Volume Based Waste Fee(VBMF) System for Municipal Solid Waste
Background
Implementing a Pay-as-You-Throw System
The amount of daily waste<1> generated by 10.3 million citizens, 4 million households and 780,000 businesses in 2012 was 9,189 tons per day, or 0.88 kg per person. All such waste has to be discarded according to regulations of the 25 autonomous gu-districts, who also issue the waste bags that must be used when households dispose of this waste (to be sent to incineration facilities or landfills).
Food waste must go in standard waste bags that are purchased by the consumer, or a chip- or RFID-based system must be used. Large items require that stickers be purchased from the relevant gu-districts, which are then attached to the item before discarding, or large items can be delivered to specialized waste collection agents (Ministry of Environment, Nov. 2012; Resource Recirculation Bureau, Ministry of Environment, Nov. 2012). Items that can be recycled like paper, scrap metal, large and small home appliances, fluorescent lamps, batteries, cooking oil, etc. should be separated and discarded according to government regulations (Ministry of Environment, 2011).
For general and food waste, the consumer covers all or part of the cost of waste collection and handling, which depends on the amount of waste discarded. It is called a “pay-as-you-throw” system. General waste and food waste are measured differently. General waste goes in standard bags which are made according to the standards<2> set by the government. The consumer can purchase the desired size of such bags at convenience stores, grocery stores, laundromats and other designated establishments.
The costs of collecting and handling the waste, producing the bags and paying commissions to the stores are all included in the price of the bags, making them a kind of marketable security.
There are various ways to measure food waste: an RFID-based weighing system, RFID chips (or stickers) or standard waste bags. The RFID-based weighing system imposes disposal fees according to weight. One advantage of this system is the accurate weighing of discarded waste. Disadvantages include that the system is a complicated configuration of weighing devices, a discarder recognition system and storing devices to save information on who threw away how much. Chips or stickers are used with standard containers. Daily and monthly volume measuring are all possible with this method.
Besides recyclables, large items and used coal briquettes, which are allowed to be discarded via other methods, all other waste must be discarded in Seoul according to a volume-based waste fee (VBWF) system. Failure to pay the related fees is a violation of the Waste Management Act and local ordinances, and is subject to the related penalties.
<Table 1> Breakdown of Elements in the Pay-as-You-Throw System in Seoul
|
General Waste |
Food Waste |
Measuring Methods |
Standard Bags |
RFID-based weighing system |
Standard Bags |
General: 3ℓ, 5ℓ, 10ℓ, 20ℓ, 30ℓ, 50ℓ, 75ℓ, 100ℓ |
General: 1ℓ, 2ℓ, 3ℓ, 5ℓ, 10ℓ |
Standard Bag Colors |
General & Reuse: White |
General: Yellow |
Standard Bag Materials |
PE |
PE |
Examples |
|
|
Background to Introduction of the Pay-as-You-Throw System
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Korea felt full of self-confidence thanks to its successful hosting of the Asian Games in 1986 and the Seoul Olympic Games in 1988, as well as continuing economic success. A great variety of products were available and plastic was mass-produced thanks to the development of production technologies.
So many products led to increasing amounts of waste. Seoul, the nation’s capital, could not secure the space needed for landfills to handle more waste, as the city continued expanding outwards.
As Nanji Landfill (operated from 1978 to 1993) came close to capacity, the central government led a project to establish new waste treatment facilities in the metropolitan area to treat the waste from Seoul, Incheon and Gyeonggi-do (province) in 1989. But moving forward proved very difficult due to strong opposition from residents living near the expected locations of these facilities.
The Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG) also planned to build 11 incineration facilities for all daily waste from Seoul, but encountered opposition from neighboring citizens and civil society concerned about excessive facility construction. By 1996, only the incineration facilities in Yangcheon (400 tons per day) and Nowon (800 tons per day) had been built, and only 4 more (with a total capacity for 2,850 tons of waste per day) after that. To address the increasing quantity of toxic waste, the government started to take an interest in recycling as an alternative.
Recycling boxes appeared in Seoul apartment complexes in 1990, and began to be provided to detached housing neighborhoods the following year. However, people were not familiar with the idea of separating their garbage, and in detached housing neighborhoods, half of the collected recyclables was general garbage. In addition, the changes in waste management cost a lot of money, used landfills a long distance away, and required incineration facilities. As shown in the data from 1991, waste management cost KRW 280 billion while fees covered only KRW 25.4 billion - just 9% of the total bill. Most of the expenses for waste treatment were absorbed by the general account budget, while waste generators, the general public, absorbed very little (SMG, 1992).
<Figure 1> Main Waste Management Projects Before & After Introduction of the Pay-as-You-Throw System
![](/sites/default/files/images/EV3_fig1.jpg)
However, prior to 1995, the fees for waste disposal in Seoul had been collected as a kind of tax based on building areas or property taxes, which had nothing to do with the amount of waste produced (Ki-young Yu and Jae-cheon Jeong, 1995). The pay-as-you-throw system was established through creation of the right social atmosphere, conditions for implementation, and pilot projects, etc., and has gone through several changes before it reached its current form.
Types of Waste | Grade | Basis for Calculating Fees | |
1980s | General waste (small amount) | 7 | Total building ground area |
General waste (large amount) | - | Weight | |
Business waste | 6 | Total building ground area | |
Early 1990s | Household waste | 9 | Total building ground area/ property tax |
Business waste (large amount) | 2 | Weight | |
Business Site Waste (Small Amount) | 6 | Total building ground area | |
1994 (Just before introduction of the pay-as-you-throw system) |
Household waste | 9 | Total building ground area |
Business waste (small amount) | 6 | Total building ground area | |
Business waste (normal amount) | 1 | Volume | |
Business waste (large amount) | 2 | Volume | |
Construction waste | - | Volume | |
Home appliances | 7 | Kind, volume | |
Furniture | 7 | Kind, volume | |
1995 (Enforcement of pay-as-you-throw system) |
General/Food waste | - | Size, number of standard bags |
Large items | - | Kind, size, number | |
Recyclable items | - | Free |
History
- Preparation Stage (1992~1994)
The pay-as-you-throw system was introduced in 1995, but preparations began in the early 1990s with practical arrangements started in 1992 with the government at its center. Surveys and research were conducted from September 1992 to January 1993 by the Korea Society of Waste Management to verify the usefulness of such a system. The main thrust of the survey and research were amendment of relevant legislation, measures for enforcement, expected effects, ripple effects, etc. In 1993, the government began the process of collecting the opinions of people from all walks of life regarding introduction of the system.
Public hearings and meetings with private organizations, relevant experts, cleaning companies, etc. (Feb. ~ Jul. 1993), meetings with consumer groups, groups of housewives and waste bag manufacturers (Jul. 1993), and meetings with managers of urban and provincial cleaning departments were held during the process, and opinions collected from waste subcommittees (Jul. ~ Aug. 1993). The opinions of related organizations and institutes on the legal status of standard waste bags were also heard (Sep. 1993). The result was that the waste bags could be regarded as official documents as long as the positions of mayor or district heads as well as the marks of the city hall or the gu-district offices were on the bags, and that it would be considered forgery of official documents if anyone were to create and sell their own bags that claimed to be official.
One year before the pay-as-you-throw system was introduced nationwide, pilot projects were conducted in 33 cities, counties and districts (Apr. ~ Dec. 1994). In Seoul, Jung-gu participated as a commercial area, Seongbuk-gu as a detached housing area and Songpa-gu as an apartment area (SMG, 1994). Before that, the central government announced measures to aid implementation of the system, including the waste fees, ways to distribute the standard bags, and handling the expected increase of recyclables (Nov. 1993).
During the pilot projects, the government concentrated on finding details on the waste discarded, standard waste bags, degree of public participation, flow of community opinions, etc. The government assembled a civil assessment team consisting of 7 civic groups including the YWCA, YMCA, Green Korea United, the Korean Federation of Environmental Movements and 165 monitoring agents to provide assessment and reporting on the status of the projects. There were significant concerns about negative effects, such as illegal dumping, but the assessment was mostly positive due to the 40% reduction of total waste, 100% increase in recyclables collected, the reduced cleaning costs, expansion of public awareness about reducing waste, and greater confidence in the program by civil employees.
Based on the problems that appeared during the pilot projects, the central government issued its “Guidelines on the Pay-as-You-Throw System” (Sep. 8th, 1994) to enforce it on a national scale. On November 7th, 1994, it held a meeting with the related urban and provincial officials to conduct an interim evaluation of the project by local governments. On December 7th of the same year, the government issued guidelines on how to fix the problems identified during the interim inspection, such as the expected rapid increase of regional processing of recyclables, handling the large amount of waste expected to be thrown away just before enforcement of the new system at the end of the year, and increasing the manpower it would need.
In addition, the government revised and amended related ordinances, initiated the manufacturing of the waste bags, designated the stores to sell the bags, and engaged in public relations activities, etc. in preparation for system introduction on Jan. 1st, 1995. In particular, the government carried out a public relations campaign to address complaints from the public about why they should have to pay to throw away their garbage via media outlets such as TV commercials, advertisements in the daily press, and TV talk shows, and made and distributed promotional materials like VTR tapes, PR books, and posters (Ministry of Environment and Korea Environment Institute, 2012).
<Figure 2> Main Projects in Introducing the Pay-as-You-Throw System
1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1995 |
∎ Sep. 1992~Jan. 1993 Feasibility study for introduction of the Pay-as-You-Throw System |
∎ Feb. ~ Aug. 1993 Collection of opinions of people from all walks of life ∎ Sep. 1993 Confirmation of the official status of standard bags ∎ Nov. 1993 Preparation of guidelines for the pilot projects |
∎ Apr. ~ Dec. 1994 Pilot implementation: Jung-gu, Seongbuk-gu and Songpa-gu, Seoul ∎ Monitoring of pilot projects by the civic assessment team ∎ Preparation for nationwide enforcement ∎ Nationwide PR |
∎ Jan. 1st, 1995. ~ Nationwide enforcement of the pay-as-you-throw system |
- Introduction Stage (1995)
In the beginning, many members of the public had difficulty with the volume-rate waste disposal methods. There were many cases where recyclables were not distinguished from general household waste. Some dumped randomly their household trash prior to enforcement of the pay-as-you-throw system - especially large items like cabinets and refrigerators, which intensified the confusion. However, these things happened often only in the early stages, and became less frequent as time went by.
In April 1995, the government had a meeting 100 days after implementation of the system to evaluate implementation. Before this time, a survey of 1,000 households was conducted, which showed that people had nearly completely adapted to the system within a month after implementation. Ninety-eight percent of the respondents stated they were comfortable with the system, while the most widely-used standard bags were 10ℓ, 5ℓ and 20ℓ, in that order.
The suggestions for improvement in the evaluation meeting were regarding the strength and convenience of the standard waste bags; application of the system to waste in public places; enhancement of convenience for separation of recyclables by displaying the recycling mark; timely collection of recyclables; prohibiting the collection of recyclables mixed with waste; prohibiting excessive packaging of disposable products; initiating the system in government organizations; preparation of criteria for enforcing penalties; establishing and expanding recycling networks; determining an appropriate price for standard bags; securing a budget for the pay-as-you-throw system; and supply and promotion of system-related information.
- Development Stage (From 1996)
The most troublesome problem in the beginning was how to handle the collected recyclables. This was resolved by enacting a producer responsibility regulation in 2003, which mandated the separation of recyclables into paper, plastic, scrap metal (including cans) and glass bottles. Under the pay-as-you-throw system, the amount of collected recyclables increased but the demand for recyclables remained the same. The producer responsibility regulation involved a deposit system for a limited number of items including paper packs, PET bottles, steel cans, and glass bottles. However, the system did not increase the demand for recycling, because many manufacturers gave up the deposit.
A decision was made to convert the deposit system into an expanded producer responsibility scheme, which required producers to handle their own recyclables. The applicable items were greatly expanded to include paper, plastic, scrap metal (including cans), glass bottles, large and small home appliances, fluorescent lamps and batteries. As a result, the supply of and demand for recyclables dramatically improved.
In 1997, the government began providing heavy-duty bags exclusively for waste that posed a danger for both discarders and collectors when handling. These special bags were used to hold broken glass, small amounts of construction waste, and other things sharp or heavy enough to cause physical injury, especially in the process of collection, and were made of tough and easy-to-handle poly propylene.
The standard waste bag, a core component in implementing the pay-as-you-throw system, was a very convenient tool for measuring the amount of waste in a large city like Seoul, where it is difficult to identify the discarders. But it was pointed out repeatedly that the waste bags themselves were disposable products and became waste after a single use. To address this issue, the government recommended that large grocery stores (E-mart, Homeplus, Lotte mart, National Agricultural Cooperative Federation or Nonghyup Hanaro Club and Mega Mart) begin selling these standard waste bags to their customers instead of their usual store-name grocery bags. This began in Seoul in 2010. The bag was called a reusable bag as consumers could also use it as a standard waste bag, and was sold for the same price as the standard bag at other stores.
The most innovative development was introduction of the weighted food waste disposal system. Many autonomous gu-districts could not apply the pay-per-disposal system properly for food waste, as most used the standard food waste containers and imposed the same fee on all households regardless of the amount of food waste they generated. Some districts collected this food waste free of charge. There were reasons for these differences. The standard bag was polyethylene, which became foreign material in food waste treatment, lowering the quality of feed or compost made from the food waste, and making feed or compost consumers reluctant to buy. The districts were also confused about the justification of imposing fees for food waste which could simply go into the regular garbage collection, while they were collecting recyclables free of charge.
However, it was very difficult to turn the enormous amounts of generated food waste into recycled resources or apply the expanded producer responsibility scheme. Thus, the national government decided to introduce a system of weighing food waste in order to reduce it. The SMG also enacted the system in 2003 (SMG, https://seoulsolution.kr).
The government felt that the system should operate not on the basis of volume, but on the basis of weight because food waste is heavier than general waste. As a result of this change, it was reported that food waste was reduced by 10~30% (Korea Institute of Industrial Relations and Korea Environment Corporation, Dec. 2013). Under this system, the amount of food waste is recorded by each individual when it is discarded, and households are charged monthly fees accordingly. However, the system is not used with all households, but only some apartment complexes, as system installation and operation is costly and requires space. For detached houses and restaurants, the standard bags or standard containers with identification chips are generally used (Resource Recirculation Bureau of the Ministry of Environment, Nov. 2012).
Item | RFID Weight Method | Chip Method | Standard Bag |
Recognition of Discarder |
Electronic tag/electronic card | NA | NA |
Measuring Unit | Weight | Volume | Volume |
Storing Container | Individual container | Individual container | Bag + base container |
Imposition of Fees | By household/restaurant | By household | By household |
Payment of Fees | Deferred payment | Advance payment | Advance payment |
Resulting Waste Reduction | 9~31% | 14% | 13% |
Items | RFID weighing system |
A standard container with identification chip |
Standard bags |
This metered waste fee system has continued to develop. During the process, the government periodically monitored the system to see how it was operating and to identify any problems. This included system acceptance by the general public, inconveniences when discarding, problems during cleaning, and issues related to the recycling industry in general. In the beginning, the government annually evaluated system achievements, holding a meeting in 2005 to look back on the system’s first 10 years. In 2004, it began to review statistics of standard bag sales by local governments, waste treatment facilities, ways to secure the financial resources for cleaning, enforcement of regulations against illegal dumping, etc. and issued a report. The guidelines for the waste disposal system were amended in 1997, 2001, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2012.
<Figure 3> Sourcebook on Achievements of the Waste Disposal System & Improvements to Implementation
![](/sites/default/files/images/EV3_fig3.jpg)
Achievements
Accelerating Waste Reduction
Of course, there are different arguments regarding the reasons for the reduction. According to some, the rapidly-decreasing use of coal briquettes and regulatory policy on disposable items and product packaging also affected waste reduction (Yong-seon Oh, 2006). On the other hand, another study showed that even when other factors are considered, the waste disposal system was the most significant reason behind the reduction in waste (Kwang-ho Jeong et al, 2007). Such evaluations were not really about the waste reduction itself, but on the impact of the system. The public became more sensitive to over-packaging when choosing products, and when purchasing, left behind the packing, or asked sellers to take packaging back after product delivery. Such reactions by consumers influenced manufacturers and were reflected in product design. After introduction of the pay-as-you-throw system, there were obvious changes in consumption patterns recognized by all.
1994 (Preparation) |
1995 (Enforcement) |
1996 (2nd Year) |
|
Total (tons/day) | 15,397 | 14,102 | 13,685 |
Per person (kg/day) | 1.43 | 1.33 | 1.31 |
Early Adoption of Habitual Separation of Recyclables
1993 (Fixed Ratio) |
1994 (Preparation) |
1995 (Enforcement) |
1996 (2nd Year) |
|
Total Waste (tons/day) | 16,021 | 15,397 | 14,102 | 13,685 |
Recycled Amount (tons/day) |
2,940 | 3,156 | 4,131 | 4,037 |
Recycling Rate (%) | 18.4 | 20.5 | 29.3 | 29.5 |
Fees to Cover Waste Management Costs
1993 (Fixed Ratio) |
1995 (Enforcement) |
1995/1993 (Increase) |
|
Fee Revenue (KRW Bil.) | 119.912 | 153.638 | 28% |
Economic Benefits
Increase/Decrease Amount (1996-1994, tons/year) |
Benefit per Unit (KRW/ton) |
Scale of Benefit (KRW bil./year) |
|
Change | -624,880 reduced | +144,071 | +90 |
Recycling | +321,565 | +18,901 | +6.1 |
Total Benefits | - | - | +96.1 |
Meaningful Experiences
- Thorough Preparation
The VBWF system is inconvenient for citizens as discarders of waste. Even experts opposed introduction of the system, saying that other countries hesitated out of concern for illegal dumping. Korea’s pay-as-you-throw system was introduced with the support of the government, cities and some scholars concerned about the difficulty in securing the necessary waste treatment facilities, but not the support of the majority of people.
To cope with this negative atmosphere, it was necessary to remove the institutional obstacles in advance, create an amicable situation for the system, identify the benefits and problems through pilot projects and persuade people of the benefits. It was particularly imperative to find the best methods for implementation in each city during the preparation stages. In Seoul, it was not easy to identify waste discarders because there are many commercial and residential high-rises and the city space is small and narrow. This is why Seoul decided to use standard waste bags as the way to measure the amount of waste.
However, it was desirable to use bins only for waste in areas with many detached houses and developed roads because it was possible to prevent excessive waste of disposable bags and illegal dumping through an agreement with the public on the size of waste bins and to reduce the cost of waste collection with an automated bin loading vehicle system.
Cooperation with the Public
Environmental associations played a large role in the public adapting the pay-as-you-throw system in Korea. During discussions on introduction of the system, the general public did not have a favorable opinion, due to concerns about illegal dumping to avoid paying the fees and unease with the intention of government to shift the responsibility for reducing and recycling waste onto the people. However, the positive aspects of the system became better known with people participating in site monitoring activities and pilot projects during the first year of project implementation.
The public has continued to participate in evaluations of the pilot project and the first, second and tenth years of implementation. Even now it is involved in assessing the food waste disposal system. Positive evaluations from society have contributed greatly to the change of attitude in the mass media and national consciousness.
Handling the Increased Amount of Recyclables
The collection of separated recyclables free of charge was implemented in a short time, but processing the collected recyclables became the task of the government. The biggest headache was the non-PET plastic containers (PE, PP, PS and PVC materials). While designated as recyclables, there was insufficient infrastructure to treat such plastic products. In addition, the producers were not responsible for the treatment of waste plastic because the waste handling fees were imposed on most plastic containers.
The issue was resolved in 2003 when the government lent financial support to plastic recycling operators to assist with facility installation and operations, had the public sector purchase products of recycled plastic over new plastic, and imposed on manufacturers the obligation to collect and process recyclables (including the plastic containers) where the recycling market was weak (Extended Producer Responsibility Scheme).
With introduction of the pay-as-you-throw system, an unplanned recycling component was added. Because of the strong odors from landfills, many complaints were raised one year after system introduction. The same complaints were heard about roads leading to waste treatment facilities. The cause of the problem was food waste and the paper used to wrap it. This paper acted as an odor buffer in standard bags, absorbing the leachate and blocking the smell of the food waste to some degree, but the paper was classified as a recyclable item.
The main cause of the odor was that this paper was no longer discarded with general waste, a problem that was resolved by collecting the food waste separately and changing the treatment system on a large scale. Landfill for any kind of food waste was prohibited in 2005, and the government began constructing food waste treatment facilities in 1998. Seoul has 5 such locations, with private facilities providing extra capacity.
Preventing Illegal Behavior
When reviewing the system, the most concerning side effect was the illegal dumping done to avoid paying the fees. Many people dumped household or business trash in public wastebaskets or in quiet or abandoned places and did not use the standard waste bags. To prevent this, reflectors were installed and flower gardens put where illegal dumping was common. Some districts removed public wastebaskets on downtown streets.
This reduced illegal dumping significantly, but did not eliminate it. In the meantime, the systems supporting the imposition of penalties for illegal waste disposal and providing standard bags to low-income households free of charge were prepared.
Garbage dumped in the suburbs (http://waste21.or.kr) |
Non-standard bags (http://waste21.or.kr) |
Flower bed in common dumping area (http://dong.jungnang.seoul.kr) |
Reflectors & sign (http://www.cpdc.re.kr) |
- Revision of Legislation
Each district has specific regulations on enforcing the system in its own ordinances. It regulates the kinds of waste to which the pay-as-you-throw system applies, as well as the methods of disposal, fees, standard bag type/color/material, supervision of manufacture and management of standard bags, designation of and guidelines for the stores that will sell them, and criteria on cancelling a standard bag seller agreement, etc.
The bag size, material, strength and type are determined by the Korean Standard on Plastic Products, to which all specifications are subject and those that do not meet the standard are failed during inspections. To prevent counterfeiting, the seals for printing on the bags are kept by each autonomous gu-district and handed over to the manufacturers only when they have already produced the standard bags. Anybody caught making or distributing counterfeit bags is subject to punishment under criminal law on unauthorized fabrication of official documents.
Legislation/Documentation | Description |
Waste Management Act | Recommendations on enforcement of the pay-as-you-throw system Legislation of ordinances related to enforcement of the pay-as-you-throw system Prohibition of illegal dumping and imposition of related penalties Revision of regulations related to the autonomous districts: Ordinances and regulations, guidelines on enforcement of the pay-as-you-throw system, guidelines and fees for discarding food waste |
Autonomous District Ordinances on Waste Management | Waste to which the pay-as-you-throw system applies, ways to discard the waste, fees, standard bag type/color/material, supervision of standard bag manufacturing and safe management, and designation of stores to sell standard bags |
Korean Standard on Plastic Products | Types: standard bags of PE material, standard bags of LLDPE material and standard bags containing calcium carbonate 9 types of bio-disintegrable plastic bags |
Reports on Performance | Enforcement: standard bag manufacturing and sales, waste collection method and collection cycles, financial independence rate in cleaning, disposal of large items and collection of disposable plastic bags, effectiveness of illegal dumping regulations, etc. |
Criminal Law | Manufacturing and distribution of counterfeit standard bags correspond to fabrication of official documents |
References
- Future Environment, Rampant Food Waste Dumping in the Food Waste Bag System Enforced Areas: Status Survey of Resource Circulation Society United, Max 1.42 Case by Dong, http://www.ecofuturenetwork.co.kr
- Graduate School of Environment of the Seoul National University, 1983. Study on the Efficient Management of Solid Waste in the Cities
- The Seoul Metropolitan Government, 1992, 1992 Administration of Seoul
- The Seoul Metropolitan Government, 1994, Detailed Guidelines for the Pay as you throw system
- The Seoul Metropolitan Government, RFID Food Waste Disposal System, Seoul Policy Archive (https://seoulsolution.kr)
- Yong-Seon Oh, 2006, Critical Evaluation on the Environment Improvement by the Pay as you throw system, Korean Policy Studies Review, 15(2):245-270
- Ki-yeong Yu and Jae-cheon Jeong, 1995, Problems of Fixed Ratio Fee System and Effects of Pay as you throw system: with Seoul as the Center, Journal of Korean Environmental Engineering, 17(9): 907~915
- Beon-song Lee, Ji-wuk Kim, Ki-young Yu and Sang-hu Park, 1996, Evaluation of the Pay as you throw system and Improvement Methods
- Jeong-jeon Lee, 1991, Study on Policy Improvement to Facilitate Environmental Improvement, Seminar Materials of International Trade Management Research Institute
- Our Dong News, Junghwa 1-dong, Jungnang-gu, http://dong.jungnang.seoul.kr
- Chungnam Public Design Center, Public Design Creation Projects of the Local Governments, http://www.cpdc.re.kr
- Waste 21, Illegal Dumping in the City Outskirts, http://waste21.or.kr
- Korea Institute of Industrial Relations and Korean Environment Corporation, Dec. 2013, Study on Performance Evaluation of Food Waste Disposal System and Development Plan
- Resource Recirculation Bureau of the Ministry of Environment, 2012.11, Guidelines for Pay as you throw system including Food Waste Discharge and Fees
- Ministry of Environment, 1997.5, Guidelines for Enforcement of Pay as you throw system
- Ministry of Environment, 2012.11, Guidelines for the Volume-rage Waste Disposal System
- Ministry of Environment· Korea Environment Institute, 2012, 2011 Modula Modularization Program of Economic Development Experiences: Volume-rate Waste Disposal Policy
- Minister of Environment, 2011, Guidelines for the Separate Collection of the Recyclables, etc., (Order No. 859 of Ministry of Environment, 18 Aug. 2009)
Policy Implementation Period
- 1994 Piloted volume-based waste fee system (Commercial arcades - Jung-gu / detached housing area – Seongbuk-gu / apartments - Songpa gu)
- 1995 Volume-based waste fee system launched (first nationwide implementation)
- 2010 Reusable VBWF bags in place
- 2013 Volume-based food waste fee system launched
Figure 1. Seoul’s Waste Treatment Before & After Launching of the Volume-Based Waste Fee System
Source: The Seoul Institute (2015)
Background Information
In the meantime, due to the shift in the city’s population, who used to flock to the capital for jobs and accommodations but now began moving out to the suburbs, Seoul’s neighboring cities were becoming “new towns” for its excess population. As a result, it became more difficult to secure landfill sites in those suburbs and even more impossible to do so in Seoul, which had been major waste treatment facility. Gyeonggi Province and Incheon had similar problems. These three governments took the lead in promoting establishment of Sudokwon Landfill Site, which they could share. However, due to the widespread dislike of facilities like landfills, this also proved very difficult.
While searching for suitable landfill sites and encountering strong resistance, Seoul established a waste management plan that focused on reducing dependence on landfills in 1991. The plan mainly covered the construction of 11 incineration facilities, but this was also severely opposed by residents of the designated facility areas. Civic groups pointed out problems in the plan, arguing the size and number of planned incinerator facilities was excessive. As a result, only 4 were built in Seoul.
