Across the world, high-performing waste sorting and recycling systems are underpinned by robust government leadership, persistent public engagement campaigns, and tailored regulatory approaches.

In Europe, Finland recycles nearly 99% of household waste—among the highest rates globally—with less than 1% sent to landfill.

This success results from close coordination between all levels of government, strict legal requirements for sorting, and widespread public education.

The government supports communities with technical and financial aid, and promotes advanced practices like waste-to-energy .

Germany’s system relies on the “Green Dot” extended producer responsibility program, making producers financially liable for packaging waste.

Color-coded bins and mandatory public participation, enforced through law and ongoing campaigns, sustain some of Europe’s highest recycling rates .

Belgium uses a similar EPR approach, achieving a 91% citizen compliance rate through legal mandates, incentives, and convenient collection services .

In Asia, Singapore maintains a 51.7% solid waste recycling rate through centralized, professional collection by government-licensed companies.

Rigorous sorting, incineration for waste volume reduction, and broad public education campaigns encourage participation .

Japan’s decades-old system mandates sorted disposal, verified by transparent bags and detailed schedules.

Longstanding government campaigns and social norms overcame early resistance, embedding sorting in daily life .

South Korea’s volume-based fee system pairs paid bags and performance-based incentives with public campaigns.

National recycling rates exceed 50%, and food waste recycling tops 94% .

Taiwan’s “4-in-1 Program” integrates stakeholders, with scheduled truck pick-ups, education funding, and visible community enforcement—enabling high diversion rates .

China’s Shanghai has piloted rigorous mandatory sorting since 2019, requiring residents to separate waste into four categories.

Across the world, high-performing waste sorting and recycling systems are underpinned by robust government leadership, persistent public engagement campaigns, and tailored regulatory approaches.

Title:

Content: Producer Responsibility System Waste Reduction Policy Package in Place
Comments ‧ World Situation 2022 / 08 / 06
Share:
Share:
On average, more than 5 million plastic beverage bottles are disposed of in landfills in Hong Kong every day, reflecting the poor results of plastic reduction and recycling.
Under the long-term initiative of environmental organizations such as Green Earth, the environmental protection department is preparing to introduce relevant producer responsibility schemes (PRS) to respond.
In simple terms, PRS usually uses financial means, such as bottle fees and glass bottle levies, to induce "producers" such as manufacturers, retailers and even consumers to shoulder their due environmental responsibility.
Effective laws and regulations are indispensable to improve the industrial chain
PRS This waste management regulation is slightly different from the common pollution control regulations. To promote source waste reduction and recycling, effective regulations and the support of the entire recycling industry chain are indispensable.
First, the recycling industry chain, which includes high-coverage front-line collection points, large and small transport fleets, adequate recycling and recycling plants, a market for valuable recycled materials, and PRS system managers.
To promote the formation and effectiveness of the recycling industry chain, we must first have "smart" regulations, in which the setting of ambitious recycling targets, attractive economic incentives (such as refunds by bottle or bottle), and a reward and punishment mechanism for manufacturers are all key elements.
For example, the EPD recently proposed that each plastic bottle should be given a refund of at least one dime, hoping to achieve a recovery rate of 40% in the first year and 75% in five years.
Is there a “tooth ” for this purpose?
Hong Kong 's plastic recycling performance is poor PRS International
Green Earth analyzed a number of countries and regions that use PRS to manage beverage containers, and concluded that the average refund amount for each plastic bottle is more than HK $1, which is 10 times less than the corner of Hong Kong.
As for the average recovery rate target for the first year of PRS, the international average is above 70%, of which 80% in South Korea in Asia and 90% in the three Nordic countries are high; even if the target is lower, Lithuania and Slovakia are also 55% and 60% respectively, which are much more positive than Hong Kong's 40%.
The reason why PRS is called producer responsibility, the key word is the word "producer", which means that this stakeholder is responsible.
I would like to remind the environmental protection department that the recycling responsibilities of manufacturers and importers must not be missed.
The most direct approach is to set up an adequate reward and punishment mechanism to ensure that if the manufacturer fails to meet the recycling target, it must bear the responsibility, so that it can be matched with the "responsibility system".
Set up incentive mechanism to encourage manufacturers to respond positively
South Korea, a model student of high plastic bottle recycling, has adopted the Pigouvian Tax: if the market fails to meet the 80% recycling target, producers, importers and PRS system administrators have to pay the corresponding punitive tax on a proportional basis.
The author also believes that, in fairness, if the recycling rate exceeds the target, or the market adopts a considerable plastic reduction package (such as naked buy, reuse container sales), there should be corresponding incentives to promote the positive response of manufacturers and create a source of plastic reduction culture.
At a time when the Government has not yet submitted the PRS Bill to the Legislative Council, the Legislative Council (especially the Panel on Environmental Affairs) has the responsibility to monitor the quality of the policy and request the Administration to respond positively to the following key points:
1. Disclose the results of the EPD ’ s 2021 plastic bottle public consultation, including supporting the proportion of different refund amounts;
2. Keep up with the international standard, the minimum refund amount should start at HK $1;
Third, update the recovery rate target: 70% in the first year of policy implementation, and increase to 90% in three years;
Fourth, set up a review mechanism: if the recycling target is not reached within the deadline, then increase the legal minimum amount of refunded bottles, increase the economic incentive; at the same time, compared with the Piguet tax, manufacturers, importers, PRS system managers must be jointly responsible for the failure to meet the target.
Author: Liu Zhaolang Senior Project Director, Green Earth
Column name: GREEN FORUM
Follow the latest financial news analysis, like hket Facebook

