Garbage sorting, have you dabbled in these misunderstandings?

　　Volunteers from the Urban Management Bureau of Xiangdu District, Xingtai City, Hebei Province sort out garbage at the designated garbage sorting and placement points in the community.

Xinhua News Agency

　　At the Domestic Waste Classification Science Exhibition Hall in Baohe District, Hefei City, Anhui Province, the staff took the children to experience environmentally friendly hand-made.

Xinhua News Agency

　　In the central kindergarten of Gaohong Town, Lin'an District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, children participated in a garbage sorting game.

Xinhua News Agency

【Ecology topic】

Since the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development announced the first batch of 8 pilot cities in 2000, garbage classification has been implemented in my country for more than 20 years, but some obviously unreasonable or specious practices have always been repeated, resulting in a lot of waste of public resources, but effective Not obvious.

Since the end of 2016, the Party Central Committee has attached great importance to the classification of domestic waste, and the classification of waste has entered a new stage of "system implementation", which has achieved good results in many places.

But the more hopeful it is, the more necessary it is to identify the various misunderstandings in past knowledge and practice, so that the advanced ones will not repeat themselves, and the prowlers can return to the right path.

Misunderstanding: It doesn't matter if the score is not good, there are people who help you

Countermeasures: whoever produces garbage is responsible for sorting and placing

　　Sorting is the starting point of the whole chain of garbage sorting. The main body of its implementation and responsibility lies with the residents. However, in reality, it is often the case that when this work is pushed forward, some people start to do it instead of the residents, or the cleaners. Or a sorting instructor, or even a "second sorter" with a clear post.

Obviously, if garbage classification becomes "mixed first and sorted later", no matter from the perspectives of resource input, output quality, or spiritual civilization construction, it will not meet its original goals and requirements.

Therefore, even if the sorting link exists, it must be based on the classification and release of each garbage producer, and its operation scenarios and time cannot overlap with the residents' release link, so as to avoid conveying to the public "It doesn't matter if the sorting is not good, there are people. "Help me out" the wrong signal.

　　The important reason why classified placement is easily replaced by secondary sorting is that many managers believe that “the public is difficult to change”, or that they lack confidence in public behavior changes and habits.

However, in many cases, taking public changes too simplistically can also cause problems.

Propaganda and education are definitely indispensable for awareness raising and behavior change, and many academic studies have confirmed this.

In the past decade or so, there have been many trash sorting education activities around us, but why hasn't it brought about a significant change in residents' behavior?

The important reason is the lack of careful design of the content and format of missions and education, and often only stay at the traditional practices of "posting slogans", "organizing lectures", "engaging in activities", and "sending buckets and bags", which leads to information transmission that is too one-way and not continuous enough. The audience's thoughts are touched to a low degree.

　　Practice has proved that in order for missionary activities to be effective, it is necessary to identify the key factors that can truly affect public behavior changes and habit formation, and design corresponding content and forms accordingly.

The Sustainable Behavior Research Group of Fudan University in Shanghai has conducted 9-year follow-up research on the topic of categorizing behavior change, and identified a set of key influencing factors of behavior change, including basic knowledge, basic skills, ability to implement activities, and results. Trust, certain norms, necessary facilities and resources, division of responsibilities, emotional incentives, etc., have also established and repeatedly verified a behavioral theoretical model from establishing a willingness to classify to forming a habit.

　　According to the model, the research team gave a scientific explanation for the reason why Shanghai has been able to increase the effect of large-scale and rapid increase in the classification of residents at the street level in recent years: First, ensure that the basic hardware facilities are in place, including night lighting and warm water in winter, which will be significant. Auxiliary facilities that affect residents’ willingness to put in classifieds; secondly, through various methods such as volunteer counseling, publicity, and behavior adjustments of cleaners, let residents realize their main responsibility, that is, who generates garbage who is responsible for sorted out; thirdly, arrange for training Volunteers or supervisors are on duty in an orderly manner at the placement location, paying special attention to “talking without hands” during the duty process, that is, in principle, they only provide verbal reminders and guidance, and do not directly assist residents in placing or sorting.

