Health impact of river water pollution in Malaysia

Abstract

n the sustainability of water resources. Not only has that but also affected plants and living organisms, the health of the population and the economy. This study reviews the state of river water quality and sources of river water pollution in Malaysia. The Department of Environment program continued monitoring of the quality of river water in 2014 to determine the status of water quality of the river and to detect changes in water quality of the river. They found that 52% of the river was found to be clean, 39% slightly contaminated and 9% contaminated. The number of the polluted river is declined over the period of time. They also observed that beverage industries are the major source of pollution in this country. This paper reviews the environmental policy related to water pollution and studies related to water pollution and health impacts.

Full text

Health Impact of River Water Pollution in Malaysia
Rafia Afroz1, Ataur Rahman2
1Department of Economics
Faculty of Economics and Management Science
International Islamic University Malaysia
2Department of Mechanical Engineering
Faculty of Engineering
International Islamic University Malaysia
ABSTRACT
Water pollution is a severe problem in Malaysia and has an adverse impact on the
sustainability of water resources. Not only that but also affects plants and living organisms,
the health of the population and the economy. This study reviews the state of river water
quality and sources of river water pollution in Malaysia. The Department of Environment
(DOE) program continued monitoring of the quality of river water in 2014 to determine the
status of water quality of the river and to detect changes in water quality of the river. They
found that 52% of the river were found to be clean, 39% slightly contaminated and 9%)
contaminated. The number of the polluted river is declined over the period of time. They also
observed that beverage industries are the major source of pollution in this country. This paper
reviews the environmental policy related to water pollution and studies related to water pollution and
health impacts.
1.0 Introduction
Water pollution is a serious problem in Malaysia and has an adverse impact on the
sustainability of water resources. Not only that, but it also affects living plants and organisms,
the health of the population and the economy. The total availability of water significantly as
the cost of treatment of contaminated water is too high and in some cases, polluted water is
not susceptible to consumption is reduced. A lot of water resources available in the basin,
unfortunately, does not guarantee an adequate supply to all users due to river pollution (Ling,
2010). Development in our watersheds leads to an increase in population activities and urban
life. The effect of urbanization typically changes the quality of runoff in a basin, which in
turn affects the water quality of the receiving waters. Rainfall in urban areas washes
pollutants accumulated on the surface of the ground in rainwater facilities. Wastewater from
residential, commercial and industrial zones causes a bad odor, especially in the presence of
trash, and quality deteriorates existing rainwater systems and contaminated rivers. Most
sources of pollution have been caused by human activity, although some come from natural
sources of contamination. The problem of water pollution is becoming increasingly
dangerous, with reports showing a downward trend year after year. However, water pollution
is not a recent environmental issue, as it has been synonymous with urbanization and
modernization. Malaysia's primary freshwater source, accounting for approximately 97% of
the total water supply (Gasim et al., 2009). Malaysia is well endowed with copious amounts
of water and water resources. With an average precipitation of 3,000 mm, it is estimated that
566 billion m3 of water run in the river system each year (Weng 2005).

1.1 River Water Quality Classification
There are mainly two main methods used to classify the water quality of the monitored river.
First, the Water Quality Index (ICA), and secondly, the National Interim Water Quality
Standard (INWQS). The INWQS defines six categories (I, IIA, IIB, III, IV and V) referring to
the classification based on descending order of water quality of the rivers of Class I and Class
V is "worse." Table 1 shows the class definition provided by INWQS.
Table 1: INWQS Class Definitions
Class Definition
I • Conservation of natural environment.
• Water supply I - Practically no treatment necessary (except by disinfection or
boiling only).
• Fishery I - Very sensitive aquatic species.
IIA Water supply II – Conventional treatment required.
• Fishery II - Sensitive aquatic species.
IIB Recreational use with body contact.
III Water supply III – Extensive treatment required.
• Fishery III - Common of economic value, and tolerant species; livestock
drinking.
IV Irrigation
V None of the above.
Source: Zainudin, (2010)
On the other hand, six parameters were chosen for the water quality index, such as dissolved
oxygen (DO), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD),
suspended solids (SS) The ammoniacal nitrogen (NH3-N) PH. Calculations are performed
not on the same parameters, but on their subscripts. The subscripts are called BEEN, SIBOD,
SICOD, SIAN, SISS, and SIPH. The best Fit equations used to estimate the six index values
below Table 2.
Table 2: DOE Water Quality Classification Based on Water Quality Index
Parameters Index range
Clean Slightly polluted Polluted
SIBOD 91-100 80-90 0-79
SIAN 92-100 71-91 0-70
SISS 76-100 70-75 0-69
WQI 81-100 60-80 0-59
Source: Zainudin, (2010)