In Europe, Finland recycles nearly 99% of household waste—among the highest rates globally—with less than 1% sent to landfill.

Title:

Content: Ukraine will deepen cooperation with Finland in the direction of household waste management.
According to the press service of the Ministry of Regional Development, this was announced by the Minister of Communities and Territories Alexey Chernyshov during a meeting with the Ambassador of the Republic of Finland to Ukraine Päivi Laine.
It is noted that in Finland, only 1% of waste ends up in landfills, the vast majority is recycled.
This is the result of the interaction of the central and local authorities, as well as the awareness of citizens
Ukraine is also planning to adopt this experience.
“Finland is a country that demonstrates high standards of environmental waste management.
Almost all the citizens of this country sort the garbage.
As a result, 99% of household waste is recycled.
This experience will be useful for Ukraine.
So, a similar process is already underway in hromadas - in 1725 settlements of our state, a separate collection of household waste has been introduced.
But it is necessary to scale this direction and introduce useful practices of international partners in the country, "Chernyshov said.
Read alsoIn the Odessa region on the Danube, the dam is destroyed - under it meter voids In the press service reminded that thanks to the implementation of separate collection of garbage in 2020, about 6.3% of household waste was recycled and disposed of in Ukraine.
In turn, Laine noted that Finland is ready to share experience and help Ukrainian communities to implement waste processing projects.
“We also have companies that recycle waste into energy.
In such a comprehensive way, we improve the ecology of our country, ” she added.
Waste recycling in Ukraine
As UNIAN reported, in July 2020, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted in the first reading the draft law No. 2207-1-d “On waste management ”.
The document establishes the procedure for the collection, removal and treatment of waste, ensures the introduction of their separate collection and recycling, provides for the requirements for the quality of the provision of waste management services and the charging of fees for such a service.

This success results from close coordination between all levels of government, strict legal requirements for sorting, and widespread public education.

Title:

Content: Bauhinia Party ｜ Refresh Waste Charges
Author: 01 Forum
Published: Updated:
Like most Hong Kong people, I did not have any concept or awareness of garbage collection, until I heard that it was officially implemented on April 1 this year, and I began to pay attention to it.
In fact, the legislation on waste charging has been passed by the Legislative Council as early as August 2021, and the specific provisions of waste charging are actually very simple and clear, that is, based on the "polluter pays" principle, all waste, whether from individuals, families or groups, or according to the pre-purchased designated garbage bags, or according to the weight of the waste, the "entry fee".
As for the government's intention to implement waste charging, it is also very clear and simple, that is, to force the public to reduce waste and recycle through charging, and promote the sustainable development of ecology.
Author ： Zhou Xiaojao
Although the rules are simple and clear, it is not so easy to really land.
In order to pay less, people will try to pack more garbage into garbage bags. How should those crowded garbage bags be tracked and handled? In order to pay less, people will dispose of their garbage in public places such as streets, parks, markets, shopping malls, etc., how should such behavior be identified and enforced? As for the different groups that produce large amounts of waste, as well as the property, cleaning, refuse collection and other organizations that assist in the disposal of waste, a series of countermeasures are also required.
It is in view of the complexity of implementation that the Government has set aside a preparation period of up to 18 months for the formal implementation of the Ordinance.
However, the general public, like the author, did not really start to pay attention to the new policy, which will affect every household, until the first two or three months of its implementation, and there was a lot of uncertainty and doubt. Ming. "
But the question is, is the disruption caused by garbage charges really just a problem of insufficient publicity?
How to deal with garbage is an old problem faced by cities, especially large cities.
Specifically, there are three core issues surrounding the garbage problem: First, how to control the amount of garbage generated? Second, how to encourage the classification of garbage management? Third, how to deal with different types of garbage? The first issue mainly relates to the source of garbage: how to avoid excessive packaging?
How to promote the environmental protection of packaging materials? The second issue relates to the recycling of waste: how to guide the public to separate and collect different types of waste according to the difficulty of recycling? The third issue relates to the fate of waste: simple stacking, centralized landfill or recycling, incineration and power generation?
In response to the above garbage issue, Hong Kong has not made a satisfactory response for a long time, let alone effective action.
The lunch boxes purchased on the street are still foam or plastic that cannot be decomposed. Shopping bags provided by shopping malls are also plastic products, and the goods purchased from the mainland are wrapped in plastic layer after layer.
There was a time when Hong Kong encouraged the classification of kitchen waste and the production of agricultural fertilizer from kitchen waste. Unfortunately, this good practice failed to persist, and the public has not formed a self-awareness of garbage classification.
A large amount of waste has been sent to the countryside to landfill without any sorting. The existing three major landfills are already overwhelmed, and facilities such as waste power generation have taken more than 10 years to start.
Solving the waste problem itself is a systematic project, involving all aspects, coupled with the interests of thousands of households and changes in living habits, so each country in the disposal of the waste issue mostly adopt a gradual, tailored, durable strategy.
Japan is recognized as the best country in terms of waste disposal. The key to its success is the gradual development of a sense of garbage sorting through half a century of sustained efforts and strict laws and regulations.
Mainland China also tries to start with garbage sorting, although there is a strong enforcement force, but the government still dare not play a game of chess across the country, but choose some cities to pilot first, and then gradually push to the whole country.
In contrast, Hong Kong, which has been lagging behind on garbage disposal, naively uses “polluter pays ” as the ultimate“ killer ’ s mace ” in an attempt to “get it done. ”
This mentality is understandable, but can a simple, one-size-fits-all waste charge really solve the waste problem facing Hong Kong?
Can you encourage eco-friendly packaging?
Can you promote garbage separation?
More importantly, can the current waste charging design really reduce the amount of waste generated?
I am afraid the answers to these questions are not as optimistic as the Government thinks.
If Hong Kong ’ s waste challenge is not effectively addressed, then what is the point of this policy, which costs the time and money of all citizens and stakeholders?
For example, in order to make up for the long-term inaction on reclamation, the SAR Government hastily launched the HK $trillion-dollar Lantau Island Construction Project in the absence of full consultation with the community, making it difficult for the project to ride under the current internal and external environment. The awkward situation.
The author is not sure whether garbage collection will also face similar experiences, but if the publicity and communication in the next few months can not convince the community that the relevant garbage collection policy can effectively solve the garbage problem faced by Hong Kong, then it is necessary for the SAR Government to suspend the implementation of the relevant policy, and redesign the plan to be more gradual and targeted, focusing on effectively solving the waste generation, waste management and recycling. A series of policies, and consistent implementation.
In fact, the above doubts about the government ’ s waste charging policy have emerged since the government first introduced the relevant bill to the Legislative Council in 2018.
Although the Bills Committee set up at that time to scrutinize the relevant bills supported the direction of the Government's waste reduction policy, it also made a large number of recommendations on the effective implementation of the relevant policies. Some members even held different views on whether the relevant fees could achieve the preset targets.
The Government has also responded to the views of the Bills Committee, including improving waste reduction and recycling measures and providing assistance to those in need.
Regrettably, these reasonable measures should be perfect in the two years after the passage of the relevant regulations in the preparatory stage either in the form, or the lack of publicity, and ultimately let this in the design of the innate deficiencies, in the landing and inadequate preparation of the waste reduction policy is likely to fall into the eyes of the public "workers hurt money" and abandoned halfway.
The author, Zhou Xiaojui, is a researcher at the Bauhinia Institute for Policy Studies.
The article is only the opinion of the author and does not represent the position of Hong Kong 01.
Please email us at 01view @ hk01.com.
Please attach the author ’ s real name and contact details.
If not applicable, no notice will be given.

The government supports communities with technical and financial aid, and promotes advanced practices like waste-to-energy .

Germany’s system relies on the “Green Dot” extended producer responsibility program, making producers financially liable for packaging waste.

Title:

Content: ROP, or How will Kyrgyzstan recycle its waste?
In Bishkek, a seminar was held on the topic of extended producer responsibility (EPR) for the disposal of goods and packaging, organized by the WasteNet.KG. project.
The seminar was attended by producers of products, government authorities, waste processing enterprises, non-governmental and international organizations and experts.
Director of CSR Central Asia Agency Asel Arstanbekova noted that the issues of environmental safety, social responsibility of producers are very acute.
“In many countries, the topic of social expanded responsibility is already active and, having studied their experience, we would like to determine what is applicable for Kyrgyzstan, ” she said.
WasteNet.KG expert Natalia Baidakova presented the concept of the concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR), its implementation mechanisms, and the ultimate goal of which is to reduce and gradually reduce to zero the disposal of waste that can be used in recycling and recycling.
How is the situation with the ROP in Kyrgyzstan?
The issue of waste accumulation in Kyrgyzstan is reflected in many strategic documents, such as the National Development Strategy of Kyrgyzstan until 2040, the Green Economy Concept, and the Green Economy Development Program.
More than 40 laws include waste issues.
The main ones are the law on environmental protection, on industrial waste, which was adopted back in 2001.
Naturally, this document needs to be amended and supplemented.
In addition, a classification of hazardous waste based on international standards has been developed and adopted.
The legislation specifies that separate collection of waste should be carried out, for use as secondary resources it is prohibited to use hazardous waste as secondary raw materials.
But at the same time, many norms are absent, for example, there is no definition of what secondary waste is, there are no norms regulating the collection and processing of secondary raw materials, there are no norms for stimulating the processing of secondary materials, and so on.
The legislation undoubtedly requires changes, another thing is what these changes will be.
On March 19, 2021, a decree of the President of Kyrgyzstan on measures to ensure environmental and climate security was adopted.
A number of points were aimed at improving the efficiency of waste management, implementing separate collection of garbage, including stimulating the creation of recycling enterprises.
In 2019, a number of laws were also amended, for example, the law of consumption production, the procedure for handling hazardous mercury-containing waste.
What now?
In Kyrgyzstan, favorable conditions have been created for the organization of an effective management system and the introduction of expanded producer responsibility.
Thus, in December 2021, the Action Plan of the Cabinet of Ministers on the implementation of the National Development Program of the Kyrgyz Republic until 2026 was approved, which provides for the implementation of a number of measures to improve the waste management system.
The measures are aimed at introducing amendments and additions to laws, regulatory legal acts, including in terms of introducing the principles of the concept of extended responsibility of manufacturers of ROP for the disposal of goods and packaging.
Experience of other countries and international companies
Aleksandara Akirman, Caucasus and Central Asia Public Relations Manager at The Coca-Cola Foundation, noted that almost all global manufacturers of goods and packaging have committed to transfer from 8 to 10% of secondary raw materials to new packaging.
“In the next five to ten years, the companies intend to use more environmentally friendly materials, develop new types of packaging, provide for collection and processing.
At the same time, companies are trying to work with government authorities in their respective countries to ensure that such systems develop.
Now in Kyrgyzstan there is a linear economy of packaging, in which most packages go to landfill, are dumped in the form of garbage.
Almost 100% of the primary material is used.
While in a circular economy, plastic packaging is used endlessly.
The new packaging needs to be recycled.
Such a circular economy is possible.
In more than 30 countries around the world, we produce packaging from recycled materials, ” she said.
The OECD Environment Directorate, economist and environmentalist Frisief Lubinger in his speech noted that at present the ROP system is actively developing and is beginning to be used more intensively around the world.
"The transition to PPE is particularly active in North America, Europe and a number of transition economies, but it should be noted that in transition economies, additional resources are needed to make the system fully operational," he added.
Next, Givi Kalandadze, an expert from Georgia, the chairman of the operator of the ROP, said that the country has a special law on waste management, which has a special section under number 9 dedicated to the ROP.
“Also, the law has an important section dedicated to responsible persons who monitor the ROP.
Such a manager should be in each organization and be responsible for coordination, for cooperation with stakeholders in waste management. "
Experts from Kazakhstan and Russia also spoke about the system of implementation of the ROP in their countries, about successes and failures.
In addition, during the event, it was noted that the first place in the ROP system for packaging is occupied by the countries of the European Union, in which Belgium is the leader, where 91% of the population sorts garbage.
Next are the countries of the Middle East, followed by the countries of Africa, then Latin America, followed by Canada, then the countries of Southeast Asia and close the list of the countries of the former USSR.
Author: Munara Borombaeva.
Photo: Vlad Ushakov
Source: Kuramastory
Tell us your news:
BACK TO TOP
BACK TO

Color-coded bins and mandatory public participation, enforced through law and ongoing campaigns, sustain some of Europe’s highest recycling rates .

Belgium uses a similar EPR approach, achieving a 91% citizen compliance rate through legal mandates, incentives, and convenient collection services .

In Asia, Singapore maintains a 51.7% solid waste recycling rate through centralized, professional collection by government-licensed companies.

