The Ban on Plastic Water Bottles: Enforcement Through Penalty or Reward?

http://capefearbusiness.com/?p=3162
Land is a precious resource that is in limited supply. One of the biggest problems with solid waste disposal is finding enough space to safely contain all the trash that we produce. In order to address this issue waste management programs in developed countries have established a number of recycling and composting programs. The purpose of these programs is to divert as much waste as possible from sanitary landfill sites in order to extend their “life expectancy”. Despite the existence of well established recycling and composting programs some members of the general public choose not sort their waste. In response some local governing bodies have chosen to implement regulatory laws that crack down on these individuals.
For residents of North Carolina, as of October 1st 2009, a law was passed that makes it illegal to dispose of plastic containers in the garbage. The law applies more to municipalities and companies that handle waste disposal, however it still requires residents to sort their trash and bring their bottles to recycling facilities. North Carolina has some of the largest plastic processing plants. Landfills will be inspected periodically, but individuals are only going to be given a large fine if they are found disposing large amounts of plastic containers. However this ban poses a problem for residents that live in municipalities which do not have an established curb side recycling program or convenient access to recycling facilities. Some individuals have to drive their plastic waste over long distances in order to reach recycling facilities. The goal of this ban is to increase the number of plastic bottles recycled in the state. Due to the inconvenience of recycling for some individuals, and the lack of strictness towards imposing this new law it is reasonable to contemplate whether a more effective incentive can be implemented.
Another approach that could be taken towards implementing this law is providing economic incentives for companies and even residences. The law that plastic containers are to be banned from trash should still be upheld; however instead of applying a penalty, a reward could be instated instead that is using a carrot instead of a stick. On the individual level, plastic bottles could be collected in a system similar to beer bottle collection. Residents could be given a small sum of money per plastic container. These containers could be returned to special collection facilities. Another form of economic incentive that could apply to large companies could be a tax rebate or a tax reduction based on the amount of plastic recycled in a year. The companies and individuals could be paid money for recycling rather than having to pay a fine if caught not recycling.
I personally believe that the most effective system would be a combination of both regulatory control and economic incentives. Since North Carolina has some of the largest plastic processing plants already established, the new plastic recycling load should be relatively easy to accommodate. In addition, for areas that do not already have established recycling programs this law will provide impetus and ultimately result in more jobs. Since it would be highly inefficient to establish expensive surveillance systems to constantly monitor the plastic content of the trash, economic incentives should be provided. These incentives, such as small monetary sums or tax deductions, persuade people on the individual level to follow the law for reward rather than for fear of punishment. That being said a large monetary penalty should also be established in order to discourage individuals for whom the reward is not a sufficient incentive. This penalty should also be strictly enforced if an individual is caught.
In reality when trying to implement environmental change, both regulatory control and economic incentives offer positives and negatives. In certain situations one may be preferential over the other. However in this scenario, a combination of both regulatory control and economic incentives offer the optimal situation for both the local municipalities and residents.