The Department of the Environment (DOE) program continued to monitor river water quality
in 2014 to determine the state of river water quality and detect changes in river water quality.
Water samples were collected at regular intervals at designated in situ stations and laboratory
tests to determine the biological and physicochemical characteristics. The Water Quality
Index (IQE) is used to indicate the level of pollution and water classes and corresponding
methods compared to the Malaysian National Water Quality Standards (ANEQ) (ANNEX).
ICA takes into account parameters such as dissolved oxygen (DO), biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), ammoniacal nitrogen (NH3-N), suspended
solids (SS) and pH. In 2014, the water quality of the rivers was evaluated in a total of 6,076
samples taken from a total of 891 manuals of monitoring stations that cover 477 streams. The
plants consist of 801 stations and environmental baseline, 55 upstream of selected water
intakes, and 35 stations for the River Life Project (RLP). Water quality was also evaluated
from 10 monitoring stations of continuous water quality.
1.3 State of the River Water Quality
Of the 473 rivers monitored, 244 (52%) were clean, 186 (39%) were slightly contaminated,
and 43 (9%) were infected (Figure 1). As in previous years, biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD), ammoniacal nitrogen (NH3-N) and suspended solids (SS) continued to be significant
regarding river pollution. High BOD can be attributed to inadequate treatment of sewage or
effluent from the agriculture and manufacturing industries.
Figure 1. River Water Quality Trend in Malaysia
The primary sources of NH3-N were livestock and domestic wastewater. From the
formulated WQI, total contaminated rivers (including the slightly contaminated Class III
river) are declining by 10% of all streams monitored in 2007, approximately 5% in 2011. At a
glance in Figure 2, the WQI data Show a decrease in the number of contaminated rivers.

Figure 2.. Number of the polluted rivers as reported by DOE Malaysia from 2010-
2014 based on suspended solid (SS), biological oxygen demand (BOD) and ammoniacal
nitrogen (AN).
It may reflect any properly implemented environmental regulations or common concerns
among citizens are increasing. However, when we focus on BOD-based river classes (Table
3), we find that contaminated rivers (class III and IV) are rising 34.6% (in 2010) to 89.3% (in
2014) of the total monitored river. Table 3 shows the percentage of the polluted river as
reported by DOE Malaysia between 2010-2014 based on water quality index, biological
oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solid (SS) and ammoniacal nitrogen (AN).
Table 3: Percentage of polluted river
Year
Suspended solid
Biochemical oxygen
demand
Ammoniacal Nitrogen
(NH3-N)
Clean
Slightly
Polluted Polluted Clean
Slightly
Polluted Polluted Clean
Slightly
Polluted Polluted
Percentage Percentage Percentage
2010 47.6 18.8 33.6 8.4 55.2 36.4 24.5 46.1 29.4
2014 70.7 15.7 13.6 10.7 89.3 29.3 42.1 28.6
Depending on the results of monitoring by the DOE in 2012, regarding the river basin
formed, the Klang River Basin received the highest BOD load (142 tons per day). The Klang
River basin also received the highest SS load (360 tons per day) and the NH3-N load (37 tons
per day) between the Malaysian watersheds (Environmental quality Report, 2012).
1.4 Sources of River Water Pollution
Sources of water pollution can be classified into point sources and non-point sources. Point
sources refer to sources with discharges that enter the body of water at a particular location
such as pipelines or emissaries. Point sources include discharges from industries, sewage

