Implementation of Existing Laws on Solid Waste Management Disposal

in Cabanatuan City

Major in Local Government Administration

Social Science, Public Finance

Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology

dannypastorfide@ygmail.com

Abstract - This research aims to examine the Existing Laws and Practice on Solid
Waste Management Disposal in Cabanatuan City through “Ordinance 015-2012 or No
Plastic Ordinance” in Cabanatuan City prohibiting the use of plastic bags and Styrofoam
containers in commercial establishments in the city, which can reduce the amount of
garbage generated. Specifically, the study will seek to determine the following, how may
the waste disposal practices of the respondents are described in terms of, Garbage
Collection, Burning in the Backyard, Compost pit. How may the proper waste disposal
participation of the respondents be described in terms of. Garbage recycling and Garbage
segregation. How may the Cabanatuan City Solid Waste Management Department and
Barangay Solid Waste management assist the respondents in proper garbage disposal in
terms of, Information dissemination, Conducts training and seminars, Sanction to the
violators.

Keywords- existing;laws;waste;solid;management

I. INTRODUCTION

One of the most common topics that are being talked about aside from the economic
and political issues is environmental issue. Solid Waste is one of the most widely known
problems that the earth is encountering. It is not just a problem in this country but also to
other countries as well. There are a lot of studies and invention created to solve the
environmental issues, specifically the waste management problem. Solid waste problem
is the number one cause of today’s issues and destruction of ecosystem. People can be ill
by exposing themselves to hazardous waste in the environment; many of these are linked
to environmental problems such as expose to mosquitoes, polluted drinking water and
poor waste disposal. The need for solid waste management is now a growing problem
due to continuous increase in population and industrial production.

Philippine homes, businesses and industry generate millions of tons of solid waste
annually. While landfill disposal continues to be an option, new disposal facilities face
strong public examination and are costly to site, build and operate. The department is
constantly seeking alternatives to landfill disposal that are both environmentally
protective and cost-effective for the consumer. Solid waste management permitting,
monitoring and enforcement efforts can prevent illegal dumping and other factors that
may cause long-term social, economic and environmental problems.Cabanatuan city is a

1
first class city in the province of Nueva Ecija. As of now it is considered the commercial,
industrial and educational hub of the province and also known as the “Tricycle Capital of
the Philippines”. The increasing growth of garbage brought some health problems. The
city is implementing an ordinance to combat such problem, one there is the so called “
Ordinance 015-2012 or the “No Plastic Ordinance “ prohibiting the use of plastic bags
and Styrofoam containers in commercial establishments in the city, which can reduce the
amount of garbage generated.

To implement this ordinance, the City government conduct training and seminar
about” No Plastic Ordinance “. It is open to all 89 Barangay of Cabanatuan City. With the
leadership of the Barangay Captains a Barangay Solid Waste Management Committee
was established. In implementing the program, each barangay will conduct compost
making, as well as continuous advocacy training on waste management, clean and green
and livelihood training seminars which among the activities undertaken and still on-going
projects of each barangay. The said activities were clearly stipulated in RA 9003 known
as “The Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000”. But it is still a question of
requirements undertaken by the program if is successfully implemented. Thereby, it is
deemed necessary to conduct the study “Implementation of Existing Laws on Solid
Waste Management disposal Trough “Ordinance 015-2012 or No Plastic Ordinance” in
Cabanatuan City.

II. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The study aims to evaluate the “ the Implementation of Existing Laws on Solid Waste
Management Disposal in Cabanatuan City”through “Ordinance 015-2012 or No Plastic
Ordinance in the City. Specifically, the study will seek to determine the following: I.
How may the disposal practices of the respondents be described in terms of; 1.1. Garbage
collection 1.2. Burning in the backyard 1.3. Compost pit II. How may the proper waste
disposal participation of the respondent be describe in terms of; 2.1. Garbage recycling
and 2.2. Garbage segregation III. How may the Cabanatuan City Solid Waste
Management assist the respondents in proper garbage disposal in terms of: 3.1.
Information dissemination; 3.2. Conduct tranings and seminars.

III. RESEARCH METHOD

A descriptive research methodology was used for this study. A survey was
administered to selected Barangay and their Barangay Captain in Cabanatuan City. The
term ‘survey’ is commonly applied to a research methodology designed to collect data
from a specific population, or a sample from that population, and typically utilizes a
questionnaire or an interview as the survey instrument (Robson, 1993).

