J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518
DOI 10.1007/s10163-013-0201-2
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Recycling of plastic packaging waste in Bandung City, Indonesia
Mochammad Chaerul • Ahmad Reza Fahruroji •
Takeshi Fujiwara
Received: 12 March 2012 / Accepted: 23 September 2013 / Published online: 18 October 2013
 Springer Japan 2013
Abstract Economic growth, changing consumption and
production patterns are resulting in rapid increase in the
generation of plastic wastes, including plastic packaging
waste (PPW). A variety of PPW is identified in the muni-
cipal solid waste (MSW) stream. In this paper, quantity and
composition of PPW at generators (residential and non-
residential sectors) and at the informal sector of waste
recycling were measured, and accordingly the flow of PPW
within Bandung City, Indonesia was analyzed. Though the
generation rate per capita is not so high (25.1 g per day),
total PPW generated by 2.3 million inhabitants in Bandung
becomes 58.4 tonnes per day (3.76 % of total MSW gen-
erated). Due to lack of integrated MSW management, most
of PPW is neither collected properly nor disposed of in
appropriate manner by the municipality. Collection of
valuable wastes including PPW is done predominantly by
the informal sector without regard to health and safety. It is
predicted that total PPW recycled by various informal
waste recycling players like scavengers, junkmen, inter-
mediates, and dealers is 27.5 tonnes per day (64.6 % of
total PPW generated). Interviews regarding the existing
handling methods and incentives preferred by generators to
increase the recycling rate are also presented.
M. Chaerul (&)
A. R. Fahruroji
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jalan Ganesha 10,
Bandung 40132, Indonesia
e-mail: mochammad.chaerul@ftsl.itb.ac.id;
chaerul_2000@yahoo.com
T. Fujiwara
Solid Waste Management Research Center,
Okayama University, 1-1-1 Tsushima-naka, Kita-ku,
Okayama 700-8530, Japan
Keywords Plastic packaging waste
Generation

Composition
Recycling
Informal sector
Introduction
In order to meet needs, humans consume a wide range of
products and subsequently this generates wastes. Similar to
other developing countries, the composition of waste
generated in Indonesia is dominated by biodegradable
organic waste. However, the use of plastic for packaging
has increased significantly as a result of the change of life
style of the community, and subsequently this has led to
increased generation of plastic packaging waste (PPW).
Conventionally, management of municipal solid waste
(MSW) emphasizes the process of collection, transporta-
tion, and disposal of the waste as far as possible from the
source, causing the increasing quantity of PPW to remain
at the final disposal site. The increase in waste generation
causes the increase in budget required for the waste man-
agement department, and shortens the lifetime of the dis-
posal site, as plastic waste is degraded by nature for years.
The breakthrough of introducing the use of biodegradable
plastic is still limited, as it is much more expensive than
common plastic.
Because of its strength and simplicity, many producers
prefer to package their product with various forms of
plastic. Since 7 May 2008, Indonesia has introduced Solid
Waste Management Act No. 18. According to the Act,
every producer should label or put a symbol related to
waste reduction and handling on the packaging and/or their
products. The producers are also obliged to manage the
packaging of their product and/or the product itself if it is
unable or difficult to be decomposed naturally. The concept
is known as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR).
123
510 J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518

