Effectiveness of the Environmental Levy Scheme

Effectiveness of the Environmental charge SchemeInvestigate the effectiveness of the Environmental bill Scheme on waxy obtain Bags and Give suggestions on alternative solutions to saturating landfills at heart 5 years.I have chosen this topic on the nucleotide that this avoidance is the first measure in the Product Eco- tariff Scheme, indeed by reviewing its effectiveness I depose give suggestions depending successful performers and areas for improvement on get ahead final causes of similar nature. (Part 1) Also, as the controversy on construction bill for an incinerator in Hong Kong is hot these days, it has interested me to evaluate other alternatives to reduce burn out exertion, use the depth psychology in Part 1. (Part 2)Date of submission 1st July,2015.Table of contentsIntroductionBackgroundLiterature reviewObjectives and expected outcomesFocus questionsMethodologyFindings and synopsisEffectiveness of the Levy Scheme on Plastic Shopping BagsDid the PSB abstrac t succeed in bringing good deal plastic bag pine away production? To what extent?The pros of the PSB dodge and successful factorsThe cons of the PSB connive and areas for improvementImplications of the effectiveness of the PSB schemeRecommendations on in store(predicate) take reduction schemes from the experience of PSBWhat elements of the PSB scheme can be kept in further schemes of waste reduction?What are the problems in the PSB scheme that further schemes of waste reduction needs to tackle?The direction for future waste reduction schemes and feasible solutions raising and promotion cosmos attitude reflected from the PSB schemeConclusionReflectionBibliographyAppendixIntroduction1.1 BackgroundI am interested in the topic Investigate the effectiveness of the Environmental Levy Scheme on Plastic Shopping Bags and Give suggestions on alternative solutions to saturating landfills within 5 years as recently debates on the urgency and essentiality of building an incinerator in Hong Kong are boiling hot in Hong Kong. As an eco-friendly person, I am deeply furbish uped that all landfills in Hong Kong are estimated to meet saturation by 2019, calculating by the current waste production rate. i Coincidentally, the PSB scheme was entering the second phase on 1st April 2015 and is another hot eco topic this year. From analysis on Hong Kong Connection (TV programme produced by RTHK), it inspired me this PSB scheme may provide many insights into how waste reduction works and what the pros and cons are of utilizing financial disincentive. Based on evaluation of the PSB scheme, I can give suggestions on alternate solutions of waste reduction.Environmental Levy Scheme on Plastic Bags is the taxing of plastic bag of $0.5 per bag. It is the first scheme under the Producer Responsibility Scheme under the Environmental Protection Department. In the first phase 7 July 2009 31 March 2015, about 3000 retail outlets were covered. In the full murder phase starting 1 April 20 15, all retail outlets (more than 100,000 points of retail sales) in Hong Kong are covered.ii1.3 Objectives and expected outcomesThere are two main objectives in this sketch 1. To evaluate the successful factors and areas for improvement of the PSB plan and 2. To give recommendations on future waste reduction schemes using the experience learnt from the PSB plan.By data collecting and analysis, I expect to gain the following outcomes the actual results of the PSB scheme, the reasons people support or boycott the scheme, governmental communication with the world interpreting waste production, the criteria for a successful eco- scheme in the normals eyes and the relation of training and promotion to effectiveness.1.4 Focus QuestionsThe focalization questions regarding the topic include-What is the current situation of Plastic Shopping Bag Levy? How effective is it in reducing plastic waste?-How do citizens evaluate the effectiveness of the PSB Levy?-What are the benefits of th e PSB Levy to HKs surroundings?-What damage or disharmony will PSB Levy bring to HK?-What can we conclude from the current situation on the effectiveness of the PSB Levy? What elements can hence be used to make future environmental policy more effective?2. MethodologyI have used the following data collection method for primary data3. Findings and Analysis3.1 Effectiveness of the Levy Scheme on Plastic Shopping Bags3.1.1 Did the PSB scheme succeed in bringing down plastic bag waste production? To what extent?The PSB scheme was to a large extent successful in bringing plastic bag waste production. The scattering of PSB in retail outlets has reduced by 90% since the launch of the PSB scheme in 2009.iii It was estimated that 84 billion PSB was distributed in 2009, thus it has decreased to 8.4 million approximately uptil now. ivFrom the questionnaire survey, the majority of 80% respondents said they would not use PSB while only a minority of 20% said they would. It shows the effectiv eness of the PSB scheme. From the field observation, the PSB distribution is a low 5% per hour.v The number of PSB distributed in supermarkets has decreased to 403, according to a survey conducted by Green Action. viThe government has attributed the change to the increasing earthly concern awareness of Bring Your Own Bag promoted by the PSB scheme. vii Therefore, the PSB scheme has succeeded to bring down PSB distribution and raise eco-awareness.3.1.2 The pros of the PSB scheme and successful factorsThe PSB scheme is successful in bringing down PSB usage and raising eco-awareness, as mentioned in 3.1.1. According to the questionnaire survey, 57% and 39% of respondents said they choose not to claim PSB because they dont want to pay the $0.5 charge and that they are eco-friendly. This shows that one of the successful factors of the scheme is the financial disincentive, as Hong Kong people are money-conscious. viii This also shows that the PSB scheme has raised public awareness toward s their eco attitude.The elements that made the PSB scheme successful can give reference to future waste reduction schemes. Firstly, financial disincentive is effective in reject waste production, thus this element should be kept. Also, another successful factor is promoting positive value much(prenominal) as Bring Your Own Bag, as public awareness has been raised in the PSB scheme.ixThe cons of the PSB scheme and areas for improvementDespite the obvious effectiveness, there is still room for improvements for the PSB scheme. The cons of the PSB scheme include the small amount of charge not being threatening enough and the difficulty in supervision. According to the questionnaire survey, 70% of respondents said they would use PSB as it is convenient and 65% said the levy is affordable. x Thus, we see that maybe the levy should be increased to be more effective. Also, according to the field observation, some customers tend to buy prepackaged goods or do many storage bags with no h and-hold to avoid the levy.xi Therefore, this shows that ineffective supervision would negatively affect the effectiveness of the measure.The major problem of the PSB scheme right now, concluded from the above, is the constituted public attitude. Hong Kong people are often money-minded and cynical, which may cause them to disregard the PSB scheme for their personal interest, such as avoiding the levy but still using other plastic bags or misusing recycling bags. xii The main issue to tackle in order to better future waste production schemes is how to change the public attitude and promote correct values in the long run.Implications of the effectiveness of the PSB schemeThe PSB scheme is the first scheme under the Producer Responsibility Scheme, thus is the water tester that indicates whether financial disincentive is effective to reduce waste production. Its success reflected that Hong Kong people are very conscious when something affects their personal interest directly, such as a dditional financial burden, therefore future waste reduction scheme should still be focused on this weakness of Hong Kong people (financial disincentive). xiii iodin supporting evidence is found in the questionnaire survey. When asked to rank what are the priorities that urge them to support a waste reduction scheme, well-nigh respondents ranked economical factor first, then personal factor. Remarkably, they least value environmental factor and sustainability, showing Hong Kong people are generally more money-minded than eco-conscious.xiv The implications of this phenomenon are that financial disincentive is most suitable for waste reduction in Hong Kong as financial concern is the greatest motivational power for Hongkongers to change living habits, also that future schemes should focus on delivering positive values such as the importance of eco-protection and sustainability in promotion and public education.xvRecommendations on future waste reduction schemes from the experience o f PSB3.2.1 What elements of the PSB scheme can be kept in further schemes of waste reduction?As discussed in 3.1.2, the main elements to be kept in further schemes of waste reduction are financial disincentive and effort to change public attitude in changing lifestyles, also their approaches to waste. xvi Based on the questionnaire findings, most respondents are supportive to the PSB scheme and regard it a political and social success. xvii This also showed that transparency of government measures and effective downward communication and public consultation is important, and should be continued in future waste reduction schemes.xviii3.2.2 What are the problems in the PSB scheme that further schemes of waste reduction needs to tackle?As discussed in 3.1.3, the main problems of the PSB scheme are the hard-to-change public attitude and thus their living habits, also non-threatening amount of levy and insufficient supervision. Furthermore, most respondents think the crux of the waste pr oduction problem are inadequate environmental education, lack of promotion of government eco-schemes and the buy-and-throw habit of the prosperous metropolis.xix These are problems that future waste production scheme most urgently face.The direction for future waste reduction schemes and feasible solutionsIn response to 3.2.2, hereby I would recommend important points for improvement with regard to the above problems. Firstly, when implementing waste reduction schemes, powerful financial disincentive should be enforced to respond to Hong Kong peoples money-conscious mindset and relatively smaller concern for the environment. xx It is the only way to receive biggest response from the public and see changes in their daily