scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

Implementing Individual Producer Responsibility for Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment through Improved Financing

TLDR
In this paper, the authors present two alternative approaches to calculate charges for products sold by producers by classifying them according to their eventual end-of-life treatment requirements and cost, which can financially reward improved design, allocate costs of historic waste proportionately (on the basis of tonnes of new products sold), and provide sufficient financial guarantees against future waste costs and liabilities.
Abstract
(EPR) industrial ecology producer responsibility organizations (PROs) recycling Summary Under the European Union (EU) Waste Electrical and Electronics Equipment (WEEE) Directive, producers are responsible for financing the recycling of their products at end of life. A key intention of such extended producer responsibility (EPR) legislation is to provide economic incentives for producers to develop products that are easier to treat and recycle at end of life. Recent research has shown, however, that the implementation of EPR for WEEE has so far failed in this respect. Current WEEE systems calculate their prices according to simple mass-based allocation of costs to producers, based on broad collection categories containing a mixture of dif- ferent product types and brands. This article outlines two alternative approaches, which instead calculate charges for products sold by producers by classifying them according to their eventual end-of-life treatment requirements and cost. Worked examples indicate that these methods provide both effective and efficient frameworks for financing WEEE, poten- tially delivering financial incentives to producers substantial enough to affect their potential profitability and, as a likely consequence, the decisions relating to the design of their prod- ucts. In particular they fulfill three important criteria required by the WEEE Directive: they can financially reward improved design, allocate costs of historic waste proportionately (on the basis of tonnes of new products sold), and provide sufficient financial guarantees against future waste costs and liabilities. They are also relatively practical for implementa- tion because they are based solely on cost allocation and financing. Further research and investigation would be worthwhile to test and verify this approach using real-world data and under various scenarios.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Extended Producer Responsibility for E‐Waste: Individual or Collective Producer Responsibility?

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate the implications of collective and individual producer responsibility (CPR and IPR, respectively) models of product take-back laws for e-waste on manufacturers' design for product recovery (DfR) choices and profits, and on consumer surplus in the presence of product competition.
Journal ArticleDOI

An in-depth literature review of the waste electrical and electronic equipment context: trends and evolution.

TL;DR: The aim of this paper is to define and analyse the main areas of research on WEEE by offering a broader analysis of the relevant literature in this field published between 1992 and August 2014.
Journal ArticleDOI

Industry attitudes towards ecodesign standards for improved resource efficiency

TL;DR: In this article, the authors present an interview study with people in Nordic industries related to new eco-design requirements to generate recycling and resource efficiency, and the results of the interview study are shown that most interviewees were positive towards eco design rules that improve product durability and enable more recycling, but less favorable towards requirements on recycled content, longer consumer guarantees, and requirements on maximum disassembly time.
Journal ArticleDOI

Efficient Implementation of Collective Extended Producer Responsibility Legislation

TL;DR: Cost allocation mechanisms that induce participation in collective systems and maximize cost efficiency are developed and include the weighing of return shares based on processing costs and the rewarding of capacity contributions to collective systems.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Mechanical recycling of waste electric and electronic equipment: a review.

TL;DR: The physical and particle properties of WEEE are presented and it is expected that a mechanical recycling process will be developed for the upgrading of low metal content scraps.
Journal ArticleDOI

Extended Producer Responsibility for E‐Waste: Individual or Collective Producer Responsibility?

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate the implications of collective and individual producer responsibility (CPR and IPR, respectively) models of product take-back laws for e-waste on manufacturers' design for product recovery (DfR) choices and profits, and on consumer surplus in the presence of product competition.
Journal ArticleDOI

The growing strategic importance of end-of-life product management

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore various forms of take-back regulation and highlight some of the key features of the institutions that emerge in response, and present seven strategic product recovery alternatives.
Posted Content

Strategic, Financial, and Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility in Europe: A Producer Case Study

TL;DR: In this paper, the potential impacts of EPR for waste batteries, packaging, and WEEE on producers distributing products in Europe through a case study of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE)—responsible for marketing and distribution of PlayStation products.
Journal ArticleDOI

Market-based approaches to solid waste management

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors review the failures that have inhibited efficient waste management policy and practice in the past and provide an economic analysis of the comparative merits and limitations of the regulatory approach and the market-based approach.
Related Papers (5)