Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Mt lasut 2007-dissertation-ait-th



My doctoral dissertation at Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand (2007)

My doctoral dissertation at Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand (2007)



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Mt lasut 2007-dissertation-ait-th Mt lasut 2007-dissertation-ait-th Presentation Transcript

  • WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT IN THE CITY OF MANADO, NORTH SULAWESI, INDONESIA by Markus Talintukan LasutA dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Technical Science in Aquaculture and Aquatic Resources ManagementExamination Committee: Prof. Ganesh Shivakoti (Chairperson) Dr. Thammarat Koottatep Dr. Wenresti G. Gallardo Dr. Kou Ikejima (External Expert) External Examiner: Dr. Hans Åke Granmo Department of Marine Ecology, Kristineberg Marine Research Station, Göteborg University, 450 34 Fiskebäckskil, Sweden Nationality: Indonesian Previous Degree: Engineer in Fisheries (Aquatic Resources Management), Sam Ratulangi University, Manado, Indonesia Master of Science, Århus University, Århus, Denmark Scholarship Donor: Denmark – AIT Fellowship Asian Institute of Technology School of Environment, Resources and Development Thailand December 2007
  • AcknowledgementsThis is a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree ofDoctor of Technical Science in Integrated Tropical Coastal Zone Management (ITCZM)Program, Asian Institute Technology (AIT). This study was supported by the DanishInternational Development Agency (DANIDA), Denmark, through the AIT, Thailand.Therefore, I extend my gratitude to both institutions.I am indebted to my present academic advisor, Prof. G. Shivakoti, as the chairperson of myStudy Program Committee and Ass. Prof. Dr. K. Ikejima, as former academic advisor andformer chairperson of my Study Program Committee, who provide helps and advicesduring my study, helped to construct my research topic, and helped in preparing my paperfor publication.I wish to thank Ass. Prof. Dr. Thammarat Koottatep, Ass. Prof. Dr. Wenresti G. Gallardo,and Ass. Prof. Dr. K. Ikejima (External Experts) as members of my Study ProgramCommittee, who gave comments, corrections, and advises for my dissertation manuscript.Thank you Ass. Prof. Dr. Åke Granmo from Gothenburg University, Sweden, whoprovided himself as the External Examiner of my dissertation, reviewed my dissertationmanuscript and gave comments and corrections on it.I am indebted to Ass. Prof. Dr. Kathe R. Jensen, as my first academic advisor, who kindlygave help during my study, helps to get points of views about my research topic, help in thepreparation of my proposal and dissertation manuscripts, and helped in preparing my paperfor publication.I would like to thank Ass. Prof. Dr. Ole Pedersen, as a former member my Study ProgramCommittee, who gave advise during my study.My special thanks to Prof. (Emeritus) C. Kwei Lin, who was involved in the first period ofmy study, as well as Ass. Prof. Dr. A. Yakupitiyage and Ass. Prof. Dr. Yang Yi, whoprovided help during my study.Thanks to Mrs. Lucia Sukanenya and Mrs. Upa Katchasuwanmanee at the ITCZM-AITProgram Secretariat that always provided help for administrative purposes.Thanks to the Dean of Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science, Sam Ratulangi University,which gave support and accommodated me during my non-residential period of study.Thanks to the Center for Environment and Natural Resources (PPLH-SDA), Sam RatulangiUniversity, and WWF-Manado, which provided secondary data for my dissertation.I thank John J. Soucy, MAT, English Language Consultant & Programmer, who edited theEnglish.Parts of this dissertation are published in:1. Lasut, M. T., Jensen, K. R., Arai, T. & Miyazaki, N. 2005. An assessment of water quality along the rivers loading into the Manado Bay, North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Coastal Marine Science 29(2): 124–132.2. Lasut, M. T., Jensen, K. R., Shivakoti, G. 2007. Analysis of constraints and potentials for wastewater management in the coastal city of Manado, North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Journal of Environmental Management, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.06.011. ii
  • AbstractWastewater management in the coastal city of Manado is a matter of great importance toprevent and mitigate pollution of the coastal environment by contaminated wastewater.Prior to formulating a wastewater management plan for the city, a survey of the currentwastewater management system of the city was carried out. This survey focused on thecommunity’s environmental knowledge and attitude towards wastewater problems, thecondition and capacity of existing wastewater treatment systems and wastewaterinfrastructure and facilities. Also, the water quality of selected rivers was studied bydetermining certain indicators. The natural characteristics, socio-economic, andinstitutional arrangement of the city were also studied. Besides, a comprehensive review ofthe literature of the impacts of human activities on the coastal area with emphasis onwastewater discharge and urban wastewater management system was also done. Based onthe information obtained, constraints and potentials of those aspects were analyzed andstrategic actions were formulated for recommendation.To collect primary data, two main research methods were applied: (1) field observation and(2) questionnaire interview (individual and household) surveys. Two study sites (districtlevel), Molas and Wenang, were selected and 145 and 139 individuals and 300 and 304households respectively were interviewed. Secondary data and information was gatheredfrom the administration of Manado City (city level) as the study area. In addition, threerivers (Bailang, Maasing, and Tondano) within the city were observed for water qualitystatus.The results showed that the status of the community’s environmental knowledge andattitude were potentials for management, but the community’s participation wasinsufficient. The overall status of the wastewater disposal and treatment systems was ingood condition and of adequate capacity, but there were also systems in poor and very poorcondition and of inadequate capacity, as well as the wastewater infrastructure and facilitiesat the house level. Moreover, the three observed rivers showed indicator values exceedinginternational as well as national levels for pollution. In addition, the natural settings, socio-economics, and institutional arrangements pose a challenge for management.The main conclusions of the study were that constraints are formed by: (1) natural settings,which influence land use changes, (2) the rapid increase of population, (3) the frequency oflow-income households, (4) the poor condition and capacity of wastewater disposal andtreatment systems, (5) the institutional arrangement of the city government, and (6) thelack or inadequacy of city level regulations and policies. Potentials include (1) the city’sreligion and ethnicity, (2) good environmental awareness of the community, (3)government institutions at provincial and national levels, and (4) the establishment ofpolicy measures in Agenda 21 at provincial and national levels.Therefore, four strategic actions are recommended to be included in the plan withappropriate modifications for implementation, such as (1) providing and/or improving on-site wastewater treatment systems and sanitation facilities, (2) improving the local citygovernment’s institutional arrangements, (3) improving the community’s participation, and(4) establishing regulations and enforcement. iii View slide
  • Table of ContentsCHAPTER TITLE PAGE Title page i Acknowledgements ii Abstract iii Table of Contents iv List of Tables vi List of Figures viii Acronyms ix Glossary xi1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Wastewater problem in the city of Manado 3 1.3 Rationale of the study 6 1.4 Objectives of the study 6 1.5 Scope of the study 62 Literature Review 7 2.1 Definitions and characteristics 7 2.2 Wastewater in coastal and marine areas 9 2.3 Coastal environmental management in Indonesia 14 2.4 Major coastal planning & management techniques 153 General Research Methodology 23 3.1 Research approach 23 3.2 Research framework 24 3.3 Research design 26 3.4 Data gathering procedure 294 Existing Situation and Condition of Manado City 31 4.1 Natural characteristics 31 4.2 Classification of the city 39 4.3 Socio-economic aspects 40 4.4 Government institutional arrangement 44 4.5 Policies, strategies, and actions 455 Community’s Environmental Knowledge and Attitude 47 5.1 Introduction 47 5.2 Research methodology 47 5.3 Results and discussion 506 Condition and Capacity of Household Wastewater Treatment 58 Systems 6.1 Introduction 58 6.2 Research methodology 58 iv View slide
  • 6.3 Results and discussion 607 Water Quality Assessment 65 7.1 Introduction 65 7.2 Research methodology 67 7.3 Results and discussion 698 Constraints and Potential Aspects and Their Implications 80 8.1 Introduction 80 8.2 Wastewater discharge-related aspect (WRA) 80 8.3 Governmental/administrative-related aspect (GRA) 82 8.4 Community-related aspect (CRA) 83 8.5 Financial aspect 839 Suitable Option of Wastewater Management 85 9.1 Objectives and considerations 85 9.2 Strategic actions of wastewater management: a 86 recommendation10 Conclusions and Recommendations 90 10.1 Conclusions 90 10.2 Recommendations 91 References 93 Appendices 102 Annexes 108 v
  • List of TablesNO. TITLE PAGE2.1 Variation in domestic wastewater composition 92.2 Constituents of wastewater and their impacts on the marine environment 102.3 Some legal tools for controlling coastal and marine pollution and 16 degradation in Indonesia2.4 Characteristic of collaborative and community-based management 193.1 Selection of the two specific study sites 273.2 Calculated and applied sample size 283.3a Distribution of sample size in Molas District 293.3b Distribution of sample size in Wenang Districts 294.1 Total area of Manado based on land slope condition 314.2 Land use classification of the Manado Area in 1999 364.3 Rivers and predominant land use a long the rivers’ watershed 384.4 Population and density of Manado in 2003 424.5 The result of household surveys on socio-economic parameters 444.6 Number of tourists visiting the Bunaken National Marine Park (BNMP) 45 in 2001-20065.1 Degree of knowledge (DK) of community (at household basis) about 51 general environmental issues and issues related to wastewater5.2 Degree of concern (DC) of community (at personal basis) about general 52 environmental conditions and impacts (Topic 1)5.3 Degree of concern (DC) of community (at personal basis) about 53 environmental conditions and impacts related to wastewater discharge (Topic 2)5.4 Community’s (household basis) preference regarding problem solving 54 of environmental issues, including wastewater problems5.5 Community’s preference (personal basis) on problem solving of 55 environmental issue, including wastewater6.1a Distribution of sample size in Molas District (SS 1) used in wastewater 59 treatment system (septic tank) capacity evaluation6.1b Distribution of sample size in Wenang District (SS 2) used in 59 wastewater treatment system (septic tank) capacity evaluation6.2 Criteria for condition and capacity of wastewater treatment system 61 (septic tank) and wastewater infrastructures and facilities (sewer system) used in this present study6.3 Condition, capacity, and presence of residential wastewater treatment 62 system (septic-tank) and wastewater infrastructures and facilities (sewer system).6.4 Pearson’s correlation coefficient (PC) by using the Bivariate 64 Correlations procedure7.1 Characterization and environmental condition (salinity, temperature, 68 and conductivity) of sampling stations during dry (September-October 2002) and wet (January-March 2003) seasons7.2 Concentration of Total coliform (TC), and Escherichia coli (EC) during 75 dry (September-October 2002) and wet (January-March 2003) seasons vi
  • 7.3 Water quality status of the river of Bailang (SB), Maasing (SM), and 77 Tondano (ST)8.1 The slum areas in 3 districts of Manado City in 1999 818.2 Cases of diseases in Manado City in 2002 82 vii
  • List of FiguresNO. TITLE PAGE1.1 The area of Manado City with five divided districts 21.2 The schematic process of the planning and implementation in integrated 3 coastal management (ICM)1.3 The schematic diagram of existing situation related to problems, 5 pressures and impacts of wastewater discharge in the coastal area in Manado2.1 Municipal wastewater components 83.1 Scheme of research approach 233.2 Conceptual framework of the study on wastewater management in the 25 city of Manado, North Sulawesi, Indonesia3.3 Schematic construction of the Study Area and Study Sites 284.1 The area of Manado City 324.2 Topographic condition of Manado City 334.3 Slope gradient of Manado area 344.4 Hydrological condition of Manado City 354.5 Tondano Watershed with Manado City area 374.6 Average annual rainfall (1991-2000) and temperature (1994-2000) 394.7 Bunaken National Marine Park (BNMP) 404.8 Administrative of Manado with 9 districts 415.1 Participation of NGOs in integrated coastal zone management activities 577.1 Map of Indonesia, North Sulawesi Province, Manado City, Study area, 66 and sampling stations7.2 BOD5 values for 3 rivers in Manado City, SB (a), SM (b), and ST (c) 70 during dry and wet seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.17.3 NO3- values for 3 rivers in Manado City, SB (a), SM (b), and ST (c) 72 during dry and wet seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.17.4 PO43- values for 3 rivers in Manado City, SB (a), SM (b), and ST (c) 74 during dry and wet seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.17.5 Concentration of Hg-tot in water (a) and sediment (b) of ST during dry 76 and wet seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.17.6 Concentration of Hg-tot in water and sediment of ST during dry (a) and 78 wet (b) seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.17.7 Concentration of Hg-tot accumulated in the marine bivalve Soletellina 79 sp. at the mouth of the river ST viii
  • AcronymsASEAN-MWQC : ASEAN Marine Water Quality CriteriaASL : Above Sea LevelAV : Aggregated ValuesBNMP : Bunaken National Marine ParkBOD : Biological Oxygen DemandCAA : City Arrangement AgencyCAM : Coastal Area ManagementCBD : Central Business DistrictCBOs : Community-Based OrganizationsCE : Cumulative EffectsCEO : Community Empowerment OrganizationsCMB : Cleaning Management BoardCOD : Chemical Oxygen DemandCRA : Community-Related AspectDC : Degree of ConcernDK : Degree of KnowledgeDO : Dissolved OxygenDWF : Dry-Weather FlowEA : Environmental AssessmentEC : Effluent ChargesEC : Eschericia coliEEZ : Economic Exclusive ZoneEHA : Environmental Health AgencyEIA : Environmental Impact AssessmentEMB : Environmental Management BoardENCORE : Enrichment of Nutrients on a Coral Reef ExperimentES : Effluent StandardsFC : Faecal ColiformGIS : Geographical Information SystemGPS : Global Positioning SystemGRA : Governmental/administrative-Related AspectICM : Integrated Coastal ManagementIGR : Indonesian Government RegulationIL : Indonesian LawINS : Indonesian National StandardLGR : Local Government RegulationMB : Manado BayMC : Manado CityMFA : Marine and Fisheries AgencyMoE : Ministry of EnvironmentMoF : Ministry of ForestryMPN : Most Probable NumberMR : Minahasa RegencyN : NitrogenNAEIM : National Agency for Environmental Impact ManagementNGOs : Non-Government OrganizationsOSDS : On-site Sewage Disposal System ix
  • P : PhosphorousPAEICB : Provincial Agency of Environmental Impact Control BoardPC : Pearson’s correlation CoefficientPOPs : Persistent Organic PollutantsPS : Public SectorPWA : Public Works AgencyRWQS : Receiving Water Quality StandardsSA : Study AreaSP : Strength of PreferenceSS : Study SitesTC : Total ColiformTDS : Total Dissolved SolidsTSS : Total Suspended SolidsUM : Urban ManagementWQC-GRRI : Water Quality Criteria of Government Regulation of Republic of IndonesiaWRA : Wastewater discharge-Related AspectWWF : Wet-Weather FlowASEAN-MWQC : ASEAN Marine Water Quality CriteriaASL : Above Sea LevelAV : Aggregated ValuesBNMP : Bunaken National Marine ParkBOD : Biological Oxygen DemandCAA : City Arrangement AgencyCAM : Coastal Area ManagementCBD : Central Business DistrictCBOs : Community-Based Organizations x
  • GlossaryAgenda 21. The forty-chapter action plan emanating from the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) that provides guidelines to nations on a wide range of matters related to environment and developmentAnthropogenic. Referring to pollutants and other forms of impacts on natural environments that occur because of, or influenced by, human activitiesAquaculture. The farming of aquatic organisms, including fish, molluscs, crustaceans and aquatic plantsBiodiversity. Variety of different species (species diversity), genetic variability among individuals within each species (genetic diversity), and variety of ecosystems (ecological diversity)Coast. The geographical area between terrestrial and marine environmentsCoastal area. See ‘Coastal zone’Coastal zone. The area at the interface between land and sea, where the sea influences the land and vice versa. Coastal zone boundaries vary depending on bio-geographical conditions, the mix of uses and problems present, and the legal system. Also, it is defined as Coastal areaColiform. A type of bacteria that resides in the human intestine whose presence in water is used to indicate whether the water may be contaminated with disease organismsDissolved oxygen (DO). Oxygen gas molecules (O2) dissolved in waterDomestic sewage. The liquid wastes from housingEcosystem. A natural entity (or a system) with distinct structures and relationships that interlink biotic communities (of plants and animals) to each other and link them to their abiotic environmentEcotourism. Tourism focusing on environmental and cultural resources and usually based on a conservation themeEnvironmental Impact Assessment. A process whereby a detailed prediction is made of the effects of a proposed development project on the environment and natural resources.Estuary. Broadest portion of a river or stream near its outlet that is influenced by the marine water body into which it flowsEutrophication. Physical, chemical and biological changes that take place after a lake, an estuary, or a slow-flowing stream receives inputs of plant nutrients-mostly nitrates and phosphates-from natural erosion and runoff from the surrounding land basinExclusive Economic Zone. The maritime zone beyond and adjacent to the territorial sea but not exceeding 200 nautical miles from the baseline from which the territorial sea is measuredGlobal. Relating to or including the whole earth; or complete or comprehensiveHazard assessment. The process of examining evidence linking a particular hazard to its harmful effectsHeavy metals. Any of the high atomic weight metals such as lead, mercury, cadmium, and zincHuman settlements. An integrative concept that comprises (a) physical components of shelter and infrastructure and (b) services to which the physical elements provide support, that is, community services such as education, health, culture, welfare, recreation and nutritionInstitutions. The rules that operate in a society xi
  • Integrated coastal management (ICM). A continuous and dynamic process by which decisions are made for the sustainable use, development, and protection of coastal and marine areas and resourcesLand reclamation. A type of coastal construction activity aimed at gaining land from the seaMariculture. The farming of marine finfish, molluscs, crustaceans, and seaweedMitigation. The prevention, elimination, reduction, or control of a project’s negative environmental effects by avoiding or minimising the effectsNatural resources. Any portion of the environment, such as air, water, soil, botanical and zoological resources and mineralsPAHs. Polycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonPCBs. Group of 209 different toxic, oily, synthetic chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds that can be biologically amplified in food chains and websPathogen. An organism that produces diseasesPeri-urban areas. Areas are characterized by a mixture of land uses associated with a range of urban and rural livelihoodsPollutant. A particular chemical or form of energy that can adversely affect the health, activities, or survival of humans or other living organismPollution. An undesirable change in the physical, chemical, or biological characteristic of air, water, soil, or food that can adversely affect the health, activities or survival of humans or other living organismPrecautionary principle. The principle that preventive or remedial action should be taken, on the basis of the best available scientific evidence, to avoid making policy decisions that have irreversible adverse effects on the environmentRisk assessment. A technique to quantify risksRisk management. The task of regulators, involving reviewing the risk data and making regulatory, decisions based on the evidenceStakeholder. Individuals and groups of individuals (including government and non- governmental institutions, traditional communities, universities, research institutions, development agencies, banks and donors) with an interest or claim (whether stated or implied) that has the potential of being affected by or affecting a given project and its objectivesSustainable development. A development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needsTropical Area. It refers to low-latitude climate that is characterised by consistently warm and humid conditionsUpland. A term describing land areas sufficiently inland from the shoreline to have limited interaction with the seaWastes. Useless or discarded material, as ashes, garbage, sewage, etc or matter excreted from the body, as faeces or urineWatershed. The total land area that drains directly or indirectly into a particular stream or river xii
  • Chapter 1 IntroductionThis chapter presents the general background of the present study and discusseswastewater problems in the city of Manado. The rationale of the study and researchobjectives are presented, and the expected contribution of the study is also provided.1.1 BackgroundWastewater discharge, especially wastewater containing harmful contaminants, is of greatconcern due to its impact on the environment of coastal and terrestrial areas. In the coastalarea it may cause the degradation and destruction of the coastal environment and resources,while degradation of environmental quality may occur in the terrestrial areas. This issuehas often been addressed partially on an ad hoc basis as it became apparent, for example:the implementations of a policy to regulate COD (chemical oxygen demand) of industrialeffluents in 1979 in order to improve the environmental quality of Tokyo Bay due toorganic pollution (Kawabe, 1998) and the occurrence of environmental degradation on themarine coastal area of Jakarta Bay, Indonesia, due to wastewater discharge from theJakarta City (Williams et al., 2000; Nur et al., 2001). In both cases, apparently, themeasures were partially taken and the other aspects (for instance, sources of wastewaterand community participation) were not taken into account. Moreover, the measures weretaken in a short period of time. The result was that the wastewater discharge was notcomprehensively solved, and the impact of wastewater may still continue in Tokyo Bay(MoE-GoJ, 2004) and in Jakarta Bay (Nur et al. 2001).In recent years, management measures to solve environmental problems due to wastewaterdischarge in coastal areas have been emphasized with a more holistic approach and forlong-term solutions. In this regard integrated coastal management (ICM) has recently beenapplied as a problem solving approach in many countries. For example, coastal areamanagement (CAM) in Singapore (Chia, 1992), ‘Beneficial Uses’ in Hong Kong (Wu etal., 1998), and by implementing legislation and several acts in the context of ICM for thecoastal area of Mumbai Metropolitan Region (Murthy et al., 2001). As wastewaterdischarge in the coastal area is predicted to be an increasing problem in the future, it isconsidered to be one of the major future challenges of ICM (Hale and Olsen, 2003).In addressing wastewater problems in Indonesia, such management measures have notbeen fully applied in cities within the country, in particular where there is still occurringenvironmental degradation due to wastewater impact. In addition, the ICM approach hasnot yet been fully adopted as an alternative to solve the environmental problems due towastewater discharge in coastal cities within the country, though it has been proposed to beincluded in the ICM (Nur et al., 2001). For example, the coastal city of Manado (Fig. 1.1),like other coastal cities in Indonesia, is a medium-sized city which is formed along thewaterfront of Manado Bay, and is facing various environmental problems due towastewater discharge. Wastewater is discharging into the bay through rivers and canalswhich cross through the city. It is a matter of fact that the bay is used for fisheries andtourism. Since measures are needed to overcome the problems, a wastewater managementplan, alternatively using the ICM approach, is needed to prevent and mitigate furtherwastewater impact. 1
  • 2 Figure 1.1 The area of Manado City with five divided districts (Molas, Mapanget, Wenang, Sario, Malalayang) 2
  • The need to manage the coastal city of Manado in relation to wastewater discharge is amatter of great importance. However, it should be planned and designed comprehensivelyprior to implementation. Hence, the present study is focused on the wastewatermanagement of the city by formulating strategic actions prior to designing a managementplan in order to improve the wastewater management of the city. In formulating suchactions, an important first step is that the status of various aspects associated with thewastewater discharge issues should be identified, described, analyzed and understoodcomprehensively. In this regard, research, encompassing problem identification, analysisand evaluation, was conducted prior to the formulation. In addition, the ICM approach isused as a basic concept approach in designing this study (Fig. 1.2).1.2 Wastewater Problem in the City of ManadoIn Indonesia, many policies, strategies and actions of environmental management related towastewaters have been formulated at regional (provincial) and national levels in Agenda21 of North Sulawesi Province (Bapedal-Sulut, 2003) and Agenda 21 of Indonesia(KMNLH, 1996a), respectively. However, at the city level of Manado City, such measuresare apparently not available, whereas in fact, wastewater discharge is predicted to increaseas the coastal and coast-related inland areas of Manado are being developed for various PLANNING IMPLEMEN- Financing TATION Installation Research Operation & Maintenance Problem Analysis Designing Desired product Identification Enforcement & Services Monitoring Evaluation Present study Figure 1.2 The schematic process of the planning and implementation in integrated coastal management (ICM) (Adopted from NOAA, 1995). 3
  • economic activities. At present, the opportunity to establish such management is morerealistic since the Indonesian Law (IL) No. 22 of 1999, concerning autonomy anddecentralization, has been implemented since early January 2000. The IL states that a city-or a regency-level of government has its own authority to manage the resources found intheir areas including protection and conservation measures.Based on a preliminary observation of the wastewater problem in the city of Manado, thereare two main factors acting as driving forces, which may cause the destruction of thecoastal ecosystem habitat and the reduction of coastal resources of Manado Bay. They are:increasing population, and development activity (Fig. 1.3).The rapid increase of population in the city of Manado is stimulating the increase ofhousing settlements and other related infrastructures and facilities. This causes an increaseof wastewater-point sources, and may increase the quality and quantity of wastewaterdischarge from the city. In the end, this situation may have an impact on the environmentof the terrestrial and coastal marine areas of the city.The development of economic activities, particularly in the tourism and trade sectors, isincreasing in the city. Both sectors, together with education, have been selected by theManado City’s Council as the ‘sectors of priority’ for development. Many policies arebeing established and acted upon to accommodate such priorities, especially for economicactivities (small- and large-scale). For example, there are plans for the coastal area ofManado to be a centre of business, the so-called ‘central business district’ (CBD). Relatedto this, various commercial buildings (tourist facilities, shops/malls, cottages, and hotels),transportation (marinas, ports, harbors) and infrastructures are being developed in order tosupport this development. In contrast, those economic activities will threaten theenvironment of the terrestrial and coastal areas of the city by increasing wastes andwastewater discharges.With regards to wastewater management in the city of Manado, several issues have beenidentified that are grouped into the community-related aspect (CRA), the wastewater-related aspect (WRA), and the government/administrative-related aspect (GRA). Thoseissues encompass community participation, physical and technical aspects, environmentalconditions related to discharge wastewater, and policy and program related to wastewatermanagement. The following are descriptions of the issues:1. At the city-level of Manado, there are no cases where the community has taken an initiative to prevent and mitigate wastewater problems. On the contrary, they are the source of discharged wastewater. This may be due to a lack of environmental awareness in the community. Therefore, the community’s environmental knowledge and attitude in relation to the wastewater issue are still in question.2. Household activities that produce wastewater increase as the population increases. This is predicted to have a negative impact on the coastal and marine environment. To prevent and mitigate the impact, adequate physical measures (wastewater treatments, infrastructures and facilities) at household level should be introduced. In order to formulate measures related to this issue, the status of wastewater treatment and facilities at the household level are still in question.3. Most enterprises and households can freely discharge their wastewater including pollutant-containing wastewater into the coastal environment through sewers, drainage, and river systems. The impact of the discharge to the river systems is still unknown. 4
  • 4. Measures for management and planning (policy, program, etc.) related to wastewater issues have not been established at the city-level of Manado and the institutional structure of the government, seemingly, is not adequate to support the management of this. Therefore, suitable options for wastewater management system and strategic actions to prevent and/or mitigate wastewater impact should be formulated, and government’s institutional structure should be evaluated.5. The socio-economic status of the city’s residents is unknown; though, low personal incomes for most people are known throughout the country. Hence, the socio-economic status for the city of Manado should be evaluated. Destruction of coastal ecosystem habitats & reduction of coastal resources of Manado Bay Increasing wastes & wastewater discharge Human Tourism & Harbor, port activities commercial infrastructures buildings Human Increasing large-& small- settlement scale commercial enterprises Rapid population Increasing increase economic growth Population Development Policy Figure 1.3 The schematic diagram of the existing situation related to problems, pressures and impacts of wastewater discharge in the coastal area in Manado 5
