Relevant Findings and Discussion - West Java Province, Indonesia

West Java Province, Indonesia

5.5 Relevant Findings and Discussion

The Law No. 18/2008 on waste management regulates roles, obligations and rights of each stakeholder related to waste management, namely, the central government, the provincial government, the local government, the private sector and communities. These stakeholders are enlisted in Tables 5.1 and 5.2. This law also states that the waste management activities consist of waste reducing and handling. Based on Law No. 33/2012 about regional authority, the solid waste problem affairs are gov- erned by the environmental and public departments of all government levels (local, central and provincial). In fact, solid waste affairs are a matter of the joint collabora- tion among the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry and the Ministry of Public Works at the central level.

Each of the mentioned ministries issues regulation on household solid waste management, and those are expected to be implemented at provincial and local level. At the provincial level, there are the Regional Environmental Protection Board (BPLHD) and the Housing and Settlement Department (Diskimrum). At the local level, the involved stakeholders can be different depending on the district and the city itself. In Cimahi, the involved stakeholders are the Cleanliness and Landscape Department (DKP), the Planning Agency (Bappeda) and the Environmental Agency of Cimahi City (KLH). In addition, the private sectors, NGOs and informal sectors play an important role in household solid waste management.

The involvement of various stakeholders causes problems related to the division of authority among them. Therefore, it is important to identify the involved stakeholders in reducing and handling waste management activities in both the formal sectors and the informal sectors. Furthermore, this study is focused on salient stakeholders in order to seek the promoters and coordinating actors who can improve the household solid waste management problems in Cimahi. The early stage of this study indicated that the attributes of stakeholders of household solid waste management vary depending on the two main waste management activities stated in the Indonesian law: reducing and handling.

Table 5.1 shows the identity and salience of involved stakeholders in waste- reducing activities. The definitive stakeholder in this activity based on Law No.18/2008 should be the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, whilst other governmental institutions qualify as dominant stakeholders. Seadon (2006) proposed that the overall responsibility for solid waste management processes should lie on the government since they are the prime change enablers. However, in reality, most governments are (just) dominant stakeholders. This is because there are conflicts of responsibility among local, provincial and central governments. Based on inter- views, each of the governmental institutions pointed to another institution as the one who has greater responsibilities! For instance, local government expected instructions and support (financial, technical and also material) from provincial government to start waste-reducing programmes. In contrary, the provincial government indicated that the central government (the Ministry of Environment and Forestry) is the most responsible stakeholder. But the central government mentioned

Table 5.1Stakeholders identity and salience for reducing activities in household solid waste management (formal sectors) NoStakeholdersRoles Power (dormant)Legitimacy (discretionary)Urgency (demanding)Power + legitimacy (dominant) Power + urgency (dangerous) Legitimacy + urgency (dependent)

Power + legitimacy + urgency (definitive)CaUbNcIdOreSfTSgCrh A. Formal sectors 1.Government National government authority 1.1. Determine national policies and strategies in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.2. Determine norms, standards, procedures and criteria in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.3. Facilitating and developing interregional cooperation, partnership and networking in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.4. Provide coordination, coaching and monitoring of local government performance in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.5. Determine policies for interregional disputes and solutions in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) Ministry of Environment and Forestry

Officially Point 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5√√√√ Practically Point 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5√√ Ministry of Public WorksOfficially Point 1.2 and 1.4√√√ Practically Point 1.2 and 1.4√√√ (continued)

Table 5.1(continued) NoStakeholdersRoles Power (dormant)Legitimacy (discretionary)Urgency (demanding)Power + legitimacy (dominant) Power + urgency (dangerous) Legitimacy + urgency (dependent)

Power + legitimacy + urgency (definitive)CaUbNcIdOreSfTSgCrh Ministry of Trade and IndustryOfficially Point 1.2√√√ Practically Point 1.2√√√ Provincial government authority 1.1. Determine provincial policies and strategies in line with national government policies (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.2. Facilitate intra-provincial cooperation, partnership and networking (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.3. Monitor and support local district and municipality governments in waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.4. Facilitate intra-provincial dispute solution (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) Regional Environmental Protection Board of West Java Province

Officially Point 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Practically Point 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Housing and Sett lement Department of West Java Province Officially Point 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Practically Point 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√

NoStakeholdersRoles Power (dormant)Legitimacy (discretionary)Urgency (demanding)Power + legitimacy (dominant) Power + urgency (dangerous) Legitimacy + urgency (dependent)

Power + legitimacy + urgency (definitive)CaUbNcIdOreSfTSgCrh Local government authority 1.1. Apply and enforce government waste management strategies and policies (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.2. Apply and enforce government waste management norms, standards, procedures and criteria (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.3. Monitor external third party waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) 1.4. Maintain official dumps, landfills, collection sites and other disposal/treatment facilities (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey 2010) Cleanliness and Landscape Department of Cimahi City

Officially Point 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Practically Point 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Planning Agency of Cimahi CityOfficially Point 1.3√√√ Practically Point 1.1 and 1.3√√√ Environmental Agency of Cimahi City

Officially Point 1.1 and 1.3√√√ Practically Point 1.3√ 2.Non-governmental organisations (NGOs)—national level 2.1. Any person in household solid waste management shall reduce and handle waste in environmentally friendly manner (Law No. 18/2008) Officially Point 2.1√√√ Practically Point 2.1√√√ (continued)

Table 5.1(continued) NoStakeholdersRoles Power (dormant)Legitimacy (discretionary)Urgency (demanding)Power + legitimacy (dominant) Power + urgency (dangerous) Legitimacy + urgency (dependent)

Power + legitimacy + urgency (definitive)CaUbNcIdOreSfTSgCrh 3.Private sector 3.1. Producer required to manage the packaging and/or product which cannot or is difficult to decompose by natural processes (Law No. 18/2008) 3.2. Any person who carries on business in waste management are required to have a permit from the head of the region (Law No. 18/2008) CorporationOfficially Point 3.1√√√ Practically Point 3.1√ Formal recycler industriesOfficially Point 3.2√√√ Practically Point 3.2√√√ 4.Communities 4.1. Reduce and handle waste in environmentally friendly manner (Law No. 18/2008) Officially Point 4.1√√√ Practically Point 4.1√ aCoersive bUtilitarian cNormative dIndividual eOrganisational fSocial gTime sensivity hCritically

that provincial and local governments are the main stakeholders to carry out these activities. Even though, they admitted the obligation of the ministry to provide law and enforcement instruments for reducing waste generation from goods manufac- turing companies, but they have limitations to enforce the law themselves due to political, financial, technological and social problems.

Furthermore, due to the DKP mandate, it should be a dominant stakeholder, but it is now becoming a dependent stakeholder due to its financial, technological and human resource constraints. DKP needs to rely on other stakeholders, such as the central government and the provinces. KLH is supposed to be a dominant stakeholder, as well, though at present this institution has become a discretionary stakeholder because it has legitimacy but lack of power and urgency. In addition, some of the KLH functions can be transferred to the Planning Agency (Bappeda). This hap- pens because Bappeda has a utilitarian power (see Section 5.2) that according to Parent and Deephouse (2007) has a greater effect on the salience.

The NGOs that are involved in waste-reducing activities are dominant stakeholders because they have power and legitimacy. Officially, NGOs have normative power, but practically, they have utilitarian power due to material support. Private sector companies are divided into corporations and formal recycling companies that should be a dependent stakeholder. This is because, and to some extent, they still require assistance from the government to implement the waste reduction methods.

However, at present the corporations are discretionary stakeholders because they only have legitimacy. They do not use their power and exclude their urgency in waste management. The formal recycling companies are a dominant stakeholder because they have power to regulate and set the price of recycled goods which can be used for their companies. The community members, as established by the Law No. 18/2008, should be the dominant stakeholders in reduction of household solid waste management because they represent the major source of the waste. Their consumption patterns cause the solid waste generation (Muthmainnah 2007;

Falasca-Zamponi 2011). Nevertheless, the community is categorised as a discretionary stakeholder because of the lack of participation and public awareness in the management of household waste (DKP, Cimahi 2014).

Whilst Table 5.1 showed the stakeholders in waste reduction, on the other hand, Table 5.2 displays the identity and salience of involved stakeholders in waste- handling activities. The involved stakeholders in these activities are both formal and informal sectors. DKP should be considered as a definitive stakeholder, but now, DKP is a dependent stakeholder. It is because DKP still relies on other stakeholders including Bappeda, which has the authority to establish the work, to develop the programmes and to allocate budgets for DKP. Bappeda is categorised as a dominant stakeholder, but practically, it becomes a definitive stakeholder due to its authority to set development planning programmes for other departments.

