Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Waste on Water
The Case of Chhnok Tru Commune, Kampong Chhnang Province, Cambodia
____________________________________________________
Hong Li Wee, Low Yi Yun and Noun Chandany (Our Cambodian Buddy)
Where, What & Why
Tonle Sap Lake
The Tonle (large river) Sap (fresh) Lake is the largest lake in Southeast Asia. The lake is affected
by the seasonal changes in hydrological regime of the Mekong Basin resulting in dry and wet
seasons (Campbell et al., 2006). During the dry season (November to May), the lake size is
around 2,500 km2 and expands to 15,000km2 in the wet season (June to October) (MRC, 2003).
Due to its sheer size and changing hydrological regime, the lake is one of the most productive
fisheries in the world that supports the livelihood of more than a million people (van Zalinge et
al., 2000). Not only is the lake valuable to the population, it is also important to the greater
Mekong system due to its rich biodiversity and complex interacting physical, biological and
human systems, making it a key element in the ecology of the system (Bonheur and Lane,
2002).
With the thriving fisheries and abundance resources, the lake attracts a large population to
reside along the catchment of and on the lake itself (Keskinen and Sithirith, 2009). This results
in an estimated population of 4.5 million people that is still growing at a rapid rate of 4.8%
(Leang, 2003). With increasing population on these floating villages, there is a risk of increasing
waste production. Thus, without proper waste management system, there would be
environmental and human impacts which can be detrimental to the lake system and livelihoods
of people. In particular, this report seeks to look into the issue of waste (referring to non-‐
human waste) on water-‐based villages through the case of Chnok Tru Commune in Kampong
Chhnang province.
Chhnok Tru Commune and its Waste Problem
Photo 1: Chnnok Tru Commune
Chhnok Tru Commune (photo 1) is one of 6 water-‐based fishing villages in Kampong Chhnang
province (Sithirith, 2014) located near the mouth of the lake connecting to Tonle Sap River. The
commune has a total of 1,761 households (Khmer Village Chief, 2016). Through our field
interviews, we discovered that there is a lack of waste management system in the commune.
Our findings suggest that a household throws around 1 kilograms of waste a day amounting up
to approximately 1.761 tonnes of waste a day and 642.765 tonnes of waste a year just by the
commune. The large amount of waste thrown freely into the lake, and the resultant
accumulation, would become a concern to the long-‐term management of the Tonle Sap, as
other floating villages may have similar practices. Therefore, our group decided to embark on
this project to detail the waste issue, the impacts and possible solutions that we can propose.
Photo 2: Waste Situation in Chhnok Tru
While there have been studies done on the various threats to the lake, most focus on human
waste issues (see Brown, 2010), resources and fisheries management and usage (see Thuok and
Nuov, 1996; Sithirith, 2014; Yen et al., 2007) and water quality issues (see Sien, 2001).
Conversely, there are limited studies relating to non-‐human waste and the associated impacts.
Therefore, using the case of Chhnok Tru Commune, this report seeks to bring to light the
pressing issue of waste on water (photo 2) through an empirical approach anchoring on post-‐
consumption geographies in exploring spatial and temporal relations. We also seek to propose
a more environmentally just approach to addressing this issue in the future.
Why Waste?
“[A]ll societies both throw things away and abandon them” (Gregson et al., 2007: 697)
During our research process, we recognized the importance of studying waste as waste is not
simply passive matter -‐ which most works tend to assume -‐ but rather an active agent that is
not characterised by fixity and is powerful (Davies, 2012; Bennett, 2004). Rather than the ‘end’,
waste disposal should be considered the beginning, characterised by processes such as waste
relocation, rematerialization and its associated impacts (Shaw and Hesse, 2010). Therefore, in
this report, we focus on tracing the processes and highlight the possible impacts that resulted
from waste disposal.
Tracing the Waste
A multi-‐method approach was adopted, including 15 semi-‐structured interviews (Annex A), 3
households interview through fellow researchers, participant observation and waste collection
(photo 3). In tracing the path of waste and identifying impacts, we conducted participant
observation and collected waste for documenting purposes.
Photo 3: Collection of waste with the help of host’s children
Given the unique geography of the floating village, our research was conducted through
assistance from gatekeepers and fellow researchers in the field. In particular, our host was very
resourceful and had directed us to numerous interviewees that our research demands.
