Public education key to waste reduction
It was announced on Wednesday that the special administrative region government’s proposed charging scheme for household rubbish won’t be implemented until the end of 2020 at the earliest, or at least one year later than originally planned. The delay, blamed on an “interplay of factors”, has naturally disappointed many in the city — particularly environmentalists.
At a time when Hong Kong is struggling to keep pace with a growing municipal solid waste problem, or even a looming rubbish crisis, the further delay in the introduction of a solid waste charging scheme is undoubtedly anxiety-inducing for those who care for the city.
The land-scarce city is seeing its three landfills fast reaching their capacity as its 7 million plus residents keep producing waste at twice the pace of their neighbors in the region.
Seoul, Taipei and Tokyo, cities that are comparable with Hong Kong in terms of economic and social development, generate about half of Hong Kong’s solid waste on a per capita basis, according to official data.
The difference in urban solid waste level between Hong Kong and the other comparable cities highlights the significance of green policies. Those policies — for example, the Extended Producer Responsibility and Pay As You Throw schemes introduced in Taiwan — that encourage separation and recycling of household solid waste have effectively help massively reduce the waste for disposal in Seoul, Taipei and Tokyo.
Indeed, the user-pays principle, or beneficiary-pays principle, has long been proven to be the most efficient resource-allocating approach whereby consumers pay the full cost of the goods or services they consume or benefit from.
There is no arguing that Hong Kong has lagged behind when it comes to waste separation, recycling and reduction. The plan to introduce mandatory charges on household solid waste has been in the works for more than a decade. The notion that land scarcity and high operating costs have restrained the development of the local waste recycling industry might hold water. But an observable lack of enthusiasm among many local residents for waste separation and recycle has also hindered the environment protection authority’s efforts to introduce relevant policies, including the scheme of imposing mandatory charges on household solid waste. Thus, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing warned on Wednesday there could be challenges when it comes to enforcing the scheme.
This suggests public education on environmental protection is the key to the success of any charging scheme for household rubbish. After all, most households would only have to pay an estimated little amount of HK$30 to HK$50 a month to dispose of their waste when the scheme was introduced; the charges are hardly enough to encourage residents to reduce their waste unless they had developed a strong sense of environmental protection. It is the right move for the secretary for the environment to prioritize public education.