European Journal of Scientific Research

ISSN 1450-216X Vol.40 No.2 (2010), pp.199-210

© EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2010
http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.htm

Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia

Christia Meidiana
Corresponding Author TU Graz, Department of Chemical Process and Environmental
Technology,Graz, Austria
Faculty of Engineering, Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia
E-mail: meidiana@student.tugraz.at
Tel: +43 316 873 7477; Fax: +43 316 873 74697

Thomas Gamse
TU Graz, Department of Chemical Process and Environmental Technology, Graz, Austria

Abstract

Indonesia is one of the ASEAN countries with the highest population (about 220
millions) and growth rate of 1.2% per year (World Bankc, 2009). The population growth
brings about the increasing amount of the waste which becomes a problem faced by the
government. Some factors influencing the quality of the service such as, lack of
policies/strategies and financial support, low involvement of private sectors, inefficiency,
and low community awareness led to The low Level of Service (LoS) of municipal waste
management (MWM). The problem occurred in all steps of solid waste management
(storage, collection, transferring, transporting, treatment) with the tendency to rise at the
end point, landfill. Based on the study of waste management conducted by UNEP in 2004,
it showed that only 33% of the indicators for LoS of MSW has been fulfilled by the
government. It means that the level of service of waste management was still low. There
were surely many factors influencing the low LoS of waste management in Indonesia.
Therefore, the study attempted to make review of the development of waste management
implementation in Indonesia by comparing the conditions in 1999, in 2004 and in recent
time. The same indicators have been evaluated and showed that only one indicator has been
changed during two decades. The result may be used as the input for specific analysis
addressed to the cause study.

Keywords: Municipal waste management, Waste policy, Indonesia

Abbreviations: MSW, municipal solid waste; LoS, Level of Service; GoI, Government of
Indonesia, CDM, Clean Development Mechanism,

1. Introduction
Indonesia has ratified The Kyoto Protocol and must participate actively in reducing the green house
gas emission including landfill gas emission. The raising number of Clean Development Mechanism
(CDM) projects in waste sector approved by the international board of CDM and proposed by
private/public sectors can be the indicator that the waste management in Indonesia becomes an
important priority in national policy (Hilman, 2005). CDM project in waste sector is one of some ways
to reduce the GHG emission. Therefore, the Government of Indonesia (GoI) should courage it more by
providing better planning and implementation in waste management to improve the involvement of the
Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia 200

public and privat sector in CDM Project for waste sector. However, the current condition of the solid
waste management is far from the adequate Level of Service (LoS). Inadequate waste policy in
national and local level, low awareness of the community, shortage of budget and low private
participation become main reasons for the low level of service in Municipal Waste Management
(MWM) (Hilman, 2005).
By comparing the previous and current waste management system, the study can analyze the
development of waste management practices during the certain period to find out the potentials and
challenges of waste management in Indonesia and take the advantage for better MWM concept
therewith.

2. Method and Material

This study was conducted by means of documents provided by the local governments and waste
authorities in Indonesia. Review of literatures related to waste management is also conducted in
comparing the theories and implementations. The study focused on description analysis of the ten
indicators evaluated by UNEP in 2004 comprising technical and non-technical aspects. The indicators
were evaluated based on three period, namely before decentralization which was started in 1999, 1999
– 2004 when UNEP conducted the study in 2004, and 2005 – 2008 when the Waste Law No. 18/2008
was enacted in 2008

