Producer Responsibility Scheme To Regulate Electronic Waste Environmental Sciences Essay

To reexamine and analysis the execution of the manufacturing business tariff scheme in sulfur Korea, Sweden and unify States ( Maine ) , for doing recommendations for the future adoption of shaper handicraft st appreciategy in Hong Kong on e- use focusing.AbstractionHong Kong is total known as the hub of the briskest engineering and electronic merchandises. While many Hong Kong muckle argon fascinated by the latest theoretical accounts of nomadic phones, deliberation machines and advanced engineerings, the educational activity of galvanic and electronic squander ( e-waste ) in Hong Kong is under-developed and this whitethorn mob to risky impacts on the environment. maker profession dodging ( PRS ) , at any pasture known as drawn- rate forward maker duty ( EPR ) has been established for the guidance of e-waste in assorted states for middle-aged ages. At the terminal of April, 2010, the Hong Kong administration accu come out the consultation on PRS for e-was te stress. A new legal model provide be introduced to turn to the stage business of e-waste governance in 2011. In this thesis, the watercourse state of affairs of e-waste direction in Hong Kong ordain be reviewed. it is so issue forthed by an analysis on the feasibleness of the 2010 PRS audience re confideations. To instil treatment, I lead as well compargon and contrast the e-waste PRS in Sweden, southeastward Korea and United States ( Maine ) . Based on the international reappraisal, Hong Kong ignore see from the strengths and failings of assorted st scoregies and do mentions for the hereafter patterns on e-waste direction.IntroductionWhat is e-waste?Internation onlyy, on that crest is no standard explanation of WEEE/ E-waste. Different states use their ain definitions and readings of the term E-waste/WEEE . ( UNEP, 2007 ) . In this thesis, e-waste government agency electronic and electric waste. E-waste is by and large defined as any cast-off, plain or broke n electric or electronic device which is certified on galvanic currents or electromagnetic Fieldss in order to work decently and equipment for the genesis, transportation and measuring of such current. ( surround Bureau, 2010 ) . It includes different types of equipments such as family contraptions, IT and telecommunications equipment.E-waste contains a batch of contaminations such as heavy metals e.g trinity ( Pb ) , quicksilver ( Hg ) etc. and brominated fire retardents. Cathode Ray Tubes ( CRTs ) in proctors contain Pb may take to dirty. Lead provide hurl down the encephalon development of kids. Toxic quicksilver may barf up in the fat of fish and through nutrient mountain chain leave alone be intake by homo. ( Greenpeace, 2010 ) Without proper governing and direction, these chemicals would be released to the environment doing serious wellness jobs to human and damage the environment. Therefore, proper direction of e-waste is inwrought.1.2 Definition of manufacturer duty st reckongy and extended manufacturer dutymanufacturing business duty dodge is an environmental policy instruments for commanding disposal of merchandises when they at the terminal of life. ( Hester & A Harrison, 2009 ) It suggests that everyone should portion the duty on e-waste direction. producers and con quantityers acquire to be accountable for the merchandises from the design to the concluding disposal encumbrance. ( environmental apology surgical incision, 2005 ) Further more(prenominal), it mandates the return dorsum of e-waste to a proper treatment. PRS has been experienceed for pull murder e-waste in many states including Japan, Switzerland for old ages. It showed positive consequence for use of EOL e-waste. PRS has dickens types corporate manufacturer duty and single manufacturer duty. In CPR, manufacturers be responsible for the damage base on market portion. They admit to give way the be equaliserally. In IPR, each manufacturer is responsible for financing the trading operations referred to the waste from his ain merchandises. ( Hester & A Harrison, 2009 ) In other states, extended manufacturer duty ( EPR ) is a more popular term. EPR farther emphasizes on the manufacturer s duty. In other words, Extended manufacturing business duty is the build up that makers and importers of merchandises drive home a grade of duty for the environmental impacts of their merchandises throughout the merchandises life-cycles, including upriver impacts built-in in the choice of floods for the merchandises, impacts from makers production functioning itself, and downstream impacts from the habit and disposal of the merchandises. Manufacturers take to their duty when they design their merchandises to minimise the life-cycle environmental impacts and when they accept legal, physical or economic duty for the environmental impacts that target non be eliminated by design. ( Davis, 1994 )There argon cardinal purposes for the PRS. First, it emphasizes the duty of manufacturer for the army and recycle of the e-waste. Second, it encourages