By observing the successful practice of social organizations in some communities, the research team also emphasized that, compared with simple information supply, a large number of interpersonal interactions can more trigger changes in residents’ consciousness and behavior, which also explains the relatively simple methods of missionary education in the past. Must change.

Misunderstanding: Too convenient, you can throw garbage anytime and anywhere

Countermeasures: strike a balance between convenience and effectiveness

　　Another important experience of Shanghai's successful implementation of waste classification is the "removal of bins and points", that is, the location and time of community waste sorting and disposal are relatively centralized. This model has become a standard action for many other cities to carry out waste sorting.

"Withdrawal of bins and merge points" encountered a lot of resistance at the beginning of its implementation, because in some places, the garbage dumping points were originally set up very densely, and even two or three households on each floor shared a set of garbage bins. The convenience of life has declined.

　　If you go back, some property companies originally set classification buckets at the door of residents’ homes. They originally had the original intention of "encouraging" classified delivery. The assumption behind it was that residents were not unwilling to classify, but rather inconvenient, as long as it was convenient. , It will naturally cooperate.

It now appears that this is a cognitive misunderstanding-too convenient to put garbage anytime and anywhere will make public supervision and neighborhood supervision difficult, and on the contrary make the classification effect worse.

It can be seen from this that garbage classification must not only consider the convenience for the thrower, but also consider how to strike a balance between convenience and effectiveness.

Moreover, convenience is not only the convenience of residents, but also the convenience of other subjects; effectiveness is not only the classification effect, but also the cost input.

Based on this, we can understand that the success of Shanghai’s “bucket-removing and merging” model is largely due to its finding a balance between the supervision of the release process and the input cost of control.

　　The use of incentive mechanisms can certainly promote garbage classification, but it needs to pay attention to what form and how to grasp it.

In the past for a long time, many places have introduced the points system and green accounts. The common feature is to encourage residents to categorize them through economic incentives.

The effect is definitely there, because as long as there is enough economic rebate, whether it is in kind, cash or consumer discounts, it can stimulate many residents to participate.

The question is, is this practice sustainable and healthy?

　　Based on the actual situation in many places, in order to reach the threshold of incentive effect, the economic return often exceeds the market value of the waste itself, and to a certain extent becomes "spending money to buy garbage". This obviously violates the laws of economics and is difficult to sustain.

Moreover, once the economic incentives cease and there are no other behavioral intervention measures to supplement, the temporary classification effect will quickly fade, and it will not help the public to establish a long-term view of garbage classification responsibility.

Nowadays, under the new situation where various localities gradually legislate to determine that garbage classification is a citizen's responsibility and obligation, the excessive use of economic incentives seems even more outdated.

Misunderstanding: Various processing "artifacts" can quickly solve food waste problems

Countermeasure: Put the preparation of sorting processing facilities first

　　The pursuit of short-term results regardless of cost reflects the "eager for success" mentality of some managers or practitioners, and this mentality is also reflected in the technical choice of food waste treatment.

From the perspective of waste categories, one of the difficulties in garbage classification lies in the food waste, because not only the residents will find it troublesome at the disposal end, but also special management and a certain time investment are required at the transportation and disposal end.

For example, aerobic composting has a processing cycle of 45 to 60 days, which is much slower than landfill and incineration operations.

Because of this, some companies have introduced various food waste processing "artifacts" to cater to the needs of all parties to quickly solve food waste problems. The most typical ones are the "24-hour composting machine" and the food waste installed in the sink of the home kitchen. grinder.

　　The fast composting machine is expensive to purchase, and the operating cost is also high. Even so, there are still many places and units rushing to it.

Scientific research shows that its processed products are not real organic fertilizers, but wastes that have undergone scorching and dehydration processes. Direct application may cause serious damage to the soil.

Let’s talk about the food waste grinder, which smashes the food waste and discharges it directly into the sewer, which not only makes the residents feel very convenient, but also saves the sanitation department the trouble of separate cleaning and transportation.

