Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Waste Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman

Review

Policy implementation of the Republic Act (RA) No. 9003 in the

Philippines: A case study of Cebu city
Dickella Gamaralalage Jagath Premakumara a,⇑, Aloysius Mariae L. Canete b, Masaya Nagaishi c,
Tonni Agustiono Kurniawan d
a
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Kitakyushu Urban Centre, Kitakyushu 805-0062, Japan
b
A2D Project-Research Group for Alternatives to Development, Inc., Cebu 6000, Philippines
c
Kitakyushu International Techno-cooperative Association (KITA), Kitakyushu 805-0062, Japan
d
United Nations University-Institute of Advanced Studies of Sustainability (UNU-IASS), Yokohama 220-8502, Japan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM) is considered to be one of the most serious environmental
Available online 23 November 2013 issues in the Philippines. The annual waste generation was estimated at 10.6 million tonnes in 2012 and
this is expected to double in 2025. The Republic Act (RA) No. 9003, widely known as the Ecological Solid
Keywords: Waste Management Act of 2000, provides the required policy framework, institutional mechanisms and
Republic Act (RA) No. 9003 mandate to the Local Government Units (LGUs) to achieve 25% waste reduction target through establish-
Municipal Solid Waste Management ing an integrated solid waste management plan based on the 3Rs (reduce, reuse and recycling). Although
(MSWM)
the initial impact of the LGUs is still very limited in implementing the national mandate, this article high-
3Rs
Capacity building
lights the successful experiences of Cebu, the second largest city in the Philippines, in reducing its MSW
Integrated planning generation by more than 30% in the past three years. This study also explores the implementation pro-
Partnership building cess, innovative actions taken by the Cebu City Government in implementing the national mandate at
local level and identifies the factors that influence the policy implementation. The findings suggest that
the impacts of the national mandate can be achieved if the LGUs have the high degree of political com-
mitment, planning and development of effective local strategies in a collaborative manner to meet with
local conditions, partnership building with other stakeholders, capacity development, adequate financing
and incentives, and in the close monitoring and evaluation of performance.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972
2. Materials and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972
2.1. Current SWM in the Cebu City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972
2.1.1. Location and population. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972
2.1.2. MSW generation and characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972
2.1.3. Waste collection and treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973
2.1.4. Institutional and financing mechanism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974
2.2. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975
2.2.1. Theoretical framework on policy implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975
2.2.2. Research method and data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975
3. Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975
3.1. Political commitment and development of effective institutional arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975
3.1.1. Cebu City Ordinance No. 2017. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975
3.1.2. Cebu City Ordinance No. 2031. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976

⇑ Corresponding author. Address: International Village Centre, 2F, 1-1-1, Hirano,

Yahatha Higashiku, Kitakyushu City 805-0062, Japan. Tel.: +81 93 681 1563; fax:
+81 93 681 1564.
E-mail address: premakumara@iges.or.jp (D.G.J. Premakumara).

0956-053X/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.10.040
972 D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979

3.2. Development of strategies and innovative programmes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976

3.2.1. Information and Education Campaigns (IEC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976
3.2.2. Kwarta sa Basura (Cash from Trash) programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976
3.2.3. Promotion of composting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977
3.2.4. Financial and incentives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977
3.3. Cooperation with local and international agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977
4. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979

1. Introduction involving innovative institutional and partnership strategies. It

In recent years MSWM has been considered to be one of the
most serious environmental and public health issues confronting
urban areas in developing countries. Rapid urbanisation, economic
growth and development, changes in lifestyles and consumption
patterns have resulted in a remarkable increase of waste volume
and its diversity in recent decades (Minghua et al., 2009; Oliveira
et al., 2013).
To overcome these challenges, many developing countries with
their counterparts in industrialised countries have developed
appropriate national policies and strategies in implementing the
3Rs (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) approach to reduce the amount
of MSW generated at source, rather than later at the end-of-cycle
(Premakumara et al., 2011). However, the implementation of these
national policies and strategies meaningfully at a local level is a far
challenging issue for many developing countries. This is not excep-
tional in the Philippines, the country which identified MSWM as
one of the serious urban environmental issues (Aguinaldo, 2008).
With an average per-capita waste generation ratio of about
0.5 kg per day, the annual waste generation in the Philippines is
estimated at 10.6 million tonnes in 2012. This figure is expected
to double in 2025 (World Bank, 2012). The National Solid Waste
Management Commission (NSWMC) reported that the country’s
solid waste generation includes 73% of households, 26% of com-
mercial establishments, institutions and industries, as well as 1%
of healthcare facilities (NSWMC, 2007).
Recognising the importance of taking immediate actions to ad-
dress this fast growing urban environmental issue at national level,
the country’s Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(DENR), established under the Office of the President, prioritised
proper management of MSW in its 12-point environmental agenda.
