kano, Nigeria 0.46 Manila, Philippines 0.60 clable... Forty-nine percent of Metro Manila's munici- Tunis,Tunisia 0.56 pal waste is biodegradable and includes large amounts Low-incomecountries: of kitchen waste and to a lesser extent, garden waste. Calcutta, India 0.51 This high percentage of biodegradable waste indicates Karachi, Pakistan 0.60 that it could be used as compost. There is also a great Source What a Waste: Solid WasteManagement in Asia. UrbanDevelopmnent Sector potential for recycling, as 42 percent of the waste is Unit EastAsia and PacificRegion, World Bank.May 1999 made of recyclable items such as paper, plastic, and metal. Chart1: MunicipalWaste Composition in MetroManila, 1999 HOUSEHOLDSEGREGATION Paper 19% Plastic Household segregation involves sorting garbage at its 17P/ source according to its characteristics or re-use potential, where common kitchen waste, recyclables (pa- At/ per, bottles, glass, etc.) and hazardous wastes (batter- Mt a6 ies, etc.), are placed in separate containers. Though waste in the country has high composition of organic matter and recyclables, household segregation is not Kitchen Garden widely practiced. The ESWMA now mandates house- 42% Waste hold segregation. 9% Source: The Studv on Hazardouts WasteManagement in the Republic of the Philippines, JICA. June 2001.

Box 1: Environmentaland Health Impactsof ImproperSolid Waste Management

The indiscriminatedumping of wastescontaminates surface and groundwater supplies. In urban areas, solid wasteclogs drains, creating stagnant water for insect breeding and floods during rainy seasons.Uncontrolled burning of wastesand improper incineration contributessignificantly to urban air pollution. Greenhousegases are generatedfrom the decompositionof organic wastesin landfills, and untreatedleachate pollutessurrounding soil and water bodies. Health and safety issuesalso arise from improper solid waste management.Human fecal matter is commonlyfound in municipal waste. Insectand rodent vectorsare attractedto the waste and can spread diseasesuch as cholera and denguefever. Usingwater polluted by solid waste for bathing, food, irrigation, and drinking can also expose individuals to diseaseorganisms and other contaminants.Waste workers and pickers are seldom protectedfrom direct contact and injury, and the co-disposalof hazardous and medicalwastes with municipalwastes poses a serioushealth threat. Exhaustfumes from vehicles,dust stemming from disposal practices,and open burning of waste also contributeto overall health problems.

Source: What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in Asia, Urban DevelopmentSector Unit, EastAsia and Pacific Region,World Bank, May 1999.

5 RECYCLING Box 2: RecyclingInitiatives Recycling opportunities are not fully harnessed... In the Philippines, only a small portion of the solid PolyethyleneTerephthalate (PET) Bottles and waste is recycled or composted, despite the existence AluminumCans of a relatively large market for compost and used prod- To promote the recycling of PET plastics and re- ucarmatdveyromrgecycledfplastpcs,tg ndssbottles,pscrap duce plastic waste, the Department of Science and ucts made from recycled pRecs, glass botles, scrap Technology (DOST)-lndustrialTechnology Develop- paper, and scrap metals. Recovery of recyclable ma- ment Institute (ITDI) and PET manufacturers and terials occurs at three stages: at the household level, users formed the PETRecycling Task Force. The same during collection time, and at open dumpsites. Junk efforts were also made by Coca-Cola Bottlers Phil- dealers buy recyclable wastes from households, while ippines, Inc. (CCBPI),Rotary Clubs and Now Trad- waste pickers manually sort through waste at source, ing Concepts, which manage 13 PETand alumi- transfer stations, and dumpsites. Palero or garbage num can recovery centers. Emptycoke PETcontain- truck helpers also recover recyclables from the collec- ers may be redeemed at fiftycentavos per container. tion trucks to augment their income. In just eight months of operation, 1,100,337 PET bottles and 1,363,115 aluminum cans have been Recycling efforts in Metro Manila are on the rise.., recovered and re-used. In 1997, only 6 percent of solid waste was recycled in Metro Manila.3 By December 2000, it increased to 13 PolystyreneBased Materials percent due to the concerted effort by Metro Manila De- terial in fast food outlets, schools, and packing in- velopment Authority (MMDA)4 and NGOs to promote dustries. Faced with an increasing PS generation, waste segregation at the source, composting, and recy- 20 PS manufacturers formed the Polystyrene Pack- cling. Additional support was also provided with the aging Council of the Philippines (PPCP)and to- passage of the MMDA Ordinance in 1999, which man- gether set up a PS recycling plant in Sta. Maria, dates source segregation. With the operation of two new Bulacan. In 1996, PPCP,Ayala Foundation, Metro- recycling and composting facilities handling 200 tons/ politan Environmental Improvement Program day each, recycling is expected to further increase. (MEIP), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR),and some private and govern- A growing number of LGUs in the country are now ment agencies started the project at fast food out- implementing integrated waste management, which lets within the Makati Commercial Center. Between 1997 and 2000, the amount of PS packaging ma- includes waste reduction, composting, recycling, terial recovered and recycled nearly doubled from and re-use.5 Estimates had shown that trade in waste 67,540 kgs to 123,001 kgs. materials has increased in volume by 39 percent, ' : and in value by 47 percent in 2000 compared to 1998 (see table 4)6.

COLLECTION The country-wide collection efficiency in the Philip- Table 4: Waste Recovery in Metro Manila pines is estimated to be 40 percent, although major towns and cities show average collection rates of up Material Value to 70 percent.7 The poorer areas of cities, municipali- Year Purchased (millionpesos) ties, and rural barangays are typically unserved or under-served. 1998 69,400 95.2 1999 95,600 124.5

3 JICA-MMDA 1999. 2000 101,850 132.5 4 MMDA Ordinance 1999. 5 PPSO Report of DENR Performance. 6Report of the Metro ManilaFederation of EnvironmentMulti-Purpose Source:Report of the MetroManila Federation of Environment BogTvs ac ,20Multi-Purpose Cooperative,Bong Teves, March 1, 2001. Cooperative,Cooepratie Bong Tevea, March 1, 2000. 7Pasig River Rehabilitation Program, DENR/DANIDA, 1990-1991.

6 MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE RECYCLING AND COLLECTION

Municipalities and cities have primary responsibility for collection... In the Philippines, LGUs are responsible for garbage collection. Municipal solid waste collection is done either by self-administration, through private contractors or by the residents themselves. The manner and frequency of collection and the choice of equipment depends on the size of roads, density of population to be covered, and affordability. In neighborhoods with narrow roads, household waste is dumped into communal receptacles placed strategically on larger roads, which are then removed by trucks.

A quarter of Metro Manila's solid waste is not collected... In 1997, municipal waste discharged to collection points in Metro Manila was estimated to be 89.7 percent of the generated waste. Seventy-threepercent of this amount or 3,500 tons/day was collected.8 The in- Box 3: LinisGanda: complete collection could be attributed to the limited A Case Study in Recycling number and inappropriate collection vehicles, absence In 2000, Metro Manila Linis Ganda, Inc., a NGO, pur- of transfer points, traffic congestion, and lack of enforce- chased 101,850 tons of waste paper, corrugated boards, ment of and compliancewith, rules and regulations.With cutlets,plastics, and metalsworth PhP132.5 million. These the closure of the San Mateo and Carmona sanitary land- recyclablematerials were, in turn, sold to factories. Linis fills, and the difcultynsitingaewlandfillwasGandaorganized the Federationof Multi-purposeCoop- fills, and the difficulty in siting a new landfill, waste col- eratives,an associationof 17 environmentalcooperatives lection has further decreased. with 572 memberjunkshops employing more than 1,000 eco-aides.Members of the cooperativeare granted loans TRANSFER AND TRANSPORT without collateral;eco-aides are also givenseed moneyto buy recyclables. Transfer systems serve to reduce the hauling distances Only 4.5 percent of waste generated in Metro Manila for collection trucks, thus enabling a lower collection are recycled by Linis Ganda. The group hopes to in- cost. Suchstat s acrease its recycling activities to 15 percent. The expan- cost. Such statlons are appropriate for large citles, | sionwould require 1000 additionaljunk shops and 2,500 where there are long haulingdistances to the final dis- | eco-aides. posal site. l_l

In Metro Manila, solid wastes collected by dump trucks T i are taken to a transfer station in Las Pifias, where it Tae 5 a pl fse was transferred to larger trucks before taken to the Philippines Carmona landfill. With the closure of the Carmona City User Fees and San Mateo landfills, the Las Pifias transfer station Cagayande Oro City Commercial and Industrial: P1500- has been converted into a materials recovery facility, 2000 (maximum) are re- LipaCity Household'P10/month billedwith wa- where compostable and recyclable materials | ~~~~~~tersupplyI covered. In addition, Marikina City also operates its o y tlHuhl IOlongapo City HouseholodP30 -P40/month collected own transfer station. through electricitybills Commercial: P75-P500/month (de- pendingon the kind of business,floor area, andwaste generated BatangasCity Household: P10/month collected throughelectricity bills |______Commercial: P300-P3000 collected 'The study of SWM for Metro Manila, Final Report, JICA/MMDA, March through business permits 1999. Source: Report from each city, August 2001.

7 TREATMENTAND DISPOSAL Box 4: Treatmentand Disposal Treatment methods include composting, anaerobic di- Options for Municipal Solid Waste gestion, incineration, and sanitary landfilling (see Box 4). Disposal only includes the final deposition of re- Disoosal in controlled dump or sanitary landfill: The jects from composting or digestion. Other materials waste is placed, compacted and covered on an area will be land applied as a recovered resource. of land in a controlled fashion. Controlled dumps have basic environmental amenities: site is fenced, Composting and landfilling are the most suitable scavenging is organized, waste is covered by soil technologies ...... Household solid waste reaching daily, fires are extinguished and stormwater is re- tpechnolosites... thouePhodisolidpiswaste rchingmrouted around the site so it does not mix with the open dumpsiesin the Pilippines shihnmis waste. They are more environmentally sound than ture and organic content, and low in calorific value, at.Te r oeevrnetlysudta tureiand torgi ontdvenand lowintriesic vsalu, open dumps but do not provide full protection against simpostiar mostato nidevelop dfiinc naries in Asa environmental and public health hazards. Sanitary Composting and sanitary landfilling are thus the landfills are similar but built and operated with full most suitable technologies for treatment and dis- environmental controls includinga liner, leachate posal, while incineration (or burning) is relatively treatment, and the flaring of gas produced by the ineffective and expensive. decomposition of the waste. Both methods of disposal are cost-effective and relatively simple to operate. Efficient and proper disposal systems for solid wastes are lacking... Illegal open dumping remains Compostina: The decomposition of organic wastes un- the most prevalent form of disposal in the country. der controlled conditions to produce soil conditioners, Controlled dumps and sanitary landfills are few. compost or organic fertilizers. Generally done to re- Composting, though gaining in popularity, remains lim- duce the amount of waste going into landfill. Necessi- ited to only a few neighborhoods and local govern- tatessource separation of the organic portion of the solid ments. Incineration is restricted to treatment of infec- waste and a market for the end products. tious medical and hazardous wastes. Anaerobic Digestion: The breakdown of organic mat- COMPOSTING ter by bacteria in the absence of oxygen, resulting in the production of biogas that can be combusted as a fuel source and a sludge that can be further composted for Composting has largely been a community-based ac- use as a soil enhancer. Generally done to reduce the tivity promoted by NGOs, people's organizations, and, amount of waste going into landfills. Necessitates source in some instances, by local governments through the separation of the organic portion of the solid waste and barangays. It can be done by households, homeowners' residue should be re-used, treated or disposed. associations or barangays. Composting systems can range from simple backyard compost pits to more Incineration: Generally it allows unsorted, non- bulky mechanized processes. solid wastes to be fed directly into the furnace and combusted. The process produces ash, which gener- While many communities produce soil conditioners ally is landfilled as well as gas and liquid emissions for their own use, others have opted to produce com- that require treatment. Significantly reduces the post or organiccommercially. fertilizers TheDepart-amount of waste to be landfilled and requires very post or organic fertilizers commercially. The Depart- little land.; However, high moisture content and low ment of Agriculture is now actively promoting the use l X H of organicCoupled fertilizers. with the growing de- calorific value makes the municipal solid waste in oandfororganicafertilzers.nCooupled,t the garor dm- the Philippinestechnically unsuitable for incineration. mand .f organically grownfotm , tfo r- In addition, the high capital and operating costs to postand organic fertlizers IS alsogrowing, but no de- fully combust the waste in an environmentally sound mand estimates are available nor is the quality of com- way makst cos poit e in tatmn of known supportandGovemmet encoragementway, .make It cost prohibitive for use in treatment of postknown. Government ost support and encouragement municipal solid waste in the Philippines. for composting activities is also limited.

8 MUNICIPALSOLID WASTE TREATMENTAND DISPOSAL

Table6: MunicipalSolid Waste Disposal Methods in SelectedCountries, 1997

Land-filling OpenDumping Composting Incineration Other-

Australia 80 - 10 5 5 Korea 60 20 5 5 10 Malaysia 30 50 10 5 5 China 30 50 10 2 8 India 15 60 10 5 10 Indonesia 10 60 15 2 13 Philippines* 10 75 10 - 5 Pakistan 5 80 5 - 10 Vietnam - 70 10 - 20 Sri Lanka - 85 5 - 10

Since7997, the amountof waste disposedof in landfiltsin the Philippineshas decreasedto about 2%. :.lncludes animal feeding, dumping in water, ploughing into soil, and open burning. Tableadapted from UN-ESCAP/ADB. Stateof the Environment,n Asia and the Pacific,2000 Source: Ministry of Environment,Singapore, Annual Report, 1997.

OPEN AND CONTROLLEDDUMPING Box 5: CompostingFacility of Barangay Uncontrolled open dumps have no environmental safe- Sun Valley, Parahaque City guards, pose major public health threats, and affect the landscape of a city. In contrast, controlled dumps have In 1997, the Barangay Council at Brgy. Sun Valley basic environmental amenities and place, compact, and in Paranaque City established a composting facil- cover waste in a controlled fashion. ity for biodegradable waste collected from 800 households of the area. As of 2000, a total of 2,500 Until recently, the Metro Manila region, except for households (50 percent) were participating. About Marikina and Malabon, which had its own disposal one ton of waste per day was being processed at the facility, resulting in a 35 percent reduction in site, disposed of its waste in the Payatas open dump, the amount of waste that has to be collected and and the Carmona and San Mateo landfills. With the disposed. closure of the two landfills, Metro Manila now dis- poses its garbage in open and controlled dumpsites in The Barangay invested around PhP500,000 to set Catmon, Malabon; RIO Vitas, Tondo; and Barangay up and operate the facility, which has two compost Lingonan, Valenzuela. reactors, a mixer, a shredder, and four pedicabs Lingonan, used for the collection of biodegradables. Aside from using lactobacilli activators, vermi-composting The Payatas dumpsite in Quezon City was partially is also practiced. reopened and only accepts waste generated in Quezon City (about 1,200 tons/day). There are also 12 small A less expensive scheme to compost the biodegrad- open dumpsites in Metro Manila. able waste from the poorer communities within the barangay was recently implemented. Processing of For the rest of the country, it was estimated in 1999 all the biodegradable waste is done in the that each of the 1,607 LGUs operates and maintains community'sbasketball court. The processed mate- its own temporary or permanent dumpsite. Of these, rials are placed in sacks and transported to the 226 open dumpsites have been identified by the Na- barangay center. tional Solid Waste Management Commission Harvested compost is sold at P5.00/kg or P120/ (NSWMC) as of July 2001. About 37 percent of 50kg bag. Vermicastis sold at P35/kg. To get the these have been inspected by the NSWMC for, most value from its compost, the barangay is now among other things, complaints by residents, re- finalizing an agreement with the municipality of quests for assistance by local chief executives, and Maragondon in Cavite to use their farmlands for environmental compliance with prescribed site re- growmg organic vegetables. quirements. According to Environmental Manage-

9 ment Bureau (EMB), 17 open dumps have been converted to controlled dumps (see Box 7). Table7: Statusof Dumpsitesin Metro Manila, 2001

SANITARYLANDFILLS Typeof Dumpsite Location Status Catmon,Malabon In operation

Environmental and social concerns caused the clo- Open Payatas, Closed July 10, 2000 sure of two landfills in Metro Manila... In recent dumpsite Quezon City but partly reopened years, Metro Manila has been continuously grappling in Feb.2001 with a garbage disposal crisis. The two landfills oper- R 10, Vitas, Tondo In operation ated by the MMDA-Carmona in Cavite Province and Controlled Brgy. Lingonan In operation San Mateo in Rizal Province were designed as sani- dumpsite Valenzuela tary landfills but not constructed or operated as ones. Sanitary San Mateo, Rizal Closed Dec. 2000 These are now closed. Collectively, the two landfills landfill Carmona, Cavite Closed Apr. 1998 accommodated between 40 and 50 percent of Metro Manila's daily garbage output. Since their closure, Table8: Wastedisposed at SanMateo and piles of uncollected garbage could be found through- Carmonalandfills (m 3 peryear) out Metro Manila, threatening the health and safety of Year SanMateo Carmona* residents. 1991 258,880 1992 344,562 - On the average, the San Mateo and Carnona landfills 1993 572,715 133,871 received daily 1,800 and 73010tons of solid waste, re- 1994 1,259,792 552,935 spectively.Both sites were closed due to environmental 1995 1,799,300 957,518 and social concerns'° such as foul odor and contamina- 1997 2,174,942 1,761,429 tion of adjoining ground water and surface water. 1998 2,965,007 293,631 1999 2,734,347 - Both sites contain over 23 million cubic meters of de- 2000 3,270,090 grading waste. Leachate from the two sites continues Note:CanrmonaMSaniaryLandfill closed in Apnl1998. to contaminate ground water. Recent studies" indicate that the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) quality of effluent from leachate treatment plants at both Box 6: Dangers of Controlled Dumps and sites exceeded permissible standards (San Mateo - Landfills: Leachate and Gas 10,000 mg/l; Carmona - 3,500 mg/,' 2 "3 ). This indicates that the treatment systems employed at both sites As water percolatesthrough the solid waste in landfills,it are not functioning properly. absorbs chemicalsand microorganismspresent in the pu- trefying materials. The uncontrolleddischarge of liquid formed in solid waste dumps or landfills, known as leachate, No restoration plans are in place for the two contaminatesground and surface waters, and thus, pose sites... Normally when sanitary landfills are closed environmentaland public health risksto the localarea. or capped, the facility owner is required to imple- Various gases are produced because organic matter in ment a post-closure program. This includes storm the landfill decomposes through the action of anaerobic water drainage, leachate treatment and monitoring, microorganisms-bacteria that flourishin the absence of and gas flaring or recovery and landscaping. Al- air. While some of these gases are relativelyharmless, though it is a regulatory requirement, such a pro- others, like methane,are highly flammable. The migration and emissionof these flammablegases should be con- trolledto prevent explosionsin the event of their build-up on or near the landfill. Methane, in particular, is com- "'A waste density of 250 kg/m3 has been assumed. monlyflared or combustedfor energy in order to reduce "Environmental Management Bureau, 1998. the risk of explosion and mitigate its effect as a green- "2Analysis of leachate quality in San Mateo 1999 and Carmona 1996-97. house gas. '3Monitoring data from EMB. Standards for effluents for Class C inland waterbodies is 50 mg/1. Source:Adapted Solid WasteManagement for LocalGovern- ments,DENR, 1996.