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Waste Management Policies and Measures in Indonesia
Indonesia has ratified some international waste legal frameworks such as Basel Convention in 1993
and Kyoto Protocol in June 2004 meaning that the government considers about the potentially adverse
waste effect on environment (MoE, 2005; IPCC, 2006). However, more actual efforts are needed
because in national and local level, there is shortage of waste regulations. There was no waste national
policy until 2007 describing the concepts, aims and measures in national waste management. The
existing waste laws did not control solid waste management specifically. Generally, the existing laws
cover the environment management, the hazardous waste management, Waste Recycling, Pollution
control, Health and Sanitation and the imported waste (UN, 2003). The new national regulation for
waste management, Waste Management Law No. 18/ 2008 has been recently issued by the
Government of Indonesian and be a legal tool in forcing all related parties in supporting national waste
management policy. The following table shows the existing law/policy/regulations related to waste
management in Indonesia.
201 Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse
Table 1: Environment- and Waste-related policies in Indonesia

Law/Regulation/Policy Remarks
Issue
Before decentralization in 1999 1999 - 2004 2005-now
Regulation 24/1992 Regulation 27/1999 - Guidelines of env.
management plan
Environment Ministerial Decree Ministerial Decree
Act 23/1997 and env.
86/2002 45/2005
monitoring plan
Ministerial Decree Ministerial Decree
Regulation 18/1999
42/MENLH/11/1994 18/2009
Hazardous waste
Reg. 68/BAPEDAL/05/1994 Regulation 85/1999 -
Reg. 1 – 5/BAPEDAL/09/1995 Regulation 74/2001 -
Waste
- Waste Law 18/2008
management
Ministerial Decree
Recycling -
2/2008
Air and Water Regulation 41/1999 -
Pollution Regulation 82/2001 -
Law 7/2004 Latest act
Ministerial Decree Ministerial Decree regarding to
Health & 288/2003 852/2008 Community based
Sanitation sanitation which
Gov. Regulation
Law No 32/2004 refers to the
16/2005
previous one
Ministerial Decree Ministry of Trade
Ministerial Decree 230/1997
41/2008 & Industry
Regulation on
Imported Waste
non-HW import.
Regulation 18/1999 -
Revision of
previous Act.
Economic
Regulation 18/1997
Instrument
Source: UNEP, 2004; MoE, 2005, MoE, 2008

The latest waste policies are related to waste management and recycling which is new in waste
policies in Indonesia. It can be an indicator that the Government is starting to concern about the waste
problem and to find out other alternatives in minimizing the waster disposal in landfill. Realizing that
there is increase in waste generation and change in waste composition, GoI has been promoting 3R
since 2007 in order to increase material recovery and to reduce waste disposed in landfill. The new
recycling policy wass issued by Ministry of Environment in 2008 . The change in waste composition is
described in Table 4.

Table 2: Waste composition in 1989 and 2006

Waste Composition (%wet weight basis)

Year generation Textile/le Inert/othe
Organics Paper Plastic Glass Metal
(kg/cap/day) ather r
1989* 0.4 87 2 3 1 4 N.A 3
2006** 1.12 62 9 14 2 2 4 7
Source: *UNDP (1987), Lee (1992), **MoE (2008)

Generally, there was significant change in waste composition percentage of organic waste,
paper and plastic. Nevertheless, there was no change in policies and measures of solid waste
management because the law used in 1989, and 2007 was still the same. In addition, none of the
existing law regarding waste management covered the integrated waste management. Moreover, the
new Waste Law does not include issue of integrated waste management. It covers public service
principles, waste minimization and handling of domestic solid waste and specific waste, incentives and
Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia 202

disincentives mechanism, local government responsibility, financial system, private and public sector
participation, and sanctions (MoE, 2008). In local level, all the provinces and cities in Indonesia have
regulations related to cleaning management, institutional framework for waste management and waste
management payment. Though the available local regulations, the enforcement is still low. The lack of
the waste policies in national level and the low waste regulation enforcement of in local level can be a
reason why the waste management in Indonesia is still low. In 2005, LoS MWM was 41.28%. The
percentage increased to 56% in 2006. The GoI have to work seriously if they want to achieve the
MDGs target of 70% in 2015 for urban waste service (Susmono, 2008).