However, during the research process, we faced a few challenges. What strikes us the most was
when we encountered false information. We managed to overcome this by conversing with our
host and experienced researchers as they were able to provide as with the actual information
based on their expertise and experiences.
Dipping into the Wastes
The starting point of the research is to understand waste, in particular, what types of waste are
produced by the villagers? We observed and collected some wastes and categorised them into
organic and inorganic waste (figure 1). Organic waste refers to biodegradable material
originating from plants and animals (Zimring and Rathje, 2012). Inorganic waste refers to non-‐
biodegradable materials that are often of mineral origins (EEA, 2016).
Figure 1: Classification of waste found in Chhnok Tru Commune
Just Throwing?
More than just the disposal of waste directly into the lake, the villagers adopt waste practices
that reflect the “Reduce, Reuse and Recycle” framework proposed by Singapore’s National
Environment Agency (NEA) in 2001 (NEA, 2016; figure 2). This framework has since played an
important role in the preventing the accumulation of waste and promoting sustainability in
Singapore. Below describes how the villagers of Chhnok Tru Commune practice the 3Rs.
Figure 2: Singapore’s 3 Rs framework (Source: NEA)
Reduce
To ‘reduce’ the amount of waste produced, villagers have a ice flask (photo 4) in their homes to
store the drinks they purchased. This avoids the production of more waste in the form of plastic
cups or bags, that ultimately gets thrown into the lake.
Photo 4: Ice flask used by villagers
Reuse
Waste was ‘reused’ through collecting plastic bottles to use as floats for their houses, fuels or
to store clean water for drinking. Another example is how styrofoam are converted into useful
objects for the children such as toys (photo 5) or floats (photo 6). Plastics were also used as
burning fuel to cook and properly dispose of medical waste (photo 7) (Tay, Doctor at Public
Health Centre, 2016) .
Photo 5.: A toy created by children using waste picked up from the lake
Photo 6: Host’s boy using styrofoam as float
Photo 7: Plastic used to fuel to burn medical waste
Recycle
To ‘recycle’ the waste produced, practices includes recycling beer cans (photo 8), iron (photo 9)
and leaked oil, and are exchanged for money in the village (Table 1).
Photo 8: Beer cans
Photo 9: Iron
S/N ITEM AMOUNT RECEIVED (RIEL)
1 Beer Cans 200
2 Plastic Bottles 100
3 Iron 200
4 Leaked Oil 15,000 -‐ 30,000 (dependant on quality)
Table 1. Amount received for recyclable goods.
Despite highlighting the above-‐mentioned examples the 3 Rs in Chhnok Tru Commune, it is
difficult to ascertain whether is such policy transfer applicable from a modern city like
Singapore to a down-‐to-‐earth floating village like Chhnok Tru Commune . These restrictions may
take in the form of cultural practices, lack of education, and the resistant to change. From
which, there is a need for more research to be done to find out the transferability of urban-‐to-‐
rural policies.
Possible Impacts from Waste
Through our observations and conversations with the villagers, we identified several impacts
(not exhaustive) -‐ classified into environmental and human -‐ that resulted from waste disposal.
Environment
The environmental impacts caused by waste is vast and complicated, and we decided to look
specifically into seasonal and temporal impacts, along with deeper considerations for scalar
impacts.
Chhnok Tru Commune is a water-‐based village that experiences both the dry and wet seasons.
Between these two seasons, the impact of waste was found to be different. FIgure 3 shows us
spatial difference in the water bodies between the wet and dry season, taking note to the rise
in area of water bodies during the wet season. Imagine, all the trash floating around on the
river during the wet season (photo 10), what would then happen in the dry season? Our
observation concluded that waste would congregate together, forming ‘rubbish islands’ and
either be deposited on dry lands or move with the village.
Figure 3: Spatial Difference between Wet and Dry Season in Chhnok Tru
Photo 10: ‘Rubbish islands’
Temporally, in the short run, we find that these waste would continue to be ignored by the
local communities. This is because the amount of bacteria contributed by these waste are not
hazardous (visible) enough to affect their livelihoods, especially during the wet seasons.
