Furthermore, information was collected by means of exercises provided  terjemahan - Furthermore, information was collected by means of exercises provided  Bahasa Indonesia Bagaimana mengatakan

Furthermore, information was collec

Furthermore, information was collected by means of exercises provided to participants during workshops including questions about the stakeholders and the state of the solid waste management system in the city in relation to the elements, the aspects and the problems associated with them. Waste management practices were followed by on-site visits of households, hospitals, offices and schools, construction sites, health care centers, agricultural and commercial areas. The following characteristics were noted: collection and transportation systems, waste treatment procedures, identification of materials for reuse and recycling and final disposal facilities. The findings were presented, analyzed and validated with relevant stakeholders from the visited cities.

The parameters found by the first author’s visits to the cities allowed creating a questionnaire (Appendix A) that has been used to systematize gathered information before 2009 and to obtain new data about waste management systems in cities up to 2011. It contains 122 questions of which 74 are measured on a five-point Likert-type scale with anchors ranging from never, none, very bad (1) to always, all, excellent (5) (Matell and Jacoby, 1971), as values of actual measurements (5 questions), binary scale (Yes/No) (22 questions) (Ekere et al., 2009) and general information (21 questions).The literature review from 2005 to 2011 allowed to validate some of the parameters used in the tool as well as to introduce others not reported during the reviewed years.

Prior to data collection the questionnaire was pre-tested for ease of understanding and content validity. A group of stakeholders from 8 municipalities (3 in South Africa, 2 in Indonesia, 1 in Peru, 1 in Kenya, 1 in Philippines) in 5 different countries in 3 continents were asked to criticize the questionnaire for ambiguity, clarity and appropriateness of the items used to operationalize each construct. The respondents were also requested to assess the extent to which the factors sufficiently addressed the topics investigated. Based on the feedback received, the instrument was modified accordingly and used to collect information about the state of waste management in the cities.

Due to the amount of information, constructs were prepared from the raw data.

(i)

Household separation as follows: summing up the points provided by the respondent on the five-point variables on extend of waste separation at: household, business, plastic, paper, metal, glass, organic materials, battery, electric and electronic municipality level.
(ii)

Sophistication of waste collection system as follows: 1 = No organized collection of solid waste; 2 = Manpower only (Wheel-barrow and/or hand trolley and/or rickshaw and/or tricycle); 3 = Manpower and draught animal; 4 = Motorized transport (Motorcycle and/or tractor and/or truck) but no contractor used; and 5 = Motorized transport (Motorcycle and/or tractor and/or truck) and compactor used.
(iii)

Environmental awareness campaigns as follows: one point for each positive answer to the nominal variables: environmental awareness campaigns supported by municipality; re-use awareness campaigns in the municipality; presence of environmental campaigns in the city; public awareness campaigns for waste management plus the points provided by the respondent on the five-point variables: reduction campaigns in schools and recycling awareness campaigns.
(iv)

Collection efficiency: one point for each positive answer to the nominal variable: Structured collection system plus the points provided by the respondent on the five-point variables: amount and suitability of equipment for waste collection, efficiency in the collection system and availability of transportation facilities for waste collection.
(v)

Legislation: one point for each positive answer to the nominal variable: Does environmental legislation exist? Plus the points provided by the respondent on the five-point variables: adequacy of policy and legal frameworks to manage solid waste, enforcement of the law in practice and clear implementation of the laws of the country by the municipality.
(vi)

Local available knowledge as follows: one point for each positive answer to the nominal variable: presence of skilled personnel in the municipality, presence of professionals in the field of waste management working for the municipality and universities offering tertiary education in waste management issues.

The results were initially explored using a Kolmogorov–Smirov test indicating that the data were not normally distributed. Consequently, a non standard parametric test was used in the subsequent statistical analysis (Field, 2009). Spearman’s correlation coefficient measures helped to obtain relationships between city factors. The values are at significant levels of p < 0.01** (2-tailed); and 0.05 > p > 0.01* (2-tailed). A bi-variate analysis was performed between variables related to technologies, environmental education, socio-cultural, institutional, financial and legal aspects. The information was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 17.0.