4. Waste Generation and Treatment in Indonesia

The high percentage of organic waste was caused by the waste source composition dominated by
household waste (43,4%). Yet, the local government could not collect total amount of household waste
for treatment purposes such as landfill, composting, recycling or incineration, so that several waste
handling systems are done by community (MoE, 2008). Table 2 and Table 3 show the waste generation
by source and household waste treatment method respectively in year 2006.

Table 3: Waste generation by Source in 2006

Source Amount(million ton/year) Percentage (%)

Household 16.7 43.4
Market 7.7 20
Street 3.5 9
Public facility 3.4 9
Office 3.1 8
Industry 1.3 6
Other 1.8 4.6
Total 38.5 100
Source: MoE, 2008

Table 4: Household waste treatment in 2006

Method Amount(Million ton/year) Percentage (% of total method)

Transported to landfill 11.6 69
Buried 1.6 9.6
Composted 1.2 7.15
Burnt 0.8 4.8
Disposed in river 0.5 2.9
Others 1.1 6.55
Total 16.8 100
Source: MoE, 2008

In 2001, the municipal waste was treated through final disposal/landfill/open dumping
(40.09%), open burning (35,49%), recycling (1.61%), buried (7.54%), disposed on street/in river/in
park (15.27%) (MoE, 2005). Though increase of waste percentage disposed in landfill in 2006, the rate
of waste collection was still low counting 69.5%. Total amount of waste treated by the local authority
was 11.6 million ton/year out of 16.7 million ton household waste generated per year (MoI, 2001). The
waste can not be collected by the local government will be individually treated by the community. This
condition leads to high percentage of improper waste treatment such as open burning, buried waste and
disposal to the river. In addition, the open dumping method in final disposal sites produces methane
causing significant increase of methane emission from landfills. Table 5 shows the methane emission
from landfills from 1990 to 2000 and the projection for 2025. The projection is made based on the
waste generation projection per person per day in 2025.
203 Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse

Once the waste volume and characteristic are known, the energy content of the waste can be
calculated. The result is required since the decision on appropriate MSW Management depends also on
the waste characteristic. The moisture content, the heating value and the organic component of waste is
important to be analyzed. For example, Municipal Solid Waste with low caloric value because of high
organics content is not suitable for incineration method, but appropriate for composting method. Due to
the fact that there is no accurate data describing the waste characteristic in Indonesia, the author
estimated the moisture content, caloric value, and organics content of Municipal Waste management
based on the typical moisture content and caloric value (Brunner, 1983). Table 6 And Table 7 describes
the moisture content and caloric value of MSW in Indonesia based on data 2006.

Table 5: Methane Emission from solid waste disposal sites from 1990 until 2025 (in 1000 ton)

1990 1992 1992 1993 1994 1995 2000 2025

(t/year) (t/year) (t/year) (t/year) (t/year) (t/year) (t/year) (t/year)
371.34 378.56 386.05 393.83 401.92 457.49 663 1,581.74
Source: Hoornweg et.al, 1995; MoE, 2005; IGES, 2008.

Table 6: Moisture Content and Heating Value of MSW in Indonesia (based on data 2006)

Component Solid waste (%) Moisture Content (%) Heating Value (kJ/kg)
Organics 62 43.40 2885.00 kJ/kg
Paper 9 0.54 1508.00 kJ/kg
Plastics 14 0.28 4560.00 kJ/kg
Glass 2 0.04 3.00 kJ/kg
Metal 2 0.06 14.00 kJ/kg
Textile 4 0.40 70.00 kJ/kg
Inert (dust, dirt) 7 0.56 50.00 kJ/kg
Total 100 45.38 9090.00 kJ/kg

Though the lower percentage, plastics contributed to higher heating value compared to the
organic waste. Along with the domestic plastic consumption increase, projected to be 3% per year, the
appropriate treatment of plastic waste such as recycle and incineration should take into consideration.
Both the treatment can be an added value for the waste management.