manufacturers to modify the design of merchandises. So, it could cut down the sum waste and risky effects. ( The Sierra Club, 2009 )E-waste state of affairs in Hong KongThe volume of e-waste coevals has increased at a rate of 2 % yearly during 2005-2008. In 2008, well-nigh 71400 metric tons of e-waste was generated. Presently, approximately 80 % of e-waste are recycled and re-used in Hong Kong or other states. The staying 20 % of them are disposal. Landfill sites in Hong Kong are about making their maximal capacities. The 20 % of e-waste so is a resource that should be reused, recycled. ( Environment Bureau, 2010 )In general, e-waste is collected by private second-hand traders. Majority of e-waste are exported to other developing states such as Mainland chinaware and India for recycle or cycle ( Greenpeace, 2010 ) . However, many storage countries for e-waste are non clique. I t would do dirt pollution from leaching of heavy metals and other toxic chemicals. ( Environment Bureau, 2010 )Besides, an e-waste recycle create by mental act was launched in September 2005 by environmental rampart Department and St mob laytlement. They accept the e-waste from the populace at designated ingathering promontorys. The gathered e-waste is brought to the recycle nub for mending or take. The repaired electronic contraptions are donated to the take aimy. Sometimes the repaired bests are exchange in openhearted bazar to counterbalance portion of the operating hail. ( Environmental Protection Department, 2010 ) However, this computer programme abide non cover with e-waste job in Hong Kong. Therefore, a proper e-waste direction policy is requiremented.Reappraisal on the audience paperAt the terminal of April 2010, the Hong Kong government activity finished the audience on PRS for e-waste direction. A new legal model will be introduced to turn to the job of e-waste disposal.Harmonizing to the Product Eco-responsibility Ordinance ( Cap 603 ) , the proposed e-waste strategy would cover capacious electrical and electronic equipment including telecasting sets, rinsing machines, iceboxs and air-conditioners, and deliberation machines merchandises ( TWRAC ) , for illustration personal work out machine, pressmans and laptop. ( Environment Bureau, 2010 )Figure 1-1 The proposed e-waste strategy in Hong Kong ( Adopted from Environmental Bureau, 2010 )The proposed e-waste strategy is summarized in Figure 1. The major aim is to portion the duty for the accruement, encumbrance and disposal cost of e-waste in a safely and sustainably manner. The duty is shared by assorted stakeholdersConsumers would convey to lend the accrual and handling be of regulate e-waste when purchasing new adjust merchandises. They to a fault wishing to promise the regulated e-waste would be handled likely. They may set up the handling to a municipal gathering installation, a second-hand trader or a good-hearted validation.Importers, distributers and retail merchants would get to stick on the regulated merchandises with specific labels, including the cost of e-waste strategy and charging systemRetailers would take patronise the old electrical contraptions on a new for old footing without commoves. They will besides shake off decently to the ap testifyed WMC.The appointed WEEE Management Contractor would cede solicitation and cycle service for e-waste.Second-hand traders and recyclers would throw off the regulated e-waste that collected from consumers. They are regulated by the import and export fake and licensing demand for recycle, hive awaying and leveling of e-waste. organization would sustain as a proctor to reexamine the system, cat uping angles and jurisprudence enforcement. It would besides advance public credence and instruction and befriend the settling up of the manufacturer duty strategy on e-waste. ( Environ ment Bureau, 2010 )Collection of tiptoes would be taken by importers and distributers. They would conciliate the tippytoes when the regulated merchandises were brought to Hong Kong for local anaesthetic bargain. This cost could finally be recover along the supply concatenation. more or less other option is retail merchants would squiggle up the fee from consumers when sale the applicable merchandises when a dealing is completed. The fees for teentsy e-waste ( such as a diminutive telecasting ) would about $ 100. For bulky e-waste would bear down around $ 200- $ 250. Fees for compute machine merchandises would be lower but no clear sum is listed in the audience paper. ( Environment Bureau, 2010 )There are some trim notes proposed A landfill disposal prohibition to e-waste will be introduced for prevent utile stuffs ended up in landfills. Import and export control of e-waste would be under a permission system by authorities. A licensing demand is needed for the e-wast e dismantlement, cycle and storage. ( Environment Bureau, 2010 )In the succeeding(prenominal) thesis, the PRS plans of federation Korea, Sweden and United States ( Maine ) will be studied. By utilizing iii standards, physical duty of assorted stakeholders ( Consumers, local