As an alternative to reducing the volume of waste to be buried, recycling was promoted. In 1990, recycling bins started being delivered to apartment complexes. Due to the level of success, the bins were delivered to detached houses as well. However, residents were not accustomed to separating their recyclables and garbage so it was not unusual to find trash in the recycling bins.
Constructing incinerator facilities and promoting recycling to avoid having to find landfill sites farther away from the central business district cost a lot of money. In 1991, Seoul and the autonomous gu-districts spent a whopping KRW 280 billion in waste management while residents, who disposed of the majority of garbage, spent only KRW 25.4 billion, or 9% of the cost of waste management.
Due to such situations in the 1980s and 1990s, governments became desperate to find ways to gain active public participation in recycling and pass on more of the growing costs of waste management onto the public.
The VBWF system is a sort of solution based on the “polluter pays” principle. This idea in support of the need for a VBWF system had already been raised in the 1980s. However, before this system, waste treatment fees were levied according to the gross area of the building or the amount of property tax. Back then, waste treatment fees were collected as a type of tax. Table 8 below summarizes the changes in waste fee systems up until implementation of the VBWF system in 1995.
Table 1. Seoul’s Waste Fee System until 1995
Type of Waste | Fee Grade | Basis for Fee Imposition | |
1980s | General waste (Small quantities) |
7 | Building total floor area |
General waste (Large quantities) |
- | Weight | |
Business waste | 6 | Building total floor area | |
Early 1990s | Residential waste | 9 | Building total floor area/property tax |
Business waste (Large quantities) |
2 | Weight | |
Business waste (Small quantities) |
6 | Building total floor area | |
1994 (Preparation Period) |
Residential waste | 9 | Building total floor area |
Business waste (Small quantities) |
6 | Building total floor area | |
Business waste (Medium-sized quantities) |
1 | Volume | |
Business waste (Large quantities) |
2 | Volume | |
Construction waste | - | Volume | |
Discarded home appliances | 7 | Type/Volume | |
Discarded furniture | 7 | Type/Volume | |
1995 (Implemented Year) |
General/Food waste | - | Size/Number of standard trash bags |
Bulky items | - | Type/Size/Number | |
Recyclables | - | Free |
The Importance of the Policy
The VBWF system was designed to levy fees in proportion to the amount of waste disposed of and to the costs required for handling. People are induced to reduce their waste on a voluntary basis. Recyclable goods are exempt from collection fees, thus inducing the separation of recyclables from general garbage, which benefits both residents and the authorities. Less waste means less in fees for residents and less dependence on incinerator facilities and landfills. The VBWF system is meaningful as a policy as it changes residents’ waste disposal patterns.
The efforts to change the public’s pattern of waste disposal through awareness campaigns or education may be more convenient but may not gain the desired results or gain them too slowly. As a way to change attitudes against protection of the environment, government rules and regulations have long been resorted to but enforcement requires human resources, adding high costs to policy implementation or a lack of enforcement due to insufficient personnel. A regulation-oriented approach may not encourage people to voluntarily reduce waste below a certain level. On the contrary, when residents are encouraged to change their behavioral patterns through economic incentives (the VBWF system in this case) proportional to the reduced amount of disposed waste, this is more successful. In the end, the VBWF system is a very environmentally-desirable and effective way to bring about changes in people’s behavioral patterns.
Relevance with Other Policies
Therefore, it is very important to make a reasonable estimation and strike a balance between the amount of waste generated, waste recovered as resources, and waste to be processed by burning or burying. The VBWF system has a particularly direct impact on related waste management policies including those on waste management facilities, as it makes a huge contribution to suppressing waste generation, the first phase of waste management policy.
Until the 1980s, the private sector took the lead in recycling, and the focus was on collecting discarded paper, scrap metal and glass bottles. Recyclable waste was collected by “junk men”. For low-income earners, scavenging for recyclable items had been a crucial means of earning a living at the Nanjido landfill. Recycling bins installed by civic groups and the Korea Resources Recovery and Reutilization Corporation (KORECO) started to appear by the time the difficulties began in securing landfill site and incineration facilities in 1990.
Recycling bins started to spread into detached housing areas in 1992. As societal conflict intensified over incineration facilities and landfills, expectations were pinned on turning waste into recyclable items as an alternative to incineration and reclamation. Of course, recyclables were not yet completely separated before disposal, and it was not unusual to find them mixed together. The VBWF system implemented in 1995 solved such problems. It has been remarkably effective in Korea towards spreading habits of separating trash and disposing of copious amounts of paper, plastic containers and cans, by mandating the purchase of standard waste bags to attach a cost to the amount of garbage thrown away.
The Waste Management Act was revised in 1998, which stated that beginning in 2005, the direct disposal in landfills of food waste generated in urban areas would be completely banned. With implementation of the VBWF system, residents expressed opposition to nearby waste treatment facilities, as food waste was disposed of with the VBWF bags, which gave rise to various environmental problems including serious odor and harmful insects.
Meanwhile, Seoul’s autonomous gu-districts, responsible for municipal solid waste, faced more difficulties when the supply of recyclables increased. It was not unusual to see recyclable items piled up in regional recycling depositories as the market was not prepared for such amounts. Also, due to a freefall in prices from the glut, the private sector refused to purchase any more. Selecting and securing food waste treatment facilities was also a serious headache as residents around the potential sites were violently opposed to them and the other option of using private facilities was simply too expensive.
In the end, the VBWF system met the policy goals of reducing waste and separating garbage and recyclables for disposal but it generated the demand for policies to secure a market for the supply of recyclable materials and establishing food waste management facilities, which led to the introduction of Expanded Producer Responsibility (EPR) in 2003 and a ban on direct disposal of food waste in landfills in 2005.
Policy Objectives
- Reduce waste generation at source
- Establish habit of separating garbage and recyclable materials before disposal
- Reduce dependence on waste processing facilities (incinerating facilities and landfills)
Main Policy Contents
General waste refers to waste to be incinerated or buried. Waste volume is measured through standard garbage bags, which are divided into household, commercial, and business use by dong- or gu-district offices. Bags are in 2, 3, 5, 10, 20, 30, 50, 75, and 100-liter sizes, with people able to purchase the size and quantity of bags they wish at designated stores. General waste is therefore handled according to volume.
Food waste can be disposed of in a variety of ways: standard bags sold by local authorities, standard plastic containers with electronic chips or stickers, and for payments based on weight using an electronic card with RFID. For RFID-based handling of food waste, the person disposing swipes a card before gaining access to the residential waste bins. The chip contains the user’s name and address and allows the authorities to monitor the weight of waste disposed with that card. The system accumulates fees on a monthly basis, and each household receives a monthly food waste disposal bill.
Other items such as paper, plastic packaging, glass bottles, scrap metal, discarded home appliances, discarded fluorescent lamps, used batteries and used cooking oil are classified as recyclable and should be disposed of in the way prescribed by the Ministry of Environment.
General Waste | Food Waste | |
Measurement | VBWF bags (Standard waste bags) | RFID-based weight measuring device Chip or sticker VBWF bags (Standard waste bags) |
Types of VBWF bags |
For General Use: 3ℓ, 5ℓ, 10ℓ, 20ℓ, 30ℓ, 50ℓ, 75ℓ, 100ℓ Reusable Bags: 10ℓ, 20ℓ For Public Use: 30ℓ, 50ℓ, 100ℓ |
General Use: 1ℓ, 2ℓ, 3ℓ, 5ℓ, 10ℓ *VBWF bags larger than 20ℓ are allowed only during national holidays or kimchi-making season when more waste is unavoidable. |
VBWF bag colors | Bags for general use and reusable bags: White For Public Use: blue |
General Use: Yellow |
VBWF bag materials | PE bags Biodegradable bags |
PE bags Biodegradable bags |
Since 2013, food waste has been disposed of according to a VBWF system in Seoul. Chips or stickers require households to buy a payment chip or sticker and attach it to a standard collection container for pick up. The container serves as a disposable or monthly volume measuring device. The advantage of an RFID system is that it accurately weighs waste volume, after which the appropriate fees can be charged. However, it can be quite complicated as it requires a weight measuring device, a chip recognition system, and volume tracking & storage devices.
Persons disposing of large items must buy a sticker for each item from the local authorities and place it on the items before pick up, or pay for private garbage haulers to pick up.
Disposal Fees
Policy Effects
1) Household Solid Waste Reduced
Change | 1994 (Preparation) |
1995 (Implementation) |
1996 (Institutionalization) |
Total Volume (ton/day) | 15,397 | 14,102 | 13,685 |
Volume Per Person (kg/day) | 1.43 | 1.33 | 1.31 |
2) Contribution to the Habit of Separating Garbage & Recyclables Before Disposal
Recycling performance (in terms of amount) in 1996 had increased by 881 tons/day over 1994. As a percentage of all waste being handled, recyclable materials rose significantly from 20.5% in 1994, to 29.3% in 1995 (the year VBWF system was introduced), to 29.5% in 1996. The separation of garbage and recyclables had successfully reduced demand for waste treatment facilities.
1993 (Base Rate) |
1994 (Preparation) |
1995 (Implementation) |
1996 (Institutionalization) |
|
Waste Generated (tons/day) | 16,021 | 15,397 | 14,102 | 13,685 |
Waste Generated by the Recyclables Generation (tons/day) | 2,940 | 3,156 | 4,131 | 4,037 |
Recycling rate (%) |
18.4 | 20.5 | 29.3 | 29.5 |
3) Covering Waste Treatment Costs with VBWF System Profit
1993 (Base) | 1995 (Implementation) | Rate of Increase | |
VBWF Revenue (KRW billion) |
119.912 | 153.638 | 28% |
4) Economic Benefit
Category | Change (1996-1994, tons/year) |
Benefits (KRW/ton) |
Scale of Benefits (KRW bil./year) |
Change | -624,880 | 144,071 | 90.0 |
Recycled | +321,565 | 18,901 | 6.1 |
Total Benefits | - | - | 96.1 |
Challenges and Solutions
1) Supply of Recyclable Waste
Recyclable waste is categorized into paper, plastic, scrap metal (including cans) and glass bottles. The VBWF system, which stipulates that collection of recyclable goods shall be for free, helped establish, in a short period, the habit of separating recyclables from garbage. In the meantime, recyclables had not been well utilized, which became the burden of the government. Particularly problematic was what use to make of non-PET plastic containers (PE, PP, PS or PVC). Even though they are designated as recyclables, the supporting infrastructure was inadequate. Moreover, as the VBWF system focused on imposing charges on plastic containers, producers were not responsible for recyclable waste. A deposit system was in place, which levied a refundable container deposit on consumers. However, that system applied to only a few items such as paper packs, PET bottles, steel cans and glass bottles. Unfortunately, many producers gave up the deposit, rendering the deposit system ineffective in utilizing the collected recyclable waste.
Solutions
The government offered loans to plastic recycling facilities to assist with installation and operation. In addition, products manufactured with recycled plastics were preferentially purchased by the public sector. Also, in 2003, an expanded producer responsibility (EPR) was imposed on manufacturers, which replaced the deposit system and held the manufacturer responsible for the costs of managing their products at end of life. The EPR’s coverage was also extended to include paper packs, plastic containers, scrap metals (including steel cans), glass bottles, large and small home appliances, discarded fluorescent lamps, and used batteries. This dramatically improved the supply and demand situation.
2) Food Waste
Difficulties in Implementing the VBWF System
Even though the VBWF system was in place, food waste was thrown out in the standard food waste bin in most autonomous gu-districts and a flat rate levied on each household regardless of the amount generated. Some districts did not use the VBWF bags and collected the food waste free of charge. The standard bag was polyethylene, which became foreign material in food waste treatment, lowering the quality of feed or compost made from the food waste, and making feed or compost consumers reluctant to buy. The districts also had a hard time justifying imposing fees for food waste which could simply go into the regular garbage collection, while they were collecting recyclables free of charge.
Solutions
It was very difficult to turn the enormous amounts of generated food waste into recycled resources or apply the expanded producer responsibility scheme. Thus, the SMG decided to introduce a system of weighing food waste in order to reduce it. The government felt that the system should operate not on the basis of volume, but on the basis of weight because food waste is heavier than general waste. As a result of this change, it was reported that food waste was reduced by 10~30% (Korea Institute of Industrial Relations and Korea Environment Corporation, Dec. 2013). Under this system, the amount of food waste is recorded by each individual when it is discarded, and households are charged monthly fees accordingly. However, the system is not used with all households, but only some apartment complexes, as system installation and operation is costly and requires space. For detached houses and restaurants, the standard bags or standard containers with identification chips are generally used.
Odors from Food Waste
Because of the strong odors from landfills, many complaints were raised the first year of system introduction. The same complaints were heard about roads leading to waste treatment facilities. The cause of the problem was food waste and the paper used to wrap it. This paper acted as an odor buffer in standard bags, absorbing the leachate and blocking the smell of the food waste to some degree, but since the VBWF system was introduced, this paper was classified as a recyclable item and separated.
Solution
The problem of odor was resolved by a massive change in the system for handling food waste, where it was disposed of, collected, and processed separately. Since 1998, the SMG has embarked on the construction and operation of 5 public food treatment facilities and also has commissioned private facilities as well. In 2005, food waste was banned from any landfills.
3) Waste Bags
Material: Broken glass and construction waste are sharp and heavy, often injuring sanitary workers, particularly during collection.
Solution
Since 1997, special VBWF bags have been manufactured especially for such physically dangerous waste. These bags are made of durable poly propylene.