  • 1.3 Rationale of the StudyWastewater discharge in the city of Manado should be managed in order to prevent andmitigate its impact on the environment of the terrestrial and the coastal and marineecosystems of Manado Bay. In such management, various aspects should be taken intoaccount and understood comprehensively as the city has its own characteristics. Therefore,a management plan should be designed based on the city’s characteristics. Prior to thedesigning, the status of various aspects related to wastewater discharge should bedescribed, evaluated, and analyzed, and primary strategic actions should be formulated.1.4 Objective of the StudyThe overall goal of the research is to study the current wastewater management system,identify constraints and potentials of wastewater-related aspects, and formulate strategicactions prior to designing a wastewater management plan, and to improve the managementfor mitigation and protection measures to address wastewater discharge in the coastal areaof Manado City. In order to achieve this goal, several specific topics were studied, whichhave the following objectives:1. To describe and assess existing aspects (natural settings and population, socio- economic aspects, present government institutional structure) related to wastewater management in the city;2. To evaluate and assess the community’s environmental knowledge and attitude related to wastewater problems in the city;3. To evaluate and assess the wastewater treatment system (septic tank) and wastewater infrastructures and facilities (sewer system) at households level;4. To evaluate and assess the water quality of rivers, as wastewater receivers, which cross the city;5. To analyze the constraint and potential aspects for wastewater management in the city;6. To formulate strategic actions as a recommendation to improve wastewater management in the city.1.5 Scope of the StudyThis study is limited to domestic wastewater from household activities and urban runoff,while other wastewater sources (for instance, from industrial activity) was not included, assuch activity was none in the city of Manado. Besides, the data for domestic wastewaterwere collected at a house unit/household level in which a household is consisted more thantwo individuals (parents and their children); and for urban runoff, water samples foranalysis were collected at river systems.The study covered the city of Manado, especially at two selected districts Molas andWenang. The secondary data about districts of Molas and Wenang used in this study weremostly up to 2001 and from 2003 (when the number of districts had changed from 5 to 9).There are several parameters for assessment of water quality. Due to time limitation,budget constraints and limited laboratory equipments and facilities, this study measuredBOD5, NO3-, PO4-3, Eschericia coli and total coliform, and mercury only for environmentalparameters. 6
  • Chapter 2 Literature ReviewThis chapter presents the results of a comprehensive literature review on the impacts ofhuman activities to the coastal area with emphasis on wastewater discharge and urbanwastewater management systems. It discusses the basic definitions of coastal area andwastewater including their characteristics, impacts of wastewater in the coastal areas, andsome coastal planning and management measures related to wastewater.2.1 Definition and Characteristic2.1.1 Coastal area‘Coastal zone’ or ‘coastal area’? Some authors use one or the other of these terms in orderto discuss the dynamics of coastal systems. Clark (1992), Hoozemans et al., (1995), andCicin-Sain & Knecht (1998), use ‘coastal zone’; while Chia (1992), Scialabba (1998), andKay & Alder (1999) use ‘coastal area’; but Brown (1997) did not mention the terms at allwhen she discussed integrated coastal management. None of them discussed the use of thisunstable term, except that Kay & Alder (1999) briefly stated that ‘zone’ and ‘area’ havelittle distinction in common English. However, they suggest that ‘zone’ could be implied tomean a planning zone, and they use ‘area’ or simply ‘at the coast’ or ‘on the coast’, exceptwhen they quote from original sources which use the term ‘coastal zone’. In the presentreview the terms are used in the way that Kay & Alder (1999) used them, without anyconsideration to quotations, i.e. ‘coastal area’ will be used except when referring toplanning zones.Coastal areas are defined in many ways by different authors depending on the purpose ofthe description and their professional background, while there is no internationallyaccepted definition (ADB, 1991; Hoozemans et al., 1995). The purposes could be orientedtowards academic interest for planning and management, and governments foradministration, etc. Some definitions from various sources provided are: an interactionbetween terrestrial and marine components (ADB, 1991); the gradual transitional regionforming the boundary between the land and ocean (Kay & Alder, 1999). Ketchum (1972)cf Kay & Alder (1999) defined this area as the band of dry land and adjacent ocean space(water and submerged land) in which terrestrial processes and land uses directly affectoceanic processes and uses, and vice versa. However, the 200 nautical miles limit fromland over which coastal nations exert sovereignty [Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ)] is aninternational legal definition for the coastal zone (Brown, 1997; Cicin-Sain & Knecht,1998; Kullenberg, 1999).The coastal area is characterized by three elements, i.e., 1) it contains both land and oceancomponents; 2) it has land and ocean boundaries that are determined by the degree ofinfluence of the land on the ocean and the ocean on the land; 3) and it is not of uniformwidth, depth, or height. After the geographical boundaries are used to define the coastalarea, all components found inside the area can be characterized. Such specificcharacteristics have been discussed in detail by ADB (1991), Chia (1992), Hoozemans etal. (1995), Brown (1997) and Scialabba (1998). In addition, urban (city) waterfront is alsoincluded (Vallega, 2001). 7
  • 2.1.2 WastewaterWastewater is sewage, storm-water and water that have been used for various purposeswithin a community. Most communities generate wastewater from both residential andnon-residential sources (Anonymous, 2001a). It contains a mixture of liquid wastes, whichconsist of domestic wastewater, urban runoff, and effluents from commercial and industrialactivities (Fig. 2.1). The non-residential component is generated from a variety of sources,such as offices, businesses, department stores, restaurants, schools, hospitals, farms,manufacturers, and other commercial, industrial, and institutional entities (Anonymous,2001a & b). Storm-water is a non-residential source; it carries trash and other pollutantsfrom streets, as well as pesticides and fertilizers from yards and fields (Anonymous, 2001b& c). Black water (toilet) Household Domestic activity, hotels, wastewater etc. Grey water (kitchen, bathroom) Municipal wastewater Industrial Pre-treated & activity Untreated Combined sewer Urban runoff Separated sewer Stormwater drainage Figure 2.1 Municipal wastewater components (modified from Anonymous, 2001b)There are two types of domestic wastewater, i.e., (1) black-water, or wastewater fromtoilets; (2) and grey-water, which is wastewater from all sources except toilets. Bothcontain pollutants and disease-causing agents (Anonymous, 2001a). The proportions ofliquid and solid parts are about 99.9 and 0.1%, respectively, and the solid part consists of70% organic (especially protein, carbohydrate, and fat) and 30% in-organic materials (sandparticles, salts, and metals) (Kusnoputranto, 1997). Composition of the materials (TDS,TSS, N, P), BOD, COD and coliform bacteria in the domestic wastewater are shown inTable 2.1. The usual BOD values for domestic wastewater range between 100 and 500mg/l. The number of coliform in domestic wastewater is about 1.9 x 107 per 100ml (Ortiz-Hernandez & Saenz-Morales 1999).Faecal coliform (FC) together with total coliform (TC) is used as indicators for human-generated microbial pollution (Ortiz-Hernandez & Saenz-Morales, 1999; Dionisio, et al.2000). According to Vandermeulen (1998), FC contamination could be used to assesshuman pathogens, biotoxins and diseases in the marine environment. The FC is used as anindicator of the level of sewage treatment of coastal communities, bacterial counts inshellfish growing areas and marine bathing beaches, and to decide about closure ofshellfish growing areas. 8
  • Concerning the black-water, such wastewater has specific characteristics. It is generatedfrom daily human activity and may cause diseases in humans. Pathogenic micro-organisms, especially bacteria, may be found in this wastewater (Reed et al,. 1995;Kusnoputranto, 1997). Feachem et al. (1983 cf Kusnoputranto 1997) reported thatKlebsiella pneumonia and K. rhinoscleromatis are characteristically found in black-water.Previously, Bacillus coli (the former name of Escherichia coli) were isolated by Escherichin 1885 from choleric faeces (Kusnoputranto, 1997).Table 2.1 Variation in Domestic Wastewater Composition (Veenstra et al., 1997) Specific Concentration Parameter production (Based on 60 and 250 liters of water (per capita/day) consumption per capita/day) (mg/l) Total dissolved solids (TDS) 100–150 g 400–2,500 Total suspended solids (TSS) 40–80 g 160–1,350 Biological oxygen demand (BOD) 30–60 g 120–1,000 Chemical oxygen demand (COD) 70–150 g 280–2,500 Nitrogen (Kjeldahl-N) 8–12 g 30–200 Total phosphorous (P) 1–3 g 4–50 Faecal coliform 108–109 104–106/100 ml2.2 Wastewater in Coastal and Marine Areas2.2.1 Status of wastewaterWastewater entering coastal and marine environments (environment of coastal and marineareas have significant relationships in this regard) carry all components ranging fromorganic to inorganic, from degradable to un-degradable, and from less to highly toxic, etc.Those components may come from urban and rural areas, and all sites inland (up- and low-land). Because of this, wastewater is considered as an important source of contamination incoastal areas (Ortiz-Hernandez & Saenz-Morales, 1999; Dyer et al., 2003; Ukwe et al.,2003).Wastewater is not a pollutant per se (NOAA, 1995). The wastewater discharged into theenvironment can be categorized as a pollutant if it destroys the living and non-livingconstituents in the environment, or reduces the productivity of the environment ordislocates the normal uses of the environment. A pollutant can be defined as a matter andenergy discharge into an environment which destroys the living and non-living constituentsin the environment and causes harm to humans (Ouano, 1988; Miller, 1996). Tebbutt(1992) considered two types of pollutants, namely (1) conservative, i.e. materials that arenot affected by natural processes; and (2) non-conservative, i.e. materials that can bedegraded by natural processes, including most organics, some in-organics and many micro-organisms.2.2.2 Wastewater impact from an ecological aspectWastewater is mostly water by weight. Other materials make up only a small portion, butcan be present in large enough quantities to endanger public health and the environment(Anonymous 2001a, b & c). And, since anything can be flushed out in a toilet, drain, or 9
  • sewer, many potential pollutants can be found in the wastewater that can cause disease orhave detrimental environmental effects. Such wastewater should be of the most concern tocommunities.Various impacts are caused by wastewater discharge to coastal water (Table 2.2). It mayinfluence dissolved oxygen, dissolved inorganic and organic carbon, and the conductivityof receiving waters (Daniel, et al. 2002). For example, in Chetumal Bay, Quintana Roo,Mexico, the BOD of coastal water reached 32.26 mg/l (mean value) and ranged from22.61-38.96 mg/l due to wastewater discharge. Standard BOD5 for coastal waters is lessthan 10 mg/l (Clark, 1996) and usual BOD values for domestic wastewater range between100 and 500 mg/l. The mean dissolved oxygen (DO) was 2.63 mg/l, with a range from0.47-3.73 mg/l at the mouth of the discharge. The most important source of water pollutionin that area was attributable to wastewater discharges (Ortiz-Hernandez & Saenz-Morales,1999; Dyer et al., 2003; Ukwe et al., 2003).Table 2.2 Constituents of Wastewater and Their Impacts on the Marine Environment (Windom, 1992) Type of Constituent Impact Solids High levels of suspended solids may cause excessive turbidity and shading of sea grasses and result in sedimentation, which is potentially damaging to benthic habitats and can cause anaerobic conditions at the sea bottom. Fine particles may be associated with toxic organics, metals, and pathogens that adhere to these solids. Organic matter Biological degradation of organic matter requires oxygen and can deplete available dissolved oxygen. The strength of wastewater is commonly expressed in terms of the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) parameter. High BOD levels in natural waters can cause hypoxia and anoxia, especially in shallow and enclosed aquatic systems, resulting in fish death and anaerobic conditions. Anaerobic conditions subsequently result in the release of bad odors from the formation of hydrogen sulphide. Nutrients Nutrients, like nitrogen and phosphorous, increase primary production rates (of oxygen and algal biomass); adverse levels cause nuisance algal blooms (including toxic algal blooms), dieback of corals and sea grasses, and eutrophication that can lead to hypoxia and anoxia, suffocating living resources (fish). Massive die-off of algal matter will result in additional organic matter. Pathogens Pathogens can cause human illness and possible death. Exposure to pathogens via contact with contaminated water or consumption of contaminated shellfish can result in infection and disease. Toxic organic Many toxic materials are suspected carcinogens and mutagens. These chemicals materials can concentrate in shellfish and fish tissue, putting humans at (Persistent organic risk through consumption. Bioaccumulation affects fish and wildlife at pollutants, or POPs) higher levels of the food chain. Metals Metals in specific forms can be toxic to various marine organisms and humans; shellfish are especially vulnerable in areas with highly contaminated sediment. Fats, oil, and grease Fats, oil, and grease float on the surface of seawater, interfere with natural aeration, are possibly toxic to aquatic life, destroy coastal vegetation, reduce recreational use of water and beaches, and threaten waterfowl. 10
  • Tourism activity in coastal areas should also be considered as a source of wastewater.Existence of this activity is associated with several types of impacts, such asenvironmental, economic and socio-cultural, positive or negative, direct or indirect,immediate or cumulative, short-term or long-term (Wong, 1998). It has been found thatsuch activity is a main cause of a decline in local water quality (Saenger, 1989 cf Clark,1992). Sewage discharge resulting from tourism activity, particularly if poorly sited orinadequately treated, is the most common source of adverse effects on the biota. Forexample, in the Caribbean region, less than 10 % of the sewage generated is treated andbacterial levels regularly exceed international standards for recreational contact waters,typically 200 MPN (Most Probable Number) coliform (Clark, 1992). Another studyreported that an on-site sewage disposal system (OSDS), for example septic tank, inrecreational and tourist areas caused the infection of human enteric pathogen(Cryptosporodium, Giardia and enteroviruses) in Sarasota Bay (Lipp et al., 2001) and Gulfof Guinea (Ukwe et al., 2003).The relationship between the consumption of polluted fish and human health has becomemore firmly established. Filter-feeding molluscan shellfish concentrate bacteria and virusessuch as hepatitis, typhoid, dysentery and cholera, present in untreated discharges of humansewage, along with other particulate materials. The consumption of contaminated shellfishmay cause enteric infections, and the transmission of infectious hepatitis through theconsumption of raw, sewage-contaminated shellfish is well documented. Dysentery isthought to have been transmitted by the consumption of cockles in Malaysia, andepidemics of typhoid and hepatitis are linked to the consumption of the shellfishcontaminated by sewage in Vietnam. Because the decomposition of sewage contaminantscompetes for oxygen with finfish larvae and shellfish, this may lead to economic losses byreducing the fish production. In the Philippines, for example, the production of mussel andoyster beds in Manila Bay as well as brackish water fishponds north of Manila is thoughtto be reduced as a result of sewage discharge (Ruddle, 1982).Generally, the effect of urban development and anthropogenic activities (industry,settlement, agriculture, etc.) cause substantial physical changes in coastal waterwaysthrough the hardening and reclamation of river banks, alteration of water flow, affectedcoastal communities, and the diffuse and point-source discharge of pollutants (Ahn &Choi, 1998; Rawlins et al., 1998; Tuncer et al., 1998; Virkanen, 1998; Inglis & Kross,2000; Dyer et al., 2003; Mallin et al., 2007). However, research on the effect ofdischarging municipal wastewater to benthic macrofauna and community structure inFutian National Mangrove Reserve concluded that there was no significant effect on totalmean biomass and density (particularly of molluscs and crustaceans) (Yu et al., 1997).Pollution of near shore waters adjacent to coastal cities has long been a problem due to thedischarge of wastewater. For example Jakarta, Indonesia, like many capital cities indeveloping countries, has experienced a rapid population and industrial growth, which hascaused pollution (metals contamination) in Jakarta Bay (Williams et al., 2000; Nur et al.,2001). This growth, however, has been at a cost, namely the degradation of the coastalenvironment of Jakarta Bay and adjacent coral reefs (Kepulauan Seribu), primarily frompollution (Kay & Alder 1999). Such land-based pollution is one of the causes of reefdegradation and decreased coral biodiversity in other marine coastal areas (Ambon, Jepara,Karimun Jawa Islands, and South Sulawesi) in Indonesia (Edinger et al., 1998). In HongKong, sewage and industrial pollution have resulted in a decrease in dissolved oxygen andan increase in nutrients and Escherichia coli in many coastal areas (Wu et al., 1998). It is 11
  • also the cause of the occurrence of persistent organic contaminants (Connell et al. 1998),and of heavy metal accumulation (Owen & Sandhu, 2000) in the marine areas.Wastewater contains a large number of organic materials and the impact of such materialsin coastal water causes euthrophication. Euthrophication is the process of the enrichmentof water with plant nutrients, primarily nitrogen and phosphorus that results in the increaseof aquatic primary production and leads to visible algal blooms. Such euthrophication isnot characterized as an adverse effect on the ecosystem during the first stage, since it hasmany positive aspects. The impact is the continuous and unlimited increase of theconcentration of plant nutrients that can have a negative environmental impact, such as thereduction of oxygen concentration, the change of marine biodiversity, poor water quality,turbidity and an increase of organic matter concentrations (Clark, 1996; Kitsiou & Karydis,2001).Nutrient enrichment in marine coastal areas, based on the ENCORE (Enrichment ofNutrients on a Coral Reef Experiment) study, may also affect coral reproduction, inducesignificant biotic responses on reef organisms, affect the calcification rate and linearextension making coral more susceptible to breakage, reduce all coral larval settlements,and affect other activities related to reef organisms (Koop et al., 2001).The occurrence of pollutants in the ecosystem of coastal and marine areas and dischargetogether with wastewater from urban areas may be influenced by many factors. Two ofthese are characteristics of the pollutants and prevailing weather in that area. For instance,pesticides and heavy metals may potentially contaminate soil and plants after beingdischarged to a wastewater disposal site. In this case, the distribution of pesticides in thesoil and wastewater was influenced by the solubility of such pesticides so that the higherthe solubility the more is present in the water phase (Jiries et al., 2002). Besides,contamination is also influenced by weather (wet or dry). McPherson et al., (2002)investigated the difference in annual pollutant loads between two different weathers, dry[dry-weather flow (DWF)] and wet [wet-weather flow (WWF)]. They indicated that theWWF was the major non-point source of pollutants including trace metals in the BallonaCreek watershed, California, while the DWF contribution is low. However, DWF loadsmay still be adversely affecting near coastal ecosystems such as wetlands and smallestuaries. Buffleben et al. (2002) have also indicated that the WWF carries a significantamount of hazardous metals into the Santa Monica Bay, California as the receiving waterarea.To understand more about the source, fate, behavior, and effect of chemicals and otherpollutants in the environment is an academic challenge. However, it is more that that; itrequires understanding of issues that affect and shape the use, regulation and control ofthousands of chemicals of commerce (Jones, 2007).2.2.3 Mitigation of wastewater problems and managementWastewater management is urgently needed in order to prevent and mitigate thewastewater impacts (Engin & Demir, 2006) besides the establishment of pollutionmonitoring programs (Zhang et al., 2006; Sheppard, 2007). From this point of view,wastewater problem solving measures applied in a coastal area should be put into a moreintegrated context than the on-site management. As so many different stakeholders, types,sources and impacts of pollutants are involved, the wastewater aspect should be evaluated 12
  • and analyzed from an integrated point of view [taking all parts of the system, that is thesewer system, wastewater treatment plant, and receiving waters into consideration(Buffleben et al., 2002)]. In this case, communities (including private sectors) andgovernments should combine their efforts and resources into an integrated managementmeasure (Shatkin, 2007). This could be an option to increase participation for conductingwastewater management. However, institutional and political factors could be barriers toimplementing this issue option (Akbar et al., 2007).A certain model of wastewater management system could be applied by a city, whether acentralized or decentralized system. In former times, a centralized system was thought tobe easier to be planned and managed. But nowadays, based on some experiences, such asystem has deficiencies, in which it is particularly poor at reaching peri-urban areas and,therefore, a decentralized system is adopted as appropriate for such areas (Parkinson andTayler, 2003). According to Parkinson and Tayler (2003), decentralized systems are morecompatible with decentralized approaches to urban management than centralized systems.In a broad sense “… the implications of decentralization on wastewater managementsystems relate to planning and decision-making, design of physical infrastructure, andmanagement arrangements for operations and maintenance” (Parkinson and Tayler,2003).A wastewater treatment system is a component of wastewater management; it is importantfor sustainable wastewater management (Engin & Demir, 2006). Several techniques couldbe applied; they can be from a direct wastewater treatment system (Reed et al., 1995;Engin & Demir, 2006) to a reused wastewater system (Brown, 1997; Ye et al., 2001;Morgan, 2004; Friedler et al., 2006).Niemczynowicz suggested two possible scenarios for a wastewater treatment system(Kärrman, 2001). Firstly, is the high technology option with continuation, developmentand complementation of present technology. Secondly, are low-cost, low-energy solutionsbased on the application of biological systems and the recycling of resources. The secondscenario will lead to a less vulnerable and more sustainable society, compared with the firstone. Based on Niemczynowicz’s action plan, another two scenarios can be suggested; firstis a centralized wastewater treatment system with off-site concentration and storage,second is the decentralized wastewater treatment system with on-site concentration andstorage. However, the application of such systems has various implications (Bakir, 2001;Roomratanapun, 2001; Tsagarakis et al., 2001; Al-Sa’ed and Mubarak, 2006).The decentralized wastewater treatment system mainly focuses on an on-site wastewatertreatment and disposal system, in which the typical system for individual homes consists ofa septic tank and a gravity-operated, subsurface soil absorption system (Reed et al., 1995).This system includes either fully high-tech technology or an in-community participationsystem. The system provides a simple, low-cost and low maintenance method (Burkhard etal., 2000; Parkinson and Tayler, 2003) and implies managing wastewater as close as ispractical to where it is generated and to where its potential beneficial reuse is located. Thiscomprises systems from the smallest single household system to a system with severalsmaller subsystems for collection, treatment, and reuse for a small community (Bakir,2001). This system has been applied worldwide in several countries, such as the MiddleEast and North African countries (Bakir, 2001). However, for small Palestiniancommunities, the system is unsustainable as it was not appropriate for the community (Al-Sa’ed and Mubarak, 2006). 13
  • The centralized system is mostly associated with a large wastewater treatment plant toprovide services for large areas and generally requires large capital investment andspecialized operators (Burkhard et al., 2000). This system has been applied mostly indeveloped countries; some of these are Greece (Tsagarakis et al., 2001), several otherMediterranean countries (Massoud et al., 2003), Sweden (Kärrman, 2001), and Bangkok(Roomratanapun, 2001).The use of wastewater for agricultural production has been applied in Calcutta (Brown,1997), Saudi Arabia (Abu-Rizaiza, 1999), Australia (Parameswaran, 1999) and Israel(Friedler et al., 2006). However, this practice may cause contamination with Salmonella ofvegetables (lettuce, parsley, tomatoes, and pimento) as it irrigates with raw wastewater inEl Azzouzia, Marrakesh city, Morocco (Melloul et al., 2001).Another wastewater treatment system is by using mangroves (Bruguiera gymnorrhiza andKandelia candel) (Ye et al., 2001), particularly suitable for the treatment of wastewaterrich in nutrients. The system using mangroves is considered to be low-cost and effectivefor pollutants from many sources, and especially efficient in the removal and beneficialreuse of nutrients (Ye et al., 2001). Wastewater from households (human excreta) may bereused into something useful in agriculture to enhance food production, with a minimalrisk of pollution of the environment and with a minimal threat to human health as well; thisconcept has been developed by the Ecological Sanitation Program (Morgan, 2004).2.3 Coastal Environmental Management in IndonesiaIndonesia’s archipelagic coastal and marine environment is one of the world’s richest areasin coastal resources, with an 81,000 km long coastline and 5.8 million km2 of marine areas(70% of its total area). The region’s long coastline contains highly productive coral reefs(500 species of corals) and mangrove ecosystems (Anonymous, 1996a and b).Many development activities are taking place in urban areas, as well as in the coastal area.Such activities in the coastal area include investments, exploitation of non-renewable andrenewable resources. Although Indonesians get benefits from them, all the activitiestogether, with an ever-increasing population, are resulting in a rapid increase in thequantity of wastes and wastewater (ATB, 2002), including pollutant-containing wastewaterin marine and coastal areas. This may lead, directly or indirectly, to the degradation ofmarine and coastal resources due to impacts of pollution from various hazardoussubstances contained in the wastes and wastewaters resulting from human activities, so-called anthropogenic pollution.In addressing such a situation, Indonesia has been seriously focusing its national policies,strategies and actions on environmental management in a context of sustainabledevelopment. Thus, the Indonesian Government has established regulations to control alldevelopment and exploitation of its coastal resources. Previously, Braadbaart (1995)suggested that to combat water pollution in particular, especially from industries, aregulatory framework be set up in three phases: (1) allocate responsibility forenvironmental policing along sectoral lines; (2) create a Board for the Control ofEnvironmental Impact (Bapedal); and (3) environmental impact analysis report evaluationbe embedded in an organizational setting replete with a good incentives policies. Inaddition, the users, in their activities and targets, have to consider the sustainability of their 14
  • utilization of the resources and minimize the impacts on the environment.Major Indonesian coastal and marine resources management issues include the degradationof coral reefs (Anonymous, 1996a and b; ADB, 2000); the increase in phosphate, nitrateand sediment loading of marine estuaries from upstream intensive paddy cultivation; theconversion of intertidal zones to rice paddies; and the incursion of mechanized andtechnologically sophisticated foreign fishing fleets (KMNLH, 1996 a and b).Regarding sustainable development, Indonesia has developed Indonesia’s Agenda 21(KMNLH, 1996a). Some action programs have been formulated to improve the quality ofthe living environment for sustainable development for the future of the 21st century (1998-2020). There are seven priority programs, which have been discussed and proposed forocean and coastal areas (KMNLH, 1996a); they are:• Integrated planning and resource development in coastal zones;• Monitoring and protecting coastal and marine environments;• Sustainable utilization of marine resources;• Strengthening and empowering coastal communities;• Sustainable development of small islands;• Maintaining security of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ); and• Managing the impacts of climate change and tidal waves.As the priority programs of Agenda 21 are being implemented, coastal and marineresources have been considered for an integrated management system, which involvesintegration of policies from other concerned sectors. However, enforcement related to thecoastal and marine environmental quality standards has been limited because regulationstill needs to be implemented as a national legislation.Indonesia has developed significant legislations (legal tools) for environmental standards(Table 2.3), including those for the coastal zones and marine areas, which also include theuse of environmental impact assessment (EIA). The process of establishing coastal andmarine management reached an important milestone with the recognition of thisenvironment as a new sector in REPELITA (Five Year Development Plan) IV. The marinesector is now officially a key element of Indonesias present and future economicdevelopment, and so the future coastal and marine strategy depends on todays decisions.A program that has been implemented to protect and control the coastal environment is thecoastal and marine integrated conservation program (Pantai dan Laut Lestari Terpadu). Theprogram which was implemented in 1996 consists of three packages of working programs,namely (1) cleaning of coastal tourism areas, (2) valuable harbors (harbor zones), and (3)conservation (coral reef and mangrove zones).2.4 Major Coastal Planning & Management TechniquesThe absence of management measures that are indicated by the absence of adequatepolicies, legislation, and public participation in addressing environmental issues may causefurther negative impact on the environment and health (Mrayyan and Hamdi, 2006).Therefore, appropriate management measures and techniques should be identified. 15
