Rethinking Landfill Governance in Canada:
Policy Lessons and Transferability from South Korea’s Circular Waste Economy
Dr. Adefarati Oloruntoba
Executive Summary
Landfill systems are increasingly becoming climate governance infrastructures rather than simple waste disposal facilities. In Canada, landfill methane accounted for approximately 17% of national methane emissions in 2023, placing growing pressure on governments to modernize waste systems under federal net zero commitments and the Global Methane Pledge. In response, Canada introduced the Landfill Methane Regulations (SOR/2025-279) under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), establishing new national standards for methane monitoring, leak detection, reporting, and landfill gas management.
Despite these advances, Canada continues to face fragmented landfill governance, infrastructure shortages, rising municipal waste generation, landfill capacity constraints, and growing environmental justice concerns in northern and Indigenous communities. Meanwhile, South Korea has developed one of the world’s most technologically integrated circular waste systems through landfill bans, pay as you throw mechanisms, RFID enabled smart bins, advanced food waste diversion, and landfill gas utilization technologies.
However, South Korea’s transition also reveals important risks, including growing dependence on incineration, regional political conflict, infrastructure inequality, and rising waste treatment costs. This paper argues that Canada should pursue selective policy transfer rather than direct replication of the Korean model. Key recommendations include strengthening organics diversion policies, expanding landfill gas to energy systems, piloting digital waste pricing mechanisms, supporting Indigenous waste infrastructure, and integrating landfill governance into broader climate and circular economy policy frameworks.
1. Canada’s Emerging Landfill Governance Crisis
Landfills are no longer merely waste disposal sites. Increasingly, they function as climate infrastructures, energy systems, and critical nodes within circular economy transitions. The decomposition of organic waste such as food, paper, and yard materials produces methane, a greenhouse gas with a warming potential significantly greater than carbon dioxide over short time horizons. According to Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), landfill emissions represented approximately 17% of Canada’s methane emissions in 2023.
Canada’s growing waste challenge is occurring simultaneously with intensifying climate obligations under the Global Methane Pledge and the federal commitment to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. These pressures have transformed landfill governance into a national climate policy issue. In December 2025, the federal government enacted the Landfill Methane Regulations (LMR) under CEPA to establish national methane performance standards for municipal solid waste landfills. The regulations impose methane surface concentration limits, leak detection and repair requirements, annual methane generation assessments, and enhanced monitoring obligations.
At the same time, Canadian municipalities are facing escalating landfill capacity constraints. Toronto’s Green Lane Landfill is projected to reach capacity by 2035, while conflicts surrounding waste stockpiles, odour emissions, and landfill expansion are intensifying in urban regions such as Calgary and Vancouver. Northern and Indigenous communities face additional vulnerabilities linked to permafrost limitations, marine contamination, and inadequate waste infrastructure.
In contrast, South Korea has pursued an aggressive circular waste governance model integrating landfill bans, digital monitoring systems, behavioral pricing mechanisms, and advanced waste to energy technologies. While the Korean model offers important policy lessons, it also reveals significant implementation risks that Canada must carefully evaluate before attempting policy transfer.
Following the implementation of a direct landfill ban in the capital region, waste intake at Incheon's Sudokwon facility plummeted. On January 2,2026, the site processed only 66 tons of residential refuse—a sharp 97% decrease from the historical daily average of 2,045 tons (Yonhap). Photo credit: Jung Min-ho, The Korean Times
2. Canada’s Landfill Governance Crisis
2.1 Methane Regulation and Compliance Pressures
Canada’s 2025 Landfill Methane Regulations represent the most significant federal intervention in landfill methane governance in decades. The regulations apply to landfills containing more than 450,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste or facilities receiving more than 20,000 tonnes annually with over 200,000 tonnes of waste in place. Facilities exceeding methane generation thresholds of 664 tonnes per year for open landfills and 1,000 tonnes per year for closed landfills face extensive compliance obligations.
The regulations impose strict performance based monitoring requirements. Surface methane concentrations cannot exceed 500 ppmv, while zone averaged methane concentrations are limited to 25 ppmv over 4,500 m² zones. Landfill operators must conduct leak detection surveys using US EPA Method 21 protocols at least three times annually, maintain continuous gas monitoring systems, and measure landfill gas flow rates every 15 minutes. Emerging drone based monitoring approaches aligned with EPA OTM-51 standards are also permitted.
These requirements significantly increase technical and financial burdens on municipalities and landfill operators. Compliance now demands sophisticated GIS mapping systems, continuous monitoring infrastructure, calibration records, quality assurance programs, and extensive reporting through ECCC’s Regulatory Services Platform. For many smaller municipalities, especially in remote regions, these obligations present serious implementation challenges.
Nevertheless, the regulations also create economic opportunities. Landfill gas recovery systems can generate renewable natural gas (RNG), electricity, and low carbon fuels eligible for compliance credits under Canada’s Clean Fuel Regulations. Offset protocols under the federal Greenhouse Gas Offset Credit System further incentivize methane recovery projects. More than 100 Canadian landfills currently operate landfill gas recovery systems, but many facilities remain technologically underdeveloped.