Title:

Content: Hong Kong ’ s slow progress in environmental governance – why not look at the Greater Bay Area and the world?
Author: Liu Mengting
Published: Updated:
In 2005, the SAR Government proposed to develop a recycling economy, that is, to reduce the environmental burden by repairing, recycling and extending the service life of materials, to find a way out for recycling recyclable materials, and to promote the development of related industries and promote economic diversification.
However, more than a decade later, Hong Kong ’ s circular economy has not made much progress.
In this regard, some scholars suggest leveraging the advantages of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.
At the same time, Hong Kong ’ s waste management policy is not yet climate, and we must match the experience of “top students ” such as Korea, Taiwan and Singapore.
Circular Economy Enemies the Greater Bay Area
Professor Patrick Poon, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, has been developing a patented technology for converting waste glass into environmentally friendly bricks since the 1990s, with a view to improving the recycling efficiency of waste glass.
Green brick is a kind of concrete brick, can effectively use construction waste and waste glass, the third generation of green brick has been put into the market as paving brick.
For more than 20 years, the technology has been optimized by scholars to the fifth generation, but it is still “technology without market ”.
In an interview with "Hong Kong 01" recently, Poon mentioned the two main reasons why the development of the local green brick industry is hindered, which is also the dilemma faced by Hong Kong's circular economy.
Pan Chih-sheng says that the research on green bricks has been successful, but the price is not competitive. (photo by O'Cara)
One of the main reasons is that local manufacturing has caused the high enterprise products to lose market advantage. Poon analysis, because the whole production process of environmentally friendly bricks produced in Hong Kong is completed in Hong Kong, and the land price and labor in Hong Kong are very high, and the price has also risen with the water. It is necessary to open up the market to achieve maximum trade liberalization, so the possibility of contractors choosing Hong Kong materials for profit considerations is very low.
On the other hand, the Hong Kong government has not introduced relevant policies to require the actual use of environmentally friendly materials, in the absence of just the premise, the market share of environmentally friendly bricks is unstable, and the current use of the third generation of environmentally friendly bricks is about 20% more expensive than natural sand bricks, so the project side may not consider the use of environmentally friendly bricks.
Another major obstacle is that the government did not help. Pan Zhisheng pointed out that environmental protection bricks are made of recycled materials, although the quality and performance of the bricks are not lost to natural sand and stone, but the quality difference is greater.
However, according to the existing government regulations, the two are regarded as the same, that is, the quality of environmentally friendly materials is too high, but it may still be regarded as unqualified due to the degree of quality difference. This single regulation is a constraint for the application of environmentally friendly bricks. If the outlook does not improve, it will be more difficult to attract investors.
Under such a vicious cycle, the government has no intention to invest or give support, and the environmental protection brick industry chain has become a dead end.
The recycling rate of local waste in Hong Kong is low, and exports are facing many restrictions.
In an interview with Hong Kong 01, Wong Woon-chung, director of the Johan Centre for Applied Forestry Research in the Pearl River Delta (PRD), Hong Kong Baptist University, pointed out that the land resources in Hong Kong are tight, such as the opening of a recycling plant for recycled materials will double the cost.
Mr Wong stressed that the circular economy requires complementary advantages from different regions. There is no way out if the development vision is limited to Hong Kong. (photo by Mr Cheng Tze-feng)
Waste management in Hong Kong is inefficient and should be seen around the world
South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan implemented waste levies in 1995, 1996 and 2000 respectively. Since then, they have gradually developed comprehensive and mature environmental policies with local characteristics.
Hong Kong's waste management system has been fragmented for many years, and it is time to look at the world and learn from advanced experience and thinking.
Hong Kong ’ s waste management policy has not been good for many years, and the climate should be on par with other regions. (Photo by Tsai Cheng-pong)
Korea has introduced waste utilization measures in a multi-pronged manner to achieve long-term management, so the Korean waste management system is at the forefront of Asia.
For example, the city of Seoul, which has achieved the most remarkable results, introduced a series of supporting measures in a few years to change the entire waste treatment model, public perception of waste and living habits after the implementation of the garbage levy system in 1995.
In contrast, the Hong Kong Government is always "discussing" with the industry and "considering" the initiatives of environmental protection groups.
Taiwan is also a leader in waste management in Asia.
The Taiwan government sent a special cleaning team to collect household waste from residents using two types of recycling trucks – yellow garbage trucks are used to collect general waste from residents using official garbage bags, and white garbage trucks are used to collect raw and cooked food waste, plastic and other recyclable resources.
As early as 1997, the Taiwan Environmental Protection Agency launched the "Resource Recovery 4-in-1 Program", which fully mobilized the role of the government, manufacturers, consumers and licensed recycling enterprises in waste management, not only to skillfully distribute the financial costs, but also to reflect the principle of impartiality.
Singapore has a small population, similar to Hong Kong, but the waste recycling work is more professional and centralized.
In Singapore, three waste management enterprises are licensed by the National Environment Agency (NEA) to provide waste collection and recycling services to residents in different parts of the country. The waste is meticulously classified into paper, plastic, glass and metal, and the garden waste is collected separately.
In the recycling process, incineration plants reduce the volume of waste by 90%, and then use 3% of non-incineration and non-recyclable waste to landfill to reduce the environmental burden.
According to statistics, Singapore ’ s solid waste recycling rate reached 51.7% in 2020, a model that Hong Kong can learn from.
As for the administrative efficiency of the Mainland, it is also worth reflecting on the Hong Kong government. In July 2019, Shanghai implemented what has been described as the “world ’ s most stringent ” waste separation measure.
First of all, its domestic waste is strictly divided into four categories, namely recyclables, hazardous waste, wet waste and dry waste; secondly, if individuals or units do not dispose of garbage in accordance with the classification, they will be punished with severe high fines.
Under the mandatory implementation of the government, Shanghai residents have achieved good environmental protection results after experiencing "pain".
The Garbage Levy Ordinance has already been introduced, but the Government must not be complacent about it, but must think about how to tie in with the Ordinance in the next step, and adopt a systematic and comprehensive thinking to achieve long-term waste management.
Leave a comment...