living. Secondly, to tackle the supervision difficulty, a report system by hotline can be opened to the public to report violation of the policy by either shops or the general public.xxi This can make supervision more all-rounded. Thirdly, education and promotion to indoctrinate correct and positive values is also important. As shown in the questionnaire findings, the public value economical concern over environmental concern, which is proinflammatory and bad to eco-protection. Thus, education and promotion is essential.In order to find out the most supported waste reduction schemes, I have asked respondents to rank policies that they regard as most effective in reducing waste. The survey results show that policies involving separation, recycling and levy are seen as most effective, with the top being book of facts Separation of Domestic Waste, scoring 1580 in sums.xxii This shows that the public would support waste reduction schemes that only require little alterations in daily living, such as household waste separation, or recycling and financial disincentive. This match with the fact that their top concern is economical factor and second is personal factor when responding to a waste reduction scheme.xxiii In contrary, public opinion do no t support policies involving new landfills and incinerators, the bottom being opening up new landfill in current country parks, scoring only 882 in total.xxiv This shows that the public is least likely to support waste reduction scheme that might be detrimental to their living environment and health, or those that may use a large amount of government reserves as it violates economic efficiency. This match with their priority tendency as they most value economical factor (efficiency, personal burden) and personal factor (impact to living environment and health). This ranking gives us important and clear insights into which directions to go and also how best to suit public concerns and gain public support in waste reduction schemes.Education and promotion *****With reference to 3.2.3, we have gained some insights into what values are to be changed for future waste reduction schemes to go smoothly (money over environment) , and also what are most motivational to the general public.3. 2.5 Public attitude reflected from the PSB scheme 4. Conclusion5.Reflections6. Bibliography7.Appendixi Environment minister Wong Kam-sing, 2003, Hong Kong issues dire warning on landfills amid protests by residents, South China Morning Post, http//www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1246229/city-could-drown-trash-environment-minister-warnsiiEnvironmental Levy Scheme on Plastic Bags, Environmental Protection Department, http//www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/pro_responsibility/env_levy.htmliii take the field Release, 28 Mar 2015, Environmental Protection Department, http//www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201503/28/P201503270921.htmiv provide Hong Kongs city-wide levy on plastic bags really change behaviour?, Time Out Hong Kong, http//www.timeout.com.hk/big-smog/features/71898/will-hong-kongs-city-wide-levy-on-plastic-bags-really-change-behaviour.htmlv Field observation, appendix 3vi Environmental Levy on Plastic Shopping Bags What are the problems?, CSR Asia, http//csr- asia.com/csr-asia-weekly-news-detail.php?id=11753vii Press Release, 28 Mar 2015, Environmental Protection Department, http//www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201503/28/P201503270921.htmviii Plastic society rethinks bags, Macau Business, 26th May 2015, http//www.macaubusiness.com/news/plastic-society-rethinks-bags.htmlix Press Release, 28 Mar 2015, Environmental Protection Department, http//www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201503/28/P201503270921.htmx Questionnaire survey, Q3, appendix2xi Field observation, appendix 3xii Values Education in Hong Kong Problems and Possibilities, The Hong Kong ground of Education, http//www.acsa.edu.au/pages/images/99_fok_values_ed.pdfxiii Values Education in Hong Kong Problems and Possibilities, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, http//www.acsa.edu.au/pages/images/99_fok_values_ed.pdfxiv Questionnaire survey, Q8, appendix2xv Values Education in Hong Kong Problems and Possibilities, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, http//www.acsa.edu.au/pages/images/9 9_fok_values_ed.pdfxvi Waste Reduction Framework Plan, Environmental Protection Department, http//www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/prob_solutions/wrfp_summary.htmlxvii Questionnaire survey, Q5 and Q6, appendix2xviii Public cite Report on the Proposal on An Environmental Levy on Plastic Shopping Bags , http//www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/prob_solutions/files/Consultation_Report_Levy_Eng.pdf.xix Questionnaire survey, Q9 , appendix2xx Values Education in Hong Kong Problems and Possibilities, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, http//www.acsa.edu.au/pages/images/99_fok_values_ed.pdfxxi Environmental Levy Scheme on Plastic Shopping Bags, Environmental Protection Scheme, http//www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/pro_responsibility/env_levy.htmlxxii Questionnaire survey, Q7 , appendix2xxiii Questionnaire survey, Q8 , appendix2xxiv Questionnaire survey, Q7 , appendix2