Abstract

The Super Depo Sutorejo Surabaya (SDSS) Project was created to separate household waste into fractions, but its separation effect is unknown. This study assessed the significance of the project in sorting general waste into biodegradable, non-biodegradable, and assorted. The t-test compared the means of general and biodegradable waste (normally distributed). The non-biodegradable and assorted waste were not significantly distributed; therefore, the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test was used to compare their medians against general waste. The multivariate analysis compared the significance level of each waste fraction. Each statistical analysis showed that the SDSS significantly sorts the general waste. The p-values were (0.000) <0.05 for each type of waste fraction. Furthermore, the multivariate analysis showed that all variables were similar, and p-values (0.00) <0.05. The biodegradable waste was the most significant fraction (M = 176,715.9; SD = 57,990.8), followed by the assorted (M = 171,412.5; SD = 94,631.3), and non-biodegradable (M = 35,243.8; SD = 17,290.7). The results showed that the SDSS significantly segregates general waste into biodegradable, non-biodegradable, and assorted, therefore hypothesis (H1) is accepted. This study recommends the Government of Surabaya to maintain and expand this waste management project throughout the city alongside the improvement of the community participation program.

References

1. Manus Coffey, Coad A. Collection of municipal solid waste in developing countries. UN-HABITAT; 2010.

2. Hoornweg D, Perinaz Bhada-Tata. What a waste: a global review of solid waste management. Washington: The World Bank; 2015.

3. The Department of Ecology State of Washington reported (DESW). Solid waste and material recovery data; 2016.

4. Balfour C. Waste authority’s move to scrap landfills, boost recycling. Herald Sun. Melbourne; 2016.

5. Desa A, Kadir NBA, Yusooff F. Waste education and awareness strategy: towards solid waste management (SWM) program at UKM. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012; 59: 47–50.

6. Belarminus R. Basuki: Jakarta butuh “Incenerator.” Kompas.com; 2013.

7. Fransilia M. Sampah Surabaya 2.000 ton tiap hari, hanya 500 ton diolah. Surya; 2015.

8. Hakim A. Surabaya siap jadi contoh pengelolaan sampah. Antaranews; 2018.

9. Adrian Coad. Collection of municipal solid waste. UN-HABITAT; 2011.

10. The World Bank. Solid waste management. The World Bank; 2019.

11. Riski P. Surabaya, kota percontohan pengolahan sampah terbaik Indonesia. Mongabay; 2014.

12. Kurnia D. Surabaya dijadikan percontohan pengolahan sampah. Republika; 2018.

13. Hakim A. 2016, Surabaya hasilkan sampah 1.500 ton/hari. www.Metrotvnews.com; 2017.

14. Dhokhikah Y, Trihadiningrum Y. Solid waste management in Asian developing countries: challenges and opportunities. Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences. 2012.

15. Effendi Z. Ini solusi Pemkot Surabaya kurangi sampah masuk ke TPA dan pantai. Detiknews; 2017.

16. Pemerintah Kota Surabaya. Pemkot Surabaya kembangkan pengolahan sampah dengan larva; 2018.

17. Marzuki MB. Volume sampah di Surabaya mencapai 1,6 ribu ton perhari. Surabaya Times; 2018.

18. Haswindy S, Yuliana F. Partisipasi masyarakat dalam pengelolaan sampah pemukiman pada Kecamatan Tungkil Ilir Kabupaten Tanjung Jabung Barat. Jurnal Ilmu Lingkungan. 2018; 15 (2): 96.

19. Ahmad F. Partisipasi masyarakat dalam pengelolaan sampah berbasis komunitas lokal. Universitas Indonesia; 2012.

20. Lapik F. Partisipasi masyarakat dalam pengelolaan sampah rumah tangga di Desa Mpanau Kecamatan Sigi Biromaru Kabupaten Sigi. EJournal Geo-Tadulako. 2017.

21. Wiweko S, Hakim A, Leksono AS, Riniwati H. The people-based waste management model in Super Depo Sutorejo Surabaya. International Journal of Humanities, Religion and Social Science. 2018; 2 (6): 2548–5725.

22. Sari N. Metode pengolahan sampah Depo Sutorejo meniru Jepang; 2015.

23. Sheau-Ting L, Sin-Yee T, Weng-Wai C. Preferred attributes of waste separation behaviour: an empirical study. Procedia Engineering. 2016; 145: 738–45.

