It is a common knowledge these days that recycling of wastes from homes is not enough as some people refuse to bring their wastes for recycling. Certain individuals have argued that to increase the effectiveness of recycling, that it should be enforced on the citizens which I considered inappropriate. Rather than doing this, authorities can give incentives, make effective publicity and even teach recycling in schools and colleges.
Firstly, proponents of this argument have argued that for public programmes to prosper, it has to be legally binding. This means that it must be passed into law and without this, citizens may not take it serious. For example, after making it a legal requirement and the implications of going against the law well spelt out, for example, imprisonment or paying a huge fine, people will recycle more and this will result in less accumulation of waste in our environment and homes.
I opined that instead of strict laws and regulations, public awareness and giving incentives to populace is a better way to go about this. For example, the German government publicized recycling in 2017 and the reward for every household that recycled and the following year it was recorded that the recycling rate had increased from 23 percent to 67 percent. Individuals were also given one dollar after five plastic bottles were recycled. Furthermore, schools and colleges can start teaching or offer courses on recycling. This will create awareness about it right from a young age.
In conclusion, both government and individual have a role to play in recycling. I believe that it should not be a must and there are other better ways of getting it done.
It is a common knowledge these days that
recycling
of wastes from homes is not
enough
as
some
people
refuse to bring their wastes for
recycling
. Certain individuals have argued that to increase the effectiveness of
recycling
, that it should
be enforced
on the citizens which I considered inappropriate.
Rather
than doing this, authorities can give incentives,
make
effective publicity and even teach
recycling
in schools and colleges.
Firstly
, proponents of this argument have argued that for public
programmes
to prosper, it
has to
be
legally
binding. This means that it
must
be passed
into law and without this, citizens may not take it serious.
For example
, after making it a legal requirement and the implications of going against the law well
spelt
out,
for example
, imprisonment or paying a huge fine,
people
will recycle more and this will result in less accumulation of waste in our environment and homes.
I opined that
instead
of strict laws and regulations, public awareness and giving incentives to populace is a better way to go about this.
For example
, the German
government
publicized
recycling
in 2017 and the reward for every household that recycled and the following year it
was recorded
that the
recycling
rate had increased from 23 percent to 67 percent. Individuals were
also
given
one dollar after five plastic bottles
were recycled
.
Furthermore
, schools and colleges can
start
teaching or offer courses on
recycling
. This will create awareness about it right from a young age.
In conclusion
, both
government
and individual have a role to play in
recycling
. I believe that it should not be a
must
and there are other better ways of getting it done.