waste as an environmental issue in the oecs - results of a kap study

8/14/2019 Waste as an environmental issue in the OECS - results of a KAP study

1/12

Waste Management

Waste as an Environmental issue in the OECS: results of a KAP study

by

Peter A. MurrayOECS Environment and Sustainable Development Unit

Morne Fortun

P.O. Box 1383Castries

Saint Lucia

and

Tecla FontenardOECS Environment and Sustainable Development Unit

Morne Fortun

P.O. Box 1383Castries

Saint Lucia

AbstractAn environmental knowledge, attitudes and practice (KAP) survey was carried out in theParticipating Member States of the OECS Protected Areas and Associated Livelihoods project.

A total of 1,479 interviews were conducted: 1,334 household and 145 departmentalrespondents. Data collection was facilitated by structured questionnaires and administered by

trained local interviewers with country-level supervision. Different questionnaires were used foreach of the two categories of respondents. Household sampling was nationally representative,

using enumeration districts stratified by parish. Respondents were full household residents aged15 to 74 years who also satisfied other eligibility criteria. Department/agency representatives

were selected via convenience methods targeting appropriate entities.

Few individuals claimed to be very familiar with environmental issues (18.0%), the majority

instead regarding themselves as somewhat familiar. Individual respondents perceived threatlevels pertaining to the environmental events showed improper garbage disposal as being one of

those seen as having the most impact. Most respondents saw individuals having a role inenvironmental maintenance but, at the same time, saw this overall as being governments

responsibility. In all countries most respondents accepted that responsibility for environmentalproblems remains mainly with residents of the country.

Specifically with regard to improper garbage disposal, most respondents accepted it as a high

threat to the environment this was more so in Dominica and least in St. Vincent and theGrenadines. Across the countries, the perception of improper garbage disposal as a high threat

was most noticeable among the 35-44 age group, yet lowest among respondents that had no morethan skills training or vocational education. The largest group of persons who saw improper

garbage disposal as being a major environmental threat saw themselves as being very familiarwith environmental issues. Similarly, persons who considered themselves very concerned about


2/12

2

environmental issues shared this view. Recycling was stated as being practiced most by personswho claimed to be familiar with environmental issues, females and persons with at least

secondary education. No interactions among the afore-cited categories were considered.

The findings suggested that direct exposure environmental issues seemed to increase perceived

impact the use of recycling as a waste management tool follows a similar trend. These resultsare worthy of consideration mindful of the commitment by OECS Member States, pursuant tothe Revised St. Georges Declaration of Principles for Environmental Sustainability in the OECS

(the Revised SGD) and within the context of the draft New treaty of the OECS.

Key wordsenvironmental threats solid waste disposal knowledge, attitude and practice

BackgroundThe OECS region is characterized by a rich biological diversity, which in combination with itsisolation from other areas, has resulted in relatively high rates of national and regional

endemism. In addition to exhibiting differing degrees of endemism, the islands of the region also provide habitat and nesting sites for non-endemic migratory species. A 2003 survey conducted

by Conservation International identified the Caribbean as the fifth ranking hot spot and one ofthe highest priorities in any global strategy for biodiversity conservation and sustainable

management.

Recognizing the importance of the sustainable management of its natural resources and rich biodiversity, the Governments of the OECS Member States have made significant commitments

to protecting their countries' resources. Some of these include their status as signatories tointernational conventions, the formulation and adoption of policy statements, legal and

institutional instruments, recent environmental programs, and financial support of conservationactivities through budget allocations. At the sub-regional level, the OECS Member States in the

year 2000 issued and subsequently endorsed the St. George's Declaration of Principles forEnvironmental Sustainability in the OECS

1(the SGD), which includes a commitment to the

conservation of biological diversity and the protection of areas of outstanding scientific, cultural,spiritual, ecological, scenic and aesthetic significance. This commitment is also consistent with

the OECS Development Charter2.

The Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Survey objectives and methodologyThe OECS Secretariat, in 2007, conducted a survey on environmental awareness to assess

peoples knowledge of, potential attitude to, and practices, in relation to the environment3. This

Knowledge-Attitude-Practice (KAP) Survey was seen as part of a broader commitment to

advance and promote the cause of environmental management based on sound research andthrough the delivery of a comprehensive programme of training and education on the

environment4. With the practical data captured, the OECS Secretariat expects to be better able to

1 OECS, 20012

OECS, 20043

OECS, 2007b.4 The private firm of Cultural Marketing Communication (Caribbean) Ltd. was contracted to manage the survey and

analyse the data gathered


3/12

3

develop the targeted environmental awareness strategies and management programmes, whichwill ultimately lead to the desired increase in public support for (and awareness of) biodiversity

conservation and sustainable management of Protected Areas Results of the survey are toserve, not only as a resource for future public awareness program, but also to guide the

development and improvement of environmental management activities and for informing policy

development.

