See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/254399225

A REVIEW ON THE SUCCESS FACTORS FOR COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Article

CITATIONS READS

4 1,777

3 authors, including:

Miswan abdul hakim Bin Mohammed Suwaibatul Sani

Kolej Teknologi Darulnaim Universiti Teknologi
131 PUBLICATIONS   1,314 CITATIONS    12 PUBLICATIONS   53 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Modeling Critical Success Factors Influencing Energy Management Performance towards Sustainability in Malaysian Public Universities Using PLS-SEM Approach View
project

FM competencies as alternative in optimising mosque's functions. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Miswan abdul hakim Bin Mohammed on 29 July 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

A REVIEW ON THE SUCCESS FACTORS FOR COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

IN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Fatin Syazwina Abdul Shukor, Abdul Hakim Mohammed, Suwaibatul Islamiah Abdullah
Sani, Mariah Awang

Department of Real Estate Management, Faculty of Geoinformation and Real Estate, University of
Technology Malaysia, Skudai Malaysia

Abstract

Community participation is recognised as a factor contributing to the success of waste management. There have been
many case studies in developing countries which prove that community participation in waste management plays a
vital role in the contribution on the success of the services provided. Nevertheless, community participation is
difficult to achieve even though it is important for solving the problem of waste management. There are several
success factors that have been put forward by researchers that can practically encourage community participation in
solid waste management. Nevertheless, there are many disputes and disagreements on the selection of the best factors
to ensure successful participation from the community in solid waste management. Therefore, this paper will discuss
the success factors for community participation in solid waste management and will present some of the opinions and
criticisms on the matter.

Keywords: Success Factors, Community Participation, Solid Waste Management

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Developing countries facing problems of solid waste management, this is due to involves public health and the
environment in urban areas. Solid waste management that is not efficient will lead to negative impacts to the
environment, such as environmental pollution, soil and water, and power generation from gas landfill. Therefore, if
the management of solid waste is not properly manage, it will give an effect for the health and safety issues (Daily
Nation Report, 2004). The management of solid waste continues to be a major challenge and issues in urban areas
throughout the world, but particularly in the rapidly growing cities and towns of the developing countries (Foo, 1997).
The need for public participation is required. According to previous research, the importance of community
participation is necessary to ensure the success of community participation (Abduli et al, 2007; Junquera. Brio and
Muniz, 2001, Massoud et al, 2003; Mongkolnchaiarunya, 2005). There are numerous case studies in developing
countries that is proven that community participation in waste management plays a vital role in contributing to the
success of the services provided (Anand, 1999; Bernardo, 2008; Mongkolchaiarunya, 2005; Ogu, 2000; Poerbo, 1991;
Rathi, 2006; Sujauddin et al., 2008).

Solid waste management is one of activity where community participation is key to success. A minimum
participation of the community is required in putting the garbage at the street to be collected in a proper way at the
right time. At the individual level, residents are responsible as users. This involves actions like storing waste in a
proper way in a bag or bin, separate recyclable or organic materials from other waste, putting waste at the right place
and at the proper time for collection, and cleaning the area around the house. Most of the researchers argued,
community participation is workable on paper thus it is hard to implement. However there are numerous of researcher
success to involve the community participating in planning and decision making. This is by identifying key success
factors for community participation in solid waste management.

963
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

2.0 ISSUES IN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Statistics show that the world population reached six billion in 2001 with 46% of this population rapidly
increasing in urban areas. The urban population in developed nations was 75% of the total population in those
countries (HMGN, MoPE, 2003). Municipal solid waste generated in 1997 was about 0.49 billion tons with an
estimated annual growth rate of 3.2–4.5% in developed nations and 2–3% in developing nations (Suocheng et al.,
2001). Urban areas in Asia produced approximately 760,000 tons of municipal solid waste per day in 1998, which is
expected to rise to 1.8 million tons by 2025. According to previous studies, there are several factors that contribute to
solid waste management problem:

