Another strategy which could be considered is the increase of consistent funding for reduction and recycling efforts. This suggestion was adapted from the successful recycling program in Michigan, 2016. Their recycling program was successful with various measures, and one of which is the use of consistent funding. They had dedicated funding for recycling in their communities based on a range of financing options such as revenue sharing with the material processors, signing franchise agreements, passing a waste and recycling millage, using general fund, and seeking grants.

In a local news report from The Straits Times, it shared that a huge debate sparked off amongst people, when they learn about the news of a possible new system – imposing a low fee for the use of plastic bags in supermarkets. A concern raised was that people in the low-income group may suffer, as it becomes an extra cost to them.

Hence, I feel that consistent funding may be a good strategy for Singapore to consider and to  find ways to consistently and fairly fund recycling efforts, so that at the minimum, ensure that there is minimal or no economic disincentive for household and business recycling. An example could be – providing reasonable incentives to people for every bag of items recycled, where the consistent funding would be able to cover the cost for this initiative.