• Sources

  • Abbreviations

    • EPA - Environment Protection Administration
    • RFMC - Recycling Fund Management Committee
    • EPR - Extended Producer Responsibility
    • FRRC - Fee Rate Reviewing Committee
    • DfE - Design for Environment
  • Recycling Fund Management Committee System

    • Similar to the EPR policy.
    • History and Goals

      • Introduced on 1998 by the EPA as one of its bureau.
      • It was comprehensively regulated to include 10 categories, including home appliances and IT equipment (which contain 8 and 11 items).
      • It aims to promote the recycling of the following materials:
        • difficult-to-process products
        • hazardous materials
        • valuable items for recovery.
    • Methodology

      • Manufacturers (including importers) pay fees for the collection and recycling of e-waste.
      • The total fees are calculated by obtaining the product between the amount of sales of the previous year and the collection and recycling cost per item.
        • Collection and recycling cost per item is determined by the FRRC.
      • The fees are used to fund the subsidies paid by the RFMC to the e-waste collection and recycling organizations (only those which are monitored by the public auditing institutes). These are used to incentivize them to strictly follow the RFMC system standards for e-waste recycling.
        • Unit-based verification is used to ensure proper treatment/recycling (RFMC pays only when a unit is properly recycled).
        • The recycling plants buy e-waste from collection sites; therefore, it becomes a way for collection firms to obtain revenue.
      • Figure 4 Describes effectively describes the process
    • Main Features

      • emphasizes the economic responsibility of manufacturers
      • economic incentive (subsidies) used to induce commercial recycling companies to participate in the scheme.
      • proper treatment of e-waste is thoroughly guaranteed.
    • Treatment and Policy Challenges

      • 1. Economic Incentives

        • Regardless of the problematic recycling processes, one reason manufacturers are thought not to be assigned responsibility during collection and recycling stages is because home appliance manufacturing sector in Taiwan is made up of numerous small and medium-sized manufacturers. As a result, no single manufacturer is able to act as a driving force.
          • This becomes an issue because the system is set up such that recyclers actually carrying out the processing and recycling are not compelled to perform all recycling within the RFMC scheme, but are free to choose whether or not to participate; hence, the system is inadequate for managing improper processing and encouraging proper processing methods throughout the country.
          • Economic incentive for recyclers to join the RFMC system in insufficient. They researchers found that recycling plants made an agreement to avoid over-concentration when it comes to used home appliances.
          • My Interpretation: Because there are no driving force for the home appliance manufacturing sector, and also because not all recyclers are compelled to follow the RFMC system, they can choose to not participate in the scheme (which is likelier given the circumstance with the home appliance manufacturers). For this reason, this system is inadequate at encouraging proper waste management at this sector.
        • Because the system was set up in such a way that commercial recyclers focus more on economic concerns than environmental concerns, a large number of them choose to refrain from participating in the scheme when it is not economically beneficial.
      • 2. Weak Influence on DfE

        • The fluctuations in the fees that manufacturers pay do not provide sufficient incentives for them to actively take part in DfE activities.
  • Causes for Initiating E-Waste Recycling

    • They were concerned about managing pollution caused by improper treatment rather than the heavy burden on municipalities or EPR.
  • Timeline

    • 1984

      • The EPA organized mixed metal scrappers together in two districts to effectively monitor their recycling practices. This was a response to the environmentally damaging impacts of the traditional methods of the mixed metal scrappers (fei-wuchin) in Taiwan.
    • 1986

      • The EPA’s attempt to monitor the mixed metal scrappers from harmful recycling practices failed. As a result, polluted water containing heavy metals originating from the monitored districts ended up in neighboring sea areas, affecting nearby oyster farms.
    • 1998

      • The RFMC system was a government-led recycling scheme that was introduced to reduce waste, promote resource collection, and ensure efficient use of resources.
  • Conclusion of the Author

    • With regards to the general flow of e-waste, a hidden flow of e-waste still exist. In order to reduce this hidden flow, Taiwan has to pay attention to the relations between commercial recycling companies and manufacturers, particularly in terms consistent of the e-waste collection stage.
      • Furthermore, this relationship should be transformed from one that promotes negative competition to one that stimulates collaborations between commercial recycling companies.