Through the passage of the 2000 Ecological Solid Waste Manage-
ment Act, widely known as the Republic Act No. 9003 (RA 9003),
proper MSWM has been institutionalised at LGU level.
As a national policy, the RA 9003 adopts a systematic, compre-
hensive, and ecological solid waste management (SWM) pro-
gramme that recognises the LGUs as the leader in its
implementation. The policy mandates the creation of Solid Waste
Management Boards (SWMB) from the national, provincial, city/
municipal, down to the barangay, the lowest-level political and
administrative body in the Philippines. As a support system for
establishing an integrated SWM system, the RA 9003 mandates
the establishment of material recovery facilities (MRFs) in all
barangays based on 3Rs in order to achieve its 25% waste reduction
target by 2010. Consequently, instead of using open dumping or
illegal burning, the RA 9003 advises LGUs to adopt sanitary land-
fills (Antonio, 2008).
While the RA 9003 is a major breakthrough in reforming
MSWM in the Philippines, its implementation at the LGU level is
still very limited. However, Cebu, the second largest city in the
Philippines with one million inhabitants, has successfully imple-
mented the national policy of RA 9003. This article highlights Ce-
bu’s experience in achieving 30% waste reduction target by
also presents reformation of the MSWM in Cebu and theoretical
perspectives on policy implementation. Innovative actions taken
by the Cebu Government and its cooperation with different stake-
holders such as the local community and the private sector are also
critically discussed. Key factors that have contributed to the imple-
mentation of the RA 9003 at the LG level are also analysed and
elaborated.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Current SWM in the Cebu City
2.1.1. Location and population
As one of the highly urbanised centres in the Central Philip-
pines, Cebu City is situated in the Central Eastern part of the Cebu
Island, bounded by the Mandaue City in the North and the Talisay
City in the South, while on the East is Mactan Channel and on its
West is the municipality of the Balamban and the Toledo (Fig. 1).
Historically, the city was a small fishing village. Since 1521, the
Cebu City has grown into a highly urbanised metropolitan city in
the Philippines. Currently, Cebu is the second largest of growth
centre in the Philippines, next to the Metro Manila, the country’s
capital. Due to its strategic location and easy accessibility by air
and sea transport, service industries such as tourism as well as
information and communication technologies (ICT) predominantly
control the economic activities of the city.
With a total land area of 326.10 km2, the Cebu city is divided
into 80 barangays that consists of 50 urban barangays and 30 rural
barangays. Urban area shares almost one-fourth of the city’s total
land area, while the rest is rural areas. In terms of topography,
the coastal areas that accounts to about 15% of the city’s total land
area (50 km2), have a relatively flat terrain, while 85% has eleva-
tions ranging from 40 to 400 m above sea level (Cebu City, 2012).
As of 2013, the Cebu City has a population of 866,171 inhabitants
with 3% of annual growth rate. However, the city’s population rises
to over a million during daytime due to the influx of the working
force who commutes into the city daily. On average, the city has
a population density of 2204 persons per m2. There are about
161,151 households in Cebu City with five (5) members per house-
hold on average (Ancog et al., 2012).
2.1.2. MSW generation and characteristics
Due to the rapid urban and economic growth in the city in re-
cent years, the daily MSW generation has increased almost 200%
from 212 tonnes in 1982 to 420 tonnes in 2010. Most of the
MSW in the city originates from households, which account for
about 40%, while the rest come from commercial establishments,
public markets, schools, hospitals, and industries. Fig. 2 indicates
that almost 50% of the waste is biodegradable, while 40% is recycla-
ble and the rest is hazardous (Cebu City, 2012).
 D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979 973

Fig. 1. Location of Cebu City in the Cebu Island (Cebu City, 2012).

2.1.3. Waste collection and treatment
Waste collection in the city operates 24 h in three shifts and the
service is provided by the Department of Public Services (DPS) in
the form of garbage trucks and barangay trucks. Two popular col-
lection methods are practiced for waste collection, including com-
munal method where common waste receptacles are strategically
located in public places, while the household collection is carried
out by garbage trucks across the Cebu City.
The above two methods are supplemented with private initia-
tives, which collect MSW from commercial establishments such
as shopping malls. Although DPS owned 29 units of garbage comp-
actors and open dump trucks, consisting eight brands from donor
countries (Japan, Korea and Sweden), only 62% (18 units) still
works properly, while the rest are out of work due to mechanical
breakdown (UNEP-IETC and HIID, 1996).
974 D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979
Fig. 2. Composition of MSW in Cebu City (Cebu City, 2012).
Fig. 3. The condition of Inayawan Sanitary Landfill in 2010.