10 MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL

gram is not in place at either of the sites. While these sites had landfill gas vents, there were no gas Box7: Opento ControlledDump - recovery facilities. The poor construction and faulty PioneeringEfforts of San Fernando, operation of the sites resulted in a negative percep- La Union tion of sanitary landfills among the general public. Thecity of San Femando,La Union is locatedin RegionI This, combined with the NIMBY syndrome, has and hasa populationof 102,000. Itgenerates an average caused problems in the siting of landfills in the of 52 tonsof wasteper day of which45 percentis currently country, especially for Metro Manila, where the collected. Disposal was a big issue, particularly for city problem is particularly acute. council,which wantedto promotethe city as a viable in- vestmentarea in NorthernLuzon. The Cebu Landfill is facing operational difficul- Encouraged by a study tour on SolidWaste Management ties... The only active sanitary landfill in the coun- in the USA,the Mayor and city officials initiatedthe shiftof try which began operations in September 1998, is their city'swaste disposalsystem from open dumping to located in Cebu. It receives 400 tons daily and was controlleddumping, while preparing for a full-fledgedsani- designed to have a life of 6-7 years. Technical prob- tarylandfill. lems have closed down its materials recovery facil- To reduce the volume of waste to be disposed, collected ity deommcoeupnbtwaste undergoes secondary sorting at the disposalsite. This to mismatch of equipment between conlec- ity due recoveryof recyclableand re-usablematerials is under- takenby the barangay,providing them with additional rev- tion constrained recycling efforts and increased the enue. Atthe same time,the residentsin thecity were taught daily volume of waste disposed in the landfill. to segregate theirwastes at source. Thesite is managedin cellswhere the residualwaste is first Landfill gas is vented through a series of horizon- compacted and then coveredwith soil. To improvethe tal and vertical pipes. However, the leachate treat- aestheticsof the site, ylang ylang trees, known for its fra- ment pond serves only as an impounding basin, grantflowers, were planted all over. Bougainvilleatrees which discharges partially treated leachate to the and other omamental plants were also planted along the surrounding area, causing the adjacent communi- peripheryof the site. ties to complain. Unless immediate corrective ac- Thecontrolled dumpsite in San Fernandonow serves as a tion is taken, this landfill could be closed. modelfor other local govemments in the country. It has been visitedby over 9,000 representativesof nationaland local LANDFILL GAS COLLECTIONAND USE governments,NGOs, the private sector, and donor institutions. Itis livingproof that waste managementcan be imme- Landfills produce large quantities of greenhouse diately improvedif only there is political will to do so. gases... Landfill gas, a gas similar to natural gas, The constructionof the sanitary landfillwould be supported is produced during the decomposition of wastes in by a loan beingobtained from the LandBank of the Philip- landfills and dumps and typically contains 50 per- pinesthrough the WorldBank-assisted Local Government cent of the potent greenhouse gas methane. Meth- Financeand Development(LOGOFIND) Project. ane affects global warming 21 times more than carbon dioxide. Waste disposal sites are estimated to account for 12 percent (see table 9) of the methane released to the atmosphere in the Philippines. The methane produced by landfills can be effectively controlled by collecting and converting the gas to energy that can be sold profitably. Production of energy from landfill gas is a well-established prac- tice in North America and Europe. A limited number of facilities have also been established in other k . l countries. For example, in Mexico and Thailand, pilot demonstration projects are being implemented to encourage the development of similar projects - nationwide and regionwide.

11 -. ;S j iii -1 .1 i;

The Philippines can harness opportunities to con- vert landfill gas to energy... Collection and utili- Table9: MethaneEmissions in the zation of landfill gas presents an opportunity to: (i) Philippinesin 1990 supplement LGUs' revenues from solid wastes; (ii) control localized emissions, such as volatile organic Source Emissions(Gg) compounds (VOCs), found in landfill gas; (iii) minimize the risks from explosion that may arise from Agriculture 904 61 the build-up of methane and other flammable gases; Waste 3273 122 and (iv) reduce emissions of greenhouse gases as -wastewater 151 10 part of the Government's commitment to the Kyoto Energy 228 15 Protocol.Land Use and Forestry 18 1 Protocol. Total 1,474 100

During the next decade, wastes generated in Source:Asia Least-costGreenhouse Gas Abaternent Strategy, Philippines, ADB/GEF/ Metro Manila can generate 1,000 GWh of energy and power 8,500 homes... There are several options for the development of landfill gas facilities in the Philippines. For example, they could be de- Table10: PotentialBenefits of LandfillGas to Energy 14 veloped as part of new disposal sites. These would Projectsin DisposalSites in MetroManila. be most suitable in sanitary landfills in urban ar- SanMateo Carmona Payalas eas, where large quantities of waste may exist. For example, if landfill gas facilities are installed in all of the disposal sites that would be accepting waste Facility capacity (MW) 5.2 2.2 3.3 from Metro Manila, these facilities could collect No. of houses powered 3,874 1,639 2,459 approximately 500 million m3 of methane and pro- Rateof returnon duce 1,000 GWh of energy over the next 10 years. 14 investment (%) 20 19 17 This amount of energy is enough to power 8,500 homes. Similarly, over the same period of time, a Methane avoided smaller city like Cebu could capture 35 million m3 (millm 3 /yr.) 17.0 6.0 8.0 of methane and power 600 homes.15 As landfills Volatile Organic Compounds can produce gas for decades, landfill gas facilities (VOCs)emissions avoided could also be developed in closed disposal sites. (tons/yr.) 25.9 9.4 12.5 This is a particularly attractive option for the closed landfills at Carmona and San Mateo. Source: USEPA,7999.

Rehabilitation of San Mateo and Carmona landfills could benefit from on-site power generation... Based on recent estimates, the waste con- tained in the San Mateo and Carmona landfills is capable of producing enough power to supply 5,500 homes (see Table 10). The use of landfill gas for energy could supplement the costs of implementing urgently needed rehabilitation plans for both sites. If designed and managed well, revenues could

4 Calculated using the EPA E Plus landfill gas model with input parametersand electricity price asdescribed by USEPA1999. Assumption on electricity generation was taken from other feasibility studies of landfill gas projects. '5 bid

12 MUNICIPALSOLID WASTETREATMENT AND DISPOSAL

help mitigate current environmental problems, reduce future risks like explosions, and contribute to Box 8: Some InternationalExperiences the socio-economic uplift of communities through in LandfillGas Utilization the provision of electricity. UnitedStates: The landfill gas industryin the US A national strategy for landfill gas manage- is the largest in the world. It grew rapidly from ment... To investigate the potential of landfill gas 86 operational projectsin 1990 to 330 today. utilization, the Government should formulate an With a combined capacity of 900 MW, approxi- appropriate national strategy. Such a framework mately two-thirdsof those projects use landfill gas could consider approaches for: (i) incorporating for electricitygeneration. Many of the remaining landfill gas management in the planning, design, projects use the gas for a wide varietyof purposes and construction of future landfill sites, the opera- including commercial fuel (high and medium BTU tion of existing landfills, and the rehabilitation of and liquefied natural gas), leachate evaporation, closed landfills; (ii) introducing landfill gas man- boilers, and greenhouses. agement in the process of converting open dumps Chile: Chile currently has four facilities that col- to sanitary landfills; (iv) targeting the most suitable lect landfill gas and feed it into a gas distribution disposal sites and technological options consider- network for its direct use as gas fuel. In Santiago, ing the quality of operation and condition of the landfill gas is able to satisfy 40 percent of the de- landfill, gas generation potential, and financial vi- mand of the city's gas distribution network, and is ability of different technological options; (v) deter- also sent to a nearby food processing plant for mining the most viable institutional arrangements, use as a fuel source for the plant's boilers. In the including public-private partnerships; (iv) minimiz- city of Valparaiso, the landfill gas is mixed with ing the legislative and regulatory barriers; and (iv) manufactured gas for use by households and in- obtaining financing via the private sector or using dustry. climate change institutional mechanisms such as grantstheGlobal from Environmntal Facility i Mexico: Although open dumping is still preva- grants fo thGlblEvomnlent,Mexico's solid waste sector and the technolo- the short term and credits from the global carbon gies used have gradually grown in sophistication trade envisioned under the Kyoto Protocol in the in the last 1 5 years resulting in increased collec- long term. tion efficiency and a larger proportion of waste disposed in sanitary landfills. However,there are currently no landfill gas facilities in Mexico. To encourage the development of these facilities, the Government of Mexico is undertaking a project with the assistance of The World Bank and the Global EnvironmentFacility. The project will de- -. ,*^ J.>. X ; velop a demonstration site in Monterrey and dis- seminate the results to encourage its replication. National and local capacity will also be developed along with a national strategy and regulatory framework.

A t Sources:- t . US: Introduction to Landfill Gas Use and the US Landfill - .,>y -':/~iv *< - | 6 $ 0 GasIndustry, USEPA- LMOP June 25, 2001. .~ z ., , n | | | *: 1Chile: Bartone and Ahmed, Landfill Gas and Composting Strategyfor LCR,World Bank, 2001. Biogas Recovery from Sanitary LandFillSites in Santiago, Chile: A Case Study, Julio Monreal, September 1998 and personal communication with Francisco Zapeda.

13 HAZARDOUSWASTES Chart 2: HazardousWaste Generation, Hazardous wastes are wastes which, by themselves or by Type after coming into contact with other wastes, have char- Oil acteristics, such as chemical reactivity, toxicity, cor- 8% Other rosiveness or a tendency to explode, that pose a risk to Putrescible/ 27% human health or the environment. organic wastes 11% Acid Waste Hazardous wastes are generated from a wide range of 10% industrial, commercial, agricultural, and to a much less extent, domestic activities. They may take the form of Inorganic solids, liquids or sludges, and can pose both acute and chemical public health and environmental risks. wastes Alkali chronic 24% Wastes 20% GENERATION Source:The Study of SWM for MetroManila, FinalReport, JICA/MMDA, March 1999. There are several thousand potential hazardous waste- generating industries nationwide, which in total, produce an estimated 2.4 million metric tons of hazardous waste per year.'6

So far, only 1,079 of these hazardous waste generators are registered with the EMB.20 These industries produce 278,393 tons of hazardous waste per year. The major waste classes include inorganic chemical wastes, 7 alkali wastes, putrescibles, acid wastes, and oils. 1

Thirty-four percent of the estimated hazardous waste production is in the National Capital Region (NCR), while 27 percent is in Region IV

MEDICALWASTES RECYCLING The 18,500 hospitals (with 90,000 beds) in the country generate about 6,750 tons of infectious wastes an- About 25 percent of the total registered hazardouswaste nually or 18 tons daily.'8 Forty-seven percent of this generated is recycled. 56 percent of the recycledwastes waste is generated in the NCR, while Region IV ac- are oils and 49 percent are inorganic chemicals. counts for 12 percent. TREATMENTAND DISPOSAL

There are currently 28 hazardous waste treatment facilities registered with DENR-EMB nationwide, 21 of which are operating full-time. '6lhe Study on Hazardous Waste Management in the Republic of the Philippines, JICA, June 2001. About half of the registered hazardous waste gener- "7[bid 5Team computation, 2001. ated each year (or approximately 140,000 tons/year),

,14 HAZARDOUSWASTE GENERATION,RECYCLING, TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL

is treated off-site, and 3,600 tons or 2.5 percent of that Box 9: Cebu Common is recycled. Treatment Facility, Inc. Five thousand tons of the waste treated on-site is re- Locatedinside the lnayawan SanitaryLandfill, this portedly incinerated. There is, however, a need to 2,781-square meter common treatment facility for toxic change this treatment process given the provisions of and hazardouswaste from Cebu-basedelectroplating the Clean AirAct of 1999. By November 2003, incin- industriesis thefirst in the countryand secondin Asia. erators will be prohibited. Non-bum technologies are It is co-ownedand managedby the CebuChamber of thus being studied for the disposal of hazardous wastes Commerceand Industryand the CebuElectroplaters from hospital and industrial sources. Association.

Thewaste water from the electroplatingplant is col- There are currently no landfill facilities for hazardous lectedand thentransported to the treatmentplant. Af- waste in the Philippines. As a result, hazardous waste ter neutralizationand precipitation,the resulting sludge sources store their wastes, or dispose of them partially is storedfor recyclingand mineralrecovery. Funded treated or untreated. Approximately 50,000 tons or 36 under a bilateralagreement between the Philippines percent of all hazardous waste treated off-site, is stored (throughthe DENR)and the FederalRepublic of Ger- on-site or off-site due to the lack of proper treatment many (throughthe GermanAgency for TechnicalCo- and landfill facilities. operation-GTZ),commercial operations started in Oc- tober 1999 withthe treatment of wastewaterfrom seven Hazardous Waste. There are 13 industrial waste firms. incinerators in the country: 7 in Region IV, 5 in Metro Manila, and 1 in Cebu. Plans for the construction of a centralized disposal facility for haz- Box 10: Govemment and ardous waste to service the Cavite, Laguna, IndustryPartnership Batangas, Rizal, and Quezon (CALABARZON) areas are also being discussed. TheIndustrial Waste Exchange Program (IWEP) of the PhilippineBusiness for the Environmentmatches the dif- Medical Waste. There are currently 43 operational ferent waste-producingindustries with recyclingand hospital incinerators in the country. Of this num- wastetreating companies.This leads to considerable ber, 22 are located in Metro Manila. Fifty percent savingsfor bothparties involved in theexchange. More of the medical waste generated is incinerated, while than 1,200 industrialwaste producers are in theirdata- the rest is disposed of improperly. At present, base.Successful exchanges have been brokered for vari- MMDA is finalizing the establishment of a central- ouswastes such as scrap fabric, silica gel, used coolant, ized hospital waste treatment facility to service used oil, used drums,used paper,used plasticsacks, Metro Manila. glasscutlets, solder waste, mold runner plastic, and saw- dust. Manyother exchanges have been negotiated di- Technology solutions and policy direction are ur- rectlybetween industries. It hasrecently launched a na- Tenoly soluti onsa policy irc tion tionwidewaste exchange network creating mini-indus- gently n eededin wresose ther inc ne ion trial waste exchangecenters in Cebu, Laguna,and ban.. For the past few years, there has been in- Cagayande Oro. tense debate in the Philippines over the use of incinerators in waste management, leading to a pro- Source:Philippine Business for the Environment,2001. hibition on their use imposed by the Clean Air Act. The provision of the Act is to take effect in Novem- ber 2003.

15 StI. :e l la g l m-

Box 11: Treatmentand DisposalOptions for InfectiousMedical Waste

Incineration:Combusts the waste under controlled con- its ineffectivenessin treating special medical waste such ditions. To be effective and safe, it must be operated at as tissuesand body parts. The capital costsrange from specific temperatures and under specific conditions. Ad- US$120,000-200,000 for each ton/day of capacity. vantages include its ability to eliminate the health risks associated with all types of hazardous medical wastes, Chemical disinfection: The waste is shredded and and reduce the volume of the waste. Its disadvantages chemicalsare added to waste to kill or inactivate patho- include high costs, sophisticated operation and produc- gens. The output has to be disposed of using tech- tion of air pollution, including dioxins, that become more niques such as safe landfilling. The advantage of this severe if properly operated at an insufficient tempera- process is the reduction of waste volume resulting from ture. The capital costs of such facility range from shredding. However, chemical disinfection requires a US$120,000- 200,000 for each ton/day of capacity. skilled operator,is costly, does not treat wastes such as tissues and body parts, and produces a toxic waste Autoclaving: Steam heats the waste in an enclosed con- stream. tainer at high pressure. The output is non-hazardous material that can normally be landfilled with municipal Safelandrilling: The waste is placed in a pit excavatedin waste. The main advantages are the ease and familiar- maturemunicipal waste or in a special area constructedin ity of its operation. Its disadvantages include the high the landfill and coveredimmediately with soil or fresh mu- cost of operation, production of air emissionsand waste- nicipal waste. For added health protection and odor sup- water, and its inability to treat special medical waste such pression, lime can be spread over the waste. The area as tissues and body parts. The capital costs range from shouldalso be fenced off to preventaccess by waste pick- US$40,000-i 25,000 for each ton/day of capacity. ers or scavenginganimals. The capital costsare low as it usesan existingmunicipal landfill. Theadvantages of these Microwave and radiowave irradiation: Waste is disin- methodsare their simplicity and low-cost. Theseare the fected using a high energy electromagnetic field that next bestoption to incineration for the treatmentof body causes high frequency oscillation of the liquid portions parts and tissues. However,the waste remains infectious, of the cell material. The output is considered non-haz- and therefore,can be very dangerous if not managed ex- ardous and can be disposed in a landfill with municipal tremelycarefully. waste. Its main advantages are the reduction in volume achieved and its minimal production of toxic pollutants. Source:AdaptedfromJohannessen,etal., HealthcareWaste Man- Its disadvantages include cost and sophistication, and a9ement Guidance Note, The World Bank, 2000.

Incineration is not an effective option to dispose fectious medical waste such as syringes, body parts of municipal solid waste in the Philippines because and tissues, and treat certain classes of hazardous of the unsuitable technical characteristics of the waste such as insecticides, pesticides, waste solvents, waste (high moisture and organic content and low types of hydraulic fluids and some oily sludges. The calorific value), high construction and operating broad-based ban on incineration will influence the costs, and attendant environmental risk due to weak way that infectious medical and hazardous wastes monitoring and enforcement. However, many are disposed, and may well present risks to health countries, including the Philippines, use incinera- and the environment if it encourages unsafe and un- tors as an option to completely destroy certain in- regulated treatment and disposal practices.

16 HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATION, RECYCLING, TREATMENTAND DISPOSAL

At the same time, allowing unregulated operation could be used to treat infectious medical wastes at of incinerators in the Philippines for infectious prices equivalent or slightly higher than incinera- medical and hazardous wastes is potentially dan- tion, but not all waste streams could be effectively gerous. The country currently has limited capacity treated. Similarly, cleaner production and chemi- to operate incinerators and monitor their emissions. cal precipitation have been used to reduce the gen- Without proper operation there is a danger that they eration of hazardous waste in manufacturing pro- could not only ineffectively treat the waste but processes. Assuming viable treatment technologies are duce significant quantities of pollutants such as di- identified soon, then it will have to be ensured that oxins. such facilities are properly operated and environmentally sound. Effective implementation of the law will require a concerted effort that focuses exclusively on the Alternatively, in the event that the incineration ban practicalities of establishing safe and effective dis- is stayed or delayed for infectious medical and haz- posal practices in the short and long term. If the ardous wastes, the government should ensure that ban is fully implemented, then there will need to be the incinerators are operated as designed and regu- a shift to alternative technologies (see Box 11). lated closely by DENR, and their performance dis- Some could take years and some technologies could closed to the public. This would require substan- potentially have a lower order of treatment effec- tial capacity building of DENR's monitoring and tiveness. The choice of technology is dependent on oversight capability. Also, existing incineration environmental and safety considerations and com- capacity should be optimized to encourage the use mercial viability. Experience from Latin America of shared facilities in order to minimize operational suggests that microwaving or autoclaving options and environmental risks.

.%.~~~V "''- ~ j ~ ~ ~ Wo

- 17v. 17t & 1-ii i S S i I - I

LEGISLATION

The Philippine Constitution (Article II Section 16) stipulates that "the state shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature." From the first anti- dumping law in 1938 to the most recent ESWMA, every piece of enacted legislation has emphasized proper collection and safe disposal of household garbage and industrialand hospital wastes.A summary of the differentpieces of legislation and their salient features follow. It is obvious that actions on the ground have not kept pace with policy and legal pro- nouncements, and every effort should be made to ensure that the ESWMA succeeds where previous legislation failed. Salient features of the ESWMA are also summarized.

Box12: Summaryof SWMLegislation CommonwealthAct No. 383 - Anti-DumpingLaw (1938) Prohibitsdumping of refuse, waste matteror other substancesinto rivers. Punishmentis imprisonmentof not more than six months and/or a fine of not more than P200. RepublicAct 4226, HospitalLicensing Law (1965) Providesguidelines to protectand promote public health by ensuringquality hospitalservices appropriate to its level of health care. GeneralOrder No. 13 (1972) Orders all residentsto undertake the cleaning of their surroundings and prohibits anyone from throwing garbage in public places. All lot owners must maintain the cleanlinessof idle lots. If they are unable to do so, the Governmentwill undertake the same at the owner's expense. PresidentialDecree No. 825, GarbageDisposal Law (1975) Providespenalties for improper disposal of garbage and other forms of uncleanliness.Penalties include imprisonment for between five days and one year and/or fines between P100 and P2000. PresidentialDecree No. 856, SanitationCode (1975) Requirescities and municipalitiesto provide an adequate and efficientsystem for collection,transportation, and disposalof refuse in their areas of jurisdiction in a manner approved by the local health authority, PresidentialDecree No. 600; as amendedby PD 979, MarinePollution Control Decree of 1976 (1976) Preventsand controls the pollution of the seasby prohibiting dumping of waste and other matter,which createshazards to human health or harms living resourcesand marine life. PresidentialDecree No. 984, Rulesand Regulationsof the NationalPollution Control Law Providesguidelines for the prevention and control of pollution from solid, toxic, and hazardous wastes. PresidentialDecree No. 1151,the PhilippineEnvironmental Policy (1978) Recognizesthe right of the people to a healthy environment,and the duty of everyone to contribute to the preservation and enhancementof the environment. Section 4 requires the preparation of Environmental Impact Statementsfor any project or undertaking that may significantly affect the environment. PresidentialDecree No. 1152, PhilippineEnvironmental Code (1978) Requiresthe preparation and implementationof waste managementprograrns by all provinces,cities, and municipalities. (OP)Executive Order No. 432 (1990) Orders the strict implementationof PD825 by all law enforcementagencies and officers. Enjoinsthe Metro Manila Development Authority to do so for Metro Manila. LocalGovernment Code RA 7160 (1991) MandatesLGUs to exercisepowers and discharge functionsand responsibilitiesas necessaryor appropriate and incidentalto the efficient and effective provision of servicesand facilities related to general hygiene and sanitation, beautification, and solid waste collectionand disposalsystems. RepublicAct 6969- ToxicSubstances and Hazardousand NuclearWaste Control Act of 1990,and its ImplementingRules and Regulations (DAO 29) (1992) Regulatesthe importation, use,movement, treatment and disposal of toxic chemicalsand hazardous and nuclear waste in the Philippines. DepartmentAdministrative Order (DAO)No. 98-49and 98-50 Providestechnical guidelines for municipal solid waste disposal, and adoptsthe landfill site identification and screeningcriteria for municipal solid waste disposal facilities. RepublicAct 8749 - TheClean Air Act of 1999 Providesa comprehensiveair pollution managementand control program to achieve and maintain healthyair. Section20 bans incinerationof municipal,bio-medical, and hazardouswastes but allowsthe traditional methodof small-scalecommunity burning. RepublicAct 9003 - EcologicalSolid Waste Management Act of 2000 Declaresthe adoption of a systematic,comprehensive, and ecologicalsolid waste managementprogram as a policy of the State. Adopts a community-basedapproach. Mandates waste diversionthrough compostingand recycling.

18 LEGISLATION,INSTITUTIONS AND BUDGETS

Box 13: Key Featuresof the EcologicalSolid Waste Management Act of 2000 (ESWMA)

RA 9003- TheEcological Solid Waste ManagementAct of 2000 was passedby Congressin December2000 and signed into law by the Presidentof the Philippineson January26, 2001 with the aim of adopting a systematic,comprehensive, and ecological solid waste managementprogram. The ImplementatingRules and Regulationsare currently being finalized.

• Institutional Arrangements: The Act provides for the establishmentof a National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC) to overseethe implementationof solid waste managementplans, and prescribepolicies to achievethe objectivesof the Act. Thecommission will be headed by DENRand composedof representativesfrom the following agencies: Department of Scienceand Technology(DOST), Departmentof Health (DOH), Departmentof Agriculture (DA), TechnicalEducation and Skill DevelopmentAuthority (TESDA),Department of Interior and Local Govemment(DILG), Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), Departmentof Trade and Industry (DTI),Metro Manila DevelopmentAuthority (MMDA), PhilippineInfor- mation Agency (PIA), Leagueof Provincial Governors, Leagueof City Mayors, Associationof Barangay Councils,and one representativeeach from NGOs, recycling, and packaging or manufacturingindustries. A similar multi-sectoral SWM Board will also be created in each Provinceand LocalGovernment Unit (LGU). LGUswill be primarily responsiblefor the implementation and enforcementof the Act within their respectivejurisdictions.Similarly, segregation and collectionof biodegradable, compostable, and re-usable solid wastes should be conducted at the barangay level, and the collection of non-recyclable materials and handling of specialwastes will be the responsibilityof the municipality or city. * Strategic PlanningFramework: A National Solid Waste ManagementStatus Reportfeaturing an inventory of existing solid waste facilities, waste characterization, waste generation projections, and other pertinent information should be regularly updated and published.Based on such report, a National Solid Waste ManagementFramework, which will include medium and long-term plans, should be formulated and implemented. The Act also requires each province, city or municipality to prepare ten year plans, which should include the re-use, recycling, and compostingof wastes generated in their respective jurisdiction, using the National Framework as their guide.

* Re-use:The Act requires all LGUsto divert at least 25 percentof all solid wastesfrom wastedisposal facilitiesthrough re-use, recycling, composting, and other resourcerecovery activitieswithin five yearsfrom the effectivityof the Act, Similarly, segregation of solid wastesat sourceis made mandatory. * Recycling: The Act mandatesthe Departmentof Tradeand Industryto prepare an inventory of existing marketsfor recyclable materials and compost. The Act also stipulatesthat procedure, standards, incentivesand strategiesshould be specified to develop local market for recyclablematerials and compost. The Act also placesrestriction on the useof environmentallynon- acceptable packaging material. * Sanitary Landfillsand Controlled Dumps: The Act prohibits new open dumps for disposal. Existingopen dumpsiteswill need to be converted into controlled dumpsiteswithin three years, and replaced with sanitary landfills in a span of five years after the Act has becomeeffective. The Act providesguidelines for the establishmentof sanitary landfills. * Participation: To encourage popular participation, the Act also allows Citizen Suits, where anyone can file a civil, criminal, and administrativeaction against any person,government agency or official who violates or fails to comply with the law.

* Fees:The Act specifiesthat fees should be levied on all waste generatorsfor SWM services. Finesand penaltiesfor any violation of the law were also set. All revenuesfrom the implementationof the law shall accrueto a SWM Fund (both national and local) earmarkedto support researchand development,provide awardsand incentives,provide technicalassistance, and conduct information, education,communication, and monitoring activities. * Incentives: The Act catalogues the incentivesthat are to be offered to LGUs, enterprises,private entities, and NGOs to encourage their active participation. These include: tax and duty exemptions,tax credit on domesticcapital equipment, provision of grants to LGUsto build their technical capabilities and incentivesto communitieshosting sharedtreatment and disposal facilities. * Appropriations: For the initial operating expensesof the NSWMC, National EcologyCenter, and the LGUs,the Act appropri- ates PhP20million for 2001. Thereafter,the expenseswill be financed through the regular budget. For 2002, PhP10million has been appropriated to support the NSWMC.

19 - I I S i0 I * 3

INSTITUTIONALARRANGEMENTS

Over the years, successive laws and issuances mandated different agencies to manage solid and hazardous wastes. This has resulted in overlapping responsibilities. The Local Government Code of 1991 re-affirmed the primary responsibility of local governments to plan and implement solid waste management programs within their locality. The ESWMA reinforces this responsibility and defines the national oversight mandate of the National Solid Waste Management Commission. The new structure and the responsibilities of the different agencies are explained below:

Chart 3: InstitutionalArrangements Mandated by the ESWMA

Office of the President

National Sold Waste Management Commission

* Chairedby the Secretary,DENR * Outlinespolicies * PreparesNational SWM Framework * Overseesimplementation of the ESWMAct * ApprovesSWM Plansof local governments * PreparesNational SWM StatusReport

NationalEcology Center Secretariat of the NSWM * Chairedby Director,EMB * Locatedat EMB * Providestechnical support to LGUs * Headedby an ExecutiveDirector * Establishesand managesSWM database * Responsiblefor day-to-daymanagement

ProvincialSolid Waste Management Boards * Reviewand integratecity and municipalSWM plans into the SWM plan the * Coordinateefforts of componentcities and municipalitiesimplementing ESWMA * Encouragethe clusteringby LGUswith commonproblems

City/MunicipalSolid WasteManagement Boards * Prepare,submit and implementlocal 10 year SWM plans * Reviewplan every2 years * Adoptrevenue generating measures to promotesupport * Providenecessary logistical and operationalsupport * Coordinateefforts of its componentbarangays * Managethe collectionand disposalof residualand specialwastes * Encouragesetting up of Multi-purposeEnvironmental Cooperatives I Barangays * Handlethe 100%collection of biodegradableand reusablewastes * EstablishMaterial Recovery Facility * Conductinformation and educationcampaigns

20 LEGISLATION,INSTITUTIONS AND BUDGETS

Department of Environment and Natural Resources Local Government Units (LGUs). Responsible for (DENR). Sets standards, criteria, and guidelines for preparation and implementation of local SWM plans all aspects of solid waste management. Performs regu- together with other stakeholders within their area. latory as well as monitoring and enforcement func- Principally responsible for proper waste manage- tions with regard to air emissions and effluent of solid ment - ensuring segregation at source, composting, waste management systems. Chairs the National Solid recycling, setting up of material recovery facilities, Waste Management Commission, which sets the over- efficient collection, and environmentally sound dis- all policy, prepares the national framework, and ap- posal. proves local action plans. Department of Health (DOH). Regulates the stor- Environmental Management Bureau (EMB). Chairs age of refuse in food establishments with respect to the National Ecology Center composed of multi- construction, maintenance, and placement of stor- sectoral and multi-disciplinary experts tasked to fa- age containers within their establishments. Provides cilitate training and education on the ESWMA. Estab- guidelines for proper management and disposal of lishes and manages an information database. Provides hospital wastes, and other infectious wastes. secretariat support to the Commission. EMB is a line agency of DENR. Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). For- mulates and implements a coding system for packaging materials and products to facilitate recycling Box 14: City DevelopmentStrategy (CDS) - and re-use. Publishes study on existing markets for a promisingapproach to mainstreamsolid recyclables and recommends steps to expand these waste management markets.

The CDS aims to assistcity govemments and their stake- Department of Agriculture (DA). Publishes an in- holders in formulating a commonvision for their future, ventory of markets and demands for compost. Assists identifying strategiesto attainthis vision and priority pro- compost producers to ensure compost produced con- gramsand projects,and facilitating resource mobilization form to standards. to finance the implementationof these programs and projects. Guided by the principles of livability,competi- tiveness,bankability and good governance,the CDS fol- Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA). lows a participatory process,which involvesall the stake- Enforces pollution laws in Laguna de Bay region in- holders in the entire planning and decisionmaking pro- cluding illegal dumping of garbage. cess. In so doing, it developsa consensusbuilding process within the city and buildsthe city's capacityfor more Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA). effectiveurban governance. Coordinates collection, transport, and disposal of solid Based on the experience of the first seven pilot cities wastes in Metro Manila. Responsible for daily opera- in the Philippines, solid waste was identified by the tion of its transfer stations, composting facilities, and various sectors as one of their priority issues.Having landfills. gone through the process together, it was easier to agreeon what needsto be done. Theissue of NIMBY Joint CongressionalOversight Committee. Moni- was thus addressed. In the case of San Fernando, La Union, the CDS process facilitated the acquisitionof tors the implementation of the ESWM and oversees an additional lot for sanitary landfill. It also paved the functions of the Commission. the way for the people's acceptance of the city's integrated SWM program. Philippine Coast Guard (PCG). Responsible for pre-

With the upscaling of the CDS in the Philippines(with 30 venting ocean dumping of solid wastes. additional cities participating), it is expectedthat a more comprehensivesolution to the issueof solid waste man- Private Sector. Serves as the Vice-Chair of the agementwill be developedand implemented. NSWMC, and plays a major role in the provision of collection, treatment and disposal services. Source: Philippines CDS ProjectTeam

21 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~S - I

BUDGET AND EXPENDITURE Table11: MMDA SWM Expenditures Cities in both developing and industrialized countries (in million pesos) generally do not spend more than 0.5 percent of their Year Actualexpenditures per capita gross national product on urban waste services. This does not include costs directly paid by busi- 1994 73.4 normal municipal 1995 136.5 nesses and residents, beyond the 1996 303.7 taxes and fees." 1997 405.9 1998 296.9 Expenditures in solid waste management also serve as 2000 24324. a reliable proxy to service levels for collection and disposal. However, in the Philippines, most LGUs do Source: PMO-MMOA not correctly or fully account for their solid waste costs. Note:'budget allocation No national data is available making it difficult to estimate the current share of solid waste expenditures in the national accounts. Table12: City BudgetsAllocated for

The budget for solid waste management as a percent- Per capita % of age of total LGU budget varies greatly. Data from allocation Total2001 some cities outside the NCR indicates that in 2001, it City (Pesos) Budget ranges from 1.2 percent to 11.7 percent. Current data Dagupan 87.17 4.1 Manila show Marikina at Antipolo 148.66 11.6 for three cities within Metro Ililo 12.50 7 10.8 percent, Muntinlupa at 9.8 percent, and Valenzuela Tagaytay 151.51 1.2 at 3.9 percent. The per capita allocation varies be- Island Garden City of Samal 85.39 3.4 than a dollar (Iloilo and Roxas) to nearly Dipolog 60.69 2.1 tween less San Fernando, La Union 162.97 7.0 US$5 (Muntinlupa). Generally, a substantial portion Marikina 192.55 10.8 of the budget for solid waste management is allocated Valenzuela 76.84 3.9 Muntinlupa 250.45 9.8 for collection and transport. Only a small portion is Roxas 23.21 1.4 provided for the management of the disposal site. Source:Report from, eachcity, August 2001. MMDA's solid waste management budget is primarily for disposal, since collection is the mandate of LGUs. The 1997 Asian economic crisis led to a re- Tablery mmonly Usedwide duction in MMDA's expenditures on solid waste man- Reo srMeasue W agement. However, by 2000, expenditures increased, (also seeTable 5) amounting to PhP424 million, more than five times Type Description the 1994 levels. User Fees Direct: Paid by waste generators according to levelof serviceprovided User fees are not widely used by LGUs. Those levy- Indirect: Regardlessof serviceslevel, ing such fees are able to cover part of the operation generators pay a flat fee. and maintenance costs. None, however, are using the Surcharge Incrementalfee leviedon property tax fees as a means for financing capital investments. or water or electricitytariffs. Thisdoes not take into accountservice levels.

Tipping Fees Fee collected by landfill operator from waste hauler or local government. MMDA levies between PhP150-430 as tipping fee depending on the truck size. "'What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in Asia - World Bank (1999).

22 THE TEN CHALLENGES...

With the passage of RA 9003: Ecological Solid WasteManagement Act of 2000 (ESWMA), the Philippines now has a comprehensive and integrated solid waste managementpolicy and legal framework. The implementingrules and regulations are currently being finalized. The next step for the Philippines is to implement the law and ensure its sustainable impact. In doing so, the following challenges need to be addressed:

Table 14: ESWMAGoals Action Goal Status Generation and Collection * Listingof non-environmentallyacceptable productswithin one year of Unknown effectivity of the law with phase out period to be set by Commission * Segregationof waste in all householdsupon effectivity of the law

Recycling and Composting * At least 25 percentof waste recycled and recoveredwithin five years of 12 percent in Metro effectivity of the law Manila; * Inventory of marketsfor recyclablesand compostwithin 6 monthsof 6 percent nationally effectivity of the law (estimate) Disposal * All open dumps convertedto controlled dumpswithin three years of 17 controlled dumps effectivity of the law 2 closedlandfills * All controlled dumps convertedto sanitary landfills within five years 1 sanitary landfill

Medical Waste Disposal * Non-burn technologiesfor treatmentand disposal (CleanAir Act) by 2003 43 incinerators National SWM Status Report * Within six monthsof effectivity Incompletereport * To be updated every two years

i Strengtheningenforcement and providing better Building the capacity of national and local in- incentives... The Philippines has a poor record of en- stitutions... The implementatingrules and regulations forcing environmentallegislation due to lack of political will detail the institutional roles and responsibilities will, institutionalcapacity and incentives. It is impor- of different organizations. However, the primary re- tant the politicalintent that was demonstratedwhen fram- sponsibility for implementing the ESWMA lies with ing the ESWMA should be continued through its imple- local governments, which include 77 provinces, 114 mentation by fully enforcing the different provisions of cities, 1,495 municipalities,and over 42,000 barangays. the Act. Otherwise, the intent of the Act will be compro- Strateg-icPlanning. As required by the ESWMA, mised and the achievement of the above goals will re- over the next few years, strategic plans at the na- main a distant dream, further exacerbating the current tional, provincial, LGU, and barangay levels need situation. At present, incentives for effective delivery of to be prepared. This will require the strengthen- SWM services are limitedto recognitionprograms, such ing of technical capacity in the country to prepare as the Clean and Green and the Galing Pook25 Awards. such plans and guide their implementation. Additional incentives shouldbe put into place including: * National Government. The National Ecology Cen- (i) provision of financial incentives for capital invest- ter and the Secretariat of the National Solid Waste ment (e.g. matching grants); (ii) imposition of user fees Management Commission will need to be and tipping fees to encourage waste reduction and in- strengthened to provide advisory and extension crease accountabilityof service delivery; and (iii) intro- services to LGUs and barangays. Their capacity duction of product standards for composting and grant- for obtaining, maintaining, and analyzing data on ing incentives to encourage market development.In ad- solid waste in the country should also be enhanced. dition, the ESWMA also stipulates the granting of cer- * Local Governments. LGUs will need to upgrade tain concessions and tax exemptions for improving solid their technical and managerial capacity to expand waste managementpractices. their role beyond the current responsibility of mainly household collection. Also, LGUs need to

2eThe Galing Pook Award, was first given in 1993, which recognizes and put in place financial systems to fully account for replicates exemplary programs of LGUs that have effectively addressed solid waste management expenditures, which will pressingproblems in theirareas. enable them to benchmark service efficiency and

23 fulfill contractual obligations in a transparent next five years (Chart 3). The average annual costs of 21 manner. implementing the law amount to 0.5 percent of the Barangays. Communities need to be made aware 2000 gross domestic product (GDP). If this would be of the benefits of proper waste disposal, as well funded solely by the Government, it would require the as their responsibilities in waste avoidance, seg- programmed public expenditure in the national bud- regation, collection, recycling, and composting. get to increase annually by 3 percent from its current level, and the local government programmed expen- 3 Addressing the NIMBY syndrome... This per- diture to increase by at least 15 percent. It is therefore spective is creating a major barrier to the siting of re- important for the Government to increase the budget gional or local landfills and materials recovery facili- for solid waste management and to supplement that ties. Public awareness and support for solid waste man- funding by encouraging the involvement of the pri- agement facilities can be encouraged through better vate sector through the establishment of a functional consultation and more widespread implementation of regulatory system, ensuring financial transparency in programs, such as the current information, education, the sector, and introducing user fees. and communication campaigns. Additionally, the establishment and promotion of landfills or demonstra- ( Mainstreaming the utilization of new funding tion landfills that are properly managed from an envi- sources and employing cost-effective approaches... ronmental and social point of view will give the public greater confidence that landfills can be safely con- National Govcrnment Cost Sharing. The Philip- structed and operated in their locality. pine Government will need to revisit its current 22 I] policy of not providing any cost-sharing grants Ž Raising public awareness on the benefits of to LGUs to address pollution-related or "brown" proper SWM... The success of the ESWMA largely environmental issues such as solid waste. There depends on the support of the people. Solid waste is are environmental externalities associated with often perceived as a purely government function, while waste disposal and treatment, which go beyond a public consultation on landfill siting and solid waste local government's jurisdiction. These often as- management programs is often lacking. This discour- sume a regional or national dimension, and there- ages citizens from playing their role in SWM, such as fore, LGUs need assistance. In many countries, participating in recycling programs. national governments offer various incentives and /< Increasing expenditures on SWM... The LGUsubsidies to local authorities to invest in proper bD Increasing expenditures on SWM..n The LGU waste disposal facilities. These take the form of budgets for solid waste management have been typi matching grants provided by the national govern- cally limited to household collection, transportation ments for capital investments only. Local gov- to open dumpsites, and minimal operational expendi- ernments usually assume responsibility for opera- tures for disposal. The ESWMA requires additional tion and maintenance costs through their own financing for: building capacity to implement the new budgets or user fees. institutional arrangements; conversion to and opera- * Private Sector Participation. The encouragement tion of controlled dumps and sanitary landfills; shift of private sector participation can provide invest- to environmentally-friendlypackaging; recycling pro- ment to supplement or replace government fund- grams; materials recovery facilities; and infectious 2 medicaland hazardouswaste non-burn treatment and 'Source: National Income Accounts, DBM disposal technologies. Preliminary estimates (exclud- GDP 3170 Billion PhP ing investments by businesses) indicate that additional For Information on programmed public expenditure in National to Philippines-at-a-Glance section. spending l 2Budget2 refer on solid waste management will have to in- The Investment Coordinating Committee (ICC) of the Nationl Economic crease by PhP150 billion (Table15) over the next ten and DevelopmentAuthority (NEDA) has adopted a policy of cost sharing years, or additionalper capitacost of PhP200per year. between the national govemment and local govemments for projects that between PhP 12 and have social and environmental benefits. While this is being implemented Currently, LGUs annually spend for green projects (forest management, protected areas, and wildlife) and 250 per capita. Much of the incremental expenditure blue environment (coastal and marine resources), there is no cost sharing will be dedicated to infrastructure investments in the for capital investments in the brown environment (urban issues).

24 THE TEN CHALLENGES...

Table15: EstimatedIncremental Costs for Implementing the ESWMA between2002 and 2011 (in real terms)'

Item Cost(PhP billion)

Institutionaland RegulatoryArrangements for Planning,Monitoring, Enforcement, and Evaluation' 20

InvestmentsRequired to ImproveWaste Collectionand Recycling 58 3 * EnhancedCollection for Complete Coverage 5 4 * Waste Separation at Household(4 bins) and collection 13 5 * Collection Vehiclesand Haulage Trucks 30 * Material RecoveryFacility' 10

InvestmentsRequired for Treatmentand Disposal 72 7 * Shift to Controlled Dumps- Construction,Operation, and Maintenance 4 * Shift to Sanitary Landfills- Construction,Operation, and Maintenance7 67 8 * Non-burn Technologiesfor InfectiousMedical Waste Treatment 1 Total 150

hazardous waste. This excludesinvestments that need to be made by the private sectorto shift to environmentally-friendlypackaging and treatmentand disposalof industrial Board and [GUICity Solid Waste The ESWMA requires theestablishment of a National Commission,Technical Secretariat at EMB,an EcologyCenter, Provincial Solid WasteManagement recyclablesneed to be in place and ManagementBoard. In addition, a national framework, provincial plans, LGUplans, an annuat report, eco-labelingscheme and market mechanismfor regularly updated. 'Incremental costsfor achieving 100 percentcollection coverage including under-servedpoor areas. level and will be replaced every thre TheAct requires that householdsor gesup of householdsto have four different bins. For purposes of costingthis is assumedto be at the barangay years. Incrementalcosts for modernizing the collection neet in LGUs. Thecost of an urban MRF is TheActs goal is to achieve 25 percentwaste diversion, and this is to be realized through material recovery facilities (MRF)to be set-up in each barangay. approximately PhP500,000, while that of a rural MRF is assumedto be PhP75,000. (for sanitarylandfills in Lagunaand Cavite). I Theunil costcoefficients are basedon actual costs(conversion of San FernandoDisposal Site to controlled dump) and from conceptualdesigns are metby the construction Assumesall existing open dumps and controlled dumpsare convertedand the additional disposal needsfrom enhancedcollection mandated under the ESWM of LGU-Ievelsanitary landfills. Thisis mandated by the Clean Air Act.

Source: TeamEstimates, 2001

ing. Currently, the private sector is only involved tions, which can optimize waste haulage. It will also as contractors for hauling, while the informal sec- be important for barangays to establish shared ma- tor has a small role in material recovery enter- terials recovery facilities, as these will be prohibi- prises. Private sector participation can be encour- tively expensive (50 percent of all barangays have aged through a regulatory environment that en- annual incomes of less than PhP500,000). Estab- sures private operators are able to recover their lishment of these facilities could be encouraged investments through garbage and tipping fees, and through demonstration projects and national or re- avoid graft and corruption through improved and gional programs that provide an instrument for co- transparent contractual practices based on perfor- ordination of the LGUs. mance standards. * Revenues from Landfill Gas Recovery. The gas User Fees: Investment and/or operational costs produced by landfills can be recovered and either can be recovered by LGUs or the private sector used as a gas fuel source or combusted to pro- by charging residential, industrial, and commer- duce electricity. These facilities can be installed cial users for garbage disposal. Successful fee in operating and closed landfills, and can provide programs require political support, a quality ser- an LGU or landfill operator with an additional vice with consumers who understand the value of source of funds to supplement other methods to the service and are willing to pay for it, and an cover the costs of solid waste management. efficient fee collection system. Shared Facilities. Substantial cost savings can be 7 Obtaining reliable information for national, achieved through the establishment of regional fa- regional, and local planning... There are many cilities that service multiple LGUs. These include gaps in the data available from the local and na- material recovery facilities and sanitary landfills. The tional-levels. Without proper data, long-term plan- latter shouldbe served by LGU-specific transfer sta- ning decisions cannot be reliably made, and the risk

25 Chart4: IncrementalAnnual Costs of Implementingthe EWSMA between 2002-2011

25-

20 Chr Irmeap. t. x e m S 3e) c -15

0 3

E~ ~ ~ ~ ~ YA

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

CD A 3 - -- Institutionaland RegulatoryArrange ments - - - - Treatment and Disposal _2 _- ImprovedCollection and Recycling 42. TotalIncrernental Costs of crises such as that being experienced by Metro tary conditions and environmental risks (contaminated Manila is higher. A comprehensive information groundwater and air pollution) and safety risks (ex- management system along with the establishment plosions and the collapse of garbage piles). Active in- of local, regional, and national monitoring databases terventions by Government will be needed to help these linked to decision support systems would greatly communities, including opportunities to expand their help governments at all levels in making informed, role in waste recycling. For example, social assess- and sound long-term decisions. ments could be required as part of the development (<> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~andclosure of any disposal site. Programs to help the e Ensuring proper management of closed dumps communities on operational and closed landfills could and sanitary landfills ...... The poor management prac- be developed. Equity considerations can be incorpo- tices at Carmona and San Mateo landfills caused ad- rated into the development of collection systems. verse public reactions and the landfills' closure. The . landfill in Cebu is also experiencing major difficul- il ({) Expanding coverage of medical and haz- ties. Landfill operators should put in place better man- ardous waste treatment. .. The main challenges in- agement practices that are closely monitored by LGUs clude expanding on-site and off-site treatment fa- and DENR. Further, the Carmona and San Mateo land- cilities and addressing the issues posed by the imple- fills, and the Payatas and Smokey Mountain open mentation of the ban on incineration by the Clean dumps continue to pose significant environmental risks Air Act. Globally, incineration remains a common to adjacent communities, especially the poor. There is means of treating infectious medical waste and haz- an urgent need to properly contain these sites and the ardous waste. Implementation of the ban will re- numerous open dumps to prevent leachate contamina- quire adoption of alternate technologies, which will tion of water bodies. Methane gas generated by closed take time. In the intervening period, every effort landfills could be collected and converted to power to should be made to ensure that disposal measures, reduce the risk of methane gas explosions, while pro- would not result in widespread unsafe and unregu- viding electricity to local communities. Iated practices. The government, civil society and mA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~theprivate sector will need to collaborate to develop m2 Protecting the vulnerable and under-served.. ,...... workable and pragmatic approaches that are cost- Poor communities are most likely to be adversely af- effective and environmentally sound. In the event, fectedby, ordonotadequatelybenefitfrom, solidwaste the incineration ban is stayed or delayed for infec- management strategies. In particular, the poor are cur- tious medical and hazardous wastes, the government rently under-served in terms of collection. Some live should ensure that incinerators are carefully oper- on or near garbage disposal sites (e.g. Payatas and ated, closely regulated, and function in the context Smokey Mountain) and thus, are exposed to unsani- of an integrated waste management system.

26 CASE STUDY: THE Two FACES OF PAYATAS- POVERTY AND ENVIRONMENT

The Payatas open dumpsite, located in Quezon City,has been receivingMetro Manila'sgarbage, hospital waste, and industrial waste for over 20 years. Rightfrom the beginning, it attracted waste pickers who earn a livingby scavenging. The waste pickers then became illegal settlersin the same location, in appalling, unsanitary livingconditions. The adverse environmental and health conditionscreated by the dump meant that the site was always under threat of closure, Thoughplans to close down the area began in 1999, the attempt was thwarted by both the settlersand middlemenwho depended on the dump for their livelihoods. In July 2000, tragedy struckat Payatas, when heavy rains caused part of the dump in the northern area to slide carrying with it 60,000 cubic meters of waste. The slide killed 250 people belonging to 700 poor families. Thiscase study discusses the two sides of Payatas: the effortsto rehabilitate illegal squatter elsewhere; and the organized approach of the scavengers to improve their lives.

