Philosophical Reconstruction of Human Needs and Ecosystem Capacity toward Sustainable Zero Waste Management in Mataram

Rofifah Aulia Amanda; Muhammad Sarjan

doi:10.71024/ecobios.2026.v3i1.79

Authors

Rofifah Aulia Amanda Resources and Environmental Management Study Program, University of Mataram Author
Muhammad Sarjan Resources and Environmental Management Study Program, University of Mataram Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71024/ecobios.2026.v3i1.79

Keywords:

Human needs, ecosystem capacity, philosophy of science, zero waste, Mataram City

Abstract

The increase in waste generation in Mataram City shows that there is an imbalance between human needs and ecosystem capacity that cannot be solved through technical approaches alone. This research aims to analyze the relationship between human needs and ecosystem capacity from the perspective of philosophy of science and reconstruct the conceptual foundation of zero waste implementation in Mataram City. , This study employed a qualitative philosophical approach through literature review using ontology, epistemology, and axiology as analytical dimensions with the library research method. Data were obtained from various scientific literature, including journals, books, policy documents, and relevant research results, then analyzed using content analysis, critical analysis, and hermeneutical synthesis. The results of the study show that the application of zero waste requires reconstruction on the three dimensions of philosophy of science, namely ontological, epistemological, and axiological. Ontologically, humans need to be understood as an integral part of the ecosystem, not an entity separate from nature. Epistemologically, the concept of human needs needs to be distinguished from consumptive desires through a transdisciplinary approach. Axiologically, zero waste is an ethical imperative based on responsibility for the environment, intergenerational justice, and strengthening the local wisdom of the Sasak people. This study concludes that the integration of scientific knowledge, environmental ethics, and local wisdom is an important conceptual foundation in supporting a sustainable zero waste policy in Mataram City without exceeding the capacity of the ecosystem.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Avilés-Palacios, C., & Rodríguez-Olalla, A. (2021). The sustainability of waste management models in a circular economy. Sustainability, 13(13), 7105. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137105

Budds, J., & Zwarteveen, M. Z. (2020). Water, power and the production of knowledge: A political ecology perspective. Routledge.

Costanza, R. (2020). Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability. Ecosystem Services, 43, 101096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101096

Dewulf, A., Klenk, N., Wyborn, C., & Lemos, M. C. (2020). Usable environmental knowledge from the perspective of knowledge coproduction: A synthesis of the literature. Environmental Science & Policy, 113, 409–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.08.006

Farley, J., Washington, H., Kopnina, H., & Piccolo, J. J. (2024). Ecological economics and the ontology of humans in nature. Ecological Economics. (Please adjust the volume and page based on the version of the article you are using).

Gibbons, L. V. (2020). Transdisciplinary knowledge and sustainability transformations: A review of knowledge co-production research. Sustainability Science, 15(6), 1785–1803.

Hannon, J. (2020). Exploring and illustrating the (inter-)disciplinarity of waste and zero waste management. Urban Science, 4(4), 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci4040073

Hannon, J. (2020). Exploring and illustrating the (inter-)disciplinarity of waste and zero waste management. Urban Science, 4(4), Article 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci4040073

Hannon, J. (2020). Exploring and illustrating the (inter-)disciplinarity of waste and zero waste management. Urban Science, 4(4), 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci4040073

Joaquin, J. J. B., & Biana, H. T. (2020). Sustainability science is ethics: Bridging the philosophical gap between science and policy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 160, 104929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104929

Kahambing, J. G. S. (2021). Wastephilia: A response to the waste crisis through environmental ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 34(5), 1–12.

Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005

Klimska, A. (2020). Sustainable consumption and the philosophy of human needs. Przedsiębiorczość i Zarządzanie, 21(3), 67–81.

Langemeyer, J., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Haase, D., Scheuer, S., & Elmqvist, T. (2020). Bridging the gap between ecosystem service assessments and urban planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 194, 103703.

Ledo Marques, A., Alvim, A. T. B., & Schröder, J. (2022). Ecosystem services and urban planning: A review of the contribution of the concept to adaptation in urban areas. Sustainability, 14(4), 2391. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042391

Luederitz, C., Lang, D. J., & von Wehrden, H. (2020). A conceptual framework to untangle the concept of urban ecosystem services. Landscape and Urban Planning, 200, 103837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103837

Mayes-Ramírez, M. M., Gálvez-Sánchez, F. J., Ramos-Ridao, Á. F., & Molina-Moreno, V. (2023). Urban waste: Visualizing the academic literature through bibliometric analysis and systematic review. Sustainability, 15(3), 1846. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15031846

Mazzocchi, F. (2020). A deeper meaning of sustainability: Insights from indigenous knowledge. Anthropocene Review, 7(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019619898888

McPhearson, T., Andersson, E., Elmqvist, T., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2022). Urban ecosystem services for resilience and sustainability: A systematic review. Sustainability, 14(3). (Please adjust the volume and page according to the article used).

Saidani, M., Yannou, B., Leroy, Y., Cluzel, F., & Kim, H. (2020). How circular economy and industrial ecology concepts are intertwined: A bibliometric and text mining analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 255, 120221.

Saidani, M., Yannou, B., Leroy, Y., Cluzel, F., & Kim, H. (2020). How circular economy and industrial ecology concepts are intertwined: A bibliometric and text mining analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 255, 120221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120221

Targa, L. (2022). Relational ontology and environmental ethics: Reframing the human–nature relationship. Environmental Philosophy. (Complete the volume and page according to the article used).

Valenzuela-Fernández, L., & Escobar-Farfán, M. (2022). Zero-waste management and sustainable consumption: A comprehensive bibliometric mapping analysis. Sustainability, 14(23), 16269. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142316269

Woodhead, A. J., Field, C. R., & Brown, K. (2025). Co-production of ecosystem services: Integrating ecological processes and human well-being. (Complete volumes, numbers, and pages according to the article used).

Wyborn, C., Datta, A., Montana, J., Ryan, M., Leith, P., Chaffin, B., Miller, C., & van Kerkhoff, L. (2021). Co-producing sustainability: Reordering the governance of science, policy, and practice. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 46, 319–346.

Yuan, M. H., & Lo, S. L. (2020). Circular economy: Concepts, applications and implications for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 276, 124180.

Zaman, A. U. (2021). Zero-waste approach towards sustainable waste management. Resources, Environment and Sustainability, 3, 100014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resenv.2021.100014

Zhang, D., Huang, G., Yin, X., & Gong, Q. (2021). Residents' waste separation behaviors at the source: Using SEM with the theory of planned behavior in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(3), 947. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18030947