The overall goal of the survey was to assess public knowledge on environmental issues and

concerns and to seek to determine the extent to which environmental agencies and organizations place emphasis on communicating with the public on the environment. Specifically, the survey

was designed to help the OECS Secretariat gain knowledge of:

Peoples opinions on environmental issues Peoples attitudes in respect of the environment

Satisfaction levels on information received on the environment Preferred information/media sources

The survey was initially designed to allow for broad-based participation based on a cluster

sampling plan that would capture an estimated two hundred and fifty (250) respondents perMember State, this was subsequently changed to 225 due to cost considerations. The survey

instrument included a series of questions in the form of (a) multiple choice, and (b) open endedwith answer choice grids provided where applicable. Other considerations for the sampling plan

include:

a. Wide in-country geographical distribution b. Age ranges proportionate to population age distribution

c. Gender in proportions mirroring population ratiod. Broad educational distribution, where possible

e. Broad economic distribution, where possible

Nationally representative household samples were selected via four (4) stages: (i) obtainingdescriptions (i.e. Enumeration Districts (EDs)) per country (ii) identifying a single regional

sampling approach (iii) selecting samples based on above and (iv) preparing maps and boundaries for field use. The EDs were stratified (parish), a random start point assigned, and

further selections made from population generated intervals, but taking into account requisitenumber of country interviews (n = 225). Final EDs were clustered (approx. three (3) each),

allowing for parish spread, and proportionality-to-population-size. Target households wereselected from random start within EDs, target respondents being selected on a last birthday basis.

At household level, one member was selected and screened for eligibility. Only one (1) callbackwas instituted, after which any failures to locate the target respondent resulted in replacement

(within-household, according to next-birthday or next household, in any event ofvacant/ineligibility/refusals).

A total of 1,479 interviews were conducted: 1,334 household and 145 departmental

respondents. Data collection was facilitated by structured questionnaires and administered bytrained local interviewers with country-level supervision. Different questionnaires were used for


4/12

4

Individuals have a role in environmental

maintenance

0

10

2030

40

50

60

70

ANU DOM GRE SKN SLU SVG

%re

sponses strongly agree

agree

neither

disagree

strongly disagree

each category of respondents. Household sampling was nationally representative, usingenumeration districts stratified by parish. Respondents were full household residents aged 15 to

74 years who also satisfied other eligibility criteria. Department/agency representatives wereselected via convenience methods targeting appropriate entities.

Table 1. Number of Interviews completed per country

Households Departmental

Antigua & Barbuda 209 18Dominica 222 25

Grenada 229 25St. Kitts & Nevis 224 25

St. Lucia 225 27St. Vincent & the

Grenadines

225 25

Data analyses used the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), with data imported

into that programme from the ASCII format in which entered. No interactions among categorieswere considered.

ResultsThe results following were from the household survey

5. While, across the study area, some

individuals claimed to be very familiar with environmental issues (18.0%), the majority (58.1)

regarded themselves as somewhat familiar. Figures 1 and 2 show the distribution of perceptions regarding the roles and responsibility for environmental maintenance, whether

individuals or government respectively.

Figure 1

5 OECS, 2007b.


5/12

5

Government is responsible for maintaining the

environment

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40


%r

esponse

strongly agree

agree

neither

disagree

strongly disagree

Most environmental problems caused by people

inside the country

0

10

20

30

40

50


%r

esponses strongly agree

agree

neither

disagree

strongly disagree

On average across the six countries studied, more persons (45.8%) accepted the individuals role

in environmental maintenance than thought that government was responsible (27.2%).

Figure 2

Figure 3 indicates acceptance that responsibility for environmental problems remains mainly

with residents of a country. This view was shared by 34.9% of respondents, on average acrossthe countries studied.

Figure 3


6/12

6

Perceived change in solid waste in the past 5

years

67.8

15.36 6.1 4.9

0

20

40

60

80

increase decrease no change both increase

and decrease

do not

know/not

sure

percieved change in solid waste production

%r

espondents

Perceived threat level average

82.4

14.71.7 1.2

0

20

40

60

80

100

High Low none not sure

perceived threat level

%

responses

The following results from the household survey relate to the issue of garbage disposal. Figure 4shows respondents perception with regard to the change in the amount of solid waste produced.

Figure 4

Figure 5 shows that on average, across the study area, most persons thought that impropergarbage disposal is a threat to the environment. This view was most prevalent in Dominica,

followed by Saint Lucia and least in St. Vincent and the Grenadines (figure 6)

Figure 5


7/12

7

Perceived high threats by country

79.8

90.5

79.3 79.3

89.8

75.6

65

70

75

80

85

90

95


%r

esponse

Figure 6

The perception that improper waste disposal is an important threat to the environment was mostprevalent among the 35-44 year age group and least among the 15-24 age group (figure 7).