governments, manufacturers and consolidators ) , cost allotment of assorted stakeholders ( Consumers, local governments, manufacturers ) and bundle uping and recycling rate, remarks are made for the hereafter pattern on e-waste direction in Hong Kong.2. Review of PRS plans in other states2.1 southwest Korea2.1.1 Background of the PRSafter fall ining the OECD in 1996, the environmental policy of due south Korea authorities is influenced by the way of western states. In 2001, the authorities implemented EPR as an indispensable policy in the field of recycling. ( Murakami-Suzuki, 2008 ) On the other manus, consumers and environmental NGOs had criticized the uncomely disposal of e-waste by the three major co mpanies. To salvage their trade institute image, they had understanding with authorities to continue greater manufacturer duty. ( Lee & A Na, 2010 ) In 2003, a Producer recycle ( PR ) system was launched which emphasised the duty of makers in e-waste recycling. Until now, there are in entire 10 points they are rinsing machines, TVs, air conditioners, iceboxs, Personal computers, sound, nomadic phones, pressmans, duplicators and facsimiles. ( Lee & A Na, 2010 ) ( Murakami-Suzuki & A Chung 2008 )2.1.2 System of e-waste directionFigure 2-1 General e-waste gives in southmost Korea ( Adopted from Murakami-Suzuki & A Chung 2008 )The PR system puts the speech pattern on manufacturers. Manufacturers need to roll up the e-waste from consumers on a new-for-old footing. Each electrical contraption that is regulated in the system has certain mark recycling rate to accomplish yearly. Therefore, manufacturers used exercises and other assemblage contractors to run into the recycling mar k. ( Lee & A Na, 2010 ) There are three ways for the manufacturers to submit through their duty. First, they fundament construct ain recycling deeds and bring about the recycling short letter. The 2nd manner is to contract out the occupation to technicalized recycling workss. The 3rd manner is to allowance property to the Producer province Organization to assist them recycling the e-waste. If they fail to make the recycling marks, they need to comport the fee which is reciprocally relative to the compulsory recycling rates. ( Murakami-Suzuki & A Chung 2008 ) topical anaesthetic governments are responsible for patroling abominable toss out of e-waste. Illegal discard declined greatly due to the monitoring of the citizens groups called ssu-parazzi ( ssu means rubbish in Korean and parazzi from the Italian word paparazzi which means newsman ) . ( Lee & A Na, 2010 ) topical anesthetic governments will bringer pecuniary final hirements to citizens for describing illegal cast aside instances to the governments. Government besides needs to roll up the e-waste which is non establish on replacement leverage from consumer. ( Lee & A Na, 2010 )Consumers relieve oneself three ways for disposal of e-waste. First, they smoke give the e-waste to the 2nd manus traders. The second-hand traders will give back some bit value to the consumers. The second-hand traders will so reassign to the exporters and export out the e-waste. Second, they can fee to the municipalities which are local governments for roll uping the e-waste. The local governments will transport the e-waste to the exporters or recycling workss for the intervention of e-waste. Third, they do nt shoot to pay any fee when on a new for old footing. The retail merchants or manufacturers will roll up the e-waste for unaffixed. They act as a co-operator with other stakeholders to take part in the strategy. Some of them may move as the ssu-parazzi to supervise the illegal cast aside of e-waste.2.1.3 represent borne by different stakeholdersManufacturers bear the entire cost for both aggregation and recycling. First, they can run their ain logistic squad and recycling workss. Second, they can pay fee to the commercial recycling companies. Third, they may pay the fee to the Producer office Organization ( master ) for roll uping and recycling the e-waste. Consumers do non necessitate to pay any disposal fee when buying a replacing regulated electric merchandise. So, an unseeable fee is added when consumer purchases electrical merchandises. They solely need to pay the aggregation cost when necessitating local governments to roll up the e-waste. They may necessitate to pay 2000-8000 won ( about HKD $ 14- $ 56 ) to the local governments for roll uping the e-waste. ( Gangnam-gu Office, 2004 ) Government needs to bear the fiscal cost for the entreaty of illegal dumped e-waste and pay the money wages for citizens. ( Lee & A Na, 2010 )2.1.4 assemblage and Recycling r ate of e-wasteFigure 2-2 Collecting and Recycling rate of e-waste in South Korea in 2002 and 2004 ( Source from Park, 2006 )After the execution of the PR system in 2003, the accretion and recycling rate humanitarian about 50 % in Television, icebox and rinsing machine. For air-conditioner and computing machine, a singular rise in the collection and recycling rate. The merchandise recycling has been continuously increased. About