5. Institutions
Before the implementation of decentralization, municipal solid waste management was the
responsibility of several departments and ministries such as The Ministry of Public Works, Ministry of
Home Affair, Ministry of Health, Agency for Technology Assessment and Development, Board of
Environmental Impact Management (BAPEDAL), and the Sub Directorate for Solid Waste
Management. The involvement of many institutions in solid waste management led to overlapping
responsibilities and weak implementation and enforcement of laws and regulations of solid waste
management. The decentralization in 1999 had brought about the change in national and local waste
institution in Indonesia where the central government plays role as a regulator and the local
governments are the prominent players. The local government obtained more responsibilities in
planning and implementing solid waste management in their locality. Moreover, there was change in
national waste management structure in 2002, as the Presidential Decree No. 2/2002 was enacted. The
Ministry of Environment took over the responsibility of BAPEDAL which was responsible for
controlling environmental pollution impact. Nowadays, there are three institutions which are involved
in waste management. In national level there are Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Settlement
and Regional Infrastructure, while at local level, the responsibility in controlling the environmental
pollution impact is in the hand of BAPEDALDA or Local Board of Environmental Impact Management
(UN, 2009). The Ministry of Environment is mainly responsible for policy developments, regulation
Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia 204

formulations and coordinating efforts in pollution control caused by waste, whereas The Ministry of
Settlement and Regional Infrastructure is mainly responsible in providing technical guidance,
promoting pilot projects, and supervising large-scale off-site sanitation systems including waste
management system. Both of the ministries provide some sorts of training program for capacity
building purposes (UN, 2003). For example, Capacity Building in Urban Infrastructure Management
(CBUIM) to increase the local government capability in providing urban services sustainably which
was implemented between 1998 and 2003 by collaboration with some other donor countries.
There are other institutions in municipal level which are responsible for municipal waste
management. Planning Agency (BAPPEDA) and Cleansing Department are responsible for the
planning and implementation of solid waste management, such as transportation from the transfer
points to the final disposal site. The municipality hires sometime private companies in cleansing and
collecting street waste in commercial areas. Some large commercial and industrial enterprises in big
cities, like Jakarta, Bandung and Surabaya, have to dispose of their own waste by either employing
Cleansing Department and/or a private contractor (WBa, 2009).

6. Finance Mechanism
One of the problems in waste management in Indonesia is financial shortage. Before the
decentralization, the local government had received solid waste program financed by the state budget
and some financial assistances from ADB Loan, IBRD Loan, JICA and JBIC. Thereafter, financial
sources for municipal waste management are from waste collection fee, waste retribution, and local
governmental budget. After the decentralization, solid waste program is mostly financed by local
government. However, the amount of the whole contribution is still little (about 2 % of the total local
budget) and can not fulfill the needed expenditure on waste management since the collection rate of the
retribution amounted only 40 - 50 % of the revenue. Limited allocation for waste sector aspect leads to
low level of service of municipal solid waste management. In 2001, only 34% of the population in
Indonesia was provided by MSW service (WBa, 2009).. During 1990s, allocation for urban public
infrastructure was approximately 0.4 percent of GDP which was about 8% of it (0.03% of GDP) spent
on solid waste management (WBa, 2009). For example, in 1993, GoI allocated 0.34% of the GNP on
municipal waste management (Farlane, 1998). Compared to other ASEAN cities, this percentage was
very low considering that Indonesia is the ASEAN country with highest population. This allocation
increased in the next decades but the percentage was still very low compared to the National Budget.
Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur) and Vietnam (Hanoi) allocated about 0.38% and 0.80% of its GNP for
municipal waste service in 1994 relatively. While Philippine (Manila) spent 0.37% of the GNP on
Solid waste management in 1995 (Farlane, 1998). Table 7 illustrates how much the municipalities in
selected ASEAN countries expend their budget for urban waste management revenue.
In 2001 and 2002, waste sector belonged to environmental sector where the overall budget for
environmental sector was only 1% of the National Budget (UNEP, 2004). Limited budget for waste
management is the reason for some existing problems in landfill operation such as inadequate
investment for sanitary facilities, low affordability in providing proper sanitary facilities for limited
operational and maintenance cost, deprived quality and quantity in sanitary services. Consequently, the
local governments can not operate the landfill which meets the requirements of the sanitary landfill
(Hilman, 2005).

7. Economic Instruments in MWM

Economic instruments encourage financial incentive and disincentive mechanisms to drive effective
environmental management (UNEP, 2003). Hence, waste problem which is always related to
environmental management can use also this method. There are some ways in encouraging all
stakeholders including industrial sector in Municipal Solid Waste Management. Especially for
industrial sectors, Government of Indonesia (GoI) through Ministry of Environment has been applying
205 Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse

some economic instruments in order to control the pollution caused by the industrial activities. Some
cases implemented economic instruments as control tools in MSWM are Environmental soft loan
program for pollution control equipment, import duty exemption for pollution control equipment,
effluent/emissions charges for municipal services (drinking water, wastewater treatment, solid waste
collection and disposal) and criminal and economical sanctions. (UN, 2003).

Table 7: Municipal Urban Waste Service Expenditure

City/country Year Expenditure on MWM per GNP per capita(US$) % GNP

capita (US$)
KualaLumpur/Malaysia 1994 15.25 4,000 0.38
Manila/Philippine 1995 4 1,070 0.37
Hanoi/Vietnam 1994 2 250 0.80
Jakarta/Indonesia 1993 1.77 740 0.34
Source: Farlane, 1998

Table 8 Use of Economic Instrument in Municipal Solid Waste Management

Economic
Method Application Legal Framework Purposes
Instrument
Revenue raising Charge system • Collection and Government “internalizing” the externalities
instruments disposal services Regulation 20/1997 associated with the production,
received transportation and disposal of
waste

• waste generation
charges

Tax system • pollution charge Ministerial Decree

35/1995 (MoE)
• pollution taxes Ministerial Decree
15/1996 (MoE)
Revenue Import tariffs free import Presidential Decree Reward desired behaviour
providing Exemption (Fiscal tariff/duty on waste 28/2008
instruments Instruments) treatment & Ministerial Decree
pollution control 36/1997 (MoF)
equipment
Soft loans & grants Incentive for Presidential Decree
(Financial implementation of 28/2008
Instrument) CP system &
pollution control
technology
Non revenue Eco-labelling Presidential Decree Performance disclosure,
Instruments 28/2008
Source: UN, 2003; UNEP, 2008

8. Private Sector Participation

Basically, Private Sector Participation (PSP) in waste sector has been initiated since 1995 when the
Indonesia’s Program for Pollution Control, Evaluation, and Rating (PROPER) was initiated (WBb,
2009). However, the PSP mostly is not in form of direct involvement in municipal waste management
system such as waste treatment or disposal but the participation of private sector (industries, factories)
in such program pushing the industries to disclose their environmental performance to public and
stakeholders. There is very little private sector participation in management the waste, for example, PT.
Patriot Bangkit Bekasi which operates the Bantar Gebang Landfill in Bekasi, West Java (Hilman,
2005). The industries participated in public disclosure system are encouraged to involve in
Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia 206

implementation of pollution control regulations and to adopt practices contributing to “clean

technology”. The industries participated in the program will be evaluated and rated by using a color-
coded rating, ranging from gold for excellent performance to black for poor performance. The
implementation of PROPER 1995 influenced the industries’ environmental performance. During the
first pilot project period (June 1995 – March 1997) there were 187 industries involved and the
percentage of the industries fulfilled the preferred parameter increased from 35% to 51%. In 1998, the
number of industries in Sumatra, Java, and Kalimantan participating in the program expanded to 350
industries (WBb, 2009). In 2002, the Government through Ministry of Environment issued the renewed
PROPER Program which included water, air and hazardous waste called PROPER 2002. The number
of factories participating in the

