Extension of landfill sites

In 2014, the Legislative Council approved $2.1 billion and HK$7.5 billion for the extension of the Tseung Kwan O and Ta Kwu Ling landfill respectively. Other funding would be approved for studying the feasibility of expanding the Tuen Mun landfill (Cheung, 2014).^[3]

The landfill services are expected to last till mid-2020s after expansion (EDP, 2015a),^[4] but concerns are raised as to its worsening of methane emission and unpleasant smell, leading to neighboring residents’ discontent.

Construction of Integrated Waste Management Facilities (IWMF)

The Integrated Waste Management Facilities develops with advanced incineration as its core along with recycling plant for recovering recyclable wastes from MSW. Apart from alleviating the landfill load, nearly hundred tons of useful materials such as metals will be recovered each day. The IWMF can also recover energy from the waste and convert the energy into electricity supplying more than 100,000 households, in turn reducing carbon dioxide emission by 440,000 tons each year (EDP, 2011).^[5] Yet, local concerns are still growing with respect to whether pollutant gases and dust particles harmful to health and environment will be emitted, and the price of incinerators run high, costing $14.9 billion for construction and $353 million a year for operations (Cheung, 2012).^[6]

Implement Municipal Solid Waste Charge (MSW)

Hong Kong is currently actively discussing the options of solid waste charging, and the quantitative-based charging system adopted by Taipei is deemed as an apt reference for Hong Kong supported by legislators. Following the “polluters-pay” principle, the public must purchase designated garbage bags, ranging from 5-litre to 120-litre at different price levels, from EDP fitting to their own needs. Recyclables can be separated to minimize the load put into the charged garbage bags as a measure to encourage recycling. The waste charge scheme has reduced 60% of domestic waste volume in Taipei (Green Power, 2012).^[7]

The scheme is in general supported, though price levels of the charge and other details remain controversial. Over 50% of the interviewed Hong Kong citizens showed positive preferences for the domestic waste charge scheme with less than 20% disagreeing, according to a survey conducted by the Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (2013).^[8]

Comparison among those alternatives

Stage one

The first phase was Public Consultation that began in 2012, spanning for three months. The public was encouraged to provide their views before the consultation period ended in April. A consultation document titling “Is Waste Charging an Option Public Consultation” was released by EPD in January 2012 (EPD, 2012). It provided an overview of Hong Kong’s waste management, outlined the international experience in launching MSW Charge Schemes and explained the key issues such as operational matters and broad approaches of MSW Charging in seeking to introduce such as system in Hong Kong. The document was publicly accessible in EPD website, the EPD office and District offices, while the public could forward their views by email, post or facsimile within the consultation period.

The consultation findings showed there was majority support within the community for introducing quantity-based MSW charging as a policy tool to facilitate waste recovery and reduction, yet the implementation details such as concerns about environmental hygiene issues and fly-tipping had diverse views. In the light of the findings, the government decided that a quantity-based MSW charging system should be the broad direction in pursuing domestic waste reduction.

Stage 2

The second phase was the Public Engagement Process implemented by the Council for Sustainable Development, spanning for four months starting in September 2013. The document entitling “Waste Reduction by Waste Charging – How to Implement?” was published to obtain views on how best MSW Charging would be launched in Hong Kong, where four key issues – charging mechanism, charging level, coverage of charging scheme and recycling were covered (SDC, 2013).^[9]

Stage 3

The third phase was the Pilot Scheme on MSW Charging implemented by EPD in April 2014. It aimed to collect further public views towards MSW Charging and accumulate practical experience for MSW Charging launch in future. The Scheme lasted for six months during which waste disposal statistics of 7 participating estates would be collected for analysis.

The entire consultation, as a policy process for administration, contained both pros and cons.

Pros

For pros, firstly, the several stages of public consultation had a rather balanced inclusion as it was publicly accessible. The series helped to reorient public towards self-organization and create overall dynamics towards Hong Kong’s waste management. The time span of the whole consultation series was appropriate, lasting for 2 years. Without being too lengthy or too short, appropriate responses from the public and stakeholders could be obtained to address the pressing domestic waste problem in Hong Kong. Moreover, the consultation did actually obtain public opinions where their stances were made clear, such that the government could set a broad direction to implement the quantity-based MSW Charging as a domestic waste management policy. It acted as a basis of community support for the scheme.

Cons

However, the consultation contained flaws that the government needed to be alert. First, the public might not be sufficiently informed. Although posters, a video and consultation documents were published, the promotion of the consultation, provision of information such as the waste problem, alternatives, opportunities and potential solutions were inadequate. Also, important issues such as charging method, fee amount and legislation process scheme were not mentioned. Thus more discussion was needed for successful implementation. Also, the public consultation was “one-way” – it was mostly the government collecting public views. Applying two-way communication using top-down approaches might be more appropriate, such that responses could be more active and the public could have more interaction with government, ultimately enhancing government legitimacy.

HKSAR government

Hong Kong government had implied different policies to deal with the Domestic Waste problem. EDB is the department assigned to manage the domestic waste in the town. The programme on Source Separation of Domestic Waste was launched territory-wide in 2005. This programme aims to decrease domestic waste. The rationale behind the Programme is straightforward. Landfills are running out of space so it is necessary to reduce the wasteload. In recent years The Government has tested various forms of domestic waste separation and recovery to identify systems that are convenient to residents, cost-effective and best suit local needs. This policy implied by the government had been an element of decision making process now since this policy had caused some positive effect to domestic waste management. The actions took by the government is affecting the decision making process.

NGOs

NGOs such as Green Power, a local environmental organization, organized various protests to express opinions to policies related to environmental problems. NGOs are usually invited by government to operate collection points in their existing premises. Their collection points are initially intended to collect recyclables of lower value and require NGOs to provide space for accepting recyclable waste at their premises, space for temporary storage of the collected recyclables and resources including manpower, hardware, etc., to operate the recycling facilities. They also promote waste reduction to the public, this would affect the consultation of the public to the government.

Friends of the earth (FoE)^[10] in Hong Kong had done a series of things to help promoting waste reduction and monitoring the government in different filed of Hong Kong. FoE had organized a field trip to Taiwan where a place had done good jobs in MSW programme; as Taiwan has implemented an advanced version (compared to Hong Kong) of MSW programme which included producer responsibility system, volume-based waste charge and an aggressive recycling of food waste. FoE has visited Taiwan in order to learn from other countries’s successful experience since it is one of the stakeholders during the policy making process of the government, learning some professional opinions from other country can facilitate giving opinions to the government in policy making process.

Furthermore, FoE has always been a responsible monitor to the government since it was established. FoE have published more than ten articles and campaign against incinerator in response to the government’s policy about implementation of incinerators and where they address the effects of them as to show their stances to the government which incineration is the least method they want for solving domestic waste problems. To response to the MSW scheme suggested by the government, instead of just simply addressing their stances in the media, they had organized campaigns to promote producer responsibility in Hong Kong because they believe that this is the most essential thing to reduce MSW. In addition, they also proposed a proposal called “Full Recovery- Zero Waste” that aim at releasing pressure of the landfills in Hong Kong and hoping the government can take it as consideration and put them into policies.