treatment plants, and animal farms. Non-point sources are derived from diffuse sources that
have no examples of specific release points from which they come from agricultural activities
and surface runoff. Table 4 shows the sources of water pollution in Malaysia. In 2014,
1,488,848 sources of water pollution were identified compared to 1662329 sources of
pollution in 2013. It has been found that there is a decrease in the total number of polluting
sources in 2014 compared to 2013. But if you look at the Individual sources of water
pollution, there is a significant increase in food services, rubber mill, public and private
wastewater treatment plants and wet market.
Table 4. River Water Pollution Sources in Malaysia in 2014
Type of source
No of Source Percentage Change
2013 2014 2013 2014
Manufacturing industries 4595 3355 0.276 0.225 -0.051
Agro Based industries
Rubber Mill 72 80 0.004 0.005 0.001
Palm Oil Mill 436 451 0.026 0.0003 -0.026
Animal Pig 754 755 0.045
Sewage Treatment Plant
Public 5800 6201 0.349 0.416 0.068
Private 4083 4594 0.246 0.3 0.054
Individual septic tank 1449383 1276195 87.190 85.76 -1.430
Commercial septic tank 3631 3628 0.218 0.24 0.022
Food Services Establishment 192710 192710 11.593 12.95 1.357
Wet Markets 865 879 0.052 0.11 0.058
1662329 1488848 100 100
An analysis of manufacturing industries in 2000 showed that the food and beverage industry
accounted for 23.7 percent of total sources of water pollution, while electricity and
electronics accounted for 11.4 per cent. The chemical industry contributes 11.2%, and the
paper industry generates 8.8% of the total contamination. The finishing industry/textile
accounted for 7.4 and 5.3% of the sources of water pollution, respectively. Effluents from
factories, oil palm, and rubber generated in water resources amounted to 5.3 and 2%,
respectively (Muyibi, Ambali, & Eissa, 2008). In general, Selangor, Johor, and Perak were
severely contaminated by these sources of parameters (Department of the Environment,
2014).
1.5 Impact of Water Pollution on Health in Malaysia
Contaminated water consists of discharged industrial effluents, sewage, and rainwater. The
use of this type of water is a common practice in agriculture. The estimate indicates that more
than 50 countries in the world with an area of 20 million hectares are treated with
contaminated or partially contaminated water (Ashraf, Maah, Yusoff, & Mehmood, 2010). In
developing countries of the world, more than 80 percent of contaminated water has been used
for irrigation with only seventy-eight percent of food and safety in urban and semi-urban
industrial areas (Mara and Cairncross, 1989). Contaminated water has both advantages and

