Key Insights
- The importance of benchmarking - how can we learn the best waste management practices from other countries and adopting it to our local context?
- The importance of data and consistency to drive actions - without a clear system to measure and verify data, it's difficult to know how far we are from ambitious waste management goals like 30% of waste reduction
- Driving policies based on actual community feedback - by joining the different associations and communities, CSWM is able to better understand the problem facing different stakeholders.
Berdaya Talk is an initiative that explores the stories of change makers and the initiatives they have developed to support sustainable development in Indonesia. This time, we are joined by Adream Bais Junior (Adream), at CSWM UI (Center of Sustainability and Management Universitas Indonesia).
Hi Adream, can you share with us about what you do at CSWM ?
I’m currently working as a manager at one of the units within the University of Indonesia, specifically at the Center for Sustainability and Waste Management. Our focus is on addressing issues related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly on tackling waste management challenges.
We do this through various programs and projects in collaboration with the government, industries, and other stakeholders.
We have a diverse team that includes experts in engineering, economics, politics, social engineering, psychology, and more. As we know, sustainability issues are complex and multifaceted – so this team helps bring a diverse perspective.
Waste management in Indonesia often doesn’t receive the urgency it deserves, whether in urban or rural areas. People tend to assume that waste is someone else’s responsibility but theirs.
However, those living near landfills directly experience the consequences. Although it might sound cliché, this is a significant concern. Recently, there have been several incidents, such as landfill fires, one of which occurred in Bali this year. I was actually in Bali at the time, and the situation was severe, with thick smoke making it difficult to drive and creating hazardous breathing conditions.
In the context of Indonesia, how would you describe the current state of waste management, and what challenges do you observe in this area?
These incidents have prompted several ministries to take more active steps toward waste management. While there are several organizations focused on this issue, achieving a holistic approach that brings together all the necessary stakeholders remains a major challenge, particularly for our government.
We are on the right track to tackling this issue – we’re working on creating a sustainable waste management system focused on reducing, reusing, and recycling. There are also several regulations currently being refined, and CSWM has been at the forefront to contribute to this process.
While the government plays a significant role in shaping policies, who else should be involved in shaping our waste management system?
To answer that question, it’s important to first understand the goal we’re aiming to achieve with waste management. Currently, the typical process involves consumers purchasing products, using them, and then discarding them as waste. This waste is collected, taken to landfills, and remains there – a process known as linear management or, more broadly, a linear economy.
What we’re striving for now is to establish a circular economy. The idea is to reduce the amount of waste that ends up in landfills by treating it through various processes by the recycling industries.
These recyclers then process the waste, which is sold back to producers. The producers create new products from these recycled materials, which are then purchased by consumers, completing the cycle.
As consumers, we also play a crucial role. From a psychological aspect, it’s vital that people start to understand sorting their waste, despite any pessimism about whether it will be mixed later. Even a simple act like separating organic from inorganic waste can make a significant difference.
For instance, plastic mixed with organic material becomes stained and harder to clean, which lowers its value, especially for waste pickers, or “pemulung.” That’s why it’s important for consumers to sort their waste, as this can help create a more humane system for waste pickers. In Indonesia, waste picking is largely informal, so there’s also a need to formalize this system.
The collected valuable waste can then be sold to recycling industries, which vary from community-based initiatives to startups and large-scale operations. However, there are still challenges in optimizing these processes. All stakeholders need to understand their roles and collaborate effectively for a circular economy to truly take shape.
How do you actively work to connect and collaborate with various stakeholders?
We actively participate in several associations and forums, such as ADUPI, ASOBSI, and IPR, among others. Being a part of these associations allows us to hear the different perspectives within the industry. For example, plastic producers might express concerns about the impact on their business, while recyclers, like those in ADUPI members, might face challenges due to unclear regulations.
We also maintain strong connections with several ministries, particularly the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, as well as those responsible for commerce, finance, and maritime affairs. Through our projects and interactions with these stakeholders, we’ve built a network. Our goal at CSWM is to serve as a neutral partner, acting as a bridge to connect all stakeholders involved in waste management.
How do you think it's possible to align these individuals or groups towards a common goal despite their differing missions and incentives?
It’s definitely a tricky challenge because, in the end, it all comes down to economics and incentives. Each party, including the government, needs to see a benefit, and the government can’t allocate unlimited funds to tackle these issues since there are other priorities. So, aligning perspectives always involves considering the economic impact.