• Management factors: Poor management of local authority who are responsible for the handling (Tadesse,
2006; Gobo, 2002), inadequate provision of facilities for waste management (Tadesse, 2006), ineffective
approach to carry out waste management (Zia and Devadas, 2007), low skill workers (Ayotamuno et al, 2004;
Harihar City Municipal Council, 2006; Asase et al, 2009), financial constraints (Ayotamuno et al, 2004;
Gobo, 2002; Asase M. et al, 2009) insufficient of sensitivity and awareness to understand the needs of the
public (Ayotamuno et al, 2004), the garbage collection process is not systematic and practically ineffective
for disposal (Osman Nuri Agdag, 2009) , there is no approach to monitoring and supervision of all activities
associated with the waste management (Gobo, 2002; Khalil and Khan, 2008)
• Lack of skills, knowledge and equipment: Ineffective management system ( Khalil and Khan, 2008),
absence of reasonable and systematic method adopted, the weaknesses in the provision of equipment for the
implementation of services, poor infrastructure (Asase et al , 2009), knowledge restrictions of the technical
work in solid waste management (Khalil and Khan, 2008).
• Inadequate law enforcement to the waste management : Limitation of knowledge in the solid wate
management organisation including weakness of action policies from government. As supported by Terazono
et al (2005), this problem occur in many Asian countries, there is no specific laws enacted specifically for
solid waste management for example in Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia.
• Lack of community participation : Bad littering habits and attitudes of people, lack of awareness among
communities, support and public interest in waste management (City Municipal Council, Harihar, 2006),
• Other factors : Increasing number of population (Latifah Abdul Manaf et al, 2009; Ogbonna et al, 2007;
Englande and Jin, 2006; Fazlina Bt Md Akhir, 2007; Periathamby et al, 2008; Gobo, 2002), rapid economic
development, lack of expertise in the infrastructure, scarcity of land for waste disposal (Latifah Abdul Manaf
et al, 2009), increasing migration to large cities (Zia and Devadas, 2007; Gobo, 2002).

3.0 RATIONALE FOR COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

“Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, on a relevant level.
On a national basis, each individual should have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is
held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the
opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States should facilitate and encourage public awareness and
participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings,
including redress and remedy should be provided” (Stockholm, 1972).

The rationale for community participation in solid waste management particularly important for several
reasons. First, everyone in the community have responsibility to participate on the fact that everyone in community
generates waste and they can be affected directly and indirectly if waste is not well managed. Solid waste can be

964
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

hazardous to community and the participation in waste management may increase community sense and responsibility
for maintaining services provided by local authorities. These aspects will essential for the continuity and efficiency of
the projects. Apart from individual responsibility, people can be collectively responsible in organizing activities, such
as meetings, clean-up campaigns, and awareness-raising activities. Furthermore, community participation can involve
in making material, financial or physical contributions to activities of solid waste management, for instance working
as cart operator or sweeper, and paying fees for waste collection (Subash, 2002). The second reason, the community is
responsible for producing waste everyday (mbsskl.edu), throwing rubbish everywhere (Chattopadhyay et al, 2009,
Stern et al, 1997; Bras et al, 2009), even though at the collection point (Chattopadhyay et al, 2009). It is very
important to get public participation in planning and decision-making process to ensure waste management working
well. Third, community participation also help the improvement of project design and effectiveness into solid waste
management. If the community get involved and participate in the design of the project, the needs and ideas from
community can be integrated and it is a way to become more effective implementation of the project (Subash, 2002).

4.0 THE CONCEPT OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

There is no fixed definition that can describe a clear meaning of community participation. This is because
different researchers interpret the purpose of community participation with different views. The community
participation concept has different meanings to different people to such an extent that virtually many community-
based project or programme that is now being a fashionable termed ‘Community participation’. It is also known as
citizen participation, people’s participation, public participation, and popular participation’. Armitage (1988) defined
community participation as a process by which communities act in response to public concerns, voice out their
opinions about decisions that affect them, and take responsibility for changes to their community. Below are concepts
and issues raised by previous research:

• An interactive process (interactive) that involves communication, listening, consulting, mergers and
collaborations with the public, who is also as a partner who will also participate to give consent and opinion
on the decision making process (Okello et al, 2009).
• Information sharing, involving communities in decision-making process, taking into consideration the idea
and opinion of the community and empower the community in terms of ability to influence the decision-
making process (Gladstone, 2008).
• Community participation describes any process that starts to inform, gather input or involve the community
regarding decision making processes. This covers all levels of information, awareness creation, outreach,
inputs involvement and collaboration. Community participation is illustrated in the diagram below
(RPRLGSP, 2009) :