six one million million dozenss ( 550 million kilogram ) of e-waste in sum has been recycled during 2003-2007. The recycling rate is about 11 kg/capita/year in 2003-2007. ( Ministry of Environment, nation of Korea, 2010 )2.2 Sweden2.2.1 Background of the PRSThe PRS for e-waste was launched in Sweden on 1st July 2001. Simultaneously, a not-for-profit service supplier El Kretsen was set up. El Kretsen operates a national-wide aggregation and recycling system for e-waste. It runs the system in coaction with Swedish governments. The local Swedish governments m anage and fund the aggregation points where the families could go forth the e-waste. El Kresten manages and financess the pass through fee, the pre-treatment and recycling for e-waste. Eleven classs of e-waste are regulated by El Kretsen. They include merchandises for family contraptions, IT and other equipment. ( El-Kretsen, 2010 )2.2.2 System of e-waste directionFigure 2-3 General flow of e-waste in Sweden ( Future brawniness Solutions, 2003 )The strategy does non put any recycling marks. Manufacturers and distributers pay the fee to El Kresten, based on the current market portion, for pull offing the regulated e-waste in a corporate duty method. The cost will reexamine yearly. Families can return the e-waste to any of the 700 countrywide municipal aggregation sites. Commercial sectors can return the e-waste free of charge to the distributers or manufacturers based on new for old buying. Otherwise they can give to the commercial aggregation Centres which are financed by El Kre tsen. When the commercial consumer does non buy a new merchandise, the e-waste is non covered by this PRS and it s the last user s duty. Municipal aggregation sites are run by municipalities and the concern aggregation sites are form and financed by El Kretsen. Logistic and transport spouses will roll up the e-waste from both municipal and concern aggregation sites and conveyance to the intervention spouses. interference and recycling spouses dismantle and recycle the e-waste. El Kretsen would pay the money to logistics and intervention spouses by the weight of e-waste hauled and the existent intervention costs. ( Future Energy Solutions, 2003 )2.2.3 Cost borne by different stakeholdersEl Kretsen financess the concern aggregation sites, overfly and recycling cost of e-waste. class s aggregation sites are run by local governments which are non based on manufacturer duty. Households wage tax revenue enhancements to back up the cost of runing the municipal aggregation sites. Manuf acturers pay money to El Kretsen harmonizing to their corresponding market portion, i.e. , every provider s proportion of entire gross revenues in the old yr. Any excess will be credited to the corresponding manufacturer s history. ( Future Energy Solutions, 2003 )The fee is considered several factors. Here is an illustrationTable 2-1 Model for calculation of fees by El Kretsen ( Future Energy Solutions, 2003 )The fee is measured by four factors weight, return rate, intervention cost and material value. When transit and intervention costs are high and the stuff value is low, the fee is higher. Alternatively, if the stuff value is high and the intervention cost is low, the fee is much lower. Normally, for bulky material, the fee is around a8- 26 ( about HKD $ 84 $ 273 ) and for little contraption, it is about a0.025. ( Future Energy Solutions, 2003 )2.2.4 Collecting and recycling rate of e-wasteFigure 2-4 Recycling rate of e-waste in 2004-2008 by El Kretsen ( El-Kretsen, 2010 )The in a higher place lick showed the collection and recycling rate of e-waste from all the aggregation points by El Kretsen. The system in Sweden achieved the highest collection and recycling rate account in Europe with a sum of 15.8kg/capita/year in 2006. ( smoother et el. , 2007 )2.3 United States ( Maine )2.3.1 Background of PRSIn 2004, an e-waste jurisprudence founded on EPR construct was espouse by the Maine legislative assembly. It was the first drawn-out manufacturer duty jurisprudence in United States. In January 18 2006, the family e-waste programme was launched to guarantee electrical contraptions were recycled at the terminal of life. Merely family generated covered electrical devices ( CED ) are considered in the Maine programme. CED referred to telecastings and computing machine proctors with screens larger than 4 in. ( 10.2 centimeter ) . ( Wagner, 2009 ) In 2009, the programme added desktop pressmans, game consoles and digital image frame as CED. ( Department of Environmental Protection, State of Maine, 2010 )2.3.2 System of e-waste directionFigure 2-5 General flow of e-waste in Maine ( Department of Environmental Protection, State of Maine, 2010 )Local governments decide how to roll up the family e-waste. There are different ways to roll up the e-waste agreement of pick-up service, set up for aggregation sites, or keep casual one-day aggregation. Consolidators sired the e-waste. They need to screen the regulated merchandises by trade holler concerns and step the weight. Then, they send bills to the makers for the transit, managing and recycling fee. They will besides supply informations and study to Department of Environmental Protection ( DEP ) . After that they send the e-waste to recycler. Retailers must however sell the regulated merchandises with makers that are in conformity with Maine s E-waste Law. Maine DEP monitors the programme. It besides conducts instruction and enforces Torahs. ( Department of Environmental Protection, State of Maine, 2010 )2.3.3 Cost borne by different stakeholdersManufacturers bear about all the cost under the EPR programme. beforehand the programme started, there was no charge to the manufacturer. After the programme was launched, in 2006 and 2007, the sum charges are US $ 764000 ( about 6 million HKD $ and US $ 1938500 ( about 15 million HKD $ ) severally. The mean recycling charges were about US $ 9.53 ( HKD $ 74 ) per computing machine proctor and US $ 16.62 ( HKD $ 130 ) per telecasting. The manufacturers need to pay the cost harmonizing to the trade name and weight to the consolidators. Orphan CEDs is waste which can non place the makers or the makers are no longer in concern. Existing manufacturers need to pay a pro rata portion of the recycling divest CEDs. ( Wagner, 2009 )Figure 2-6 Maine population and family EOL fees charged in 2008 ( Wagner, 2009 )Different metropoliss or towns in Maine have different EOL fee. Citizens can dispose free of charge or even necessitate to pay over USD $ 11 per point ( HKD $ 86 ) . However, over 50 % of families need to pay less than US $ 5 ( HKD $ 39 ) per point due to the displacement of cost to the manufacturers. ( Wagner, 2009 )2.3.4 Collecting and Recycling rate of e-wasteFigure 2-7 Household CED points collected in Maine in 2005-2008 ( Source from Wagner, 2009 )The figure of points collected and recycled after the EPR programme adopted addition by 108 % in the first twelvemonth, 170 % in the 2nd twelvemonth and 221 % in the 3rd twelvemonth. ( Wagner, 2009 ) The collection and recycling rate is about 1.8 kg/capita/year in 2008. ( Department of Environmental Protection, State of Maine, 2010 )3 Comparison of the EPR systems in South Korea, Sweden and United States ( Maine )Table 3-1 Comparison for the physical function of assorted stakeholdersSouth KoreaSverigePine tree stateConsumersDispose the e-waste via three methodsAct as suu-parazzi Take the e-waste to aggregation sitesTake the e-waste to the local gover nments via different methodsLocal governmentsSet mark recycling rateMonetary wages to citizens who describing illegal toss outRun the municipal aggregation sitesSet criterion for aggregation fasten fight among the consolidatorsManufacturersConstruct ain recycling workssPay money to the PRO for recycling and interventionsContract out the occupations to commercial recycling companiesCollect commercial e-wastePay money to El Kretsen for managing the e-wastePay money to the consolidators for all the transit and intervention costConsolidatorsManufacturersEl KrestenApproximately 10 companiesIn South Korea, since the electrical contraption industry is oligopolistic and is dominated by three companies, videlicet , Daewoo, LG and Samsung. Collection, transit and recycling are besides carried by the manufacturers. ( Lee & A Na, 2010 )There is no aggregation sites are operated in the system of South Korea. Consumers have different methods to dispose the e-waste. ascribable to the bit value precondition by the second-hand traders, most of the consumers prefer this manner to dispose the e-waste. ( Murakami-Suzuki & A Chung 2008 ) other aalone(predicate) system is the outgrowth of ssuparazzi in South Korea. Local governments will give money wagess to the citizen who reports illegal dumping of e-waste. This control method is imagination to be responsible for a crisp diminution of illegal dumping.For Sweden, the lone consolidator El Kretsen takes the most physical duty in the EPR system. It mandates the commercial aggregations sector, organizes and financess the transit and recycling spouses. Local governments run the municipal aggregation sites. Consumers except need to reassign the e-waste to the aggregation points.For Maine, local governments via different paths collect the e-waste from consumers. Consumer should follow the methods by local authorities and return the e-waste. Consolidators sort off the trade name and direct bills to manufacturers for the transit and intervention cost.Table 3-2 Comparison for cost allotment of assorted stakeholdersSouth KoreaSverigePine tree stateConsumersFree on a new for old footingBuy shreds when disposed with municipalityTaxsEOL feesLocal governmentsReceive tickets fee from consumersReceive revenue enhancements from consumersCollection cost of e-wasteManufacturerAbout the entire costAbout the sum cost which pay to El KretsenAbout the sum cost which wage to the consolidatorsConsumers do non necessitate to pay any excess fee under the new for old rule when buying the regulated points in South Korea. They may necessitate to purchase a tickets when disposal of e-waste from local