To address this, we hold numerous Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with stakeholders, including producers from various industries like plastics, textiles, and e-waste. We work to understand their challenges, listen to their concerns, and identify what incentives they need or what regulations should be prepared.
We compile this information into an academic script, which will be published and made available to everyone, but primarily it’s intended for the government to help translate these insights into effective regulations.
One example we’re advocating for is refining the regulation from the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, specifically Regulation No. 75 / 2019, which introduces the concept of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR).
This concept has already been implemented in developed countries, and it’s crucial that we start applying it in Indonesia as well, given our large and diverse country with varied geographical and cultural backgrounds.
The current regulation requires further details and refinement in order to align everyone’s understanding of circular economy and implementing EPR. This year and next, we’ll continue working closely with the government, gathering input from various associations, industries, and communities to help refine the regulation. Hopefully, by next year, we’ll see significant progress in the EPR regulations. Fingers crossed!
Can you dive a bit deeper into the EPR concept?
EPR stands for Extended Producer Responsibility, which means that producers of plastics, food, drinks, electronics, and so on (primarily products that leads to waste generation), are responsible for their products even after they’ve reached the end of their life cycle. Currently, producer responsibility ends once the consumer purchases the product, leaving the disposal to the consumer or other parties.
However, EPR extends this responsibility, requiring producers to manage the waste generated by their products.
To implement this, producers are mandated, by the government supposedly, to take back the waste from their products, while not harming the economics of the business. The challenge lies in determining how to do this systematically and ensure it benefits ever parties involved.
To enable a holistic and fair view and judgement, a separate organization needs to be established to facilitate EPR. This organization is referred to in the literature as a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO).
Currently, a PRO has yet to be established in Indonesia, but we are proposing an initiative to create one under the gaze of the Indonesian government. This organization would operate independently, allowing the relevant ministries to focus on other matters while the PRO handles the EPR implementation.
The PRO would have two main functions: operational and financial. On the operational side, it would manage the recyclers, waste pickers, sorters, and other entities involved after the product becomes waste.
All these entities would need to register with the PRO, which would monitor and set standards for recycling, measuring, and classifying materials.
This would provide a single source of truth for data and help educate people and entities on best practices. The PRO would support the government without overlapping its functions, creating an integrated system.
The financial side involves collecting an EPR fee from producers. This fee is how producers take responsibility for their products. Each producer would be charged based on their output, but the fee isn’t a flat rate.
Instead, it’s an eco-modulated fee, meaning that if a producer designs products to be easier to recycle, uses recyclable or biodegradable materials, or includes recycled content, they would receive bonuses that reduce their fee.
Conversely, products that are difficult to recycle would incur higher fees. This system encourages producers to design products with end-of-life considerations in mind, promoting a circular economy.
In the long run, this approach makes a circular economy feasible. Producers are incentivized to think about the end-of-life stage, and recyclers and sorters are supported by a system funded by the producers. All of this is regulated by the government, with the PRO conducting audits to ensure fairness and transparency.
This model has already been implemented in Europe, Korea, Canada, and other countries, and it’s the direction we need to head toward in the future. In essence, everyone contributes to the system, ensuring that waste management is more efficient and sustainable.
Most people may not be familiar with the EPR concept, but it’s more effective than simply imposing additional taxes on producers. There’s been talk of a plastic tax, where producers would pay based on the amount of plastic in their products.
However, a flat tariff rate doesn’t fully take into account the recyclability effort made by the producers
The EPR system, on the other hand, directly links the fee to waste management efforts, ensuring that the money is used effectively and transparently. This is why EPR has been successful in Europe – it avoids the issues associated with blanket taxes and provides a clearer path for producers to contribute to waste management.
What is the current state of waste management regulations in Indonesia? EPR is clearly a significant part of it, but could you share insights on other regulations related to waste sorting, transportation, or any other relevant areas?
There are several targets and goals that have been set for each region to reduce or recycle their waste, with the most common being a 30% waste reduction.
Since 2018 or 2019, the Ministry of Environment has developed a platform called SIPSN, a real-time dashboard designed to monitor waste generation across different regions and years.
Although a good stride in the right direction, this system is not yet fully optimized, as the monitoring infrastructure is not as robust as it could be – we lack a comprehensive understanding of the actual amount of waste produced annually, how much leaks into the ocean, how much is burned, and other disposal methods.
Until we have accurate data, setting goals like the 30% reduction can seem very premature. While it’s a good target, we need a clear strategy to achieve it and measure progress effectively. We’re collaborating with teams like TKN PSL to address these issues, particularly beyond 2025, and working on other related projects.
