Residents' Perceptions of the Visual Quality of On-Site Waste Storage Bins in Kuching
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
On-site storage of waste can be convenient to waste generators, especially for those who generate a large amount of waste every day. Concerns regarding public health and aesthetic considerations of the on-site storage of wastes have also arisen due to the use of unsightly makeshift containers or open-ground storage. There has been extensive research conducted to improve the understanding of the aesthetic qualities of natural landscapes. Nevertheless, research on residents' visual preferences and concerns for solid waste management facilities is still limited. Therefore, the ultimate goal of this study is to understand the perceived visual aesthetic quality of on-site storage facilities of wastes at collection points in Kuching District. A survey was conducted in August 2009 using a set of questionnaires consisting of several sections with 60 closed-ended questions, including questions with Likert scales. Since the official privatization of solid waste management in Kuching, the concession company has been providing uniform mobile garbage bins of standard sizes to residents and commercial areas. This has gradually improved solid waste management systems. In general, the solid waste management problems in Kuching city are perceived to be moderately serious. Other than that only overflowing waste in containers is the main problem that creates visual pollution. The highest mean ratings for the visual assessment were 3.43 (physical attribute -clean), 4.60 (feelings' comfortable), and 3.34 (appraisal -attractive). It was also found that the photographs showing the mobile garbage bins provided by the concessionaire had the highest mean ratings for all three scales, i.e. descriptive, affective and appraisal scales.
Article Details
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Darvlynn Yiu Li Chung, Azizi Muda, Che Musa Che Omar, Latifah Abd Manaf
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Arriaza, M., Canas-Ortega, J. F., Carias-Maduefio, J. A.• and Ruiz-Avilcs, P. (2004). Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69,115-125.
Bales, K. (1985). Determinants in the perceptions of Visual Blight. Human Ecology, 13(3). 371-387.
Bulut, Z., and Yilmaz, H. (2008). Determination of landscape beauties through visual quality assessment method: a case study for Kemaliye. Environmental Minitoring Assessment, 141, 121-129.
Carlson, A. (2000). Aesthetics and the environment: the appreciation of nature, art and architecture: Routledge.
Coctcrier, J. F. (1996). Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 34,27-44.
Galindo, M. P. G., and Rodriguez, J. A. C. (2000). Environmental Aesthetics and Psychological Wellbeing: Relationships Between Preference Judgements for Urban Landscapes and Other Relevant Affective Response. Psychology in Spain, 4( I), 13
Hassan, M. N. (2002). Solid waste management in Malaysia: can we charter future strategies? Paper presented at the International Conference Environmental Management: Ten Years after Rio. Artiele Number 8, Universiti Putra Malaya.
Hassan, M. N., Chong, T. L., Rahman, M. M., Salleh, M. N., Zakariah, Z., Awang, M., et al. (2000). Solid Waste Management -What's the Malaysian Position. Paper presented at the Seminar on Waste to Energy 2000.
Ng, S. W. (2009). Solid Waste Management in MPP, Kuching. Kota Padawan, Kuching.
Priestley, T., and Evans, G. W. (1996). Residents perception of a nearby electric transmission line. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1,65-74. Rojas-Caldclas, R. I., and Zambrano, E. A. C. (2008). Urban observatories opportunities for environmental monitoring: Solid wastes. Waste Management, In Press.
Scott, D., and Willits, F. (1994). Environmental attitudes and behavior: A Pennsylvania survey. Environment and Behavior, 26(2),239.
Siraj, M. (2006). Waste Reduction: No Longer an Option but a Necessity. Bernama.
Stapleton, R. M. Visual Pollution. Retrieved 22 August, 2008, from http://www. pollutionissues.eom/Ve-ZNisual-Poll ution.html
Tang, H. H., Soon, H. Y., and Larsen, I. (2003). Solid Waste Management in Kuching, Sarawak.
Tchobanoglous. G., Theisen, H., and Vigil, S. A. (1993). Integrated Solid Waste Management: Engineering Principles and Management Issues. New York: McGraw-Hili.
Tweed, C., and Sutherland, M. (2007). Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83,62-69.
UNICEF (2004). Malaysia -Statistics Retrieved 23 March, 2009, from http://www.unicef. org/infobycountry/mal aysia_statistics.html
Wong, K., and Dornrocs, M. (2005). The visual quality of urban park scenes of Kowloon Park, Hong Kong: likeability, affective appraisal, and cross-cultural perspectives. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 32(4),617-632.
Xu, Y. (1995). Sense of place and identity. East St. Loius Action Research Project Retrieved 19 September, 2008, from http://www.eslarp.uiuc.edu/la/la437-f95/reports/yards/ main.html
Yamane, T (1967). Elementary sampling theory: Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Yamane, T. (1983). Statistics: an introductory analysis: Harper & Row New York. Zube, E., Sell, J., and Taylor, J. (1982). Landscape perception: research, application and theory. Landscape Planning, 9(1), 1-33.