The Inayawan Sanitary Landfill (ISL) with 15 ha land area, is lo-
cated in Barangay Inayawan. It was constructed in 1998 under the
financial and technical assistance of the Japan International Coop-
eration Agency (JICA). The ISL, which is commissioned to receive
400 tonnes of MSW daily, is estimated to have a life span until
2005. As it was built based on semi-aerobic design, the landfill
gas is vented through a series of horizontal and vertical pipes.
However, due to the lack of adequate expertise in utilising and
maintaining the equipment and facilities, insufficient financial re-
sources for operation and maintenance coupled with the increas-
ing volume of MSW disposed in the landfill daily, after having
operated for a few years, the landfill almost reaches its maximum
capacity (Fig. 3). Although its lifespan was limited to seven years
only, the Cebu City Government still continues to operate the land-
fill by using a compactor machine for levelling and pushing the
garbage disposed of at the landfill until it was decommissioned
in March 2012.
Inside the ISL, there was a PhilBio biogas reactor for collecting
sewage and leachate. However, due to technical problems, the
reactor was closed. Hence, leachate treatment pond served as an
impounding basin. It discharges untreated leachate to the sur-
rounding areas, causing land and water contamination issues
(UNEP-IETC, 2009).
In addition, an incinerator that cost PHP 10 million (US$ 0.2 mil-
lion) was built in 1997, thanks to the loan (US$ 4.5 million) from
the Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund for the sanitary landfill
under the Metro Cebu Development Project. Despite it was ac-
quired to dispose of the hospital and hazardous waste, the city
was unable to use the incinerator because local community and
environmentalists strongly opposed its operation when the Clean
Air Act was enacted in 2009. As a result, the Cebu City disposes
of its collected waste daily in the Consolacion, an adjacent munic-
ipality of the Cebu City, by paying PHP 700 (US$ 14) per tonne as a
tipping fee.
2.1.4. Institutional and financing mechanism
The city is headed by a Mayor. Under the RA 7160, the city gov-
ernment is empowered within its jurisdiction to design and imple-
ment its own organisational structure and staffing pattern. By
taking into accounts the city’s service requirements and financial
capability, staff recruitment is subject to the minimum standards
and guidelines prescribed by the city’s Civil Service Commission.
The DPS of the Cebu City Government is responsible for provid-
ing SWM and disposal, street cleaning, street lighting, potable
water supply as well as operation and maintenance of garbage
trucks. There are three department divisions within the DPS for
carrying out its functions, including Street Cleaning Division, Gar-
bage Collection and Transport Operation Division, and Administra-
tive Division.
Territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the
Philippines are the provinces, cities, municipalities and barang-
ays. The barangay is the smallest unit of local government. A
group of barangays constitutes a city or municipality. A publicly
elected council, led by a captain heads each barangay in the city.
Barangay council is involved in local planning and governance as
well as in charge of passing and enforcing laws, especially those
pertaining to SWM. Further, waste segregation and collection at
the barangay-level, particularly biodegradable and reusable
wastes, are carried out by barangays respectively. The collection
of residuals and hazardous waste is the responsibility of the
DPS.
The Cebu City collects service fees for waste collection that is
incorporated in local real estate and business taxes. In addition,
various economic tools are available in the Cebu City to support
the SWM operation. These include annual SWM appropriations,
fees, fines, subsidies from provincial and national governments,
 D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979
grants from international organisations and funding agencies. In
the past years, the Cebu City has been subsidising the cost of waste
collection, transportation and disposal amounting to about PHP 47
million (US$ 1 million) annually. This subsidy does not include the
costs of supervision, fuel, lubricants and aid to the different
barangays (Ancog et al., 2012).
2.2. Methodology
2.2.1. Theoretical framework on policy implementation
The implementation of public policies has become one of the
major issues in developing countries including the Philippines.
The difficulty in turning policy into practice had been identified
by scholars since 1970s. A pioneering work, entitled ‘‘Implementa-
tion’’ authored by Pressman and Wildavsky (1973), recognised the
importance of implementation as a key element of policy making
and public administration.
Public policy is a set of interrelated decisions taken by a politi-
cal actor or group of actors concerning the selection of goals and
the means of achieving them within a specified situation where
those decisions should, in principle, be within the power of those
actors (Howlett and Ramesh, 1995).
Literally, implementation is defined as ‘carrying out, accomplish-
ing, fulfilling, producing or completing a given task’. Pressman and
Wildavsky (1973) defined it with respect to its relationship to pol-
icy as laid down in official documents. According to them, policy
implementation might be viewed as a process of interaction be-
tween goals-setting and actions that need to be taken to achieve
them (Pressman and Wildavsky, 1973).
