COMPARISON AND CONTRAST BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN`S WASTE MANAGEMENT LAWS

  • Uncategorized

1

COMPARISONAND CONTRAST BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN’S WASTE MANAGEMENT LAWS

City(State)

WasteManagement Laws

Theprocedures and regulations that have been put in place to monitor,govern, and regulate the transportation, treatment, and disposal ofwaste products are called Waste Management Laws. Each nation on Earthhas its own specific codes within which all the private and publicinvestments are under the obligation to observe for the wellbeing ofthe society. In this essay, an analysis of the Chinese WasteManagement Laws will be discussed ideally alongside those of Japan.Inan attempt to reduce the level of pollution across the whole globe,Waste Disposal Acts are supposed to be unilateral and universaldespite the specifications of waste that each country is known for.

BackgroundInformation

Ina recent environmental report by China, it was proved beyond anyreasonable doubt that the whole world would have run out of itsnatural sources of energy in the next half a decade suppose energyconservation methods are not embraced by the whole society. It is dueto this reason, coupled with several others that nations like Japanand China took the initiative to establish laws that are aimed atreducing the level of pollution that emanates from industry, privateresidential places and not to mention private investors among others.The cardinal intention was to minimize the level of pollution in allplatforms.

WasteManagement Laws in Japan

Themost recent amendment law of waste disposal in Japan was in July2010. It was an improvisation of law 173 of the 1970 Act. The new lawbecame effective after one year. Prior to this new development, Japanhad been battling cases of illegal waste disposal, especially fromprivate business owners. Close to 50% of the total waste of Japan wastraced back to private business moguls who fail to follow the rightprotocol in designing new products and services that are supposed tobe of minimal hazardous effect if not none at all.

WasteManagement Laws in China

Thelast amendment of the Waste and Clean Act law was done over 25 yearsago. This creates the impression, that all through this while, thechemical, biological, as well as electronic waste of China has beenat its comfortable corner. According to reality, China is the largestexporter of waste due to the fact that it is an overly populatednation with the highest number of production industries (Hester 2013,p. 42). The same industries that create employment opportunities andmake living standards better are the only reason the nation is theone and only largest exporter of its own waste.

Argumentand Relevance of the Study

Overthe recent past, some of the most powerful nations in the world likethe United Kingdom and China went into a crusade calling for thewhole world to focus on enhancing international cohesion, peace, andunity. This would be achieved if all the nations chose to engage in acommon code of communication called environment conservation. Theobjective of this study is to analyze the different rules andregulations regarding waste management in China and Japan. The ideaof fines that are heavily imposed in China due to violation of therules that have been put in place will be highlighted and ideallyelaborated to the satisfaction of the reader. Moreover, a contrastand comparison of the two nations as far as waste management goeswill also be included in the study below. What is more important isthe fact that the details that will be revealed in this essay can beused as an ideal recommendation in relation to waste monitoring inthe whole world.

Anoverview of Waste Management Laws in Japan

Aquick review of Japan’s internal economy reveals the fact that thenation has a capability of increasing its level of productivity asfar as production industries are concerned, but then the currentadministration has come up with strict rules that are aimed at makingJapan’s environment a better place than it was a couple of yearsback. In addition to that, the violation fine to anyone that isproved guilty of intentional pollution or illegal disposal of wasteis nothing less than $100 million (Sailing 2012, p. 56). Additionalfacts regarding waste disposal acts in Japan and their impacts on theenvironment are elaborated below.

InJapan, the Last Amendment Act took place after 25 years. According tothe rules of politics, serving the nation with a constant rule thatis liable to change for far too long is almost considered as a vice.Being able to twist the law in order to work well with contemporarymatters is what marks the true quality of a successfuladministration. It follows, thus, that the fact that Japan used asingle law to govern different waste disposal eras and levels meantthat the nation was definitely underperforming in one section of itsmakeup. Moreover, since environmental pollution has not beencompletely curbed in the nation, further modification of the wasteamendment act is required. The review is necessary to ascertain thatthe disposed materials are controlled properly and in line withmodern and international environmental regulations.

Additionally,48% of Japanese waste are illegal remains. It is wise to note thefact that close to half of the overall percentage of all waste thatis disposed in Japan is illegal. By illegal, it simply means thatthere are approximately over 30,000 business entities that are notonly running illegally but also produce illegal and hazardous waste.When this goes unchecked for far too long, there is placing no limitto which the level of pollution in Japan will have gotten within thenext five years. Thus, the country has established policies to ensurethat these unlawful waste disposals are eliminated. The companies inthe country both private and parastatals are required to followparticular standards or be subjected to a legally imposed fine forfailing to observe environmental friendly laws.

AnOverview of Waste Management Laws in China

Tothis point of the study, it has now been successfully establishedthat China is the largest exporter of waste and especially electronicwaste. The core reason why electronic waste of China is beingexported at a higher rate despite being proved as a menace to dealwith is the fact that these electronic products that have beenrejected by the Chinese economy are well received by third worldcountries all over the world. In other words, China might be takingthe blame for exporting the highest number of electronic rejectsacross the corners of the world, but the real perpetrators are thosethird world nations that create a ready market for the samecommodities (Sailing 2012, p. 67).

Surprisingly,the preceding modification Waste act in China happened after 40years. As unbelievable as it may sound, there is no arguing over thefact that the last time that the China got into a forum to discussthe progress and development of waste management laws was close tohalf a decade ago. China is well-known for being a conservativenation that is adamant to its own existence since ancient times. Itis as a result of the same rigidness that the nation saw no need inamending waste management laws despite being one of the worstnightmares it would ever have.

Besides,more than 70% of Chinese waste are illegal. When a country gets tothe point where over three quarters of its total waste productsemanate from illegal sources, its administration is probed (Hester2013, p. 34). It is only natural to assume that the whole of thenation is in with the deal. It simply defeats logic that a powerfulnation like China has failed to curb one of its major stumblingblocks against growth and development unless there is more to thedeal than what meets public eyes.

Comparisonbetween China and Japan’s Waste Management Laws

Inthis part of the study, the similarities that occur between thestrategies and regulation practices of waste management laws of bothChina and Japan will be mentioned and discussed further to thesatisfaction of the reader. Factors such as the presence of heavyfines for the slightest violation of the rules and regulations thathave already been put in place will be critically analyzed. Ideally,waste determination processes in both countries and an extension ofproducer rights and freedoms will also be elaborated here.

Bothwaste management laws in the two nations involve the recycling ofdiscarded products. In both countries, there is an unwritten rule toensure that none of the waste products of a firm have gone to the binwithout being recycled to be used by other related businesses. Thesole objective of coming up with waste management laws was to ensurethat all the available resources have been utilized. Through thisrecycling, it goes without being mentioned that the safety of theenvironment would have been recycled. A simple explanation of this isthat the industrial waste such as biogas in China can be used to runagricultural firms (Uma 2015, p. 72).

WasteDetermination Processes are involved in both nations.Inwaste management, there is a particular protocol that all releasedwaste has to observe prior to being released for disposal. The firststage is the transportation part. This is the simplest of all stagesas it involves ferrying the waste materials from one part of the firmto another while it waits to move to the next level. Aftertransportation comes treatment. It is at this stage that the level ofhazardous effect of waste is determined. After treatment there iswaste determination, which seeks to ascertain that the treated wasteis of less environmental effects before it is finally disposed.

Moreover,in both countries, there is a prevalence of fines and charges forviolation of waste management rules. In Japan, when an individual hasbeen proved to have intentionally or accidentally illegally releasedwaste, the standing charges or rather fines that will be imposed bythe court is $100 million (Hester 2013, p. 44). The same case appliesto China only that the value is slightly lower. In real life, therehave been over 60,000 cases of lawsuits of business moguls that werefound guilty of disposing illegal waste, but in almost all the abovecases, only a handful of the perpetrators paid the real price.

Whatis more is that both countries have a waste disposal restrictions.Thisgoes back to the waste determination factor. This ideology is used byboth nations to estimate the risk level of the waste that has justbeen released or rather disposed in its appropriate site is eitherlow or strictly none at all. Given that a particular waste proved tocontain a high level of toxic substance, a restriction will have tobe placed on that particular entity as both parties await furtherinstructions from the concerned authorities. In most cases, theserestrictions are lifted after a while of thorough consideration.

Thereis an extension of producer obligations in both nations. Producerobligations are the responsibilities that all the business persons,parastatals and private investors have all the rights and freedoms ofengaging in whatever legal business they would like as long as everydetail of the deal is accounted for by the owner. It simply meansthat for one to be allowed to operate a business that has potentialwaste products in both countries, he or she has the obligation ofaccounting for all the activities that the business participates inincluding its waste products.

Furthermore,there is availability of promotion laws that deal with Cleanerprocurement in both Japan and China. It is the nature of mostbusinesses that enjoy maximized levels of economies of scale to wantto hire the services of Cleaner Procurement organizations. Thismostly occurs when that articular firm is producing a lot of goodsand services all at once and in bulk. The role of cleaner procurementservices in both nations is to ensure that prior to the waste gettingdetermined, it is safe and less hazardous. The purpose of this ideais to lighten the work load and charges that are applied during thewaste determination stage (Vaughn 2014, p. 60).

Bothnations have a common goal of cutting down the regeneration of majorpollutants. In China, it has been proved that its largest wasteproducts originate from electronic waste which ends up receivingbetter markets in most developing nations. In Japan, a huge number ofits biological waste is recycled since the nation has resolved innatural ways of securing reliable sources of energy. Cutting down theregeneration of the major pollutants in both nations means that theyare trying as much as possible to get rid of their individual wasteproducts.

Inboth nations, there is proficiency of utilization of resources. Ithas come out clear that despite being the largest exporter of waste,Japan is also among the most active nations when it comes tovolunteering to participate in international environmental programsand projects aimed at making the world a better place. In Japan,reusing of both chemical and biological waste is the order of the daysince the mentality is instilled in the younger generation rightafter their moment of birth. It is prudent to recycle waste productssince they may come to be of use at a later stage in life.

Besides,they both have an objective of ensuring the production of safe andhealthy products. If most businesses went without being put in checkby the government, chances are that at one point in time, illegalbusinesses may come up and end up subjecting the same government toextreme prejudice. The reason why most governments would like to beinvolved with the businesses that are run within its jurisdiction isthe fact that the production of any new service or commodity has toascertain by necessary law enforcing agencies.

Essentially,both nations protect the environment. Both China and Japan exercisereuse and recycle services. This simply means that their goal ismainly to minimize the level of hazard that untreated and uncheckedwaste has to the whole society. It seems apparent that both nationsare paying close attention to the fact that internationalenvironmental agencies made a public announcement claiming thatwithin the net half decade, the whole world might have run short ifnot totally out of natural resources of energy. This thought is notonly a threat to Japan and China, but also the entire world.

Likewise,both nations direct their efforts in saving all available resources.In Japan, reusing of both chemical and biological waste is the orderof the day since the mentality is inculcated in the youngergeneration right after their moment of birth. It is prudent torecycle waste products since they may come to be of use at a laterstage in life. It has come out clear that despite being the largestexporter of waste, Japan is also among the most active nations whenit comes to volunteering to participate in internationalenvironmental programs and projects aimed at making the world abetter place.

Anothercomparison is that in both states, there is availability ofemployment opportunities revolving around waste management. Whatreally determines the quality of a reliable government is its abilityto create employment opportunities in areas that no longer existed inthe past. In both China and Japan, there is room for employmentopportunities in all maters revolving around waste management. Forexample, consider the fact that waste management is divided into fourmajor sections, each of which have detailed labor processes thatrequire expert knowledge and skills. The waste determination level,the cleaner procurement methods and not to forget the intoxicationstage where the risk of each category of waste is subsidized are someof the employment loops.

Principally,the countries engage in methods of government in business.Thereason why most governments would like to be involved with thebusinesses that are run within its jurisdiction is the fact that theproduction of any new service or commodity has to ascertain bynecessary law enforcing agencies. If most businesses went withoutbeing put in check by the government, chances are that at one pointin time, illegal businesses may come up and end up subjecting thesame government to extreme prejudice (Hester 2013, p. 42).Subsidization and regulation are some of the most common methods ofgovernment involvement in business.

Comparably,in both Japan and China, there is a reduction of the chances of an uprise of new firms that release unnecessary waste products.Thegood thing with getting involved in all the basic business activitiesin a country is that the government gets in control of all availableresources. It therefore follows that the governments of both Chinahave the power of bringing down all businesses that are deemed asunfit or rather too hazardous to be part of the economy. When thishappens, chances are that new investors will get word of the alreadyprevailing situation on the ground and get wind of the new rules andregulations (Uma 2013, p. 72).

Bothcountries aim at energy saving techniques.Through recycling, it goes without being mentioned that the safety ofthe environment would have been guaranteed. A simple explanation ofthis is that the industrial waste such as biogas in China can be usedto run agricultural firms. In both countries, there is an unwrittenrule to ensure that none of the waste products of a firm have gone tothe bin without being recycled to be used by other relatedbusinesses. The goal of the established management laws aimed to makesure that the available resources were applied.

Furthermore,both China and Japan have storage prohibition rules and regulations.Atthe mention of storage prohibition rules, private investors freakout. In a case where the government has declared a certain businesstoo unhealthy to be running in its capital, it provides a finiteduration of time to the owner of the business to give them adequatetime to plan how to get rid of his company’s waste. In mostscenarios, the same government denies that particular a chance todump the waste of his company within its jurisdictional boundaries.This is what storage prohibition rules and regulations dictate.

Lastbut not least, both nations are big at exporting electronic waste. InChina, industrial growth is fostered by the fact that agriculturalproducts are a thing of luxury in the state. As technologicaladvancements kept going, electronic attempts of new products keptfailing or succeeded for some time, then after a while came to fall.These were the same products that are later exported to obliviousthird world nations who purchase them at cheap prices. In Japan,industrial growth is favored by the fact that the nation has widecollections of agricultural ventures that provide raw material andresources to run electronic gadgets.

Contrasts

Inthe previous section of this study, the similarities that existbetween Chines and Japanese waste management laws have beenhighlighted and elaborated successfully. That aside, the differencesthat have been since in existence between the two countries will becritiqued in the following paragraphs. For example, the exportationof E-waste, the value of fine placed in violation of waste managementlaws and finally the origin of illegal waste in both countries aresome of the major platforms of the differences that exist between thetwo. Below are further elaborations for simpler understanding of thedifferences.

Tobegin with, China exports the largest E-waste in the whole world. Inthe previous sections of this study, it was established that the oneand only reason why China is able to export a large amount ofelectronic waste is due to the fact that the same products have alarge market coverage in nations that are still developing. When thisis compared to Japan, it comes out clear that the electronic wasteexportation of Japan is nothing as compared to the heftiness ofChinese waste. Even though there has been no known action takenagainst China, it is obvious that the act is never ceasing in thenear future (Sailing 2012, p. 59).

Thefine for violation of Environmental and Waste Management Laws is $100million in Japan and only $40 in China. Despite China being thelargest exporter of waste in the whole world, it only places a $40million fine in violation of waste management laws. This isexcessively low as compared to Japan that attempts by all means tocontain its waste products in a biological and chemical manner. Thedifference between the two nations is as clear as a crystal and nowthis fine has made the matter even more approachable. The fineindicates that China is more tolerant to pollution when compared toJapan which imposes a higher levy for environmental pollutionviolations.