DIAGRAM 4.1: COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION CONCEPT

965
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

5.0 WHY COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IS IMPORTANT?

The importance of community participation can be viewed with a broader scope and initially not only focusing on
waste management. First, community participation can effectively target resources and efficiently. This is because
through community participation, community willing to share ideas and opinions. It is a way to get know the
requirements and needs of the community. Besides that, the provision of resources including money and time
consuming to use the best because everything they do will not be in vain as the support of the community. Second, it
can allow two ways communication and thus participants to give a new ideas. Through two-way communication, the
conflicts and information can be delivered effectively. Third, community participation offers a new thinking and
innovative ideas from community. Through the opportunities provided, community will pleasure to voice out their
opinion. It will indirectly train the community to think creatively and become more innovative. Forth, by community
involvement in planning and decision making, community will have the responsibility and sense of ownership. As the
community will feel that they are also involved in a project. Fifth, it is a process of empowering people and it is a way
to sustainable planning and development.

6.0 A LADDER OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

A ladder of participation is popularized by Arnstein in 1969 through his journal "A Ladder of Citizen
Participation”. He introduced the eight rung for citizen participation. Even so, after few years, most of researchers
believe that participation ladder introduced by Arnstein can be improved for a better explanation to provide a clear
understanding. The figure showed a ladder of community participation. It is explaining the degree of participation,
participant’s action and illustrative modes for achieving community participation. Meanwhile, the wheel of
participation developed by South Lanarkshire Council is a model to assist the community planning (Figure 6.2). The
wheel explain about the objectives related to information, consultation, participation and empowerment.

Figure 6.1 : A ladder of community participation : degree of participation, participant’s action and illustrative modes for
achieving it (Brager & Specht, 1966)

966
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

Figure 6.2: The wheel of participation (Davidson, 1967)

967
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

7.0 CONCEPT OF SUCCESS FACTOR

The concept of “success factors” first discussed in the management literature in 1961 by D.Ronald Daniel
who was the director of Mckinsey & Company then the process was refined by John F. Rockart in 1981. In 1995,
James A. Johnson and Michael Friesen applied it to many sector settings, including health care. It is very important in
determining the success of a project undertaken to identify the best elements that had be chosen for the best
performance. Although this approach is widely used in business analysis and data analysis, and it is rarely applied in
other fields, but it is also successfully used in other areas by selecting the factors or the best strategy to ensure success
of projects. There are some researchers from other fields who use this approach to determine the best factor to be
applied in their planning process. According to Wener Ketelhohn (1998), he argues the concept of key success factor
is a key strategic one, and should not be confused with the many fashionable buzzwords in management that come
and go. Understanding and developing key success factor enables the organization or company to enter an industry
successfully, differentiate between themselves with generic strategies and operate optimally between higher perceived
value and lower delivered costs.

8.0 SUCCESS FACTORS IN COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION FOR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

There are a few of researcher in the community participation had use the term of 'key success factors’ in
explaining the best factors in community participation. Most of them used the word 'effective', 'best practice', 'best
approach', 'sustainability approach' 'attribute of success'. Whatever term is used, the concept and meaning of the
research is not much different for explaining the selection of best factors. There are various opinions on selecting the
best factor to encourage people to participate in a community project, including the planning and decision-making
process. Although there are many disagreements on the different ideas, each researcher has choose this factor based
on the most appropriate factors to be implemented in a field of study and, as appropriate, taking into account for this
various factors. It can be concluded that the selection of success factors in community participation for solid waste
management will be different depends on region, culture and communities acceptance.

9.0 THE SUCCESS FACTOR FOR COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

9.1) Welcome Them

The most important action you can take to ensure community participation success is to welcome them.
According to Reid (2000), by welcoming them, people know when they are welcome, and when they are not. Where
they are not truly welcome, few people will stay for long. Welcoming participation means more than giving new
participants a friendly smile and supporting them. It requires opening the process to newcomers and inviting their
active participation in the project at hand. Some actions that can help are:
• Be glad for the opportunity for new contributions, despite any resentment that
they were not present to help with already completed jobs.
• Explain where things stand, so participants can fit into the process easily.
• Offer a variety of job opportunities, so newcomers can find roles that fit their
talents and interests.
• Take newcomers’ ideas seriously, even when they represent viewpoints that have previously been considered
and rejected. Be patient with the reaction of community.
• Don’t leave them out by making decisions among the “old-timers.”