24. Mukama T, Ndejjo R, Musoke D, Musinguzi G, Halage AA, Carpenter DO, et al. Practices, concerns, and willingness to participate in solid waste management in two urban slums in Central Uganda. Journal of Environmental and Public Health. 2016; 2016.

25. Otitoju TA, Seng L. Municipal solid waste management: household waste segregation in Kuching South City, Sarawak, Malaysia. American Journal of Energy Engineering. 2014; 03 (06): 82–91.

26. Sinthumule N, Mkumbuzi S. Participation in community-based solid waste management in Nkulumane Suburb, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. Resources. 2019; 8 (1): 30.

27. Sakai SI, Yoshida H, Hirai Y, Asari M, Takigami H, Takahashi S, et al. International comparative study of 3R and waste management policy developments. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2011; 13 (2): 86–102.

28. Samiha B. The importance of the 3R principle of municipal solid waste management for achieving sustainable development. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 2013; 4 (3): 129–35.

29. Banga M, Banga M. Household knowledge, attitudes and practices in solid waste segregation and recycling: the case of Urban Kampala recycling. Zambia Social Science Journal. 2011; 2 (1).

30. Ajayi SO, Oyedele LO, Akinade OO, Alaka HA. Critical management practices influencing on-site waste minimization in construction projects. Waste Management. 2016; 56: 330–9.

31. Johnson KM, González ML, Dueñas L, Mario G, Relyea G, Luque LE, et al. Improving waste segregation while reducing costs in a tertiarycare hospital in a lower–middle-income country in Central America. Waste Management & Research. 2013.

32. Zurbrügg C, Gfrerer M, Ashadi H, Brenner W, Küper D. Determinants of sustainability in solid waste management - the Gianyar waste recovery project in Indonesia. Waste Management. 2012; 32 (11): 2126–33.

33. Jun Tai, Zhanga W, Chea Y, Feng D. Municipal solid waste sourceseparated collection in China: a comparative analysis. Waste Management. 2011; 31 (8): 1673–82.

34. Kushairi. Jual pupuk organik BOKASI; 2017.

35. Hartini D. Sampah disulap jadi pupuk kompos, Pemkot Surabaya hemat anggaran 50 persen!. KompasTV; 2020.

36. Xevgenos D, Papadaskalopoulou C, Panaretou V, Moustakas K, Malamis D. Success stories for recycling of MSWat municipal level: a review. Waste and Biomass Valorization. Springer Netherlands. 2015; 6: 657–84.

37. Rousta K. Household waste sorting at source: a procedure for improvement. University of Boras; 2018.

38. Sinthumle NI, Mkumbuzi SH. Participation in community-based solid waste management in Nkulumane Suburb, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. Resources. 2019; 8 (1).

39. Yakubu KN, Mado H. Assessment of community participation in solid waste management in Kaduna Metropolis. In: Nigerian Environmental Society National Conference: Deployment of Green Initiatives for Economic Diversification in Africa; 2018.

40. Tanuwijaya F. Partisipasi masyarakat dalam pengelolaan sampah di Bank Sampah Pitoe Jambangan Kota Surabaya. Universitas Airlangga Surabaya; 2016.

41. Sudati Nur Sarfiah WJ. Manfaat bank sampah bagi masyarakat di Dusun Semali Desa Salamkanci Kecamatan Bandongan Kabupaten Magelang. Jurnal REP (Riset Ekonomi Pembangunan). 2017; 2 (2): 165–84.

42. Hakim A. Puluhan warga Surabaya peroleh manfaat kelola bank sampah. Antara Jatim; 2018.

43. Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO). Waste pickers. WIEGO; 2012.

44. Chikarmane P. Integrating waste pickers into municipal solid waste management in Pune, India. WIEGO Policy Br (Urban Policies); 2012.

45. Masood M, Barlow CY. Framework for integration of informal waste management sector with the formal sector in Pakistan. Waste Management & Research. 2013; 31 (10 SUPPL.): 93–105.

46. Sembiring E, Nitivattananon V. Sustainable solid waste management toward an inclusive society: integration of the informal sector. Resources, Conservation & Recycling. 2010; 54 (11): 802–9.

Download

Share

COinS