Regarding regulations, there are gaps that need refinement. For example, the EPR guidelines outlined in Regulation No. 75 are very broad, leading to confusion among industries about how to comply. Many industries are unsure how to implement these requirements effectively.
Data then becomes fundamentally crucial in setting and achieving these goals, but consistency across partners is equally important.
The issue with the EPR is largely about consistency. For instance, if Industry A claims to have recycled a certain amount of waste, there must be a mechanism to audit, validate, and ensure transparency in reporting. Without clear standards to measure and verify these actions, it’s difficult to know if these efforts are genuinely impactful or are just made to appear in such a way.
To your knowledge, are there any existing standards that people can refer to when measuring and making claims related to their recycling efforts?
When it comes to emissions, there are many established standards you can follow. For example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has developed a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol, which provides guidelines for calculating emissions by region, scope, and other factors.
Emissions have been a global focus for several years, so there is a wealth of standardized methods available.
On the other hand, waste management is much harder to standardize because each country has its own methods and types of waste.
For example, polyethylene plastic in Indonesia may be very different from polyethylene in temperate countries, even though they share the same name. Currently, there is no clear national standard for measuring waste. There are some established methods for specific scenarios, like conducting a statistical survey to determine the amount of waste in a river, where the survey results can be representative of the entire river.
However, there are no clear standards on whether recycled products are safe for the environment or humans, or on what constitutes “good” recycling practices. You can look to other countries that have developed such standards for guidance. Germany, France, and South Korea have some of the most robust standards for determining what can be recycled, the recycling rate, and similar criteria.
Do you think some countries serve as better references than others?
Absolutely, it is well understood that you cannot simply copy and paste regulations or standards from one country to another. However, valuable insights can be gained by learning from other countries’ standards.
South Korea is a good example. Although it is now classified as a developed country, it only recently achieved this status, so it is not entirely different from us in terms of social and economic conditions, culture, and so on.
While the portrayal of South Korea in popular media might focus on luxury and glamor, if you visit the suburbs, you will find a waste-picking system that is quite similar to ours.
People there often live in very basic, with very simple housing, yet every waste picker must have a “license”. This differs from Indonesia, where waste picking is largely informal.
South Korea started their initiative by gathering data – each waste picker must report to the government or relevant authorities on what they do, including the types and quantities of waste collected. While this data may not be 100% accurate, it provides a solid foundation to identify and understand the waste management issues.
Using this data, governments and businesses can begin to notice patterns, like an abundance of plastic bottles or paper in certain areas, and can then develop a supply chain to support a circular economy.
Looking at other countries’ practices can be a good starting point for improving our own systems. Right now, we are working on an academic paper that analyzes best practices from countries like South Korea and Canada.
You can check our website and social media for updates when it is published.
That’s really interesting, and I think it aligns well with the work you do at CSWM. I’d love to hear more about some of the other waste management projects you’re currently involved in that are relevant to today's issues.
Since we are a unit within a university, our approach is mainly academic. We maintain a neutral stance, free from any political or financial interests, and our work is based on established academic principles.
For example, we are working on establishing an EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility) framework in Indonesia. Recently, we’ve been developing a policy brief for Indonesia’s new capital city, aiming to make it a model for waste management through a pilot EPR program.
We also run training programs for individuals interested in waste management, whether for their own industries or at a national or city-wide regulatory level. Beyond waste management, we focus on other sustainability issues like emissions and sustainability reporting.
Most of our waste management efforts involve creating policy briefs and academic papers that provide benchmarks and best practices by collaborating with governments and associations, and we aim to make these resources publicly available to educate people.
For those interested in accessing our resources, you can visit our website at cswmui.com for comprehensive reports, books, or detailed articles. If you prefer more digestible information, we also share updates on waste management issues on our social media platforms. You can find us on Instagram, LinkedIn, and Facebook under the handle @cswmui, and we are also working on launching a TikTok account soon.
What emerging trends in waste management do you foresee would become important for the future of Indonesia?
So, the emerging trend will likely be in the area of management. While waste management may seem like a large-scale issue beyond individual control, understanding the problem and its solutions is a significant step forward for society.
How can we, the everyday people, play our part in solving the waste crisis?
If you’re not able to study the topic in depth, you can start by applying the 3R principle – reduce, reuse, and recycle – and really live by it. For instance, imagine you’re in Singapore: you don’t litter in parks, you use trash cans correctly, and you separate organic waste from plastics and paper. Simple actions like these, though small, are vital trends for the future.
Share this article
