韓国における使用済み製品のリサイクル政策と拡大生産者責任

概要

論文の詳細を見る
OECD advocates EPR invented as effective approach to waste problem. In this paper, verified whether Korea would actually have introduced OECD's EPR. For example, product charge system must have aimed at reduction of waste without economical efficiency in recycling. However, "redoubling of government annual revenue" is evaluating as a desirable result. Therefore, this system has no motivation for reduction to producers. On the other hand, the purpose of deposit-refund system is recycling promotion of post-consumer products which has economical efficiency in recycling. However, amount of deposit-refund didn't promote recycling to producers, and promoted to pay deposit rather. Korea insists that deposit-refund system shifted to producer responsibility system by the reason of following to OECD. However, it will be hard to think that Korea aimed at "waste reduction, resources effective use, and toxic substance management" as OECD. If it is, just product charge subject without economical efficiency must have been shifted to producer responsibility system. Therefore, it can be said that the reason Korea introduced producer responsibility system isn't waste problem solution at least. Moreover, since Korea have much export for OECD countries, it is thought that Korea makes appeal to OECD countries of the EPR introduction as a trade strategy rather.
北東アジア学会の論文
2003-10-01