Similarly, waste are often trapped amongst the water hyacinth, and are thus ‘invisible’ (Photo
11). However, the same amount of bacteria would be hazardous during the dry season, due to
its increased concentration when the water volume has decreased. It was revealed that during
the dry season, there was a period of 3 months when they rely on the purchase of clean water
for their survival as it was when the water is dirty and polluted (Fishing authority, 2016; OM
Kong, Household 2, 2016).
Therefore, assuming that no intervention was made to the current waste problem, we can
foresee how waste continues to accumulate till they become even more ‘visible’ even during
the wet season. We can only lament on how the waters might become more polluted,
drastically affecting their livelihoods in the long run.
Photo 11: Rubbished trapped amongst Vegetation
Lastly, we need to account for the scalar impact of the waste the local communities throw into
the river. The waste produced by them are harmful as a collective whole, not just within their
own living spaces, but also to neighbouring villagers and the lower Mekong River. Hence, such a
problem has to be studied beyond the boundaries of the village, to assess the impacts of
localised waste on the wider ecosystem.
Human
Two anthropogenic impacts have been identified. First, water pollution has worsened the
quality of water around the commune and this has impacts on human health. It is understood
that villagers use the water straight from the lake for purposes such as drinking, washing and
cooking. These may result in unintended health impacts such as diarrhea (Thea, Household 3,
2016) and rashes (Srey, Provision Shop Owner, 2016; photo 12). Furthermore, these conditions
tend to worsen in the dry season when water level is lower (Mr Wong, Household 1, 2016).
Often times, villagers resort to buying clean drinking water for use.
Photo 12: Rashes developed from showering in the lake
Another issue identified is effects on livelihoods of villagers, especially during the dry season.
Water level falls and the outcrop of water hyacinth (photo 13) makes it difficult for villagers to
maneuver around. Mr. Wong (household 1, 2016) told us that time have to be spent clearing
the water hyacinth before they could start their boat and their propeller would often get
trapped between the plants while travelling. While these impacts seem common and that the
villagers have gotten use to them, with greater amount of waste and falling water levels during
the wet season, such issues are likely to worsen further threatening the livelihood of the
villagers.
Photo 13: Outcrop of water hyacinth during the dry season
“I have no choice” -‐ Are they Aware?
Throughout our interviews, one key question that we asked was whether the villagers know
about the impacts of waste disposal. Many replied that they know about the potential impacts
on the environment but they have no choice. The Fishing Authority (2016) said that the impacts
are most apparent in the dry season where mobility is obstructed by the outcrop of water
hyacinth and the lack of clean water. However, these impacts are viewed only as “short term”
impacts by the villagers (Chhnok Tru Commune Fishing Authority, 2016).
Furthermore, there is a lack of close ties between the human activities and the environment
because the information they have are inaccurate or insufficient (Phyrun, 1996). This is
reflected when the villagers weren’t able to provide much examples of environmental impacts
other than the outcrop of water hyacinth which is a highly visible impact.
More importantly, the lake is the only place that they could dispose of their wastes as there is
no proper waste management system. Thee Environment Agency mentioned that the nearest
landfill is located 10 kilometers away from the commune and travelling is costly, making it
tedious to dispose waste there. These, we argue, is very much linked to the need for ‘survival’
that triumphs over other agendas (Bonheur and Lane, 2002). While the villagers understand
that the disposal of waste can result in further impacts, they had no other viable alternatives.
Thus, we cannot entirely place the blame on the villagers as they were forced by circumstances
and the lack of infrastructure. Therefore, noting these, the next section details some of the
factors to be considered.
Proposed Factors
Beyond the deconstruction of waste, this study aimed to provide a set of factors to be carefully
considered when implementing waste management systems in floating villages like Chhnok Tru
Commune. An effective waste management system needs to involve the collaboration between
community members, academic researchers, professionals and government agencies as the
environment is collectively used by the various stakeholders each with different agendas
(Agyemen, 2002). Therefore, central to our proposed factors is the idea of ‘environmental
justice’ -‐ reinforces the need for equal participation of all groups (Agyeman, 1990) -‐ where we
further consider the roles and involvement of the various stakeholders in achieving effective
waste management.