When implementation subject was initially studied, there was
an assumption that the implementation would be happening auto-
matically once the appropriate policies were established. However,
when this did not take place, research was undertaken to explain
the causing factors of implementation failure, either due to a com-
bination of bad execution, or to inappropriate policy and/or bad
luck, and it was concluded that the implementation was a political
process similar to policy formulation (McLaughlin, 1987). Recent
work tried to understand how the implementation works in gen-
eral and how its prospects might be improved (O’Toole, 1995).
As research on implementation gradually evolved, two schools
of thought were developed for describing the implementation pro-
cesses, such as top-down and bottom-up approaches. On one hand,
those who support top-down approach view policy designers as
the main actors and policy implementation processes as flowing
downwards from the state structures. On the other hand, those
who favour bottom-up approaches argue that the target groups
and those who deliver the services should be seen as central to
the process (Matland, 1995).
Fig. 4. The reduction of MSW in Cebu City (2005–2012).
975
2.2.2. Research method and data collection
This study focused on the implementation of RA 9003 at LGU le-
vel. Based on the above theoretical discussions, it examines both
top-down and bottom-up approaches. In the top-down approach,
the study reviews the policy itself and the extent to which objec-
tives of the national policy are achieved at LGU level. By using
the bottom-up approach, it focuses on the implementation process
and innovative actions taken by the Cebu City at local level build-
ing partnership and cooperation among different stakeholders,
including citizens and private sector to achieve the key policy tar-
gets set in the national policy, such as reduction of waste to be
landfilled by 25%, introduction of separated waste collection,
establishment of MRF and composting facilities for waste recycling
at barangays and stop of open dumping (see Fig. 4).
This research applied a single case study method based on qual-
itative approach. According to Palumbo and Harder (1981), a case
study represents an empirical inquiry that investigates a contem-
porary phenomenon within its real-life context. A case study illu-
minates a decision or set of decisions, why they were taken, how
they were implemented, and what results were attained (Yin,
2003). As pointed out by (Creswell, 2003), qualitative research is
exploratory and it takes place in natural settings. In this study, pri-
mary data were collected by the authors through field visits, semi
structured interview with key stakeholders, and direct involve-
ment in on-going project activities in the Cebu City, while second-
ary data were obtained from relevant institutions.
An assessment of policy and institutional arrangements was
carried out by reviewing the Cebu City’s ordinances and legisla-
tions that came into effect in 2000. Data related to SWM and
financing arrangements were analysed based on the volume,
collection schemes, garbage fees and monitoring done by the Cebu
City’s DPS and Office of the Chair of Environmental Committee. In
addition, semi-structured interviews were also conducted with
members of the Cebu City Council and department heads of the
city government, Cebu Environmental and Sanitation Enforcement
Team (CESET), Barangay Environmental Officer (BEOs), private sec-
tor and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in Cebu.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Political commitment and development of effective institutional
arrangements
Under the leadership of the City Mayor and the Chair of the
Environmental Committee, who was a barangay captain in the city,
the municipality has promulgated several proactive legislative
measures to strengthen the policy framework at the LGU level
and to implement the RA 9003.
3.1.1. Cebu City Ordinance No. 2017
Under this Ordinance which passed on October 6, 2004, the
SWMB was established to prepare, submit and implement working
plans for a safe and sanitary management of MSW generated in the
city. The SWMB was headed by the Mayor with the relevant repre-
sentatives from other sectors. One of its mandates is to provide a
long-term vision for SWM in the city, which includes the develop-
ment of a solid waste management plan (SWMP).
A 10-year plan for Solid Waste Reduction in Cebu City was
drafted in 2005 with the technical assistance provided by the Fort
Collins (Colorado, USA) under the Resource Cities Program of the
International City/County Management Association. The SWMP,
resulting from consultations with the various sectors of the com-
munity, integrates the various solid waste management plans
and strategies of the barangays.
976 D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979
The SWMB is also required to adopt measures to promote and
to ensure the viability and effective implementation of the SWMP
in its component barangays by forging cooperation with private
sector and local NGOs. In addition, it adopts specific revenue-gen-
erating measures to promote the viability of the SWMP. To ensure
an effective planning and implementation of the SWM programs in
their respective barangays, the barangay solid waste management
committee (BSWMC) was established in each barangay.
Under the Kitakyushu Initiative Network for Clean Environment
(2000/2010), which was initiated by the Kitakyushu City and the
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) and assisted
by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia
and the Pacific (UNESCAP), the Cebu City has set a target to reduce
waste disposal into local landfills by 50% by 2015.
3.1.2. Cebu City Ordinance No. 2031
The Cebu City Ordinance No. 2031 has passed in November
2004 aiming to promote solid waste segregation at its source with
penalties for violations and facilitates the creation of a special fund
for incentives. Since April 2011, the city has strictly enforced seg-
regated waste collection. The implementation of ‘No Segregation,
No Collection policy’ educates citizens to separate waste at source
into different categories: biodegradable, recyclable and residual.
