Correcting the Paradigm of Waste Management in Schools
The exhortation from the Minister of Basic and Secondary Education, Abdul Mu’ti, for schools to intensify waste recycling activities with students (Kompas.com 30/3/2026)—even with the aim of transforming it into eco-friendly energy—initially sounds progressive.
In the broader narrative of energy efficiency and environmental concern, this idea feels ‘visionary’. Upon critical dissection, however, the statement reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of recycling and waste management concepts.
As reported, schools are encouraged to manage waste through recycling so that it can be ‘processed and converted into a source of eco-friendly energy’. This is where the problem begins. There is a conflation of concepts between recycling and waste-to-energy processing.
The two are not only technically different but also differ in principle. The misleading simplification is that recycling is an industrial process. It requires a long chain: collection of homogeneous materials, processing with specific technology, and re-production into raw materials.
Plastics, paper, metals, and glass can indeed be recycled—but not directly in a school environment. Schools do not have facilities for shredding plastics, melting metals, or purifying paper pulp. Therefore, imagining that schools can ‘recycle’ waste in its entirety is a mistaken simplification.
Plastics are separated from organics, paper from residues, and so on. From there, the waste can enter the industrial recycling chain through waste banks, collectors, or municipal management systems. This is the real contribution schools can make to the circular economy.
The narrative of ‘recycling in schools’ often gets trapped in symbolic activities: making crafts from waste. Plastic bottles become flower pots, coffee wrappers become bags, and so forth. These activities are educational, but their scale is very small and does not address the main problem. In many cases, these craft products end up as new waste.
Waste-to-energy technology requires large installations, strict emission controls, and hazardous residue management. Even at the city level, this technology remains debated due to high costs and environmental risks.
If schools attempt to ‘process waste into energy’, the most likely outcome is simple incineration practices. This is highly dangerous. Burning mixed waste—especially plastics—produces dioxins and other toxic substances with serious health impacts. In an educational context, this is not only misguided but also counterproductive.
On the other hand, not all waste is suitable for energy conversion. Organic waste can indeed be processed through biodigesters into biogas or via composting. However, this is not ‘energy’ on a large scale, but rather more appropriately termed biological management. Meanwhile, inorganic waste like plastics is better recycled than burned, as incineration eliminates its material value.
This is where correcting the paradigm is crucial. Waste management in schools should follow the proper hierarchy: reduce, reuse, recycle. The first step is to reduce waste accumulation—for example, by banning single-use plastics, as has begun in some regions. The second step is reuse. And the third is ensuring waste is sorted so it can enter the recycling industry.
Schools actually have a strategic role as centres of education. Not as waste processing technology hubs. What needs to be built are habits: sorting waste at the source, understanding material types, and realising the consequences of every consumption. This kind of education has far greater long-term impact than pseudo-experiments in turning waste into energy.
Additionally, a systems-based approach is important. Schools cannot stand alone. There must be connections to local waste management systems: waste banks, TPS3R, and recycling industries.
What is needed is not mere jargon, but a comprehensive understanding of waste management systems. If not corrected, policies like this risk instilling misguided understanding in the younger generation.
Instead of building critical ecological awareness, students are led to believe that waste always has a ‘shortcut’ to becoming energy. In reality, it is far more complex: unsorted waste from the start almost always ends up as a problem, not a solution.