968
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

9.2) Communication among Stakeholder

According to Subash (2002) in his paper entitled "Community Participation in Solid Waste Management,
communication is considered as favourable factor for the sustainability of community participation. He stressed that
communication is essential to generate a broad-based understanding on solid waste issues. Among community
members on the one hand and responsiveness of the stakeholders to the demands of the community on the other. This
factor is also supported by several other researchers, namely Laura Moningka, 2000; Minn et al., 2010; Subash, 2006:
The National Environment Justice Advisory Council, 2000, explains the participation of communities can be achieved
with effective communication. Effective communication is to develop a broad understanding of an issue among
community members. Through a clear communication and better understanding, the community will see a project or
services performed will benefit them and feel responsible to participate in the project and will show interest to
participate in continuous service (Gozun, 1994 ; Bulle, 1999). Communication is also important to know the
willingness of the community and a two-way communication can allows the identification of conflicts and constraints.
This allows the management to implement the conjunction with the community and for the identification of the
problem effectively (Haugthon, 1999, Imperato and Ruster, 1999). Effective communication is also important to get
community involvement and support of further efforts will be made. According to Squires (2006), identify the
appropriate techniques of public communication will provide relevant information in a form that can be easily
undertood.

9.3) Local leaders/ Religious Leader

Some researchers believe the selection of leader by democratic is a way to ensure success of community
participation in solid waste management. It is difficult to have community participation if the selection of local leader
is not accepted by the community. Thus, the selected of leader should be agreed by the leaders of the community
involved in the project or program. The appointment of local leaders may also include traditional leaders. Traditional
leaders are the wise men, the notables, district leaders and religious figures. They play an important role in the success
of an activity and act as mediators between residents and community structures. They benefit from their image of
respectability due to their social rank (their age and their religious status) and they are vested with traditional powers.
Social or informal leaders (opinion leaders, teachers, leading politicians) are more involved at the management level,
although they may have a certain influence on a neighbourhood level. They often help to initiate projects, setting-up
committees and clean-up campaigns (Bulle 1999). According to Bulle (1999), the role of leader including encourage
the young people, the mainstays of the projects. They may support the start-up stage of projects. They can help
organisations to identify needs of community and can stimulate community participation and ensure that community
needs are taken into account. According to Subash (2002), in the context of waste management, community leaders is
essential in promoting community responsibility to contribute in the collection of waste by ensuring that communities
paying a fee, to promote waste separation and supervise the performance of the services by local authorities (Subash,
2002). Effective leadership is a key element in determining whether an environmental group will be successful.
This is one reason that national organizations emphasize fostering local leadership skills through training
programs and published materials. Leadership responsibilities may be vested in a single individual or in a small
core membership that work together closely (Alley et al., 1995).

9.4) Empowerment/ Sense of ownership

By giving the communities power to make their own decision , it invested interest in the project and create sense
of ownership to participate. Ali and Snel (1999), in the journal entitled 'Lessons from Community-based Initiatives in
Solid Waste' is need to develop willingness for participate. It is hard to have community willingness if communities
do not feel a sense of ownership toward the waste collection. According to researchers in community involvement

969
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

such as Reid (2000) and Minn et al (2010), they are some of the opinion that by granting empowerment to the
community is essential to build public participation. Giving communities the power is refer to the process that allows
communities to increase control over their own lives. This empowerment also includes the process by which
communities control of these factors and any decisions that will affect their lives (Labonte and Laverack, 2008).
According to Reid (2000), empowerment is a boost to public participation because the parties involved in any game,
everyone wants to play an important role in it. This allows the community to understand how little contributions from
them can give an affects of the overall effort. The use for discussion in planning, budgeting, job details and
specification of work needs to be done for clarification and enough time required to convince the community. In
conclusion, through this approach, the skills, knowledge and confidence of the community will be developed to
encourage them for participate in a project. The second approach is inclusive. The community from various races and
religions join in the success of project implemented. To create a harmonious and good participation, inclusive
approach should be adopted because it would close the gap for racial discrimination through a consultative approach
to each other. This discussion will strengthen relationships with other communities through the exchange of expertise
and experience, the work they have done together, despite customs and cultural differences. A third approach is an
arrangement. The community is exposed to the waste management project and bringing the community to participate
directly in the problems and raised issues. It is democratic and more flexible. When communities see these issues is
their responsibility as well as, indirectly, they will feel responsible to the project they will be involved. The last
approach to empower the community is affected. It can be done by providing opportunities for communities to take
part in the decision making process that will subsequently affect the activities and services. By this approach,
communities feel they are also play an important role in a running project (Community Development Exchange and
the National Empowerment Partnership, 2008).