According to the Ordnance 2031, barangay officials, designated
barangay residents, academic institutions, civic groups, commu-
nity-based organisations (CBOs), NGOs and representatives from
the private sector may represent the Mayor to apprehend any per-
son or entity caught violating any provision of the same Ordinance.
To ensure the enforcement of the Ordinance, the Cebu Environ-
mental and Sanitation Team (CESET) was established to issue cita-
tion tickets to its violators. As a result of violations, about PHP 1.5
million (US$ 0.3 million) was generated by the City since its imple-
mentation in March 2008. Any person, who has been found guilty
of violating Ordinance 2031, shall be punished by a fine that ranges
between PHP 1000 (US$ 20) and PHP 5000 Peso (US$ 100) or by
imprisonment (between one month and six months), or combina-
tion of both fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court
(Ancog et al., 2012). If the violator cannot pay the fine, the person
has to render community service from one day to fifteen days at
any barangay, as determined by the Monitoring/Enforcement Unit
of the Cebu City SWMB.
Fig. 5 shows that the number of violations since the CESET
enforcement program has gradually decreased until the end of
2011. This indicates that the environmental awareness of the peo-
ple has improved. About 50% of collecting fine from the barangay
shall proceed to the city treasury, while 30% shall go to the baran-
gay where the apprehension is made and the rest shall go to the
apprehending person. The City Government provides incentives
to barangays and the apprehending persons on a semi-monthly
basis.
Fig. 5. The total number of violations recorded during April–December, 2011.
3.2. Development of strategies and innovative programmes
Recently the Cebu City has introduced several innovative pro-
grammes and strategies in order to improve its MSWM system
based on the integrated resource recovery approach. These strate-
gic programmes include information and education campaign
(IEC), cash back from trash programme, composting of organic
waste, finance and incentive mechanisms, local and international
partnership in implementing SWM programmes. They started with
the development of pilot models experimenting innovative
methods (simple, cost-effective, user-friendly and creating eco-
nomic benefits) as an evidence base to influence both community
members and local decision makers. Once the community has ac-
quired enough experiences in pilot model in terms of its applicabil-
ity and effectiveness, programmes are scaled up and developed
accordingly to ensure political commitment, develop effective
strategies, institutional arrangements, budget allocation, capacity
building and continuous monitoring and evaluation of the perfor-
mance among relevant stakeholders.
3.2.1. Information and Education Campaigns (IEC)
The Cebu City Government, especially the Office of the Environ-
mental Committee has recognised that the implementation of the
SWM programme depends on the level of environmental aware-
ness among its community to ensure their active participation.
The environmental committee has carried-out various information
and education campaigns to improve their understanding on the
need to comply with the laws and ordinances on MSWM.
A system was established by recruiting at least five volunteers
from each barangay with community-leadership elements, known
as BEOs, to serve as the main initiator of these education cam-
paigns. For this reason, BEOs have become an important medium
through which the Cebu City government can communicate its pol-
icies to citizens at the barangay level. Both CESET and BEOs encour-
age not only participation of household members, information
sharing, but also implementation of new waste management sys-
tem and monitoring and evaluation system using communication
channels, such as meetings, discussions, and seminars (Fig. 6).
The IEC activities in the barangays were complemented with recy-
cling education programmes at schools and aimed at increasing the
level of environmental awareness and participation among
students.
3.2.2. Kwarta sa Basura (Cash from Trash) programme
To highlight the economic value of wastes, the office of the
environmental committee, which was assisted by the CESET and
the BEOs, has organised women’s organisations to conduct a buy-
Fig. 6. Public seminar on MSWM in Cebu City.
 D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979
ing day of all recyclable waste, called ‘Cash from Trash program’.
Once a week, local communities gather recyclable waste and bring
it to the collection site for sale. Every barangay has been assigned
to have a buyer of recyclable materials using seed money given by
the Cebu City Government. This programme was first piloted in the
barangay Luz and eventually expanded to other barangays. These
women’s organisations represent a driving force to improve the
lives of its members, as they are gradually turned into cooperatives
which would eventually become an avenue for addressing other
environmental, economic, and social issues in the community.
Furthermore, a number of NGOs in the city have implemented
programmes that contribute to waste reduction and recycling,
while providing alternative sources of income to other family
members. These organisations help housewives to be skillful in
handicraft making and provide an initial capital as a grant to
implement their programmes. Members make various types of
handicrafts such as bags, slippers and wallets using recyclable
materials and then sell them in the market. Two biggest malls of
Cebu City, namely the SM City Cebu and the Ayala Mall, have cre-
ated their Waste Market programs in partnership with the barang-
ays under their corporate social responsibility (CSR) program.
3.2.3. Promotion of composting
With over 50% of municipal solid waste includes organic mate-
rials, composting programmes helped the city to reduce the vol-
ume of organic waste being disposed to the sanitary landfill.