Rigorous sorting, incineration for waste volume reduction, and broad public education campaigns encourage participation .

Title:

Content: Bauhinia Party ｜ The Dilemma and Countermeasures of Hong Kong ’ s Waste Management System
Author: 01 Forum
Published: Updated:
Author ： Shi Lei
The author believes that many of the current garbage collection disputes have been implemented to the feasibility level, in fact, are related to the inadequacy of the behavior system of residential areas to place garbage, and some of the shortcomings have not been collected garbage bags to make up for.
Its shortcomings mainly include: almost all residents of the garbage can be carried out 24 hours (such as a fixed garbage room and a long "business hours"), each residents of the garbage room often let the residents put garbage into (super) large garbage bins, and each garbage room corresponding to the number of residents, resulting in if there is a "black sheep" do not buy a levy garbage bag to throw garbage, they can walk without obstruction.
Property companies or FEHD contractors may have to wait for a long time before they find a "bad horse" in the process of comprehensive garbage disposal, but at this time it is difficult to claim responsibility, which leads to the "polluter pays" principle in fact is empty words.
The recent Jordan fire has also reminded all walks of life in Hong Kong that there are a large number of "trivial" old tenements in the most prosperous city center in Hong Kong, with chaotic personnel, lack of property services, and unethical behavior, resulting in a large number of public safety risks.
In these places, even property fees are difficult to ensure that the tenants pay in full, and how can the executive power to ensure the implementation of the levy garbage bag system? If the measures to effectively and timely remove the "black sheep" from the institutional level can not be designed, and the implementation level will be discounted for various "objective reasons", then it will form the behavior of "bad money driven away from good money".
Soon, no one will follow the requirements of the levy garbage bag system to do, and the criticism is rife, may the next government will abolish the annoying garbage collection system as a "moral government".
Refer to the garbage disposal policies of representative regions of the world, you can see that their garbage classification, collection of garbage bags and other systems are "devil in the details", often in the geographical environment, the unwritten rules of behavior in the residential community, and institutional protection, etc., to ensure that timely detection, isolation and failure to classify, pack and dispose of garbage according to the system requirements, and minimize the possibility of "black sheep".
For example, in the European Union, Belgium, where I lived, they have long promoted charging garbage bags.
Similar to Japan, Korea and Taiwan, residents have a fixed time to throw garbage (usually early in the morning on certain days), and garbage bags containing garbage should be placed in designated places.
It can be imagined that there is no requirement for garbage bags to be filled with garbage, but the specified bags are filled with garbage that should not be loaded or excessive garbage will be rejected.
The main way of living in the city of Leuven, where the author was at the time, was a single building or an apartment building (but the floor is usually no more than 10 floors, and the residents do not exceed 50 households). Once the garbage bags are found to be not in compliance with the regulations, whether it is the city government or the apartment manager, the difficulty of tracing is not great, and the surrounding residents will actively cooperate.
For example, Japan, Korea and Taiwan are using garbage levies to regulate the classification of citizens and reduce waste. The above areas must use the volume charge, through the use of garbage charging plastic bags to implement polluter pays.
In addition to requiring residents to place garbage (in the correct bag) in the designated location at the specified time, Japanese and Korean garbage bags are more meticulous in sorting.
For example, Japan, which is more familiar to Hong Kong people, requires transparent bags (not limited to specific models but must be transparent, can be tied) to quickly confirm that the garbage classification is correct, and the bag is combustible garbage, plastic, metal cans, etc., or non-recyclable and non-combustible waste.
Recyclable waste paper, etc., does not need to buy a separate garbage bag, but needs to be properly wrapped. Although Japan has a much higher density of living than EU countries, neighbors will pay more attention to not sorting garbage and will not delay the action.
South Korea's recycling rate is also more than 50%, the main reason is the strict classification of garbage bags, different from a kind of paid garbage bags in Hong Kong, South Korea is a variety of paid garbage bags, and each garbage bag can only contain one kind of material, and according to the difficulty of recycling to determine the price of garbage bags, the more difficult the recovery, the higher the price of garbage bags.