9.5) Collaboration and Partnership between Community and Organization

Most of researcher agree that collaboration or partnership between community and organization is essential to
participation success (Togar Arifin Silaban (2002), Reid (2000) dan The National Environment Justice Advisory
Council (2000), A.Subash (2006). According to Joseph (2006), one positive experience with his experiment with
community partnership has been gained, political leader s and local authorities may actively promote partnership with
neighbourhood communities. At that point, the partnerships become broader and more effective in overall
development of the project. The local authority may define the terms of the reference of stakeholder platform
including explanation about stakeholder planning with official waste management planning and regulation process, as
well as the relationship between local authorities and stakeholder. Sharing of responsibilities can be implemented
through the commitment given by the community will create complete sharing of responsibility in problem solving
(Kakonge, 2000). Communities will also be given an opportunity to monitor and review progress of projects. By this
approach, communities can share an ideas or an experiences for the resolution of an issue occurred (Community
Development Exchange and the National Empowerment Partnership, 2008). To develop partnerships, transpiration of
all information and activities must transparent. This is because the community will be more open to participate in a
transparent and honest deal (Kakonge, 2000). Collaborative learning and social learning are strategies for engaging
stakeholders and experts to work together for settlement of complicated issue by exploring options, collecting data
and learning about potential solutions (Daniels and Walker 2001; Keen, Brown and Dyball 2005; Sirianni and
Friedland , 2001).

9.6) Community Awareness

The important factor in community participation in solid waste management to success is awareness (Joseph,
2006). Awareness factor is necessary to enable the community to understand the issues that happened, cause and
effect, and expand on their role in the participation to manage solid waste (Minn et al, 2010). According to Muller
(2002), in her case study of community-based solid waste management in Nagapura, ward 14, Bangalore, she explain

970
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

the degree of participation of households in the new collection scheme is rising, especially after each round of
awareness raising. The impact of awareness campaigns could definitely be improved if they succeeded in exploiting
all the potential in a community, whether this means its social customs (scheduling meetings, taking local behaviour
into account for clean-up actions) or the added value of the grass-roots scale of action. Waste collection or clean-up
actions are most effective when residents gain genuine control over their content and their social or sanitary
scope; that is when they take an active part in informing people, monitoring the service and/or raising their
awareness at the neighbourhood level (Subash, 2002). The success of an awareness campaign also greatly depends
on the role played by volunteers, on the level of training they have in waste management matters, and thus on
recruitment strategies (Bulle, 1999). According to a pilot project for low-income urban area in the city of Karachi,
Pakistan which was conducted by a local NGO “Association for Protection of the Environment (APE)”, informal
meetings conducted separately for different ethnic and gender target groups were generally held throughout the
community involvement project. These meetings discussed general matters pertaining to community welfare and area
cleaning, as well as the most appropriate communication methods to enhance awareness in solid waste management
among the community. The emphasis on community responsibility and a role in maintaining hygiene and health may
create awareness among the community. Local authorities has to ensure the community will provided clear
explanation. This explanation has to explain clearly of their role and responsibility to the community, so that
community are aware of limitation of local authority services and community can help the authorities to solve waste
management problem (Zurbrugg and Rehan Ahmed, 1999).

9.7) Role of Women

The role of women in the community is one of the factors for participation to success. Special attention should be
paid to the role of women. In many situations women are the first to be affected by a deterioration of the environment
and are most willing to participate in projects that improve their living conditions (Subash, 2002). As residents and
citizens, women play a determining role in the small-scale activities, and they form important channels of
communication thanks to their numerous opportunities to meet one another. Collective action does not always take
account of female customs. The integration of women into management structures or awareness-raising activities for
collection services neglects to take into account their domestic circumstances (Bulle,1999).