disadvantages. The uses of contaminated water for the effects of water pollution are
numerous. Some effects of water pollution are recognized immediately, while others do not
appear for months or years. When toxins are in the water, toxins travel from the water that
animals drink to humans when the meat of animals is eaten for contaminants to enter the food
chain. Infectious diseases such as typhoid fever and cholera can be contracted by drinking
contaminated water. This health impact of water pollution is called microbial water pollution.
The human heart and kidneys may be adversely affected if they drink contaminated water
regularly. Other health problems associated with contaminated water are poor blood
circulation, skin lesions, vomiting and damage to the nervous system. In fact, the effects of
water pollution are the leading cause of death for humans around the world (Ghafoor, Rauf,
Arif, & Muzaffar, 1994). Good health is something everyone wants, for them, their children
and for the broader economic and social benefits it brings to society. It plays a significant role
in the long-term economic growth and sustainable development. Malaysian society has
become increasingly urbanized and more involved. By supporting contemporary lifestyles,
air, water, and soil pollution have increased; Persistent chemical pollutants have gradually
become generalized and global climate change poses new risks to environmental health.
These factors are contributing to communicable diseases, noncommunicable diseases,
physiological and neurological disorders.
Amirah, Afiza, Faizal, Nurliyana and Laili (2013), is responsible for assessing the risk to
human health of metal contamination through the consumption of fish in the selected area in
Kuantan, Pahang River. This research describes the analysis of the evaluation experiment on
metal and the high risk for health. The inductively coupled plasma membrane system (ICP-
MS) was used to determine the concentration of heavy metals in fish. The average
concentration of Cu, Pb, and Cd at three sites is about 0.0205 μg / g, 0.0145 μg / g of 0.0004
μg / g. The hazard risk ratio (THQ) was used in the health risk assessment to determine the
carcinogenicity of the sample. The result shows that the concentration and THQ around the
metal pin IED (Cu, Pb, Cd) are less than 1; This means that daily exposure at this level is
unlikely to cause adverse effects throughout the person's life.
Lonercan and Vansickle (1991) conducted a study on the relationship between water quality
and human health. The implicit assumption behind these projects is to improve physical
infrastructure, and further improvements in water quality, substantially reduce water-related
diseases. This study questions this assumption and uses a socio-ecological model as a
framework for assessing risk factors associated with increased likelihood of waterborne
diseases. The research focuses on Port Dickson, a district that defines the conditions of
existing waters and the mostly semi-rural sanitation of Malaysia. We used health service
utilization data and a survey of 268 diarrheal disease households to measure the burden of
waterborne diseases in the district's disease and to identify predictors of disease. While
treatment facilities will reduce the health burden in the region, some behavioral and sanitation
factors may be more important and could act to minimize the potential impacts of improved
water quality.
Jamaludin, Sham, and Ismail (2013) conducted a study on the health risk assessment of
nitrate exposure in residents of the drinking water well area to determine the health hazard of
inhabitants in the intensive cultivation zone By Bachok Kelantan. The nitrate in safe water
was determined with a spectrophotometer, while the health risk was determined by
calculating chronic daily intake (ICD) and the risk index (HI). The results indicate that the
nitrate level in this study was below the limit of the maximum National Drinking Water

Quality Standards (NDWQS) concentration (<10 mg L-1) at the mean ± standard deviation of
1, 66 ± 2.11 mg L-1 and the range from 0 to 9.60 mg L -1.
A cross-sectional study was conducted by Qaiyum, Shaharudin, Syazwan and Muhaimin
(2011), Mukim Part Lubok (MPL) and Parit Raja (PR), Batu Pahat, Malaysia determine the
concentration of aluminum in drinking water and to predict health. The respondents were
from these two residential areas. A total of 100 respondents were selected from the study
areas by inclusive and exclusive criteria. Two duplicate samples of treated water were taken
from the household of each respondent using 200 ml of high-density polyethylene (HDPE)
and 0.4 ml (69%) of pure concentrated nitric acid as the preservative. The concentrations of
aluminum were analyzed using a Lambda 25 UV / V spectrophotometer. The result showed
that the concentration of aluminum in MPL drinking water was 0.18 ± 0.022 mg / L and 0.22
± 0.044 mg / L for PR. Statistical analysis showed that 14 samples (28%) of water collected
from MPL and 35 (70%) of an aluminum concentration of PR were recorded above the
standard limit established by the Ministry of Health's guide for drinking water (0, 2 mg / L).
The mean value of daily chronic aluminum intake (CDI) in PR drinking water (0.00707 mg /
kg / day) was significantly higher compared to MPL (0.00164 mg / kg / day). The calculation
of the risk index (HI) showed that respondents had less than 1. In conclusion, there was an
incredible potential for adverse health effects of aluminum intake in drinking water from the
two areas of study. However, it was necessary to take some measures to reduce aluminum
levels in drinking water for both places.
When analyzing data on river pollution from 2007-2012, Wahab (2015) found that river
pollution has a high correlation with gross domestic product, not in the same year, but in the
previous two years. It indicates a time delay. It was also found that under-five infant mortality
has a strong correlation with river pollution. The triangular cycle of health development must
be put in balance to ensure national prosperity and sustainability of the nation.
Afroz et al., 2015 conducted a survey in Gombak in 2014 to investigate the perceived risk of
household water contamination and to examine demographic and socioeconomic factors that
influence their perception of risk. Respondents were asked to rate the six specific diseases
caused by water pollution in the Gombak River area. The results reported that 45.2% of the
interviewees selected diarrhea as the most severe disease in the Gombak River area. To them,
diarrhea was much higher than that of other types of diseases. 13.3% of respondents
classified dengue fever as the second most dangerous disease. Water pollution causes only
2% of households classified hair conditions ( Figure 3 and 4).
Figure. 3. Disease caused by water pollution

Figure. 4. Source of drinking water
In their study, they asked respondents where they got their drinking water. There were several
sources of drinking water. 40% of respondents who buy for drinking water, city water (30%),
individual well (16.0%) and only 5% respond that they do not know the source of drinking
water. During the storage of drinking water also, they did not use any special precaution.
About 68% stored water in plastic buckets, 16% in earthenware, 10% in stainless steel
containers and 6% in others as shown in Fig. 5. Most of them did not use any separate glass
to draw water from The containers in which the water was stored. Villagers, especially
children, did not use basic hygiene measures such as washing their hands before removing
water from the storage container. Most villagers reported that they wash their water storage
utensil once a month, while some wash it once every 2 to 3 months. Most of them were
unaware of some precautions to be taken before and after storing water and preventing
waterborne diseases.
Figure. 5. Storage of drinking water
The findings show that 58.9% of children aged 0-12 years are more affected by diarrhea
despite demonstrating only a small fraction of the population. On the other hand, those over
60 consider an exaggeratedly small percentage (2.4%) of diarrhea, despite apparently having
a high vulnerability to diarrhea as shown in Fig. 6. It may occur due to a various treatment
depending on the traditional medicine. It may be attributable to statements made by several
respondents, who are confident that they have developed a form of "immunity" to diarrhea
disease through an extended connotation with diarrhea and untreated, unboiled water. The
results of their study also indicate that gender, age, education, income, awareness, and
attitude have a significant impact on the perception of the risk of water pollution in
households.Although it has been shown that water quality influences rates of health
problems, the impact of programs to improve water quality can only be minimal since it only
affects the primary source. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop parallel programs to
accompany water improvement projects.
Figure. 6. Mostly affected by diarrhea disease
1.6 Water Resource Policies in Malaysia
There are several strategies to combat the problems of water quality at international,
national and local level. In order to obtain water quality, there are four key strategies to
combat the problems of water quality that can form the basis of policy solutions to improve

water quality (Dabelko & Aaron, 2004), such as prevention pollution, treatment of
contaminated water, the safe use of wastewater and the restoration and protection of
ecosystems. In this section, we discuss the policies of water resources in Malaysia as follows:
1.6.1 National Policy
The National Environmental Policy states that the nation must implement
environmentally sound and sustainable economic, social and cultural development progress
and improve the quality of life of Malaysians (Daud, 2009) development. It is based on eight
inter-related principles of mutual support and respect to water will include the sustainable use
of water resources, preservation of the vitality and diversity of a river, and the continuous
improvement of water quality. The policy outlines strategies and actions to be taken towards
effective management of water resources, pollution control, and prevention of environmental
degradation. A holistic approach is needed to manage our water quality of the river.
1.6.2 Environmental policy in Malaysia to control river water pollution
Malaysia has been pollution-related legislation from the 1920s through the Water Act
1920.The main objective of the legislation was to control river pollution. However, the
legislation was limited in scope and insufficient to handle the complex environmental
problems that emerged. This led to the creation of the Environmental Quality Act 1974
(EQA) for a more comprehensive form of legislation and an agency to control water pollution
(Wichelman, 1976). Importantly, the Act was designed as a framework for other laws and
regulations or ordinances which were enacted after it. EQA is a piece that allows the
legislation to prevent, reduce and control pollution and improving environmental resources in
general. Pollution, as stated in EQA, including direct or indirect alteration of any quality of
the environment or any part of it through positive act or act of broadcasting. Pollution control
was through the mechanism of the license issued by the Department of Environment. The
control mode includes prescribing licenses that were mandatory for prescribed use and
occupancy of premises; discharge or emission of residues exceeding acceptable conditions to
the atmosphere causing pollution or contamination of any type of soil or any land surface;
and discharge or deposit any waste or oil above the acceptable conditions in Malaysian
waters inland. Currently about 16 of the 43 sets of regulations and orders to avoid damage to
the environment, they are particularly pollution of various kinds and executed by the
Department of Environment under the EQA 1974. One of the three strategies incorporated in
EQA 1974 was the regulation of pollution. The other two strategies were to prevent and
reduce all forms of pollution, especially water pollution. Overall, the pace of EQA in 1974
marked a new chapter in national efforts to improve the quality of the environment conducive
to a life of the population. He also represented a new focus on prevention, reduction, and
control of water pollution. A detailed analysis of the provisions of Article 25 of EQA shows
that Malaysia's approach to environmental pollution management is broad in scope and not in
relation to pollution itself, but with the pollution affecting the beneficial use of water
resources examination. Beneficial use involves the use of any element or segment of the
environment that is conducive to public health, welfare or safety requires protection against
the effects of waste discharges, emissions, and deposits in rivers. The general scheme Section
25 EQA, in relation to the preservation of the environment, leans more towards controlling
water pollution. This should be done through licensing by the Department of Environment.
EQA authorizes the relevant minister to prescribe the level of acceptable conditions, although
it may involve some contentious arguments between affected and polluters. To achieve the