Model composting facilities are established at different levels.
At the household level, composting baskets are distributed to
make compost using kitchen waste. BEOs have educated house-
wives how to use the compost basket in collaboration with the
women’s organisations, homeowners associations and NGOs
(Fig. 7). To date, city government has freely distributed about
2350 baskets across the city. However, it is important to note that
the success of this composting programme depends on the com-
mitment of the users, the level of education and the extent of fol-
low-up mechanisms.
In addition, barangay composting facilities are established at
a small-scale operation. These composting schemes, which have
a receiving capacity of less than one tonne per day, relied on
segregated waste collected from local community. The BEOs col-
lect the waste separated from households and make compost at
existing facility using a vermicomposting (special organisms
such as red worms, African night crawler and the European
crawler). In addition, the other seminal method using fermented
microorganism, known locally as ‘‘Takakura Method’’ which is
introduced by the Kitakyushu City also works very well in Cebu,
Fig. 7. Community training on household composting.
977
Fig. 8. Takakura composting in barangay Kalunasan.
the same as in Surabaya (Indonesia) (Kurniawan et al., 2013)
(Fig. 8).
The compost products are mainly used as fertilizers for beauti-
fying the barangays. In addition, they are commercially sold within
the barangay although potential customers are limited within the
personal network of the collectors and core members of the asso-
ciation. Compost, which is sold from PHP 8 (US$ 0.16) to PHP 20
(US$ 0.4), targets middle and high-income groups in the areas,
where these schemes are located. This scheme encounters a num-
ber of challenges such as cooperation level of residents, suitable
location, bad odour complaints by nearby residents due to vermi-
composting facilities, and the lack of capacity, interest and willing-
ness of barangay officials and staff to tackle these issues.
3.2.4. Financial and incentives
The City Government has introduced supportive financial mea-
sures to encourage the barangays to establish recycling and com-
posting programmes. The annual municipal budget of PHP 20,000
(US$ 400) for each barangay is allocated based on the demand-dri-
ven approach. This budget can be used not only to cover the con-
struction costs of MRF and composting, but also to acquire
necessary equipment and community education programmes. In
addition, the City Government through its BEO volunteers and CE-
SET conducted project-demonstration on composting activities. In
2012, about 58 barangays have established MRF and composting
programmes. The City Government allocated a budget for purchas-
ing the compost fertilizers at PHP 5/kg (US$ 0.1/kg) that could be
used for greening the parks and playgrounds across the city. To
promote environmental awareness, competition among local
barangays under the urban and rural categories is conducted annu-
ally to award and recognise the best environmental barangay in
the city.
3.3. Cooperation with local and international agencies
To improve environmental protection, the Cebu City also has
developed a strong networking with local and international groups
and institutions. Educational institutions such as the South-wes-
tern University, the University of Cebu and the St. Theresa College
have implemented in-house solid waste management initiatives
program including IEC among their students. The St. Theresa Col-
lege has implemented a school-wide SWM program particularly
in integrating environmental concerns in its curriculum and
instruction. It has established a model composting facility to dem-
onstrate the practical process in making compost.
Lihok Filipina, which is a network of Filipino women, has also
carried out an education campaign programme in the Cebu City re-
978 D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979
Table 1
Job opportunities through composting and material recovery facility in barangay Luz (Premakumara, 2012a,b).
Direct job opportunities at the composting facility and the material recovery facility
Waste separation, collection and transport to the facility
Composting facility
Eco centre assistant
Indirect job opportunities created through the program
Collection of recyclable materials
Production of handicrafts from the recyclable materials
Household composting and making worms for selling
Total
Fig. 9. Central recycling facility in Inayawan.
lated to SWM at household level. The NGO has encouraged house-
wives to participate in a ‘‘Cash from Trash’’ programme that pro-
duces homemade crafts that could be sold in the market. Alyansa
sa mga Lumulupyong Kabus Alang sa Pagpalambo (ALCAP) or Alli-
ance of the Urban Poor for Development has also engaged its mem-
ber for producing and selling paper products to generate additional
income and/or job opportunity for their family members. Table 1
shows the average income from recycling activities in the barangay
Luz.
The private shopping malls in the city are also involved in
supporting the community initiatives in implementing recycling
programmes. Ayala Mall has organised the Cebu Business Park
and Neighbouring Barangays Altruistic Alliance Inc. (CBPNBAAI)
to build partnerships among all tenants and the surrounding
barangays to implement a recycling programme. Ayala Mall ten-
ants sell their recyclables to enable them to be bought and reused
by other potential buyers. Likewise, the SM City Cebu has desig-
nated every Saturday as Waste Market day, where Cebu barangay
residents can bring in their recyclable waste.