• hours of meetings need to be adapted to their working days and their responsibilities in the home,
• cultural traditions need to be taken into account by scheduling women’s meetings separate from those of men,
• literacy classes should be offered,
• women need to be encouraged to participate in elections of delegates in decision-making
structures, and a better balance must be achieved in the recruitment of volunteers

9.8) Incentive

One of the important aspects must be considered to get success participation is an incentive. Some of the community
participation researchers (Laura Moningka, 2000 ; Reid, 2000, The National Environment Justice Advisory Council,
2000) agree that community participation can be achieve and success with incentive by giving a reward or conducted
event or programme to the effort given by the community and it is one of the inisiative to encourage them to
participate in any solid waste management activity. Proper incentives is another important factor (Castro, 1997;
Castro and Nielsen, 2001; Chapeskie, 1995; Hughes, 1996; Sarin, 2001) that was not adequately addressed for the
certain projects. Even if a participant performed the assigned task, there were no guarantees of continuation of the
tenure. In most of the places, people seemed to be unsure about the benefit sharing process. Incentive is also one way
to increase community motivation.

971
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

9.9) Information and Knowledge

Opportunities to engage people in local environmental issues, then, must provide understandable and meaningful
information to get success participation. People need information that makes sense and allows them to understand
well for the current goal of the project and any possibilities. The organization should ensure the information for the
issues is well informed to the community if they become involved in the decision-making processes. Providing
appropriate information in a forum requires that organisers understand what the audience knows and where it tends to
become confused. Doing so requires that misconceptions are carefully acknowledged and addressed. It also requires
that credible experts are involved to present technical and complex information, as long as the presentations do not
make participants feel stupid or helpless, but rather satisfy people’s need to learn, explore and be involved (Kaplan
and Kaplan 1982). Kaplan and Kaplan in 2003, 2008, suggests that our ability to engage in environmental problem-
solving can be enhanced with information that enables us to take meaningful actions and to believe that we have the
ability to take these actions. Information provided should be clear to avoid conflict and ensure the success of a
project. For example, in Nebraska, a participatory watershed plan that sought meaningful public input was
unsuccessful in involving the public, possibly because of the lack of a defined problem and citizen complacency with
current conditions (Irvin and Stansbury 2004). In addition, the more technical or complex the issue, the less likely the
public is to have sufficient background knowledge to be meaningfully engaged. People tend to avoid situations where
they are confused or are unable to follow the discussion (Kaplan 2000; Kaplan and Kaplan 1982).

10.0 CONCLUSION

Waste management is becoming a major problem in developing countries. Although there are many issues
that contributed to the waste management, community is considered as a contributor in solving the problem of waste
management. This is because the attitude and lack of community awareness and support from community effort for
managing waste. Active community participation is key to build an empowered community. Community participation
is far more than a requirement. It is need for success. Studies have documented that communities that engage their
citizens and partners deeply in the work of community development raise more resources, achieve more results, and
develop in a more holistic and more beneficial way. Community participation, then, is critical to community success.
Identification of success factors described above are intertwined and have a unique relationship. These factors may
affect the success of other factors. Community participation should be applied as efforts to involve the community for
the benefit and objectives achievement for the project. Eventhough, there are many difficulties and challenges in
implementing community participation. However it is not impossible if the best efforts can be made to encourage
community participation in all planning and implementation of waste management.

11.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research is funded by Zamalah Scholarship Award of University Technology Malaysia. The special
thank goes to Prof Dr Abdul Hakim Bin Mohammed whose help, encourage and stimulating suggestions for me in all
the time. The co-operation is much indeed appreciated. I would like to express my gratitude to all those who gave me
the possibility to complete this paper especially Sir Izran Sarazzin Mohammad. Last but not least I would like to
thanks my friends especially Fatin Aziz for her suggestions and help.

972
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

12.0 REFERENCES

Ali, M., Snel.M. (1999). Lessons from Community-Based Initiatives in Solid Waste. Water and Environmental Health
at London and Loughborough, 2-29.

Anand, P.B. (1999). Waste Management in Madras Revisited. Journal of Environment and Urbanization, 11(2), 161-
176.

Arnstein, S. R.(1969). A Ladder of Citizen Participation. JAIP 35 (4), 216-224.

Asase, M., Yanful, E.K., Mensah, M., Stanford, J., Amponsah, S. (2009). Comparison of Municipal Solid Waste
Management Systems in Canada and Ghana: A case study of the cities of London, Ontario, and Kumasi, Ghana.
Waste Management 29, 2779-2786.

Ayotamuno, J. M., Gobo, A.E. (2004). Municipal Solid Waste Management in Port Harcourt, Nigeria Obstacles and
Prospect. Management of Environmental Quality, An International Journal, 15 (4), 389-398.

