Waste sadaqah: a new community-based waste-management practice in Java, Indonesia

Abstract

Waste management is one of the most important environmental and public health issues of the 21st century. In Indonesia, the trend in waste management has changed from a government-led to a community-driven social activity, which significantly manages household-solid waste and positively affects the environment. Additionally, waste management supports the circular economy (CE), a topic that many scholars and policymakers are now debating. Waste sadaqah (WS) is a community-based waste-management movement that seeks to achieve economic empowerment through social action. This Brief Report describes how WS contributes to waste handling and how the community engages in social actions that affect the environment and advance CE practices. The focus of our data collection and analysis was the province of Yogyakarta, a well-known region on the Indonesian island of Java. This study reports participant observations and casual discussions with the founders. To capture photographic evidence to support the interview findings, we supplemented the study with a field survey. To highlight WS practices, we applied the perspectives of community theory, social capital, social action, and empowerment theory. We found evidence that this practice is distinct from other modes of community-based waste management.

Keywords:

• Waste sadaqah
• waste management
• waste bank
• social action
• circular economy

Introduction

Waste is a major environmental and public health concern in developing countries. For example, approximately 85% of the waste generated in Vietnam is buried without treatment at landfill sites, 80% of which is unhygienic and pollutes the environment (Globenewswire 2020). Pakistan generates approximately 49.6 million tons of solid waste annually, an amount that has been increasing by more than 2.4% every year, creating serious environmental problems (ITA 2022). Meanwhile, approximately 27.8 million tons of solid waste are produced in Thailand, which translates into a daily volume of 1.13 kilograms (kg) per person, of which 12–13% comprises plastics (Simachaya 2020). Bangladesh has been facing rapid growth in waste generation, and in the last three decades, the country’s waste volume has doubled every 15 years. An average of 55% of solid waste remains uncollected in the country’s urban areas, with a variation in collection efficiency from 37 to 77%. In Bangladesh, discarded materials are not formally segregated, contributing to the accumulation of waste, and creating pressure on landfills that are not managed sustainably (Islam 2021). The Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK), the government agency in charge of waste management in Indonesia, reported that 67.8 million tons of rubbish were produced nationally in the country in 2020. This implies that 270 million individuals produce approximately 185,700 tons of daily waste, an amount equal to roughly 0.68 kg of waste per person every day. Compared with earlier years, this is a significant increase. In 2018, the country’s population of 267 million generated 64 million tons of waste nationwide, with households accounting for 37–39% of all national waste sources, making them the largest contributor (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Sources of waste in Indonesia, 2019–2021. Note: Data for 2021 are provisional. Source: Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia, 2021.

These nations currently have a waste problem that pollutes both land and water—in this case, the oceans, lakes, rivers, and also air. According to Ferronato and Torreta (2019), the primary and most readily discernible environmental impacts are visual effects, air contamination, odors, greenhouse-gas emissions, disease vectors, and surface water and groundwater pollution.

Why has waste become a burden for many local authorities in developing countries? We examined a portion of the relevant literature and concluded that the problem exists within the domain of public governance and management, as well as in the political systems and their interrelationships. In the public sphere, the issue pertains to public awareness (Hasan 2004; A. Islam et al. 2021), which is also tied to educational level and employment status (Wang et al. 2020). Generally speaking, the higher a person’s level of education, the greater their pro-environmental awareness.

The waste issue also relates to public and private sector interactions and the level of political support for engagement in the governance context (Bull et al. 2010). Moreover, Mmereki, Baldwin, and Li (2016) determined that solid-waste management in developing countries is often ineffective. A lack of coordination among stakeholders, institutional and structural deficiencies, lack of recycling legislation, and ad hoc and uncoordinated measures were identified as the most significant problems.

In Indonesia, it has been a long time since numerous government programs raised public awareness of the importance of the environment. During the era of the New Order that characterized the Suharto presidency from 1966 to 1998, the government rewarded institutions and individuals who cared about and took action on environmental issues through a series of initiatives called “Kalpataru” (the root of the Sanskrit word—kalpavriksha—which means tree of life). These programs aimed to increase awareness, to stimulate opportunities for the development of innovation and creativity, and to encourage community initiatives as a form of recognition and motivation to individuals and community groups engaged in sustainable environmental and forest-management protection. The arrangement was reinforced at the start of the Jokowi administration in 2014 by a dedicated regulation promulgated by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry pertaining to the Kalpataru Award.