objectives of control water pollution in the country as outlined in EQA, laws/orders and
regulations relating to the control of an agro-based episode of water pollution were enacted
chronologically. An indirect measure to prevent water pollution was Street, Drainage and
Building Act enacted in 1974. Section 70A of the Act dealt with the basic requirement for
earthmoving to ensure protection from pollution of water resources. They could awaken the
earthworks. In this regard, local authorities were entitled to use their discretion to reject any
activity that may create soil erosion and sedimentation of water resources. There were several
other provisions of this Act authorizing local authorities to control and prevent pollution of
inland waters. This was most pronounced in section 7A of the Act 1976.The Local
Government Act contains provisions on pollution reduction in overall control, but water
pollution in particular. Local authorities were empowered to curb disorderly conduct to
ensure that the source of drinking water supplies is not contaminated. Another regulatory
policy for the protection of inland waters is Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974
(McCourt, 2008).This Act is a federal law enacted to amend and consolidate the laws relating
to drainage and construction areas local authorities, with particular reference to the infra-
structure facilities to be provided to buildings, such as adequate access to modern sanitation
system and proper drainage system can also protect pollution. In water, it requires the Local
authority to properly maintain clear, emptying sewers, drains, and waterways in your area.
You can also empty the sewage in the sea areas or other adjustment or transmitted throug16h
own channel in the most convenient dump. The local authority can use its discretion to reject
any activity that may result in water pollution or soil erosion and sedimentation of the
watercourse. The Town and Country Planning Act 1976 have also been formulated to include
a provision for the prevention of environmental pollution. Although it is not ready directly to
water pollution, provides for the development and use of land and measures to improve the
physical environment. The inclusion of environmental and social dimensions of well-being in
the process of planning in the Act indicates that the planning process is not simply focused on
the built and natural environment, but takes into account the social implications and the
public view of development. In this sense, planning is central to the notion of a balance
between development and environmental ethos protection of natural resources. It ensures that
development projects do not cause damage to water resources or to ensure that development
projects and factories and is adjacent to the river and in close proximity to rivers. Under the
Act 3 of 1970, the Malaysian government has formulated the Land Conservation to protect
some of the major contributors of pollution of inland waters, such as sedimentation and soil
erosion. In view of the fact that the nature of the discharge of sediment and erosion leading to
water pollution are from non-point sources such as activities involving earthmoving
operations, logging and land clearing a regulatory policy were enacted at the state and federal
levels Malaysia. Following the Federal Regulation, many control enactments have been
adopted under the competence of the state authority. Other Acts and Regulations include:
(Licensing) Regulations of Environmental Quality, 1977; Environmental Quality (Local
prescribed) crude palm oil Order, 1977 and its amendment in 1982; Environmental Quality
(prescribed Premises) Order relating to Raw Natural Rubber, 1978 Environmental Quality
(prescribed Premises) Regulations related raw Natural Rubber, 1978 Environmental Audit
(EA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) .With respect to control municipal and
industrial wastewater pollution, environmental quality related to sewage and industrial
effluent regulation was enacted in 1979. In fact, control of industrial emissions caused a
concern for the government. To update this, Mahathir administration in 1981 enacted the
Environmental Management Control hazardous waste. Environmental quality standards
related to waste programmed was approved in 1989. In order to take action, Orders and
Environmental Quality Regulation (prescribed premises) related to waste treatment and
disposal facilities are scheduled simultaneously introduced in 1989. In 1990, Investment