Illegalwaste in Japan is only 48%, while in China it is over 70% (Hester2013, p. 49).Outof the total waste of Japan, 48% originates from private businessowners. Most of these investors are usually oblivious to theimplications of what their particular products are bound to cause tothe environment, but even after realizing it, none of them has beenknown to do anything to help change the situation. In China, due toover-prevalence of industries, illegal waste runs up about 70%. Everyyear, the government point out businesses that have played a greatrole in contributing to this percentage and firm action is takenagainst those that are found guilty of their crimes.

Mostof the illegal waste in Japan stems from private business ownerswhile in China it is traced back to parastatals. According to therules of business, being part of a major business means that one getsto be part of the stakeholder. Being a stakeholder means that one isentitled to his or her own opinion regarding the growth anddevelopment of the business. In China, a huge number of governmentaccredited organizations make up a large scale of the perpetrators ofthe release of illegal waste into free flowing rivers among others(Vaughn 2014, p. 37).

Theprocess of the waste determination in China is too detailed asopposed to Japan. In as much as China is the leading exporter of itselectronic waste, prior to exporting it, a metric based analysis isrun over and over to ascertain the health and safety of thatparticular category of waste. In Japan, there is minimal exporting,creating the impression that its waste determination procedures areeither shallow or inactive for the time being. In China, wasteproducts cannot be released to the local and international governmentbefore being run by the waste determination process.

Chinamostly focusses on transport and disposal while Japan is all abouttreating and storage. Through this, it sounds clear that lawmanagement exists in four major stages that are geared towardsreducing the level of risk in the whole environment. According toreality, all the above stages should be used while detoxing thewaste, but then China and Japan do it differently. China mostlyfocusses on transportation and disposal as it has evidently beenpresented through its massive exportation of electronic waste unlikeJapan that is all about treating the waste in order to curb and studyall facts prior to storage.

Additionally,there is identification of waste stream in China while only the useof waste determination is available for Japan. In Japan, there isminimal exporting creating the impression that its wastedetermination procedures are either shallow or inactive for the timebeing. In China, waste products cannot be released to the local andinternational government before being run by the waste determinationprocess. In as much as China is the leading exporter of itselectronic waste, prior to exporting it, a matric-based analysis isrun over and over to ascertain the health and safety of thatparticular category of waste.

Moreover,waste Disposal can be restricted by a ban in Japan but not China. Thecitizens of China are already used to the fact that waste runs withintheir nation like a passing river. For centuries, in the past, Chinahad been dumping its waste in rivers and other sources of water. Inother words, the whole society of China has been dwelling on thementality that polluting the environment is a necessary evil. Whenthe same is compared to Japan, it is realized that bans are actuallysome of the most fundamental principles of communicating to the restof the citizens (Sailing 2012, p. 64). Asa result, a ban of waste disposal in Japan can be easily supported bycitizens without much complaint. However, if a similar measure wastaken in China it can cause a rebellion because the citizens of thecountry are not used to such bans. Mostly, this is because people arenot willing to readily accept change even if it is for their owngood.

InJapan, construction waste makes up 52%, while in China it is 78%.This was seen coming since it is a well-known fact that China is homefor some of the most renowned architects ever celebrated in thehistory of man. It has great construction sites such as the GreatWall, which is the only man-made feature that can be spotted from thehighest level of the sky. In Japan, construction makes up more thanhalf the percentage of total waste in the nation, but this is nothingcompared to the three quarter percentage in China.Althoughboth countries produce massive amounts of construction waste, Chinastill leads Japan by about 15% of the generated waste.

Thetragedy of the commons in China contributes to its heightened levelof E-waste exportation procedures as compared to Japan. The tragedyof the commons is simply an ideology of social-philosophy developedin the late 15thcentury, pointing at overpopulation as the core reason of some of themajor implications and challenges that the world faced at thatparticular time. In the current world, the tragedy of the commons iswhat plays a big part in prompting China to produce and test a widecollection of electronic gadgets that end up getting exported toother countries due to the extreme prevalence in the mother country.The robust population of China has also created a potentialsituation, where the highly concentrated areas contribute toenvironmental pollution. Many people in the country live in crowedareas with poor drainage system and lack of essential amenities forhuman survival. As a result, they contribute to polluting theenvironment through human activities and since the country’s wastepolicies are not strong they are not held responsible. Moreover, citycenters in China are filled with smoke and gasses emitted fromindustries resulting to contaminated air, water, and soil indicatingthat the country needs to introduce stringent regulations to ensureenvironmental safety.