However, until now, the government regulation regarding 2. to provide incentives to producers to incorporate
the technical guidance for the producers’ obligation above environmental considerations in the design of their
has not yet been endorsed. products.’’
The problem of MSW management in Indonesia has a
number of aspects associated with it, such as technical,
Municipal solid waste management in Bandung City
institutional, financial, environmental and social aspects.
Waste recycling becomes a promising measure to reduce
The city of Bandung is the capital of West Java Province
the burdens. While the government is trying to establish the
and the Indonesia’s fourth largest city. Bandung City is
infrastructure of waste recycling, other so-called ‘‘informal
situated on a plateau, about 180 km southeast of Jakarta,
sector’’ parties have practiced recycling for years. They
the capital city of Indonesia (Fig. 1). With its 26 sub-dis-
collect valuable materials including paper, plastic, alumi-
tricts and 139 villages, the city of Bandung covers an area
num, metal, etc. The informal sector’s activities are not
of 167 km2 and has a total population about 2.3 million
considered illegal in Indonesia. Various player, such as
inhabitants. The surrounding cities still have vast available
waste pickers, micro-enterprises and small enterprises, etc.,
land and as such, urban sprawl is evidence of the increasing
are getting involved in informal waste recycling
population. Host to the historic Asia Africa conference in
The informal sector, according to the International
year 1955, Bandung is now a center of higher education,
Labor Organization (ILO) definition, comprises production
commerce and the aircraft industry; despite its modern
units that typically operate at a low level of organization.
amenities still retains much of its colonial era charm.
Most of these recycling units have very low fixed capital
Like most other cities in developing countries, MSW
for machinery and are generally run as small family busi-
management in Bandung relies on a conventional collect–
nesses. Informal enterprises are not usually registered, and
haul–dispose system. In order to carry this out, the
thus evade rules and regulations, e.g. tax laws, minimum
municipality has task-force groups in each sub-district. It
wage laws, accounting and workplace safety [1]. Conse-
mainly relies on manual labor and non-specialized trucks to
quently, not only is child labor come across, but dismal
collect the waste to transfer stations, and then the waste is
working conditions are also encountered (e.g. no ventila-
transported to the final disposal site. In an attempt to
tion, not protection from pathogenic waste). Moreover, it is
increase productivity, a variety of collection, transfer, and
practically impossible to control the practices of post-
haulage and disposal methods have been tried with limited
consumer waste handling and processing; this can result in
success. The lack of success may be attributed to poorly
products that fail to comply with minimum safety and
define long-term goals, lack of information for planning,
health requirements [2]. The role of the informal sector in
monitoring and evaluation, and the fact that public con-
solid waste recycling and the need of an integration system
sultation and participation are not an integral part of the
towards an inclusive society have been described in detail
system [4].
[3]. The present paper quantifies the generation and com-
The other impediment is that no single ministry or
position of PPW in Bandung City, Indonesia and it sub-
agency at the national level in Indonesia is charged with
sequently analyzes the existing situation on recycling of
the development and implementation of solid waste man-
waste, particularly plastic waste, performed by the informal
agement goals and policies. Instead, policy development is
sector in the city. The present paper aims to provide data on
divided among several ministries, namely the Ministry of
the capacity of the PPW handling system that may useful
Public Work, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of
for the stakeholders, related to the concept of EPR to be
National Planning etc., and the implementation is the
implemented in the near future in Indonesia.
Until now, there has been no certain definition of EPR in
Indonesia, and the definition of this term varies around the
world. A possible definition of EPR that could be adopted for
Indonesian regulation comes from the Organisation for Eco-
nomic Cooperation and Development (OECD). It has defined
EPR as: ‘‘…an environmental policy approach in which a
producer’s responsibility physical and/or financial, for a
product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s
life cycle. There are two related features of EPR policy:
1. the shifting of responsibility (physically and/or eco-
nomically; fully or partially) upstream to the producer
and away from municipalities; and Fig. 1 The location of Bandung City

