Problem overview:

     Stakeholders participation: Several communities in Phitsanulok province have adopted a community waste management programme to reduce the amount of generated waste, separate waste in different types for recycling, and improved their waste collection systems. It is the cooperation and coordination among community members and municipality officials that made this process work.

Background in summary:

     Baromtrilokanat 21 Community -participation for waste management: In 1997, 289 people from 81 families initiated their own community organization under the name "Baromtrilokanat 21 Community" with support from Phitsanulok Municipality. The build-up and strengthening of communities within the city area had been introduced to promote participation of the people in community management. One of the activities under this programme is the community waste management plan.

     Implementation of the programme: The community members have the willingness to participate in environmental management and pay for such activities. With strong determination and cooperation from community members and Phitsanulok Municipality, a common understanding and practice of waste handling was then developed:

• Treating organic waste: Organic waste or digestible waste, including waste from gardens are collected in a brown bin (compostainer) and treated in a jointly managed community composting facility.
  
  
• Recycling/Reusing waste: Re-saleable waste (for recycling) is separated and stored temporarily in households before being sold, and
  
  
• Dumping useless waste: General waste (non-usable-waste) is placed in green bins for collection and disposal by the Municipality.
  
  

     Information gathering for feedback and review: Shortly after the introduction of waste separation, a waste composition study was implemented that showed that the community produces an average of 306 kg waste per day. After separation of waste only 132 kg/day had to be collected by the Municipality.

     Positive outcome: As it turned out, the activity has a series of very positive achievements:

• Collaboration and communication among community members has been strengthened,
  
  
• Income of each household increased by selling recyclable waste,
  
  
• Due to reduced amount of waste, the Municipality spent less on waste collection and disposal,
  
  
• Improvement in the environmental condition, the Municipal is visibly cleaner
  
  
• Community members, especially the younger generation, are well aware of the benefit of waste recycling and environmental issues.
  
  

     Programme implementation in other communities: The Baromtrialokanat 21 Community serves as the most comprehensive and successful example for other municipalities to take up as a good practice example. Since then some 30 more small communities, each comprising 80-150 households, have formulated their own community management programmes with the assistance of the Municipal administration.

     Success owes to participation and awareness raising: Phitsanulok Municipality has successfully implemented this project through strengthening community participation so that they would feel involved with the programme. Also through environmental awareness programmes targeting at people in the province and provinces nearby, to make aware of the benefit of the programme, which is improved health and living conditions.

     In addition: The Municipality started last year the Phitsanulok Sanitary Landfill, a state of the art sanitary landfill site, which is in operation since February 1999 and contributes greatly to the better healthy management of the solid waste.

See also Solid Waste Management Program for Phitsanulok

Peer Review Committee Good practice rating: (1 for the best, 5 for the lowest score)
Sustainability		Efficiency
2	Improvement in either the environment of economic condition with no harm to the other.	2	Cost efficient.
2	Sustainable over time (not one-off)	Process
Adaptability		1	Participation of the community
3	Location adaptability (can the project be done in other places?)	2	Participation of resource owners/users
3	Socio-cultural adaptability.	2	Partnerships between various actors (Governments, NGO, Academia, Private)
2	Level of development adaptability.	2	Degree of coordination and cooperation between government departments.
3	Style of government adaptability.	-	Ability to attract political interest/support
2	Degree of decentralization adaptability.	2	Procedures for feedback and review.
Comments on this example:      The government of Thailand has been promoting waste separation for the past 3-4 years through awareness raising campaigns. The campaigns seemed to be a success because Thais were eager to separate their waste from seeing how waste separation can help improve the environment. However, the provision of different types of garbage bags were not easily available, resulting in people being discouraged from following the programme as they found it too much of a hassle.      A waste treatment plant has been set up in Orn-nuch District, Bangkok to treat separated waste. But so far, households are still dumping all types of waste together, making the purpose of setting up this treatment plant in vain. Hence, cooperation from all parties is needed. The Provincial Government needs to make separated garbage bags readily available and households need to seriously act upon separating their waste. Sustainability of the project:   Adaptability of the project to other situations:      Stakeholders participation: One factor that could possibly contribute to the success of this programme is the size of the community. 80-150 households per community is not considerably to large to manage. Besides, most of the people in these communities tend to know each other well since most of them have lived their for generations. Therefore, communicating among community members and asking for cooperation from each member shouldn't be a difficult task for a closely linked community. Once there is cooperation and coordination, implementation of any such programme is most likely to be a success.      On the contrary, if a community as fairly large and each community member are not familiar with each other's company, receiving community participation might not be as easy nor successful. Process of decision making and implementation:   Cost efficiency: