Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia

World Association for Triple Helix and Future Strategy Studies (세계트리플헬릭스미래전략학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Mitigating Hazards by Better Designing a Recycling Program: Lessons Learned from South Korea

  • Kim, Kyung Woo (Department of Public Administration, University of North Texas) ;
  • Song, Minsun (Askew School of Public Administration and Policy, Florida State University)
  • Published : 2015.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

As an effort of mitigating hazards, pro-environmental programs have been vigorously activated with regard to solid waste recycling. It is beneficial for both the environment and resource saving, but implementation and enforcement are hard to achieve voluntarily. The South Korean Government first implemented the Deposit Refund System (DRS) and later the Extended Producer Responsibility Program (EPR) to reduce waste and encourage recycling in South Korea. Un-der the DRS, producers would pay for recycling the wastes of the products. The government then repealed the DRS and implemented the EPR program. Under this program, the producers recycle as much as the Ministry of Environment determines or pay a penalty for an excessive amount of the waste. In the broader perspective of disaster management, such policy programs can mitigate environmental hazards. This paper compares those two programs that facilitated the level of recycling, focusing on how such programs regulate producers and how they were operated from the perspective of implementation and enforcement.

Keywords

References

  1. Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I., & Wisner, B. (2004). At risk: natural hazards, people's vulner-ability and disasters. Routledge.
  2. Calcott, P., & Walls, M. 2005. Waste, recycling, and "Design for Environment": Roles for mar-kets and policy instruments. Resource and energy economics, 27(4), 287-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2005.02.001
  3. Castell, A., Clift, R., & Francae, C. (2004). Extended producer responsibility policy in the Euro-pean Union: a horse or a camel?. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 8(1-2), 4-7. https://doi.org/10.1162/1088198042442333
  4. Choi, ByungSun.1992. Evaluation of Recently-Introduced Environmental Policy Instrument, Korean Journal of Public Administration, 30(2)
  5. Choi, ByungSun. 2004. Government Regulation, Seoul: Bobmunsa
  6. D'Amico, Marie, and Jim Jubak. 1990. "Five Plans to Solve the Garbage Mess." McCall's (Au-gust): 52, 56, 57, 59.
  7. Dinan, T.M., 1993. Economic efficiency effects of alternative policies for reducing waste dis-posal. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 25, 242-256. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1993.1046
  8. Feiock, R. C., & West, J. P. 1993. Testing competing explanations for policy adoption: munici-pal solid waste recycling programs. Political Research Quarterly, 46(2), 399-419. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591299304600211
  9. Field, Barry C., Martha K. Field. 2006. Environmental economics : an introduction. Boston, Mass: McGraw-Hill.
  10. Fullerton, D., Kinnaman, T., 1995. Garbage, recycling and illicit burning or dumping. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 29, 78-91. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1995.1032
  11. Georgakellos. 2007. The use of the deposit-refund framework in port reception charging systmes. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 54.
  12. Goulder, L. H., & Parry, I. W. (2008). Instrument choice in environmental policy. Review of En-vironmental Economics and Policy, 2(2), 152-174. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/ren005
  13. Hong, Y. H., Recycling Management of Fluorescent Light, Sogang University.
  14. Industrial Waste Recycling Technology Business Group. 2004. Recycling White Paper: Re-source Recycling White Paper, Chungmunkak
  15. Jung, H.S, B.S. Byun. 2003. Understanding of Environmental Policy, Pakyoungsa
  16. Jung, W. S. 2003. Prospect and the present condition of EPR- characters & Marketability of Mandatory Items." Local Welfare 17: 13
  17. Jung, W. T., Jaechun Jung. 2002. Activation for Economic Incentive., Environmental Policy, 3(2):17.
  18. Korea Environment Corporation Korean Environment Corporation, Extended Producer Respon-sibility
  19. Korean Environment Corporation(KECO). 2008. Extended Producer Responsibility
  20. Korea Consumer Agency 1998. Management of Waste Deposit and Refund System and Im-provement, Living Economy 98-11
  21. KORECO. 2001. Research for Limitation in Introduction of EPR and Strategy.
  22. KEI, 1999. Research on Settling Adequate Deposit Rate - Calculation of Actual Collection & Recycling
  23. KIET. 1998. Problems of Waste Deposit and Refund System and Improvement, Policy Research Data 98-54
  24. Kim, M. J. 2004. Evaluation to economic efficiency according to introduction of EPR. Sungkyunkwan University
  25. Kim, E, H. 2007. "Analysis of factors on behavior to reduce wastes: Application of Planning Be-havior", Chosun University.