IV. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

In order to conceptualize the study, the Input, Process and Output system will be used.
The Input box represents the primary data of the study wherein doing an actual interview
with the respondents and the secondary data is the material document coming from the

2
city government. The process box shows data analysis and data interpretation, while the
Output box is the baseline data, the probable outputs of the study namely
“Iimplementation of Existing Laws on Solid Waste Management disposal in Cabanatuan
City” through Ordinance 015- 2012 0r “ No Plasatic Ordinance “ Program in Cabanatuan
City”. Input Process Output “Implementation of Existing Laws on Solid Waste
Management Disposal in Cabanatuan City “through Ordinance 015-2012 or No Plastic
Ordinace Program in Cabanatuan City” 1. Data collection; data analysis; questionaire
construction.2. Primary data; actual interview to barangay captain. 3. Secondary data;
Material documents coming from the city government.

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Result and Discussion presents the data gathered on proper waste management,
garbage collection, burning in the backyard compost pit, garbage, recycling, garbage
segregation, information dissemination, conducts training/seminars.
The disposal practices of the respondents may be described in terms of:

1. Table 1.1 to 1.3 The waste disposal practices of the respondents may be described
in terms of:

Table 1.1
Garbage Collection

Garbage Collection Frequency Percentage

Always 48 87.27
Often 6 10.91
Sometimes 1 1.82
Total 55 100

Figure 1.1. shows that there were no respondents who have a never garbage
collection a week. Forty eight (48) respondents have always garbage collection a week,
which is equivalent to eighty seven point twenty seven percent (87.27%).
Six (6) of them have often garbage collection a week, which is equivalent to ten point
ninety one percent (10.91%), one (1) of them have sometimes, garbage collection a week
which is equivalent to one point eighty two percent (1.82%). From the data presented,
forty eight (48) respondents have always garbage collection a week. It shows that most of
the respondents have always garbage collected.

Table 1.2.
Burning in the Backyard

Burning in the Backyard Frequency Percentage

Always 1 1.82
Often 6 10.91
Sometimes 48 87.27

3
Total 55 100

Figure 1.2 shows that there were no respondents who have never burned their
garbage in their back yard once a week. One (1) respondent has always burned their
garbage in their back yard a week, which is equivalent to one point eighty two percent
(1.82%)
Six (6) of them have often burned their garbage in their back yard a week which is
equivalent to ten point ninety one percent (10.91%), and forty eight (48) of them have
sometimes burned their garbage in their backyard in a week which is equivalent to eighty
seven point twenty seven percent (87.27%). From the data presented, forty eight (48)
respondents have sometimes burned their garbage in their back yard a week . It shows
that most of the respondents focused on burned their garbage as their way in disposing
their garbage.

Table 1.3.
Compost pit

Compost pit Frequency Percentage

Always 1 1.82
Often 6 10.91
Sometimes 48 87.27
Total 55 100

Figure 1.3 shows that there were no respondents who have never used a compost
pit as their way in disposing their garbage in their back yard. One (1) respondent has
always used compost pit as they’re to dispose their garbage permanently in their back
yard, which is equivalent to one point eighty two percent (1.82%). Six (6) of them have
often used compost pit as their alternatives in disposing the garbage in their back yard
temporarily, which is equivalent to ten point ninety one percent (10.91%), and forty eight
(48) of them has sometimes used compost pit temporarily in disposing their garbage in
their backyard while waiting the garbage collector which is equivalent to eighty seven
point twenty seven percent (87.27%). From the data presented, forty eight (48)
respondents have sometimes used compost pit temporarily in disposing their garbage in
their backyard while waiting the garbage collector which, it shows that most of the
respondents more preferable and focused on garbage collection as their way in disposing
their garbage.

Table 2.1. to 2.2. The proper waste disposal participation of the respondents is
described in terms of:
Table 2.1.
Recycling
Recycling Weighted Verbal
Mean Interpretation
1. I have properly disposed my garbage 4.93 Always
recycled the things that it can be used

4
 in other used.
2. I have personally advised my 4.76 Always
constituent in recycling the garbage
before the garbage collector collect
their garbage.
3. I can adjust in every situation and 4.64 Always
circumstances like time consuming
in recycling my garbage to dispose it
environmentally friendly.
4. I have disagreed with my constituent 2.80 often
if they don’t recycle their garbage to
dispose their garbage using a
recycling method whatever
disposal they’re used in an issue of
garbage disposal.
5. I experienced to disappointment if my 2.31 Sometimes
constituent is not following the
recycling method of disposing their
garbage.
Average weighted mean 3.89 Always