123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518
responsibility of each municipality. Furthermore, within
each municipality, there is no separation between regula-
tory and operational roles and the same department per-
forms these two tasks, leading to potential conflicts of
interest [5].
Methodology
Various activities carried out to determine the flow of
PPW, including field observation to find the type of plastic
packaging used by consumers, sampling of waste genera-
tion at source, and interview with the generators and the
informal sector in waste recycling. Bandung City was
chosen as case study representing major cities in Indonesia
and the common situation of MSW management system in
developing countries. Collected data was then analyzed
using descriptive statistics.
Classification of plastic packaging
From investigation, plastic is used to package the following
products, and the classification of PPW was made accord-
ingly for this research. Some may have different classifi-
cations on the same products. During survey, a picture of an
example of product was shown to respondents to ensure that
they had same understanding of the classification.
1. Foods, including snack, candy, ice cream, noodle,
biscuit, etc.
2. Beverages, including sachets and plastic bottles for
soft-drink, milk, juice, mineral water, supplement
energy, etc.
3. Toiletries, including toothpaste, deodorant, hand and
body soaps, shampoo, face cleansing, etc.
4. Cosmetics, including perfume, hand and body lotion,
facial cream, skin care, etc.
5. Home cleaners, including for floor, window, porcelain,
dish, and other cleaner for kitchen appliances, etc.
6. Laundries, including detergent, softener, whitener, etc.
7. Lubricants, including brake fluid, engine oil for
vehicle, etc.
8. Others, including cooking oil, plastic bags, hairspray,
etc.
Sorting studies were also conducted for respondents of
recycling informal players. The classification of plastic
material type was either based on the standard number
symbols on the bottom of container or based on the
information from the players. The players are familiar with
any plastic material type, as they only collect particular
plastic material types, including Polyethylene Terephthal-
ate (PET), Polypropylene (PP) and High Density Polyeth-
ylene (HDPE).
511
Identification of sample
A stratified sampling method was adopted to quantify PPW
generation from residential and nonresidential sectors. To
ensure the representativeness of samples, the selected
households were geographically scattered and of different
economic level. In view of these principles, 80 households
scattered in all 26 sub-districts available in Bandung City
were selected. Sample size of household was different
among the sub-districts, as we considered three levels of
monthly income per household as a basis, i.e. low income
(less than IDR 1,200,00/US$ 133), middle income
(between US$ 133 and US$ 555), and high income (higher
than IDR 5,000,000/US$ 555). Using this basis, there were
eight, 30 and 42 selected households representative of low-,
middle- and high- incomes, respectively. The classification of
income level was based on each family’s self-assessment
during the interview.
The waste generated by the nonresidential sector, which
included governmental offices, hotels, malls, hospitals,
schools and workshops/machine shops, was also found
through eight days of sampling. One sample was selected
for each utility, each with a sample size of five. A similar
sampling procedure was also conducted to quantify PPW
accepted and recycled by informal recycling players like
scavengers, junkmen, intermediates and dealers. The
informal sector players selected as respondents have con-
sidered the geography and scale of the business. The
sample size of scavenger, junkman, intermediate and dealer
were 12, eight, four, and four, respectively.
Cycles of potentially recyclable and financially valuable
wastes start from their sources, such as residential and
nonresidential areas. These informal sector activities are
most attractive for businesses, involving main players such
as scavengers and junkmen, who collect the valuable
wastes door-to-door. The difference between junkmen and
scavengers is that the latter get their valuable wastes free of
charge, while the former have capital to buy these used
goods. Usually, they sell their goods to the nearest inter-
mediates in dirty condition without any further treatment.
The intermediates clean and sometimes shred the recycla-
ble material to pieces, and subsequently sell it to dealers.
Dealers, as collectors of goods in mass scales, usually have
business scopes encompassing the processing of these
goods, especially plastics, to be converted into goods
available for recycling.
Interview
During the sampling, interviews were also conducted for
all selected samples of residential and nonresidential sec-
tors, to get various data including the handling methods for
the waste, and their willingness to recycle. Specifically, the
123
512
interviewer asked about the price of plastic wastes for
informal recycling players. The flow of recyclable waste
moves from the generator to scavenger and/or junkman, to
intermediate, to dealer before reach to the recycling
industry.
Result and discussion
Generation and composition of PPW
PPW generation rates from residential and nonresidential