Another program initiated in 1986 called Adipura developed reputational incentives for mayors to seek recognition of their cities as “green and clean.” This initiative relies on inspections and public disclosure of results to evaluate city-level waste management and cleanliness (Dethier 2017). However, Dethier argued that the program had little effect on waste reduction due to a decline in the prominence of environmental problems on the political agenda.

The legislation for waste management in Indonesia is listed in Table 1. Instead of being effective in addressing the waste problem, implementation is often contradictory. These regulations have become a mountain of policy texts without comprehensive follow-up programs to ensure their effective enactment. Similar paradoxes of policy are frequently evinced at the global and national levels (Muheirwe, Kombe, and Kihila 2022) and are particularly prevalent at the local governmental level in Indonesia. Therefore, waste-management frameworks in the country should be designed and implemented with a more coherent approach to obtain public support and to maximize policy effectiveness (Bull et al. 2010; Wan, Shen, and Choi 2018).

Table 1. Indonesian regulations focused on waste management.

Type of regulation	Number	Arrangements aspects
Law	18/2008	Waste management
Government regulations	81/2012	Household-waste management and household-waste types
Government regulations	27/2020	Specific waste management
Presidential regulations	97/2017	National policies and strategies for household-waste management and household waste
Presidential regulations	83/2018	Handling marine waste
Ministerial regulations	PermenLH 13/2012	Reduce, reuse, and recycle implementation guidelines through waste bank
Ministerial regulations	P.59/Menlhk/Setjen/Kum.1/7/2016	Quality standards for business and/or final processing site activities.
	P.10/MENLHK/SETJEN/PLB.0/4/2018	Guidelines for the preparation of policies and strategies for household-waste management and household waste
	P.75/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/10/2019	Waste-reduction roadmap by manufacturers
Ministerial regulations	14/2021	Waste collection at waste banks

Some policies, as outlined in Table 1, allow the private sector and the general public to engage in waste management, primarily as an economic or a community-service activity. To this end, in the era of regional autonomy, local administrations are permitted to manage and address the issue of waste in their own areas. This includes the creation of regionally-based regulations to develop and enhance public knowledge.

Accordingly, as described in their anthropological studies (Schelehe and Yulianto 2018, 2020), waste management has become an integral part of the daily lives of Indonesians. They practice waste self-management, such as burning solid waste in their backyards, which is a part of local and national culture. However, community engagement in waste management has increased over the last 10 years (Dholikah, Trihadiningrum, and Sunaryo 2015; Prasetiyo, Kamarudin, and Dewantara 2019; Schelehe and Yulianto 2020; Amin et al. 2021; Kurniawan et al. 2021).¹

In Indonesia, research has focused on waste banks as distinctive community-based waste-management enterprises. Premised on regulation of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry No. 14/2021, the waste bank (bank sampah in Indonesian Bahasa) is a facility that is established and managed by the community, businesses, and/or local government with the purpose of managing waste based on the 3R principles (reduce, reuse, and recycle) as well as educating people, changing their behavior toward waste management, and implementing a circular economy (CE). Waste banks are superior alternatives to conventional waste management and contribute to societal and economic benefits (Faradina, Maryono, and Warsito 2020). In the social realm, they facilitate environmental awareness education, waste recycling, waste-bank management, ecotourism development, and creation of instructional tools for young students (Indrianti 2016; Prasetiyo, Kamarudin, and Dewantara 2019). Even today, the presence of waste banks results from a more collaborative approach (Fatwamati et al. 2022). Following studies by Schelehe and Yulianto (2018, 2020), we developed a classification pattern for community-based waste management in Indonesia (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Community-based waste-management pattern in Indonesia.

The Ministry of Environment and Forestry has issued two regulations governing the existence of waste banks (Table 1) and the government recognizes waste banks as community-based waste-management activities. Waste banks are regarded as an institutional tool and the government encourages the relevant institutions to be supported by administrators, organizational structures, and work programs. In addition, waste banks can register their facilities with the local government and the formal rules take effect as soon as this is achieved. The waste bank benefits from this registration because the local government provides complimentary scales, a waste-bank book to record transactions, and promotional banners.

Nevertheless, numerous waste banks operate autonomously by exploiting the economic benefits of their activities, namely the sale of recyclable materials to waste entrepreneurs (Indrosaptono and Syahbana 2017). By contrast, waste management by the community is conducted individually by burning waste (Schelehe and Yulianto 2020). However the self-management of waste is incompatible with the five CE principles of reduce, reuse, recycle, recover, and revalue, according to the current trend in modern waste management (Kirchher, Reike, and Hekker 2017).

Community-based waste management in Indonesia has expanded to include waste sadaqah (WS), a novel innovation. As it is not registered with the government-regulatory system, but rather is a movement that is more informal and charitable than that of the waste bank (Hasanah et al. 2018). An absence of formality, ceremonies, and institutional organization typically characterizes WS. For this Brief Report, we explored how the description and practice of WS contribute to the management of waste in Java and how the community transforms waste into social actions that affect its environment and facilitate CE practices

Although some scholars have studied WS projects, such as Muslim (2015) who discussed the practice and its implementation in Yogyakarta and Endah and Kasjono (2017) who assessed the success of WS practices in Semarang City, few studies link the existence of WS to the challenges of CE. According to Wiesmeth (2021), the CE discourse is still centered on economic integration with the environment and neglects the role of social action as a tool. In this Brief Report, we explain how WS is not only pursuing economically-oriented waste management, but also engendering activities that have a social dimension. Furthermore, we elaborate the results of empirical studies related to waste management in Indonesia, followed by a descriptive overview of the practice of WS, with the support of photo documentation. In the next section, we describe the differences between WS, waste banks, and other community-based waste-management systems in the CE context. We conclude this Brief Report with several recommendations from scientific and policy-making perspectives.

Theoretical dimensions

The formation of community-based movements directed toward the environment have become a global trend over the last 50 years. In studying these activities, the term community has been employed in many different ways. One popular approach has relied on the work of sociologist Joseph Gusfield (1975) which distinguished two distinct community groups: territorial and geographical (neighborhood, town, and city) (Tu 2019). Based on these distinctions, Hayden Roberts (1979) contended that the community is “a collection of people who have become aware of some problems or some broad goal, who have gone through a process of learning about themselves and their environment, and have formulated a group objective”—an appropriate explanation of the existence of communities against waste around the world.

How can the community be effective in mobilizing society? Communities motivate and encourage people to develop themselves through self-initiative and with minimum assistance from the government. They enable processes in which people, in partnership with those able to assist them, are increasingly encouraged to assume responsibility and plan, manage, control, and assess their collective actions (Mezirow 1997). Recent evidence suggests that civil society actors can create platforms for environmental justice and resistance to overcome inequitable and unsustainable development practices (Suharko 2020).

This leads us to assess the importance of community empowerment and scholars have provided several definitions. For instance, McClelland (1975) stated that empowerment is a change process, but to gain power organizers need to know themselves and their surroundings and be able to identify and collaborate with others. Empowerment is the process of expanding the ability of individuals and groups to make choices and to change toward a common goal. Immanuel Wallerstein (1992) translated empowerment as a social action process that promotes the participation of people, organizations, and communities toward enhancing individual and community control, political efficiency, improved quality of life, and social justice. Peterson and Reid (2003) suggested a few steps and processes for implementing an empowerment approach in community development which to be successful needs to be followed sequentially: (1) building hope, (2) fostering widespread participation, (3) forging relationships, (4) creating visions, (5) establishing a work plan, (6) finding resources, (7) creating success, (8) developing community capacity, (9) adopting a strategic plan, and (10) aiming toward sustainability.

Another explanation relies on neighborhood-based forms of social capital. Political scientist Robert Putnam (1993) defined social capital as a picture of social life that allows participants to act together more effectively to achieve common goals. Trust, norms, and social networks enable citizens to act together and constitute forms of social capital. This was demonstrated through a notable study by Liao and Xing (2023) in China which found that social capital could change plastic-recycling behavior. The upshot is that more robust social capital can lead to a more positive attitude toward the environment (Onyx, Osburn, and Bullen 2004) and can facilitate development of education and engagement strategies to promote environmental responsibility (Miller and Buys 2008). Drawing on the aforementioned theoretical perspective, we present a framework for examining the practice of WS (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Methodological framework to investigate the WS practice.

Methods

This study is based on empirical evidence from Yogyakarta, a province on Java Island, Indonesia. Based on Creswell (1994), we deployed a descriptive-qualitative approach that involved in-depth individual conversations (lasting two days) with WS initiators in November 2021. The present study reports on a field visit conducted to the Muhammadiyah Central Leadership Tablig Council Office located in the Kasihan District, Bantul Regency, Yogyakarta where we interviewed the initiator of WS and who served as the key informant. Furthermore, the interview process involved several young people who had volunteered for WS. In order to ensure accurate documentation of the interview, a mobile phone was used to record the conversation. Subsequently, the interview results were transcribed into a script for further analysis.

We combined this methodology with a field survey to obtain photographic documentation that supported the interview results and was intended to contribute to a triangulation process to assess the validity of the information that we collected (Carter et al. 2014). The photographic documentation was obtained to provide a visual record of WS activities and infrastructure, including storage warehouses and the involvement of young people in the waste-sorting process as described in the next section.

Results

We initially focused our research on waste banks and unexpectedly discovered the concept of WS (Schelehe and Yulianto 2020; Wijayanti and Suryani 2015; Nilan and Wibawanto 2015). The proposal for this work focused on exploring policies and indicators of sustainable waste-bank governance in Muhammadiyah, Indonesia’s very large religious and social organization (Fuad 2004; Barton 2014). We selected Muhammadiyah because it has been extremely diligent in bringing environmental issues to the fore over the last 10 years, especially climate change, and also advocates for government action on environmental issues. According to Ikhwanudin (2020), there has been a notable shift in the organization’s perspective toward the environment. Initially, the organization focused on academic promotion, as illustrated in “Environmental Theology” (Asaad 2011), which presents an Islamic perspective on environmental discourse. However, the organization has now moved toward advocating for environmental issues, reflecting the current circumstances that necessitate significant efforts toward developing a practical direction for the environmental awareness movement.

We became familiar with the notion of WS while interviewing one of the heads of the Environment Council, a department that handles environmental issues in Muhammadiyah. The specific term WS was introduced in 2011 by the Council and Ananto Isworo followed this up with more specific action. In 2013, Isworo was the first person to promote environmental issues, particularly waste management, across the community in Brajan Village, Bantul (a district to the north of Yogyakarta City). In March 2020, he was invited by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to the Global Forum on Environment, Gender Mainstreaming, and Empowering Women for Environmental Sustainability held in Paris.

History of WS as part of community empowerment

The WS movement initially gained momentum during the fast-breaking event of Ramadan in 2013 that was attended by a large number of local residents of Brajan Village.² The ceremonial meal was held in a mosque called the Masjid Al Muharram that led to the generation of a sizable amount of solid waste from rice boxes and snack packs. Isworo then invited the attendees to collect the leftover packaging and dispose of it in an available sack for donation.

Since local residents were aware that sadaqah had previously been limited to monetary donations, they quickly protested the announcement, particularly on the basis of their budgetary constraints. However, after a few weeks, Isworo demonstrated that properly managed waste could be profitable. The proceeds from the sale of the waste collected at the mosque were then presented to the community. Local residents were amazed by the profits from the waste, and began to realize that their discarded materials had economic value. These findings led us to conclude that religious predispositions can affect environmental awareness. Isworo also addressed the topic of economic incentives in a nuanced manner and the resultant economic benefits raised the consciousness of this mostly lower income community. As a result of the realization that waste may have financial advantages, they were inspired to become more involved.

Local residents were also motivated, from a religious standpoint, by the rewards that they gained from their charitable deeds. In Islam, a tangible or intangible asset issued by a Muslim or commercial entity outside of zakat (tithing) for the benefit of society is referred to as sadaqah. According to Islamic principles, Muslims believe that the material or immaterial items that they donate will atone for their sins and bring them rewards from Allah. The local residents soon realized that sadaqah was the genuine preaching of a Muslim to other people, without being constrained by time or finances. Sadaqah encompasses all acts of charity and good deeds and is not limited to issuing or donating tangible objects. In this instance, collecting waste is construed as kindness because the material damages the environment. As stated in Sura Ar-Rum 41–42, we are prohibited from destroying nature at whim to indulge in self-lust and preventing positive experiences for subsequent generations.

Therefore, the main principles of WS operations comprise Islamic practices of ta’awun (giving aid to each other) and takaful (cooperating with each other). The value of human pursuits is, as the initiator statement elaborates, “to work and to give in the congregation so that everyone has the right to help and has the right to participate with all their abilities.” In addition to these values, the WS movement also draws on Islamic values regarding the importance of caring for the environment. Under Islamic law, every Muslim is obliged to preserve the environment, utilize useful goods for only the requisite benefit, and avoid israf (excessive behavior) and tabdzir (various acts of wasting materials that can still be used). In Islamic preachings, protecting and preserving the environment is tantamount to sustaining generations of human descendants on Earth. In the language of sustainability, current environmental damage affects future generations. Thus, those values lead local residents to believe that their performance is a good reward in Allah’s ibadah (“notebook”).

The WS concepts and the basis of religious motivation

It was easy for WS founders to motivate Yogyakartans because WS originated in a mosque. For Muslims, the mosque is highly significant since it serves as an assembling space for prayer and social interaction (Hidayat 2015) and they frequently use mosques as gathering sites for communal events. Every Muslim is bound by Islamic law and associated societal norms serve as the foundation for the development of social activities (Tuomela 1984). Congregation improves their ability to communicate with one another and can inspire them to join the WS movement. Our findings support other studies that claim that mosques play a vital role in enhancing Muslims’ external integration, whether in ancient history or the present (Kamil and Darajat 2019). Mosques also serve as places where religious beliefs can be integrated into daily life (Tugal 2009), and even provide a platform for economic activity (Ch 2016). Seen through the lens of contemporary social theory, mosques are the foundation of social capital (Moqaddam and Mohammadi 2016).

Relevant to this discussion is the work of ecotheologian Mawil Izzi Dien (1997) who discussed the Islamic paradigm of the environment. Although Dien (1997) concludes that Islam has many difficulties in practice because of misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and misappropriations, our evidence shows that Islamic values are very congenial for real-world practice. By implementing these ideas, the movement can encourage people to take a more active personal interest in the management of household waste (Vitria 2015). Our reference here to WS also enriches previous studies, such as the work of Afroz, Hanaki, and Tuddin (2010) which focused on Bangladesh. Prior research pertaining to household waste has raised doubts about community involvement in waste management (Odufuwa et al. 2012) and has identified low levels of motivation among community members to engage more extensively in such activities (Ying, Qinghua, and Haight 2007). We also found that the movement encourages youth to voluntarily participate in sorting the waste delivered by community members (Figure 4). This distinguishes the WS movement from waste banks and other community-based waste management. A detailed description of these differences is displayed in Table 2.

Figure 4. Youth in the neighborhood engaging in waste-sorting activities.

Table 2. The distinguished motives for community-based waste management.

Motives	Waste bank	WS	Self-managed
Economic	√	√	x
Social	√	√	x
Environmental	√	√	√
Religion/believes	X	√	x

Waste sadaqah as a form of circular economy

In terms of organizational management, the leaders of the WS movement have designed an optimal organizational structure (Figure 5) and series of action plans that includes offices and waste-storage warehouses (Figure 6) as well as social media accounts to disseminate information about its activities.³ In addition to having an organizational structure, the leadership has established standard operating procedures for WS management (Figure 7).

Figure 5. The structure of WS in Brajan Village, Yogyakarta.

Figure 6. Temporary waste storage warehouse.

Figure 7. WS management flow.

There are additionally indications that the WS movement is developing strategies that are consistent with sustainable practices of CE which is a regenerative system that reduces the use of resources, the production of waste and emissions, and the utilization of energy by shortening the cycles of energy and materials. For environmental sustainability, this model focuses on making the most effective use of materials by recycling and/or reusing products (Wiesmeth 2021). CE is a framework that aims to sustainably combine economic growth and environmental well-being (Murray, Skene, and Haynes 2017). In certain situations, WS employs the 5Rs which serve as the backbone of waste management in CE standards (Figure 7). Because the Islamic paradigm encourages healthy business and economic activities that are in line with maqasid sharia (the purpose of Islamic canonical law) there are opportunities to attain societal benefit with minimum harm (Khateeb, Jumat, and Khamis 2021).

In practical terms, the waste that is sorted according to type is sold to collectors (waste entrepreneurs). Each type of waste is priced, with the highest-priced articles being electronics. Detailed information on the waste prices by type is reported in Table 3. As a result of transacting waste, monetary value was earned, which reached a monthly total of 6,000,000 Indonesian rupiah (US$390). This money was then redistributed to poor people and older women or given away as school supplies in the village. The proceeds affected the local economy in the short term as well as the surrounding area by increasing capacity of people to meet their daily needs. In addition, through the WS fund, the movement provides educational scholarships for children in the village and health and basic food assistance to those in need (Figure 8). Furthermore, the movement offers operational assistance to religious schools in the vicinity. Table 4 summarizes information on the compensation programs for the poor in the village.

Figure 8. Basic food assistance for elderly residents.

Table 3. Waste prices by type.

Waste type	Price (Rupiah) per kg
Plastic polyethylene terephthalate (PET) such as mineral water plastic glass	6500
Plastic high-density polyethylene (HDPE) such as shampoo bottles, plastic buckets, plastic toys, etc.	2200–3500
Duplex paper such as posters, books, snack box paper, etc.	800
Other types of paper: newspaper, white paper, cement paper, cardboard paper	1900–2600
Aluminum	14,000
Iron	2700–3650
Glass bottle	150–250
Electronics	50,000–150,000

Table 4. Compensation program for the poor.

No	Beneficiary group	Program	Amount of money (Indonesian Rupiah)
1	20 orphans and poor	Educational scholarships for monthly school fees	Elementary school level: 40,000 per month Junior high school level: 60,000 per month Senior high school level: 80,000 per month
2	70 widowers and poor	Pack of nine staples	50,000 per pack
3	—	Health compensation for the community is hospitalization.	500,000 for each hospitalization
4	Al-Quran learning center (TPA)	School operating expenses	450,000 per three months
5	Youth mosque	Operating expenses	450,000 per three months

Source: Internal document.

Compared with other empowerment movements, WS is an Islam-based approach to empower poor and lower income communities. As noted by Yunus et al. (2019), “The WS engages in interventions in these underprivileged communities by promoting environmental awareness. This strategy affects the environment and the local economy of an underprivileged neighbourhood.” The WS movement in Yogyakarta is socially successful and has encouraged communities in other regions to implement similar practices.

Conclusion

While waste management was a governmental concern during Indonesia’s New Order, current national regulations promote a high level of public involvement. As a result, several innovations in local waste management such as waste banks have been developed and are regarded as successful examples of moving toward a CE. Furthermore, waste banks are well known and they are increasingly used in community-based waste management, both as a tool for environmental improvement and as a way to raise public environmental awareness through education.

In addition to waste banks, the Yogyakarta community is engaging in other charitable organizations. This movement is associated with Muhammadiyah, a well-known social and religious movement in Indonesia, that calls its activities waste sadaqah. Organizers have successfully mobilized public engagement and invoked public participation in the campaign, success that is attributable to its being mosque-based and supported by Islamic values. Respecting the values of ta’awun and takaful is the foundation of WS’s guiding philosophy. The characteristics of WS that deal with the problem of waste prioritize the social aspect of generating financial benefits, contrary to the operational procedures for waste banks. The WS approach seeks to address the waste issue through social programs and by benefiting underprivileged communities. Because local residents believe that their actions have religious significance, the activities have expanded into a social movement.

WS practices focus on environmental issues through social movement mobilization. Regarding environmental concerns, the implementation of WS has made a noteworthy contribution to the operationalization of fundamental principles of CE and effectively stimulated local residents to participate. This communal involvement functions as a supplement to the deficiencies of CE practices that overlook the social dimension which are crucial. The triple bottom lines model seeks to balance the economic, social, and environmental factors. We can conclude that the WS practice contributes to the sustainability of a CE.

Our research has resulted in numerous findings. However, the lack of local interviews posed a constraint to our study. The information provided by local residents regarding the effects of the program needs to be further investigated. This offers scope for further research in the field and our study can serve as a foundation for academics worldwide to investigate how WS is practiced in other countries. Furthermore, for policymakers in Indonesia, the WS strategy has revolutionized and complemented existing community-based waste management practices. Governments worldwide are encouraged to emulate this model and the related social practices for enhanced waste management.

Notes

1. Waste self-management exists not only in Indonesia but also in Europe, including Ireland (Davies 2007). It has been reported in Canada (Sholanke and Gutberlet 2022), Johannesburg, South Africa (Kubanza 2019), and Uganda (Tukahirwa, Mol, and Oosteveer 2010).

2. The WS movement is an inorganic waste-collection program that is based in mosques and the waste is intended as shadaqah to be further sorted and sold with the proceeds being used for social activities such as education, basic food, health compensation, teaching of the Quran.

3. For instance, WS’s Twitter handle is @shadaqahsampah.

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the support from the Muhammadiyah Higher Education Research and Development Council through the #Batch5 Research Scheme in 2021. We would also like to express our gratitude to Muhammadiyah Central Leadership in Yogyakarta’s Environment Department and WS founder Ananto Isworo for agreeing to the interviews.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by the Muhammadiyah Higher Education Research and Development Council through the #Batch5 Research Scheme in 2021.