Figure 1: Percentage of Indonesian cities implementing some ways of public participation in SWM (MoE,
2008)

rate system during 2002 to 2004 decreased compared to 1998. There were 85 industries which were
evaluated and the result showed the positive trend though the less number of involved factories. There
was 81% decrease of factories with black category and 76% increase of factories with blue category
(Roosita, 2004).
Along with the PROPER Program, the government also has set a kind of partnership program
in the hazardous waste management called KENDALI Program by enacting the Board of
Environmental Impact Management Regulation No. 03/1998. This program involved 141 industries
which comply with Indonesian Regulation. 15% of these industries treat their own waste by the
existing technology and 73% of industries send their wastes to the treatment facility.

9. Community Participation
There are various ways to involve the community in reducing and recycling the waste. The most
easiest and common way is by charging them for waste retribution. Waste generator has to pay waste
bill according to certain criteria such as house type, building function or electricity voltage (MoE,
2008). Yet, the community initiative is still the best option for the local government because it can help
the local government can not provide good solid waste services for the community. There are a range
of community initiatives, such as women-owned collection cooperatives, itinerant waste
pickers improvement, neighborhood-based youth groups for collection, contract to micro-enterprises,
neighborhood composting or vermin-composting facilities, and collection of user charges from each
household. For such services, the community have to pay small amount of addition cost for community
savings used to pay operational activities for example paying the salary of garbage collectors and street
sweeper’s, providing garbage bins and containers, purchasing of carts (UN, 2003; WBa, 2009). In
many Indonesian cities, all of the above practices are present with various modifications. The other
207 Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse

ways to engage community in waste management are by implementing neighborhood waste treatment,
introducing waste management in the schools, applying community based management and planning,
and initiating waste separation closed to the source point. Figure 1 shows that community initiative
(92%) and retribution (75%) were widely implemented by the local governments in improving the
public participation in waste management.
Communities provided with SWM service are obligatory to pay a collection fee since the
collection of domestic waste is carried out by community neighborhood organization (RW’s). The
collection fee usually includes also other “communities fees” such as security and environmental
improvement. Each household pays on monthly basis and the fee ranges from IDR 10,000 to IDR
30,000 (about US$ 1.1 – US$ 3.2). The amount of community fee charged depends on the living
conditions of the residential area and is decided amongst community members. In addition to
collection fees, there is also transportation and disposal costs of solid waste. The amounts charged for
transportation and disposal costs depend on the dimensions (land area) of the residential plot. The
payment for transportation and disposal can be done through water bill, electricity bill or direct
payment. Households connected to the city water supply system pay their solid waste fees through their
water supply bills. Thus the water supply bill includes the solid waste fee. The water supply company
then delivers the payment to the account of the City on a monthly basis. Solid waste fees for
transportation and disposal generally vary from between IDR 6,000 – IDR 14,000 (US$ 0,55 – US$
1.5). Direct payment is applied when the households not connected to the water supply system (UN,
2003). Figure 12 illustrates that the most of the payment is direct payment where the customer have to
pay waste retribution through community initiatives collecting it and transfer it to the municipality via
bank (MoE, 2008).

10. Information System

One of the factors causing the low service of solid waste management in many Indonesia cities are lack
of information about the exact amount of waste generated at the source point, collected at transfer
point, and delivered to final disposal site. The inadequate information about the components in waste
management leads to the inefficient planning of municipal waste management in most Indonesian
cities. Until now, there is no weighing system in transfer point and final disposal site required in
estimating the waste generation and collection rate. If there is such system, the local government can
take advantage for landfill area estimation. The accurate estimation of landfill area can minimize the
number of overload landfills which currently occurs in many Indonesian cities. Based on the data from
MoE in 2006, 60% of the landfills in Indonesia closes to the end-year-period (23% next year and 37%
in next 5 year). This could be a problem, because the planning and construction process of landfill sites
can not be accomplished in short time.