Evaluating Existing (Lack of) Efforts
The lack of waste management reflects the lack of government participation due to the
economic and political weakness (Bonheur and Lane, 2002). However, it is important for
government authorities to take part in environment protection by considering how it is not an
obstacle to economic growth but rather as effort to promote sustainable development (Phyrun,
1996). Beyond the government, there is a strong presence of NGOs in attempting to promote
proper waste management. However, their efforts are often ineffective as they fail to consider
a multitude of factors. One example is when an NGO provided villagers with trash bins and
waste collection, but this only lasted for a period of two months (Chhnok Tru Commune
Environment Authority, 2016). Therefore, moving forward, to ensure the success of waste
management system, we have identified several factors that we think are important.
Managing Attitude and Habit
The villagers are aware that there are impacts brought upon by waste disposal, but were not
able to pinpoint to specific impacts and felt that the impacts are short term and not
detrimental. Thus, there is a need to change villagers’ attitude towards waste through efforts
such as public education. Phyrun (1996) notes that environmental education provides them
with the necessary knowledge to understand the complexities of the environment, but is
currently lacking. Only with an informed and committed citizenry that environment protection
can be successfully carried out (ibid). We believe that is is also necessary to educate the
children in the commune. Williams (2014) highlighted how educating children (photo 14) can
promote inter-‐generational influence, where through children, families began to adopt waste
practices.
Photo 14: Host’s child helping to pick up trash
Space Constraints
There is a need to acknowledge the issue of space constraints faced by the villagers. Moving
beyond the scale of the lake and commune, it is important to consider household spaces, since
that is where most day-‐to-‐day waste are being generated. As the floating homes have to be
mobile and stable, they are often small in size resulting in space constraints within the house
(photo 15). From our observations, some houses barely have enough space to fit the whole
family. This brings about the need to re-‐think how spaces can needs to be manipulated at the
various scales when re-‐thinking waste management policies.
Photo 15: Typical house in the commune
Involving the Actors
Most importantly, environmental protection projects need to consider the complexities of
environmental issues and mobilise environmental justice by involving the collaboration
between multiple actors (Agyeman, 2002). We argue for the engagement of the villagers (other
than government and NGOs) in the planning and execution of projects as they are the ones that
are most burdened by environmental decisions (Cole and Foster, 2001). Siphan (2009: 39) using
his example of ecotourism highlights that involving the community helps “to develop a sense of
stewardship among local communities” and ensure greater sustainability. This has been
reinforced by Mr. Wong (Household 1; 2016) where he mentioned that efforts should involve
all stakeholders and not just the NGOs.
Women Empowerment
Beyond the community, we realised that women are often involved in managing household
wastes, thus it is important to involve them. Buckingham et al. (2005) argues that while women
play important in the households and are frequently in contact with waste, they often have
limited role in political decision making at the higher level. Thus, to ensure the success of
management systems, a gender sensitive approach needs to be adopted through mobilizing
environmental justice.
Moving Forward
In all, we have highlighted the issue of waste on water using the case of Chhnok Tru Commune
and through that highlight the associated impacts resulting from free waste disposal. We
moved on to provide several factors that we feel will be crucial to implementing successful
waste management systems. However, it is important to note that “Tonle Sap is the product of
a complex set of interdependent systems, however, it continues to be dealt with in a piecemeal
manner” (Bonheur and Lane, 2002: 39). We believe that further research is required, to
examine the impacts of waste during the dry season, to engage the stakeholders and examine
the willingness of communities to participate in the projects.
References Agyeman, J. (1990). ‘Black People in a White Landscape: Social and Environmental Justice’, Built Environment, 16(3): 232–6.