Figure 2.1 the first item it shows the scaled response of the respondent in
accordance to the proper disposal of garbage that they have properly disposed their
garbage recycled the things that it can be used in the other used the weighted mean four
point ninety three (4.93) which is interpreted as always.The second item is about the
personal and social adjustment the respondent has personally advised their constituent in
recycling the garbage before the garbage collector collect their garbage, the weighted
mean is four point sixty four (4.64) which is interpreted as always.The third item is if the
respondent can adjust in every situation and circumstances like time consuming in
recycling their garbage to dispose it environmentally friendly; the weighted mean is four
point sixty four (4.64) which is interpreted as always.
The fourth item is if the respondents have disagreed with his constituent in certain
issue like not recycling the garbage properly before the disposal, the weighted mean is,
two point eight (2.80) which is equivalent to often.The last item is about if the
respondents experienced disappointment through the negligence of their constituent in
recycling their garbage before the disposal of it, the weighted mean is, two point thirty
one (2.31) which is interpreted as sometimes.The tables 2.1 have an average, weighted
mean of three point eighty nine (3.89) which are interpreted as often.From the data
presented, it can be said that respondents that recycling of their garbage with his or her
constituent can be achieved. It shows that respondent can adjust to any situation and
circumstances concerning the proper disposal of the garbage that the environment calls
for.
Table 2.2.
Segregation

Segregation Weighted Mean Verbal

5
 interpretaion
1. To Prevent Mix Ups At Landfills 4.16 Always
And Avoid Toxic Emissions
2. To Reduce Chances Of Infection 4.00 Always
3. Reduce Impact On Climate Change 3.60 Always
4. Reduce Wastage And Encourage 2.93 Often
Recycling
5. It Is Free And Can Help You Reuse 4.47 Sometimes
Average weighted mean: 3.83 Always

Figure 2.2 shows the scaled response of respondents in accordance to the needs of
segregation. The first statement is if we do segregation To Prevent Mix Ups At Landfills
And Avoid Toxic Emissions, the weighted mean is four point sixteen (4.16) which is
interpreted as always.The second statement is if the respondents are able to segregate
their garbage. To Reduce Chances of Infection, the weighted mean is four (4.00) which
are interpreted as always.The third statement is if the respondents can provide for the
segregation of the garbage it can Reduce Impact On Climate Change, the weighted mean
is three point sixty (3.60) which is interpreted as often.
The fourth statement is if the respondents can provide time for segregation of
their garbage it can Reduce Wastage And Encourage Recycling, the weighted mean is,
two point ninety three (2.93) which is interpreted as sometimes.The last statement is if
the respondent’s does segregation It Is Free And Can Help us Reuse, the weighted mean
is four point forty seven (4.47) which is interpreted as always. The Table 2.2 The average
weighted mean is three point eighty three (3.83) which are interpreted as often. Based on
the data presented, it shows that the respondent often does segregation of their garbage
because they know the needs of their community. In segregation of the garbage, the
respondents can protect their family and the environment from deterioration for future
calls.

Table 3.1 to 3.2 Described the Cabanatuan City Solid Waste Management
Department and Barangay Solid Waste Management assist the respondents in proper
garbage disposal in terms of:
Table 3.1.
Information Dissemination

Information Dissemination Weighted Mean Verbal

Interpretation
1. Discussed project activities on the 4.93 Always
local radio
2. Publishing information in the local 4.76 Always
newspaper
3. Presented program results to local 4.64 Always
community groups and other local
stakeholders.

6
 4. Created and distributing program 2.80 Often
materials, such as flyers.

5. Hosted health promotion events at 2.31 Sometimes

health fairs and school functions.

Average weighted mean: 3.89 Often

Figure 3.1 the first item it shows the scaled response of the respondent in
accordance to information dissemination regarding the proper disposal of garbage that
they have Discussing project activities on the local radio about the proper disposal of
their garbage in the weighted mean four point ninety three (4.93) which is interpreted as
always.The second item is about the Publishing information in the local newspaper
regarding the proper disposal of their garbage, the weighted mean is four point sixty four
(4.64) which is interpreted as always. The third item is if the respondents presenting
program results to local community groups and other local stakeholders about the proper
disposal of their garbage in the weighted mean are four point sixty four (4.64) which is
interpreted as always.
The fourth item is if the respondents Creating and distributing program materials,
such as flyers, about the proper disposal of their garbage, the weighted mean is, two
point eight (2.80) which is equivalent to often. The last item is about if the respondents
hosting health promotion events at health fairs and school functions Regarding the effect
of proper disposal of their garbage in the weighted mean is, two point thirty one (2.31)
which is interpreted as sometimes.
The tables 3.1 have an average, weighted mean of three point eighty nine (3.89) which
are interpreted as often. From the data presented, it can be said that respondents’ doe’s
information dissemination about the proper disposal of their garbage with his or her
constituent can be achieved. It shows that respondent can motivate and properly informed
the people in any situation and circumstances concerning the proper disposal of the
garbage that the environment calls for.