  26. Kim, J. K. 1993. Suggestion on Improvement of Waste Deposit Refund Systems, Seoul National University
  27. Kim, Y.S. 2004. Analysis on behavior to reduce wastes - Application of Planning and Behavior. The Korea Policy Association for Analysis and Evaluation, 14(2)
  28. Korea Zero Waste Movement Network, 2007. Research on Discharge and Recycling of Paper Pack
  29. Kun, O. S. 1999. Environmental Economics, Seoul: Pakyoungsa.
  30. Le, T. C., Rambo, A. T., Fahrney, K., Vien, T. D., & Sy, D. T. (1996). Red books, green hills: The impact of economic reform on restoration ecology in the midlands of Northern Vi-etnam.
  31. Lee, J.J. 2001. Environmental Economics. Seoul: Pakyoungsa
  32. Lee, K. S. 1997. Analysis of influential factors in recycling behavior-Public OfficeAround Capi-tal City, Kapa21, 31(2), 125-140, 1997
  33. Lindhqvist, Thomas. 2000. Extended Producer Responsibility in Cleaner Production: Policy Principle to Promote Environmental Improvements of Product System. In The Interna-tional Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics: PhD thesis, Lund University, Sweden.
  34. McEntire, D. (2011). Understanding and reducing vulnerability: from the approach of liabilities and capabilities. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 20(3), 294-313. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653561111141736
  35. Mileti, D. 1999. Disasters by Design:: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States. National Academies Press.
  36. Needhidasan, S., Samuel, M., & Chidambaram, R. (2014). Electronic waste-an emerging threat to the environment of urban India. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engi-neering, 12(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/2052-336X-12-36
  37. Nam, M. U. 2004. Estimation on Cost of Withdrawal of Fluorescent Light under EPR, Seoul National University
  38. Nam, J. W. 1994. Research on Incentive of Waste Management Instruments, Dongguk University.
  39. Needhidasan, S., Samuel, M., & Chidambaram, R. (2014). Electronic wastean emerging threat to the environment of urban India. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engi-neering, 12(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/2052-336X-12-36
  40. Oh, S. R. 1997. Research on Problems and Improvement of Waste Deposit Refund, Chonnam University
  41. Oh, Y. S. 2002. Social economic cost to management of plastic, Seoul National University.
  42. OECD, 2004. Economic Aspects of Extended Producer Responsibility
  43. Quarantelli, E. L. (1992). The Environmental Disasters of The Future Will Be More and Worse but the Prospects Is not Hopeless. Disaster Research Center.
  44. Palmer, K., Walls, M., 1997. Optimal policies for solid waste disposal: taxes, subsidies, and standards. Journal of Public Economics 65, 193-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(97)00028-5
  45. Park J. W., H.S. Lee. 2002. Reform of Environmental Tax, Accounting Research 18(3): 42, 2
  46. Renaud, F. (2006), "Environmental components of vulnerability", in Birkman, J. (Ed.), Measur-ing Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: Towards Disaster Resilient Societies, United Nations University Press, Hong Kong, pp. 117-27.
  47. Seo, D. S. 2005. Problem and Improvement of EPR, Kwangwon University.
  48. Seol, Y. S. 1999. Research on The Introduction of EPR- Daejeon Metropolitan City, Seoul Na-tional University.
  49. Sigman, H., 1995. A comparison of public policies for lead recycling. Rand Journal of Economics 26, 452-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555998
  50. Spicer, A. J., & Johnson, M. R. 2004. Third-party demanufacturing as a solution for extended producer responsibility. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(1), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00182-8
  51. Tran, P., & Shaw, R. (2007). Towards an integrated approach of disaster and environment man-agement: A case study of Thua Thien Hue province, central Viet Nam. Environmental Hazards, 7(4), 271-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.03.001
  52. Tojo, Naoko. 2001 Effectiveness change in Design Change - Study of the Factors that Affect the Swedish and Japanese EEE and Automobile Manufactures. In IIIEE Reports. Thesis: The International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics.
  53. U.S EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2012. Availa-ble:http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/recycling/benefits.htm [Accessed October 21, 2014]
  54. Yang, K. H. 2003. Research on Promotion of Effectiveness-Economic Incentive, Yonsei University
  55. Yu, M.S. 1997. Research on Improvement of Waste Deposit Refund Systems, Seoul National University
  56. Yun M. Y. 2002. Research on Establishing of Interdependence System. Kyunghee University.

Cited by

  1. Does having a strong commitment matter in building sustainable networks? pp.1573-7845, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0583-7
  2. The Relationship Between Information-Sharing and Resource-Sharing Networks in Environmental Policy Governance: Focusing on Germany and Japan vol.17, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.17477/jcea.2018.17.2.176