  • Table 2.3 Some Legal Tools for Controlling Coastal and Marine Pollution and Degradation in Indonesia Year Number Concerning 1969 Convention International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969 1972 Convention Prevention Of Marine Pollution by Dumping from ship and Aircraft, 1972. 1973 Convention International Convention For The Prevention of Pollution from Ship 1974 GR (Government Regulation) No. Concerning Controlling of Oil and Gas Exploration 17 and Exploitation in the Coastal Zone 1978 Protocol International Convention For the Prevention of Pollution from Ship, 1973 1982 Act No. 4 Concerning Environmental Management 1982 Convention United Nations Conventions on the Law of the sea 1983 Act No. 5 Economic Exclusive Zone 1988 Decree of State Minister for Guideline for Environmental Quality Standard Population and Environment Establishment 1990 Act No. 5 Conservation of Living Resources and Their Ecosystems 1992 Act No. 21 Concerning Shipping 1992 Act No. 24 Spatial Planning 1993 GR No. 51 Environmental Impact Analysis (revision) 1994 GR No. 19 Management of Dangerous and Toxic Wastes 1995 Environmental Impact Liquid waste Standards For Industrial Activities Management Agency (BAPEDAL) Decree of The State Minister For The Environment Number KEP- 51/MENLH/10/1995 1996 Decree of State Minister for Environmental Quality Standard Liquid Waste for Environment Number 42 Oil, Gas and Global Warming Activities. 1996 State Ministerial Decree: Environmental Standard for Liquid Waste for The Kep-42/MENLH/10/1996 Oil and Gas Activities and Global Warning : October 1996 1999 GR No. 19 Marine Pollution and DegradationWith regards to coastal areas, Kay & Alder (1999) suggested three groups of majorapproaches for coastal management and planning. They are (a) administrative, (b) social,and (c) technical measures. Those approaches consist of applications, which are eachcomposed of some tools.2.4.1 Administrative aspectMany countries have adopted laws, decrees, and other regulatory acts to specify theenvironmental requirements for development activities. In this sense, it is the role of thegovernment to ensure and promote environmental conservation, and therefore, on behalf ofsociety, to set standards for all industrial activities (including public-owned ones), toestablish an effective permit or licensing system, and to take measures to ensure that it isadhered to (UNEP, 1992). The following tools are included in the administrative aspect: 16
  • • Policy and legislationPolicy and legislation can be powerful tools for managing the coast, where policy is a basisfor decision-making. Anderson et al. (1984, cf Kay & Alder, 1999) suggest a definition of“policy” as a purposive course of action followed by appropriately dealing with a problem.Examples of policies applied in coastal management are: coral reef conservation inHonduras in which they focus on the policy for individual behavior inside the boundariesof the reserve, such as the prohibition of anchoring (facilitated by a successful mooringbuoy program that had been previously accomplished), spearfishing, coral collection ordestruction, and others (Luttinger, 1997). Other examples are shown in Table 2.3. In 1979the National Government of Japan concentrated on eliminating the organic contaminationproblem by implementing a policy to regulate COD from industrial effluents, and addednitrogen and phosphorus levels to the list of effluents to come under regulation in October1993 (Kawabe, 1998).“Legislation” or “law” is defined through a parliamentary or legislative process and theoutcome is often expressed as an ‘Act’ or ‘Law’. It can be defined as “the government ofthe time’s response to community demands for government action or management ofparticular issues, areas or activities” (Kay & Alder, 1999).• GuidelinesThe term of “guidelines” is used to describe a group of documents, which are lessprescriptive and or forceful than formal legislation, policies or regulations. It is also usedas guidance for decision makers to act upon.• Regulation and enforcementRegulation permits and licenses. Permits and licenses are written approvals from a government to conduct specified activities in specified areas. The processes and criteria for issuing permits are generally controlled by either policy directions or regulations, or are specified in legislation (Kay & Alder, 1999). In addition, permits can be used in some activities to assist in day-to-day coastal management activities.Enforcement. Enforcement is a management tool used to effect compliance with acts, regulations, permits, licenses, policies or plans with a legislative basis (Kay & Alder, 1999).• Incentive instrumentsThe need for incentive instruments for managing marine resources and uses, criteria forevaluating, and principles for instrument design is discussed by Greiner et al. (2000). Theauthors further state that for a policy evaluation there are three criteria that are commonlyapplied, namely economic efficiency, equity, and environmental implication.Some principles related to incentives in terms of how they are designed, are user pays andpolluter pays; cost sharing; sense of community, ownership, and stewardship; adaptivesystems; and ecosystem approach (Greiner et al., 2000). 17
  • 2.4.2 Social aspect• ParticipationHildebrand (1997) stated that participation can only be achieved when power is shared.This means that citizens, through community organizations, are, with a government,making planning decisions that have meaningful consequences. Since a ‘bottom-up’approach is adopted widely in integrated coastal zone management, participation in suchmanagement activities has increased. This is because the traditional form of ‘publicconsultation’ is no longer adequate (Hildebrand, 1997).Who are the actors that will participate in coastal management and planning? Players arethe actors who participate in the program and initiatives. They are commonly called‘stakeholders’ to stress that they have a stake in the future of the coast, either because theylive there, earn a living from the exploitation of coastal resources, or it is their job toadminister the rules and regulations controlling coastal use. Stakeholders also includevicarious users who may never use or access the coast but still value it, and those who maynot reside on the coast but use it for recreation (Kay & Alder, 1999).For a general system, the term ‘stakeholder’ might be those who affect, and/or are affectedby, the policies, decisions and actions of the system (Grimble & Chan, 1995). Thus, theycan be individuals, communities, social groups or institutions of any size, aggregation orlevel in society; they include policy makers, planners and administrators in governmentand other organizations, as well as commercial and subsistence groups (Grimble & Chan,1995; Clark, 1996; Lee, 1998; Kay & Alder, 1999), coastal residents via community-basedorganizations (CBOs) and local representative authorities; various economic sectors viacooperatives, federations, and chambers of commerce; conservationists via NGOs; and thestate of government via its various public agencies (Jorge, 1997).In regard to the community aspect as a part of an integrated perspective, collaborative andcommunity-based management are powerful tools of participation because they have thepotential to help and solve coastal problems at the local level. Both are capable ofmodifying people’s activities at the source of the problem in a way which can help to meetmanagement objectives, and assist in integrating environmental and resource managementactivities into people’s everyday lives: where a community makes some resourcemanagement decisions that affect their activities (Kay & Alder, 1999).It is implied that collaborative management has a number of common elements, includingall stakeholders. The stakeholders have a say in the management and sharing ofmanagement responsibility which varies according to specific conditions but thegovernment assumes responsibility for the overall policy coordination; and socio-economicand cultural objectives are an integral part of management (Kay & Alder, 1999).Community-based management uses the "empowered people" concept which provides theresponsibility to manage resources. In this case, the community, together with thegovernment, business and other interested parties share an interest in co-managingresources with some decision-making devolved to the community.According to Hildebrand (1997), community-based coastal management represents a newform of partnership between government and community-based organizations. In essence, 18
  • it is about ‘power sharing’ in the integrated planning and management of the coastal zone.It may be initiated by communities themselves, by government agencies, or with theassistance of non-government organizations (NGOs). However, it is rarely achieved, if thegovernment is reluctant to devolve power. Communities are often viewed as unqualified ortoo unskilled to take on the responsibility for managing, or communities are reluctant totake on the responsibility for decision-making.• Capacity buildingCrawford et al. (1993 cf Kay & Alder, 1999) give a definition for capacity building: it is aterm used to describe initiatives that aim to increase the capability of those charged withmanaging the coast to make sound planning and management decisions. Since the term isalso used commonly by international organizations, there are two different kinds ofcapacity building that focus on supporting and improving coastal management decisions,namely ‘human capacity’ and ‘institutional capacity’. In the coastal managementperspective, the former focuses on individual decision makers and coastal managers, whilethe latter is focused on business, governments, non-governmental groups and communities(Crawford et al., 1993 cf Kay & Alder, 1999; Kay & Alder, 1999). The difference in termsof component items set up for capacity-building program can be seen in Table 2.4.Table 2.4 Characteristic of Collaborative and Community-based Management (Jentolft, 1989 cf Kay & Alder, 1999) Characteristics Collaborative management Community-based management Initiative Decentralize Local Organization Formal Informal Leadership Participant Mutual Adjustment Control Decentralize Decentralize Autonomy Some Yes2.4.3 Technical aspectTechnical tools are used for practical approaches, including environmental assessment(environmental impact assessment), risk and hazard assessment, quality criteria andstandards, and a potential wastewater treatment (wastewater-fed aquaculture) that arecommonly applied in coastal management and planning.• Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)One of the most powerful tools in minimizing impacts is a requirement to complete anenvironmental impact assessment (EIA) (Brown, 1997) for various development activities.Basically, an EIA aims to evaluate the effects of proposed developments and projects onthe environment (Hoozemans et al., 1995) by clearly evaluating the environmentalconsequences of a proposed activity ‘before’ action is taken (Brown, 1997). In thisevaluation, the impacts of a single development activity can be estimated and so, they canbe prevented in advance. 19
  • EA, or EIA, has relevance and importance in all activities in coastal development(Hambrey et al., 2000), and it is considered as a management tool rather than as anadministrative or regulatory process. In particular it may be used to (1) modify andimprove the content or design of a policy, plan or proposal; (2) ensure that resources areused efficiently; (3) enhance the social aspects related to a proposal; (4) identify measuresfor monitoring and managing impacts; and (5) facilitate informed decision making,especially in relation to sustainability criteria. The essence of EIA is a prediction of thefuture state of the environment, with and without the development activity (Carpenter &Maragos, 1989). Thus, the EIA is conducted in order to predict the adverse consequencesof development on the environment.In Indonesia EIA is compulsory for a development project that has a potential impact onthe environment, while it is not in Singapore (Chia, 1998). Since most developmentprojects proceed within a very short time frame, a detailed EIA is often impossible. It is notuncommon that EIA is conducted only a few months before the commencement of workand the development would proceed regardless of the conclusion of the impact assessment(Wu et al., 1998).In coastal waters, like other common development activities, EIA is considered to be avital tool for sound coral reef conservation to maintain an optimum ecosystem function.Tomascik (1993) has developed a general guideline for such a measure.In addition, there is another evaluation that is always conducted together with or as acomplement of EIA; it is ‘cumulative effects’ (CE) assessment. Vestal & Rieser (1995)described the term of CE as the phenomenon of changes in the environment that resultfrom numerous, small-scale alterations. For example, alteration of critical habitats throughwetland loss, degradation of water quality from non-point source pollution, and change insalinity of estuarine waters from water dispersion projects.• Risk and Hazard AssessmentRisk and Hazard Assessment is considered as one of the control measures to prevent thedestruction of coastal areas due to the development of human-generated activities(anthropogenic pressures). However, there are no activities, which have a zero risk. Thisassessment is concerned with assessing the probability that certain events will take placeand assessing the potential adverse impact on people, property, or the environment thatthese events may have. For example, failures of a chemical refinery on the coast causingdamage to the plant itself, and to surrounding residents and the environment through therelease of toxic chemicals into near-shore waters. Potential impacts on a coastal region bysevere storms are also included (Kay & Alder, 1999). The risk and hazard assessment, likeEIA, is always conducted as part of coastal planning and management before the activitiesare carried out, so all the risks due to the activities are taken into account.Conducting the risk and hazard assessment once it has been identified is called ‘riskmanagement’, and the method of managing risks is called the ‘risk management technique’(Kay & Alder, 1999). Developing a risk management strategy involves a number ofdistinct stages. According to Kay & Alder (1999), they are (1) scoping and investigation;(2) analysis; (3) implementation (mitigation); and (4) monitoring. 20
  • • Quality Criteria and StandardsOne of the management approaches to control pollution is an environmental management.Environmental management is the art of conserving and improving the quality of theenvironment by controlling the quality and quantity of waste-loads discharged into it(Ouano, 1988). The environmental control standards are based on the concept of allocatingthe Assimilative Capacity to the different users for free. The assimilative capacity could beconsidered a resource owned by the people as represented by the government of thepollution control agency.Quality criteria and standards are one of the tools in environmental management. Thecriteria and standards that are discussed here include receiving water quality standards,effluent standards and effluent charges, and the precautionary principle.Receiving Water Quality Standards (RWQS). RWQS vary from one country to another depending on various social, economic, and technical factors. The most well researched and discussed water quality standards are for drinking water, whereas the non- consumptive water quality standards have greater variation especially those developed for the coastal and marine environment. ‘Pollutant’ is usually defined as the quantity of waste-loaded discharge to the environment, which will result in concentrations higher than those allowed by the RWQS. Due to variations in the coastal and marine environment standards, the same quantity of waste-load will have different meaning in different countries (Ouano, 1988). The RWQS is difficult to administer if there are two or more waste discharge sources within the water body. Implementation of the receiving water quality standard calls for extensive monitoring of the waste discharges, the mixing, dilution and purification in the water body. The RWQS favor the waste discharges located upstream as they could utilize completely the assimilative capacity of the water body. The waste discharged down stream will be required to remove all waste-load completely, or relocate or close down.Environmental (Assimilative) Capacity. Environmental (Assimilative) Capacity can be applied both in sea and freshwater and underlies the calculation of safe discharges of sewage waste to the sea and rivers. The concept is that the environment (marine, river, and lake) has the capacity to tolerate an input of man-made waste without suffering significant damage. That level may be quite small for some wastes, and different areas will have different capacities to dilute and disperse waste to harmless levels (Ouano, 1988; Clark, 1997).Effluent Standards (ES) and Effluent Charges (EC). ES is derived by dividing the assimilative capacity among the waste dischargers. The assimilative capacity is treated as a common resource that the effluent standards distribute to the different users. One of the main problems in the development of effluent standards is the tendency to impose the RWQS as ES (Ouano, 1988). For example, the Philippines National Pollution Control Commission implemented the RWQS as ES between 1978 and 1981. As a result waste dischargers were automatically required to remove up to 99.99% of the waste-load. While the effluent standard of 1981 tried to correct the problems related to BOD, the concentration of the other constituents were practically copied from the RWQS of 1978. Even today the required concentrations of copper, zinc, fluoride and 21
  • other metals are the same as that for ES which makes Philippines standards more stringent than the WHO International Drinking Water Standard of 1972. Some economists involved in environmental management suggested that the allocation of the assimilative capacity would be more efficient if it is carried out using a free market mechanism (Ouano, 1988). The pollution control technology used by the waste generator will not be dictated by the standards but rather by the market forces such as its competitors, demand, and the assimilative capacity available. The pollution control agency monitors the allowable assimilative capacity and sells it to the highest bidder. The winning bidder is allowed to discharge into the water body while the losing bidder will have to store his waste (Ouano, 1988).Precautionary Principle. The Precautionary Principle was proposed by Germany in 1986 (Clark, 1997) to prevent damaging effects of wastes entering the environment. Where there are threats or serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. The application of the precautionary principle decision should be guided by (a) careful evaluation to avoid, where practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment, and (b) an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options (Brown, 1997). In addition, seeking to understand effects of chemicals and pollutants in the environment, requires an understanding of issues that affect and shape the use, regulation, and control of thousands of chemicals of commerce (Jones, 2007). 22
  • Chapter 3 General Research MethodologyThis chapter presents the general research methodology used in this study. Themethodology encompasses a research approach, a research framework, a research design,and a data gathering procedure. Detailed research methodology is presented in each topicof the study.3.1 Research ApproachThe present study has included a set of research activities, which principally deal withexisting available data and information (primary and secondary) obtained from varioussources. As a descriptive research method was used and the research topic was analyzedaccording to some selected aspects, this research is called descriptive (Gay, 1975 cf Sevillaet al., 1988) and analytical research. Physical part Source of wastewater Social part Sewer system Government Community Treatment system Institution Receiving waters (rivers, marine coastal area) Figure 3.1 Scheme of research approachThis descriptive and analytical research used a survey research method (using interviews,questionnaires, and observation techniques) for the collection of data and information withsampling methods. The analytical research method included, for instance, the contentanalysis method to collect data and information from published and un-publisheddocuments, archives, etc. Residential and non-residential buildings, households or personswere used as the basic sampling unit in some aspects of this study. 23
  • As mentioned before in Chapter 2, a wastewater system should be analyzed and evaluatedfrom an integrated point of view, taking into consideration all parts of the system, i.e.sources of wastewater, sewer systems, wastewater treatment facilities and receiving waters.These parts constitute the physical measure aspect. Being applied in a managementcontext, this physical measure was combined with various social parts (for examplecommunity, government, institution) (Fig. 3.1). An integrated system was used as anapproach to develop the present research.3.2 Research FrameworkThree groups of data were considered as data sources in this study based on thepreliminary observation on wastewater problems in the city of Manado; they are 1) thewastewater discharge-related aspect (WRA); 2) the community-related aspect (CRA); and3) the governmental/administrative-related aspect (GRA). The WRA relates to wastewaterdischarge, which comprises aspects from the wastewater-related activities at individualhouses (e.g. toilets, and septic tanks) to the entire sewer system including wastewaterinfrastructures and facilities. Natural characteristics can be included in this aspect. TheCRA includes a community which is related (Pompeo, 1999; Hauger et al., 2002) to theproblem solving approach of wastewater discharge. It could be an individual person, ahousehold, and/or a group forming a community institution. The GRA relates to agovernment/administrative institution, as it plays an important role in problem solvingmeasures for wastewater discharge.From those groups of data, three selected aspects were studied, such as 1) the community’senvironmental knowledge and attitude, 2) wastewater treatment systems and wastewaterinfrastructures and facilities, and 3) the water quality in the river system. Those are themain aspects in this study. Three associated aspects were also selected; they are 1) thenatural settings, 2) the socio-economic aspects, and 3) institutional arrangement &management measures (Fig. 3.2). All aspects (main and associated aspects) wereidentified, evaluated, assessed, and analyzed prior to formulating strategic actions.Following are the specifications of the main aspect:1. Status of community’s environmental knowledge and attitude aspects. This study was conducted to evaluate and analyze the community’s environmental knowledge and attitude related to wastewater issues. Two indicators were evaluated, i.e.:• Environmental knowledge: knowledge within a community related to general environmental issues and specific environmental issues caused by wastewater.• Environmental attitude: the attitude of the community related to general environmental issues and environmental issues caused by wastewater. This indicator was assessed through two components, such as 1) community concerns related to general environmental issues and environmental issues caused by wastewater, and 2) community preference concerning solutions of environmental problems related to wastewater. 24
  • WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Analytical & Formulation: STRATEGIC ACTIONS Constraints & Potentials MAIN ASPECT: ASSOCIATED ASPECT: I Identification, Descriptive, Descriptive: M Analytical & Evaluation: P L Status of water quality • Natural E (WRA) characteristics M (WRA) E Status of wastewater N treatment system & facilities • Socio-economic T (WRA) aspect (CRA) A T • Institutional I Status of community’s arrangement & environmental knowledge & O management (GRA) N attitude (CRA) Identification: Wastewater issuesDenote: (WRA): wastewater discharge-related aspect (CRA): community-related aspect (GRA): government/administrative-related aspect Aspect of Process Provision studyFigure 3.2 Conceptual framework of the study on wastewater management in the city of Manado, North Sulawesi, Indonesia. 25
  • 2. Status of wastewater treatment system & facilities aspect. This study was conducted to evaluate wastewater treatment systems at household levels. Two indicators were evaluated, i.e.:• Wastewater treatment system: the condition and capacity of the wastewater treatment system (septic tanks) was evaluated. This is related to the ‘black water’ part of wastewater.• Wastewater infrastructure and facilities: the condition of the wastewater infrastructure and facilities was evaluated, including systems for wastewater from kitchens, bathrooms (‘grey water’). In this study, the factor affecting the condition of the wastewater treatment system was also evaluated. Socio-economic factors (monthly income, level of education, and house status) and the community’s environmental knowledge were predicted to influence the condition of the on-site wastewater treatment system (septic tank) in the city.3. Status of water quality aspect. This study was conducted to measure and evaluate the quality of discharged wastewater in the river system. The following indicators were observed:• Quality of wastewater: Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), nitrogen (N) and phosphate (total phosphorous), and an amount of fecal coliform.• Pollutant-containing wastewater: the concentration of mercury (Hg). Mercury was considered in this study because this pollutant is used widely in the upland area around the city of Manado for amalgam gold mining in small-scale industries.The following are the specifications of the associated aspect:1. Natural characteristic aspect. The following are the components described:• Topography: slope and elevation.• Drainage: rivers, canals and other water-draining areas.• Climate: precipitation and seasons, etc.2. Socio-economic aspect. Socio-economic characteristics, population, employment, and level of education were described in this study.3. Institutional arrangement and management measure aspects. Besides the management measures information, the following are the components described:• Government: role and function, responsibility, and coordination (from local level to national level);• Policies, strategies, and actions related to wastewater management.3.3 Research DesignA research protocol was designed for this study. The design considers ensuring that thisresearch can be repeated for monitoring and evaluation purposes or for comparison withother cases. 26
  • 3.3.1 Study areasThe study area covered the area under the administration of Manado City (Fig. 1.1, p. 3).Two types of study areas were identified:• Study Area (SA) I: this study area covered the city level (Manado City with all districts).• Study Area (SA) II: this study area covered the district level. Two districts were selected as specific study sites (SS) because they met the following conditions:1. The area is close (water-front) to the coastal area, so discharged wastewater can be observed from upland to coastal areas.2. The area is influenced by the Tondano Watershed. This criterion was used because some parts of the Manado area are included in this watershed and most of the wastewater is brought down to the coastal area through this watershed.The two specific study sites (SS), which were selected, based on those conditions (Table3.1) are:• Study Site (SS) 1: Molas District. The area is a waterfront area within Manado Bay (Fig. 1.1, p. 2). Approximately 5,988 households of this area are included in the Tondano Watershed (JICA, 2000).• Study Site (SS) 2: Wenang District. The area is a waterfront area within Manado Bay (Fig. 1.1, p. 3). Approximately 15,377 households were included in the Tondano Watershed (JIC,A 2000).Figure 3.3 gives an overview of how the study areas (SA) and study sites (SS) areinterrelated.Table 3.1 Selection of the Two Specific Study Sites Condition Districts Molas Mapanget Malalayang Wenang Sario The area is close (water-front) to the coastal area √ X √ √ √ The area is influenced by the Tondano Watershed (No. of sub- 6 2 X 13 1 districts) The area is influenced by the Tondano Watershed (No. of 5,988 1,194 X 15,377 3,937 households)√: yes, X: no3.3.2 Sample and sampling designSample size was calculated by using a formula introduced by Slovin (1960, cf Sevilla etal., 1988): n = N / (1 + N e2); where n is sample size, N is population size, and e is apreferred critical number. Below, descriptions of sample size and sampling design for eachstudy area and site are provided. Table 3.2 shows the calculated and applied sample sizefor households, individuals/person, and houses used. 27
  • The Study Area Study Area (SA) I: City level Manado City Study Area (SA) II: District level Study Site (SS) 1: Study Site (SS) 2: Molas Wenang Figure 3.3 Schematic construction of the Study Area and Study SitesEach of the study sites (district level) is divided into several sub-districts. The appliedsamples were distributed into the sub-districts in accordance with a stratified randomsampling method (Steel & Torrie, 1980). The sample size for each of the sub-districts ispresented in Table 3.3a & b.Table 3.2 Calculated and Applied (*) Sample Size Site Districts Number of Sample Size House- Individuals/p Houses House- Individuals/ Houses holds ersonals holds personals 1 Molas 29,025 113,443 15,498 395 / 100 / 145* 390 / 300* 300* 2 Wenang 21,337 89,424 15,848 393 / 100 / 139* 390 / 304* 304*3.3.3 Questionnaire designA questionnaire was used as one of the survey/observation instruments to collect primarydata. The questionnaire was developed by involving persons (Kumurur, pers. comm.; Polii,pers. comm.) who are experts in this field.3.3.4 Interview designInterviews, as an instrument to collect primary data, were carried out in this research.Some questions related to a selected topic were presented to persons in order to getresponses/answers indicating their knowledge about the topic. In order to get completeanswers there were no limitations on the question scope. For practical reasons, to simplify 28