Table 3.2
Conduct training and Seminar

Conduct training and Seminar Weighted Mean Verbal

Interpretation
1. Conduct training in the awareness of the 4.16 Always
people of the negative effect of improper
waste disposal in their health.
2. To educate the people regarding the 4.00 Always
different consequences of the improper waste
disposal in the environment.
3. To inform the people that they can 3.60 Always

7
earn money from the recycled materials such
as papers, plastics, and bottles.
4. to make them a partner in taking care, 2.93 Often
the environment by following the laws about
the proper waste disposal
5. To make them a trainer and advocate 4.47 Sometimes
about the law abiding citizens either after the
seminars and training attended.
Weighted Mean Average 3.83 Often

Figure 3.2 shows the scaled response of respondents in accordance to the needs of
conducting training and seminars. The first statement is if we do Conduct training in the
awareness of the people of the negative effect of improper waste disposal in their health.,
the weighted mean is four point sixteen (4.16) which is interpreted as always. The second
statement is if the respondents are able to educate the people regarding the different
consequences of the improper waste disposal in the environment. To Reduce Chances of
global warming, the weighted mean is four (4.00) which are interpreted as always. The
third statement is if the respondents can provide the information through
seminars/training marginalized constituent of their community can earn money from the
recycled materials such as papers, plastics, and bottles. For the segregation of the garbage
and it can Reduce Impact on Climate Change, the weighted mean is three point sixty
(3.60) which are interpreted as often.
The fourth statement is if the respondents can provide time for training/seminars
in their community, to make them a partner in taking care, the environment by following
the laws about the proper waste disposal, weighted mean is, two point ninety three (2.93)
which is interpreted as sometimes. The last statement is if the respondents can provide
time for training/seminars in their community, To make them a trainer and advocate
about the how to become law abiding citizens either after the seminars and training
attended the weighted mean is four point forty seven (4.47) which is interpreted as
always.

VI. CONCLUSION

According to the information the researcher obtained, after the analysis of the data
being gathered, come up with the following conclusions: There is a collection of wastes
of all the barangays every week. The respondents do not have the burning of waste
practice in their barangay because of the barangay memorandum. Some of the
respondents used compost pit temporarily in disposing their garbage in their backyard
while waiting the garbage collector which and their backyard is spacious. Most of the
respondents are engaged in recycling and segregation of their solid waste, especially
those who are aware of the negative effect of improper waste management and disposal
in their health and in their environment The Respondents Conducted Training/Seminars
to make the people aware in the existing Laws concerning the proper solid waste disposal
they do believed the need of obedience for the benefits of their own health as well as their

8
environment.The respondents make the people to be aware of their responsibility in their
own family, community, through broadcast on the local radio, published in the local
newspapers and distributed some flyer. About the Existing laws, Proper Solid waste
management disposal.

VII. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the summary of findings and conclusions the following recommendations are
offered: The researcher recommends the full blast of information dissemination regarding
the laws that it already existed, so that the people in every Community would be fully
informed in obedience of every law concerning the proper solid waste management. The
researcher recommends the full blast implementation to make recycling, segregation,
before the garbage collector collected their garbage. The researcher recommends to
continue using compost pit for the biodegradable waste to lesser the burden of the
garbage collector in collecting the Solid waste.The researcher recommends to continue in
segregation of the Solid Waste materials and recyclable materials those who are can sell
to the junk shop for additional income. The researcher recommends to the respondents to
invite resource speaker who is master in Solid Management or environmentalist to share
an additional Information in proper solid waste disposal management. The researcher
recommends to the respondent to monitor and always overseeing their Barangay helping
to their constituents to comply with the existing laws regarding the proper solid waste
disposal.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Researcher would like to take immense pleasure in thanking the following: To my
colleague Mrs. Gemma D. Santos, Ph.D. for the guidance, motivation, and inspiration she
has given. A heartfelt thank you is greatly extended for the valuable advises and
suggestions she made to improve the overall contents of this study. To Dr. Walter Salva,
my English critic, for the knowledge, and understanding he has shared with me

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(1) Todaro , Michael P. 2011 Person Custom Publishing, Essentials of Development

Economics, (2) Published materials – CCSWMO , (3) Felipe E. Balaria, DBA, Arjay F.
Ortiz, MBA Principles of Research”; (3)
http://ap.fftc.agnet.org/ap_db.php?id=153&print=; (4)
https://m.facebook.com/nuevaecijajournal/posts/10151651778324650

9
10