Bernardo, E.C. (2008). Solid Waste Management Practices of Households in Manila, Philippines. New York Academy
of Sciences, 1140 (1), 420-424.

Bulle, S. (1999). Issues and Results of Community Participation in Urban Environment: Comparative Analysis of Nine
Projects on Waste Management. UWEP Working Document 11, ENDA/WASTE Publication. 2-59.

Castro, A.P. (1997). Social and Anti-Social Forestry in Bangladesh. Development Anthropologist, 15 (1-2), 3-12.

Castro, A.P. and Nielsen, E. (2001). Indigenous People and Co-management: Implications for Conflict Management.
Environmental Science and Policy, 4 (4-5), 229-239.

Changes. (2008). Empowering agencies to engage communities: Exploring how public agencies can assess and
improve their openness and ability to respond to community influence. National Empowerment Partnership, 1-23.

Chapeskie, A. (1995). Land, Landscapes, Culturescape: Aboriginal Relationships to Land and Co management of
Natural Resources. Ottawa: Royal Commission on Aboriginal People.

Chattopadhyay, S., Dutta, A., Ray, S. (2009) .Municipal Solid Waste Management in Kolkata, India- A review. Waste
Management 29, 1449-1458.

Daniels, S.E., G.B. Walker. (2001). Working Through Environmental Conflict: The Collaborative Learning Approach.
Praeger.

Englande, A.J., Jin, G. (2006). Application of Biotechnology in Waste Management for Sustainable Development An
Overview. Management of Environmental Quality, An International Journal, 17(4), 467-477.

Foo, T.S., 1997. Recycling of Domestic Waste: Early Experiences in Singapore. Habitat International 21, 277–289.

973
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

Gozun, E. (1994). The Human Face of The Urban Environment: Community Governance in Urban Environmental
Management (draft). Washington D.C.: The World Bank.

Haughton, G. (1999). Environmental Justice and the Sustainable City. Journal of Planning Education and Research,
18 (3), 233-243.

HMGN, MoPE. (2003). Nepal Population Report 2060. Published by His Majestys Government of Nepal (HMGN),
Ministry of Population and Environment (MoPE).

Hossain, A., Karim, R. (2009). Community Participation – Key to Success in Co-management of Protected Areas in
Bangladesh. A Multinational Conference on Policy Analysis and Teaching Methods, 1-27.

Hughes, D.M. (1996). When Parks Encroach Upon People. Cultural Survival Quarterly, 20(1), 36-40.

Joseph, K. (2006). Stakeholder Participation for Sustainable Waste Management. Habitat International 30, 863-871.

Keen, M., V.A. Brown and R. Dyball. (2005). ‘Social Learning: A New Approach to Environmental Management’, in M.
Keen, V. A. Brown and R. Dyball (eds), Social Learning in Environmental Management: Towards a Sustainable Future.
London, UK: Earthscan.

Ketelhohn, W. (1998). What is a key success factor?. European Management Journal, 16 (3), 335-340.

Khalil, N., Khan, M. (2009). A Case of a Municipal Solid Waste Management System For a Medium-Sized Indian City,
Aligarh. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 20 (2), 121-141.

Latifah Abdul Manaf, Mohd Armi Abu Samah, Nur Ilyana Mohd Zukki. (2009). Municipal Solid Waste Management in
Malaysia: Practices and challenges. Waste Management 29, 2902-2906.

Minn, Z., Srisontisuk, S., Laohasiriwong, W. (2010). Promoting People’s Participation in Solid Waste Management in
Mynmar. Journal Of Environmental Sciences 4, 209-222.

Mongkolchaiarunya, J. (2005). Promoting a Community-Based Solid-Waste Management Initiative in Local

Government: Yala Municipality, Thailand. Habitat International, 29 (1), 27-40.

Moningka, L. (2000). Community Participation in Solid Waste Management Factors Favouring the Sustainability of
Community Participation: A Literature Review. UWEP Occasional Paper.

Monroe, M.C., Oxarart, A., Mcdonell, L., Plate, R. (2009). Using Community Forums to Enhance Public Engagement in
Environmental Issues. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 3, 171-182.

Muller, M. S., Iyer, A., Keita, M., Sacko, B., Traore, D. (2002). Differing Interpretations of Community Participation in
Waste Management in Bamako and Bangalore: some methodological considerations. Journal of Environment &
Urbanization, 14(2), 241-258.