Conclusion
Inadequate waste management law led to inefficient solid waste management in Indonesia. The current
laws do not regulate specifically the solid waste management. Furthermore, the new Waste
Management Law No. 18/2008 introduced in 2008 has not been implemented well causing low Level
of Service (LoS) in waste management. The current practices focusing on ‘the end-pipe-approach’
bring about the problem in final disposal site. Many cities are facing the problem of overburdened
landfill because of limited land availability and open dumping sites equipped no sanitary system, such
as soil cover, leachate collection and treatment system polluting the environment through CH4
emission and leachate intrusion into ground and surface water. Waste management improvement is
required because, based on comparison data between data from UNEP and the author’s compilation,
only one indicator of waste management aspects which was not fulfilled in 2004 has been realized in
2008. Table 9 shows the development of some indicators of waste management aspect in Indonesia. It
shows that from 10 indicators of municipal waste management aspects, 4 aspects has been adequate
Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia 208

since 1999 and only one aspect was improved after the UNEP evaluation. The training program for
capacity building in municipal waste management has been provided by The Ministry of Environment
and The Ministry of Settlement and Infrastructure. Therefore, the efforts to improve the above
indicators should be initiated by viewing the inferior condition as a challenge and use the potentials to
develop them. Potentials and challenges in MWM in Indonesia are showed in Table 10. In addition, the
enactment of new waste law introduced in 2008 can be a mile stone for the waste management
development in Indonesia which can encourage the national and local government to implement a
better waste management.

Table 9: Municipal Waste management aspect implementation in three periods.

Before decentralization in 1999 – 2004

Waste Management Aspect 2005-now
1999 (UNEP)
1. Policy on Integrated Waste Management NA NA NA
2. Policy on Solid Waste Management NA NA NA
3. Institutional arrangement to handle/ manage wastes A A A
4. Regulatory framework for waste management A A A
5. Budget support for waste management NA NA NA
6. Training program for waste management NA NA A
7. Private sector participation NA NA NA
8. Community participation A A A
9. Information system NA NA NA
10. Economic Instrument A A A
NA: Not available, A: Available

Table 10: Potentials and challenges for Municipal Waste Management in Indonesia

Potentials
1. Waste Law No. 18/2008 accommodates greater role
in MWM for local government.
2. Community participation has been actually
practiced although indirectly. It can be improved
into direct involvement such as waste separation.
3. Incentives and disincentives scheme including in
Waste Law can encourage law enforcement
4. New recycling policy in 3R can increase the
possibility in waste reduction, material recovery and
revenue
5. High organic content waste is a source for
composting treatment.
6. Projected plastics consumption increase can be
potentials in achieving added value from the waste
since it can be a material input for recycling plant
and incinerator in the future.
Challenges
1. Enactment of Waste Law No 18/2008, forced Local
government to propose plan and implementation for
open dumping closing at the latest 1 year and 5 year
from the waste law enactment (May 2008)
2. Landfill developer is obliged to build waste separation
system
3. MDGs achievement target in waste sector is 70%
community is provided by MWM by 2015
4. Low public awareness in separating waste
5. Low priority in the local government’s annual budget
allocation
6. Low private sector participation
7. Lack of infrastructure
8. Though the enactment of Waste Law, there is no
policy on Solid waste management since most
municipal waste is solid waste

Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank Directorate General of Higher Education, Department of National Education
of the Republic of Indonesia for their important contributions to the development of this work.
209 Christia Meidiana and Thomas Gamse