  • this method, the author organized a workshop 1 and the key informants and communityofficials from local government and community were invited as participants. During theworkshop, the participants were interviewed regarding their opinion about environmentalproblems in general and problems related to wastewater.Table 3.3a Distribution of Applied Sample Size in Molas District (n= number of samples) No. Sub-district Sample Size Households Individuals/personals Houses (n=300) (n=145) (n=300) 1. Islam 22 15 22 2. Tuminting 33 13 33 3. Sumompo 30 16 30 4. Mahawu 32 14 32 5. Tumumpa Satu 31 19 31 6. Tumumpa Dua 27 20 27 7. Maasing 36 22 36 8. Bitung Karang ria 58 11 58 9. Sindulang Dua 31 15 31Table 3.3b Distribution of Applied Sample Size in Wenang District (n= number of samples) No. Sub-district Sample Size Households Individual/personals Houses (n=304) (n=139) (n=304) 1. Istiqlal 24 15 24 2. Wenang Selatan 29 8 29 3. Mahakeret Timur 29 15 29 4. Teling Bawah 28 12 28 5. Komo Luar 26 9 26 6. Pinaesaan 20 15 20 7. Bumi Beringin 19 10 19 8. Mahakeret Barat 31 12 31 9. Wenang Utara 34 10 34 10. Lawangirung 35 15 35 11. Tikala Kumaraka 20 6 20 12. Calaca 9 12 93.4 Data Gathering ProcedureTwo types of data were collected in this research, secondary and primary data. Primarydata were collected and obtained directly from the field as the primary source. Secondarydata were collected and obtained from other sources (for example charts, reports, statistics,archives, experts, etc.). The main aspect of the study was considered as the primary data,while the associated aspect was the secondary data.1 The workshop was entitled ‘solid and wastewater management in the city of Manado’; it was conducted onMay 13, 2003 in collaboration with Sam Ratulangi University, the government of Manado City, and NaturalResources Management organizations. 35 participants from the government and the community attended. 29
  • 3.4.1 Secondary data collectionAvailable secondary data and information were collected from various sources. For thecollection of adequate and appropriate information, a number of organizations werecontacted and visited as sources of information. These included national universities (forexample Sam Ratulangi University, Manado); international universities (for example AsianInstitute of Technology, Thailand); provincial government agencies of North SulawesiProvince; local government agencies (the city of Manado and the Minahasa Regency),including executive and legislative parties; profit-organizations (private companies); non-profit organizations (non-governmental organizations); and others. Information fromInternet sources was used as an additional and worldwide source of information.3.4.2 Primary data collectionThis research was conducted in two sequenced stages: Pre-Survey (Stage 1) and MainSurvey (Stage 2). The Pre-Survey was conducted as a reconnaissance survey in order toadjust the research designed (for instance the study sites, sampling areas, representativesampling), to conduct a pre-test for the questionnaire, and to request permission. The MainSurvey was conducted in order to gather data used to identify, analyze, and formulatespecific objectives in each of the studies. 30
  • Chapter 4 General Description of Manado CityThis chapter presents a general description of the existing situation and condition ofManado City, including the study sites of Molas and Wenang districts, where such anoverview may, directly or not, relate to the wastewater management aspect. Several aspectsof natural characteristics (topography, natural settings, land use patterns, climate, andmarine coastal areas), classification of the city, socio-economic aspects (population,education, employment, religion and ethnicity, and income), and government institutionalarrangement, policies, strategies, and actions, are described. The information and data wereobtained from a field survey of the household socio-economic and relevant references(unpublished reports, archives, etc.), as well as government and consultancy reports. Thoseof land use data were calculated using GIS (ArcView software and satellite imagery SPOTXS4).4.1 Natural CharacteristicsManado, the capital city of North Sulawesi Province, Indonesia, is located at 1°30’-1°40’N; 124°40’ - 124°50’E. It is a developing coastal city forming a waterfront on Manado Bay(Fig. 4.1) and covers an area of 160.61 km2 (10.5% of the total area of the province).The topographic elevation of land in the area is from 10 to 650 m (ASL: above sea level)with various types of landscapes from low-lying (slope), undulating and hilly tomountainous (Fig. 4.2). Land slopes range from 0 up to >40% (Fig. 4.3). Of this, 12,296.50ha (76.56%) have a slope of 0-8% and 179.01ha (1.11%) have a slope of >40% (Table4.1). The topography of Molas (SS 1) is mostly slope and hilly while Wenang (SS 2) ismostly sloping and undulating (BPSKM, 2003).Table 4.1 Total Area of Manado Based on Land Slope Condition Slope (%) Area (ha) % 0-8 12,296.50 76.56 8-15 1,622.84 10.10 15-25 1,357.22 8.45 25-40 605.51 3.77 >40 179.01 1.11 Total 16,061.08 100.00The geomorphologic features of the area influences land use, since only flat land of 0-8%slope (only 76.56%) is suitable for proper settlement (housing and commercial activities,and others). Therefore, settlement developments are distributed haphazardly in the city,following the natural settings of topography and slopes, and mostly distributed andconcentrated along the coastline. 31
  • 32 Figure 4.1 The area of Manado City 32
  • 33 Figure 4.2 Topographic condition of Manado City 33
  • 34 Figure 4.3 Slope gradient of Manado area 34
  • 35 Figure 4.4 Hydrological condition of Manado City 35
  • The land use of the city in 1999 was classified into 15 categories (Table 4.2). The threelargest land use categories were mixed agricultural land (mixture of estate) (69.82%),housing/settlement areas (18.38%), and secondary forests (2.56%). Along the coast of thenorthern part, there were mangroves with a total area of 1.74 km2 (1.09%). River and canalareas were reported to take up 0.77 km2 (0.48%).Table 4.2 Land Use Classification of the Manado Area in 1999 Land use classification Ha % 1. Mixed agricultural land (mixture of estate) 11,213.74 69.82 2. Housing/Settlement area 2,951.44 18.38 3. Hospitals 13.10 0.08 4. Government land properties 339.72 2.12 5. Commercial/Business area 278.42 1.73 6. Secondary forest 411.17 2.56 7. Golf court 56.19 0.35 8. Sport area 13.22 0.08 9. Vacant (unused/cleared land) & dry fields 334.83 2.08 10. Mangrove 174.27 1.09 11. Natural/semi-natural forest 156.37 0.97 12. Cemetery 4.36 0.03 13. Bush (shrubbery) 21.51 0.13 14. River & canals (water body) 77.03 0.48 15. Road/Boulevard 15.68 0.10 Total 160.61 100.00The city is traversed by rivers and canals (Fig. 4.4). Six of 21 rivers flowing into ManadoBay (Bailang, Maasing, Malalayang, Sario, Tondano, and Wusa/Paniki rivers) crossthrough the city with various widths, lengths, and depths. Catchment areas of the rivers andtributaries are predominantly used for various human activities, for instance agriculture,housing, and commercial activities (Table 4.3). This causes the rivers to become narrowersince such activities are growing and, therefore, need more space. In addition, the riversand canals are important components of water and wastewater drainage.The source of water flowing through the rivers, except S. Maasing, is from the upland areaoutside Minahasa Regency, i.e., from 3 volcanic mountains (Klabat, Lokon, and Mahawu)and a watershed (Tondano watershed) with lake Tondano. The majority of the city area(29.2 km2) is part of this watershed. The number of the city’s people/households, as part ofthe watershed, is shown in Table 3.1, p. 26.The watershed extends across an area of 510.0 km2 from an elevation of 680 m above sealevel (ASL) at the lake of Tondano (covering an area of 46.8 km2), descending graduallytowards the northeast to Manado Bay through the Tondano River as the widest river withthe highest amount of water (Fig. 4.5). During 1985-1995, the monthly discharge of waterfrom Lake Tondano through the Tondano River ranged from 5 to 22 m3/sec and the yearlyaverage was 14-17 m3/sec. In 1999, the average annual discharge was about 15 m3/sec withmaximums and minimums of about 16 m3/sec in January and 13 m3/sec in September,respectively (JICA, 2000). 36
  • Figure 4.5 Tondano Watershed with Manado City areaThe area of the city is influenced by a tropical climate with two different seasons, dry(May to October) and rainy (November to April). The information collected from theStation of Meteorology & Geophysics, Kayuwatu, Manado, shows that annualprecipitation is about 2,000-2,400 mm with a monthly average of 250.8 mm and amaximum and minimum of 407 mm (January) and 75 mm (August) during 1991-2000. Thenumber of days with rain is 90-120 days. Humidity varies from year to year; averagehumidity in 1997, 1998 and 1999 was 77.08, 86.17 and 85.40%. Average annualtemperature (1994-2000) is about 26.11 oC with a maximum and minimum of 26.8 and25.4 oC, respectively (Fig. 4.6). In 2003, the annual temperature during the daytime was29.4 to 32.2 oC and during the night-time was 21.6 to 23.2 oC. The maximum air 37
  • temperature was in September (32.2 oC) and the minimum was in September-October (21.6o C) (BPSKM, 2003).The marine part of the coastal area is located around Bunaken; it is one of the importantareas in the Sulu-Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion Program (Miclat et al., 2006). Bunaken is anational marine park (BNMP) declared in Decree No. 730/KPTS-II from the Ministry ofForestry (MoF) of Indonesia in 1991. The park covers 790.56 km2 of coastal land andmarine waters that consist of two parts; at the northern part are 5 islands (Bunaken,Manado Tua, Siladen, Mantehage, and Nain), and the southern part includes the coastlinealong the main island of northern Sulawesi, i.e., an area of 169.06 km2 (Fig. 4.7). The areahas a potential for tourism activity (snorkelling and diving) as it has wide areas of coralreefs and a high biodiversity of marine organisms. The islands (especially Nain Island)have a potential for seaweed cultivation and artisanal fishery. In 1996, the production offish was about 6,181.9 ton (DPPSU, 1994). Some parts of the BNMP area (including theislands of Bunaken, Manado Tua, and Siladen) administratively belong to the city whilethe others to the regency of Minahasa.Table 4.3 Rivers and Predominant Land Use a Long the Rivers Watershed No Rivers Villages/Districts/Sub-district of passing by Predominant land uses 1. Kima Lapangan, Mapanget Barat, Kima Atas, Housing, agriculture Desa Bengkol, Pandu 2. Kima Oki (branch) Paniki Bawah, Lapangan, Kima Atas Agriculture 3. Wusa (branch) Kima Agriculture 4. Tona/Kualatona Kel. Tongkaina Agriculture 5. Molas Molas Housing, agriculture 6. Meras Meras Agriculture 7. Bailang* Buha, Singkil, Tuminting, Tumumpa Agriculture, housing 8. Paniki* Paniki Dua Housing, agriculture 9. Mapanget (branch) Paniki Bawah, Kairagi Dua, Buha, Bengkol, Agriculture, housing Bailang, Tumumpa 10. Maasing* Singkil, Kampung Islam, Bitung Karang Housing Ria 11. Tondano* Kairagi Weru, Paal Dua, Dendengan Luar, Housing, agriculture, Komo Luar, Pinaesaan, Istiqlal, Calaca commercial 12. Tikala/ Sawangan Ranomuut, Tikala Baru, Tikala Ares, Komo Agriculture, housing, (branch) Luar commercial 13. Kumaraka Teling Atas, Teling Baru Housing 14. Sario* Pakowa, Ranotana Weru, Sario Kota Baru, Commercial, housing, Sario Utara agriculture 15. Wanea (brach) Teling Atas, Tanjung Batu, Sario Kotabaru Housing 16. Ranotana Karombasan, Ranotana, Sario Tumpaan, Commercial, housing Sario Utara 17. Malalayang* Winangun, Kleak, Bahu Housing 18. Lumondonga Malalayang I Housing, agriculture 19. Rano Pasu Malalayang I Housing, agriculture 20. Wanikus Malalayang I Housing, agriculture 21. Kolongan Malalayang I, Malalayang II Agriculture, housing, agriculture* Crossing through the city to Manado BaySource: The land use map analysis 1997, Land Use Management Section, Land Management Office, Manado. 38
  • 50 27 Rainfall (cm) Temp (oC) 40 26.5 Temperature (oC) Rainfall (cm) 30 26 20 25.5 10 0 25 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 4.6 Average annual rainfall (1991-2000) and temperature (1994-2000)4.2 Classification of the CityThe city of Manado is the capital city of the North Sulawesi Province of Indonesia. It isclassified as a medium-sized developing city consisting of urban and rural areas. It consistsof 3 categories of areas, such as urban, urban-rural (mixed urban and rural), and ruralareas. The classification is based on population density, percentage of households workingin agriculture, and access to public facilities that are considered urban (BPSPSU, 2001).Before 1999, the city did not yet have the agglomeration of a big city, but it had adistribution of population at the level of a city and showed the potential to become a citywith developing urban areas. Hence, it was designated as a city after 1999 under theIndonesian Law (IL) No. 22, whereas formerly it was as a municipality. A city, as definedby Cappon (1990, cf Haughton and Hunter, 1995), usually requires at least 10,000residents. In 2005, the population was about 429,000 individuals (BPSKM, 2006).Before 2001, the city administratively consisted of 5 districts (Molas, Wenang, Mapanget,Sario, Malalayang, and Wanea) and 68 sub-districts. Since 2001, it has consisted of 9districts (Kecamatan) and 87 sub-districts (Kelurahan). The present districts are Bunaken,Malalayang, Mapanget, Sario, Singkil, Tikala, Tuminting, Wanea, and Wenang. Thedistribution of the districts in the city is shown in Fig. 4.8 where the district of Molas wasdivided into 3 districts, Tuminting, Bunaken, and Singkil, while the district of Wenang wasdivided into 2 districts, Wenang and Tikala. In addition, the districts that include ruralareas are Malalayang and Mapanget. 39
  • Figure 4.7 Bunaken National Marine Park (BNMP)4.3 Socio-Economic AspectsSocio-economic aspects are considered closely related to wastewater production andmanagement because a large number of people may generate a large amount ofwastewater; also the low economic and social (employment) status of a community mayinfluence the management measures. 40
  • 41 Figure 4.8 Administrative of Manado with 9 districts 41
  • 4.3.1 Social aspect• PopulationIn 1990, the population of Manado was approximately 320,600 individuals, and in 2000 itwas 418,000 individuals with 81,892 households. The population growth rate in the cityduring the years 1990-2000 was 3.40% per year. The population density in 1998 was about2,637 individuals per km2 comprising 15.15% of North Sulawesis total population(BPSPSU, 1998) and 2,584 individuals per km2 in 2003 (BPSKM, 2003). The citypopulation grew to 419,688 in 2003, distributed into the districts and sub-districts as shownin Table 4.4. However, in 2005, the population was about 429,000 individuals with 2,656individuals per km2 of density (BPSKM, 2006).Table 4.4 Population and Density of Manado in 2003 No. Districts Number of sub-districts Population1 Density (individual/ha) 1. Bunaken2 4 8 21,712 4.2 2. Malalayang 9 54,544 31.7 3. Mapanget 11 49,500 8.4 4. Sario 7 26,649 183.8 5. Singkil4 9 46,865 120.5 6. Tikala5 12 70,867 42.2 7. Tuminting4 10 49,648 101.5 8. Wanea 9 58,367 521.1 9. Wenang3 5 12 41,536 148.3 Total 87 419,6881 based on district data2 4 sub-districts in Bunaken Island and 4 sub-districts in the mainland3 including small market4 formerly included in the district of Molas5 formerly included in the district of WenangSource: RTI, 2004In 2000, the ratio between males and females of the city was 1.01:1, likewise in 2005(BPSKM, 2006). The ratio between the population living in urban and in rural areas was12.96:1. Moreover, from the survey done in this study, in the Wenang district, thepopulation of 20-60 year olds and >60 years old was 68.1% and 17.4%, respectively, whilein the Molas district it was 79.7% and 16.0%, respectively. However, there was noinformation for 14.5% in Wenang and 4.3% in Molas (Table 4.5).• EducationIn 1999, 365,988 individuals were educated from primary (elementary) school up topostgraduate university (BPSKM, 2000). There were a number of people at 10 years of age(867 individuals) who had not yet attained any education. Usually, the age of enteringpreliminary school is 6 years old. The highest number educated individuals were from thehigh school level (134,061 individuals). From the socio-economic survey of households(for the head of the family) in the study sites of Molas (SS 1) with 304 respondents andWenang districts (SS 2) with 300 respondents in the two age groups of 20-60 year olds and 42
  • >60 years old it showed that there were found people (2.6% and 13.3%, respectively) whoonly graduated from primary school. Most of the people graduated from high school(61.5% and 53.7%, respectively), while for the universities it was 27.3% and 13.7%,respectively.• EmploymentThere were 344,251 persons in the age of employment (>15 years old) in 2003. However,only 157.654 (45.80%) of them were employed (at least 1 hour continuously working perday) of which 31.10% were in the service sector, 30.06% in trade, 12.96% in construction,and 10.86% in transportation and communication sectors (BPSKM, 2003). In 2000 therewere only 36,204 individuals unemployed (Mokat, 2003). In Wenang and Molas districts,most of the people worked in the private sector (70.7% and 74.7%, respectively) and ascivil servants of government offices (26.0% and 21.7%, respectively) (Table 4.5).• Religions and ethnicityAll Indonesians, according to the constitution, must have their own religion. There are 5official religions in Indonesia; they are Islam, Christian Protestant, Christian Catholic,Hinduism, and Buddhism. Besides, there are many ethnic groups recorded in Manado,which were distributed among the 5 districts. The ethnic groups are Minahasa, Sangir,Gorontalo, Jawa, Bolaang Mongondow, Bantik, Ambon, Tonsea, and others whichincludes the Chinese (BPSKM, 2000).4.3.2 Economic aspectIn general, the economic activities of the city are increasing as indicated by the rapidincrease in the number of commercial buildings (hotels, restaurants, malls, and others) andtourism activities. The average economic growth of the city was about 22.57% over theperiod of 1995-2000 (BPSKM, 2000). Agriculture, the manufacturing industry, hotels andrestaurant sectors were growing at a stable and significant rate. The increase in the numberof industries followed the increase in agriculture production.Tourism is one of the city’s assets for development to increase primary city monetaryincome. In the period of 1995-2000, tourism grew at an average of 16.15% per year forinternational tourists with 349,028 individuals, and 42% per year for domestic tourists with1,714,454 individuals. Although the number of tourists decreased in 1997 due to theeconomic crisis, domestic tourism increased 22.55% by the end of 2000. The BNMP is oneof the most promising assets for the development of a tourism destination (BPSPSU,1999). However, the increase of economic activities in general is followed by thedevelopment of tourism infrastructure and facilities (hotels, restaurants, cottages) (Shatkin,2007), which may threaten the coastal marine environment, since these activities produce asignificant amount of wastewater, especially as most of the infrastructures are built close tothe coast.The growing economic activity may improve the monetary income of the city. In general,the annual income per capita of the city during the period of 1993-1997 showed asignificant monthly increase from Rp. 1,615,241 to Rp. 1,940,146 (BPSPSU, 1997), whilein 2001 it was Rp. 1,824,310. The growth rate of income was 1.80% per year (BPSPSU,2001). However, this was not enough to support the daily life of a household as 22,515 43
  • households (27.49%) were categorized as poor in 2000 (Mokat, 2003). For the Molas andWenang districts (with 304 and 300 respondents, respectively), the proportion ofhouseholds with incomes under Rp. 1 million per month was quite high (65.5% and 68.7%,respectively) and that with more than Rp. 1 million was low (16.2% and 15.6%,respectively) (Table 4.6). The income is either from their employment in a privatecompany (small-scale economic activity), such as small auto/cycle repair shops and othernon-formal sectors, or from their employment as civil servants with the local government.Table 4.5 The Result of Household Surveys on Socio-Economic Parameters (%) Variables Wenang Districts Molas Districts N=304 N=300 Age group (years): 20-60 68.1 79.7 >60 17.4 16.0 No information 14.5 4.3 Employment: Private company 70.7 74.7 Civil Servant 26.0 21.7 Unemployed 1.6 No data No information 1.6 3.7 Income per montha: <Rp. 1,000,000 64.5 68.7 >1,000,001 16.2 15.6 No information 19.4 15.7 Level of education: Primary school (6-11 years old) 2.6 13.3 Secondary school (12-14 years old) 8.2 19.0 High school (15-17 years old) 61.5 53.7 University graduate (>17 years old) 27.3 13.7 No information 0.3 0.3 Number of person in a households to be responsible: 0-2 36.8 28.7 3-4 36.8 40.0 5-6 13.5 18.3 7-8 2.0 6.0 9-10 1.0 1.7 No information 9.9 0.3 House status: Owner 81.6 82.7 Family 0.0 4.7 Rent 18.4 12.7 No information 0.0 0.0a 1 US$ = Rp. 8,5004.4 Government Institutional ArrangementSince January 2000, when the Act of the Republic of Indonesia No. 22 of 1999 about localautonomy was implemented, a city or a regency government has been given its ownauthority to manage the resources found within its borders and also, to rearrangeinstitutions to adequately support management and to produce suitable regulations locally. 44
  • At the present time, however, the responsibility for waste management is divided amongseveral institutions, and no laws or regulations have been implemented at the local level forwastewater management.In the city of Manado, the Environmental Management Board (EMB) is the only institutionresponsible for the management of wastewater (liquid waste) and this function is separatedfrom the Cleaning Management Board (CMB) that has the responsibility for themanagement of solid wastes. Both institutions are under the Mayors Office. The CityCompany for the Market is the technical agency responsible for solid waste managementwithin the market area.Table 4.6 Number of Tourists Visiting the Bunaken National Marine Park (BNMP) in 2001-2006 Year Tourism Total International National 2001 5,194 9,872 15,066 2002 8,262 17,435 25,697 2003 8,166 31,017 39,183 2004 9,826 28,178 38,004 2005 10,448 20,587 31,035 2006 10,229 22,050 32,279 Total 52,125 129,139 181,264 Percentage 32 68 100Source: BNMP (pers. comm)At the provincial level of North Sulawesi, the Provincial Agency of Environmental ImpactControl Board (PAEICB) has the function of implementing the coordination of themanagement and control of pollution, including the marine environment, for the cities andregencies in the province. At the national level, the National Agency for EnvironmentalImpact Management (NAEIM) is responsible for implementing pollution control, includingthe marine environment, as well as for managing the environmental impact assessment(EIA) process in the country under the supervision of the Ministry of Environment (MoE).Separate ministerial decrees exist on wastewater quality standards for various sectors(industries, hotels, hospitals, petrochemical activities). Integrated Coastal Management(ICM) is the responsibility of the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries and thus hasbeen focused mainly on natural resource management (Christie, 2005).4.5 Policies, Strategies, and ActionsSome measures of environmental management related to wastes and wastewater have beenestablished at the national level in Agenda 21 of Indonesia (period of 1998-2020)(Anonymous, 1996a), as well as at the provincial level in Agenda 21 of North SulawesiProvince (Bapedal-Sulut, 2003). The strategies for wastewater management at theprovincial level mentioned in Agenda 21 of North Sulawesi Province are to increase publicservice and improve the wastewater treatment facilities. The planned actions to increasethe public service include establishing a central wastewater treatment system as a long-term prospective, and improving the current wastewater treatment systems over short andintermediate terms, both for individual and communal facilities. Establishing a central 45
  • wastewater treatment system with appropriate technology for households in denselypopulated areas will be included in the future action plan to improve wastewater treatmentfacilities (Bapedal-Sulut, 2003). However, in the city of Manado few measures have beenestablished, and only in a partial sense, as tactical actions for short-term periods (Tamon,2003). 46
  • Chapter 5 Community’s Environmental Knowledge and AttitudeThis chapter describes the results of the study on the status of the community’senvironmental knowledge and attitude (concern and preference) related to the wastewaterdischarge of the two selected districts of Molas and Wenang in the city of Manado. Thecommunity’s participation and willingness to pay for wastewater management were alsodiscussed.5.1 IntroductionCoastal areas are being threatened by anthropogenic pressures due to land-based activitiesand pollution-causing wastewater from developmental activities in cities. This situation is ageneral phenomenon in most tropical developing countries, including Indonesia. Oneapproach to prevent and mitigate such a situation is to involve the local community whichcan play an important role in the management, for instance community-based coastalmanagement (Hildebrand, 1997). An example of that is a community-based wastemanagement and environmental quality management program applied in the coastal city ofJakarta to prevent and mitigate degradation of the coastal area of Jakarta Bay (Nur et al.,2001).Like other coastal areas in Indonesia, Manado Bay (Fig. 1.1) is facing variousenvironmental problems due to wastewater discharge from the city of Manado. Themajority of wastewater from the city is discharged without any treatment; therefore, it ispredicted to cause contamination to canals and rivers flowing through the city and causefurther impact on the community’s health (Table 4.5). To overcome the problem,improvement to the exiting wastewater management of the city is urgently needed toprevent the wastewater impacts. But, it could not be done if the city’s community has alack of awareness and is without adequate involvement and participation. This was one ofthe identified issues related to wastewater management in the city.This study aims to evaluate the community’s environmental knowledge and attitude(concern and preference), and to discuss the community’s participation and willingness tofinancially contribute to wastewater management in the coastal city of Manado. Findingsfrom this study could be used to formulate recommendations for further measures toimprove the current management in the city, and as a case study of how a tropical coastalcity in Indonesia can involve the community in addressing wastewater problems.5.2 Research MethodologyThis study was conducted in the two study sites (SS) of Molas Districts (SS 1) and WenangDistricts (SS 2) in the city of Manado (Fig. 1.1). The general research methodology andgeneral description of the study area have been presented in Chapter 3 and 4, respectively.This study was set up to evaluate some aspects as seen below: 47
  • Aspect of study Basis of study Environmental Environmental attitude knowledge concern preference Household level √ √ Personal level √ √ √: aspect evaluated5.2.1 Community’s environmental knowledgeThe environmental knowledge of the communities was described using degree ofknowledge (DK), which was assessed by using a questionnaire for interviewing. The datawere collected through surveys which were done in households (questions were given tothe head of a household). Two topics, consisting of several focus questions, were given tothe respondents to be answered. The first topic was ‘knowledge of general issues aboutenvironment and pollution; it consisted of 4 focused questions, such as (i) the terminologyof ‘environment and pollution, (ii) pollution in the coastal area, (iii) toxic substancescausing pollution, and (iv) why toilets should be used. The second topic was ‘knowledge ofenvironmental issues related to wastewater. This consisted of 3 focus questions, such as (i)pollution of potable water due to wastewater discharge, (ii) wastewater discharge causingdisease, and (iii) diseases (example: diarrhoea) caused by wastewater from toilets(Appendix 1).The basic principle of this technique was to find out whether the community knows ordoes not know the answers of the questions given. The numbers of ‘know’ answers werethen counted; the results of each of the focus questions were described as a percentage, andalso aggregated values (AV: mean value of the focused question percentages) were alsocalculated. Then, the DK of each of the topics was measured based on the averagepercentage of the aggregated values obtained.An ordinal scale was applied to measure the DK which was constructed as follows: Degree of environmental knowledge (DK) 0 - 33% 34 - 66% 67 - 100% Low Middle High5.2.2 Community’s environmental attitude• Community’s concernThe environmental concern of communities was described using ‘degree of concern’ (DC).Two topics were focused, namely (a) the community’s concern about generalenvironmental conditions and impacts, and (b) the community’s concern aboutenvironmental conditions and impacts related to wastewater discharge. Six focusedquestions were arranged for the first topic (point a): (i) solid waste discharge, (ii) toxicwaste discharge, (iii) community health conditions, (iv) local environmental conditions, (v)local air pollution, and (vi) environmental destruction in coastal areas. Six focusedquestions were arranged for the second topic (point b): (i) local potable water pollution, (ii)pollution in coastal areas, (iii) toilet conditions and facilities, (iv) sewerage conditions and 48
  • facilities, (v) wastewater-caused diseases, and (vi) pollution caused by wastewaterdischarge (Appd. 2). This aspect was described on a personal level, meaning that questionswere given to respondents in person. The DC, described in 5 levels (‘very concerned’,‘concerned’, ‘somewhat concerned’, ‘less concerned’, and ‘not concerned’), was calculatedas percentage answers of respondents. The aggregated value (AV) of each topic as thepercentage of the DC was obtained.A graphic rating scale was applied in order to measure the DC. Using this scale peoplewere asked to indicate their concerns with the listed items. As an example:On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate your concern about the items listed? (E.g.,problems caused by wastewater quality) Degree of concern (DC) Very high degree of Very low degree of concern ‘somewhat ‘less concern ‘very concerned’ ‘concerned’ concerned’ concerned’ ‘not concerned’ 1 2 3 4 5• Community’s preferenceThe preference of the community was described using ‘strength of preference’ (SP). It wasfocused on 3 topics, namely (1) related to the government’s responsibility, (2) related tothe community’s responsibility, and (3) the responsibility of all parties in the city. The firsttopic focused on 2 questions, namely (i) the government is the only party that hasresponsibility, and (ii) no funds should be collected from the community. The second topicfocused on 2 questions, namely (i) the community is the only party that has responsibility,and (ii) funds must be collected from the community. The third topic focused on 3questions, namely (i) all parties must have the responsibility for environmental qualityimprovement, and (ii) funds can be collected from the community and other parties, and(iii) the government should improve environmental conditions and wastewater treatmentfacilities (Appd. 1 & 2). This study was conducted on two levels: household and personal.The SP was calculated as the percentage answers of respondents. Aggregated value (AV)of each topic was then calculated.The graphic rating scale was also applied in order to measure the SP. Using this scalepeople were asked to indicate their preference. Due to different techniques used betweenthe household surveys using interviews and the personal surveys using questionnaires, thepreferences are described below:• For household level:On a scale of 1 to 2, how would you rate your strength of preference about the itemslisted? (E.g., the government may take funds from the community to solve wastewaterproblem) Strength of preference (SP) ‘agree’ ‘disagree’ 1 2 49
  • • For personal level:On a scale of 1 to 4, how would you rate your strength of preference about the itemslisted? (E.g., the government may take funds from the community to solve wastewaterproblems) Strength of preference (SP) Very high strength of preference Very low strength of preference ‘very agree’ ‘agree’ ‘agree less’ ‘disagree’ 1 2 3 4All the data were collected between August 2002 and June 2003. The data were obtainedthrough interviews with households and individuals using questionnaires covering theselected topics (App. 3 & 4). Sample size was determined according to Slovin (1960, cf.Sevilla et al., 1988) and the stratified random sampling method (Steel and Torrie, 1980)was applied (Table 3.3a & b). In the attitude aspect study, statistical modes were calculatedto conclude the results and their statistical significance was analyzed using the Chi-square(χ2)-test (Steel & Torrie, 1980).5.3 Results and Discussion5.3.1 Community’s environmental knowledgeTable 5.1 shows the degree of knowledge (DK) of the communities in Molas and Wenangdistricts. On the general issue about the environment and pollution, the DK was at a‘middle’ degree (AV= 49%) in Wenang and at a ‘low’ degree (AV= 27.3%) in the Molasdistrict. On this topic, the community knowledge on ‘why toilets should be used?’ was‘high’ for both districts, Wenang (AV= 96.7%) and Molas (AV= 93.0%). This indicatesthat people in both districts knew enough to use toilets for their personal wastes. At thesame time, the DK on the ‘environmental issues related to wastewater’ was ‘high’ in bothdistricts as the AV showed 88.8% for Wenang and 80.0% for Molas. However, theknowledge about wastewater impact on potable water was ‘middle’ (AV= 44.7%) forWenang and ‘low’ (AV= 29.7%) for Molas. This might be because of a lack of informationon the origin of drinking water for their daily consumption.The community’s knowledge on the terminology of ‘environment’ and ‘pollution’ is basicknowledge for the communities to be able to describe what they are facing every day. Byknowing these terms, people should realize how important the environment is for theirlives and how important it is to keep it clean. The DK seen in these districts probablyreflects the environmental condition of the districts. However, it is also closely related withthe level of education and how far such information is spread within the community.5.3.2 Community’s environmental attitudeTwo aspects of environmental attitudes were measured in the present study, they being thecommunity’s concerns related to general environmental issues and environmentalproblems caused by wastewater (Topic 1), and community’s preference for solvingenvironmental problems related to wastewater discharges (Topic 2). 50
  • • Community’s concernThe DC of the communities in Molas and Wenang districts is shown in Table 5.2 and 5.3.Based on the statistical mode, the communities in both districts were in the ‘concerned’level to the Topic 1 with AV of 47.5% in Wenang and 61.4% in Molas districts. However,there were some respondents that had the level of ‘less concerned’ (AV= 3.6% in Wenangand AV= 2.1% in Molas) as well as no response to the questions in Wenang (AV= 0.7%)(Table 5.2). In each of the focus questions, the statistical mode felt the DC of ‘veryconcerned’, ‘concerned’, and ‘some what concerned’ for the questions of ‘toxic wastedischarge’, but it was statistically not significant. A similar result was also shown for Topic2, which had the AV of 57.6% for Wenang and 56.6% for Molas (Table 5.3).These results reflect the existing situations and conditions of the city’s environment. Allthe issues (Topic 1 and 2) may influence their daily activities, as the impacts are directed tothem.Table 5.1 Degree of Knowledge (DK) of Community (at household level) about General Environmental Issues and Issues Related to Wastewater Topics and focus of questions Percentage of answers No ‘know’ ‘do not know’ answer Topic 1: Knowledge on the general issue of environment and pollution: • Terminology of ‘environment and pollution. a 60.2 39.8 0.0 b 34.0 66.0 0.0 • Pollution in coastal area a 45.1 54.9 0.0 b 40.7 59.3 0.0 • Toxic substance pollution a 41.8 57.9 0.3 b 20.7 79.3 0.0 • Why toilet should be used a 96.7 3.3 0.0 b 93.0 7.0 0.0 Aggregated value (AV) a 49.0 ts 51.0 ts 0.0 b 27.3 ss 72.7 ss 0.0 Topic 2: Knowledge on environmental issues related to wastewater: • Pollution of potable water due to wastewater a 44.7 55.3 0.0 discharge b 29.7 70.3 0.0 • Wastewater discharge causes disease a 99.3 0.7 0.0 b 98.3 1.7 0.0 • Diseases (example: diarrhoea) were caused by a 85.9 14.1 0.0 wastewater from toilet b 77.7 22.3 0.0 Aggregated value (AV) a 88.8 ss 11.2 ss 0.0 b 80.0 ss 20.0 ss 0.0 a Wenang district (N=304); b Molas district (N=300); N: respondent ts not significant; ss highly significant Degrees of knowledge (DK): low: 0-33%; middle: 34-66%; high: 67-100% 51
  • Table 5.2 Degree of Concern (DC) of Community (at Personal Level) about General Environmental Conditions and Impacts (Topic 1) Focus of questions Percentage of answers No Mode 1 2 3 4 5 Answer • Solid waste discharge a 35.3 41.7 15.8 2.9 4.3 0.0 2 ss b 40.7 26.9 21.4 8.3 2.1 0.7 1 ss • Toxic waste discharge a 23.0 18.0 25.9 15.1 13.7 4.3 3 ns b 26.9 42.8 19.3 3.4 2.1 5.5 2 ss • Community’s health condition a 34.5 41.7 16.5 3.6 2.2 1.4 2 ss b 34.5 36.6 17.2 6.2 2.8 2.8 2s • Local environmental condition a 33.8 44.6 17.3 2.2 1.4 0.7 2 ss b 44.1 38.6 11.7 3.4 2.1 0.0 1s • Local air pollution a 20.9 38.1 23.0 11.5 5.0 1.4 2 ss52 b 40.7 33.8 17.9 5.5 1.4 0.7 1 ss • Environmental destruction in coastal areas a 28.8 25.2 30.9 6.5 4.3 4.3 3 ns b 50.3 26.2 15.9 6.2 1.4 0.0 1 ss Aggregated value (AV) a 15.8 47.5 32.4 3.6 0.0 0.7 2ss b 23.4 61.4 13.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 2ss Degree of concern (DC): 1: ‘very concerned’; 2: ‘concerned’; 3: ‘somewhat concerned’; 4: ‘less concerned’; 5: ‘not concerned’ a Wenang District (N=139); b Molas District (N=145) ns not significant; s significant; ss highly significant 52
  • Table 5.3 Degree of Concern (DC) of Community (at Personal Level) about Environmental Conditions and Impacts Related to Wastewater Discharge (Topic 2) Focus of questions Percentage of answers No Mode 1 2 3 4 5 Answer • Local potable water pollution a 33.1 41.7 16.5 2.2 5.8 0.7 2 ss b 47.6 28.3 13.8 5.5 4.8 0.0 1 ss • Pollution in coastal areas a 28.1 28.8 29.5 8.6 2.9 2.2 3 ns b 35.9 37.9 15.2 8.3 1.4 1.4 2 ns • Toilet facilities condition a 36.0 38.8 13.7 5.8 3.6 2.2 2 ns b 40.7 35.9 15.9 2.8 4.1 0.7 1s • Sewerage facilities condition a 40.3 35.3 16.5 3.6 2.9 1.4 1s b 29.7 44.1 18.6 4.8 2.1 0.7 2 ss53 a 32.4 41.7 22.3 0.7 2.2 0.7 2 ss • Wastewater-caused diseases b 42.8 31.7 10.3 7.6 4.8 2.8 1 ss a 30.9 40.3 23.7 2.9 0.7 1.4 2 ss • Pollution caused by wastewater discharge b 24.1 38.6 22.8 8.3 3.4 2.8 2 ss Aggregated value (AV) a 18.0 57.6 20.9 3.6 0.0 0.0 2 ss b 20.7 56.6 18.6 3.4 0.0 0.7 2 ss Degree of concern (DC): 1: ‘very concerned’; 2: ‘concerned’; 3: ‘somewhat concerned’; 4: ‘less concerned’; 5: ‘not concerned’ A: Wenang District (N=139); b: Molas District (N=145) ns not significant; s significant; ss highly significant 53
  • Table 5.4 Community’s (Household Level) Preference regarding Problem Solving of Environmental Issues, including Wastewater Problems Focus of questions Percentage of answers No Modus 1 2 answer Government’s responsibility: • Government is the only party that has responsibility a 6.9 92.8 0.3 b 4.3 94.7 1.0 • No fund is collected from community a 55.9 42.8 1.3 b 83.0 16.0 1.0 Aggregated value a 5.3 94.4 0.3 2ss b 5.0 94.3 0.7 2ss Community’s responsibility: • Community is the only party that has responsibility a 3.6 96.1 0.3 b 1.3 97.7 1.0 • Funds must be collected from community a 65.1 33.2 1.6 b 29.0 70.0 1.0 Aggregated value a 3.0 96.7 0.3 2ss54 b 0.7 98.7 0.7 2ss All parties’ responsibility: • All parties must have responsibility for environmental quality a 98.7 1.0 0.3 improvement b 98.3 0.7 1.0 • Funds can be collected from community and other parties, and government a 71.7 27.3 1.0 will improve environmental condition and wastewater treatment facilities b 56.3 42.7 1.0 Aggregated value a 72.0 27.6 0.3 1ss b 56.0 43.3 0.7 1ss 1: ‘agree’; 2: ‘disagree’; a: Wenang District (N=304); b: Molas District (N=300); ss highly significant 54
  • Table 5.5 Community’s Preference (Personal Level) on Problem Solving of Environmental Issue, including Wastewater Focus of questions Percentage of answers No Modus 1 2 3 4 Answer Government’s responsibility: • Government is the only party that has responsibility a 5.8 10.8 49.6 33.1 0.7 b 22.1 29.0 21.4 25.5 2.1 • No fund is collected from community a 19.4 37.4 29.5 10.1 3.6 b 24.8 40.0 22.1 10.3 2.8 Aggregated value a 3.6 20.1 59.0 17.3 0.0 3ss b 2.1 47.6 33.8 14.5 2.1 2ss Community’s responsibility: • Community is the only party that has responsibility a 5.0 7.2 41.0 45.3 1.4 b 9.7 18.6 34.5 35.2 2.1 • Funds must be collected from community a 5.0 16.5 50.4 25.9 2.2 b 12.4 17.9 30.3 36.6 2.8 Aggregated value a 4.3 5.0 43.2 46.8 0.7 4ss55 b 4.1 17.2 38.6 39.3 0.7 4ss All parties’ responsibility: • All parties must have responsibility for environmental quality improvement a 66.2 30.9 2.2 2.2 0.7 b 39.3 42.1 15.9 2.1 0.7 • Funds can be collected from community and other parties, and government a 8.6 25.9 43.9 18.7 2.9 will improve environmental condition and wastewater treatment facilities b 13.8 27.6 20.7 36.6 1.4 Aggregated value a 10.1 48.9 38.8 1.4 0.7 2ss b 4.8 44.8 42.1 7.6 0.7 2ss 1: ‘very agree’; 2: ‘agree’; 3: ‘agree less’; 4: ‘disagree’; a: Wenang District (N=139); b: Molas District (N=145); ss high significant 55
  • • Community’s preferenceTable 5.4 shows the community’s preference (at the household level) regarding theproblem solving of environmental issues, including wastewater problems. People have apositive attitude towards the solving of environmental problems including wastewater asmost of the households ‘disagreed’ with the statement that wastewater problems are eitherfully a government or fully a community responsibility. Most of the households ‘agreed’(preferred) that all parties (government, community, private sector, etc.) have the samelevel of responsibility to address wastewater problems. Also, they ‘agreed’ that thegovernment may collect funds from the community for improving the quality ofwastewater infrastructure and facilities.Individual (personal) responses to solve the environmental problems including wastewaterproblems were also positive (Table 5.5). Most people personally preferred that all partiesshould take responsibility for environmental quality improvement. They also agreed thatfunds can be collected from the community and other parties for the government toimprove environmental conditions and wastewater treatment facilities.5.3.3 Willingness to be charged (willingness to pay)The implementation of wastewater management cannot be separated from financialaspects. Sources of funds are an issue of whether it is fully from a government (subsidy),fully from a community (tax, retribution), or a combination of those.The household and personal surveys showed that most people agreed to be charged(willingness to pay) to address wastewater problems (Table 5.4 & 5.5). This means thatfunds can be collected from the community and other parties in the city by the governmentto improve environmental conditions and wastewater treatment facilities. These situationswere probably related to the public awareness that people are concerned withenvironmental issues and wish to solve environmental issues including wastewaterproblems.5.3.4 Community’s participationThe participation of the community to be involved in a management program is a matter ofimportance as they may play a role as one of the subjects in the program. However,participation can only be achieved when power is shared (Hildebrand, 1997).In general, the participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in sustainabledevelopment in Indonesia occurs in several ways. They can be involved in collaborationsas one of the parties together with government and investors, community empowermentactivities, and environmental education (Fig. 5.1). Most of those relationships have beenestablished in coastal zone activities (Kumurur & Lasut, 2002).There are two types of community institutions addressing environmental anddevelopmental issues in the city of Manado. Some institutions are not limited by an areaand have free membership [for instance governmental organizations (NGOs)], and otherinstitutions are limited by area and have closed membership [for instance communityempowerment organizations (CEOs)]. Both institutions play an important role in the citydevelopment, functioning as a partner or giving suggestions to the government. This is 56
  • mostly the role of an NGO. The CEO, which is established in each of the districts in thecity, is a partner of the district’s government for developmental aspects as the governmentis the sponsor of the institution.In the city of Manado, no cases have been observed in which the community has taken aninitiative to prevent and mitigate the wastewater problems, except for spontaneous personalor household initiatives who have taken actions in regards to environmental problems.Moreover, such actions were mostly local, limited to where their homes are located. Province INFORMATION City -Technical Assist District -Education -Practical NGOs Sub-district Figure 5.1 Participation of NGOs in integrated coastal zone management activities (modified from Kumurur and Lasut, 2002) 57
  • Chapter 6 Condition and Capacity of Household Wastewater Treatment SystemsThis chapter describes the results of the study of the status of wastewater treatment systemconditions and capacities, the condition of wastewater infrastructures and facilities, andfactors affecting the conditions of wastewater treatment systems.6.1 IntroductionWastewater discharges from various sources may have implications for and impacts on theenvironment of a city. Those implications and impacts are mostly negative and maydegrade the quality of the environment and cause various significant environmentalproblems, for instance the outbreak of wastewater-transmitted diseases (Table 4.5).However, such impacts depend on the quantity and quality of the discharged wastewaterand both depend on many factors (e.g. source and type of wastewater discharge).In the city of Manado, untreated wastewater from most household activities (grey water) inmost cases, including toilets (black water) in some cases, is discharged directly intoManado Bay through ditches, sewers, canals, and rivers. Besides the presence ofwastewater-generating activities (restaurants, hotels, hospitals, garbage disposal, markets,etc.) located close to and along the rivers, the condition will be worse if the householdshave wastewater treatment systems in a poor or bad condition and of an inadequatecapacity, as well as having poor wastewater infrastructures and facilities (sewer system).The condition and capacity of the wastewater treatment system may play a significant rolein environmental degradation as well as that of health and hygiene in the coastal area; poorconditions may cause an outbreak of wastewater-transmitted diseases, and unsuitable/poorcapacity may cause leaking and spilling of wastewater into the area and further maydegrade the environment of the area.The condition and capacity of the residential wastewater treatment systems (septic tanks)and the condition of residential wastewater infrastructures and facilities (sewer systems) inthe city of Manado are unknown, regardless of the fact that such information is necessaryin the wastewater management of the city. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate thecondition and capacity of wastewater treatment systems (septic tanks) and wastewaterinfrastructures and facilities (sewer systems) at the household level (residential), and toinvestigate factors (socio-economic characteristics and community’s environmentalknowledge) affecting the condition of the wastewater treatment systems (septic tanks). Theinvestigation hypothesizes that the condition and capacity of wastewater treatment systems(septic tank) at household levels were correlated with socio-economic characteristics(household income per month, house status, level of education) and the degree of thecommunity’s environmental knowledge.6.2 Research MethodologyThis study was conducted in the two study sites (Molas and Wenang districts) in the city ofManado (Fig. 1.1). All data were collected between August 2002 and June 2003. Anindividual house (permanent, semi-permanent, or other) was the basic sample unit (Annex 58
  • 2) to design the sampling method with an assumption that every house has its ownwastewater treatment system (toilet with septic tank). Even though, a sample size of up to200 houses in each of the districts was considered sufficient for this study (Shivakoti, pers.comm), the sample size used in the wastewater treatment system (septic tank) conditionevaluation was 300 houses in Molas (SS 1) and 304 houses in Wenang (SS 2) (Table 3.2).The distribution of the samples is presented in Table 3.3 a & b. Among those, only 163 and169 houses in Molas and Wenang, respectively, were observed for wastewater treatmentsystem (septic tank) capacity evaluation; they were distributed in both study sites (Table6.1a & b). To quantify the measurement, a criterion was set up for each subject (Table 6.2;Appendix 5).For wastewater infrastructure and facilities (sewer system) evaluation, the facility (sewersystem) at an individual house was the basic sample unit (Annex 2). Except for thecriterion of quantities, the observation was conducted together with the wastewatertreatment system evaluation with the same study area, sample size and sampling method,(Table 6.2; Appendix 6).Table 6.1a Distribution of Sample Size in Molas District (SS 1) Used in Wastewater Treatment System (Septic Tank) Capacity Evaluation (n= Sample Size) No. Sub-districts Sample sizes (n=163) 1. Islam 15 2. Tuminting 20 3. Sumompo 15 4. Mahawu 20 5. Tumumpa Satu 18 6. Tumumpa Dua 15 7. Maasing 20 8. Bitung Karang ria 25 9. Sindulang Dua 15Table 6.1b Distribution of Sample Size in Wenang District (SS 2) Used in Wastewater Treatment System (Septic Tank) Capacity Evaluation (n= Sample Size) No. Sub-districts Sample Size (n= 169) 1. Istiqlal 13 2. Wenang Selatan 14 3. Mahakeret Timur 14 4. Teling Bawah 14 5. Komo Luar 14 6. Pinaesaan 13 7. Bumi Beringin 12 8. Mahakeret Barat 15 9. Wenang Utara 19 10. Lawangirung 19 11. Tikala Kumaraka 13 12. Calaca 9 59
  • At the same time, socio-economic characteristics (household income per month, housestatus, level of education) and the community’s environmental knowledge data wereobtained through household surveys (family level) along with interviews. The interviewsran using a questionnaire with relevant topics as issues. The way of obtaining the data ismentioned in Chapter 5.The data of the wastewater treatment system and wastewater infrastructure and facility(sewer system) evaluations were presented in percentage to describe their condition andcapacity, as well as the data of socio-economic characteristics to describe thecharacteristics of each aspect. The Chi-square (χ2)-test with 0.5% significance level (Steel& Torrie, 1980) was applied to analyze the significance of the results. The Pearson’scorrelation coefficient (PC) using Bivariate Correlations procedure was used to test thecorrelation between the independent variables (the socio-economic characteristics and thecommunity’s environmental knowledge) and the dependent variable (the condition ofwastewater treatment system). The computations were done using the SPSS® computerprogram.6.3 Results and Discussion6.3.1 Condition and capacity of wastewater treatment system (septic tank)In general, most constructions whether residential or commercial, have their ownwastewater disposal system for black water (wastewater from toilet), such as a toiletsystem with a septic tank. A wastewater treatment system for a cluster of homes is setup toserve several households in an area. However, no modern system with proper technologyhas been adopted for the residential treatment system in this area, only the conventionalmethod with one or two septic tanks using the gravity method. Besides, for low incomehouseholds, a deep hole, ditch, or river are still used. The latest is considered as the mainsource of wastewater in the city, as well as toilet and septic tank systems which are in poorcondition and have inadequate capacity.The study results on the conditions and capacities of wastewater treatment systems and thepresence of septic tanks observed during the present study at household levels in thedistricts of Molas (SS 1) and Wenang (SS 2), as well as Wanea districts for comparison,are shown in Table 6.3. The condition and capacity of the system varied from very good(vg) to very poor (vp). The ‘very poor’ (the septic-tank is leaking into residential wells andsewers) and ‘poor’ (using an open hole) conditions of septic tanks were observed in bothdistricts as well as the ‘adequate’, ‘good’, and ‘very good’ categories. In this study, acondition is categorised as ‘very good’ if the septic tanks consist of two compartments,have a closed hole (with lid), and are made of concrete or cement.There were also houses without septic tank facilities. The absence of septic tanks inWenang, Molas, and Wanea districts was found in 16.8%, 25.0%, and 14.7% of the houses,respectively (Table 6.3). In this case, the households probably use the communal septictank or sewers, canals, or rivers to directly discharge the contents from their toilets. It wasobserved in the Molas district that most of the public or communally-used toilets haveseptic tanks in poor condition. This was probably due to a lack of management, especiallya lack of finances for maintenance, and the lack of awareness of the users to keep themclean. 60
  • Table 6.2 Criteria for Condition and Capacity of Wastewater Treatment System (Septic Tank) and Wastewater Infrastructures and Facilities (Sewer system) Used in This Present Study Residential septic-tank Condition of infrastructures and facilities (sewer Criteria: Condition Capacity system) condition at house level 1. Very poor (Vp): leaking to sewer 1. With or without concrete/cement, littering by solid waste, no running water 2. Poor (Pr): open hole <1419.38 liters (< 5 years of use) 2. No concrete/cement, littering by solid waste, running water 3. Adequate (Aq): closed hole, no concrete/ cement 1419.38-1774.23 liters (5 to 10 years 3. With or without concrete/cement, no littering by of use) solid waste, no running water 4. Good (Gd): closed hole, concrete/cement, 1 >1774.23 liters (10 to 15 years of use) 4. With or without concrete/cement, with or without compartment littering by solid waste, running water61 5. Very good (Vg): closed hole, with 5. Concrete/cement, no littering by solid waste, concrete/cement, 2 running water. compartments Standard: 1 bedroom equal 1419.38 litres1; 1 bedroom consists of 2 persons 1 Feachem et al., (1983 cf Kusnoputranto, 1997) 61
  • Table 6.3 Condition, Capacity, and Presence of Residential Wastewater Treatment System (Septic-Tank) and Wastewater Infrastructures and Facilities (Sewer System). The Values are the Percentage of Houses Presence of Wenang District (n=304) Molas District (n=300) Wanea District/Tanjung Batu Sub-district (n=930)* residential septic- Yes 83.2 75.0 85.3 tank No 16.8 25.0 14.7 Criteria: Wastewater treatment Infrastructures and facilities Wastewater treatment system Wastewater treatment system system (septic-tank) (sewer system) condition at (septic-tank) capacity in (septic-tank) capacity in condition house level Wenang District (n=169) Molas District (n=163) Wenang Molas Wenang Molas Volume per Volume per Volume per Volume per District District District District bedroom person bedroom person (n=304) (n=300) (n=304) (n=300) Very poor (Vp) 12.2 4.3 8.2 2.3 Poor (Pr) 0.3 0.3 5.9 3.0 55.0 45.0 35.0 37.462 Adequate (Aq) - 0.7 2.0 3.3 11.8 11.2 10.4 9.8 Good (Gd) 15.1 23.3 4.9 38.0 33.1 43.9 54.6 52.8 Very good (Vg) 30.9 37.0 62.2 52.7 No information: 24.7 9.3 16.8 0.7 * PPLH-SDA (unpublished data) 62
  • Besides these conditions, most of the septic tanks of the city’s houses were categorized aspoor, regarding their capacity. The capacity of septic tanks is considered in relation to anon-technical aspect, such as the number of persons using the facility; while the presenceof the septic tank is considered to be related to the availability of available space (2x2 m)to a house. One standard to measure the appropriate capacity of a septic tank is to considerthat every 2 household occupants equivalent with 1419.38 litres of wastewater(Kusnoputranto, 1997).6.3.2 Condition of wastewater infrastructure and facilities (sewer system)None of the houses observed during the present study have grey water treatment systems.Seemingly, wastewater from bathrooms, kitchens, and other sources except septic tanks,were not considered by the residents to cause environmental problems. So, they had notconsidered it necessary to build such treatment facilities.The sewer system at the household level is an open channel system (open system). Table6.3 shows the condition of infrastructures & facilities (sewer system) at homes in twodistricts, Wenang and Molas. The conditions varied from very good (vg) to very poor (vp).62.2% of the houses in Wenang and 52.7% in Molas were with very good systems(concrete/cement, no littering of solid waste, running water conditions). However, thesewer condition was in very poor condition (with or without concrete/cement, littering ofsolid waste, no running water) in 8.2% of the houses in Wenang and 2.3% in Molas.This poor condition of the sewer systems may block the wastewater discharge (grey water)flowing into the ditches and canals which causes wastewater puddles. It is an unhygieniccondition promoting bad odors, rats, mosquitoes and other insects.6.3.3 Factors affecting the wastewater treatment system conditionThe socio-economic characteristics (household income, level of education, and housestatus) of the respondents in the study area, districts of Molas (SS 1) and Wenang (SS 2)are shown in Table 4.5 (p. 42). More than 50% (64.5% in Wenang and 68.7% in Molas) ofthe respondents had monthly incomes below 1 million Rupiah. Due to this level of income,they were categorized as low-income households. More than 50% of the residents (61.5%in Wenang and 53.7% in Molas) were graduated from the high school. Besides, up to 80%(81.6% in Wenang and 82.7% in Molas) of the respondents were house owners. Table 5.1shows the degree of knowledge (DK) of the respondents to general environmental issuesand issues related to wastewater.The results of the correlation analysis between socio-economic characteristics and thecommunity’s environmental knowledge, on one hand, and the condition and capacity ofresidential septic tanks on the other hand, showed that the Pearson’s CorrelationCoefficient (PC) was negative, except for the correlation between the septic tank conditionand the level of education, and for the correlation between the capacity of septic tank andthe community’s knowledge on environmental issues related to wastewater were positive(Table 6.4). However, they were statistically not significant. From this result, of thepositive correlation, it can be said that the condition of residential septic tanks correlatedwith the level of education, and the capacity of the septic tanks correlated with theknowledge of environmental issues related to wastewater. 63
  • Table 6.4 Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient (PC) by using the Bivariate Correlations ProcedurePearson Correlation (PC) Capacity of Condition Septic Tank Septic Tank• Socio-economic aspects: Household Income per Month PC -.091 -.021 Sig. (2-tailed) .099 .699 N 332 332 Level of Education PC -.044 +.103 Sig. (2-tailed) .424 .062* N 332 332 House Status PC -.022 -.047 Sig. (2-tailed) .689 .394 N 332 332• Community’s environmental knowledge: Knowledge on general issue about environment PC -.039 -.033 & pollution Sig. (2-tailed) .482 .551 N 332 332 Knowledge on environmental issue related to PC +.017 -.003 wastewater Sig. (2-tailed) .761* .949 N 332 332* Not significantA small number of the houses were furnished with septic tanks in very poor and poorcondition (with about 12% in Wenang and 4% in Molas, and about 50% in both districtswith poor capacity). But, this situation was not correlated (the PC was negative) with thehousehold income and the status of the respondents. It can be said, although improving thecondition and capacity of septic tanks needs higher costs, the higher income, however, wasnot the guarantee that their septic tank’s condition and capacity would be better. Besides,even though most of the houses in the study sites were owned by the residents themselves(82.7% in Molas and 81.6% in Wenang), this was also not the guarantee for bettercondition and capacity of their septic tank.Seemingly, other factors than those of the socio-economic aspects mentioned above mayhave influenced the septic tank’s condition and capacity of the households. One such factormay be a direction from the city’s government to improve their own wastewater facilities.However, the community’s concern for environmental conditions and impacts was voicedin a positive note (Table 5.2 & 5.3). 64
  • Chapter 7 Water Quality AssessmentThis chapter describes the results of the study of the status of the water quality of selectedrivers which cross through Manado City. The pollution status of the rivers are presentedand discussed.7.1 IntroductionManado Bay (MB) is located in the western part of Minahasa Peninsular Coastal Waters(Fig. 7.1). The bay creates the waterfront to Manado City (MC), a middle-sized city with apopulation of approximately 418,000 people in 2000 with a growth rate of 3.04% per yearin the last decade according to Mokat (2003), and having a total area of approximately160.61 km2. The bay receives water from the land through 21 rivers, and six of them[Sungai Bailang (SB), S. Maasing (SM), S. Malalayang (SML), S. Sario (SS), S. Tondano(ST), and S. Wusa/Paniki (SWP)] cross through the city with various widths, lengths, anddepths (Fig. 4.4). The sources of water for the rivers are mostly from the hinterlandagricultural areas of Minahasa Regency (MR). Since most of the sewerage and drainage ofthe city connects to those rivers, the rivers and the bay are being threatened by a decreasein the water quality due to untreated city wastewater discharge. Whereas, a good waterquality of the bay is significantly important to support the subsistence fishing of the localpeople, local tourism activities, and marine ecosystems (coral reefs and other importantmarine biota) of Bunaken Island (the central point of the Marine National Park ofBunaken) that is located at the outer part of the bay (Fig. 7.1).Information about the water quality of the rivers and the bay is a matter of importance.However, almost no published information is available, especially in regards to organic,inorganic, bacteria, and metal, except Lasut (2002) on the metal accumulation in the bayand the unpublished data of BOD5 and bacterial load by the PPLH-SDA Unsrat (2000,unpublished) in several selected rivers conducted in 1999. This lack of publishedinformation and data is one of the problems that causes difficulty in formulatingmanagement measures in order to overcome further impacts on those rivers and the bay.Most domestic wastewater is discharged, untreated and uncontrolled, directly to the rivers.Also, the rivers are used for waste (garbage) disposal systems and also, except for SM, forthe daily activities of people living around the rivers such as washing, bathing, andtransportation. Therefore, this study is aimed to assess the water quality, including theexisting concentrations and its variations due to space and season. Besides, this may beused as base-line data for further controlling and monitoring, and it may be used as aguideline for responsible agencies to create management measures to mitigate pollution inMB caused by wastewater discharge from land-based sources.With regard to domestic wastewater, since it may consist of a wide range of organic,inorganic, bacterial, metal, and other pollutant-containing substances, most authors havereported that such wastewater has been a major environmental concern in coastal waters(Adingra and Arfi, 1998; Lee and Arega, 1999; Wu, 1999; Lipp et al., 2001). Furthermore,Ortiz-Hernandez and Saenz-Morales (1999) suggested that the most important source ofwater pollution was attributable to wastewater discharge. 65
  • 66 Figure 7.1 Map of Indonesia, North Sulawesi Province, Manado City, Study area, and sampling stations 66
  • 7.2 Research Methodology7.2.1 Water quality indicators assessedAssessment of the water quality was done using four indicators, i.e., organic, inorganic,bacteria, and metal [mercury (Hg)] content. The bacterial level was determined using TC-EC parameters; organic, inorganic, and Hg levels were determined using the parameters ofBOD5, NO3-, PO4-3, and Hg-tot, respectively. Measurement of the BOD5 was conductedusing the method presented by Adams (1991) with some modifications for measuring thedissolved oxygen using the portable La Motte DO-4000 and performed at the laboratory ofthe Pusat Penelitian Lingkungan Hidup & Sumberdaya Alam (PPLH-SDA), Sam RatulangiUniversity. The NO3- and PO4-3 concentrations were measured using the cadmium-reduction and ascorbic acid methods respectively (Adams, 1991). The TC and EC weremeasured using the multiple-tube technique (APHA-AWWA-WPCF, 1969) with thehighest measurement of 2400 MPN (most probable number per 100 ml); this is the onlymethod available in the laboratory of the Balai Laboratorium Kesehatan (BLK), Provinceof North Sulawesi, where the samples were analyzed. In the same laboratory, the AtomicAbsorption Spectrophotometers (AAS) method was used for Hg-tot analysis with theprotocol of the APHA-AWWA-WPCF (1990). All methods follow the Indonesian NationalStandard (INS).7.2.2 Study area and sampling procedureThe three selected rivers of SB, SM, and ST situated in the urban area of MC (1°30–1°40Nand 124°40–124°50E) were observed in this study. Sampling stations were selected in eachriver and named as #B1–B4, #M1–M4, and #T1–T5, respectively (Fig. 7.1). Geographicalcoordinates of the stations were marked using the Global Positioning System (GPS) inorder to re-monitor for future activities. The dominant area characteristics and uses of therivers as well as width and environmental conditions (salinity, temperature, andconductivity) of the water in each station during observation were noted.Sampling was carried out in two different seasons, dry (September–October 2002) and wet(January–March 2003), which had monthly rainfalls of 75–136 mm and 370–376 mm,respectively; 150 mm is usually regarded as the end of the dry season (pers. comm.). Themonthly rainfall data were obtained from the Climatologic Station at Kayuwatu Manado(CSKM). As the river water is flowing continuously, the samplings were set upconsecutively, from down to upstream, and conducted in one day per indicator to avoidsampling of the same water. All samplings were done using the procedure of INS. Surfacewater of a 30 cm depth was collected in sterile plastic bottles of 500 ml for BOD5, NO3-,PO4-3, and Hg-total; glass bottles of 250 ml for TC-EC; and plastic pockets were used for a5-10 cm depth (JPHA, 2001) of surface sediment samples for Hg-tot. The marine bivalveSoletellina sp. was sampled for accumulated Hg-tot; the biota were collected randomlyfrom five selected sites at the river mouth of ST (T5). The sites were selected so that twostations were to the left and two to the right of the river mouth, and 50 m apart. Except forHg-tot, the samples were taken in duplicate. All samples were kept in a cooler box withblock ice during transportation to the laboratories and were analyzed within 24 hours fromthe time of collection. 67
  • Table 7.1 Characterization and Environmental Condition (Salinity, Temperature, and Conductivity) of Sampling Stations during Dry (September-October 2002) and Wet (January-March 2003) Seasons Location Sampling Coordinates Predominant land Uses Approx. Salinitya Temperaturea Conductivitya station (UTM) use in surrounding Width (ppt) (oC) (µS) ID # area (m) Dry Wet Dry Wet Dry Wet Bailang B1 51 N 0706427 MRA Transportation 2.5 0.1 0.1 30.4 27.4 275.8 226.0 River 0167511 B2 51 N 0706041 MRA Transportation 15 0.2 0.2 31.9 28.1 470.2 241.0 0168198 B3 51 N 0705652 R Toilet 20 10.0 5.1 33.7 28.2 17.9* 8.9* 0168711 B4 51 N 0705099 MRA - 30 17.4 15.5 33.1 28.7 28.6* 26.5* 0168407 Maasing M1 51 N 0705989 R Toilet, garbage dump 1 0.3 0.2 31.6 27.7 538.5 448.5 River 0166417 M2 51 N 0705622 R Public Toilet 2.5 0.5 0.2 31.7 27.7 982.0 471.0 0166788 M3 51 N 0705404 R Garbage dump 2 0.5 0.4 34.0 28.3 1171.0 666.068 0167125 M4 51 N 0705304 MRA - 3 9.0 20.0 34.2 28.8 15.4* 30.3* 0167254 Tondano T1 51 N 0708992 R Transportation, Toilet, 30 0.1 0.1 30.1 27.4 259.8 252.5 River 0165397 washing, bathing T2 51 N 0706413 RDU Transportation, fish culture, 35 0.2 0.2 28.1 28.1 328.5 315.0 0164390 fishing, Toilet, washing T3 RDU Fish culture, fishing, Toilet, 35 washing T4 51 N 0705312 MRA Bathing, washing, Toilet 50 2.1 0.6 30.4 27.4 4.7* 1.3* 0165354 T5 51 N 0704989 RDU - 50 4.1 1.1 31.1 27.3 9.0* 2.1* 0165630 a the average of two values; * mS; MRA: mix residential and agriculture; R: residential; RDU: residential (dense urban) 68
  • 7.2.3 Statistical analysisA simple statistical computation of one-way analysis of variance (Fowler and Cohen,1990) was applied to test differences of concentration of each parameter among the riversand during the seasons.7.3 Results and Discussion7.3.1 General characteristic and environmental conditionThe general characteristics of the observed rivers are shown in Table 7.1. Since the riversare located in the urban area of MC, the predominant land use in their surrounding area isresidential (R), residential in dense urban area (RDU), and residential mixed withagricultural (MRA). Most sewerage and drainage are directly connected to the rivers; suchconditions result in rivers full of garbage, coloring, mud, having offensive smells, and badin visual appearance. During the wet season, the rivers are relatively full of water. Incontrast, there is a lack of water during the dry season. The width of the rivers measured ateach of the sampling stations is in the range of approximately 2.5–30.0, 1.0–2.5, and 30.0–50.0 m, for SB, SM, and ST, respectively.The salinity values during dry and wet seasons were low at the upstream ends (in the rangeof 0.1–10.0 ppt) and high at the downstream ends, close to the river mouth (up to 20.0 ppt)where mixing with marine water occurred. Conductivity showed a similar pattern. Thewater temperature was in the range of 28.1–34.2°C during the dry and 27.3–28.8°C duringthe wet season (Table 7.1).7.3.2 Organic matter loadThe content of organic matter, expressed as BOD5, during the dry and wet seasons in thethree selected rivers is shown on Figs. 7.2 (a–c); high values indicated the highconcentration of organic matter. The highest concentrations were at sampling stations B1(21.79 mg/l), M2 (28.20 mg/l), and T3 (15.58 mg/l) during the dry season; and at B2 (8.30mg/l), M2 (18.36 mg/l), and T4 (5.49 mg/l) during the wet season. These values were mostlikely attributable to the presence of high amounts of organic matter in domesticwastewater discharged from residences at those sampling stations.During the dry season, the concentrations showed a pattern with slightly higher values atthe upstream than the downstream ends. This may be explained by the fact that most of theorganic matter was degraded during its passage from the upstream area because the river’swater was flowing slowly due to a lack of water. Conversely, during the wet season,concentrations at the river mouths (downstream) of M4 and T5 were higher than those atthe upstream end. This indicates that during the wet season a high amount of organicmatter is flushed and dispersed faster than it can be degraded. Most of the material wastrapped and degraded in this area and caused the increasing of the BOD5. No statisticscould be calculated on data within rivers as samples were only collected in duplicate. 69
  • 30 a D ry W et 20 BOD5 (mg/l) 10 0 B1 (upstream ) B2 B3 B4 (downstream ) Sampling stations 30 Dry b W et 20 BOD5 (mg/l) 10 0 M1 (upstream) M2 M3 M4 (downstream) Sampling stations 20 Dry c W et 15 BOD5 (mg/l) 10 5 0 T1 (upstream) T2 T3 T4 T5 (downstream) Sampling stationsFigure 7.2 BOD5 values for 3 rivers in Manado City, SB (a), SM (b), and ST (c) during dry and wet seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.1The average values of the BOD5 among the rivers showed that SM (19.34 mg/l) > SB(14.78 mg/l) > ST (12.48 mg/l) in the dry season; however, this was not statistically 70
  • significant (p>0.05). Differences observed during the wet season were statisticallysignificant (p<0.01) and SM (14.11 mg/l) > SB (5.10 mg/l) > ST (4.18 mg/l).Concentrations were higher during the dry season than in the wet season in all rivers. Thiswas probably due to dilution. The values obtained in the present study were higher thanthose reported by PPLH-SDA Unsrat (1999) where BOD5 in the rivers SB and ST was 7.00and 16.46 mg/l. However, the actual sampling locations were not reported.The average organic matter flushed into the bay in the dry season (15.30 mg/l of BOD5)was significantly higher than in the wet season (7.52 mg/l of BOD5 ) (p<0.01). Theselevels may significantly influence the BOD5 concentration of Manado Bay. Ortiz-Hernandez and Saenz-Morales (1999) reported BOD values ranging from 22.61–38.96mg/l (mean 32.26 mg/l) from Chetumal Bay, Quintana Roo, Mexico, whereas Cheevapornand Menasveta (2003) reported values between 1.3 and 3.2 mg/l at river mouths in theupper Gulf of Thailand. The standard of acceptable BOD5 for coastal waters is less than 10mg/l (Clark, 1996, p. 211). In general, BOD5 values for domestic wastewater rangebetween 100 and 500 mg/l (Ortiz-Hernandez and Saenz-Morales, 1999). This indicatesthat, especially in the dry season, organic load of rivers in Manado City should be reduced.7.3.3 Inorganic nutrient loadLevels of inorganic matter measured as NO3- concentration are shown in Figs. 7.3(a–c).The highest concentration during the dry season was at sampling stations B1 (2.14 mg/l),M2 (3.46 mg/l), and T2 (3.31 mg/l). During the wet season, the highest concentration wasat B3 (2.02 mg/l), M3 (2.30 mg/l), and T2 (2.33 mg/l). The concentration during the dryseason was generally high at the upstream and low at the downstream end close to the rivermouth for all rivers. This pattern was not evident during the wet season. As the river waterflow is slow during the dry season, most of the NO3- input must have come from theupstream areas beyond the initial sampling station. Moreover, the concentration may havedecreased towards the downstream end as the NO3- was used as a nutrient source foraquatic plants. However, an input apparently occurred at stations M2 and T2 as indicatedby increased concentrations.The average NO3- concentration varied among the rivers at SM (2.37 mg/l) > ST (2.13mg/l) > SB (1.49 mg/l) during dry season, and ST (1.83 mg/l) > SM (1.46 mg/l) > SB (0.93mg/l) during wet season; however, this was not statistically significant. In addition, theaverage level of inorganic matter as NO3- loaded into the bay during the dry season was notsignificantly higher (2.01 mg/l) than during the wet season (1.44 mg/l).Concentrations of PO4-3 (Figs. 7.4a–c) showed a pattern of increase towards thedownstream end during the wet season in all rivers. This indicated that there was asignificant input from the urban area into the rivers. The highest concentrations in the dryseason were found at B2 (2.06 mg/l), M2 (2.98 mg/l), and T2 (1.56 mg/l), and during wetseason at B2 (1.81 mg/l), M4 (2.88 mg/l), and T5 (3.52 mg/l), respectively.The average concentration in the river SM was highest during the dry season, and in STduring the wet season; this was statistically significant ( p<0.05). The PO4-3 loaded into thebay was significantly (p0.05) higher during the wet season (2.20 mg/l) than the dry season(1.71 mg/l). 71
  • 3 a Dry W et 2 NO3 (mg/l) 1 0 B1 (upstream) B2 B3 B4 (downstream) Sampling stations 4 b Dry W et 3 NO3 (mg/l) 2 1 0 M1 (upstream) M2 M3 M4 (downstream ) Sampling stations 4 c Dry W et 3 NO3 (mg/l) 2 1 T1 (upstream) T2 T3 T4 T5 (downstream) Sampling stationsFigure 7.3 NO3- values for 3 rivers in Manado City, SB (a), SM (b), and ST (c) during dry and wet seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.1Levels of NO3- and PO4-3 in the 3 rivers were one to two orders of magnitude higher thanthose recorded from river mouths discharging into the upper Gulf of Thailand (0.006-0.64mg/l for NO3- and 0.09-0.36mg/l for PO4-3) (Cheevaporn and Menasveta, 2003). High 72
  • nutrient levels (eutrophication) are likely to cause massive algal blooms, possibly withtoxic (harmful) algal species, and subsequently oxygen depletions (Cheevaporn andMenasveta, 2003; Mallin et al., 2007).7.3.4 Bacterial loadBacteria were measured in all the selected rivers. This was indicated by highconcentrations of TC and EC, which mostly exceeded the maximum measurableconcentration of 2400 MPN (Table 7.2). Concentrations of EC vary within the rivers in therange of 11 to 2400 MPN during the dry season and 15 to 2400 MPN during the wetseason. Since the value of 2400 MPN is not an absolute value, no statistical test wasapplied to test the differences among the rivers and seasons. Previous measurementsshowed that both E. coli and Vibrio sp. were detected in the river ST (PPLH-SDA Unsrat,2000, unpublished).The presence of E. coli in recreational and potable waters is a major concern to the generalpublic as elevated levels of E. coli suggest the presence of pathogenic bacteria and viruses(Somarelli et al., 2007). As coliform bacteria are associated exclusively with mammalintestinal tracts (Rees, 1993; Somarelli et al., 2007), the high levels of bacteria must beattributable to the presence of untreated wastewater discharge from toilets or domesticanimals, for instance pig husbandry that has been observed in those areas.7.3.5 Mercury (Hg) loadMercury total (Hg-tot) was the only metal concentration measured in the river ST. Theconcentration in water and surface sediment slightly varied according to the samplingstations (space) and the season. The level in water during the dry season was low at theupstream and slightly higher at the downstream end close to the river mouth; in contrast,during the wet season it was high at the upstream and much lower at the downstream end(Fig. 7.5a). The high concentration at the upstream sampling stations (T1–T3) during thewet season was perhaps due to the high volume of water bringing suspended, particle-bound mercury from the hinterland area of MR where elemental mercury is used inartisanal gold mining practices (pers. obs.). The concentration decreased when the watermixed with water from a tributary and estuary close to the river mouth at sampling stationsT4–T5. The concentration during the dry season was 0.002–0.044 mg/l, with the highestvalue at station T4 (0.044 mg/l), and 0.013–0.125 mg/l during the wet season, with thehighest value at station T1 (0.125 mg/l) (Fig. 7.5a). The average concentration in the wetseason (0.081 mg/l) was slightly higher than in the dry season (0.024 mg/l), though thiswas not statistically significant (p>0.05).The same pattern of slightly higher concentrations at the downstream end was also shownfor Hg-tot in surface sediment during both seasons, dry and wet (Fig. 7.5b). Thesuspended, particle-bound mercury brought out from the hinterland area tends to settle inthe areas close to the river mouth (T4 and T5). This was probably the reason why theconcentration in the surface sediment at these stations was slightly higher than the others.The concentration during the dry season was 0.047–0.179 mg/kg with the highest at stationT5 (0.179 mg/kg), and 0.073–0.185 mg/kg during the wet season with the highest at stationT4 (0.185 mg/kg). The average concentration in the dry season (0.133 mg/kg) was slightlyhigher than in the wet season (0.130 mg/kg) though this was not statistically significant(p>0.05). 73
  • a Dry W et 2 PO4 (mg/l) 1 B1 (upstream) B2 B3 B4 (downstream) Sampling stations b Dry W et 3 PO4 (mg/l) 2 1 M1 (upstream ) M2 M3 M4 (downstream ) Sampling stations 4 c Dry W et 3 PO4 (mg/l) 2 1 T1 (upstream ) T2 T3 T4 T5 (downstream ) Sampling stationsFigure 7.4 PO43- values for 3 rivers in Manado City, SB (a), SM (b), and ST (c) during dry and wet seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.1 74
  • Table 7.2 Concentration of Total Coliform (TC), and Escherichia coli (EC) during Dry (September-October 2002) and Wet (January-March 2003) SeasonsLocation Sampling TC (MPN)a EC (MPN)a Station ID # Dry Wet Dry WetBailang B1 1100 >2400 15 >2400River B2 >2400 >2400 23 17 B3 >2400 >2400 >2400 >2400 B4 >2400 >2400 11 >2400Maasing M1 >2400 >2400 1100 >2400River M2 >2400 >2400 1100 >2400 M3 >2400 >2400 210 >2400 M4 >2400 >2400 23 15Tondano T1 >2400 >2400 >2400 7.4River T2 >2400 1100 23 240 T3 >2400 >2400 >2400 558 T4 >2400 >2400 >2400 93 T5 >2400 >2400 210 17a the highest value from the two valuesMPN (most probable number per 100 ml of sample)Comparing the Hg-tot concentration in the water and in the surface sediment in the twoseasons showed that the concentration in the surface sediment was significantly higher(p<0.01) during the dry season, and also (p<0.05) during the wet season than in the water(Figs. 7.6a & b, respectively). Seasonal variations for metals (Al, Cr, and Fe) in water andsurface sediment have been reported from Richards Bay Harbor, South Africa (Vermeulenand Wepener, 1999). Cheevaporn and Menasveta (2003) reported mercury concentrationsof 0.01-847 µg/l in seawater and 0.003-2.8 µg/g in sediment of the upper Gulf of Thailand.The concentration of Hg-tot accumulated in the bivalve, Soletellina sp., ranged between0.012 and 0.124 mg/kg. The concentration was higher to the right (North) than to the left(South) of the river mouth (Fig. 7.7). Unfortunately, no statistical test could be applied dueto the single measurement obtained from each station. The observed distribution can beexplained as water current in the MB runs continuously from South to North. Lasut (2002)reported that Hg-tot which accumulated in gastropods, Littoraria sp. and Nerita sp., fromthe same area was 0.045 and 0.344 mg/kg, respectively. Marine biota accumulates metalsfrom the sediment. Chen and Chen (1999) reported that grey mullet (Liza macrolepis)accumulated the metals Cd and Cu in their body from contaminated harbor sediment andthe liver had levels at least 2–5 times higher than those found in the sediment. In thepresent study, the concentrations of Hg-tot in the surface sediment and in the bivalvesfound at the river mouth of ST were of the same magnitude.7.3.6 Pollution status and challenge to managementBased on the observed levels of the above parameters, the status of the rivers must beconsidered to be in a condition of pollution by organic matter, inorganic nutrients, bacteria,and mercury. The level of BOD5 in all rivers exceeded the WQC-GRRI for water that maybe used for recreational activities, fisheries, livestock, and irrigation, while those for NO3- 75
  • and Hg-tot exceeded the ASEAN-MWQC for protection of aquatic life and the WQC-GRRI for water that may be used for recreational activities, fisheries, livestock, andirrigation, respectively. The level of PO4-3 exceeded the WQC-GRRI and the ASEAN-MWQC for the protection of aquatic life in estuaries and coastal areas (Table 7.3). Allobserved rivers were in the status of pollution with regard to bacterial levels, since thelevel of TC and EC greatly exceeded those of the International Standard for recreationalcontact waters, typically 200 MPN coliform (Clark, 1992). 0.14 Dry 0.12 W et 0.10 Hg-Total (mg/l) 0.08 0.06 0.04 a 0.02 0.00 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 Sampling stations 0.20 Dry 0.18 Wet 0.16 0.14 Hg-Total (mg/l) 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 b 0.02 0.00 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 Sampling stationsFigure 7.5 Concentration of Hg-tot in water (a) and sediment (b) of ST during dry and wet seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.1 76
  • Table 7.3 Water Quality Status of the River of Bailang (SB), Maasing (SM), and Tondano (ST) Parameters Indonesia (mg/l)a ASEAN (mg/l)b Present study results Rivers Concentration (mg/l)c Status a b c d Dry season Wet season BOD5 3 SB 14.78 5.10 Exceed: a SM 19.34 14.11 Exceed: a ST 12.48 4.18 Exceed: a Nitrate (NO3-) 10 20 0.060 SB 1.49 0.93 Exceed: c SM 2.37 1.46 Exceed: c ST 2.13 1.83 Exceed: c Phosphate (PO4-3) 0.2c 1d Estuaries: 0.045 SB 1.56 1.67 Exceed: a, b, c Coastal: 0.015 SM 2.18 2.26 Exceed: a, b, c ST 1.42 2.57 Exceed: a, b, c Mercury (Hg-tot) 0.002 0.002 0.16 µg/l 21 µg/l ST 0.024 0.081 Exceed: a, b, c, d77 a Water Quality Criteria of Government Regulation of Republic of Indonesia (WQC-GRRI), No. 82, 2001 (Tunggal, 2002) b Proposed ASEAN Marine Water Quality Criteria (ASEAN-MWQC) (Jusoh, 1999) c Average values d Phosphate total a: Class II, water that may be used for recreational activities, fisheries, livestock, and irrigation. b: Class III, water that may be used for fisheries, livestock, and irrigation. c: Criterion for protection of aquatic life. d: Criterion for protection of human health (recreational activities). 77
  • 0.20 Water 0.18 Sediment 0.16 0.14 Hg-Total (mg/l) 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 a 0.04 0.02 0.00 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 Sampling stations 0.20 Water 0.18 Sediment 0.16 0.14 Hg-Total (mg/l) 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 b 0.02 0.00 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 Sampling stationsFigure 7.6 Concentration of Hg-tot in water and sediment of ST during dry (a) and wet (b) seasons. Stations are shown on Fig. 7.1NOAA (1995) suggested that wastewater is not a pollutant per se. It can be categorized asa pollutant if it has a negative impact on the environment. From our results, obviously, thewater quality of the observed rivers was highly problematic. Water quality is significantlyimpacted by the input of wastewater discharged from residential areas. Therefore, it isextremely important to overcome and mitigate further impact through management. In thisregard, a management plan integrating all sectors, and community stakeholders, is anappropriate way, as it will involve all parties who have roles in this problem. As thecondition of water in MC is influenced by runoff from hinterland agricultural areas of MR,the management should be trans-boundary, involving the MR authority where the upstreamrivers are located. In addition, the other aspects of water temperature and daily maximumwater temperature, in particular with aquatic diversity values, should be included in themanagement (Rivers-Moore and Jewitt, 2007). 78
  • 0 .1 4 0 .1 2 0 .1 0 Hg-total (mg/kg) 0 .0 8 0 .0 6 0 .0 4 0 .0 2 0 .0 0 L e ft-1 0 0 50 M id d le 50 R ig h t- 1 0 0 P o s is itio n o f s a m p lin g s ite a t r iv e r m o u th (m e te r )Figure 7.7 Concentration of Hg-tot accumulated in the marine bivalve Soletellina sp. at the mouth of the river ST 79
  • Chapter 8 Constraints and Potential Aspects and Their ImplicationsIn the previous chapters, a comprehensive presentation of the current state of severalaspects of Manado City in relation to wastewater management through research findings ispresented. In this chapter, the constraints and potentials of the findings which arecorrelated with other aspects, as well as their implications, are discussed.8.1 IntroductionConcerning wastewater management, the city of Manado poses some aspects that can beconsidered as constraints on one hand, and potentials on the other hand. In general, theaspects are from wastewater discharge-related aspects (WRA), governmental/administrative-related aspects (GRA), and community-related aspects (CRA). All thesegeneral aspects could interconnect to one another and produce several implications whichcause more challenges in management.8.2 Wastewater Discharge-Related Aspect (WRA)8.2.1 Natural characteristicsThe natural settings of the city of Manado with various geomorphologic features of landand water drainage of the rivers flowing through the city to Manado Bay pose challengesto be managed in regard to wastewater. Therefore, it was considered as a constraint aspectin regard to wastewater management. Such a condition has made unplanned developmentand the uncertainty of spatial planning due to such natural condition problems of land usechanges in the city, as the development of land reclamation for commercial activities(hotels, restaurants, malls, and other trade buildings) constructed in the coastal area(Kumurur, 2002a). The area was originally set for marine eco-tourism activity purposes assuch activities are one of the primary incomes for the city. In addition, this development islikely to cause problems if such activities do not have proper wastewater treatment systemsand the discharge of their sewage goes directly into the coastal marine water.8.2.2 Socio-economic aspectsSocio-economic aspects (population, education, employment, and personal and householdincomes) are significant aspects for management. The population of the city will continueto grow along with the need for more space for settlement with proper publicinfrastructures and facilities, including wastewater handling to maintain a healthyenvironment in the area. The limited amount of suitable land (only 76% is suitable forsettlement development due to land slope features) causes the housing and commercialareas to be distributed haphazardly and concentrated in certain areas of the city, mostlyalong the coast. This condition forces the city to face many environmental problems, suchas the haphazard establishment of slum areas, defined by very high densities of population(>250 individuals/0.01 km2). The problems of such areas are run-down housing andgenerally wretched living conditions with poor conditions of public and sanitation facilities(sewer, wastewater treatment). In 1999, such areas were identified in 3 districts of five in 80
  • the city (Table 8.1). Therefore, the rapid increase of population was considered as aconstraint aspect.Table 8.1 The Slum Areasa in 3 Districts of Manado City in 1999b Districts Sub-districts Population density (individuals/0.01 km2) Sario Ranotana Weru 321 Pakowa 264 Tanjung Batu 327 Titiwungen 597 Wenang Komo Luar 626 Mahakeret Barat 274 Lawangirung 254 Molas Karame 419 Ternate Baru 573 Sindulang I 360 Sindulang II 416 Kampung Islam 280 Alung Banua 637 Manado Tua I 356a >250 individuals/0.01 km2b Source: Kumurur (2002b)In the city, the low and middle levels of education, i.e. primary or middle school, could bea constraint (Section 4.3.1). Although educated people with higher levels of schooling willensure that management measures are understood and adapted easily. Moreover, half(54.20%) of those of employment in 2003 (344,251 persons) were unemployed. Inaddition, the general economic situation and monetary income of the city, thoughincreased, were not enough to support the daily life of 22,515 households (27.49%) whichwere categorized as poor in 2000 (Mokat, 2003) which is also considered a constraint.In contrast, many religions and ethnicities of people are found in the city. As all of thereligions and the ethnicities in general are adherents of maintaining and saving theenvironment and natural resources for future needs, they can support the effort ofenvironmental management. It can be a positive potential aspect to wastewatermanagement in the city.8.2.3 Wastewater treatment facilities and infrastructures and water quality statusThe increase of the economic activities in general followed by the development of tourisminfrastructure and facilities (hotels, restaurants, malls, and others) will create a variety ofwastewater sources, and may threaten the coastal marine environment and the urban areaof the city, since these activities produce a significant amount of wastewater, especially asmost of the infrastructures are built close to the coast with improper wastewater treatmentfacilities. These are considered as point sources of wastewater.The condition and capacity of an on-site wastewater treatment system may play asignificant role in avoiding environmental degradation as well as protecting the health andhygiene of humans in the coastal area; conversely, poor conditions may cause an outbreakof wastewater-transmitted diseases, and inadequate capacity may cause the leaking and 81