They have capacity to insert or remove the programmes that will be implemented.

Mitchell et al. (1997) mentioned that a stakeholder exhibiting both power and legitimacy could be moved from the category of dominant stakeholder to definitive stakeholder when such stakeholder’s claim is urgent. Managers have a clear and immediate mandate to attend to, and they give priority to that stakeholder’s claims.

Table 5.2Stakeholders identity and salience for handling activities in household solid waste management (formal and informal sectors) NoStakeholdersRoles Power (Dormant)Legitimacy (Discretionary)Urgency (Demanding)Power + Legitimacy (Dominant) Power + Urgency (Dangerous) Legitimacy + Urgency (Dependent)

Power + Legitimacy + Urgency (Definitive)CUNIOrSTSCr A. Formal Sectors 1.Government National Government Authority 1.1 Determine national policies and strategies in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.2 Determine norms, standards, procedures and criteria in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.3 Facilitating and developing inter-regional cooperation, partnership, and networking in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.4 Provide coordination, coaching and monitoring of local government performance in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.5 Determine policies for inter-regional disputes solutions in solid waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) Ministry of Environmental and Forestry

Officially Point 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5√√√ Practically Point 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5√ Ministry of Public WorkOfficially Point 1.2 and 1.4√√√ Practically Point 1.2 and 1.4√√√ Provincial Government Authority 1.1 Determine provincial policies and strategies in line with national government policies (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.2 Facilitate intra-provincial cooperation, partnership and networking (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.3 Monitor and support local district and municipality governments in waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.4 Facilitate intra-provincial dispute solution

NoStakeholdersRoles Power (Dormant)Legitimacy (Discretionary)Urgency (Demanding)Power + Legitimacy (Dominant) Power + Urgency (Dangerous) Legitimacy + Urgency (Dependent)

Power + Legitimacy + Urgency (Definitive)CUNIOrSTSCr Regional Environmental Protection Board of West Java Province

Officially Point 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Practically Point 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Housing and Settlement Department of West Java Province

Officially Point 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Practically Point 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Local Government Authority 1.1 Apply and enforce government waste management strategies and policies (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.2 Apply and enforce government waste management norms, standards, procedures and criteria (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.3 Monitor external third party waste management (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) 1.4 Maintain official dumps, landfills, collection sites and other disposal/treatment facilities (Law No. 18/2008; Bruce and Storey, 2010) Cleanliness and Landscape Department of Cimahi City

Officially Point 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√√ Practically Point 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4√√√ Planning Agency of Cimahi City

Officially Point 1. 3√√√ Practically Point 1.1 and 1.3√√√√ Environmental Agency of Cimahi City Officially Point 1.1 and 1.3√√√ Practically Point 1.3√ (continued)

NoStakeholdersRoles Power (Dormant)Legitimacy (Discretionary)Urgency (Demanding)Power + Legitimacy (Dominant) Power + Urgency (Dangerous) Legitimacy + Urgency (Dependent)

Power + Legitimacy + Urgency (Definitive)CUNIOrSTSCr 2.Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)-Local Level 2.1. Any person in household solid waste management shall reduce and handle waste in environmentally friendly manner (Law No. 18/2008) Officially Point 2.1√√√ Practically Point 2.1√√√ 3.Communities 3.1. Reduce and handle waste in environmentally friendly manner (Law No. 18/2008) Officially Point 4.1√√√ Practically Point 4.1√ B. Informal Sectors 1.City’s waste manager Practically Waste handling operators Waste recyclable collectors√

Table 5.2(continued)

Bappeda has used its authority to claim the urgency and has been categorised as a definitive stakeholder. The NGOs and the communities have both some attributes that help them to be involved in the reduction and handling of solid waste by advo- cating government policy and supporting government programmes to minimise waste generation.

The informal sector consists of a city’s waste manager, informal waste collectors and informal recycling companies. The city’s waste manager represents a demanding stakeholder because they only have the urgency attribute when they are unable or unwilling to acquire either the power or the legitimacy necessary to move their claim into a more salient status (Mitchell et al. 1997). They are assigned to collect solid waste from households, streets and shopping and trade centres which is then dumped to the temporary dumpsite. Before the disposal of household solid waste to the temporary dumpsite, the marketable goods are taken out which helps in the generation of additional income. This act is not considered as an illegal one in Indonesia since it is beneficial in a way that it helps in the reduction of the waste, which is then sent to the final dumpsite (Damanhuri 2009).

Informal waste collectors are also categorised as a demanding stakeholder because they do not have power and legitimacy, but their presence in the waste- handling activities is crucial. The informal recycling industry is assessed as dangerous stakeholder because it has a utilitarian power and urgency in most of the cases.

They are a dangerous stakeholder because they can obstruct government programmes to reduce solid waste generation. For example, a restriction by government to use plastic bags will threaten the continuity of their company because it reduces input of recycled plastics that normally are used as raw material. As for the informal companies, they also have the ability to determine the price of incoming goods. These types of small companies are categorised as informal because they do not register to the Industrial Chamber and do not pay taxes. The owners of informal companies believe that becoming a part of the formal sector is not easy and it brings inconvenience. Some of the barriers to registration are the procedural difficulties, costs and requirements to fulfil the registration processes (Bruce and Storey 2010).

Based on the above discussion, it can be observed that stakeholders, who are involved in the household solid waste management in Cimahi, are different regard- ing the waste management activities: reduction and handling. This is because for the managing of solid waste, the government has created legislation that has divided the managerial authority among central, provincial and local governments. This has directly affected the government’s performance in solid waste management, espe- cially by lowering the priority in handling waste due to financial problems and by the occurrence of locality ego-centrism, which creates difficulties for local governments to operate landfills that are situated in the areas outside their jurisdiction, as it has mentioned by Damanhuri (2008). In addition to it, there are conflicts among stakeholders on using their authorities or as it was called by Bruce and Storey (2010) “implementation confusions” among stakeholders. Furthermore, there is still a huge gap between human resource competencies and requirement

competencies in Cimahi, which was a similar result compared to the study carried out by Herayani (2011).

Furthermore, the results of this study show that a majority of the stakeholders are dominant, dependent and definitive. This contradicts the findings of Parent and Deephouse (see Sect. 5.2). This is because stakeholder attributes are not fixed and they can be changed by particular entity or determination from decision-makers (compare Mitchell et al. 1997; Magness 2007). Besides that, the most influential factor to cause saliency in household solid waste management in Cimahi is utilitarian power. According to Etzioni (1964), stakeholders need access to resources in order to maintain their power. Therefore, NGOs and Bappeda represent those stakeholders that have used utilitarian power to claim their attributes. NGOs have material supports as utilitarian power, whilst Bappeda has utilitarian power to set goals in development planning programmes for other departments.

The determination of stakeholder’s identity and salience is very important when there are multi-stakeholders’ activities. This classification can shed light on those stakeholders who can have strong influence over the processes needed for the solution of a problem, the waste management in Cimahi, in this particular case.

Even further, if the efforts of one of the stakeholders fail along the process, its impact might produce different damage levels (Clarkson 1995). After analysis of the current stakeholder’s constellation of household waste management in Cimahi, some of the highlighted results imply that intervention of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry is very important to boost waste reduction activities.

They should become a salient stakeholder who can be able to integrate all of stakeholders that are involved in household solid waste management, as well as to govern and define their roles to minimise conflicts among stakeholders. On the other hand, for the solid waste-handling activities, the intervention of DKP and community participation can improve the waste management system in Cimahi. DKP can provide an adequate technology to handle household solid waste generations, whilst the community can pay retribution as a passive participant to support government financially or by participating actively to reduce, reuse and recycle household solid waste.

However, household solid waste-handling cannot be seen apart from other economic activities. As long as production and consumption continue without closed cycles, solid wastes generation will still exist. Therefore, it is necessary to look for some ways to solve solid waste generation problem, one is by circulating the solid wastes before they are mixed up. Reducing and handling activities are part of material flows which after disposal are available to circulate (reuse or recycle) within the socioeconomic system (Haas et al. 2015). Scheepens et al.

(2016) said that the introduction of the circularity in complex systems in a truly circular economy can take several years and that its promotion and coordination rely on the government role who needs to be a reliable stakeholder in the long term. Consequently, it is important to know stakeholders’ identity and salience to boost household solid waste management.

Dalam dokumen Circular Economy Boost, Waste to (Halaman 104-115)