References
[1] Brunner, RC. Waste to energy combustion. In: Tchobanoglous G, Kreith F, editors. Handbook
of solid waste management. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2002 p.13.3–84.
[2] Farlane, Mc., (1998). “Financial and Operational factors Influence the Provision of Municipal
Solid Waste Services in Large Cities”. Unpublished Paper, WHO Regional Office for Europe,
Denmark.
[3] Hilman, M.,(September 2005). “Prospect of municipal waste management through CDM
Project Indonesia”, Proceeding of International Workshop on Landfill Gas development and
The CDM, September 5 – 7 , Bali, Indonesia
[4] Hoornweg, D., L. Thomas, K. Verma. (1999). “What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in
Asia”. Washington DC
[5] IGES, (2008). Climate Change Policies in the Asia-Pacific. IGES, Japan.
[6] Lee, K.B., and S. Troxler, (1992), “Assesment of waste management in the Asean Regions. p.
103 - 138 In T.-E. Chua and L.R. Gaces [eds]. Waste management in the Coastal Areas of
ASEAN Regions: roles of governments, banking institutions, donor agencies, private sectors
and communities”. ICLARM Conference Proceedings 33, 218 p.
[7] Ministry of Environment (2005). “Indonesia Country Fact Sheet. Jakarta, Indonesia”. MoE,
Jakarta
[8] Ministry of Environment (2008). “Indonesian Domestic Solid Waste Statistics Year 2008”.
MoE, Jakarta
[9] Roosita, H., (December 2004). “Public Disclosure System as an effective tool for pollution
control. The Implementation of PROPER in Indonesia”. Unpublished Paper: Keynote Address
presented at the GFSD Conference on Economic Aspects of Environmental Compliance
Assurance, Paris
[10] Susmono, (January 2009).” Urban Environment Sanitation Infrastructure Improvement in
Indonesia”. Unpublished Paper: Keynote Address presented at the Conference on Delta
Challenges in Urban Areas, Jakarta
[11] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), (2006). “2006 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories”. Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara T. and Tanabe K. (eds), IGES, Japan.
[12] The Ministry of Infrastructure, (2001). “Data and General Information of Urban and Rural
Development”. MoI, Jakarta.
[13] United Nation of Development Program, (1987). “The Need for Solid Waste Management”.
ASEAN Report, UNDP Thailand
[14] UNEP (2003). “Sustainable Use of Natural Resources in the Context of Trade Liberalization
and Export Growth in Indonesia. A Study on the Use of Economic Instruments in the Pulp and
Paper Industry”. Division of Technology, Industry and Economics UNEP, Geneva.
[15] United Nation for Environmental Program (2004).” State of Waste Management in South East
Asia”. UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics – International Environmental
Technology Centre, UNEP Kusatsu City, Japan
[16] United Nations, (2003). “Cities and Sustainable Development. Lesson and Experiences from
Asia and The Pacific”. UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, New
York.
[17] United Nations, (Retrieved 10th May 2009). “Sanitary Country Profile Indonesia”. Sanitation
2004-Indonesia,
http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/indonesa/sanitationIndonesia04f.pdf
[18] UNEP, (2002). “Enhancing Synergies and Mutual Supportiveness of Multilateral
Environmental Agreements and the World Trade Organization”. A Synthesis Report,
Unpublished Paper, United Nations, Geneva
Development of Waste Management Practices in Indonesia 210

[19] UNEP, (2008). “Demonstrating Environmentally Sound Technologies (ESTs) for Building
waste Reduction in Indonesia”, Background Document on Economic Instruments with special
reference to Debris and C&D Waste Management”. The Debri Project, UNEP.
[20] World Banka, (Retrieved 10th June 2009). “Indonesia Environment Monitor 2003 - Special
Focus:Reducing Pollution”. http;//web.worldbank.org
[21] World Bankb, (Retrieved 1st July 2009). “Indonesia’s Program for Pollution Control,
Evaluation, and Rating (PROPER)”.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEMPOWERMENT/Resources/14825_Indonesia_Proper
-web.pdf
[22] World Bankc, (Retrieved 10th June 2009). “Indonesia data and statistics” World Development
Indicators Database April 2009. http;//web.worldbank.org