Nasrabadi, T., Hoveidi, H., Bidhendi, G.N., Yavari, A.R., Mohammadnejad. (2008). Evaluating Citizen Attitudes and
Participation in Solid Waste Management in Tehran, Iran. Journal of Environmental Heallh, 71(5), 39-40.

974
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

Ogbonna, D.N., Amangabara, G.T., Ekere, T.O. (2007). Urban Solid Waste Generation in Port Harcourt Metropolis
and Its Implications for Waste Management. Management of Environmental Quality, An International Journal, 18(1),
71-88.

Ogu, V.I. (2000). Private Sector Participation and Municipal Waste Management in Benin City, Nigeria. Journal of
Environment & Urbanization, 12(2), 103-117

Okello, N., Beevers, L., Douven, W., Leentvaar J. (2009). The Doing and Un-Doing of Public Participation During
Environmental Impact Assessment in Kenya. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 27 (3), 217-226.

Periathamby, A., Fauziah Shahul Hamid., Kahlil Khidzir. (2009). Evolution of Solid Waste Management in Malaysia:
Impacts and Implications of the Solid Waste Bill, 2007. Journal Material Cycles Waste Management 11, 96–103.

Poerbo, H., 1991. Urban Solid Waste Management in Bandung Towards An Integrated Resource Recovery System.
Journal of Environment and Urbanization, 3(1), 60-69.

Pokhrel, D., Viraraghavan, T. (2005). Municipal Solid Waste Management in Nepal: Practices and Challenges. Waste
Management 25, 555-562.

Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee of The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC). (1996). The Model Plan for Public Participation. A federal Advisory Committee to the U.S EPA.

Rathi, S. (2006). Alternative Approaches for Better Municipal Solid Waste Management in Mumbai, India. Waste
Management, 26(10), 1192-1200.

Reid, J.N. (2000). Community Participation: How People Power Brings Sustainable Benefits to Communities. USDA
Rural Development Office of Community Development, 1-13.

Sarin, M. (2001). Disempowerment in The Name of ‘Participatory’ Forestry? – Village Forests Joint Management in
Uttarkhand. Forests, Trees and People, 1-44.

Silaban, T.A. (2002). Solid Waste Management in Surabaya. Solid Waste Management, Seminar Kitakyushu.

Sirianni, C. and L. Friedland. (2001). Civic Innovation in America: Community Empowerment, Public Policy, and the
Movement for Civic Renewal. University of California Press.

Solheim, C. A., Faupel, C.E., Bailey, C. (1997). Solid Waste Management and The Need For Effective Public
Participation. Southern Rural Sociology, 13(1), 65-88.

Squires, C. O. (2006). Public Participation in Solid Waste Management in Small Island Developing States. MSc
Research Paper, UWI, Cave Hill, 1-50.

Stern, J., Southgate, D., Strasma, J. (1997). Improving Garbage Collection in Latin America’s Slum; Some Lessons
from Machala, Ecuador. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 20, 219- 224.

Subash,A.(2006).Community Participation in Solid Waste Management. Office of Environmental Justice.

975
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT (ICM 2011) PROCEEDING

Sujauddin, M., S.M.S. Huda and A.T.M.R. Hoque. (2008). Household Solid Waste Characteristics and Management in
Chittagong, Bangladesh. Waste Management, 28 (9), 1688-1695.

Suocheng, D., Tong, K.W., Yuping, Y. (2001). Municipal Solid Waste Management in China: Using Commercial
Management to Solve a Growing Problem. Utilities Policy 10, 7–11.

Tsouros, A.D. (2002). Community Participation in Local Health and Sustainable Development: Approaches and
Techniques. European Sustainable Development and Health Series 4, 1-100

Zia, H., Devadas, V., Shukla, S. (2008). Assessing Informal Waste Recycling in Kanpur City, India. Management of
Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 19 (5), 597-612.

Zia, H., Devadas, V., Shukla, S. (2007). Municipal solid waste management in Kanpur, India: Obstacles and Prospects.
Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 18 (1), 89-108.

Zurbrugg, C., Ahmed, R. (1999). Enhancing Community Motivation and Participation in Solid Waste Management.
SANDEC News No. 4, ISSN 1420-5572.

976

View publication stats