Two central waste treatment facilities were established by pri-
vate ventures near the ISL to treat plastic and organic wastes. A plas-
tic recycling facility managed by the Cebu Solid Waste Management
Inc. can treat about 100 tonnes of MSW per day collected within the
city, while the Composting Plant Bio Nutrient Waste Management
Inc. operates a central composting plant to treat about 10–20 tonnes
per day of organic waste collected from shopping malls and public
markets in the city. Both the plants created job opportunities for
over 150 people, who worked at the landfill site (Fig. 9).
Apart from local collaboration, international partnership has
strengthened the MSWM programmes and initiatives of the city.
The Cebu city is one of the most active members of the Kitakyushu
Initiative Network for Clean Environment. Since 2000, both cities
No. of new job Average monthly Total monthly income
opportunities are created income in PHP generated in PHP
15 6000 (US$120) 90,000 (US$1800)
6 6000 (US$120) 36,000 (US$720)
2 3000 (US$60) 6000 (US$120)
40 1500 (US$30) 60,000 (US$1200)
75 1500–3000 (US$30–60) 112,500 (US$2250)
200 500–1000 (US$10–20) 100,000 (US$2000)
338 404,500 (US$8090)
have undertaken several programmes, including a community-
based wastewater treatment facility for solving the SWM issue in
the Guadalupe River, a major river system in the Cebu City. In its
recent partnership, the Kitakyushu City has been involved in pro-
viding technical assistance for promoting organic waste compost-
ing using the Takakura Home Composting Method. Both cities
are building a partnership to implement a plastic material recycle
programme.
During 2000–2005, Fort Collins (Colorado, USA), a sister city of
Cebu, provided the technical assistance to draft its solid waste
management framework and to enhance the capability of local offi-
cials with respect to SWM. Furthermore, Haarlemmermeer (The
Netherlands), another sister city, helped Cebu in educating waste
scavengers at the ISL on how to make organic compost as an alter-
native source of income.
4. Conclusions
The RA 9003 has set guidelines on proper MSWM among LGUs
in the Philippines and aims at protecting public health, ensuring
environmental sustainability and economic efficiency. In this re-
gard, the recent experience of the Cebu City in MSWM has clearly
demonstrated that establishing a supportive institutional frame-
work at the local level would have improved SWM in terms of
waste separation and reduction. It is conclusively evident from
our survey that about 60% of barangays in the Cebu City have been
involved in waste separation at source in recent years and most
importantly, its 30% waste reduction target by 2012 has been
achieved. The environmental condition in local areas has substan-
tially improved by establishing appropriate waste collection and
treatment methods and increased environmental awareness and
public participation among residents.
In addition, treating solid waste at source have minimised
transportation costs, reduced the amounts of waste to be land-
filled, and prolonged the life of landfills, thus saving municipal
expenditure for landfill operation and its management. There has
also been a considerable reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) gen-
erated in the ISL through organic waste composting across the
Cebu City. This suggests the potential of creating job opportunities
and additional incomes for the urban poor and scavengers through
the implementation of the MRF, and composting programmes. Fur-
thermore, lessons learned from these programmes not only create
economic opportunities within the local neighbourhoods, but also
promote public green spaces for community involvement, building
partnerships and social capital for achieving sustainable develop-
ment goals at the local level.
Nevertheless, these national policies were effective when they
were accompanied by strong political commitment at local govern-
ment level in establishing a supportive institutional framework
and ensuring political will. Both of them are necessary to carry
out innovative, strategic programmes when financial and organisa-
tional resources are available.
 D.G.J. Premakumara et al. / Waste Management 34 (2014) 971–979
Needless to say, community participation is essential to imple-
ment the SWM programme successfully. This can be achieved
when the programmes provide economic incentives coupled with
a strict enforcement. For this reason, active participation and part-
nership among different stakeholders such as businesses, non-
governmental organisations, and barangay councils need to be
established to ensure the programme’s sustainability. International
partners might also have played major roles not only in providing
technical know-how and capacity building opportunities, but also
in facilitating research and best practices, thus providing develop-
ment assistance to improve the city’s waste management system.
This case study highlights that the policy planning or formula-
tion in developing country like the Philippines is merely a top-
down approach where policies are set at higher levels in a political
process and are then communicated to the local level for imple-
mentation purpose. However, policy implementation is a bottom-
up approach which requires more interactive process involving dif-
ferent stakeholders and complex partnerships that reflected in a
wide range of decision-making process. Successful policy imple-
mentation therefore involves not only just a common agenda and
long term joint commitment, but also a degree of political commit-
ment, supportive institutional structure, appropriate local legal
frameworks and availability of adequate resources (financial,
human and technological).
Acknowledgements
The authors greatly acknowledge Hon. (Ms.) Nida Cabrera,
Chairperson, Committee of Environment, Cebu City, Mr. Amancio
S. Dongcoy, Regional Solid Waste Management Committee, Envi-
ronmental Management Bureau (EMB), Regional Office VII, Eng.
(Mr.) Gualiza, Director, Department of Public Services (DPS), Cebu
City and all those who provided valuable information for this
study. This paper is based on the experience of implementing the
Community-based Solid Waste Management System Development
Project in Cebu City under the financial assistance of the Japan
Fund for Global Environment (JFGE) during 2010/2012. In addition,
Dr. Kurniawan thanks the Japan Society for Promotion of Sciences
(JSPS) for the support of his fellowship. The authors would also like
to thank all anonymous reviewers for their inspiring and construc-
tive comments on the paper.
References
Aguinaldo, E., 2008. National and Local Initiatives on Solid Waste Management and
Implementation of 3Rs in the Philippines. Environment and Livable Cities 08,
Manila, Philippines.
979
Ancog, R.C., Archival, N.D., Rebancos, C.M., 2012. Institutional arrangements for
Solid Waste Management in Cebu City, Philippines. Journal of Environmental
Science and Management 15 (2), 74–82.
Antonio, L.C., 2008. Study on 3R Policy and Waste Exchange in the Philippines. In:
Michikazu, K., Enri, D., (Eds.), 3R Policies for Southeast and East Asia. ERIA
Research Project Report, Tokyo.
Cebu City, 2012. Cebu City’s Community-Based Composting and Solid Waste
Management. In: Premakumara, D.G.J., et al. (Eds.) A Follow-up Seminar on
KitaQ System Composting in Asia, 17-20 July 2012, JICA, IGES, Kitakyushu,
Japan, pp. 15–16.
Creswell, W.J., 2003. Research Design, Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods
Approaches. London, Sage.
Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., 1995. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Sub
systems, second ed. Oxford University Press.
Kurniawan, T.A., Oliveira, J.P., Premakumara, D.G.J., Nagaishi, M., 2013. City-to-city
level cooperation for generating urban co-benefits: The case of technological
cooperation in the waste sector between Surabaya (Indonesia) and Kitakyushu
(Japan). Journal of Cleaner Production 58, 43–50.
Matland, R.E., 1995. Synthesizing the implementation literature: the ambiguity-
conflict model of policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory: J-PART 5 (2), 145–174 (April 1995).
McLaughlin, M.W., 1987. Learning from experience: lessons from
policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 9 (2), 171–
178.
Minghua, Z., Xiumin, F., Rovetta, A., Qichang, H., Vicentini, F., Bingkai, L., Giusti, A.,
Yi, L., 2009. Municipal solid waste management in Pudong New Area, China.
Journal of Waste Management 29, 1227–1233.
National Solid Waste Management Commission, 2007. Top 15 cities solid waste
generators in the Philippines, NSWMC, Manila, Philippines.
Oliveira, J.P., Doll, C., Kurniawan, T.A., Yong, G., Kapshe, M., Huisingh, D., 2013.
Promoting win-win situations in climate change mitigation, local
environmental quality and development in Asian cities through cobenefits.
Journal of Cleaner Production 58, 1–6.
O’Toole, L.J.R., 1995. Rational choice and policy implementation. American Review
of Public Administration 25 (1), 43–57.
Palumbo, D.J., Harder, M.A. (Eds.), 1981. Implementing Public Policy. Lexington
Books, Lexington, Mass.
Premakumara, D.G.J., 2012. Best Practices and Innovations in Community-Based
Solid Waste Management in Cebu, KITA, IGES, A2D, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Premakumara, D.G.J., 2012. Establishment of the Community-Based Solid Waste
Management System in Metro Cebu, the Philippines. In: KITA & IGES (Eds.), The
Report for the Establishment of the Waste Management System in Metro Cebu,
Philippines, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Premakumara, D.G.J., Abe, M., Maeda, T., 2011. Reducing municipal waste through
promoting integrated sustainable waste management (ISWM) practices in
Surabaya City, Indonesia. In: Villacampa, Y., Brebbia, C.A. (Eds.), Eco System and
Sustainable Development VIII. WIT Press, pp. 457–470.
Pressman, J.L., Wildavsky, A., 1973. Implementation, First ed. University of
California Press, Bekeley.
UNEP-IETC and HIID, 1996. International Source Book on Environmentally Sound
Technologies for Municipal Solid Waste Management. UNEP, International
Environmental Technology Centre, Osaka.
UNEP-IETC, 2009. Technology for Waste Management/Infrastructure – Cebu,
Philippines, Osaka.
World Bank, 2012. What a Waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste Management,
Washington DC, USA.
Yin, R.K., 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Third ed. In: Applied
Social Research Method Series. vol. 5, Sage Publications, Inc.