Agyeman, J. (2002). Constructing environmental (in) justice: transatlantic tales. Environmental Politics, 11(3): 31-‐53. Bennett, J. (2004). The force of things steps toward an ecology of matter.Political theory, 32(3): 347-‐372. Bonheur, N. and Lane, B. D. (2002). Natural resources management for human security in Cambodia’s Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve. Environmental Science & Policy, 5(1): 33-‐41. Brown, M. (2010). Sanitation in Floating Communities in Cambodia. Available from Live & Learn Environmental Education, Cambodia. Buckingham, S., Reeves, D., & Batchelor, A. (2005). Wasting women: The environmental justice of including women in municipal waste management.Local Environment, 10(4): 427-‐444. Campbell, I. C., Poole, C., Giesen, W., and Valbo-‐Jorgensen, J. (2006). Species diversity and ecology of Tonle Sap Great Lake, Cambodia. Aquatic Sciences, 68(3): 355-‐373. Cole, L. and S. Foster (2001), From the Ground Up: Environmental Racism and the Rise of theEnvironmental Justice Movement, New York and London: New York University Press. Davies, A. R. (2012). Geography and the matter of waste mobilities.Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(2):191-‐196. Europe Environment Agency (EEA). Inorganic Waste. Available at: http://glossary.eea.europa.eu/terminology/concept_html?term=inorganic%20waste, accessed: 24 Oct 2016. Gregson, N., Metcalfe, A. and Crewe, L. (2007). Identity, mobility and the throwaway society. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 25: 682–700 . Keskinen, M., & Sithirith, M. (2010). Tonle Sap Lake and its management: The diversity of perspectives and institutions. PN67 project report, improving Mekong water resources investment and allocation choices. CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Leang, P. (2003). Sub-‐Area Analysis, The Tonle Sap Sub-‐Area. Report for the Basin Development Plan, Mekong River Commission, Phnom Penh, pp. 79.
Moore, S. A. (2012). Garbage matters Concepts in new geographies of waste. Progress in Human Geography, 36(6): 780-‐799. MRC. (2003). State of the Basin Report 2003. Mekong River Commission, Phnom Penh, pp. 300. National Environment Agency. (n.d.) Waste Minimisation and Recycling. Available at: http://www.nea.gov.sg/energy-‐waste/3rs, last accessed: 23 October 2016. Phyrun, U. (1996). The environmental situation in Cambodia, policy and instructions. Biopolitics, the Bio-‐Environment, and Bio-‐Culture in the Next Millennium, 5. Shaw, J. and Hesse, M. (2010). Transport, geography and the ‘new’ mobilitie. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 3: 305–12. Sien, C. L. (2001). Overview of impact of sewage on the marine environment of East Asia: Social and economic opportunities. United Nations Environment Programme. Siphan, O. (n.d.). Ecotourism in the Wetlands of Cambodia. Ministry of Tourism, Cambodia: 37-‐39. Sithirith, M. (2014). The Patron–Client System and Its Effect on Resources Management in Cambodia: A Case in the Tonle Sap Lake. Asian Politics & Policy, 6(4): 595-‐609. Thuok, N., & Nuov, S. (1995). Cambodia's Great Lake: how to sustain its ecological and economic diversity. publisher not identified. Williams, I. D. (2014). The importance of education to waste (resource) management. Waste Management, 34: 1909-‐1910. Van Zalinge, N., Thouk, N., Tana, T.C. and Leung, D. (2000). Where there is water, there is fish? Cambodian fisheries issues in a Mekong River Basin perspective. In: Ahmed, M., Hirsch, P. (Eds.), Common Property in the Mekong: Issues of Sustainability and Subsistence. ICLARM Stud. Rev., pp. 27.
Yen, N. T. H., Sunda, K., Oishi, S., and Ikejima, K. (2007). Tonle Sap ecosystem water quality index development and fish production. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 102. Zimring, C. A., & Rathjie, W. L. (2012). Organic Waste. Encyclopedia of Consumption and Waste: the Social Science of Garbage: 636-‐638.
Annex A List of Interviewees (Semi-‐Structured Interviews)
S/N Interviewee Remarks
1 Fishing Authority
2 Environment Authority
3 Public Health Centre (Tay, Doctor)
4 Provision Shop 1 (Pheap, 35)
5 Provision Shop 2 (Srey, 35)
6 Oil Seller (Sreoun, 38)
7 Machinery Shop Owner (Hing, 45)
Member of Environment Authority
8 Wood Shop Owner (Ratha, 27)
9 Ice Shop Owner (Thean, 54)
10 Household 1 (Mr. Wong, 35)
11 Household 2 (OM Kong, 42)
Yien Jun’s host
12 Household 3 (Thea, 35)
Jess’s host
13 Household 4 (Key Sokna, 31)
Bella’s host
14 Household 5
Khmer Village Chief
Kellie’s host
15 Household 6 (Vann Ros, 54)
Community Chief