Environmental Issues
VBWF bags, the essence of the VBWF system, are very convenient, especially in big cities like Seoul as the system inherently passes the cost of handling waste onto the people who generate it. However, many have asked whether it is appropriate to use single-use VBWF bags.
Solution
As a way to partially resolve this, the government had shopping giants (including E-mart, Homeplus, Lotte Mart, Nonghyup Hanaro Mart, and Mega Mart) sell VBWF bags to shoppers instead of offering their customary free plastics bags. These VBWF bags are called “reusable” in Korea as they are used at least once as shopping bags and then finally as VBWF bags. The price of the bags is identical to VBWF bags available elsewhere.
4) Negative Public Sentiment toward the VBWF System
The VBWF system was instituted with the strong support of government, cities and some academics who felt a sense of crisis due to the difficulties in securing sites for waste treatment facilities, but not with the support of the general public. After all, the system is quite inconvenient from the perspective of citizens, who generate the waste, and many experts argued that other nations would not introduce it for fear of widespread illegal dumping.
Solution
To overcome the negative feelings about the VBWF system, the authorities made efforts to get rid of institutional stumbling blocks and explored the benefits and effects as well as possible problems, and were able to persuade the population.
- Thorough Preparation
It was imperative to figure out what type of VBWF system was best for the city during the preparation stages. Seoul chose the VBWF bags as a means to measure waste volumes as otherwise it is quite costly to identify every person who disposes of waste in a densely-populated city with plenty of residential and commercial high-rises.
However, it was desirable to use bins only for waste in areas with many detached houses and developed roads because it was possible to prevent excessive waste of throw-away VBWF bags and illegal dumping through an agreement with the public on the size of waste bins and to reduce the cost of waste collection with an automated bin loading vehicle system.
- Cooperation with Civic Groups
Environmental associations played a large role in the public adapting the pay-as-you-throw system in Korea. During discussions on introduction of the system, these associations did not have a favorable opinion, due to concerns about illegal dumping to avoid paying the fees and unease with the intention of government to shift the responsibility for reducing and recycling waste onto the people. However, the positive aspects of the system became better known with people participating in site monitoring activities and pilot projects during the first year of project implementation. These associations have continued to participate in evaluations of the pilot project and of the first, second and tenth years of implementation. Even now they are involved in assessing the food waste disposal system. Positive evaluations from society have contributed greatly to the change of attitude in the mass media and national consciousness.
5) Illegal Dumping
When reviewing the system, the most concerning side effect was the illegal dumping done to avoid paying the fees. Many people dumped household or business trash in public wastebaskets or in quiet or abandoned places and did not use the standard waste bags.
Solution
To prevent this, reflectors were installed and flower gardens put where illegal dumping was common. Some districts removed public wastebaskets on downtown streets. This reduced illegal dumping significantly, but did not eliminate it. In the meantime, the systems supporting the imposition of penalties for illegal waste disposal and providing standard bags to low-income households free of charge were prepared.
Figure 4. Illegal Dumping & Countermeasures
6) Legal Framework for Institutionalization of the Volume-based Waste Fee System
- Legal Grounds for the Volume-based Waste Fee System
The basis for enforcement of the VBWF system is the Waste Management Act. Local governments are authorized to determine the details of implementation through ordinances. The Act also deals with penalties for illegal dumping.
Each regional authority has specific regulations on enforcing the system in its own ordinances. It regulates the kinds of waste to which the pay-as-you-throw system applies, as well as the methods of disposal, fees, standard bag type/color/material, supervision of manufacture and management of standard bags, designation of and guidelines for the stores that will sell them, and criteria on cancelling a standard bag seller agreement, etc.
The bag size, material, strength and type are determined by the Korean Standard on Plastic Products, to which all specifications are subject and those that do not meet the standard are failed during inspections.
To prevent counterfeiting, the seals for printing on the bags are kept by each regional authority and handed over to the manufacturers only when they have already produced the standard bags. Anybody caught making or distributing counterfeit bags is subject to punishment under criminal law on unauthorized fabrication of official documents.
Table 7. Legal Framework for Implementation of Seoul’s VBWF System
Legislation/Documentation | Details |
Waste Management Act | ‣Recommendations on enforcement of the VBWF system ‣Legislation of ordinances related to enforcement of the VBWF system ‣Prohibition of illegal dumping and imposition of related penalties ‣Revision of regulations related to the regional authorities: Ordinances and regulations, guidelines on enforcement of the VBWF system, guidelines and fees for discarding food waste |
Autonomous District Ordinances on Waste Management | ‣Waste to which the pay-as-you-throw system applies, ways to discard the waste, fees, standard bag type/color/material, supervision of standard bag manufacturing and safe management, and designation of stores to sell standard bags |
Korea Federation of Plastic Industry Cooperation (KFPIC) | ‣Types: VBWF bags made of PE, LLDPE, or containing LDPE (CaCO3+HDPE) ‣9 types of biodegradable VBWF bags |
Progress Reports | ‣Contents: Implementation, manufacture and sales of VBWF bags, method and frequency of waste collection, financial independence of waste management and financial dependence allotment rate, discharge of bulky waste and collection of disposable plastic bags, enforcement of illegal activities, etc. |
Criminal Law | ‣Manufacturing and distribution of counterfeit standard bags correspond to fabrication of official documents. |
Phased Price Increase of VBWF Bags
Collection & Transport Fee | Treatment | Bag Manufacture | Profit | Total | Deviation | ||
General Waste | 20L (Base Cost) |
402 | 190 | 51 | 22 | 665 | 1.00 |
20L (Current) | 308 | 12 | 21 | 22 | 363 | 0.55 | |
Food Waste |
2L (Base Price) |
142 | 149 | 10 | 4 | 305 | 1.00 |
2L (Current) |
101 | 5 | 10 | 4 | 120 | 0.39 |
National Average | Average in Metropolitan Cities | Seoul | Busan | Daegu | Incheon | Gwangju | Daejeon | Ulsan | |
Price (KRW) | 457 | 650 | 363 | 850 | 430 | 620 | 740 | 660 | 600 |
As residents’ share of waste treatment costs remained low, district financial strain worsened. While the price of VBWF bags had not changed much since 1995 (the year the system was introduced), the cost of waste management continued rising. In addition, VBWF bag sales have had a direct impact on each district’s financial condition as, starting in 2015, profits from these sales have been directly managed by the districts.
Current Fee | Average of All Autonomies | 2015 | 2017 | |
General waste (20ℓ) | KRW 340~400 | KRW 363 | KRW 437 | KRW 492 |
Food waste (2ℓ) |
KRW 40~160 | KRW 120 | KRW 133 | KRW 187 |
Seoul released guidelines on the price rise in its efforts to address this impending crisis, bringing the wide-ranging prices of VBWF bags from district to district to greater similarity and increasing the lowest price of VBWF bags in Seoul in phases until 2017.
