Spa t02 solid_wastes_mgt_team_a


Published on

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 1Advisory group to collect opinion on waste management facilitiesNew mode of civic engagement and it do not have statutory powerSet up five sub groups to help it asses submissions2 members in advisory group : green groups, academia, the business community ,the general community3Government select individuals to chair the sub-groups then chairperson were then allowed to select their own sub-group memebers
  • The advisory group helped with EOI to examining the tenders
  • Members of CSD are appointed by the chief executive.
  • Spa t02 solid_wastes_mgt_team_a

    1. 1. Solid Waste Management<br />Environmental Policy: The Case of Municipal Solid Waste Management<br />
    2. 2. Outline<br /><ul><li>History Timeline, Policy Problem
    3. 3. Civic engagement mechanisms
    4. 4. Advisory Group & Support Group
    5. 5. Institutional arrangement for engagement
    6. 6. Actors
    7. 7. Engagement process
    8. 8. Engagement result</li></li></ul><li>History Timeline<br />
    9. 9. History Timeline<br />1977<br />EPU established<br />EPD established<br />1986<br />1989<br />White Paper Pollution: A Time to Act<br />1990<br />International cooperation on environmental issues<br />1997<br />Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance<br />1999<br />Tung Chee-hwa Policy Address : Sustainable Development<br />2000<br />2 Major policy : Partnership & Public education<br />2001<br />Seven major initiatives to enhance prevention, separation,<br />and recycling of domestic waste.<br />2002<br />Waste Recycling Campaign, <br />Mobile-phone-battery recycling programme<br />2004<br />Pilot programme on separation of waste at the source<br />2005<br />Gov published “A First Sustainable Development Strategy for H.K<br />
    10. 10. Origin of The Policy Problem<br />2030<br /> More 400 Hectares<br />FULL<br />2014<br />Year<br />2005<br />0<br />Landfill (Per Hectare)<br />
    11. 11. Advisory Group of Environmental Protection Department<br />
    12. 12. Structure of Advisory Group<br />The areas of environmental<br />impact<br />Economic <br />viability<br />Technological feasibility<br />Social impact<br />Consumer <br />preference<br />
    13. 13. Civic engagement processes<br />Expressions of Interest(EOI) evaluation<br />Receive information<br />Assess the various technologies<br />Disposal of municipal solid waste<br /> Tenders<br />Examine and shortlist the tenders<br />Submit a detailed<br />proposal<br />
    14. 14. Civic engagement results<br />Environmental Protection Department <br />Combine the proposals<br />Consider a list of technologies and facilities<br />Set out a comprehensive strategy for municipal solid waste management <br />
    15. 15. Council for Sustainable Development (CSD) & the Support Group on Solid Waste Management<br />
    16. 16. Council of Sustainable Development (CSD)<br />
    17. 17. Five stages of engagement processof the CSD and the Support Group<br />
    18. 18. Civic engagement results<br />The CSD compiled its comments and suggestions: establishment of principles for three pilot areas<br />Government invitation for responding the issues<br />Enhancement on the quality of stakeholders and public engagement process<br />
    19. 19. Institutional arrangement for engagement<br /><ul><li>Membership & representation
    20. 20. Functions, powers, resources, and institutional support
    21. 21. Decision-making rules</li></li></ul><li>Membership & representation<br />
    22. 22. Function, power, resources & institution support<br />
    23. 23. Decision-making rules<br />
    24. 24. Actors<br />Conceptions of civic engagement<br />
    25. 25. Government Officials<br />
    26. 26. Civil society actors<br />
    27. 27. Actors<br />Interests, values and knowledges<br />
    28. 28.
    29. 29. Actors<br />Strategies<br />
    30. 30.
    31. 31. Engagement Process<br />Commonality of goal and level of trust<br />Level of transparency<br />Level of accountability<br />Breadth and depth of engagement of stakeholders<br />Policy coordination<br />
    32. 32.
    33. 33.
    34. 34. Engagement results<br />Policy papers, higher legitimacy of policy, building the capacity for governance partnership, promoting the concept of sustainable development<br />
    35. 35. Policy Papers<br />
    36. 36. Higher Legitimacy of Policy<br />
    37. 37. Building the Capacity for Governance Partnership<br />Consulting Ways<br />Consultation Paper were submitted to public<br />Various workshops, forums, and summits to the district<br />
    38. 38. Building the Capacity for Governance Partnership<br /><ul><li>Effectiveness
    39. 39. Increase Civic Awareness
    40. 40. Signal to Policy Maker that they Success or not
    41. 41. Limited in Scale and Improvements are Essential
    42. 42. The Role is too Passive
    43. 43. Ambivalent that Influential Figure from the Government
    44. 44. Difficult to Play an Important Role in Monitoring Existing Policies</li></li></ul><li>Promoting the Concept of Sustainable Development<br />CSD Stimulate Public Discussion and Set up the Sustainable Development Fund<br />Enabled the Society to Undertake Related Projects<br />Heightened Awareness of Sustainable to the Public and the Politician.<br />
    45. 45. Promoting the Concept of Sustainable Development<br />Evaluate<br />CSD should play a more active role<br />Not just Devising SD Strategy for the future<br />Monitoring Existing Actions and Policies too<br />Take up a Guardian Role<br />