2.2 Infrastructure Constraints and Municipal Pressures
Canada’s waste infrastructure challenges extend beyond methane regulation. Landfill dependency remains deeply embedded within provincial and municipal waste systems. Alberta continues to landfill approximately 1,034 kilograms of waste per person annually, the highest rate in Canada. Despite strong beverage container recycling performance, regional landfill dependency remains substantial.
Urban municipalities are increasingly encountering severe capacity limitations. Toronto’s Green Lane Landfill, located approximately 200 kilometres west of the city, is projected to reach capacity by 2035. New provincial legislation granting municipalities veto authority over landfill developments has further complicated expansion efforts.
In Calgary, public frustration intensified in 2026 following the emergence of a massive waste stockpile at the Ecco Recycling and Energy facility near the Shepard Industrial landfill area. Residents reported debris dispersion, odour concerns, and visual pollution associated with the temporary accumulation of construction and demolition materials. Although the company attributed the issue to interruptions in low carbon fuel off take agreements, the incident revealed broader tensions surrounding urban landfill operations, community compatibility, and waste infrastructure governance.
Illegal dumping also remains a persistent issue across Canadian municipalities. Ontario has experienced growing incidents involving unauthorized soil dumping and improper leachate disposal, reflecting both regulatory enforcement gaps and broader weaknesses in construction waste governance.
2.3 Northern and Indigenous Environmental Justice
Canada’s landfill governance crisis is particularly severe in Arctic and Indigenous communities. Across Inuit Nunangat, landfill systems are frequently located dangerously close to marine environments due to geographical and infrastructure limitations. In communities such as Iqaluit, Nain, and Tuktoyaktuk, landfill sites are situated within a few hundred metres of coastal waters.
Permafrost conditions often prevent conventional waste burial, while limited infrastructure forces many communities to rely on open burning practices. Plastics and hazardous materials frequently enter marine ecosystems, threatening food security and traditional harvesting systems. Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Oceans North have both argued that inadequate waste infrastructure represents a broader environmental justice and reconciliation issue.
Climate change further intensifies these risks through coastal erosion, thawing permafrost, and increased environmental vulnerability. Unlike southern municipalities, many northern communities lack basic recycling systems, hazardous waste processing facilities, or engineered landfill infrastructure. These disparities demonstrate that landfill governance in Canada is also a question of environmental equity and Indigenous infrastructure investment.
3. South Korea’s Circular Waste Governance Model
3.1 Behavioral Governance and Smart Waste Systems
South Korea has developed one of the world’s most technologically advanced food waste management systems. Following severe landfill capacity crises during the 1990s, the country implemented a nationwide pay as you throw system in 1995 and banned food waste disposal in landfills entirely in 2005.
Today, RFID enabled smart bins have become central to South Korea’s waste governance model. Residents dispose of food waste through digitally monitored bins that weigh waste down to the gram and automatically charge households based on disposal quantities. In Seoul, households pay approximately $120 CAD per tonne of food waste. The system integrates behavioral economics directly into waste management by providing real time feedback on household waste generation.
Resident using an RFID bin at residence in Seoul to weigh food waste. Photo credit: Rapheal Rashid/The Guardian
The results have been substantial. South Korea recycled approximately 96.8% of its 4.81 million tonnes of food waste in 2023. Seoul alone operates over 27,000 RFID units serving more than 80% of apartment residents. Food waste generation in Seoul declined by nearly 24% over a decade, while some apartment complexes achieved reductions exceeding 50%.
The Korean model combines mandatory waste separation, landfill restrictions, digital tracking systems, and extensive processing infrastructure. Nationally, approximately 42% of recycled food waste becomes animal feed, 33% becomes compost, and 16% is converted into biogas through anaerobic digestion systems.
3.2 Landfill Bans and Incineration Dependence
South Korea’s landfill transition accelerated further in January 2026 with the implementation of a direct landfill ban for municipal waste within the Seoul metropolitan region. Under the policy, municipal waste must be incinerated or processed prior to disposal. Similar restrictions are scheduled for nationwide implementation by 2030.
An underground food waste processing plant in South Korea. Photo credit: Rapheal Rashid, The Guardian.
Although the policy dramatically reduced direct landfill disposal, it also exposed major infrastructure challenges. Municipalities lacking incineration capacity increasingly rely on private contractors and waste transport to other regions. Seoul currently faces an estimated shortfall of approximately 1,000 tonnes per day in incineration capacity. Proposed incinerator developments in districts such as Mapo have generated strong public opposition due to concerns over air quality, health impacts, and local environmental burdens.
Environmental organizations including the Korea Federation for Environmental Movements have criticized the policy for prioritizing disposal infrastructure rather than waste prevention. By early 2026, 127 municipalities planned to expand incineration infrastructure, while only 34 prioritized waste reduction measures. Critics argue that the landfill ban risks entrenching an incineration dependent system rather than advancing genuine circular economy objectives.
3.3 Landfill Gas, Carbon Markets, and Waste to Energy
South Korea has also positioned landfill gas management within broader climate and energy strategies. State backed organizations such as Korea Midland Power (Komipo) and the Seoul Metropolitan Landfill Management Corporation are developing international landfill gas projects under Article 6 carbon market mechanisms.
Simultaneously, Korean researchers have pioneered landfill gas to sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) technologies. In 2026, the Korea Research Institute of Chemical Technology successfully demonstrated a pilot facility converting landfill methane into approximately 100 kilograms of SAF daily through plasma reforming and Fischer Tropsch synthesis. The modular system used methane rich landfill gas as feedstock and operated within a relatively compact 100 m² facility.
These developments reflect a major conceptual shift. Landfills are increasingly viewed not as terminal waste sites but as integrated energy infrastructures capable of generating low carbon fuels, carbon credits, renewable gas, and industrial energy resources.
4. What Canada Can Learn
Canada can learn important lessons from South Korea’s waste governance model, but direct replication would be neither politically nor geographically realistic.
Several policy mechanisms demonstrate high transferability potential. Enhanced organics diversion policies, stronger landfill methane monitoring systems, expanded landfill gas to RNG projects, and broader extended producer responsibility frameworks align well with existing Canadian regulatory structures. Digital methane monitoring systems, centralized reporting frameworks, and improved leak detection technologies could also strengthen implementation of the new federal methane regulations.
Pay as you throw systems and RFID enabled smart bins offer moderate transferability potential, particularly in dense urban municipalities such as Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal. These systems have demonstrated measurable behavioral impacts in South Korea by directly linking waste generation to household costs. However, implementation across Canada would face challenges associated with housing diversity, municipal fragmentation, privacy concerns, and public resistance to increased user fees.
Some aspects of the Korean model demonstrate low transferability potential. South Korea’s highly centralized governance structure, dense urban form, and strong cultural compliance norms differ substantially from Canada’s provincial autonomy, dispersed population, and geographically remote communities. National landfill bans similar to those implemented in Seoul would likely face severe political and logistical resistance in many Canadian provinces.
Importantly, South Korea’s experience also highlights potential unintended consequences. Aggressive landfill restrictions without sufficient infrastructure planning can accelerate dependence on incineration rather than reducing waste generation itself. Canada must therefore avoid replacing landfill dependency with excessive reliance on combustion based waste systems that may create new environmental and public opposition challenges.
Rather than pursuing wholesale replication, Canada should adopt a selective transfer strategy focused on climate aligned landfill modernization, organics diversion, methane utilization, and behavioral incentives while maintaining flexibility across provincial and regional contexts.
5. Policy Recommendations
- Establish a National Organics Diversion Framework
Canada should develop mandatory organics diversion targets tied directly to federal methane reduction objectives. Provinces and municipalities should receive dedicated funding support for composting and anaerobic digestion infrastructure.
- Expand Landfill Gas to Energy Systems
Federal and provincial governments should accelerate landfill gas utilization projects for renewable natural gas, electricity generation, and emerging fuels such as sustainable aviation fuel. Expanded access to carbon credits and Clean Fuel Regulation markets would improve economic viability.
- Pilot Smart Waste Pricing Systems
Major urban municipalities should pilot RFID enabled pay as you throw systems for food waste diversion. Pilot programs should prioritize dense residential regions where collection logistics and behavioral impacts are most feasible.
- Create a Northern and Indigenous Waste Infrastructure Strategy
Dedicated federal infrastructure funding should support engineered landfill systems, hazardous waste management, recycling capacity, and marine protection measures across Arctic and Indigenous communities.
- Integrate Landfills into Climate and Circular Economy Policy
Landfills should be governed as climate infrastructure rather than isolated waste facilities. National policy frameworks should integrate landfill methane, circular economy objectives, low carbon fuels, and environmental justice considerations into coordinated governance systems.
Conclusion
Canada’s landfill governance challenge is no longer simply about waste disposal capacity. Increasingly, it is a question of climate governance, infrastructure modernization, circular economy transition, public health, and environmental justice. The 2025 Landfill Methane Regulations represent a significant policy shift toward performance-based methane management, yet major governance, infrastructure, and implementation gaps remain.
South Korea demonstrates the transformative potential of integrated waste governance systems combining landfill restrictions, behavioral pricing mechanisms, digital monitoring technologies, and advanced waste to energy infrastructure. However, the Korean experience also reveals the dangers of over reliance on incineration and infrastructure driven approaches that fail to sufficiently prioritize waste prevention.
The future of landfill governance in Canada will depend not on eliminating waste entirely, but on transforming landfill systems from passive disposal sites into actively managed climate and resource infrastructures capable of supporting methane mitigation, circular economy objectives, and long-term environmental sustainability.
Selected References
- Environment and Climate Change Canada (2025). Landfill Methane Regulations, SOR/2025-279.
- Statistics Canada (2025). More plastic diverted from landfills in Canada, but waste and pollution remain high.
- The Guardian (2025). Smart bins measuring food waste in South Korea.
- CBC News (2025). How confusion and inconvenience are filling B.C. landfills with recyclable plastics.
- Eco-Business (2026). South Korea landfill ban drives shift toward incineration.
- Canada’s National Observer (2025). Toronto struggles to find places for its waste.
