Road to 5**：30 million-dollar-subsidy to recycling firms
【明報專訊】Cardboard boxes are a source of livelihood for many elderly scavengers, yet as the trade-in prices for recycled paper waste continue to fall, the volume of paper recycled is also decreasing. The Environmental Protection Department approved a subsidy of $30 million from the Recycling Fund to subsidize frontline recyclers according to the amount of recycled paper waste they receive, hoping to encourage frontline waste pickers to continue collecting cardboard boxes.
◆News summary
Applications began to be accepted on September 13, 2019. A monitoring committee was set up to ensure the smooth operation of the project as well as the appropriate use of funds. According to Lau Yau Sing, President of the Hong Kong Environmental Protection and Recycle Industry Sustainable Development Association, participating recyclers must purchase wastepaper at no less than $0.5 per kilogram, which is higher than current market price of $0.3 by over 60 percent.
Lau points out that in 2019, paper-making factories on the mainland offered to acquire wastepaper for $800 per tonne, a sharp fall from over $1,000 in 2018. As a result of the ripple effect, wastepaper exporters purchase wastepaper from recycling firms for $500, and recycling firms purchase wastepaper from waste pickers for $0.3 per kilogram. The prices have reached their lowest point, and ''no one will collect these (cardboard boxes) anymore if prices drop further.''
Source: Ming Pao, 30 September 2019
■Mock examination question
Are government subsidies the most effective method to raise wastepaper recycling rates in Hong Kong? Support your argument with evidence.
◆Agree
•Provide enough incentives
Through cash subsidies, the government can provide sufficient financial incentives to raise wastepaper recycling rates. According to the information provided, if scavengers have no desire to collect cardboard boxes, the amount of wastepaper purchased by recycling firms decreases, so do recycling rates. Subsidies will be more efficient than public education, as the latter requires a prolonged period of time to take effect and does not provide immediate incentives.
•Public support
The public or recycling firms directly benefit from cash subsidies, and this will result in higher level of public support and thus higher feasibility. This will help increase the recycling rate of wastepaper. While the establishment of more recycling facilities is considered inconvenient by some citizens, cash subsidies can provide direct intervention and assistance in the recycling industry as well as the lives of citizens, which should be more effective.
◆Disagree
•A cosmetic exercise only
Cash subsidies provide only incentives but do not get to the root of the problem, so it is not the most effective solution. On the contrary, changing the recycling industry by reducing reliance on the mainland market, which will make wastepaper recycling prices less affected by external market factors, is a more effective solution.
•Unable to raise recycling rates in the long run
Governmental funding also has its limits, and it is considered a short-term measure. Although cash subsidies can directly encourage the public to recycle, they also increase government expenditures. On the contrary, increasing recycling facilities in urban areas is more beneficial to citizens. Altering the habits of the public in the long run should be more helpful in increasing willingness to recycle wastepaper.
Translated by Odyssey Lang
[通通識 第692期]