Promotion Order (made under the Investment Promotion Act, 1986) was enacted to regulate
environmental issues in the context of investment activities that may affect any
environmental resource, particular water. This was then followed by the Prohibition of Use of
Controlled Substance in soap, synthetic detergents, and other cleaning products Order
approved in 1995. These were strictly emphasized in the EIA, 1987.
1.7 Conclusion
Water pollution is a serious problem in Malaysia and has an adverse impact on the
sustainability of water resources. Not only that, but it also affects living plants and organisms,
the health of the population and the economy. The total availability of water significantly as
the cost of treatment of contaminated water is too high and in some cases, polluted water is
not susceptible to consumption is reduced. Muyibi et al., 2008 shows that development
regarding industrialization, urbanization and population growth explains several changes in
the annual level of pollution in Malaysian rivers. As such, water pollution trends tend to be
sporadic in nature to the present situation, despite all policy measures and actions were taken
by DOE, as well as technologies for waste treatment. The document has considered
technology and policy measures as moderating the balance between development activities
and water pollution. The findings of his study have also pointed to many implications for
lawmakers. First, the outcome of the interactive effects of predictors on contaminated water
implies that policy measures that could be taken against individual sources of water pollution
would be ineffective when actions were concentrated to control only one source of water
contamination. In other words, it implies that co-policy instruments and effects must be very
strict; Working together against all identified sources of water pollutants. Secondly, policy
measures against water pollution may be appropriate and effective, but the lack of
coordination actions and holistic actions in policy implementation could lead to a failure to
improve the level of river pollution in the country. Third, the problem may also be associated
in part with financial constraints to invest in appropriate technology, especially sewer systems
to control the human source of water pollution in the country. In the case of waste treatment,
most technologies currently rely only on primary and secondary treatments. Since Tertiary or
Advanced Treatment is not used in the country, it, therefore, implies that the effluent from
such treatment plants will be very high in nutrient loads. Fourth, the problem could be
associated with a lack of cooperation between government and private companies to comply
with water pollution regulatory policies. Fifth, the availability of technologies in industries
does not require a reduction of water pollution, but depends on the adequacy of these
techniques regarding capacity and dates; And the conformity of industries interested firms to
install these technologies. Also, most of these technologies are only capable of primary and
secondary operations. Advanced and tertiary waste treatment operations are needed to reduce
water pollution. Sixth another central point of the problem is the issue of the license policy of
infringement awarded to some film industries as well as their renewals.
Finally, personal awareness is one of the most important recommendations to protect
water from pollution. Therefore, an individual should not use any products that are harmful to
the environment. They urge stores to abandon the packaging and use of biodegradable
materials. In addition, the authority must provide adequate sewerage and drainage systems, as
well as formulate strict pollution control standards and educate the people of this city to
develop ecological awareness. In addition, an awareness campaign is needed to change
attitudes, behaviors, and expectations of the public. Furthermore, participation in partnerships
is necessary for the contribution and support of local and national groups working to resolve
environmental problems at institutional, national and international levels. Each person should