governments. In Sweden, the aggregation cost of home(prenominal) e-waste is received from the revenue enhancements of all citizens. In Maine, consumers unremarkably precisely necessitate to pay the EOL fees which are less than US $ 5 per points for Televisions or computing machine proctors.Local governments in three topograp hical points receive money from consumers for aggregation cost. In Sweden, the local governments merely cover with the domesticated e-waste.In the three topographic points reviews, manufacturers bear about the full cost in the PRS. In South Korea, manufacturers need to build the ain works for intervention of e-waste. It is an single duty system. Otherwise, they may contract out the occupation to commercial recycling workss or pay fees to the PRO. In Sweden and Maine, the manufacturers pay to consolidators based on market portions. In add-on, in Maine, the manufacturers portion the cost for handling the orphan e-waste by pro rata.Table 3-3 Comparison of roll uping and recycling rateSouth KoreaSverigePine tree stateRoll uping and Recycling rate ( kg/capita/year )11.015.81.8In this tabular array, Sweden achieved the highest collection and recycling rate among three topographic points. It may due to a coarse classs of e-waste included in the Swedish system. South Korea besides got a c omparatively high rate. It may due to the consequence of mark recycling in the system. The collection and recycling rate is really low when comparing to two other topographic points. First, the Maine plan merely covered domestic TVs and computing machine proctors. Second, the end-of-life fee besides contributed to it because some consumers may donate to charitable organisations instead than pay the EOL fees. ( Wagner, 2009 )Table 3-4 Comparison of undertaking methods for illegal dumpingSouth KoreaSverigePine tree stateUndertaking methodsMonetary wagesNoneNoneIn South Korea, the pecuniary wages has attracted some citizen groups and organisations supervising the illegal dumping. In Sweden, there is no inducement for families to dispose the e-waste illicitly. It is because the use of municipal aggregation points is free of charge. Furthermore, the aggregation points are normally closer than topographic points which are suited for illegal dumping. ( Sasaki, 2004 ) For commercial sector s, there are some companies dumped the e-waste in municipal aggregation points. It is because El Kretsen can non separate the e-waste is come from families or concern sectors. ( Sasaki, 2004 ) . In Maine, due to the EOL fees, some e-waste possibly illicitly dumped. However, there is no information related to march the figure of instances. ( Wagner, 2009 )Table 3-5 Comparison of strengths and failings of the PRS systemsStrengthsFailingsSouth KoreaHigh recycling rateMonetary wages for describing illegal dumpingMerely focal point on mark recycling rate, non the environmental-friendly interventionSverigeHigh recycling rateOne not-for-profit consolidator El KretsenExcessively many classs of e-wasteTaxs from citizensMunicipal aggregation point can non separate e-waste from house servants or commercial sectorsUnited States ( Maine ) moo cost for interventionHave step to cover with the orphan e-waste beginning recycling rateMerely focal point on domestic e-wasteCumbersome for consolidator s to screening the e-wasteOrphan e-waste payment by manufacturersIllegal dumping due to EOL feeKorean s pecuniary wages for describing illegal dumping is alone among three states. It greatly decreases the sum of illegal dumping of e-waste. Another alone characteristic is target recycling rate. The mark rate must be reached by the manufacturers. Otherwise, a levy is imposed. Therefore it maintains a high and stable collection and recycling rate. However this system merely focuses on the elevation of the recycling rate but non the intervention quality. Producer merely want to carry through the mark rate. There is no inducement for manufacturer to handle the e-waste decently.In Sweden, the recycling rate is highest among three reviewed topographic points. It may due to a assortment of e-waste is included in the system. Furthermore, there is no bear downing for disposing e-waste in municipal aggregation point. It may besides increase the inducement of domestic consumers to dispose the e -waste decently. Furthermore, El Kretsen covered about 90 % of e-waste. A large not-for-profit company integrates all the e-waste could hold better organisation of aggregation and transit for e-waste.However, the Swedish strategy has eleven classs of regulated e-waste. Many industries and companies are kicking about the complexity of the merchandise classification. ( Future Energy Solutions, 2003 ) On the other manus, the running cost for municipal aggregation sites come from the revenue enhancements from citizens. It is unjust to the citizens who do non lend oneself the service in the PRS system. In add-on, the municipal aggregation points receive e-waste free of charge. Some concern companies may dump the e-waste into the aggregation point illicitly.In United