Bipolarity of "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle" in Developed vs Developing Regions

In the American school system, the first embodiment of sustainability we’re taught is “Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle.” The ideology was introduced to promote sustainable living habits to revolutionize our planet for the better. Soon enough, it became widespread and standardized, so much so that it initiated grounds of controversy. This idea was rejected mainly due to an underlying and overlooked source: vagueness. The root of this concept was left out. People had the space to interpret this slogan as they liked. It became everything it wasn’t: a distraction and a scheme. There was a discrepancy between the interpretation of this concept in developing and developed countries.

The 3Rs of waste management aren’t distractions specifically from overconsumption and overproduction, yet they influence underlying issues within the global community. Those who fully understand and implement the 3Rs recognize their benefits, such as encouraging climate activism, promoting healthy/cheaper living, and optimizing resources. However, the challenge was not only the confusion but also the implementation of this core initiative. In developed countries, people are constantly exposed to new ideas and adaptations that they can afford to align themselves with, yet in developing countries, many obstacles come in the way - though lack of willingness is normally not one of them. This can affect the progressiveness and development of sustainability globally and promote regional superiority. Therefore, we can observe that initiatives such as “Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle” have different effects across developed versus developing countries.

The three R’s of waste management are: “Reduce: Only buy what you need, as the best way to reduce waste is by not creating it; Reuse: If you must acquire goods, consider getting used ones or finding substitutes; and Recycle: When disposing of your waste, look for ways to recycle it instead of sending it to a landfill.” (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle: Alternatives for Waste Management | New Mexico State University - BE BOLD. Shape the Future.) While these strategies are widely viewed as effective environmental practices, some controversy persists due to misconceptions. Common misunderstandings about waste management range from confusion over what can be recycled to insufficient access to reusable facilities. The three R’s of waste management aim to reduce greenhouse emissions, conserve natural resources, and lessen environmental impact. A survey conducted on a Chinese population found that “although the analyzed sample comprises educated individuals, there is a lack of participation in the 3R principles, as well as a lack of environmental knowledge.” (Samiha) The study suggests that while people know what the 3Rs of waste management are, they do not grasp its core principles.

There is a significant knowledge gap between the two sides of the world. Developed countries often possess a more advanced knowledge base regarding implementation and fundamental works, while developing countries may lack access to the same level of expertise. Additionally, developing countries constantly struggle with their lack of infrastructure, meaning they do not have the resources for an effective waste management system. In an economic context, developing countries already have very limited resources. They may prioritize other development goals, such as addressing areas of conflict and natural disasters. It seems unfair to hold them to the standard set by advanced countries without proper compensation. Governments, policymakers, and the global community need to educate and raise awareness about sustainable waste management, as well as to provide support for these programs without harming the country’s economy, to help bring them up to international standards.

This phenomenon exists as different extremes in relevance to location. The effectiveness of the 3Rs of waste management has a significant impact on the economy and development of developed and developing countries. In developed countries, the tendency to be informed and literate about waste management procedures is higher. A 2018 study found residents in developed countries had significantly higher levels of knowledge about waste management principles, including the 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle), compared to those in developing countries (p < 0.01)(Obasogie, Lee, and Lee 441-451). In addition to the economic development this concept promotes, it also sets a high environmental standard relative to other countries. Furthermore, it shifts our attention from aiding developing countries in the field to raising the bar higher, creating a “superiority” complex.

Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle are of utmost importance when it comes to sustainability. As long as the 3Rs of waste management are executed in innovative and researched methods there’s little room for overproduction and overconsumption. However, these principles differ in execution in developed versus developing countries and emphasize the costs versus benefits in both. Developed countries have made significant progress in waste management through optimizing product design for sustainability and minimizing packaging. As well as the implementation of EPR responsibilities which creates liability for producers, raising education and awareness through campaigns and events, increasing popularity and trend for second-hand goods, reusable product distribution, and advanced recycling technologies.

Developing countries aren’t able to reach this standard on their own. To emphasize, “Green on Green: Environmental Aid and Domestic Environmental Policy” is a study that delves into the lack of support given to developing countries by developed ones because they're preoccupied with advancing their own, whether it be for monetary value, status, or liability. The researchers used data from 14 developed nations including the United States, Japan, the UK, and Germany, and found that developing countries acquire less environmental aid: the study found that developing countries receive less environmental aid per capita in comparison to developed countries. This implies that developed countries are more focused on their environment rather than providing support to developing countries. (Bernauer, Mintz, and Sieben 242).

Arguably, the 3Rs are a pivotal component of sustainable development because they are not a fixed target to be achieved. Rather, it’s a process to refine sustainability and wasn’t intended to create an international hierarchy. While there are initial costs, it is beneficial in the long run. I believe these arguments present a sort of bias because although these waste management alternatives aren’t a “fixed target”. It’s still a journey for developing countries to be able to implement and address this process, and it would require years of work and cooperation to establish groups for the development of these initiatives, considering the countries may already be in other conflicts or addressing more impending disputes.

In addition to this, while the 3Rs of waste management may not have been created to encourage superiority amongst the global community, it has resulted in focusing only on creating a viable reputation for developed countries, rather than encouraging nations to help developing ones. Furthermore, the initial costs of executing the 3Rs in developing countries are way more than it seems. For one, many developing countries have weak currencies making an exchange of materials and setups for this process very tricky. Secondly, countries are considered “developing” due to the lack of average income in comparison to other nations, so they most likely won’t have the means to pay even for the initial costs unless they receive outside support. Initial costs are one thing, but what about costs along the way? Of course, nothing is free, so there will be costs for education, repairs to equipment, hiring a workforce, etc. These nations may want to prioritize spending money on more urgent matters. Unfortunately, the global community has yet to support these projects in developing countries as they are solely focused on gaining benefits for themselves and not promoting global sustainability and climate awareness.

We need to re-shift the focus back to humanity’s core values, which means helping one another. As a developed country while investing in humanitarian causes, it’s important to remember the several struggling nations out there working to meet the standard level. Not all aid is monetary. Help can be in the form of providing necessities for those undergoing crisis or educational volunteer work to promote activism. The global community should also focus on setting new bars to achieve, and rather than setting these bars for developing countries, we should set them for developed countries. This can help strengthen ties across countries and encourage climate action through diplomacy.

References:

Bernauer, Thomas, J. R. Mintz, and Bernd S. Sieben. "Green on Green: Environmental Aid and Domestic Environmental Policy." Journal of Environmental Economics, vol. 69, no. 3, 2010, pp. 242-253.

Sapawi, Safraa, et al. Theory of Planned and Sustainable Waste Management Behaviour. 18 Feb. 2024, encyclopedia.pub/entry/54998.

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle: Alternatives for Waste Management | New Mexico State University - BE BOLD. Shape the Future. pubs.nmsu.edu/_g/G314/index.html.

Obasogie, E. E., M. K. Lee, and J. Y. Lee. "Waste Management Knowledge and Behavior in Developed and Developing Countries." Waste Management & Research, vol. 36, no. 5, 2018, pp. 441-451. doi: 10.1177/0734242X18765414

Samiha, Bouanini. “The Importance of the 3R Principle of Municipal Solid Waste Management for Achieving Sustainable Development.” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, Richtmann Publishing, Sept. 2013. Crossref, doi:10.5901/mjss.2013.v4n3p129.