As a result, South Korea ’ s recovery rate is higher.
As for the Taiwan region, in addition to adopting a regular garbage collection mode similar to Japan, in the area where there are no conditions to set up a garbage room, there is a garbage truck and recycling truck every night, and the song of the snow truck comes to the small area.
This requirement is even higher, and residents need to actively show up at a specific time, so recycling workers can more accurately and timely eliminate the "black sheep" that do not pack garbage according to regulations, and therefore refuse to accept or take other measures.
It is worth pointing out that I have only visited Japan, Korea and Taiwan on short trips, and only stayed in commercial hotels.
Therefore, details such as the garbage system in residential areas are indirectly obtained through online KOL sharing, live scene dramas and other channels.
Please note that there are errors.
From this, it can be seen that the problems existing in Hong Kong's current waste management system and the waste management experience of advanced regions abroad have produced the following suggestions that deserve serious consideration and reference by the Hong Kong Government and relevant departments:
1. Improve the behavior system of residents throwing garbage.
First of all, the public garbage room and the garbage disposal place in the residential area should no longer be allowed to throw garbage 7x24 hours.
To consider formulating standards, such as limited delivery time and designated delivery points, for the reference of the entire Hong Kong property management industry, the FEHD will implement them to prevent the "black sheep" from evading garbage bag charges.
2. Strengthen the management of "no matter" areas, standardize the premises and methods of refuse collection in areas where property services are lacking, and ensure that the refuse charging system can be effectively implemented even in these problem areas.
3, with reference to the practices of Japan, Korea, Taiwan and other places, after the successful implementation of the garbage collection system, it continues to optimize, the implementation of more detailed garbage classification management, according to different materials and recycling difficulties to carry out differentiated charges.
This will increase the willingness of the environmental protection industry to handle high-difficulty waste, while increasing the residents ’ enthusiasm for sorting and waste reduction.
Critics may think that the institutional construction of these areas requires a long period of time and a large amount of resources to invest, and may not be able to be directly replicated in the real environment of Hong Kong.
Moreover, the improvement of the relevant system requires no small investment of resources.
Perhaps this is precisely the original intention of the SAR Government to levy a "short and fast" garbage levy.
However, it is already clear that the "short and fast" has only attracted doubts, and even if it is forced to push forward, it will also be at the expense of the government's recognition.
Moreover, the "black sheep" can not be effectively eradicated in a timely manner, which will inevitably make the garbage collection system become "half suspended". Only a few able and willing citizens are willing to do so (such as cooperating with "green in the area", and working hard even in the hot sun at the recycling point to deliver their own recyclable plastic waste to the recycling point of respectable citizens). Go your own way, the system cost has been paid a lot, and the problem to be solved by the garbage levy is still the same.
No matter what kind of solution is adopted, the government will need some time to refine the design of the refuse collection system and promote it more vigorously.
The implementation of the principle of garbage collection in the European Union, Japan and Korea, and Taiwan is not completed in three or two months.
Garbage collection needs the long-term cooperation of residents, change the long-term behavior habits can be completed in a few months?
How can this be called good governance and good governance? If you cook for the government, you can't be anxious and work hard for the government for a long time, you can only make a well-intentioned system truly have the positive meaning it should have.
The author is a researcher at the Bauhinia Institute for Policy Studies.
The article is only the opinion of the author and does not represent the position of Hong Kong 01.
Please email us at 01view @ hk01.com.
Please attach the author ’ s real name and contact details.
If not applicable, no notice will be given.

Japan’s decades-old system mandates sorted disposal, verified by transparent bags and detailed schedules.

Longstanding government campaigns and social norms overcame early resistance, embedding sorting in daily life .

South Korea’s volume-based fee system pairs paid bags and performance-based incentives with public campaigns.

National recycling rates exceed 50%, and food waste recycling tops 94% .

Title:

Content: Pens and Clouds: Robbing Citizens' Purses Again - Cheng Wanli Media
April 21, 2022 00: 05
Eastern Network Television
More News Clips
What do you want to pay for without words?
The Chairman of the Commission on Sustainable Development, Mr Lam Ching-chai, said earlier that the current levy on 50 cents plastic bags was too cheap and made the public feel like "immune".
In response, the Environment Bureau immediately submitted a paper to the Legislative Council proposing that the levy on plastic bags should be raised from the current 50 cents to $1, and that the exemption for frozen food should be abolished.
Food outlets will continue to be exempted from selling plastic bags. However, restaurants can only distribute one plastic bag to guests free of charge.
Under the control of the “one-size-fits-all ” faction of the Legislative Council, raising the levy on plastic bags seems inevitable.
However, as mentioned in this column, at present, the economy is frozen and the unemployment rate is high, and any proposal to increase the burden of the public should not be implemented. Not to mention, merchants do not have to pay the plastic bag fee to the government, and directly fall into the pockets of the merchants.
What adds to the burden of the public is that the authorities plan to implement a garbage levy in the second half of next year. After the increase in electricity and bus fares, the Government has started to attack the public on the grounds of the garbage levy.
Originally, the garbage levy has been proposed for many years, and it is inevitable that it will be implemented as soon as possible. However, now that the epidemic is still raging and the grassroots are in deep trouble, the Hong Kong Government does not want to find ways to reduce the burden of the public, but continues to rob the public of their purse.
At the end of the day, for the sake of environmental protection, people don ’ t mind paying, but they have to pay what they can.
Let ’ s talk about the economic environment, let ’ s talk about what the government has done to protect the environment, I believe no citizen can answer it. Waste recycling is not a matter of words, recycling is not a matter of words, only selling a single levy, there is no matching, so how can environmental protection be done, how can it not be a matter of nothing? South Korea ’ s recycling policy started even earlier, and today the recycling rate of food waste exceeds 94%, which is a remarkable achievement.
Other people can do it, Hong Kong can't do it, it's not the government's problem.

Taiwan’s “4-in-1 Program” integrates stakeholders, with scheduled truck pick-ups, education funding, and visible community enforcement—enabling high diversion rates .

China’s Shanghai has piloted rigorous mandatory sorting since 2019, requiring residents to separate waste into four categories.

Title:

Content: Waste management in Hong Kong starts early and matures late. How can we catch up with Taiwan, Shanghai, Korea and the tail lights of the starry cars?
Author: 01 Weekly Report
Published: Updated:
Hong Kong's environmental protection policy has not made great progress. For many years, it seems that it has remained at the stage of "blue waste paper, yellow aluminum cans, coffee plastic bottles", and there is no plastic reduction policy.
Last year, the mainland stopped the import of waste paper, and Hong Kong recyclers also stopped collecting waste paper.
When the Government is faced with Members' questions on plastic reduction and countless initiatives by environmental groups, it is always in a state of "discussion" with the retail and restaurant industries, "under consideration", lest it harm the economic interests of the industry, and would rather harm the environmental benefits than see any actual action taken.
On July 1, 2019, the Shanghai Municipal Domestic Waste Management Ordinance was officially implemented.
At Haihong Bridge Station on the railway line, volunteers are promoting a little knowledge of garbage classification. (Visual China)
On the other hand, after years of vigorous promotion, waste management is well organized and highly efficient: South Korea ’ s waste management system is at the forefront of Asia, with Seoul being the most effective.
The local municipal authorities have the responsibility to collect, recycle and dispose of domestic and commercial solid waste. Waste management in Taiwan once lagged behind Hong Kong, but due to the early introduction of the waste levy policy by the Taiwan government, and then formulated a complex and effective waste management system, the situation in Singapore is gradually reversed. Shanghai launched the “Shanghai Municipal Domestic Waste Management Ordinance ” in 2019. The complicated measures have caused complaints from the public. Over time, the results can be said to be immediate after the people have familiarized themselves with the regulations.
Looking at the situation in these four Asian regions, it is not difficult to imagine why there is no systematic waste management in Hong Kong today, when we look back at Hong Kong's garbage collection practices, which rely entirely on the people's consciousness to separate and unsupervised waste.
For more details, please read the 285th issue of Hong Kong 01 (4 October 2021), “What should Hong Kong look for in Taiwan, Shanghai, Korea and Star? ”.
Click here to try our weekly newsletter for more in-depth coverage.
285 issues of Hong Kong 01 e-newsletter Other exclusive highlights:
Pull gate limit or energy consumption double control? China North and South electricity shortage is the same and different
The Expectations of Lam Cheng's Final Policy Address: Regaining the Dominant Power of Development and Restructuring the Land Economy
"Left glue" opens up the land, imagines that the government is lagging behind the people.
Has the central bank 'pacified' the property market twice in a week?
Sixteen Years of Progress: The Delayed Garbage Levy Ordinance
After Meng Wanzhou's return to the motherland, the public opinion has been heated to examine Sino-US relations.
Lau Kwok-hoon: Regaining the "True Hong Kong Speed" and developing a new centre in New Territories North
Is the time for UK to relax regulation of gene editing agriculture coming?
An Interview with Chu Hsing-hsiang and Hu Kuo-hsien
Leave a comment...