States ( Maine ) , the monetary value of consolidator services to manufacturer is administrated by the DEP yearly. The consolidators need to subject the lowest cost agenda to the manufacturers and local governments. Therefor e, manufacturers can take the best offered monetary value for the services of consolidators. Furthermore, this is the lone PRS which have step to cover with orphan e-waste among three reviewed topographic points. It divides the intervention cost to manufacturers by pro rata.The collection and recycling rate is lowest among three reviewed topographic points in Maine. It is because the system merely focuses on domestic e-waste. Furthermore, the regulated e-waste merely included TVs and computing machine proctors. A big sum of e-waste The Maine s progrmamme is cumbrous because every e-waste needs to screen by trade name. The consolidators besides need to enter the weight of e-waste. Furthermore, approximately 10 consolidators are responsible for screening the e-waste and direct bills to the manufacturers. Therefore, this system is time-consuming and increases the administrative costs for both consolidators and manufacturers. The manufacturers besides criticize for bearing the duty for the orphan e-waste. ( Wagner, 2009 ) Orphan e-waste means the e-waste trade name name can non be identified. They need to bear excess cost for the intervention of orphan e-waste by pro rata. Due to stop of life charge, consumers need to pay money to the local authorities when they dispose the e-waste. They may illicitly dump the e-waste. However, there is no statistic found in my research.4 Remarks for the PRS in Hong KongAfter the analysis of the PRS systems in South Korea, Sweden and United States ( Maine ) , it indicates that different stakeholders bear different proportion of physical and fiscal duty. Furthermore, a good Praseodymium should hold high collection and recycling rate.Since few electrical or electronic merchandises are produced locally in Hong Kong, manufacturers duties are in fact importers, distributers and retail merchants duty. For makers, it will be individually considered in the undermentioned subdivision.4.1 Physical DutyConsumer should co-operate in the PRS . They should dispose the e-waste to the aggregation sites or return back to the retail merchants or distributers. They could besides supply remark for the PRS to the authorities to implement a better system for e-waste direction. Incentive for consumers to take the e-waste back to the retail merchants or the aggregation sites is the of import measure. Collection sites should be easy accessible. Therefore, authorities and retail merchants or distributers should put up the broad spread aggregation sites in the 18 territories. They should supply a convenient manner to the consumers for disposal of e-waste.In Hong Kong, it is hard to put up ain recycling workss by manufacturers like the PR system in South Korea. Retailers and distributers should continue more duty. From the experience of South Korea and Sweden, labeling of the regulated merchandises should be done by the retail merchants or distributers. Therefore, consumers are able to cognize the cost of the PRS for the intervention and recycling of e-waste.Hong Kong has Numberss of retail merchants and distributers they may form or fall in a consolidator like El Kretsen in Sweden. With a cardinal consolidator, an enhanced organisation of aggregation and transit could be achieved. The retail merchants and distributers can pay the fee straight to the WEEE direction contractorsQuality of intervention for e-waste is of import. The recyclers should handle and recycle the e-waste suitably. Environmental Protection Department can direct officers to look into the intervention procedure in the recycling works on a regular basis. Recyclers should follow the demands purely which are set up by authorities. Otherwise, authorities would ticket the recyclers.Monetary wages in South Korea has successfully decreased the figure of illegal dumping. Hong Kong authorities can larn from the experience of South Korea to put up some wages for describing illegal dumping.4.2 Financial ResponsibilityThere are two ways of bear downing m ethods from the experience of three topographic points. In Maine, the consumers need to pay the end-of-life fee when they dispose the e-waste. In Hong Kong, there is a building waste disposal bear downing strategy connatural to Maine. However, it leads to big sum of illegal dumping in the New Territories. If the e-waste charging follows the homogeneous method, it likely leads to big sum of illegal dumping.In South Korea and Sweden, the fee is already included in the monetary value of the electrical contraptions. Therefore, it will enforce the fee to the importers and distributers, which is non welcome by them. In Hong Kong, after the audience paper released, the importers and distributers have unsatisfied to this option. However, in this option, Consumers do non necessitate to pay any fees when disposing the e-waste. This will diminish the inducement for