sectors over the sampling period are summarized in
Table 1. The generation of PPW varies not only among the
households, but also among nonresidential generators. A
descriptive statistic was made to obtain a mean value and
its standard deviation for waste generation. The total PPW
generated daily from each household during sampling
ranged from 15 to 505 g, and the highest portion was the
waste generated from the high-income household, but this
had the highest standard deviation (SD = 101 g). This
translates to a daily per capita rate of 7, 20, 33 g for low-
income, middle-income and high-income households,
respectively. Total PPW generated from all households in
the city was predicted by multiplying the generation unit
with its respective population. Though the generation rate
per capita is not so high, with total inhabitants around 2.3
million, the total PPW generated from all households in
Bandung City becomes 57.2 tonnes per day.
The profile of PPW from nonresidential generators is
also summarized in Table 1. Similarly, total PPW gener-
ated from each type of facility in Bandung City per day was
predicted by multiplying the generation unit with the
respective total number of each facility available in Ban-
dung. It can also be inferred that total PPW generated daily
from all nonresidential sources combined is 1.13 tonnes
(about 1.97 % of the total waste generated from house-
holds). This small percentage may occur when people
consuming a product with plastic packaging discharge the
waste not within the premises; they may discharge it
directly to another public waste collection point or to their
household garbage box. During the sampling period, hotel
(including guest house) was the biggest generator of actual
numbers of bottles, cartons etc. among nonresidential
generators (205 packages, SD = 71 packages), and the
daily generation unit was about 1.35 kg per hotel
(SD = 398 g).
Total PPW generated daily from residential and non-
residential sources in the city becomes 58.4 tonnes (25.1 g/
capita ? day). It has been predicted that total MSW gen-
erated daily in Bandung City was 1,551 tonnes [6]. Thus,
PPW contributes about 3.76 % of total MSW generated in
Bandung. This is comparable with other studies, where the
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518
portion of all plastic wastes including PPW and other type
of plastic waste like plastic bags, pipes and fittings, home
appliances, electronic equipments, toys, etc. was 12–14 %
of total MSW generated in Indonesia [6, 7].
The global trend in waste has been towards increasing
waste generation and changing its composition. This trend
is closely linked to the levels of industrial and economic
development of the country. For instance, in Sydney,
Australia, the amount of MSW generated is about 5 kg/
person ? day; and the amount of plastic in MSW gener-
ated is about 6–7 % [8]. In Vietnam, the average household
solid waste generation rate is 0.281 kg/person ? day and
the amount of plastics in MSW generated is about 6 % [9].
The weight of individual components of PPW generated
depends on product type (Fig. 2). One kilogram of PPW
may consist of anywhere between 6 and 714 U of plastic
packaging, depending on the product type composition.
The heaviest is lubricant oil packaging (158 g), while the
lightest is candy wrap (1.4 g). It can be seen that toiletries,
home cleaners and foods become the biggest portions
found in the stream of PPW in residential and nonresi-
dential sectors. Cosmetics are also dominantly found in the
residential sector. It was observed that food packaging
waste consists predominantly of noodle wrappings.
Detailed composition of each product ccan be found in
Fig. 3. All percentages shown in Figs. 2 and 3 use a wet-
weight basis.
Handling method for PPW
The proper methods for handling waste should be clearly
mentioned on the packaging, to educate the community.
Still, most PPW generated in households is simply mixed
and collected for disposal with the rest of MSW (more than
60 %, Fig. 4). This includes sachets of detergent, tooth-
paste tubes, plastic bottles of perfume, hand and body
lotions, and containers of lubricant. Only a small part of
those wastes is cleaned and reused by housewives, like
plastic bottles of cooking oil and liquid soap, as the pro-
ducer provides refill products. But again, this will produce
another PPW, as the refill product is usually packed in a
one-time-use plastic packaging. Only a small quantity of
non-reusable plastic bottle is normally given, or sold as it is
profitable, to the junkmen.
Among non-households, the same pattern as for house-
holds emerges with respect to handling methods, except
that the portion of the waste collected without separation is
higher. It may happen because the cleaning department in a
public utility gives less attention to the waste recycling;
they may focus to keep their premises clean from any kind
of waste. It also commonly happens that the scavengers
pick any valuable material, including PPW, from the
temporary waste depot.
 Table 1 Generation rate of PPW in residential and nonresidential sectors
Waste generators Number of PPW (unit bottle Weight of PPW (g/household ? day) Weight Population Total PPW generated
or carton/household ? day) (g/person ? day) (thousand) (tonne/day)
Range Average SD Range Average SD

Households
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518

1. Low income 9–28 17.0 3.3 15–235 34 13 7 302 1.98

2. Middle income 45–63 51.1 3.5 65–452 91 90 20 893 18.1
3. High income 43–72 65.4 5.1 54–505 137 101 33 1,135 37.1
Total from residential sector 2,330 57.2
Waste generator Number of PPW Weight of PPW (g/facility ? day) Total facility available Total PPW generated
(unit bottle or carton/facility ? day) in Bandung City (tonne/day)
Range Average SD Range Average SD

Facilities
1. Governmental office 100–201 143 40.1 329–2,054 1,103 129 31 0.03
2. Hotel 103–302 204 70.5 544–2,567 1,350 398 242 0.33
3. Mall 123–231 175 44.8 884–2,065 1,437 211 32 0.05
4. Hospital 102–191 142 43.0 694–3,530 1,068 364 30 0.03
5. University 103–211 140 41.0 561–2,506 1,134 202 33 0.04
6. Workshop 120–201 149 34.6 1,089–5,965 1,284 668 502 0.65
Total from nonresidential sector 1.13
Total from residential and nonresidential sectors 58.37
513

123
514 J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518

Fig. 2 Composition of PPW

(wet-weight basis after
composition of PPW)

Fig. 3 Detailed composition of

PPW (wet-weight basis)

Fig. 4 Handling method for

PPW

Figure 5 represents the discharge period, meaning the proportional lifetime of the product itself and any reuse of
period of time between consumption of the product and the packaging; the longer lifetime, the longer period that
collection for disposal of PPW. The period is the the packaging becomes waste. The discharge period for

123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518
Fig. 5 Discharge period of
PPW
Fig. 6 Flow of PPW in Bandung City (daily basis)
food and beverage products is usually shorter than for a
home cleaning product. Plastic packaging from food and
beverage products is discharged daily or weekly, depend-
ing on the expired time of the product, while, home cleaner
packaging may be discharged after more than 1 week, as
most home cleaners are reusable.
Plastic waste recycled by the informal recycling sector
The existing PPW flow in Bandung is shown in Fig. 6.
Producers will distribute their product to a variety of
retailers, such as supermarkets, mini-markets, and stalls,
etc. From these retailers, consumers at residential and
nonresidential sectors may get all goods for their needs,
including products with plastic packaging. After consum-
ing the product, PPW will be generated. At source, PPW
could simply be buried or burned, stored or reused by the
generators. Otherwise, PPW will be collected by either the
515
informal sector (like scavengers and junkmen) or by
municipality officer, and becomes mixed with other MSW
stream. The scavengers may collect the remaining PPW at
collection points, transfer depots and the final disposal site.
The PPW is usually stained by soil or other dirt at the
source. After receiving PPW from scavengers and junk-
men, the intermediates sort, clean, and sell it to dealers.
The dealers crush the PPW into small pieces and/or pel-
letize it before they sell it to the recycling factories.
We realize that the flow of product and PPW may cross
city boundaries. From the sampling, it is predicted that
some portion of PPW collected by scavengers and junkmen
is sold to the intermediates located in other surrounding
cities of Bandung. Subsequently, the PPW sorted at the
intermediates will enter to Bandung City and be accepted
by the dealers. The number written in the box in Fig. 6
represents quantity of PPW on a daily basis (tonnes per
day).
123
516 J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518

Table 2 Quantity of plastic wastes collected by informal waste recycling players

Recycling PP and PET HDPE Mix plastics Average Population Total
players (kg/sample ? day) (kg/sample ? day) (kg/sample ? day) (kg/sample (tonne/day)
? day)
Range Average SD Range Average SD Range Average SD

Scavengers 2.0–6.7 4.58 1.39 1.0–2.5 1.83 0.62 1.3–6.9 1.60 1.19 10.29 2,208 22.7
Junkmen 3.4–7.1 5.68 1.41 2.0–3.0 1.28 1.42 1.4–5.8 2.57 1.18 10.84 600 6.50
Intermediates 6.4–8.9 7.48 2.05 3.0–4.3 3.73 1.56 1.9–7.5 3.25 1.25 15.15 44 0.67
Dealers 222–235 231 10.8 104–127 115 9.02 35.0–42.0 38.5 2.89 128 61 7.83
PP = polypropylene; PET = polyethylene terephthalate; HDPE = high density polyehtylene