REHABILITATIONEFFORTS value to their products and stabilize their incomes. Ac- tivities supported include: The accident highlighted the need to improve the liv- * Promoting home-based solid waste related micro- ing conditions of the people in Payatas. Local com- enterprises, by encouraging investments in recy- munities, with the help of NGOs, the private sector, cling processes that enhance the value of their and local governments are undertaking three reloca- products, and transform recycled materials into tion projects in the area: new/exportable products. * 200 families living in the danger zone are being Mobilizing savings through a regular savings pro- relocated to Bagong Silangan, Quezon City-a gram open to all members of the communities and two-hectare plot not far from Payatas donated by collected daily by community members. The sav- the private sector.Atotal of 342 housing units will ings of their 6,115 members from June 1995 to be provided at a cost of about PhP70,000 per unit. September 2000 amounted to PhP14.2 million. A training center would also be constructed. Through these funds, they were able to purchase * Another relocation site is a three-hectare lot in land, expand their businesses, pay for their San Isidro, Montalban bought by the waste pick- children's tuition fees, buy medicines, and meet ers at PhP150/sqm. All developments in the area emergency needs. Loans disbursed within the are being undertaken by the relocatees, including same period amounted to PhP61.5 million-indi- the design and construction of roads, drainage cating that the total amount of money had been systems, and the houses. So far, 16 shell houses loaned out and paid back four times, creating as- have been constructed. sets and increasing wealth for households with an * The Golden Shower Homeowner's Association, average income of only PhP3,500 per month. formed in 1993, started a savings program,mapped, Encouraging the acquisition of land and construc- enumerated and surveyed their settlements,and ar- tion of their own houses, and accompanied im- ranged to put their land titles in order. Plans include provements in living conditions. the purchase of 3.2 hectares of land which associa- Aside from these activities, the association also has tion members alreadyoccupy They plan to improve programs for children including a center cooperatively their homes, build new houses,and establisha com- managed by mothers. The center offers working chil- munity recycling center.After the Payatas incident, dren a place to play, obtain first-aid, sleep, shower, the Asian Development Bank, through the Japan and get something to eat. Alongside the center is a Fund for Poverty Reduction, provided a US$1 mil- day care school where mothers take turns teaching and lion grant to help people with home ownership and feeding children nutritious meals cooked in the court- on-site improvement. yard outside. The children themselves have initiated a savings scheme for those who are on their own. The WORKING TOGETHER TO BUILD BETTER LIVES savings scheme is aside from their families'. These experiences have shown that making savings and credit In 1993, the community living in Payatas organized the building block of a people-driven community de- themselves into the Payatas Scavengers Association velopment movement, helps individuals understand with the support of the Vincentian Missionaries So- their own situation and needs. It develops and promotes cial Development Foundation. Through this associa- community strength, creates the bargaining chip of tion, they work to secure their economic future by ac- collective assets, and truly turns poor communities into cessing the resources and opportunities that will add potential development partners.

27 Barangay: Pilipino term used to describe a community or vil- Leachate: Wastewater that collects contaminants as it trick- lage; also the smallest political unit in the country. les through MSW disposed in a landfill. Leaching may result Biodegradable:Capable of decompinhazardous substances entering surface water, ground water Biodegradable: Capable of decomposition by microorganisms or 1ol under natural conditions. Most organic materials, such as food or -oil. scraps and paper, are biodegradable. Market wastes: Primarily putrescible MSW, such as leaves, skins, and unsold food, discarded at or near food markets. Collection: The process of picking up wastes from residences, businesses, or at a collectionpoint, loading them intoa vehicle, and trans- Materials recovery facility: Facility that processes residentially porting them to a processing site, transfer station or landfill. collected mixed recyclables into new products. Commercial waste: All municipal solid waste emanating from Medical waste (hospital waste): Any MSW generated in the di- business establishment such as stores, markets, office buildings, agnosis, treatment or immunization of human beings or animals. restaurants, shopping centers, and entertainment centers. Methane: A colorless, non-poisonous, flammable gas created by Composting: The controlled biological decomposition of the pu- anaerobic decomposition of organic compounds. trescible fraction of MSW in the presence of air to form a humus- Moisture content: The fraction or percentage of a substance that like material. is water. Controlled dumps:A non-engineered disposal site at which MSW Municipal solid waste (MSW): Includes non-hazardous waste is deposited in accordance with minimum prescribed standards of generated in households, commercial and business establishments, site operation. It has minimal site infrastructure. Basic operational . . . p controls include: control over size of waste tipping area with waste institutlons, and non-hazardous ndustral process wastes, agricul- spread and compaction, stormwater management, and supervision tural wastes, and sewage sludge. of site operations by trained staff. NIMBY: Acronym for "Not In My BackYard"; an expression Decomposition: The breakdown of matter, changing the chemi- of resident opposition to the siting of a municipal solid waste cal makeup and physical appearance of MSW in landfills or management facility based on the particular location proposed. composting facilities. Open dumps:A site used to dispose of municipal solid waste with- Disposal: The final placement of MSW that is not salvaged or out management and/or environmental controls. recycled. Putrescible: A fraction of MSW which can decompose under aero- Energy recovery: Obtaining energy from MSW through a variety bic or anaerobic conditions, used as a feedstock for composting. of processes (e.g. combustion). Recycling: Physical/mechanical separation process by which sec- recovery system: A system designed to collect ondary raw materials (paper, metal, glass, plastics) are obtained GascnrladrcvrsytmAsytmdsgetocletGascontrol and from MSW. The process could be accomplished manually, or us- or for use as an energy source. ing the pment. landfill gases for treatment ing sophisticated equipment. Generation rate: The amount of MSW generated over a given Resource recovery: The process of obtaining matter or energy period of time by a given source. from MSW. Groundwater: The supply of freshwater that is found beneath the Sanitary landfill: This is a disposal site designed, constructed, earth's surface, which supplies wells and springs. Since ground- operated, and maintained in a manner that exerts engineering con- water is a major source of drinking water, there is a growing control over significant potential environmental impacts arising from cern about contamination from pollutants leached from dumpsites the operation of the facility. It has comprehensive site engineering and/or badly managed landfills... and exhibits containment, treatment, and management of leachate Hazardous waste: Waste generated that can pose a substantial or and landfill gas. potential hazard to human health or the environment when im- Solid waste: MSW composed of solid matter from household, com- properly managed. mercial, institutional, and industrial sources. Household waste (domestic waste): MSW composed of garbage Tipping fee: A fee for unloading MSW at a landfill, transfer sta- and rubbish, which is generated as a consequence of household tion or recycling facility. activities. In developing countries, up to two-thirds of this cat- egory consist of putrescible wastes. Toxic waste: A waste that can produce injury if inhaled, swal- Incineration: A treatment technology involving destruction of lowed, or absorbed through the skin. MSW by controlled burning at high temperatures. The main ob- Transfer station: A facility at which MSW from collection ve- jective of this process is to reduce the volume of MSW and to hicles is consolidated into loads that are transported in larger trucks make waste innocuous. or other means to more distant disposal sites. Industrial waste: A heterogeneous mixture of different materials Waste picking: A process of extracting recyclables and re- generated during an industrial operation. usable materials from a mixed MSW for further use and/or Infectious waste: Hazardous waste with infectious characteris- processing. tics, including contaminated animal waste, body parts, human blood, and blood products, isolation waste, pathological waste, and discarded needles and medical instruments. Source: Adaptedfrom Planning Guidefor StrategicMunicipal Solid WasteManagement in Major Cities in Low-income Countries, Draft Institutional waste: Waste originating from schools, hospitals, Planning Guide, February 1998, Environment Resources Man- prisons, research organizations, and other public buildings. agement, London.

28 THE PHILIPPINESAT A GLANCE

Society Economy Capital ...... Manila GDP-real growth rate ...... 3.9%1 Population ...... 76.5 Mc GDP ...... PhP3,322.6 Bb Population growth rate ...... 2.32%c Birth rate .. ... 28 births/l ,000 populationo i GDP-composition by sectora Death rate ...... 6.5 deaths/1,000 population,i Agriculture ...... 16% Net migration rate ...... 1.03 migrants/ 1,000 populationcI Industry ...... 31% Sex ratio ...... 0.99 male/femalec Services ...... 53% Total fertility rate ...... 3.6 children bom/womanc Poverty (% below poverty line) ...... 375/e GNP per capita..US$1,016.0' Urban population (% of total population) ...... 56.9%ci GNP-real growth rate ...... 2% Infant mortality rate ...... 32 deaths/1,000 GNP . .PhP3,302.6Bb live birthsc (1998) (In percent)b Under-five mortality rate ...... 44 deaths/l ,000 Gross domestic investmentlGDP ...... 18.8 live birthsc (1998) Exports of goods and services/GDP . 51.3 Life expectancy at birth (both sexes) ...... 68.3 yearsch Gross domestic savings/GDP ...... 14.6 Child malnutrition (% of children below 5)...... 28%, k Gross National Savings/GDP ...... 20.7 Access to safe water Inflation rate (consumer prices . . 4.4%d Md (% of population) ...... 83 %f Labor force ...... 48.4 Adult literacy rate Participation rate . .. 64.3%d (% of population age 15+) ...... 94.8%'i Employment by sector (In % total employment)b Geography Agriculture . .... 40.1% Location: Southeastern Asia, archipelago between the Phil- Government and social services . . ... 19.5% ippine Sea and the South China Sea, east of Vietnam Services ..... 44.2% Area Manufacturing . .... 9.5% Total...... 300,000 sq km Construction ...... 5.3% Land ...... 298,170 sq km Water ...... 1,830 sq km Unemployment ...... JlAMd Land boundaries ...... 0 km Unemployment rate ...... 11.1 %d Coastline ...... 36,289 km Climate: Tropical marine; northeast monsoon (November Budgetg to April); southwest monsoon (May to October) Programmed public expenditure (2001)..... PhP700B Elevation extremes Local government programmed expenditure.. PhP I 28B Lowest point: ...... Philippine Sea: 0 m Industries: Textiles, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, wood Highest point: ...... Mount Apo: 2,954 m products, food processing, electronics assembly, petroleum Natural resources: timber, petroleum, nickel, cobalt, sil- refining, fishing ver, gold, salt, copper Land use Industrial production growth rate ...... 0.5%b Arable land: ...... 19% Agriculture-products: Rice, coconuts, corn, sugarcane, Permanent crops: ...... 12% bananas, pineapples, mangoes; pork, eggs, beef, fish Permanent pastures: ...... 4% Forests and woodland: ...... 46% Exports of goods and services ...... PhP1,648.2 Bb Other: .. 19%s Imports of goods and services ...... PhP1,342.6 Bb Currency conversion average ..... US$1=PhP44.1938 Bb Environmental issues: Solid waste management; defores- Debt-external ...... US$52.06 Bb tation; air and water pollution in Metro Manila; marine and Currency ...... I Philippine Peso (PhP) = 100 centavos coastal pollution.

Sources: 'World Development Indicators 2000, b Selected Philippine Economic Indicators - Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (SPEI-BSP), National Statistics Office (NSO),'Nat ional Statistical CoordinationBoard (NSCB),'National Economic and DevelopmentAuthority(NEDA),f Human Development Report 2000, B National Income Accounts, Department of Budget and Management (DBM).