  • spilling out of wastewater into the area and may further degrade the environment of thearea.The growing population with low household incomes is a big problem for the city. Thepopulation pressure encourages the increasing of amounts of wastewater and, due to thelow household incomes, most of the housing developments are constructed with poorstandards of wastewater disposal and treatment systems, or even without such facilities.Most of the discharged wastewater from household activities has the potential to pollutenot only the urban but also the coastal environment because the wastewater alwayscontains high concentrations of human and animal sewage containing micro-organisms,which are pathogenic in humans. Many diseases are water-borne and may be caused bybacteria (e.g. gastroenteritis, typhoid and cholera), viruses (e.g. poliomyelitis and hepatitis)or amoebas (e.g. amoebic dysentery) found in water contaminated by human and animalfeces (Haughton and Hunter, 1995; Somarelli et al., 2007).Since the rivers are used for activities such as washing, bathing, fishing, and fish cageculture, the discharge of untreated wastewater poses a threat to community health. Thenumber of cases of wastewater-transmitted diseases observed at the city’s hospitals and theCommunity Medical Centers in several districts of the city is presented in Table 8.2. Mostresidences receive a supply of piped, treated freshwater from upland sources, which isconsidered safe for drinking after boiling. Some residences have their own wells, which inmany cases are located too close to septic tanks, open sewers or ditches. With increasedeconomic growth and increased tourism activities, the public demand for improvedsanitation levels in the urban areas has also increased (Sukarma and Pollard, 2000). Thecity of Manado needs to implement a regular water quality monitoring program for themajor rivers, especially for indicators of pollution with fecal and pathogenicmicroorganisms and toxic wastes.Table 8.2 Cases of Diseases in Manado City in 2002a Districts (sub-districts) Diarrhoea Dermatitis Gastritis Typhoid b c Molas (Tuminting) 513 (58 / 48 ) 1618 196b / 272c 10b,c Wenang (Tikala Baru) 1250 Sario (Ranotana) 27 253 Malalayang (Bahu) 288 777 City Hospital 1075 2725a the data were collected at Puskesmas (community’s medical centre) in each districtb October-December 2002c January-April 20038.3 Governmental/Administrative-Related Aspect (GRA)8.3.1 Institutional arrangementThe arrangement of government institutions is considered to have aspects acting asconstraints. At the city level, it is inadequate if the EMB (Environmental ManagementBoard) is the only institution taking responsibility to address wastewater management inthe city whereas the CMB (Cleaning Management Board) focuses only on solid wastemanagement, even if these institutions improve their functions (Section 4.4). Moreover, 82
  • apparently the EMB has not yet established any regulations. Tsagarakis (2001) suggestedthat institutional, administrative and managerial factors should be seriously taken intoaccount when planning water and sanitation policies. This could be done, for instance, byinvolving all waste and wastewater-related institutions and establishing guidelines andregulations.8.3.2 Planning and management aspectsThe sewage, except from toilets, is discharged directly into the coastal waters throughsewers and shows high concentrations of wastewater indicators and furthermore containspolluting substances (Table 7.3). Effects result from all sources (point and non-point)combined. Hence they are difficult to control. No monitoring system is in place, whichmay in part be due to the lack of guidelines. The developers or businesses are advised tocarry out self-monitoring and controlling procedures based on the impacts identified intheir environmental impact analysis. These aspects may easily act as constraints for themanagement. However, as it is monitoring and control at the source for point sources, itought to be the simplest way for controlling pollution loads. The non-point sources ofwastewater from the hinterland of the regency of Minahasa are predicted to causesignificant problems, but they are difficult to measure, control, and monitor.As mentioned previously, no particular guidelines or regulations have been established orauthorized by the city, except in a partial sense as a tactical action for a short-term period(Section 4.5). This can be a constraint for management. Fortunately, some policy measuresrelated to environmental management have been established at the provincial level of theNorth Sulawesi Province (for instance the LGR No. 38 of 2003, concerning CommunityBased Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management of North Sulawesi Province) asmentioned in Agenda 21 of Indonesia and the North Sulawesi Province. This should beseen as a potential. However, they can also be a constraint, as the city has not yet appliedthese measures, let alone enforced them.8.4 Community-Related Aspect (CRA)8.4.1 Community awareness and participationThe community’s environmental knowledge and attitude were fortunate aspects that havepotentials for wastewater management in the city (Chapter 5). The community can beasked for their participation, including financial support as most of them are not opposed tothis, but it is clear that the government should help them by improving the publicinfrastructures and facilities for wastewater discharge. However, there have been noobserved cases where the community has participated in the management. This is probablybecause they have not been given this option from the government, and there are no signsthat the government intends to help the community by improving such facilities.8.5 Financial aspectFinances are one of the most important aspects in an environmental planning andmanagement program, whereas lack of financial support means the planning cannot beimplemented and fosters instability in running the management. Local budgetary income is 83
  • the only source of finances for the development of the city. Since such budgetary isallocated for all developmental aspects of the city, lack of finances may be one of theconstraints to conducting wastewater management in the city. However, one potentialsource is that finances may come from the community (community-collected funds) asthey prioritized the solution on environmental problems, and wastewater problems inparticular, by agreeing to contribute to the funding of these efforts and at the same time thegovernment should improve wastewater and sewerage systems in the city (Table 5.4 and5.5). 84
  • Chapter 9 Suitable Option of Wastewater ManagementFrom the previous chapters, the current situation and condition of the city of Manado inregards to wastewater management have been described, identified, and analyzed pointingout their constraints and potentials. Based on such discussions, this chapter presentssuitable options for wastewater management for the city of Manado and strategic actions asrecommendations to improve an integrated wastewater management of the city.9.1 Objectives and ConsiderationsIntegrated wastewater management in the city of Manado is a priority that must be appliedto address environmental degradation due to wastewater discharge in the urban and coastalareas. Integration means that the management should be conducted by all of the city’sparties, such a government, community, and private sectors. In the government/administrative aspect, the integration also means that the management should be conductedwith various related institutions at a same level and/or different levels.Based on the present situation and condition of the city of Manado, the following aregeneral objectives of integrated wastewater management which are suitable for the city ofManado:1. Protecting environmental health from pollution and the unhygienic conditions of wastewater;2. Protecting the water quality of canals, rivers, and coastal areas to support marine life, fishery and coastal resources;3. Protecting freshwater resources from wastewater contamination.The formulation of the objectives considered: (1) the characteristics of the area of Manadowhere the major part of the city is located along a coastal area forming a waterfront, and(2) the dynamics of the city as an urban area. Thus, the wastewater problems should beaddressed through integrated coastal management (ICM) measures in combination withurban management (UM). As the environmental condition of the city is closely related tocoastal and marine conditions of Manado Bay that has a high production of resources, thecoastal environment should be assessed and the planning of the wastewater managementshould be included in the ICM process. The procedure of such assessment has beensuggested by Gourbesville & Thomassin (2000) for Mayotte Island, a highly sensitivecoastal area located in the Indian Ocean, and their study can be used as an experiencewhere sustainable wastewater management is being applied.Regarding a wastewater treatment system, the decentralized system provides simple, low-cost and low maintenance methods of treating domestic (household) wastewater (Burkhardet al., 2000). Such a system constitutes a suitable and possible solution to be applied in thecity of Manado because a lack of finances is one of the main problems. Several models of adecentralized system have been suggested for small communities, for example in theMiddle East and North Africa (Bakir, 2001). These models range from the smallest, singlehousehold system to larger systems for a small community. The smallest system is suitablefor residential areas, especially those sparsely populated and distributed haphazardly in thecity. However, they should only be constructed in sites where soil and groundwater 85
  • conditions are suitable (Bakir, 2001) as they may otherwise be contaminated. This systemis highly suitable since most households have low incomes, barely enough to support theirdaily lives.A small-scale conventional or modern wastewater treatment plant with low-techtechnology that can serve for a cluster of buildings (Engin and Demir, 2006) is suitable forcommercial centers (hotels, restaurants, and small industries), institutional buildings(hospitals, laboratories) and garbage dumps in the city. Clustered houses in the city, mostlyconcentrated along the coastline of Manado Bay, are also suitable for such a system. Thesystem may comprise several small subsystems for collection, treatment and re-use likethose applied in the Mediterranean countries where wastewater is managed by way of there-use or disposal systems (Massoud et al., 2003). The size of each subsystem should bedetermined administratively based on drainage boundaries and prevailing social andeconomic conditions (Bakir, 2001). It is important for the success of this type of systemthat there are clear regulations identifying who will be responsible for the operation andmanagement of such a wastewater treatment plant. Korf, Wilken and Nel presented severalmodels used worldwide that may be suitable for adoption by the city: (1) agency, i.e., theoperation and management of wastewater care is implemented by a selected localauthority(ies) on an agency or a local basis; (2) privatization, i.e., the plant is fully ownedand managed by the private sector; (3) local government, i.e., the facilities are managed bythe local authorities and owned by the public; (4) PS & PSP, i.e., the facilities are ownedby the public sector (PS), but managed by a private enterprise (PSP) (Tsagarakis et al.,2001; Shatkin, 2007).9.2 Strategic Actions of Wastewater Management: a RecommendationMitigation and protection measures to address wastewater discharge should be taken inorder to improve the wastewater management in the city of Manado. As the city has itsown characteristics which differ from other cities, suitable wastewater managementsystems are needed besides taking particular strategic actions. The followingrecommendations can be proposed towards integrated wastewater management in the city.Below, five strategic actions, to be included in the plans for improving the wastewatermanagement, have been suggested for decentralized systems that are suitable for the city ofManado. Some of them are based on the lessons learned from the small communities in theMiddle East and North Africa (Bakir 2001): (1) physical and technical measures: providingand improving on-site wastewater treatment systems and sanitation; (2) government’sinstitutional arrangement: improving the government’s institutional arrangement; (3)regulation, policy and program: establishing regulations and enforcement; (4) communityparticipation: Improving community participation; (5) financial: establishing financialsupport from the communities. Each of these strategic actions may form constraints tomanagement measures, but they may be used as an entry-point for improving suchmanagement. Hence we present below each of the four actions with appropriatemodifications for implementation. 86
  • 9.2.1 Physical and technical measures: providing and improving on-site wastewater treatment system and sanitationOn-site wastewater systems already exist in the city where the residential and commercialbuildings have private/individual wastewater disposal systems or toilet systems with septictanks. However, such systems are mostly in poor condition and have an insufficientcapacity and there are even houses with no such systems; the latter is mostly found in low-income households that are growing rapidly in the city. Therefore, providing andimproving on-site wastewater systems are a matter of high priority.Providing and improving an on-site wastewater system of good standard and propertechnology should be given high priority in residential and individual commercialbuildings where no such system is set up or where poor conditions and/or capacity isfound. Technically, each household and owner of commercial buildings should beresponsible for the cost required to build and maintain the system, in which case no tax orretribution needs to be levied by the government authority. However, low-incomehouseholds should be subsidized for obtaining such systems. In addition, this action mayalso be used as a measure to improve sanitation and pollution control.A sanitation system is much more than its technology. It encompasses the collection,transport, treatment and management of the end products of human excreta, solid waste,industrial wastewater and storm water (Kvarnström and Petersens, 2004). The universalgoal of environmental sanitation can be stated as follows: water and sanitation for allwithin a framework which balances the needs of people with those of the environment tosupport a healthy life on earth (Schertenleib, 2002). In an ecological sanitation concept,sanitation systems can be regarded as sustainable if they protect and promote humanhealth, do not contribute to environmental degradation or depletion of the resource base,and are technically and institutionally appropriate, economically viable and sociallyacceptable (Kvarnström and Petersens, 2004). According to Kvarnström and Petersens,(2004), a sanitation measure should primarily function as follows:1. Hygiene and disease protection: the system should not cause unsanitary conditions or negative aspects such as foul odors or insect infestations in any part of the system. The toilet itself should be easy to use and clean. Outgoing wastewater should be treated and discharged to surface water or be reused for irrigation.2. Water protection: in order to be environmentally sustainable, surface- and groundwater should, as much as possible, be protected from nutrients, organic matter and pathogens from the sanitation system. Infiltration, as a treatment method, should be avoided, since groundwater is commonly used as drinking water. Greywater, which includes water from laundry and washing but which is not contaminated by excreta, should be treated before discharge.3. Natural resource conservation: natural resources should be considered for sanitation systems including water, nutrients, land requirement and energy. Recycling the nutrient content in sanitized excreta and wastewater can be done in agriculture or other soil- plant systems. The sanitation system could include the reclamation of wastewater or greywater if freshwater is scarce. If it is used for irrigation, the risk of soil salinization needs to be considered in dry areas. 87
  • 9.2.2 Government’s institutional arrangement: improving government’s institutional arrangementThe existing arrangement of government institutions to support city wastewatermanagement does not function effectively as the EMB is the only party under the Mayor’sOffice responsible for wastewater management. Even though the PAEICB may getinvolved in the management, this party can only act as a coordinator to support the citiesand regencies in the province. This then, is considered as a constraint to the management inthe present analysis. Therefore, a re-arrangement of the government’s institution isrecommended.Due to its complexity, wastewater management should be addressed by all the involvedinstitutions and other associated institutions in coordination with others in the city. Forinstance, since wastewater management covers both the urban and coastal marineenvironments, technical agencies of the City Arrangement Agency (CAA) that hasresponsibility for the city development, and of the Marine and Fisheries Agency (MFA)should be involved as associated institutions. Others, such as technical agencies of thePublic Works Agency (PWA) and the Environmental Health Agency (EHA), should beincluded in the management. The significance of coordinating the management with PWAis that these agencies comprise the technical expertise to improve most of the publicfacilities, including wastewater disposal and treatment, and the EHA is the institution bestequipped to control and monitor the pollution impacts. The PAEICB and NAEIM,operating at provincial and national levels respectively, are considered to be in anappropriate position to coordinate institutions at the city level based on the provisions ofAct No. 22, 1999.9.2.3 Regulation, policy and program: establishing regulations and enforcementThe application of suitable technical options of wastewater management in the city shouldbe done in combination with administrative options through the establishment ofregulations and law enforcement. The administrative aspects of wastewater managementmay include establishing requirements and regulations for buildings (residential andcommercial) to have proper designs for on-site wastewater systems of adequate standardsand established guidelines of a standard system for commercial buildings (hotels, hospitals,shopping centers, and restaurants). High priority should be given to establishing a programfor on-site systems improvement with subsidies to low-income households since theseoften have no facilities at all. Enforcement should be applied with sanctions to parties whodisobey the regulations.With regards to sanctions, any party who produces wastewater (hotels, restaurants, smallindustries, hospitals, and others) must, in accordance with IGR No. 82, 2001 of waterquality management and water pollution control, be held responsible so that the dischargewill not produce any impact on the receiving water, and if impacts occur, sanctions(administrative, fines, re-establishment or improvement, or punishment) will be imposedaccording to Act of the Republic of Indonesia No. 23, 1997, of EnvironmentalManagement. 88
  • 9.2.4 Community participation: Improving community’s participationBased on the above analysis, community participation in the city is considered to be apotential in regard to supporting wastewater management because environmentalawareness is generally good. However, the awareness specifically related to wastewatermanagement is still insufficient. Therefore, it is important that the city government takesactions to increase and improve participation and awareness. Such actions could includedistribution of information, establishing wastewater-related programs, capacity building forcommunity institutions (NGOs and CEOs) and community involvement in the controllingand monitoring of wastewater management activities. These activities are important toprevent failures observed elsewhere in the operation of wastewater treatment plants due totheft and vandalism (Tsagarakis et al., 2001).9.2.5 Financial: establishing financial support from communityIn addition to the finances for wastewater management coming from the city budget, apotential source may come from other stakeholders/parties, such as the communities andprivate sectors. The considerations of such stakeholders that should be involved in thisaspect are that the stakeholders (for instance: restaurants, small industries, and others)produce and discharge wastewater which may influence and have an impact on theenvironment. The funding can be collected by applying a retribution or tax to address thewastewater discharge issue. However, all the actions should be done under a legal localgovernment regulation. 89
  • Chapter 10 Conclusions and Recommendations10.1 ConclusionThe city of Manado is a medium-sized developing city which consists of urban, rural, andmixed urban-rural areas. It is located close to and forms the waterfront of Manado Bay. Itconsists of various geomorphologic features with several rivers crossing through the cityfrom the hinterland areas of Minahasa Regency to the Manado Bay. This condition is thereason why it lacks land for settlement, which is distributed haphazardly along the coastline of Manado Bay. The economic activity of the city is increasing as indicated by therapid increase in the number of commercial buildings and tourism activities. But,apparently, the city is facing problems due to the increase of population and the socio-economic aspects due to unemployment and to low-level households with inadequatepersonal incomes. Therefore, with its natural setting and social-economic conditions, thecity is faced with the challenge for integrated wastewater management.Community environmental knowledge and attitude are a significant part of generalenvironmental management. In the city of Manado, this aspect shows a potential foreffective environmental management and wastewater management, in particular. However,community participation to prevent and mitigate any wastewater problems is stillinsufficient. Therefore, it is important that the city government take actions to increasepublic awareness.Most buildings, residential and commercial, have their own wastewater disposal systemsfor black water, such as toilet systems with septic tanks, or alternatively, especially forsmall residences, deep holes, ditches, and rivers. For others there are on-site wastewatersystems which serve for a cluster of homes in an area. However, no modern system withproper technology has been adopted for the residential treatment systems in these areas.The systems, more primitive than toilets with septic tanks, are considered as the mainsource of wastewater in the city, as well as toilet and septic tank systems in poor conditionand with inadequate capacity. The condition of residential septic tanks correlated with thelevel of education, and the capacity of the septic tanks correlated with the knowledge ofenvironmental issues related to wastewater.The water quality of the rivers of Bailang, Maasaing, and Tondano had high levels ofBOD5, NO3-, PO4-3, TC, EC, and Hg-tot concentration. Variations in concentrationoccurred among each of the sampling stations and among the rivers, and were affected bythe seasons. The poor condition was attributable to the input of wastewater dischargedfrom residential areas in the urban areas of Manado City and from the hinterlandagricultural areas of Minahasa Regency. Since some of the concentration levels exceededthe WQC-GRRI and the ASEAN-MWQC limits, they are in a state of pollution that needsto be managed to overcome further impacts on Manado Bay. The present data can be usedas a base-line to monitor improvements to prevent further deterioration of the water qualityof the rivers running through Manado City.Some of the aspects studied act primarily as constraints and some as potentials to supportwastewater management; all of them pose a challenge for designing a wastewatermanagement plan. The constraints are formed by: (1) natural settings, which influence land 90
  • use changes, (2) the rapid increase of population, (3) the number of low-incomehouseholds, (4) the poor condition and capacity of wastewater disposal and treatmentsystems, (5) the institutional arrangement of the government, and (6) the lack orinadequacy of local regulations and policies. Potential strengths and opportunities forimprovement include (1) city’s religion and ethnicity, (2) good environmental awareness ofthe community, (3) government institutions at provincial and national levels, and (4) theestablished regulations and policy measures of Agenda 21 at provincial and national levels.Five strategic actions were identified for better governance and effective wastewatermanagement including (1) physical and technical measures: providing and improving on-site wastewater treatment systems and sanitation; (2) the government’s institutionalarrangement: improving the government’s institutional arrangement; (3) regulations,policies and programs: establishing regulations and enforcements; (4) communityparticipation: improving the community’s participation; (5) financial: establishing financialsupport from the community. In order to implement these actions, it is important thatsuccess lessons learned from community participation and Integrated Coastal ZoneManagement Models of other successful operation in the cities of developing countriesshould be considered. It is with this background in mind, the following recommendationsare proposed.10.2 RecommendationsBesides the main recommendations presented in Section 9.2 (p. 81), the followingrecommendations can be proposed regarding wastewater management in the city:• As the community’s environmental awareness is positive towards wastewater management, an environmental education program should be set up, which should be targeted towards individual households, so that the knowledge of the immediate environment may help in taking steps towards specific improvements, as well as fostering awareness of broader environmental issues. Besides, the community should be involved as the primary subject (together with the government) in the management. Although, they both can play important roles, the community can be a source of finance. The involvement could be done by increasing participation, capabilities and skills, and empowering them in the management.• Communities and businesses should be informed of the environmental consequences of developmental proposals as a matter of right. Better availability of information is also important to improve decision-making.• More of the city’s government institutions and agencies are needed to take responsibility in wastewater management. This could be done by enlarging several of the institutions’ functions and duties. For instance, besides the Environmental Management Board, for wastewater management, the Cleaning Management Board and Public Works should take responsibility.• Considering that the source of wastewater includes the hinterland area of Minahasa Regency, the wastewater management of the city should involve this regency in the integrated and trans-boundary management rather than independent management systems in each area. This will be more effective management.• Regulations and guidelines (for instance, EIA and criteria and the standard of effluent discharge), as well as their enforcement, for managing the wastewater discharge are 91
  • needed to be established at the local level of Manado City in line with provincial and national levels.• The establishment of policies, strategies, and actions as mentioned in Agenda 21 of Indonesia and North Sulawesi Province would be advantageous for the city. Since such measures have not yet been established in the city, it would be wise if the city government adopts and develops these measures to be the policies of the city. However, the city has its own right to choose appropriate measures that are suitable for the area, according to Act 22 of 1999.• Financial support from all parties in the city (community and private sectors) is needed to be explored. 92
  • ReferencesAbu-Rizaiza, O. S. (1999). Modification of the standards of wastewater reuse in Saudi Arabia. Water Resource, 33 (11), 2601-2608.Adams, V. D. (1991). Water & Wastewater Examination Manual. Chapter 5 In Methods for the determination of organics. Lewis Publishers, Michigan, pp. 163–167.ADB (Asian Development Bank). (1991). Environmental evaluation of coastal zone projects: methods and approaches. ADB Environment Paper No. 8. 72 p.ADB (Asian Development Bank). (2000). The environment program: recent achievements and a new agenda for the poor. Environment Division, Office of Environment and Social development. Asian Development Bank. 158 p.Adingra, A. A. & Arfi, R. (1998). Organic and bacterial pollution in the Ebrie Lagoon, Cote d’Ivoire. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36, 689–695.Ahn, I-Y. & Choi, J-W. (1998). Macrobenthic communities impacted by anthropogenic activities in an intertidal san flat on the West Coast (Yellow Sea) of Korea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36(10), 808-817.Akbar, H. M. D., Minnery, J. R., van Horen, B. & Smith P. (2007). Community water supply for the urban poor in developing countries: The case of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Habitat International, 31, 24 –35.Al-Sa’ed, R. & Mubarak. (2006). Sustainability assessment of onsite sanitation facilities in Ramallah-Albireh district with emphasis on technical, socio-cultural and financial aspects. Management of Environmental Quality, 17(2), 140-156.KMNLH (Kantor Menteri Negara Lingkungan Hidup). (1996a). Agenda 21 Indonesia: Strategi nasional untuk pembangunan berkelanjutan [National Strategic for Sustainable Development]. Publikasi Awal. Kantor Menteri Negara Lingkungan Hidup. Juli, 1996. Jakarta.KMNLH (Kantor Menteri Negara Lingkungan Hidup). (1996b) Indonesias marine environment: a summary of policies, strategies, action and issues. Ministry of state for environment. pp. 86. Jakarta.Anonymous. (2001a). http://pasture.ecn.purdue.edu/~epados/septics/wwater.htmAnonymous. (2001b). http://www.gpa.unep.org/documents/ihe_cd/Anonymous. (2001c). http://www.gpa.unep.org/pollute/sewage/chapter1.htmAPHA-AWWA-WPCF. (1969). Bacteriologic examinations. Chapter VII. In Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater including Bottom Sediments and Sludges. 12th ed. APHA Inc., New York.APHA-AWWA-WPCF. (1990). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Washington, DC.ATB (Asian Textile Business). (2002). Indonesia: Damage by industrial wastewater. http://www.allbusiness.com/asia/1115956-2.html, July 6 2007.Bakir, H. A. (2001). Sustainable wastewater management for small communities in the Middle East and North Africa. Journal of Environmental Management, 61, 319-328. 93