Table 2 provides information on all plastic wastes
recycled by the informal sector. All kinds of plastic wastes
recycled by all players in the informal sector becomes
37.7 tonnes per day. By assuming that recycled PPW
contributes to 73 % of all recycled plastic wastes [9], it can
be predicted that total PPW recycled throughout Bandung
City is 27.5 tonnes per day (64.6 % of total PPW generated
and 1.78 % of total MSW generated). Another study in
Bandung city also revealed that the total all wastes recy-
cled by all players in informal sector was less than 4 % of
total weight MSW generated [10].
The players in the informal recycling sector usually sep-
arate the plastic waste into three categories; namely, poly-
propylene (PP) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET), high
density polyehtylene (HDPE), and mix plastics. PP and PET
usually come from bottles or cups of mineral water and other
beverages. HDPE is a harder type of plastic used in pack-
aging for lubricants, perfume and cooking oil, etc. It can be
seen that the average quantity of material handled increases
along the recycling value chain from scavengers/junkmen to
intermediates and to dealers. The higher levels of the infor-
mal sector close to the factories will obtain much more
recycled material. The quantity of waste collected by each
dealer is the highest, followed by each intermediate, with
scavenger and junkman as the least.
The price of selling PPW among players within the
informal sector differs according to the handling method
that is practiced. The range of the selling prices of PPW
among them can be seen in Table 3. The price of the waste
cleaned and sorted is more expensive compared with the
dirty and unsorted waste (e.g. PPW that is soiled or con-
taminated with other forms of waste).
Table 3 Range of selling prices for different types of plastic wastes
(US$/kg)
Plastic wastes Scavengers Junkmen Intermediates
PET & PP 0.13–0.17 0.17–0.26 0.19–0.56
HDPE 0.13–0.14 0.17–0.23 0.18–0.27
Mix plastics 0.11–0.13 0.14–0.22 0.17–0.24
Response and willingness of generators to separate
the waste
In order to get higher purity of recyclable materials, waste
separation at source should be promoted more. We asked
the respondents about their willingness to separate their
PPW (Fig. 7) and to utilize a communal depot for depos-
iting recyclable PPW, if it is provided (Fig. 8). Most of
them are willing to separate their waste, and they expect
that the waste separated at source will not be mixed again
with other MSW. From the interviews, it was concluded
that the willingness of waste separation at source will
increase if the municipality keeps the waste separate and
re-processes it.
Plastic bottles of soft-drink and mineral water are the
most widely reused by the respondents. They may refill the
bottle with a different content than the original one.
Respondent may not consider that the bottle may have
specific requirement to be reused for a particular period of
time. As the portion of respondents unwilling to separate
the waste is high (more than 20 % of total respondent),
awareness and education on this matter is urgently needed
for the community. Promoting waste separation through
television, newspaper, internet, and other interactive media
became more effective methods rather than gathering
household members at a place to be briefed on this matter
[10]. Moreover, promotion of waste recycling to primary
school (age of children 5–12) is also economically effi-
ciently, and socially desirable as they then influence their
households, and participate themselves at home.
From interviews, the willingness to separate the waste is
increasing to 96 % if the depot is available. The depot
should be operated professionally to maintain the trust of
the community. The quantity of waste recycled may
increase more with the support from producers and the
government. Recently, there are many ‘‘waste banks’’ ini-
Dealers tiated by the community to recycle the waste generated by
the community itself. Each household should separate at
0.29–1.22
the source, bring and collect their wastes to the bank, and
0.33–0.42
the generators should be completely informed about the
0.24–0.33
quantity and composition of their recyclable wastes. The

