Recently, activists have become increasingly concerned that individuals are not doing enough to recycle their own waste and there should be laws to make this happen. In this essay, I argue that this is not necessary as there are sufficient other ways to encourage individuals to recycle.
To start with, it is possible to change peoples habits without the law. The first method is through greed. Community councils or local governments could increase the price of collecting or throwing out rubbish by increasing the price of rubbish bags - and by only allowing official rubbish bags to be used. This is the approach taken by Taiwan. Another point is that generally, humans are competitive. This means it would be possible to turn to recycle into a game - ideally supported by an app - with leaderboards scores, and stickers. Neighbourhoods could take photos of their recycling, share them, and receive scores stickers and other prizes. While this would not work for everyone, it would work for many. To sum up, eventually, whatever the motivation, a society could get into the habit of recycling through a variety of smart encouragements.
Finally, it is possible that passing laws to require a certain amount of recycling would run into a number of problems. The first being that it is difficult to determine exactly how much a person has or has not recycled - unless someone actually goes through the trash. A related issue is how to enforce it. If it is impossible to know how much a particular person should have recycled in a particular situation, how would it be possible to know if they have recycled enough, some, or not all? In other words, the problem is the measurement.
In conclusion, not only are there various ways to change people’s behaviour through taking advantage of their greed, competitiveness, and desire to do good, using the law to force people to recycle may even be counterproductive. Therefore, I strongly disagree with the idea of using the law to force the issue.
Recently, activists have become
increasingly
concerned that individuals are not doing
enough
to recycle their
own
waste and there should be
laws
to
make
this happen. In this essay, I argue that this is not necessary as there are sufficient other ways to encourage individuals to recycle.
To
start
with, it is
possible
to
change
peoples habits without the
law
. The
first
method is
through
greed. Community councils or local
governments
could increase the price of collecting or throwing out rubbish by increasing the price of rubbish bags
-
and by
only
allowing official rubbish bags to be
used
. This is the approach taken by Taiwan. Another point is that
generally
, humans are competitive. This means it would be
possible
to turn to recycle into a game
-
ideally
supported by an app
-
with leaderboards scores, and stickers.
Neighbourhoods
could take photos of their recycling, share them, and receive scores stickers and other prizes. While this would not work for everyone, it would work for
many
. To sum up,
eventually
, whatever the motivation, a society could
get
into the habit of recycling
through
a variety of smart encouragements.
Finally
, it is
possible
that passing
laws
to require a certain amount of recycling would run into a number of problems. The
first
being that it is difficult to determine exactly how much a person has or has not recycled
-
unless someone actually goes
through
the trash. A related issue is how to enforce it. If it is impossible to know how much a particular person should have recycled in a particular situation, how would it be
possible
to know if they have recycled
enough
,
some
, or not all?
In other words
, the problem is the measurement.
In conclusion
, not
only
are there various ways to
change
people
’s
behaviour
through
taking advantage of their greed, competitiveness, and desire to do
good
, using the
law
to force
people
to recycle may even be counterproductive.
Therefore
, I
strongly
disagree with the
idea
of using the
law
to force the issue.