have enough information, participate in public hearings, serve on advisory committees, and
go to review boards.
References
R Afroz, H Banna, MM Masud, R Akhtar, SR Yahaya. 2015 Household’s perception of water
pollution and its economic impact on human health in Malaysia. Desalination and Water
Treatment, 1-9.
Amirah, M. N., Afiza, A. S., Faizal, W. I. W., Nurliyana, M. H., & Laili, S. (2013). Human
health risk assessment of metal contamination through consumption of fish. Journal of
Environment Pollution and Human Health,1(1), 1-5.
Ashraf, M. A., Maah, M. J., Yusoff, I., & Mehmood, K. (2010). Effects of polluted water
irrigation on environment and health of people in Jabber, District Kasur,
Pakistan. International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences,10(3), 37-57.
Dabelko, D., & Aaron, T. (2004). Water, conflict, and cooperation.Environmental Change
and Security Project Report, 10, 60-66.
Daud, H. (2009). Legislative approach to water quality management in Malaysia: Success
and challenges. Malaysia: Department of Environment, Ministry of Natural Resources and
Environment.
Department of Environment Malaysia (DOE). (2014). The study on pollution prevention and
water quality improvement of Sg. Melaka. Malaysia: Government of Malaysia, Ministry of
Natural Resources and Environment.
Gasim, M. B., Ismail Sahid, E. T., Pereira, J. J., Mokhtar, M., & Abdullah, M. P. (2009).
Integrated water resource management and pollution sources in Cameron Highlands, Pahang,
Malaysia. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Science, 5, 725–732.
Ghafoor, A., Rauf, A., Arif, M., & Muzaffar, W. (1994). The chemical composition of
effluents from different industries of the Faisalabad city. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural
Sciences, 31, 367–370.
Jamaludin, N., Sham, S. M., & Ismail, S. N. S. (2013). Health risk assessment of nitrate
exposure in the good water of residents in the intensive agriculture area. American Journal of
Applied Sciences, 10(5), 442-448.
Ling, J. K. B. (2010). Water quality study and its relationship with high tide and low tide at
Kuantan river (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Malaysia Pahang).
Lonergan, S., & Vansickle, T. (1991). The relationship between water quality and human
health: A case study of the Linggi River basin in Malaysia. Social Science & Medicine, 33(8),
937-946.
Malaysia Environmental Quality Report (2012).

Mara, D. D., & Cairncross, S. (1989). Guidelines for the safe use of wastewater and excreta
in agriculture and aquaculture: measures for public health protection.
McCourt, W. (2008). Public management in developing countries: From downsizing to
governance. Public Management Review, 10(4), 467–479.
McCourt, W. (2008). Public management in developing countries: From downsizing to
governance. Public Management Review, 10(4), 467–479.
Muyibi, S. A., Ambali, A. R., & Eissa, G. S. (2008). The impact of economic development on
water pollution: trends and policy actions in Malaysia. Water resources management, 22(4),
485-508.
Qaiyum, M. S., Shaharudin, M. S., Syazwan, A. I., Muhaimin, A., (2011). Health risk
assessment after exposure to aluminum in drinking water between two different
villages. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 2011.
Sikder, M. T., Kihara, Y., Yasuda, M., Mihara, Y., Tanaka, S., Odgerel, D., ... & Kurasaki, M.
(2013). River water pollution in developed and developing countries: judge and assessment
of physicochemical characteristics and selected dissolved metal concentration. CLEAN–Soil,
Air, Water, 41(1), 60-68.
Wahab, M. A. A. (2015). River Pollution Relationship to the National Health Indicated by
Under-Five Child Mortality Rate: A Case Study in Malaysia.BIOREMEDIATION SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH (e-ISSN 2289-5892), 3(1), 20-25.
Weng, C.N. (2005). Sustainable management of rivers in Malaysia: Involving all
stakeholders. International Journal of River Basin Management, 3(3), 147–162.
Wichelman, A.F. (1976). Administrative agency implementation of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969: A conceptual framework for explaining differential
response. Natural Resources Journal, 16, 263.
Zainudin, Z. (2010). Benchmarking river water quality in Malaysia. Jurutera, 12-15.