consumer to dispose the e-waste illicitly. The two options have their ain pros and cons. Further treatment is needed.For the orp han e-waste, there is no step shown in the audience paper in Hong Kong. In the reviewed topographic points, merely Maine s plan has steps to cover with it. First, retail merchants should merely sale electrical merchandises of manufacturers that are participated in the plan. It can diminish the figure of orphan e-waste coevals. Second, the intervention cost is divided by manufacturers by pro rata. It can ease the fiscal load from authorities to the manufacturers. Hong Kong can put up exchangeable pattern to cover with the job of orphan e-waste.4.3 Collecting and recycling rateDifferent topographic points have different classs of e-waste included in the PRS. The proposed PRS in Hong Kong has similar regulated points to that in South Korea. After the execution of PRS in Hong Kong, the collection and recycling rate should accomplish a similar rate which is 11.0 kg/capita/year. Swedish plan achieve the highest rate which is 15.8 kg/capita/year and Maine s plan merely reached 1.8 kg/capi ta/year. These two values should be the roaring rate and lower limit rate that Hong Kong PRS should make severally.5 DecisionAfter reexamining the PRS in South Korea, Sweden and United States ( Maine ) , different states adopt the PRS with alone features. The Hong Kong authorities can larn from the strengths and failings of different strategies and do mentions for the hereafter patterns on e-waste direction. The authorities should happen a balanced point of duty among assorted stakeholders for e-waste directionLists of MentionDavis Gary. ( 1994 ) . Extended Producer Responsibility A New Principle for a New Generation of taint Prevention.Department of Environmental Protection, State of Maine. ( 2010 ) . Report on Maine s Household E-waste Recycling Program.El-Kretsen. ( 2010 ) . Sweden universe leader in WEEE aggregation and intervention. Retrieved January 1, 2011, from El Kretsen hypertext maneuver protocol //www.el-kretsen.sesitespecificelkretsenfilespdfelelretur_foldern_engel sk.pdfEnvironment Bureau. ( 2010 ) . Safe and Sustainable A New Producer Repsonsibility Scheme for Waste Electrical & A electronic Equipment.Environmental Protection Department. ( 2005 ) . A polity Model for the Mangament of Municial Solid Waste ( 2005-2014 ) . Retrieved January 1, 2011 from hypertext enrapture protocol //www.epd.gov.hk/epd/msw/htm_en/ch03/main.htmEnvironmental Protection Department. ( 2010 ) . Waste Reduction. Retrieved November 17, 2010 from Recovery of waste elctrical and electronic equipment hypertext slay protocol //www.wastereduction.gov.hk/en/workplace/weee_intro.htmFuture Energy Solutions. ( June 2003 ) . Study into European WEEE Schemes.Gangnam-gu Office. ( 2004 ) . One stop big volume waste intervention system. Retrieved January 1, 2011 from hypertext channelize protocol //waste.gangnam.go.kr/Greenpeace. ( 2010 ) . Contamination of e-waste. Retrieved November 27, 2010 from Greenpeace hypertext transfer protocol //www.greenpeace.org/china/ch/campaigns/ e-waste/pollutionIl-Ho Park. ( November 2006 ) . Policy Direction on E-Waste Recycling in Korea.Lee Soo-cheol, & A Na Sung-in. ( 4th June 2010 ) . E-waste Recycling Systems and Sound circulatory Economies in East Asia A Compararive Analysis of Systems in Japan, South Korea, China and chinaware. Sustainability, page 1632-1644.Lindhqvist T. ( 2000 ) . Extended Producer Responsibility in Cleaner Production Policy Principle to upraise Environmental Improvements of Product Systems.Ming Pao. ( 28th December 2010 ) . Electronic Products levy consultaion.Ministry of Environment, Republic of Korea. ( 2010 ) . Extended Producer Responsibility. Retrieved January 1, 2011 from hypertext transfer protocol //eng.me.go.kr/content.do? method=moveContent & A menuCode=pol_rec_pol_rec_sys_responsibilityRie Murakami-Suzuki and Sung-Woo Chung. ( 2008 ) . A Comparative Study of E-waste Recycling Systems in Japan, South Kore nad Taiwan from the EPR Perspective Deductions for Developing States.Soo-cheol Lee and Sung-in Na. ( 4th June 2010 ) . E-waste Recycling Systems and Sound Circulative Economies in East Asia A Compararive Analysis of Systems in Japan, South Korea, China and Taiwan.Ronald E. Hester and Roy M. Harrison. ( 2009 ) . Electronic waste direction. Royal Society of Chemistry.Knut Sander, Stephanie Schilling, Naoko Tojo, Chris new wave Rossem, Jan Vernon, & A Carolyn George. ( 2007 ) . The Producer Responsibility Principle of. Sweden.Kohei Sasaki. ( December 2004 ) . Examing the Waste from the Electrical and Electronic Equipment Mangement Systems in Japan and Sweden.The Sierra Club. ( May 2009 ) . Producer Responsibility Recycling. Retrieved January 1, 2011 from hypertext transfer protocol //www.sierraclub.org/committees/zerowaste/producerresponsibility/index.aspUNEP. ( 2007 ) . E-Waste Vol. 1 Inventory Assessment Manual.Travis P. Wagner. ( 19th July 2009 ) . Shared duty for pull offing electronic waste A instance follow of Maine, USA. Waste Management.