In other words, by 2018, the price of VBWF bags will have been raised gradually to where prices in all autonomous gu-districts in Seoul will be similar. The final prices for 20 liter VBWF bags will be KRW 492 and KRW 187 for 2 liter food waste bags.
To sum up, these price increases mainly aim to reduce the financial burden of local districts, as well as reducing waste.
People would throw away less if VBWF bags cost more, and even go so far as to not generate as much waste in the first place. To these ends, the VBWF system has been instituted and the prices raised.
Model Cases of the Volume-Based Waste Fee System
The model cases in Dobong-gu, Seoul
Separate Disposal and Collection of Recyclable Waste
Dobong-gu (gu is an administrative district) came up with different guidelines for each of 6 housing types. Basically, disposal of waste from apartment complexes could be done independently by residents while those living in other residential areas required active involvement of the district office in the collection and disposal of waste and recyclables.
a) Professional Collection System
Garbage collection teams were organized in each dong (sub-district), and two personnel (a cleaner and a driver) took a waste management vehicle to collect the recyclable waste at the side of the road, joined by a city employee responsible for waste management from the dong-district office. These three persons entered into a business relationship with recycling shops on behalf of the dong district. The team members brought and sold the collected recyclable materials at the shops. Profitability was maximized and resident involvement increased.
b) Compensation for Recyclable Materials
The Volume-based Waste Fee System is a good way to encourage the separation of waste for disposal and collection but can seem very inconvenient to residents. It does not make any sense if the recyclable materials are to be collected free of charge while residents are asked to considerably inconvenience themselves in following the system. Compensation (toilet paper) given for the recyclable materials served to motivate residents to participate and to promote the system in a short space of time.
c) Separation of Recyclables into 5 Types
There are 5 types of recyclable materials - newspapers, other paper, milk cartons, bottles, metal - and there are certain ways of disposing of each. Once separated, these recyclables could be sold at recycling shops immediately upon collection.
d) Daily Collection Drive in a Single Zone
The one-size-fits-all approach was not pursued in waste collection for dong-districts, but flexibility added instead to ensure appropriate collection methods and schedules, etc. In other words, they divided the entire dong into five zones and focused on the promotional drive and thorough collection of waste in one zone each day, rather than covering all five. The sanitary workers were ordered not to collect garbage that had been disposed of improperly at the door and induce the residents to load their garbage bags onto the waste collection truck when they heard the truck’s electronic tune.
e) Collection and Selling on the Same Day
As the recyclable materials were collected in the morning and sold in the afternoon, a recyclable selection yard was no longer necessary. The recovered materials were sold directly to private recycling shops as well as to the public recycling companies. In that way, profit from management of recyclables could be returned to the residents.
f) Implications
The key drivers for success were 1) the active involvement of residents who were encouraged to do what they had to, 2) high proceeds from the sale of recovered recyclables by the relevant administrative authorities, 3) return of the proceeds to residents, and 4) efforts by the authorities to motivate residents to participate. To ensure success, in-depth educational sessions were conducted, hosted by the head of the dong-district office. And instead of perfunctory committee gatherings, civil servants had face-to-face meetings with residents to promote the program.
References
- Future Environment, Rampant Food Waste Dumping in the Food Waste Bag System Enforced Areas: Status Survey of Resource Circulation Society United, Max 1.42 Case by Dong, http://www.ecofuturenetwork.co.kr
- Graduate School of Environment of the Seoul National University, 1983. Study on the Efficient Management of Solid Waste in the Cities
- The Seoul Metropolitan Government, 1992, 1992 Administration of Seoul
- The Seoul Metropolitan Government, 1994, Detailed Guidelines for the Pay as you throw system
- The Seoul Metropolitan Government, RFID Food Waste Disposal System, Seoul Policy Archive (https://seoulsolution.kr)
- Yong-Seon Oh, 2006, Critical Evaluation on the Environment Improvement by the Pay as you throw system, Korean Policy Studies Review, 15(2):245-270
- Ki-yeong Yu and Jae-cheon Jeong, 1995, Problems of Fixed Ratio Fee System and Effects of Pay as you throw system: with Seoul as the Center, Journal of Korean Environmental Engineering, 17(9): 907~915
- Beon-song Lee, Ji-wuk Kim, Ki-young Yu and Sang-hu Park, 1996, Evaluation of the Pay as you throw system and Improvement Methods
- Jeong-jeon Lee, 1991, Study on Policy Improvement to Facilitate Environmental Improvement, Seminar Materials of International Trade Management Research Institute
- Our Dong News, Junghwa 1-dong, Jungnang-gu, http://dong.jungnang.seoul.kr
- Chungnam Public Design Center, Public Design Creation Projects of the Local Governments, http://www.cpdc.re.kr
- Waste 21, Illegal Dumping in the City Outskirts, http://waste21.or.kr
- Korea Institute of Industrial Relations and Korean Environment Corporation, Dec. 2013, Study on Performance Evaluation of Food Waste Disposal System and Development Plan
- Resource Recirculation Bureau of the Ministry of Environment, 2012.11, Guidelines for Pay as you throw system including Food Waste Discharge and Fees
- Ministry of Environment, 1997.5, Guidelines for Enforcement of Pay as you throw system
- Ministry of Environment, 2012.11, Guidelines for the Volume-rage Waste Disposal System
- Ministry of Environment· Korea Environment Institute, 2012, 2011 Modula Modularization Program of Economic Development Experiences: Volume-rate Waste Disposal Policy
- Minister of Environment, 2011, Guidelines for the Separate Collection of the Recyclables, etc., (Order No. 859 of Ministry of Environment, 18 Aug. 2009)
- Yoo, Ki-young (2015), Seoul Solution Waste, The Seoul Institute , ‘Waste’ section, The Seoul Institute
- Seoul Metropolitan Government, 1992, 92 Seoul City Administration
- Minister of Environment, 2011, Guide in separate discharge of recyclable resources and etc. (Ministry of Environment, Directive, No.859, 2009. 8. 18)
- Ministry of Environment, 2012. 11, Volume based Waste Fee system implementation guide
- Ministry of Environment, Resources Recirculation Bureau, (2012) Implementation guide on volume-based waste fee system for the discharge of food waste
- Sohn, Youngbae(2001), Volume-based waste fee system, Who established it and how did it go? ‘Monthly magazine waste 21’, 2(7) : 1-5
- Oh, yong-sun, 2006, A Critical Evaluation on the Effect of Environmental Improvement by Volume-based Waste Fee System, 「Korean Association for Policy Studies Newsletter」, 15(2) : 245-270
- Korea Institute for Industrial Research·Korea Environment Corporation, (2013). A study on the performance evaluation and development of volume-based food waste fee system
- Ministry of Environment·Korea Environment Institute, 2012, Modularization of Korea's economic development experience : Volume-based wastee fee system
- SBS, 2015. 8. 6, The price of volume-based waste fee bags, should it be raised?