Chinahas socioeconomic constraints, unlike Japan, which struggles withsocial-cultural implications. It is known all over that labororiginating from the Chinese is easily affordable, cheap, andreliable. This is the same concept that is applied even within itsown premises. Cheap labor acts as an attractive site to majorstakeholders who have the power of recruiting a high number ofChinese labor for cheap labor (Hester 2013, p. 53). Availability ofcheap, but authentic labor enhances economies of scale, but createsan economic gap between the rich and poor that can never be filled nomatter how long it takes. The implications of these measures are thatmany products are generated in China that end up as waste.

Japanhas a less market coverage when it comes to exporting or ratherdisposing electronic waste as compared to China.Inmost developing countries, fake Chinese electronic products seem togain more market than some of the most reliable and authenticsuppliers of electronic gadgets like Germany, United States andBritain just to mention a few. The reason why Japan lacks such areception with its electronic products is that they aim at achievingquality and building household names as opposed to increasing theireconomies of scale at the suffering of others while providing thecustomers with poor quality products.

Japanhas a 10% subsidy on all its exports unlike China that has none.Itis worth noting that subsidies are a way that the government wouldlike to engage in business so as to regulate the price of a givencommodity or service. This is mostly those that are being exported toanother nation or perhaps one that is still operating within itsnative grounds. In Japan, the country would like to associate itselfwith positive reinforcement with the hope that its citizens willlearn and in turn design, reliable, and long lasting electronicgadgets (Uma 2016, p. 47). Thus, such policies allow Japan to controland manage industrial waste while China strugglers because it hasweak policies to regulate its waste.

Chinahas more advanced risk control protocols as compared to Japan.Inas much as China is the leading exporter of its electronic waste,prior to exporting it, a metric-based analysis is run repeatedly toascertain the health and safety of that particular category of waste.In Japan, there is minimal exporting, creating the impression thatits waste determination procedures are either shallow or inactive forthe time being. In China, waste products cannot be released to thelocal and international government before being run by the wastedetermination process. Waste Determination procedures areincorporated in the control manuals of large firms and companies inChina (Vaughn 2013, p. 51). Thecountry introduced this regulation after it was termed as one of theleading pollutant nations in the world among other western states.

Japangets involved in the businesses of its citizens through subsidizationwhile China through tax collection. It has been mentioned in theearlier section of this study that the method of governmentinvolvement in business of Japan is price regulation through the useof subsidies unlike in China where a higher taxable value is placedon basically all products and services. Through this difference, itcan be deduced that while Japan is attempting to keep in check itswaste management issues, China on the other hand is doing everythingin its power to extort additional funds from its citizens.

Conclusion

Basedon the above facts, in an attempt to reduce the level of pollutionacross the whole globe, Waste Disposal Acts have been officiated tobe unilateral and universal despite the specifications of waste thateach country has implemented within its jurisdictional boundaries.Over the recent past, some of the most powerful nations in the worldlike the United Kingdom and China went into a crusade calling for thewhole world to focus on enhancing international cohesion, peace, andunity. This would be achieved suppose all the nations chose to engagein a common code of communication called environment conservation.This has been a comparison and contrast study of Waste ManagementLaws of China and Japan.

Bibliography

Hester,R. (2013).Electronic Waste Management.London: Phaidon.

Sailing,J. (2012).Radioactive Waste Management, Second Edition.New York: Sunny Press.

Uma,O. (2016).Pollution Control and Waste Management in China. California:Cengage

LearningPublishers.

Vaughn,J. (2014).Waste Management: A Reference Book.New York: AMACOM.