However, as long as you have a little common sense, you will know that this is not in line with the principle of environmental protection, because it does not really treat garbage, but transfers the garbage to the sewage treatment plant, which is more difficult and economical to deal with.

In fact, the negative consequences caused by these "quickness" have always existed, but they have not been well recognized and valued.

　　According to the research of the Sustainable Behavior Research Group of Fudan University, the final destination and treatment results of the classified garbage are a key factor for the continuation of the residents' classification behavior-if the residents know that the separated garbage is well classified, then the classification behavior It will definitely be strengthened; on the contrary, if you find that the separated garbage is mixed again or not properly disposed of, you will begin to doubt the significance of your behavior adjustment, and then produce negative reactions.

　　In recent years, with the improvement of classified collection, transportation capabilities, and implementation effects, the main issues affecting the public's trust in the results of behavior change have become the insufficiency of classified processing facilities and the gap in processing capabilities.

Take Shanghai, which has the best classification effect, as an example. As of June 2020, Shanghai residents can separate more than 9,600 tons of kitchen waste every day. Part of the separated kitchen waste has to be sent to mixed waste treatment facilities.

　　From the perspective of performing functions, local governments should prioritize the preparation of classified processing facilities.

The preparation mentioned here does not necessarily mean that there must be facilities to be built and operated immediately-this does not conform to the reality of the implementation of the current garbage classification system in most Chinese cities, but at least there must be a facility construction plan that can be explained to the public. So that the residents have clear expectations and believe that their persistence and waiting are worthwhile.

Misunderstanding: Outsourcing as a whole

Countermeasures: multiple co-governance, effective guidance and management of third parties

　　The role and positioning of government departments in waste sorting are very important.

In many cases, some local governments tend to outsource the overall garbage classification in their jurisdictions to third-party companies, especially some companies under the banner of "Internet +", but they themselves become "hands-off shopkeepers" and only do some superficial assessments. Work.

There are huge risks in this model: First, the business itself is very unstable. Once a problem occurs, service interruption will seriously affect the public’s trust in public services; Second, the primary purpose of the company is to pursue profit, even Short-term profits lack consideration of the integrity and long-term aspects of waste classification.

This kind of risk has become a reality in many places and has a negative impact on the garbage sorting process.

　　In response to the above problems, the author believes that there is no better way except to establish and strengthen the leading role of the government.

The recent "party building leadership, multiple co-governance" model in some places, as well as the government's new approach to effectively guide and manage third-party services by improving waste classification and assessment standards and systems, are worthy of research and promotion.

　　For some garbage that has difficulty in recycling, such as low-value recyclables, hazardous garbage, electronic waste, etc., many local governments want to play a more active role. A common practice is to directly subsidize the recycling industry. The assumption behind it is If the market fails, the government should extend its control.

This assumption is not wrong, but how the government should extend its hands is debatable. Is it possible to "enclose" all uneconomical recycling through transfer payments, or to better implement the extended producer responsibility system that is already under trial?

Judging from the experience of successful countries or regions, producers directly fulfill the responsibility of recycling and bear the cost of recycling, which can not only increase the recycling rate of difficult-to-recycle materials, but also promote the innovation of products and packaging design by enterprises, and reduce the amount of waste from the source.

This type of intervention does not exclude government transfer payments and subsidies, but uses them in more effective places.

The author learned during an inspection in South Korea that when some products are initially included in the corporate recycling responsibility, the government will participate in and bear part of the start-up costs, in order to get the system up and running, and then gradually enable the company to fulfill its responsibilities.

　　In addition, it should be noted that the waste sorting system has always been in the macro-promotion of "Jiulong Water Control". There are many departments including housing construction, urban management, development and reform, ecological environment, health, spiritual civilization office, etc., but they are responsible for each other. The distribution of power is not clear enough, and the cooperation is not smooth enough.

For this reason, it is necessary to establish a higher-level, inter-departmental organization or mechanism to improve the top-level design and departmental coordination in order to more effectively promote the next stage of waste classification in my country.

(Author: Mao Da, Executive Director of Shenzhen Zero Waste Environmental Public Welfare Development Center, Doctor of Environmental History)