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used with orthogonal rotation (varimax) with the objective to establish the linear components or factors that exist within some of the data. Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) statistic was used to assess the adequacy of the PCA to the initial variables measuring the sample adequacy. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was applied to examine whether the original data were appropriate for factor analysis (Field, 2009).
5. Results and discussion
5.1. Stakeholders

The stakeholders of waste management systems were identified during the workshops. The main ‘recognized” or formal stakeholders included the local authority, some ministries from central government and private contractors providing services. Participants in the workshops acknowledged the national and the local governments as the most important stakeholders which set up policies and the provision of solid waste management systems respectively. The private contractors are also regarded as important stakeholders as well as the service users such as: households, civil organizations, commercial and industrial sector. Less mentioned are educational and research institutions, political parties, farmers (including poultries, fisheries), health care centers, media, donor organizations, Chamber of Commerce and Industry, recycling companies, police and religious leaders.

The “unrecognized” or informal stakeholders include waste pickers collecting door to door, at the street or in the disposal site, itinerant waste buyers, junk shop owners and street sweepers.
5.2. Generation and separation

The quantity of solid waste generation is mostly associated with the economic status of a society. Shekdar (2009) suggests that the quantity of solid waste generation is lower in countries with lower GDP. However, this relation cannot be seen from the data presented in Table 1. A possible explanation is that waste generation rates have been collected from information provided in the cities by several sources: municipalities, NGOs, universities, research centers or recorded by the first author and the Gross Domestic Product is an indicator of the economic situation at a national level.