123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518
Fig. 7 Willingness to separate and to reuse PPW
Fig. 8 Willingness to utilize a communal depot for PPW if it is
provided
Table 4 Incentives preferred by consumers
No. Incentives preferred
1. Getting a new similar product from
a number of similar PPW
2. Getting a new other product (glass,
dish, etc.) from a number of
mixed PPW
3. Getting a discount for buying a new
similar product from a number of
similar PPW
4. Others (financial support for
education, health and community
empowerment, etc.)
Total
wastes are r-processed in producing handcrafts like bags
and wallets, and are sold to any interested buyers. House-
holds will get some money from the profit.
517
Incentive preferred by generators to increase recycling
rate
Another attempt to increase the quantity of waste that is
recycled is by offering an incentive for the consumer.
Besides physical responsibility, the producer should have
financial responsibility for EPR implementation. Four
hypothetical options were provided for both household and
non-household respondents. Most respondents would
choose to exchange their PPW for a new similar product
(Table 4). In very small portion, respondents may request
the producer to partially finance their children’s school and
health fees, community empowerment, etc. All options may
lead the producers to increase product price in order to
recover the necessary funds. The producer may also provide
the funds from the budget of Corporate Social Responsi-
bility (CSR). The producer may consider all the options
preferred by consumers, as this may sustain participation in
separating PPW at the source and recycling it more.
Conclusion
There is no doubt that recycling waste is preferable to it
being buried in a landfill or burned openly, which is a
significant producer of methane and carbon emissions.
More attention should be given to plastic waste including
PPW, as it degrades for years in nature. Recently, there has
been no adequate infrastructure for recycling PPW pro-
vided by the municipality in Indonesia or by the producer
directly, and it still dominantly relies on informal sectors
such as scavengers, junkmen, intermediates and dealers,
who collect PPW along with other valuable materials from
Respondents residential and nonresidential areas like governmental
Households Non- offices, hotels, malls, hospitals, universities and workshops.
(%) households Similar to MSW, the quantity of PPW generated by
(%) high-income households is generally higher than that of
57 58
middle-income and low-income ones. PPW generated by
non-households is directly affected by the number of
22 24 people doing activities in the facility. Composition of PPW
varies widely and will significantly affect the weight of
PPW generation. In Bandung City, it is predicted that total
15 13 PPW generation is 58.4 tonnes per day (3.76 % of total
MSW generated), equal to 25.1 g/capita ? day.
The quantity of PPW recycled daily by all informal
6 5
recycling players like scavengers, junkmen, intermediates,
and dealers is 27.5 tonnes per day (64.6 % of total PPW
100 100 generated and 1.78 % of total MSW generated in Ban-
dung). The results of our interviews show that generators
respond positively and are willing to utilize a communal
depot specified for PPW if it is properly provided. As an
incentive, the generators prefer to get new, similar products
from a number of similar PPW.
123
518
Acknowledgments We thank the Directorate General of Higher
Education, Indonesian Ministry of National Education for providing
fund for the Research through the Program Academic Recharging
(PAR) type C in year of 2010. We would like thank also to Okayama
University, Japan as a host university for the program.
References
1. Vishwanath T (2001) Needs and demand in the informal sector
and small enterprises for skills and knowledge: an Asian per-
spective. In: Proceedings of the international conference on
linking work, skills and knowledge: learning for survival and
growth, Interlaken, Switzerland
2. Mutha NH, Patel M, Premnath V (2006) Plastics materials flow
analysis for India. Resour Conserv Recycl 47:222–244
3. Sembiring E, Nitivattananon V (2010) Sustainable solid waste
management toward an inclusive society: integration of the
informal sector. Resour Conserv Recycl 54:802–809
4. Pasang H, Moore GA, Sitorus G (2007) Neighbourhood-based
waste management: a solution for solid waste problems in
Jakarta, Indonesia. Waste Manage 27:1924–1938
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag (2014) 16:509–518
5. Supriyadi S, Kriwoken LK, Birley I (2000) Solid waste man-
agement solutions for Semarang, Indonesia. Waste Manage Res
18:557–566
6. Damanhuri E, Wahyu IM, Padmi T (2009) Evaluation of muni-
cipal solid waste flow in the Bandung metropolitan area, Indo-
nesia. J Mater Cycl Waste Manage 11:270–276
7. Ministry of Environment (2008) Indonesian domestic solid waste
statistics year 2008. Ministry of Environment
8. Office of Environment and Heritage, New South Wales, Australia
(2011) Reducing waste: implementation strategy 2011–2015.
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/waste/
9. Thanh NP, Matsui Y, Fujiwara T (2010) Assessment of plastic
waste generation and its potential recycling of household solid
waste in Can Tho City, Vietnam. Environ Monit Assess
175(1–4):23–35
10. Damanhuri E, Wahyu IM, Padmi T (2010) Evaluation of waste
recycling potential in Bandung municipal solid waste. World Rev
Sci Technol Sust Dev 7:282–295