According to Kompas.id, each person in Indonesia discards food worth 2.1 million per year. Food waste management in Indonesia still needs more attention from the government. The method of waste management still focuses on landfilling in the final disposal site (TPA). This method is avoided in developed countries like the US due to limited landfill space. Additionally, food waste landfilling causes odor, public health issues, economic losses, and environmental damage. According to the National Food Waste Strategy Feasibility Study, household food waste contributes to the most significant component of food waste in Australia (56%). In 2017, the Australian government launched the National Food Waste Strategy to halve food waste by 2030. Food Bank Australia successfully processed 48.1 million kilograms of food in 2022. Based on this argument, our group aims to describe the differences in regulations and rules regarding food waste management, specifically household food waste, between Australia and Indonesia through a systematic review. The hope is to raise awareness among the Indonesian community to adopt appropriate measures for sustainable and efficient food waste management.
In Australia, waste management regulations are not only governed at the national level but also involve the role of local governments in supporting the movement to reduce food waste. The national regulation in Australia is called the National Food Waste Strategy, which provides guidance and a framework for collective action to reduce food waste. This policy involves multiple stakeholders, including the government, industry, and society, emphasizing the importance of education, self-awareness, and improving waste management system innovation. The goal of this policy is not only to reduce food waste but also to create economic opportunities, preserve the environment, and develop a sustainable food system. In Indonesia, the latest regulations regarding managing household food waste are regulated explicitly in the Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 97 of 2017 concerning National Policies and Strategies on Management of Household Waste and Household-Type Waste. Previously, these regulations were governed by the Minister of Environment Regulation No. 16 of 2011 and Government Regulation No. 81 of 2012. These three regulations indicate the government's concern for managing household food waste. However, specific targets, benchmark indicators, monitoring, and practical framework guidelines for managing household food waste still need to be explicitly outlined.
For reading tasks of the systematic review, we divide tasks per database. Each group member is responsible for a database to search and read more detailed journals obtained from that database. Regarding the group's dynamic, there is enough cohesive flow. We always ask questions about what we need help understanding from the journals we get from the database. While doing the work, we always have offline discussions or occasionally have online discussions. Our group prefers to hold offline meetings; apart from facilitating communication, offline meetings can also make us understand each other's constraints experienced by other group members. Holding meetings offline improves our performance, especially in reading journals related to our topic. Offline meetings are very influential in the reading process because they are very efficient and make it easy for each of us as a group. With many online and offline discussions supporting group dynamics, it becomes easier to work together.
EBSCOHost, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Taylor & Francis, SINTA, and GARUDA are search engines for searching the literature. Each group member is given a search engine to make it more efficient. We planned to have an offline meeting to discuss research articles that can be used. Keywords used for searching the literature include Food waste management, law, regulation, Australia, and Indonesia. While exploring the literature, there still needs clarity in making the right decision. Therefore, our group agreed to consult with our lecturer through MS Teams. Then we collect the research article by sending it to the LINE group chat.Â
However, our teamwork still needs more improvement due to communication issues. Not all of the group members are active all the time in the group chat. Overall, our group needs improvement in communication for excellent results and time-saving. With the current group, teamwork will lead to suboptimal results.
In doing a systematic review, we took several steps, namely making assignments (ASG) starting from ASG 1-4. ASG 1, we made a topic tree and determined research objectives for a systematic review; firstly, we discussed the offline system several times because considering the discussion would be more efficient for brainstorming and the online system could follow the meeting in the evening. ASG 2 made abstracts along with keywords; we also had offline discussions. ASG 3 was making an introduction; we divided the task into four parts through a ladder shuffle in the group line, namely paragraphs 1 and 2, paragraph 3, paragraph 4, and paragraph 5. In addition, we each made data extraction in Excel following citations taken in producing the introduction. ASG 4 contained discussions about regulatory differences, approaches to handling household waste, government engagement, and infrastructure and technology in Indonesia and Australia. At this ASG, we divided tasks through a ladder shuffle in the group line.
In the making of ASG 1-4, the dynamics of our group, both offline and online, were still solid, but there were still obstacles, such as determining the right time for the group to work or discuss. Then sometimes, there needed to be more clarity in working on it and in terms of having to revise it. At first, our group also needed help understanding the concept of a systematic review. From discussing topics to searching for data on search engines, it is undeniable that several questions still stick out; we even once felt that the topic we chose was too tricky for us. However, in the end, we finished the work that was supposed to be our job. Our goal is to complete our assignment; we try to understand that many of our writings are imperfect. As students, our main responsibility is to engage in studying. Even if there are imperfections, they can be rectified at a later time. Therefore, we decided to consult with our lecturers using Microsoft Teams via chat in groups or consultative meetings, where most of us consult via chat. We salute the lecturers who can respond quickly and provide patient guidance from our group from scratch.
In working on ASG 1-4, we learned many things we didn't know before, such as using Perpusnas (Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia or Indonesian National Library), further searches on Google Scholar, databases, etc. These assignments taught each of us to practice and think critically. In addition, it also taught us to be able to collect and filter essential information efficiently and accurately. Even though these tasks are tricky, we get a lot of benefits.Â