The study investigated the factors affecting waste separation at household level. The most significant correlations found between household separation and city parameters are presented in Table 2. Paper, plastic, glass, food, metal, batteries and electric and electronic waste were the categories used during the survey as a construct called “Household separation”.
0/5000
Dari: -
Ke: -
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1: [Salinan]
Disalin!
Furthermore, information was collected by means of exercises provided to participants during workshops including questions about the stakeholders and the state of the solid waste management system in the city in relation to the elements, the aspects and the problems associated with them. Waste management practices were followed by on-site visits of households, hospitals, offices and schools, construction sites, health care centers, agricultural and commercial areas. The following characteristics were noted: collection and transportation systems, waste treatment procedures, identification of materials for reuse and recycling and final disposal facilities. The findings were presented, analyzed and validated with relevant stakeholders from the visited cities.The parameters found by the first author’s visits to the cities allowed creating a questionnaire (Appendix A) that has been used to systematize gathered information before 2009 and to obtain new data about waste management systems in cities up to 2011. It contains 122 questions of which 74 are measured on a five-point Likert-type scale with anchors ranging from never, none, very bad (1) to always, all, excellent (5) (Matell and Jacoby, 1971), as values of actual measurements (5 questions), binary scale (Yes/No) (22 questions) (Ekere et al., 2009) and general information (21 questions).The literature review from 2005 to 2011 allowed to validate some of the parameters used in the tool as well as to introduce others not reported during the reviewed years.Prior to data collection the questionnaire was pre-tested for ease of understanding and content validity. A group of stakeholders from 8 municipalities (3 in South Africa, 2 in Indonesia, 1 in Peru, 1 in Kenya, 1 in Philippines) in 5 different countries in 3 continents were asked to criticize the questionnaire for ambiguity, clarity and appropriateness of the items used to operationalize each construct. The respondents were also requested to assess the extent to which the factors sufficiently addressed the topics investigated. Based on the feedback received, the instrument was modified accordingly and used to collect information about the state of waste management in the cities.Due to the amount of information, constructs were prepared from the raw data.(i) Household separation as follows: summing up the points provided by the respondent on the five-point variables on extend of waste separation at: household, business, plastic, paper, metal, glass, organic materials, battery, electric and electronic municipality level.(ii) Sophistication of waste collection system as follows: 1 = No organized collection of solid waste; 2 = Manpower only (Wheel-barrow and/or hand trolley and/or rickshaw and/or tricycle); 3 = Manpower and draught animal; 4 = Motorized transport (Motorcycle and/or tractor and/or truck) but no contractor used; and 5 = Motorized transport (Motorcycle and/or tractor and/or truck) and compactor used.(iii) Environmental awareness campaigns as follows: one point for each positive answer to the nominal variables: environmental awareness campaigns supported by municipality; re-use awareness campaigns in the municipality; presence of environmental campaigns in the city; public awareness campaigns for waste management plus the points provided by the respondent on the five-point variables: reduction campaigns in schools and recycling awareness campaigns.(iv) Collection efficiency: one point for each positive answer to the nominal variable: Structured collection system plus the points provided by the respondent on the five-point variables: amount and suitability of equipment for waste collection, efficiency in the collection system and availability of transportation facilities for waste collection.(v) Legislation: one point for each positive answer to the nominal variable: Does environmental legislation exist? Plus the points provided by the respondent on the five-point variables: adequacy of policy and legal frameworks to manage solid waste, enforcement of the law in practice and clear implementation of the laws of the country by the municipality.(vi) Local available knowledge as follows: one point for each positive answer to the nominal variable: presence of skilled personnel in the municipality, presence of professionals in the field of waste management working for the municipality and universities offering tertiary education in waste management issues.The results were initially explored using a Kolmogorov–Smirov test indicating that the data were not normally distributed. Consequently, a non standard parametric test was used in the subsequent statistical analysis (Field, 2009). Spearman’s correlation coefficient measures helped to obtain relationships between city factors. The values are at significant levels of p < 0.01** (2-tailed); and 0.05 > p > 0.01* (2-tailed). A bi-variate analysis was performed between variables related to technologies, environmental education, socio-cultural, institutional, financial and legal aspects. The information was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 17.0.Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used with orthogonal rotation (varimax) with the objective to establish the linear components or factors that exist within some of the data. Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) statistic was used to assess the adequacy of the PCA to the initial variables measuring the sample adequacy. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was applied to examine whether the original data were appropriate for factor analysis (Field, 2009).5. Results and discussion5.1. StakeholdersThe stakeholders of waste management systems were identified during the workshops. The main ‘recognized” or formal stakeholders included the local authority, some ministries from central government and private contractors providing services. Participants in the workshops acknowledged the national and the local governments as the most important stakeholders which set up policies and the provision of solid waste management systems respectively. The private contractors are also regarded as important stakeholders as well as the service users such as: households, civil organizations, commercial and industrial sector. Less mentioned are educational and research institutions, political parties, farmers (including poultries, fisheries), health care centers, media, donor organizations, Chamber of Commerce and Industry, recycling companies, police and religious leaders.The “unrecognized” or informal stakeholders include waste pickers collecting door to door, at the street or in the disposal site, itinerant waste buyers, junk shop owners and street sweepers.5.2. Generation and separationThe quantity of solid waste generation is mostly associated with the economic status of a society. Shekdar (2009) suggests that the quantity of solid waste generation is lower in countries with lower GDP. However, this relation cannot be seen from the data presented in Table 1. A possible explanation is that waste generation rates have been collected from information provided in the cities by several sources: municipalities, NGOs, universities, research centers or recorded by the first author and the Gross Domestic Product is an indicator of the economic situation at a national level.The study investigated the factors affecting waste separation at household level. The most significant correlations found between household separation and city parameters are presented in Table 2. Paper, plastic, glass, food, metal, batteries and electric and electronic waste were the categories used during the survey as a construct called “Household separation”.
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:[Salinan]
Disalin!
Selanjutnya, informasi dikumpulkan dengan cara latihan yang diberikan kepada peserta selama lokakarya termasuk pertanyaan tentang pemangku kepentingan dan negara dari sistem pengelolaan sampah di kota dalam kaitannya dengan unsur-unsur, aspek dan masalah yang terkait dengan mereka. Praktek pengelolaan limbah diikuti oleh kunjungan di tempat rumah tangga, rumah sakit, kantor dan sekolah, lokasi konstruksi, pusat kesehatan, daerah pertanian dan komersial. Karakteristik sebagai berikut dicatat: pengumpulan dan transportasi sistem, prosedur pengolahan limbah, identifikasi bahan untuk digunakan kembali dan daur ulang dan fasilitas pembuangan akhir. Temuan yang disajikan, dianalisis dan divalidasi dengan para pemangku kepentingan yang relevan dari kota-kota yang dikunjungi. Parameter ditemukan oleh kunjungan penulis pertama untuk kota-kota diperbolehkan menciptakan kuesioner (Lampiran A) yang telah digunakan untuk melakukan sistematisasi informasi yang dikumpulkan sebelum 2009 dan untuk memperoleh data baru tentang sistem pengelolaan sampah di kota-kota hingga 2011. Ini berisi 122 pertanyaan yang 74 diukur pada lima poin Likert-jenis skala dengan jangkar mulai dari tidak pernah, tidak ada, sangat buruk (1) untuk selalu, semua, baik (5) (Matell dan Jacoby, 1971), sebagai nilai-nilai pengukuran yang sebenarnya (5 pertanyaan), skala biner (Ya / Tidak) (22 pertanyaan) (Ekere et al., 2009) dan informasi umum (21 pertanyaan) .suatu tinjauan pustaka dari 2005 untuk 2011 diizinkan untuk memvalidasi beberapa parameter yang digunakan dalam alat ini juga untuk memperkenalkan orang lain tidak dilaporkan selama tahun Ulasan. Sebelum pengumpulan data kuesioner itu pra-diuji untuk mempermudah pemahaman dan validitas isi. Sekelompok pemangku kepentingan dari 8 kota (3 di Afrika Selatan, 2 di Indonesia, 1 di Peru, 1 di Kenya, 1 di Filipina) di 5 negara yang berbeda di 3 benua diminta untuk mengkritik kuesioner untuk ambiguitas, kejelasan dan kesesuaian item yang digunakan untuk mengoperasionalkan setiap konstruk. Para responden juga meminta untuk menilai sejauh mana faktor-faktor yang cukup membahas topik diselidiki. Berdasarkan umpan balik yang diterima, instrumen dimodifikasi sesuai dan digunakan untuk mengumpulkan informasi tentang keadaan pengelolaan sampah di kota-kota. Karena jumlah informasi, konstruksi disusun dari data mentah. (I) pemisahan Rumah Tangga sebagai berikut: menjumlahkan atas poin yang diberikan oleh responden pada variabel lima titik pada memperpanjang dari pemisahan sampah pada:. rumah tangga, bisnis, plastik, kertas, logam, kaca, bahan organik, baterai, listrik dan tingkat kotamadya elektronik (ii) Kecanggihan pengumpulan sampah Sistem sebagai berikut: 1 = Tidak terorganisir pengumpulan limbah padat; 2 = Tenaga Kerja hanya (roda-barrow dan / atau troli tangan dan / atau becak dan / atau roda tiga); 3 = Tenaga Kerja dan rancangan hewan; 4 = transportasi Bermotor (Motor dan / atau traktor dan / atau truk) tapi tidak ada kontraktor yang digunakan; dan 5 = transportasi Bermotor (Motor dan / atau traktor dan / atau truk) dan pemadat digunakan. (iii) kampanye kesadaran lingkungan sebagai berikut: satu titik untuk setiap jawaban positif terhadap variabel nominal: kampanye kesadaran lingkungan yang didukung oleh pemerintah kota; menggunakan kembali kampanye kesadaran di kotamadya; Kehadiran