  • Bapedal-Sulut. (2003). Pengelolaan limbah padat dan cair [Waste and wastewater Management]. In Agenda 21 Sulawesi Utara. Bapedal Propinsi Sulawesi Utara. Manado.BPSKM. (2000). Kota Manado Dalam Angka 2000 [Statistic of Manado 2000]. Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Manado. Manado.BPSKM. (2003). Kota Manado Dalam Angka 2003 [Statistic of Manado 2003]. Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Manado. Manado.BPSKM. (2006). Kota Manado Dalam Angka 2006 [Statistic of Manado 2006]. Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Manado. Manado.BPSPSU. (1997). Manado Dalam Angka 1997 [Statistic of Manado 1997]. Badan Pusat Statistik Propinsi Sulawesi Utara. Manado.BPSPSU. (1998). Sulut dalam angka tahun 1998 [Statistic of North Sulawesi Province 1998]. Badan Pusat Statistik Propinsi Sulawesi Utara. Manado.BPSPSU. (1999). Sulut Dalam Angka Tahun 1999 [Statistic of North Sulawesi Province 1999]. Badan Pusat Statistik Propinsi Sulawesi Utara. Manado.BPSPSU. (2001). Population of Manado City. Result of the 2000 Population Census. Badan Pusat Statistik Propinsi Sulawesi Utara. Manado.Braadbaart, O. (1995). Regulatory strategies and rational polluters: industrial wastewater control in Indonesia, 1982-1992. TWPR, 17(4), 439-458.Brown, B. E. (1997). Integrated coastal management: South Asia. Department of Marine sciences and Coastal Management, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.Buffleben, M. S., Zayeed, K., Kimbrough, D., Stenstrom, M. K. & Suffet, I. H. (2002). Evaluation of urban non-point source of runoff of hazardous metals entering Santa Monica Bay, California. Water Science and Technology, 45(9), 263-268.Burkhard, R., Deletic, A. & Craig, A. (2000). Techniques for water and wastewater management: a review of techniques and their integration in planning. Urban Water, 2, 197-221.Carpenter, R. A. & Maragos, J. E. (1989). How to assess environmental impacts on tropical islands and coastal areas. Sponsored by Asian development Bank. Environment and Policy Institute, Wast-West Center. 345 p.Cheevaporn, V. & Menasveta, P. (2003). Water pollution and habitat degradation in the Gulf of Thailand. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 47, 43-51.Chen, M.-H. & Chen, C.-Y. (1999). Bioaccumulation of sediment-bound heavy metals in grey mullet Liza macrolepis. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 39, 239–244.Chia, L. S. (1992). Singapore’s urban coastal area: strategies for management. ICLARM Tech. Rep. 31, 99 p.Chia, L.S. (1998). Coastal management in Singapore: institutional arrangement and implementation. Ocean & Coastal Management, 38, 111-118.Christie, P. (2005). Is integrated coastal management sustainable? Ocean & Coastal Management, 48, 208-232. 94
  • Cicin-Sain, B. & Knecht, R. W. (1998). Integrated coastal and ocean management. Concept and practices. Island Press. Washington, D.C. 517 p.Clark J. R. (1992). Integrated management of coastal zones. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 327. Rome, FAO. 167 p.Clark, J. R. (1996). Coastal zone management handbook. Lewis Publsihers. Boca Raton. 694p.Clark, R. B. (1997). Marine pollution. Forth Edition. Claredon Press, Oxford. 161p.Connell, D. W., Wu, R. S. S., Richardson, B. J., Leung, K., Lam, P. S. K. & Connell, P. A. (1998). Occurrence of persistent organic contaminants and related substances in Hong Kong marine area: an overview. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36(5), 736-384.Daniel, M. H. B., Montebelo, A. A., Bernardes, M. C., Ometto, J. P. H. B., De Camargo, P. B., Krusche, A. V., Ballester, M. V., Victoria, R. L. & Martinelli, L. A. (2002). Effects of urban sewage on dissolved oxygen, dissolved inorganic and organic carbon, and electrical conductivity of small streams along a gradient of urbansation in the Piracicaba river basin. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 136, 189-206.Dionisio, L. P. C., Rheinheimer, G. & Borrego, J. J. (2000). Microbiological pollution of Ria Formosa (south of Portugal). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 40(2), 186-193.DPPSU. (1994). Pembangunan Sub Sektor Perikanan selama Pelita V dan Program Pelita VI (Fisheries Development Plan). Dinas Perikanan Propinsi Sulawesi Utara, Manado, 1994.Dyer, S. D., Peng, Ch., McAvoy, D. C., Fendinger, N. J., Masscheleyn, P., Castillo, L. V. & Lim, J. M. U. (2003). The influence of untreated wastewater to aquatic communities in the Balatuin River, The Philippines. Chemosphere, 52, 43 –53.Edinger, E. N., Jompa, J., Limmon, G. V., Widjatmoko, W. & Risk, M. J. (1998). Reef degradation and coral biodiversity in Indonesia: effects of land-based pollution, destructive fishing practices and changes over time. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36(8), 617-630.Engin, G. O. & Demir, I. 2006. Cost analysis of alternative methods for wastewater handling in small communities. Journal of Environmental Management, 79, 357– 363.Fowler, J. & Cohen, L. (1990). Practical Statistics for Field Biology. John Wiley & Sons, England.Friedler, E., Lahav, O., Jizhaki, H. & Lahav, T. (2006). Study of urban population attitudes towards various wastewater reuse options: Israel as a case study. Journal of Environmental Management, 81, 360 –370.Gourbesville, Ph. & Thomassin, B. A. (2000). Coastal environment assessment procedure for sustainable wastewater management in tropical islands: the Mayotte example. Ocean & Coastal Management, 43, 997-1014.Greiner, R., Young, M. D., McDonald, A. D. & Brooks, M. (2000). Incentive instruments for sustainable use of marine resources. Ocean & Coastal Management, 43, 29-50.Grimble, R. & Chan, M-K. (1995). Stakeholder analysis for natural resource management in developing countries: some practical guidelines for making management more participatory and effective. Natural Resources Forum, 2, 113-124. 95
  • Hale, L. Z. & Olsen, S. B. (2003). Context and future directions for integrated coastal management. InterCoast, Fall, 31-33.Hambrey, J., Phillips, M., Chowdhury, M. A. K. & Shivappa, R. B. (2000). Environmental assessment of coastal aquaculture development: an environmental assessment (EA) manual to assist governmental agencies, coastal aquaculture developers, non- governmental organisation (NGOs) and community organisations. SEACAM. 213 p.Hauger, M. B., Rauch, W., Linde, J. J. & Mikkelsen, P. S. (2002). Cost benefit risk-a concept for management of integrated urban wastewater system. Water Science and Technology, 45(3), 185-193.Haughton, G. & Hunter, C. (1995). Sustainable cities. Regional Policy and Development Series 7. Regional Studies Association. London.Hildebrand, L. P. (1997). Introduction to the special issue on community-based coastal management. Ocean & Coastal Management, 36(1-3), 1-9.Hoozemans, F. J. M., Klein, R. J. T, Kroon, A. & Verhagen, H. J. (1995). The coast in conflict: an interdisciplinary introduction to coastal zone management. The Hague.Inglis, G. J. & Kross, J. E. (2000). Evidence for systemic changes in the benthic fauna of tropical estuaries as a result of urbanisation. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 41(7-12), 367-376.JICA (Japan International Co-operation Agency). (2000). The study on critical land and protection forest rehabilitation at Tondano Watershed in the Republic of Indonesia. Progress Report I. Nippom Koei Co., Ltd., Kokusai Kogyo Co., Ltd.Jiries, A. G., Al Nasir, F. M. & Beese, F. (2002). Pesticide and Heavy Metals Residue in Wastewater, Soil and Plants in Wastewater Disposal Site Near Al-Lajoun Valley, Karak, Jordan. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 133(1-4), 97-107.Jones, K. C. (2007). Sources, fate, behaviour and effects of organic chemicals at the regional and global scale (editorial). Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 9, 500.Jorge, M. A. (1997). Developing capacity for coastal management in the absence of the government: a case study in the Dominican Republic. Ocean & Coastal Management, 36(1-3), 47-72.JPHA (Japan Public Health Association). (2001). Preventive measures against environmental mercury pollution and its health effects. Japan Public Health Association, Japan, 112 pp.Jusoh, M. M. (1999). A contextual framework for the development and use of marine water quality criteria in ASEA. In C. McPherson, P. Chapman, G. Vigers & K. –S. Ong (Eds.), ASEAN Marine Water Quality Criteria: Contextual Framework, Methodology and Criteria for 18 Parameters (pp. I1–I10). ASEAN Marine Environmental Quality Criteria—Working Group (AMEQC-WG), ASEA-Canada Cooperative Programme on Marine Science—Phase II (CPMS-II). EVS Environment Consultant, North Vancouver and Department of Fisheries, Malaysia.Kärrman, E., (2001). Strategies towards sustainable wastewater management. Urban Water, 3, 63-72.Kawabe, M. (1998). To enhance the environmental values of Tokyo Bay- a proposition for integrated coastal zone management. Ocean & Coastal Management, 41, 19-39. 96
  • Kay, R. & Alder, J. (1999). Coastal planning and management. E & FN SPON. London and New York. 375 p.Kitsiou, D. & Karydis, M. (2001). Marine eutrophication: a proposed data analysis procedure for assessing spatial trends. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 68, 297-312.Koop, K., Booth, D., Broadbent, A., Brodie, J., Bucher, D., Capone, D., et al. (2001). ENCORE: the effect of nutrient enrichment on coral reefs. Synthesis of results and conclusion. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 42(2), 91-120.Kullenberg, G. (1999). The exclusive economic zone: some perspectives. Ocean & Coastal Management, 42, 849-855.Kumurur, V. A. & Lasut, M. T. (2002). The participation of NGOs in managing coastal communities: an experience from North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Ekoton, 2(1), 69-72.Kumurur, V. A. (2002a). Pembangunan, sumberdaya alam dan lingkungan hidup di Kota Manado [development, natural resources, and environment in the city of Manado]. Ekoton Edisi Khusus, 1, 29-38.Kumurur, V. A. (2002b). Kawasan pemukiman kumuh di Kota Manado dan alternatif solusi untuk meningkatkan kualitas lingkungannya [the slum areas in the city of Manado and alternatives to improve the environmental quality]. Ekoton, 2(2), 129- 135.Kusnoputranto, H. (1997). Air limbah dan ekskreta manusia: aspek kesehatan masyarakat dan pengelolaannya [wastewater and human excrete: community health aspect and management]. Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Tinggi, Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Jakarta.162p.Kvarnström, E. & Petersens, E. (2004). Open Planning of Sanitation Systems. EcoSanRes Fact Sheet 7. EcoSanRes Publication Series. Report 2004-3. Stockholm Environment Institute; Stockholm, Sweden.Lasut, M.T. (2002). Akumulasi logam pada beberapa jenis biota laut di perairan Semenanjung Minahasa, Sulawesi Utara [Metal accumulation in marine biota at Minahasa Peninsular, North Sulawesi]. Ekoton, 2, 107–115.Lee, J. (1998). Policy issues and management framework of Chinhae Bay, Republic of Korea. Ocean & Coastal Management, 38, 161-178.Lee, J. H. W. & Arega, F. (1999). Eutrophication dynamics of Tolo Harbour, Hong Kong. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 39, 187–192.Lipp, E. K., Farrah, S. A. & Rose, J. B. (2001). Assessment and impact of microbial fecal pollution and human enteric pathogens in a coastal community. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 42(4), 286-293.Luttinger, N. (1997). Community-based coral reef conservation in the bay islands of Honduras. Ocean & Coastal Management, 36(1-3), 11-22.Mallin, M. A., Cahoon, L. B., Toothman, B. R., Parsons, D. C., McIver, M. R., Ortwine, M. L. & Harrington, R. N. (2007). Impacts of a raw sewage spill on water and sediment quality in an urbanized estuary. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 54, 81 –88.Massoud, M. A., Scrimshaw, M. D. & Lester, J. N. (2003). Qualitative assessment of the effectiveness of the Mediterranean action plan: wastewater management in the Mediterranean region. Ocean & Coastal Management, 46, 875-899. 97
  • McPherson, T. N., Burian, S. J., Turin, H. J., Stenstrom, M. K. & Suffet, I. H. (2002). Comparison of the pollutant loads in dry and wet weather runoff in a southern California urban watershed. Water Science & Technology, 45(9), 255-261.Melloul, A. A., Hassani, L. & Rafouk, L. (2001). Salmonella contamination of vegetables irrigated with untreated wastewater. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 17(2), 207-209.Miclat, E. F. B., Ingles, J. A. & Dumaup, J. N. B. (2006). Planning across boundaries for the conservation of the Sulu-Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion. Ocean &Coastal Management, 49, 597 –609Miller, G. T. Jr. (1996). Living in the environment: principles, connections, and solution (Ninth Editions). Wadsworth Publishing Company. New York. 729 p.MoE-GoJ (Ministry of the Environment-Government of Japan). (2004). Result of FY 2002 Marine Environment Monitoring. Press Release. Available at http://www.env.go.jp/en/press/2004/0906a.html (accessed 25 July 2007).Mokat, A. (2003). Implementasi kebijakan pemerintah kota terhadap pengelolaan sampah di Kota Manado [implementation of the Manado City’s Government policy on the waste management]. Ekoton Edisi Khusus, 2, 11-17.Morgan, P. (2004). An Ecological Approach to Sanitation in Africa: A Compilation of Experiences. Aquamor: Harare, Zimbabwe. EcoSanRes Fact Sheet 12.Mrayyan, B. & Hamdi, M. R. (2006). Management approaches to integrated solid waste in industrialized zones in Jordan:A case of Zarqa City. Waste Management, 26, 195 – 205.Murthy, R. J., Rao, Y. R. & Inamdar, A. B. (2001). Integrated coastal management of Mumbai metropolitan region. Ocean & Coastal Management, 44, 355-369.NOAA (National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration). (1995). Analytical & planning for integrated coastal management. A prototype multimedia CD-ROM. Payson Stevens InterNetwork, Inc.Nur, Y., Fazi, S., Wirjoatmodjo, N. & Han, Q. (2001). Towards wise coastal management practice in a tropical megacity – Jakarta. Ocean & Coastal Management, 44, 335- 353.Ortiz-Hernandez, M. C. & Saenz-Morales, R. (1999). Effect of organic material and distribution of fecal coliforms in Chetumal Bay, Quintana Roo, Mexico. Environemntal Monitoring and Assessment, 55, 423-434.Ouano, E. A. R. (1988). Training manual on assessment of the quantity & type of land- based pollutant discharges into the marine & coastal environment. 66p.Owen, R. B. & Sandhu, N. (2000). Heavy metal accumulation and anthropogenic impacts on Tolo Harbour, Hong Kong. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 40(2), 174-180.Parameswaran, M. (1999). Urban wastewater use in plant biomass production. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 27, 39-56.Parkinson, J. & Tayler, K. (2003). Decentralized wastewater management in peri-urban areas in low-income countries. Environment & Urbanization, 15, 75-90.Pompeo, C.A. (1999). Development of a state policy for sustainable urban drainage. Urban Water, 1, 155-160. 98
  • Rawlins, B. G., Ferguson, A. J., Chilton, P. J, Arthurton, R. S., Rees, J. G. & Baldock, J. W. (1998). Review of agricultural pollution in the Caribbean with particular emphasis on small island developing states. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36(9), 658- 668.Reed, S. C., Crites, R. W. & Middlebrooks, E. J. (1995). Natural systems for waste management and treatment. Second Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc. New York. 434p.Rees, G. (1993). Health implication of sewage in coastal waters-British case. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 26, 14–19.Rivers-Moore, N. A. & Jewitt, G. P. W. (2007). Adaptive management and water temperature variability within a South African river system: What are the management options? Journal of Environmental Management, 82, 39 –50.Roomratanapun, W. (2001). Introducing centralized wastewater treatment in Bangkok: a study of factor determining its acceptability. Habitat International, 25, 359-371.RTI (Research Triangle Institute). (2004). Improving and expanding solid waste collection in Manado, North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Research Triangle Institute (USA) in association with PT Deserco Development Services. Manado.Ruddle, K. (1982). Environmental pollution and fishery resources in Souhteast Asian Coastal Waters. In C. Soysa, L. S. Chia & W. L. Collier (Eds.), Man, Land and Sea (pp. 15-35). The Agricultural Development Council, Bangkok.Schertenleib, R. (2002). Principles and implications of household centred-approach in environmental sanitation. Water and Sanitation for Developing Countries (SANDEC), Swiss Federal Institute for Environmental Science and Technology (EAWAG), Ueberlandstrasse 133, CH-8600 Duebendorf, Switzerland. Copyright 2002 EcoSanRes.Scialabba, N. (1998). Integrated coastal area management and agriculture, forestry and fisheries. FAO Guidelines. Environment and Natural Resources Service, FAO, Rome. 256p.Sevilla C. G., Ochave, J. A., Punsalan, T. G., Regala, B. P. & Uriarte, G. G. (1988). An introduction to research methods. Rex Printing Company, Inc. Philippines.Shatkin, G. (2007). Global cities of the South: Emerging perspectives on growth and inequality. Cities, 24(1), 1–15.Sheppard, Ch. (2007). Biomonitoring coastal seas –Celebrating the contributions of our first North American editor –Dr.John (Jack)B.Pearce (editorial). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 54, 1–4Somarelli, J. A., Makarewicz, J. C., Sia, R. & Simon, R. (2007). Wildlife identified as major source of Escherichia coli in agriculturally dominated watersheds by BOX A1R-derived genetic fingerprints. Journal of Environmental Management, 82, 60 – 65.Steel, R. G. D. & Torrie, J. H. (1980). Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw- Hill, Inc.Sukarma, R. & Pollard, R. (2000). Indonesia. Overview of sanitation and sewerage experience and policy options. Urban Development Sector Unit, Indonesia Country Management Unit, East Asia and Pacific Region. Available at 99
  • http://Inweb18.worldbank.org/eap/eap.nsf/Attachments/Water-Ris&Pollard/$file/ 1INDONESIA-sewerage+experience+(final).pdf (accessed 6 January 2006).Tamon, B. (2003). Pengelolaan limbah (padat dan cair) di Kota Manado [management of wastes (solid and liquid) in the city of Manado]. Ekoton Edisi Khusus, 2, 19-23.Tebbutt, T. H. Y. (1992). Principles of water quality control. Fourth Edition. Pergamon Press. Oxford. 251 p.Tomascik, T. (1993). Coral reef ecosystems: environmental management guidelines. Environmental management Development in Indonesia Project (EMDI). 79p.Tsagarakis, K. P., Mara, D. D., Horan, N. J. & Angelakis, A. N. (2001). Institutional status and structure of wastewater quality management in Greece. Water Policy, 3, 81-99.Tuncer, G., Karakas, T., Balkas, T. I., Gokcay, C.F., Aygnn, S., Yurteri, C., et al. (1998). Land-based sources of pollution along the black sea coast of Turkey: concentrations and annual loads to the Black Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36(6), 409-423.Tunggal, A. Dj. (2002). Peraturan perundang-undangan Lingkungan hidup [Environmental Acts of Indonesia]. Buku VII. Harvarindo, Jakarta.Ukwe, C. N., Ibe, C. A., Alo, B. I. & Yumkella, K. K. (2003). Achieving a paradigm shift in environmental and living resources management in the Gulf of Guinea: the large marine ecosystem approach. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 47, 219 –225.UNEP. (1992). From regulation to industry compliance: building institutional capabilities. United Nations Environment Programme. Industry and Environment Programme Activity Centre (IE/PAC). 62p.Vallega, A. (2001). Urban waterfront facing integrated coastal management. Ocean & Coastal Management, 44, 379-410.Vandermeulen, H. (1998). The development of marine indicators for coastal zone management. Ocean & Coastal Management, 39, 63-71.Veenstra S., Alaerts, G. & Bijlsma, M. (1997). Technology Selection. In: Water Pollution Control. Eds. R Helmer & I. Hespanol. E&FN Spon, London.Vermeulen, L. A. & Wepener, V. (1999). Spatial and temporal variations of metals in Richards Bay Harbour (RBH), South Africa. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 39, 304– 307.Vestal, B. & Rieser, A. (1995). Methodologies and mechanisms for management of cumulative coastal environmental impacts. Part I: Synthesis, with annotated bibliography; Part II: Development and application of a cumulative impacts assessment protocol. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 6. NOAA Coastal Ocean Office, Silver Spring, MD.Virkanen, J. (1998). Effect of urbanisation on metal deposition in the Bay of Toolonlahti, Southern Finland. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36(9), 729-738.Williams, T. M., Rees, J. G. & Setiapermana, D. (2000). Metals and trace organic compounds in sediments and waters of Jakarta Bay and the Pulau Seribu complex, Indonesia. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 40(3), 277-285.Windom, H. L. (1992). Contamination of the marine environment from land-based sources. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 25, 32-36. 100
  • Wong, P. P. (1998). Coastal tourism development in Southeast Asia: relevance and lesson for coastal zone management. Ocean & Coastal Management, 38, 89-109.Wu, R. S. S. (1999). Eutrophication, water borne pathogens and xenobiotic compounds: environmental risks and challenges. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 39, 11–22.Wu, R. S. S., Cheung, R. Y. H. & Shin, P. K. S. (1998). The ‘beneficial uses’ approach in coastal management in Hong Kong: a compromise between rapid urban development and sustainable development. Ocean & Coastal Management, 41, 89-102.Ye, Y., Tam, N. F. Y. & Wong, Y. S. (2001). Livestock wastewater treatment by a mangrove pot-cultivation system and the effect of salinity on the nutrient removal efficiency. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 42(6), 513-521.Yu, R-Q., Chen, G. Z., Wong, Y. S., Tam, N. F. Y. & Lan, C. Y. (1997). Benthic macrofauna of the mangrove swamp treated with municipal wastewater. Hydrobiologia, 347(1-3), 127-137.Zhang, Z., Zhu, M., Wang, Z. & Wang, J. (2006). Monitoring and managing pollution load in Bohai Sea, PR China. Ocean &Coastal Management, 49, 706 –716 101
  • AppendicesAppendix 1. Aggregation Variables in Environmental Awareness Analysis (Household Level)No. Variables Issues Focuses 1. Knowledge 1.1. General Knowledge on • Terminology of ‘environment environmental general issue and pollution. issue about • Pollution in coastal area environment • Toxic substance pollution and pollution • Why toilet should be used 1.2. Environmental Knowledge on • Pollution on potable water due issue related to environmental to wastewater discharge wastewater issue related to • Wastewater discharge causes wastewater disease • Diarrhoea disease caused by wastewater from toilet 2. Preference 2.1. Problem Government’s • Wastewater problem is solving of responsibility government’s responsibility environmental • No need to collect money issue including (retribution, tax, donation) from wastewater community Community’s • Wastewater problem is fully responsibility communitys responsibility • Government need to collect money (retribution, tax, donation) from community to solve wastewater problem All parties • Wastewater problem is all responsibility party’s responsibilities • Government can collect money (retribution, tax) from community and government should improve public wastewater facilities 102
  • Appendix 2. Aggregation Variables in Environmental Awareness Analysis (Personal Level) Variables Sub-variables Issues Focuses 1. Concern 1.1. Concern on General o Solid waste discharge general environmental o Toxic waste discharge environmental condition and o Community’s health condition issue impact o Local environmental condition o Local air pollution o Environmental destruction in coastal areas 1.2. Concern on Environmental o Local potable water pollution environmental condition and o Pollution in coastal areas. issue related impact related to o Toilet facilities and condition. with wastewater o Sewerage facilities and condition. wastewater discharge o Wastewater-caused diseases. o Pollution caused by wastewater discharge. 2. Preference 2.1. Preference on Government’s o Government is the only party has problem responsibility responsibility solving of o No fund is collected from environmental community issue, including Community’s o Community is the only party has wastewater responsibility responsibility o Fund must be collected from community All parties have o All parties must have responsibility responsibility for environmental quality improvement o Fund can be collected from community and other parties, and government will improve environmental condition and wastewater treatment facilities 103
  • Appendix 3. List of Questions Used in the Household Survey (at Household Level) done by Interview a. General questions: Wastewater treatments and facilities 1 Name / age 2 Occupation 3 Number of income 4 Number of person to be responsible 5 Highest achieving education 6 Houses status 7 Number of person lived in the house 8 Number of bedroom 9 Spare space (2x2 m) 10 House construction 11 Bathroom 12 Worry about diseases cause by wastewater discharge 13 Septic tank 14 Septic tank capacity (for black water) 15 Septic tank condition (for black water) 16 Condition of wastewater facilities for grey b. Special questions: Knowledge 17 Pollution in coastal area 18 Pollution of potable water due to wastewater discharge 19 Toxic substance pollution 20 Why toilet should be used Why toilet should be used 21 Wastewater discharge causes disease 22 Diseases (example: diarrhoea) were caused by wastewater from toilet 23 Terminology of ‘environment and pollution c. Special questions: Preference 24. Government is the only party has responsibility 25. No fund is collected from community 26. Community is the only party has responsibility 27. 28. Fund must be collected from community 29. All parties must have responsibility for environmental quality improvement 30. Fund can be collected from community and other parties, and government will improve environmental condition and wastewater treatment facilities 31. Polluters must pay for the environmental quality improvement 104
  • Appendix 4. List of Questions Used in the Personal Survey (at Personal Level) done by using Questionnaire a. General questions 1. N a me 2. Age 3. Gender 4. Married status 5. Highest achieving education 6. Occupation 7. Number of income 8. Lingkungan 9. Sub-district 10. District 11. House status b. Special questions: Concern 12. Solid waste discharge 13. Toxic waste discharge 14. Community’s health condition 15. Local environmental condition 16. Local air pollution 17. Environmental destruction in coastal areas 18. Local potable water pollution 19. Pollution in coastal areas 20. Toilet condition and facilities 21. Sewerage condition and facilities 22. Wastewater-caused diseases 23. Pollution caused by wastewater discharge c. Special questions: Preference 24. Government is the only party has responsibility 25. No fund is collected from community 26. Community is the only party has responsibility 27. 28. Fund must be collected from community 29. All parties must have responsibility for environmental quality improvement 30. Fund can be collected from community and other parties, and government will improve environmental condition and wastewater treatment facilities 31. Polluters must pay for the environmental quality improvement 105
  • Appendix 5. Matrix for Wastewater (Septic Tank) Condition Categories Condition Leaking to Open Close No concrete/ Concrete/ Concrete/ sewer hole hole cement cement cement (1 compart- (2 compart- ment) ments)Leaking to sewer 1 1 1 1 1Open hole 1 2 2 2Close hole 1 3 4 5No concrete/ cement 1 2 3Concrete/cement (1 1 2 4compartment)Concrete/cement 1 2 5(2 compartments) Denote: Condition 1: Very poor (leaking to sewer) Condition 2: Poor (open hole) Condition 3: Adequate (closed hole, no concrete/cement) Condition 4: Good (close hole, concrete/cement, 1 compartment) Condition 5: Very good (close hole, concrete/cement, 2 compartments) 106
  • Appendix 6. Combination for Infrastructure and Facility (at House Level) Condition Categories Concrete/ Littering by Running Condition cement solid waste water No Yes 5 Yes No 3 Yes Yes 4 No 1 No Yes 4 No No 3 Yes Yes 2 No 1Denote: Condition 1: Very poor (Concrete/cement or no, littering by solid waste, no running water) Condition 2: Poor (No concrete/cement, littering by solid waste, running water) Condition 3: Adequate (Concrete/cement or no, no littering by solid waste, no running water) Condition 4: Good (Concrete/cement or no, littering or no by solid waste, running water) Condition 5: Very good (Concrete/cement, no littering by solid waste, running water) 107
  • AnnexesAnnex 1. An Example of Questionnaire for Environmental Awareness Survey at Personal LevelI. GENERAL QUESTIONS a. Personal identity N a me : …………………………………… (may not be filled) Age : ……… Years Gender : …. 1. Female …. 2. Male Married status : …. 1. Married …. 2. Not Highest achieving : ………………………………………………… education Occupation : ………………………………………………… Number of income : Rp. …………….. Weekly or Monthly b. Address Lingkungan : ………………………………………………… Sub-district : ………………………………………………… District : ………………………………………………… House status : ….. 1. Owner ….. 2. Parents / Relatives ….. 3. Rent Signature : …………………………..II. CONCERN OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUESHow would you rate your concern about the items listed below? 1. Solid waste discharge around your home. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned 2. Toxic waste discharge around your home. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned 3. Community’s health condition around your home. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned 4. Environmental condition around your home. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned 108
  • …… 5 Not concerned5. Air pollution around your home. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned6. Environmental destruction in coastal areas closed to your home …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned7. Land reclamation in coastal area. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned8. Pollution in coastal and marine area of Manado Bay. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned9. Toilet facilities and condition in your home and your neighbors. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned10. Sewerage facilities and condition close to your home. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned11. Wastewater-caused diseases (diarrhoea, dermatitis, etc.) around your area. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned12. Pollution caused by wastewater discharge. …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concerned13. Local potable water pollution due to wastewater. 109
  • …… 1 Very concerned …… 2 Concerned …… 3 Somewhat concerned …… 4 Less concerned …… 5 Not concernedIII. PREFERENCE FOR WASTEWATER PROBLEMS SOLVING14. Do you agree or disagree that wastewater problems are government responsibility only? …… 1 Very agree …… 2 Agree …… 3 Less agree …… 4 Disagree15. Do you agree or disagree if government addressed all wastewater problems solving to community responsibility only? …… 1 Very agree …… 2 Agree …… 3 Less agree …… 4 Disagree16. Do you agree or disagree if all wastewater problems solving are government and community including all parties’ responsibility? …… 1 Very agree …… 2 Agree …… 3 Less agree …… 4 Disagree17. Do you agree or disagree that the way to solve wastewater problems is no need to collect fund from community? …… 1 Very agree …… 2 Agree …… 3 Less agree …… 4 Disagree18. Do you agree or disagree that the way to solve wastewater problems is needed to collect from community (examples: by increasing tax or retribution)? …… 1 Very agree …… 2 Agree …… 3 Less agree …… 4 Disagree19. Do you agree or disagree if government collects fund (examples: by increasing tax or retribution) from community to solve wastewater problem by improving wastewater treatment and sewer facilities? …… 1 Very agree …… 2 Agree …… 3 Less agree …… 4 Disagree20. Do you agree or disagree that who dispose wastewater to environment must pay for (polluter pay)? …… 1 Very agree …… 2 Agree …… 3 Less agree …… 4 Disagree 110
  • Annex 2. Illustration of a House Unit HOUSE UNIT Kitchen Wastewater Bathroom Infrastructure & Septic tank facilities Toilet (2 compartments) (at house basis) Sewer Sewer Concrete/ Running cement water Concrete/ cement 111