MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND
WASTE-TO-ENERGY IN INDONESIA: A POLICY REVIEW
Aretha Aprilia1, Tetsuo Tezuka1, Gert Spaargaren2
1
Department of Socio-Environmental Energy Science, Graduate School of Energy Science,
Kyoto University
2
Department of Environmental Policy, Wageningen University, the Netherlands
ABSTRACT
This paper presents the review of existing
policies on waste management and waste-to-
energy in Indonesia. This paper seeks to identify
the policy gaps in the promotion of renewable
energy to provide policy recommendations. The
findings shows that despite the early stage of
development in waste-to-energy, the values of
waste as untapped potentials for energy
provisioning are already identified and regulated
in the recently-devised policies. The paper
suggests the incorporation of policy mixes and
quantifiable criteria in the policies. The
financing potential through introduction of new
policy instruments for retribution of waste
management, as well as the shift of subsidies
from conventional energy to clean energy is
presented.
Keywords: clean energy, municipal solid waste,
waste management, policy.
INTRODUCTION
Major urban centres in Indonesia produce nearly
10 million tons of waste annually that increases
2-4 per cent annually. It is predicted that by
2019, the volume of waste in Jakarta will exceed
the design capacity of Bantar Gebang landfill
(Cleansing Department, 2010). The main
constituent of waste generated in Jakarta is
organic wastes with more than 70 percent,
which is potential for energy generation
(Chaerul, M., et al, 2007). This may respond to
the energy insecurity that has become an
emerging issue in Indonesia.
Indonesia has large new and clean energy
potential, which includes 50 gigawatt of
biomass (Ministry of Energy and Mineral
Resources, 2008). With regard to energy from
waste, currently the government has generated 2
megawatt of energy, which is targeted at 26
megawatt by 2013 (Suara Pembaruan, 2010).
Organic municipal waste is identified as one of
the potential source of biomass energy. The
types of wastes produced in Indonesia are
mainly consists of organic matter (65%). The
major sources for MSW are residential localities
(Chaerul, 2006). Considering these facts, the
waste in the landfill is mostly comprised of
household organic wastes that produce methane,
therefore potential for energy generation.
The discourse that is put at the centre of this
paper relates to the existing policies on energy
and waste management in Indonesia that
correspond to the urgent need of energy
generation from waste. The purpose of this
paper is to identify the current policies on
energy and waste management in order to
recognize the policy gaps in the promotion of
clean energy from waste and propose the policy
instruments that can be taken into account to
improve the current policies.
Three research questions guide this paper:
1) What are the existing policies of energy and
waste management in Indonesia which are of
direct relevance for the development of clean
energy from wastes?
2) What are the policy gaps in the promotion of
clean energy and MSW management?
3) What policy instruments can be proposed to
improve the policies on waste management and
development of clean energy from wastes?
Scope and Limitation
The determinants of success in waste
management and clean energy generation from
waste would include policy instruments,
available technologies, roles of market actors,
and households’ behaviour on waste. This paper
puts the particular emphasis on policy, therefore
the limitation of the paper is the exclusion of
other aspects such as technologies, market
actors and households’ behaviour on waste.
ENERGY AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
POLICIES IN INDONESIA
Indonesia had moved to a decentralized
planning model following the two key
legislations, which are the Law No. 22 and Law
No. 25, passed in 1999 and implemented in
2001. The enactment of these laws has changed
Indonesia from a highly centralized state, with
governance, planning, and fiscal management
partially `de-concentrated' to provincial
government offices, to a decentralized state with
autonomous power over these responsibilities
`devolved' to lower levels of government.
(Beard, 2005). The aforementioned laws
authorize local governments to regulate and
manage many affairs of local communities,
including the authority to formulate local energy
policies and plans.
The following sub-chapters elaborate on the
policies of energy and waste management in
Indonesia.
National Energy Policies in Indonesia
To support the development of new and
renewable energy, the government has issued
several key regulations, consisting of
Presidential Decree No. 5 / 2006, on the
National Energy Policy, Law No. 30 / 2009 on
Electrification, Law No. 30/2007 on Energy,
Law No. 15/1985 on electricity, Government
Regulation No. 03 / 2005, No.26 / 2006
regarding the supply and usage of electricity,
and Blueprint of National Energy Management
2005-2025. The government allocates IDR 144
billion (ca. US$ 16 million) for energy subsidies
out of the total IDR 1,13 trillion (ca. US$ 125
million) of National Budget in 2010
(Government of Indonesia, 2010).
The current overall development of clean and
renewable energy is regulated by the
Presidential Decree No.5 / 2006 on National
Energy Policy. This decree states that the
contribution of new and renewable energy in the
2025 national primary energy mix is estimated
at 17%, consisting of 5% biofuel, 5%
geothermal power, biomass, nuclear, hydro, and
wind, and also liquefied coal at 2%. The
government will take measures to add the
capacity of biomass of 180 MW by 2020 2024
(Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources,
2008). The specific regulations regarding the
management of waste to energy is not yet in
place (IEA, 2008). Jakarta municipal
government is currently targeting 26 megawatt
of energy generation from waste by 2013.
Policies on Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
Management in Indonesia
Decentralization applies to MSW
management in Indonesia, in which the
laws that are devised by the state
government are to be followed by
regional regulations as guidelines for the
technical implementation. Currently, the
implementation of MSW management in
Indonesia does not refer to any specific
guidelines or require any regulations
compliance since the policy formulation
is still at infancy stage. The follow up of
the laws that should be translated into
regional policies are still underway. The
formulation of waste management
hierarchy, laws and regulations, are
expected to provide an effective baseline
for devising regional policy that largely
depends on the context of each specific
region.
Waste Management Hierarchy
In most of the industrialized nations, the ‘Waste
Management Hierarchy’ (minimization,
recovery and transformation, and land disposal)
has been adopted as the menu for developing
solid waste management strategies (Bai, R.,
Sutanto, M., 2002). The EU has also mandated a
waste management policy based on a
“hierarchy” of options that give top priority to
waste minimization, followed by recycling, and
then incineration, with landfill disposal last
(Fullerton, D., Raub, A., 2004). Either case,
waste minimization has been placed at the top of
solid waste management hierarchy. Waste
minimization consists of two basic operations:
source reduction and recycling (Hopper et al.,
1993).
Similar to that, it is only recently that the
government of Indonesia adopted a new system
of waste hierarchy that is incorporated in the
policy. The figure below shows the differences
between the emphases of waste management in
the old paradigm compared to the new
paradigm. In the past, the government focused
on the end-of-pipe approach, which resulted in
the high volume of waste in the final disposal
site. However in the new paradigm, the highest
of importance is on waste prevention and
reduction in order to ease the burden on the final
disposal. (Cleansing Department, 2010).
Most
Disposal favoured
option
Treatment
Recycle
Reuse Least
favoured
Prevention and reduction option

Figure 1 Old Paradigm of Waste Hierarchy in
Indonesia
Most
favoured
Prevention option
and reduction
Reuse
Recycle
Treatment
Least
Disposal favoured
option
Figure 2 New Paradigm of Waste Hierarchy in
Indonesia
Laws and Regulations on Waste Management
in Indonesia
The government of Indonesia has undertaken
measures to increase the awareness on the
importance of proper waste management,
through the establishment of National Waste
Day, which is commemorated annually on 21
February. It is to observe the tragedy of
mountains of garbage in the Bandung landfill
that resulted in the death of 41 people. In
addition, the government had incorporated waste
management programs as part of dedicated
programs for regional development, which is
priority programs in large scale, monumental,
and with high level of urgency. The program is
titled ‘The implementation of 3R system in the
neighbourhood-level’. The expected outcomes
from this program is the reduction of waste at-
source (Provincial Government of Jakarta, 2007)
According to the Government Regulation no.
03/2001, the regional government has the main
authority to manage the wastes in their
respective jurisdiction area (Jakarta Regional
Government, 2010). The master plan of waste
management in Jakarta is mainly based on two
major laws: Law no. 18 year 2008 and the
Medium Term Development Plan Jakarta
Province year 2007 – 2012.
In 2006, The Minister of Public Works issued a
National Regulation no. 21/PRT/M/2006 on the
National Policy and Strategies for the
Development of Waste Management System.
This regulation addressed that the communities
are potential to be involved in the waste
management; however it is not yet
systematically developed. Under this regulation,
there are several policies that were devised;
among others are the minimization of wastes
optimally from the source and improvement of
active roles of the society and private sectors as
waste management partners.
Further to this, the President of Republic of
Indonesia enacted the Law no. 18 year 2008 on
Waste Management, which defines wastes as the
remaining of daily human activities and/or
natural process in solid formation. This law was
established considering the waste management
to date that is not yet according to the methods
and techniques of sustainable waste
management, therefore resulted in negative
impacts upon public and environmental health.
It is stated in the law that waste has been a
national issue so that the management should be
done comprehensively and in integrated manner
in order to give benefits economically, health
benefits for the public, and environmentally
safe, as well as to enable behavioural shift in the
society. Article 3 of the law specifically
mentions that waste management is conducted
based on various principles, including
sustainability, benefits, togetherness, awareness,
and economic values. With regard to sorting, it
is regulated under article 13, which states that
the managers of residential areas, among others,
must provide facilities for waste sorting.
This law also denotes waste management as
systematic activities, integrated, and sustainable,
that involves the reduction and handling of
wastes. Transfer stations is defined as the site
before the wastes are carried to the recycling
sites, treatment, and/or integrated waste
treatment sites; whereas integrated waste
treatment sites are the sites in which the
activities such as the pooling, sorting, reusing,
recycling, treatment, and final processing of
wastes. On Article 9 of the law, the
municipal/regency governments have the
authority to establish the policy and waste
management strategies based on national and
provincial policies. On article 47, it is stated that
the local regulations mandated by this law
should be completed no later than 3 (three) years
starting from the law is enacted (Government of
Indonesia, 2008).
In regards to financing the MSW management
operation, the government does not yet impose
retribution from the households. The total
budget for Cleansing Department in 2006 is IDR
678 billion (USD 67,8 million) (JBIC, 2008).
The financing of SWM largely relies on the
Regional Budgets. Based on the Regional
Budget of Jakarta in 2010, the allocated funds
for Cleansing Department is 2,9% of the total
Budget (Jakarta Provincial Government, 2010).
The communities are reluctant to pay retribution
as they have already pay the monthly
community waste management fee. There is
little awareness on the role of Cleansing
Department in MSW management.
Policy Gaps and Recommendations
The current energy subsidies that are allotted by
the government in the National Budget are
projected at 12.6% of the total budget in 2010.
This condition leads to the difficulties in the
penetration of clean energy technologies to the
market. The removal of subsidies and price caps
for conventional energy sources is long overdue
and prerequisite for the attempt to promote clean
energy. The problem however, is rather complex
due to the large portion of Indonesians who still
live in poverty. The removal of subsidies for
energy would mean the increase of goods and
services, which will affect affordability. Hence
the adjustment of subsidies should be done in
small portion at first, which will be increased
gradually before the subsidy is completely
removed. It is also recommended that the
subsidy should be imposed for clean energy to
allow market penetration.
Another gap found in the existing laws is the
ambiguity with regard to the priorities in waste
management that put waste-to-energy and waste
minimization as priorities. Waste minimization
would imply the reduction of feedstock for the
energy generation. Thus it is only recently that
the Cleansing Department established the waste
hierarchy, which puts waste minimization and
prevention as the top priority. Therefore the
laws and regulations should clearly indicate
waste minimization as the priority for waste
management and the remaining portion that
would end up in the landfill can be used for
energy generation both through methane capture
and incineration. In order to achieve the goals
on optimal waste minimization, retribution can
be imposed with volume-based pricing, which
implies that the disposal fee is set on a per unit
volume basis. Another plausible instrument is
refundable deposit systems, of which the initial
charge to cover the expenses of disposal that can
be refunded upon the return of products for
recycling. The individuals or communities that
are active to significantly reduce the wastes may
also be offered incentives, both for composting
and recycling activities.
In general terms, the objectives that are
established by the regional policies in Indonesia
should be accompanied with scenarios that
include SMART criteria (Specific, Measureable,
Achievable, Realistic, Time-bound). These
criteria will be useful to evaluate the objectives
of a particular activity. It is expected that with
the inclusion of these criteria, the policies will
translate itself into guidelines for
implementation of proper waste management
and waste-to-energy practices.
Conclusion
Decentralization planning in Indonesia allows
the local government to play the major roles in
policy making and implementation. Since the
development of policies on waste-to-energy and
waste management is still at take-off stage, there
are several instruments that can be taken into
account for improvement. It is only recently that
the government of Indonesia starts to emphasis
on the importance of clean, new, and renewable
energy applications. However the government
still allocate large portion of the National
Budget for conventional energy subsidies, which
is counterproductive to the attempts to promote
clean energy. This paper suggests the decrease
in the amount of conventional energy subsidies,
which finally aims to the removal of subsidies
altogether. The subsidies for clean energy
technologies can be imposed to further promote
market penetration.
With regard to the waste management policies,
the government had established hierarchies that
put waste minimization as the first priority,
followed by reuse of waste as resources to be
converted into other products including energy.
This point should be clearly defined in the future
laws and regulations. For the achievement of
waste minimization, policy mixes such as waste
volume-based retribution and refundable deposit
system can be considered. It is also
recommended that the policies that serve as
implementation guidelines include quantifiable
‘SMART’ criteria that will determine the
specific objectives in measurable terms as well
as the success indicators.
In principle, it is conceded that aside of policies, Hopper, J.R., Yaws, C.L., Ho, T.C., Vickhailak,
the availability of appropriate technologies, the M. (1993). Waste minimization by
roles of market actors, and households’ process modification. Waste Management
behaviour on waste are important determinants 13, 3.
in the promotion of energy from waste as well International Energy Agency (2008) Energy
as management of waste. This paper focuses on Policy Review of Indonesia, available
policies, thus future studies on best available online:
technologies (BAT), roles of waste and energy www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2008/Ind
actors, as well as households’ behaviours on onesia2008.pdf
waste, can be explored.
Jakarta Provincial Government (2010) Regional
Budget Information, available online:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS http://www.jakarta.go.id/jakv1/apbd/brow
The authors are grateful to the Global Centre of se/2010#browse
Excellence (GCOE) Program of Kyoto Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources,
University’s Graduate School of Energy Science 2008, Indonesia’s Renewable Energy
for the financial support of this research and Mr. Potential, available online:
Iwan Wardhana SE, MSiP of the Jakarta http://www.esdm.go.id/news-
Cleansing Department, for his supports on the archives/general/49-general/1963-
provisions of information and policy documents. indonesias-renewable-energy-
potential.html
REFERENCES
Provincial Government of Jakarta, 2007,
Bai, R., Sutanto, M. (2002). The practice and Medium Term Development Plan Jakarta
challenges of solid waste management in Province year 2007 – 2012 (Rencana
Singapore, Waste Management 22, pp. Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Daerah
557–567. Provinsi DKI Jakarta tahun 2007-2012).
Beard, V., (2005) Individual determinants of Suara Pembaruan, 2010, Bekasi Membutuhkan
participation in community development Sampah, available online:
in Indonesia, Environment and Planning http://www.suarapembaruan.com/index.p
C: Government and Policy 2005, volume hp?detail=News&id=15587
23, pages 21 - 39.
Chaerul, M., Tanaka, M., Shekdar, A.V. (2007)
Municipal Solid Waste Management in
Indonesia: Status and Strategic Actions.
Journal of the Faculty of Environmental
Science and Technology, Vol. 12, No. 1,
pp. 41-49.
Cleansing Department (2010) Modul 1: Master
plan of Waste Management in Jakarta
(Master plan Persampahan di Jakarta).
Fullerton, D., Raub, A. (2004) Economic
Analysis of Solid Waste Management
Policies, proceeding of Addressing the
Economics of Waste workshop, OECD.
Government of Indonesia (2010) Law of
Republic of Indonesia no. 2 / 2010 on
Amendment of Law no. 47 / 2009 on
National Budget and Expenditures fiscal
year 2010, available online:
http://www.esdm.go.id/prokum/uu/2010/
UU%201%20tahun%202010.pdf
Government of Indonesia (2008) Law of the
Republic of Indonesia no. 18 year 2008 on
Waste Management