kampanye lingkungan di kota; kampanye kesadaran masyarakat untuk pengelolaan sampah ditambah poin yang diberikan oleh responden pada variabel lima poin. kampanye pengurangan di sekolah-sekolah dan kampanye kesadaran daur ulang (iv) efisiensi Koleksi: satu titik untuk setiap jawaban positif terhadap variabel nominal: Structured sistem pengumpulan ditambah poin yang diberikan oleh responden pada variabel lima poin. jumlah dan kesesuaian peralatan untuk pengumpulan sampah, efisiensi dalam sistem pengumpulan dan ketersediaan sarana transportasi untuk pengumpulan sampah (v) Legislasi: satu titik untuk setiap jawaban positif terhadap nominal variabel: Apakah undang-undang lingkungan ada? Ditambah poin yang diberikan oleh responden pada variabel lima poin. Kecukupan kerangka kebijakan dan hukum untuk mengelola limbah padat, penegakan hukum dalam praktek dan implementasi yang jelas dari hukum negara oleh pemerintah kota (vi) Pengetahuan lokal tersedia sebagai berikut: satu titik untuk setiap jawaban positif terhadap variabel nominal: kehadiran tenaga terampil di kotamadya, kehadiran profesional di bidang pengelolaan sampah bekerja untuk pemerintah kota dan universitas yang menawarkan pendidikan tinggi dalam isu-isu pengelolaan limbah. Hasil awalnya dieksplorasi menggunakan uji Kolmogorov-Smirov menunjukkan bahwa data tidak terdistribusi normal. Akibatnya, standar uji non parametrik digunakan dalam analisis statistik selanjutnya (Field, 2009). Tindakan koefisien korelasi Spearman membantu untuk mendapatkan hubungan antara faktor kota. Nilai berada pada tingkat signifikan p <0,01 ** (2-tailed); dan 0,05> p> 0,01 * (2-tailed). Sebuah analisis bi-variate dilakukan antara variabel yang berhubungan dengan teknologi, pendidikan lingkungan, aspek sosial budaya, kelembagaan, keuangan dan hukum. Informasi yang dianalisis menggunakan Paket Statistik untuk Ilmu Sosial (SPSS) Versi 17.0. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) digunakan dengan rotasi orthogonal (varimax) dengan tujuan untuk membangun komponen linear atau faktor-faktor yang ada dalam beberapa data. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) statistik digunakan untuk menilai kecukupan PCA untuk variabel awal mengukur kecukupan sampel. Uji Bartlett dari kebulatan diaplikasikan untuk memeriksa apakah data asli yang sesuai untuk analisis faktor (Field, 2009). 5. Hasil dan diskusi 5.1. Stakeholder Para pemangku kepentingan sistem pengelolaan limbah yang diidentifikasi selama lokakarya. The 'diakui "atau formal stakeholder utama termasuk otoritas lokal, beberapa kementerian dari pemerintah pusat dan kontraktor swasta yang menyediakan layanan. Peserta dalam lokakarya mengakui nasional dan pemerintah daerah sebagai pemangku kepentingan yang paling penting yang mengatur kebijakan dan penyediaan sistem pengelolaan sampah masing-masing. Para kontraktor swasta juga dianggap sebagai stakeholder penting serta pengguna jasa seperti: rumah tangga, organisasi sipil, sektor komersial dan industri. Kurang disebutkan adalah lembaga pendidikan dan penelitian, partai politik, petani (termasuk unggas, perikanan), pusat kesehatan, media, lembaga donor, Kamar Dagang dan Industri, perusahaan daur ulang, polisi dan pemimpin agama. Para pemangku kepentingan "tidak dikenal" maupun informal termasuk pemulung mengumpulkan pintu ke pintu, di jalan atau di tempat pembuangan, pembeli limbah keliling, pemilik toko sampah dan penyapu jalan. 5.2. Generasi dan pemisahan Jumlah timbulan sampah yang sebagian besar terkait dengan status ekonomi masyarakat. Shekdar (2009) menunjukkan bahwa jumlah timbulan sampah lebih rendah di negara-negara dengan GDP yang lebih rendah. Namun, hubungan ini tidak dapat dilihat dari data yang disajikan pada Tabel 1. Sebuah penjelasan yang mungkin adalah bahwa tingkat limbah telah dikumpulkan dari informasi yang diberikan dalam kota oleh beberapa sumber: kota, LSM, universitas, pusat penelitian atau direkam oleh penulis pertama dan Produk Domestik Bruto merupakan indikator situasi ekonomi di tingkat nasional. Studi ini meneliti faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi pemisahan sampah di tingkat rumah tangga. Korelasi yang paling signifikan ditemukan antara pemisahan rumah tangga dan parameter kota disajikan pada Tabel 2. Kertas, plastik, kaca, makanan, logam, baterai dan limbah listrik dan elektronik yang kategori yang digunakan selama survei sebagai konstruksi yang disebut "pemisahan Rumah Tangga".







































Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
 
Bahasa lainnya
Dukungan alat penerjemahan: Afrikans, Albania, Amhara, Arab, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Belanda, Belarussia, Bengali, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burma, Cebuano, Ceko, Chichewa, China, Cina Tradisional, Denmark, Deteksi bahasa, Esperanto, Estonia, Farsi, Finlandia, Frisia, Gaelig, Gaelik Skotlandia, Galisia, Georgia, Gujarati, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Ibrani, Igbo, Inggris, Islan, Italia, Jawa, Jepang, Jerman, Kannada, Katala, Kazak, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Klingon, Korea, Korsika, Kreol Haiti, Kroat, Kurdi, Laos, Latin, Latvia, Lituania, Luksemburg, Magyar, Makedonia, Malagasi, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Melayu, Mongol, Nepal, Norsk, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Polandia, Portugis, Prancis, Punjabi, Rumania, Rusia, Samoa, Serb, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somali, Spanyol, Sunda, Swahili, Swensk, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turki, Turkmen, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnam, Wales, Xhosa, Yiddi, Yoruba, Yunani, Zulu, Bahasa terjemahan.

Copyright ©2024 I Love Translation. All reserved.

E-mail: