“ZERO WASTE” LIFESTYLE HABITS AND

ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY IN THE FACULTY OF

MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE AT UNIVERSITAS
NEGERI MALANG AS AN IMPLEMENTATION OF
SUPPORTING SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENTAL
DEVELOPMENT

Sueb1, Aisy Hanifah1 and Nadiya Dini Rifqi1

1
Department of Bology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences,
Universitas Negeri Malang, Jalan Semarang 05 Malang 65145, Indonesia

Corresponding author: sueb@um.ac.id, haniaisy@gmail.com

Abstract. Waste is a complex, subjective and sometimes controversial issue. The

problem of waste is related to the human lifestyle and waste acknowledgement. Zero
waste offers a good system to solving this waste problem. The purpose of this study is
determine the zero waste lifestyle habits and environmental literacy of students in
Faculty of Mathematics and Science, to correlate views zero waste lifestyle habits and
environmental literacy. The research was carried out with a quantitative approach
using questionnaire and community campus in the Faculty of Mathematics and
Science at State University of Malang as samples. The overall Environmental Literacy
Score indicates a good environmental literacy. There is a correlation between
environmental literacy and zero waste lifestyle students. It can be concluded that
student environmental literacy leads to pro-environment

Keywords : Environmental literacy, zero waste, waste problem, campus

community.

1. Introduction
Waste is a complex, subjective and sometimes controversial issue. Based on Republic of
Indonesia Act Number 18 of Solid Waste Management (2008), Waste is defined as as the rest of
human daily activities and or natural processes that are solid[1]. Specific waste is garbage which
because of its nature, concentration, and or volume requires special management. Waste producer is
every person and or due to natural processes that produce waste.
Environmental pollution generally comes from waste that loosens up on one shelter or
disposal. Revamp organic waste in an anaerobic atmosphere (oxygen-poor) will cause unpleasant
odors. Higher protein content inside rubbish, the more odor it causes. Another impact is due to deep
landfill large number is a dirty environment and a rundown landscape. Waste dumps become a nest for
vectors and diseases[2].
The increasing volume of solid waste in landfills contributes to unprecedented levels of
environmental problems, such as water and soil contamination via leaching of heavy metals, and air
pollution via emission of greenhouse gases[3]. The environmental problems being discussed is plastic
pollution by the sea. There has been an almost 2000% increase in the annual global production of
plastic during the past 65 years, generating to the “plasticsphere” in marine ecosystems. In Indonesia,
the greatest archipelago in the world, the presence of plastics in marine environments has gained
public attention during the past 3 years. Indonesia produces an estimated 5.4 million metric tons of
plastic waste. 3.2 million metric tons of plastic waste was mismanaged so that 0.48–1.29 million
metric tons will end up in marine environments[4].
Actually the problem of waste is closely related to the pattern of human life it self. The
amount of waste every year continues to increase in line and as the population increases and the
quality of life of the people or people and is accompanied by advances in technological knowledge
which also results in a shift in the lifestyle of people who tend to be consumptive[5].
Waste depletes natural resources, uses energy and water, places pressure on land, pollutes
the environment and, finally creates an additional economic cost for managing the waste[6]. Thus, the
problem of waste becomes a barrier to the implementation of sustainable environmental development.
In Republic of Indonesia Law Number 32 of 2009 about Protection and Management of Environment,
Sustainable Development is an effort conscious and planned that integrates environmental, social and
economic aspects into development strategies to ensure the integrity of the environment and safety, the
ability, welfare, and quality of life of present and future generations.
To realize sustainable development, we need to move to a position where there will be no such
thing as waste, merely transformation; this position is called zero waste. ‘Zero Waste’ is one of the
most visionary concepts for solving waste problems[7]. Zero waste is a very complex system, and
there are still mountains of works need to done in future. In order to minimize the solid waste to zero
waste, it needs all of people together to act to reduce, reuse, and recycling them for getting rid of waste
from our land[8]. With more awareness campaigns and educational programs the society can be made
more aware of zero waste and its benefits. With such awareness and awareness programs it would also
encourage the zero waste lifestyles, i.e. reduction in consumption and waste generation[9].Zero waste
has become an aspirational goal for tackling waste problems. Many cities such as Adelaide, San
Francisco and Vancouver have adopted zero waste goals as a part of their waste management
strategies[10].
One place that has the potential to produce waste is campus. The number of students,
lecturers, educational staff, and campus officers who carry out activities in it, so that the campus
becomes a place that is found in many waste generated from these activities. The usual waste
produced in educational buildings, such as a campus in the form organic waste, recyclable waste, and
waste that cannot be recycled [11].
The Faculty of Mathematics and Science is one of the faculties at Universitas Negeri Malang.
Behavior of the campus community in the Faculty of Mathematics and Science is still considered to be
less concerned about the environment, especially in the matter of waste. Whereas as humans are
educated in the world of science, they should contribute to the environment and become role models
for others. Therefore, the aim for the research are to determine the zero waste lifestyle habits and
environmental literacy of students in Faculty of Mathematics and Science, to correlate views zero
waste lifestyle habits and environmental literacy, and to compare the result of environmental literacy
based on department.

1. Methods
The research was carried out with a quantitative approach as the aim for the research are to
determine the zero waste lifestyle habits and environmental literacy of students in Faculty of
Mathematics and Science. The research was conducted in the Faculty of Mathematics and Science at
Universitas Negeri Malang, Jalan Semarang 5, Lowokwaru, Malang , Jawa Timur. This research was
conducted in March until April 2019. The population in this study were the community campus in the
Faculty of Mathematics and Science at State University of Malang. Therefore, the aim for the
research are to determine the zero waste lifestyle habits and environmental literacy of students in
Faculty of Mathematics and Science, to correlate views zero waste lifestyle habits and environmental
literacy, and to compare the result of environmental literacy based on department.
This design was adopted from the study ‘The relationship between environmental literacy and self-
efficacy beliefs toward environmental education’ by Saribas et al., 2014[12]. The study was carried
out by collecting data with the help of questionnaire distribute to students of Biology Department,
students of Physics Department, students of Chemistry Department, students of Mathematics
Department and students of Mathematics and Science Study Program. The questionnaire used in this
research involve two topics multiple choices:
1. Choose your opinion about environmental literacy below (5 questions)
2. Choose your opinion about zero waste lifestyle habits below (10 questions)

Table 1. Demographic information of the participants.

Type of Department Number of Students in each faculty
participants f %
Biology Department 16
Physics Department 16
Chemistry Department 16
Mathematics Department 16
Mathematics and Science 16
education study program
 Source:https://petatematikindo.files. com/2015/03/administrasi-kota-malanga11.jpg

With Likert scale data we cannot use the mean as a measure of central tendency as it has no
meaning. To test hypotheses one, Kruskal-Wallis test was used for the purpose of measuring “Zero
Waste” Lifestyle Habits and environmental literacy, survey instrument which use questionnaire items
on a five point Likert scale with option strongly disagree (=1) to strongly agree (=5)[13]. To measure
To compare the result of environmental literacy based on department used One Way ANOVA.
Correlation between Community’s environmental literacy and zero waste lifestyle, Correlation
Pearson was employed to determine the significance of the relationship.

3. Result
The total results of environmental literacy score students of the faculty of mathematics and
natural sciences scores from 5 department as many as 80 students are listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Total Score Environmental Literacy Students of the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural
Sciences
 Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
environmental literacy 80 17,00 25,00 22,4375 1,86808
Valid N (listwise) 80

Based on Table 2, the average overall environmental literacy score is 22,4375, with a standard
deviation of 1,86808, a minimum score of 17,00 and a maximum score of 25,00.

The overall results of the Environmental Literacy score based on Biology Department (16
students), Physics Department (16 students), Chemistry Department (16 students), Mathematics
Department (16 students), Mathematics and Science education study program (16 students) are listed
in Table 3.

Table 3. Number of Respondens, Environmental Literacy Score, and Standard Deviation of Biology
Department, Physics Department, Chemistry Department, Mathematics Department and Mathematics
and Science Study Program
Report
Mathematics
and Science
Biology Physics Chemistry Mathematics Education
Mean 22,3750 22,3750 22,5000 21,3750 22,8750
N 16 16 16 16 16
Std. Deviation 2,41868 1,40831 1,67332 2,24722 1,78419
From Table 3 it appears that the number of respondens of each deparment is 30 students with an
average score of 22,38 with a standard deviation of 2,41 for Biology Department; average score of
22,38 with a standard deviation of 1,40 for Physics Department, average score of 22,50 with a
standard deviation of 1,68 for Chemistry Department, average score of 21,38 with a standard deviation
of 2,25 for Mathematics Department, average score of 22,88 with a standard deviation of 1,78 for
Mathematics Department and Mathematics and Science Study Program.

Table 4 Average environmental literacy scores in each department

ANOVA
Score Environmental Literacy
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 27,500 4 6,875 2,078 ,092
Within Groups 248,187 75 3,309
Total 275,688 79

Based on table 4, it is known that the average environmental literacy score is significantly the same.
Obtained sig. amounting to 0,092 which is greater than α = 0,05.
There is a significant correlation between environmental literacy and the lifestyle of zero
waste students . Based on the results of the Pearson correlation (Table 5) obtained p = 0,007 which is
smaller than α = 0,05. This means that there is a significant correlation between environmental literacy
and a lifestyle of zero waste students. Which means the more environmental literacy, the better the
zero waste lifestyle.

Table 5 Correlation between Environmental Literacy and Lifestyle Zero waste

Correlations
environmental
literacy zero waste lifestyle
Environmental Literacy Pearson Correlation 1 ,298**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,007
N 80 80
Zero Waste Lifestyle Pearson Correlation ,298 **
1
Sig. (2-tailed) ,007
N 80 80
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 6 Category of Environmental Literacy Score

No Category Ʃ %
1 Good (x > 24,3) 12 15%
2 Enough (20,57 ≤ x ≤ 24,3) 55 68,75%
3 Bad (x < 20,57) 13 16,25%

Based on table 6, there is 12 (15%) students whose score are in Good Category, 55
(68,75%) students have score in Enough Category and 13 (16,25%) students have a Bad
Category score. Majority of respondens, students of Mathematics and Science Faculty, have
enough literacy score.
4. Discussion
The overall Environmental Literacy Score was 22.44 (standard deviation or SB = 1.86) out of a
total of 5 majors of 80 respondents. This score is close to a score that indicates good
environmental literacy of 25.00, which means students of the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural
Sciences have good environmental literacy. This is in accordance with the study of Saribas et. al
(who obtained a mean total score of 38.52 (SB = 1.49). This means they have good environmental
literacy. There are 68,75% students have enough environmental literacy, so majority of student are
well-educated in environmental-science and favourable attitudes toward the environment,
accordance with the study of Alp et. al (who obtain students’ mean scores on the environmental
Attitude subscales (M ranging from 72.7 to 80.4) were relatively high.)
The results of the Pearson correlation obtained p = 0,007, the community whose environmental
literacy is good, they will have a good zero waste lifstyle. In order to make an environment with a
less waste problem, the community should apply zero waste lifestyle in their daily routine. As
science community, zero waste lifestyle can be one of a good example of contribution in
environmental awareness. So, waste problem can be minimized and in another faculty if
community of Mathematic and Science Faculty can achieve a good progress in minimazing waste
problem through zerowaste lifestyle.

5. Conclusion
Based on the results and discussion, it can be concluded that student environmental literacy leads
to pro-environment, there is no difference in environmental literacy among biology students,
physics, chemistry students, mathematics students and mathematics and science study program
students, there is a correlation between environmental literacy and zero waste lifestyle students. in
the future it is necessary to improve environmental literacy which leads to the pro-environment so
that the awareness of students in particular and society generally increases.
References

[1] Marliani N. PEMANFAATAN LIMBAH RUMAH TANGGA (SAMPAH ANORGANIK)

SEBAGAI BENTUK IMPLEMENTASI DARI PENDIDIKAN LINGKUNGAN HIDUP 2014:9.
[2] Widiarti IW. Pengelolaan Sampah Berbasis “Zero Waste” Skala Rumah Tangga Secara Mandiri. J
Sains Teknol Lingkung 2012;4:101–13. doi:10.20885/jstl.vol4.iss2.art4.
[3] Zelenika I, Moreau T, Zhao J. Toward zero waste events: Reducing contamination in waste
streams with volunteer assistance. Waste Manag 2018;76:39–45.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2018.03.030.
[4] Li J, Lusher AL, Rotchell JM, Deudero S, Turra A, Bråte ILN, et al. Using mussel as a global
bioindicator of coastal microplastic pollution. Environ Pollut 2019;244:522–33.
doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2018.10.032.
[5] Hogland W, Kaczala F, Jani Y, Hogland M, Bhatnagar A. Beyond the zero waste concept.
Linnaeus Eco-Tech 2017. doi:10.15626/Eco-Tech.2014.028.
[6] Nizar M, Munir E, Munawar E. Manajemen Pengelolaan Sampah Kota Berdasarkan Konsep Zero
Waste: Studi Literatur n.d.:10.
[7] Connett P. Zero Waste: Theory & Practice Around the World n.d.:136.
[8] Song Q, Li J, Zeng X. Minimizing the increasing solid waste through zero waste strategy. J Clean
Prod 2015;104:199–210. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.027.
[9] Veleva V, Bodkin G, Todorova S. The need for better measurement and employee engagement to
advance a circular economy: Lessons from Biogen’s “zero waste” journey. J Clean Prod
2017;154:517–29. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.177.
[10]Zaman AU. A comprehensive review of the development of zero waste management: lessons
learned and guidelines. J Clean Prod 2015;91:12–25. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.013.
[11]Moscone A. Waste Not, Want Not: A Student Manual To Create Zero Waste College Campuses
n.d.:29.
[12]Saribas D, Teksoz G, Ertepinar H. The Relationship between Environmental Literacy and Self-
efficacy Beliefs toward Environmental Education. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci 2014;116:3664–8.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.820.
[13]Junaidi Junaidi. Statistik Uji Kruskal-Wallis 2015. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.1439656.
 LAMPIRAN
Sub
N Variables and Tools of
vari
o Relationship of Indicators Statistics How to Measure
abl
. Variables Used
e

Score of questionnaires of students of

Biology Department, students of
Community’s
Physics Department, students of
views of Kruskal Questionnaires and
1 - Chemistry Department, students of
environmental Wallis Test Statistics Analysis
Mathematics Department and
literacy
students of Mathematics and Science
Study Program (80 people)

Score of questionnaires of students of

Biology Department, students of
Physics Department, students of
The zero waste Kruskal Questionnaires and
2 - Chemistry Department, students of
lifestyle Wallis Test Statistics Analysis
Mathematics Department and
students of Mathematics and Science
Study Program (80 people)

Score of questionnaires of students of

Correlation
Biology Department, students of
between
Physics Department, students of
Community’s Correlation
3 - Chemistry Department, students of Statistics analysis
environmental Pearson
Mathematics Department and
literacy and zero
students of Mathematics and Science
waste lifestyle
Study Program (80 people)
Score of questionnaires of students of
Compare the Biology Department, students of
result of Physics Department, students of
One Way
4 environmental Chemistry Department, students of Statistic analysis
ANOVA
literacy based on Mathematics Department and
department students of Mathematics and Science
Study Program (80 people)
Option: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree
A. Environmental literacy
1. Environmental science is important for our well-being
2. Principle of sustainability is important for saving our planet
3. Climate change is real, caused by humans, and is going to/already is causing major weather-
related disruptions
4. Recycling makes a difference and is worthwhile
5. My attitude support sustainability for human and ecological health, social justice, and a better
world for all generations
B. Zero waste
1. I have a consciousness on zero waste
2. I must recycling solidwaste (i.e., paper, bottles, cans, etc.)
3. I consciously conserve water
4. I must use reusable shopping bags
5. I must bring my own lunch box
6. I prefer reusable water bottle to disposable water bottle
7. I eat with no leftover for decreasing number of trash
8. If there are a leftover, I’ll eat it later
9. I reduce buying food in plastic wrap
10. I prefer buying reusable straw to using disposable straw