In this article, Professor Tim Forsyth explores climate change through technology waste in the Philippines and Thailand. Forsyth, an advocate for efforts to stop climate change, recognizes that technological waste is a large contributor to climate change, especially in Southeast Asia. Forsyth talks about finding the technological waste and then turning it into technology that could be useful, repurposed, and more appropriate to developing countries, as a means of reducing the amount of total waste. While waste management is a general issue in Southeast Asia, the Philippines has had notoriously poor performance, specifically regarding technological waste. As an example, large piles of technological waste have been created in the Philippines, and have been present long enough to create dependencies on such piles. One such pile is “Smokey Mountain,” which when closed, created economic unrest in the communities around it, as many community members lost their jobs that relied on Smokey Mountain. This creates a difficult dilemma between protecting the environment and managing civil unrest. Forsyth explores this challenge by offering a solution that he claims could bring in more jobs to these waste-reliant, Filipino communities. Forsyth proposes that small, private companies could enter into this trash-collecting market, providing the local community with new jobs, while also streamlining and effectively sorting through these large waste piles that have littered the Philippines.
Ultimately, the likelihood of Forsyth’s proposition comes down to the economic viability of a trash-sorting business from an outside, purely profit-seeking spectacle. If there is no money to be made, or if production cannot be easily scaled, business development in this specific industry could be stifled early-on. Business development will only occur if there is a clear, scalable profit to be made. Forsyth’s argument is well-grounded, planted in the idea that if communities can make money, it is only logical that businesses would be profitable as well. An oversight Forsyth makes is not considering the scalability of such business ventures. Considering how widespread the issue is in the Philippines and in the rest of Southeast Asia, one could argue that these are markets of scale, however, building infrastructure to handle this scale in exchange for marginal profit gains is a risky business venture from a profit-seeking viewpoint.
Perhaps a costly venture like this could be partially funded by the government, and kept as a single business entity, reducing competition and keeping their business in the market for longer. Funding a single trash-sorting entity could be a wise government decision, as it is an untapped opportunity for economic growth that can likely only be developed upon with assistance from the Philippines government. Also, it is important to only have one such entity, as soon as competition enters this fragile, developing market, profits would likely be wiped away, preventing larger scale expansion, thus making treatment of this regional issue more difficult.
Forsyth is a reliable source because he works and researches climate change policies and six years of experience in Southeast Asia and this is a peer-reviewed article. While Forsyth’s expertise is extremely valuable, and his views make logical sense from a climate change perspective, his idealistic proposition does not easily hold up to business development and public policy-oriented scrutiny. These approaches are crucial to consider in order to fully realize the radical development in this sector, for which he argues is essential to the slowly of global climate change. Addressing the overarching comparison between the Philippines and their neighbors, it is evident that the Philippines is in a comparatively worse state regarding waste management, as argued by Forsyth. That being said, it is important to recognize that development in this sector, founded upon a public-private partnership between the Philippines government and a new business, could be the solution to bolster Philippines’ waste management infrastructure, perhaps becoming a beacon of how business-oriented waste management could be the solution to this evermore globalizing problem.
Despite the lack of attention technological waste management has received from the Philippines government, other aspects of waste management have been profoundly successful for the Philippines, specifically in their agricultural sector. Perhaps one of the best examples of how the Philippines’ citizens manage to produce little agricultural waste can be found in pineapples produced in the Philippines. Pineapples are vital in the agricultural industry in South and Southeast Asia as they are exported throughout the world during the year. Dipshika Hazarika, a researcher for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, analyzes how the Philippines does a comparatively better job managing the waste as it pertains to producing pineapples, a staple product of Southeast Asia, which makes this product specifically applicable as a comparator within the region. Hazarika states that in the Indian subcontinent, pineapples are simply harvested, torn out of the soil, and the rest of the plant is wasted, in some cases burned, which creates a large carbon footprint due to the thick fibrous material.
Hazarika contrasts the waste management actions taken by India by introducing and discussing the Philippines’ holistic approach to pineapple harvesting. Hazarika states that the Philippines’ people have found that the pineapple leaf fibers have good strength, softness, and could be repurposed into many items that involve fine cloth. Through the processes of decortication of the leaves and water retting to extract the fibers, these researchers found the Philippines can produce a quality thread of Tex 90. Filipino pineapple harvesters can turn those threads into fine apparel, among other, potentially more useful items including tents, sails, and sandbags. Pineapples, among other agricultural efficiencies exhibited in the Philippines, show the Philippines comparative advantage in regard to utility maximization when compared to its neighbors. Hazarika argues that the Philippines is setting a strong example on how to avoid unnecessary waste and is the leader when it comes to agricultural utility maximization. While the macro effects of such efficiencies may seem to be relatively inconsequential on the surface, being overshadowed by the general counteracting wastefulness in the rest of the Philippines, Hazarika emphasizes that this kind of utility maximization behavior is an invaluable example to the rest of the Southeast Asian region.
The Philippines’ having strong infrastructure maintenance and fast disaster response is critical to the economic development of the country, which can lead to further developments, both economic and technological, for their waste management processes. Without maintained infrastructure, investment becomes increasingly risky from an investor’s or investment bank’s viewpoint. Without adequate investment, the much-needed radical growth in waste management will be stifled. J. Sedfrey S. Santiago, a representative and researcher for Ateneo de Manila University in the Philippines, reviews the shortcomings of the Philippine government’s disaster response, specifically focusing on the 2013 storm, Typhoon Haiyan. This typhoon caused devastating physical destruction in the Philippines, further amplified by, among other things, the water pumps failing as soon as the typhoon hit. From reviewing a daily log of what had happened, Santiago found that the disaster response plan at the time of the typhoon had too many vulnerabilities, compromising many basic human needs for much of the Philippines. As an example, when the hurricane passed, the largest city, Tacloban City, the citizens of Tacloban were left with no means to get adequate food, water, or security. Santiago argues that the government did not plan properly for preparing or protecting their citizens from the typhoon, nor did they have an effective disaster response strategy. As a direct response to Typhoon Haiyan, the Philippines needed to come up with a more robustly strategized and implemented storm response. Santiago also provided certain suggestions that could be useful in a revised response strategy including rehearsals. Santiago also stated that many of the humanitarian problems could have been significantly lessened if the necessary equipment was staged where they were needed, instead of only moving equipment after-the-fact. Santiago gives examples of such equipment and where they should have been ready to be deployed as soon as the typhoon had passed, including trucks and large extractors at the bottom of landslides. Due to the tardiness of the response, the ineffectiveness of the response as a whole only compounded on itself, as, due to the slow response, Santiago states that relief operations were not operating due to debris and cadavers as blocking roadways. Such an ineffectively maintained and dangerous part of the world is immensely restrictive when it comes to promoting development, including waste management development which is the main concern of this paper. In order to provide an environment ripe for economic growth and development for sectors including waste management, it is more than essential for the Philippines to adopt and rigorously hold themselves to an effective and robust disaster response strategy and infrastructure maintenance policy.
In conclusion, The Philippines has much to improve and rethink when it comes to waste management and infrastructure maintenance. While certain aspects of the Philippines’ are promising, especially considering their superior utility maximizing agricultural sector, the Philippines government has made critical oversights, stifling infrastructure development and maintenance. Much of these oversights could be remedied with effective public-private partnerships, as argued by Tim Forsyth, and robust infrastructure maintenance and disaster response, as argued by Joseph Santiago. It is imperative that actions are taken by the government of the Philippines, or they will continue to be the proverbial eyesore of the Southeast Asian region.