Figure 7

Perceived high threats by age range

79.1

82.7

87.1

81.7

74

76

78

80

82

84

86

88

15 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 +

age range (y)

%r

esponse


8/12

8

Perceived high threats by stated education level

89.1

82.7 82.7

76.380.3

84.886.7

6570

75

80

85

90

95

Noform

al

prim

ary

seco

ndary

skills

/voc

Colle

ge

Univ

Post

education level

%r

esponse

Percieved high threat by level of familiarity with environmental

issues

90.8

82.7

75.7

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

very somewhat not

stated familiarity with environmental isues

%r

esponse

This perception was also least among those whose education was limited to primarily the skills

or vocational level and highest among those who had no formal education (figure 8).

Figure 8

Most persons who considered themselves familiar with (figure 9) or very concerned about(figure 10) environmental issues, perceived improper waste disposal as posing a high threat to

environmental maintenance.

Figure 9


9/12

9

Percieved high threat by level of concern about environmental

issues

46.2

72.583.1 84.6

87.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

none little average high very high

stated concern about environmental issues

%r

esponse

Figure 10

Figure 11 shows that greater familiarity with environmental issues tended to lead to a slightlyhigher tendency to recycle waste.

Figure 11

Recycling as a function of familiarity with

environmental issues

74.569.7

59

25.5 30.3

41

0

20

40

60

80

Very Somewhat Not

stated familiarity with environmental issues

%r

esponse

Yes

No


10/12

10

Recycling as a function of gender

63.770.5

36.329.5

010

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Male Female

gender

%r

esponse

Yes

No

Recycling as a function of educational level

attained

66.753.5

72.7 67.773.8

85.6 80

33.346.5

27.3 32.3 26.214.4 20

0

20406080

100

Noform

al

Prim

ary

Seco

ndary

Skills

/Voc

Colle

ge

Unive

rsity

Postgrad

stated educational level

%r

esponse

Yes

No

Females tended to recycle a bit more than males (figure 12)

Figure 12

The tendency to recycle increased with educational level attained (figure 13).

Figure 13

DiscussionWe have presented these results as a point of departure for further discussion. It is of note

however that improper waste disposal is generally accepted as threatening the environment andthis perception appears to increase with exposure to information on, and familiarity with,

environmental issues. Whether this is as a consequence of age, education or otherwise is a matterworth investigating further. What is also interesting is that most of the respondents with no


11/12

11

formal education saw improper waste disposal as a significant environmental threat. This begsthe question whether this is a consequence of their acquiring hands-on experience in this

regard, yet respondents with mainly vocational training were least concerned with waste disposalas a threat to the environment. We would not be so precipitate as to suggest that this may be a

consequence of the fact that vocational trades in the region are solid waste generating.

The use of recycling as a waste management tool follow a similar trend to the perception ofimproper waste disposal as a threat to the environment except that respondents with secondary

education are among the more frequent users of recycling. It may be suggested that this is aconsequence of the fact that a number of secondary school curricular propose waste recycling as

either a civic duty or an environmental management activity.

We commend these results to your consideration, mindful of the commitment by OECS MemberStates, pursuant to goal 3 of the Revised St. Georges Declaration of Principles for Environmental

Sustainability in the OECS (the Revised SGD)6, to develop policies and strategies to address

creative and sustainable management of solid waste by 2010 and within the context of the draft

New Treaty of the OECS

7

, in which the Revised SGD has been enshrined.

ReferencesOrganisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), 2001. St. Georges Declaration of Principles

for Environmental Sustainability in the OECS. Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States,Saint Lucia. 35p.

Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), 2004. OECS Development Charter: Our

Vision of the Future. Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States, Saint Lucia. 48p.

Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), 2007a. St. Georges Declaration ofPrinciples for Environmental Sustainability in the OECS: Revised 2006. Organisation of

Eastern Caribbean States, Saint Lucia. 30p.

Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), 2007b. Environmental Awareness in the

OECS: Report of a KAP (Knowledge, Attitude and Practice) Survey conducted in Six

OECS Member States. Final Report 18 August 2007. OECS Environment and SustainableDevelopment Unit, Saint Lucia. 191p.

Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), 2008. The Organisation of Eastern

Caribbean States: Draft of the New Treaty. Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States, SaintLucia. 68p.

World Bank, 2004. OECS Protected Areas and Associated Livelihoods Project: Project

Appraisal Document. Caribbean Country Management Unit, Environmentally and SociallySustainable Development Sector Management Unit, Latin America and Caribbean Region.

6OECS, 2007a. Goal 3 of the revised SGD is to achieve the long-term protection and sustained productivity of the

regions natural resource base and the ecosystem services it provides one of the desired outcomes of this goal beingthat environmental quality is not diminished by pollution and waste.7 OECS, 2008


12/12

12

Report No. 28621. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank),Washington, DC. 121p.

waste as an environmental issue in the oecs - results of a kap study

Documents