Extended producer responsibility

About: Extended producer responsibility is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1120 publications have been published within this topic receiving 26805 citations. The topic is also known as: EPR.

Factors Shaping the Recycling Systems for Plastic Packaging Waste—A Comparison between Austria, Germany and The Netherlands

Abstract: Setting up strategies for a sound management of plastic packaging waste (PPW) is becoming increasingly crucial at many levels of the value chain in Europe. After the very first implementation of an extended producer responsibility scheme in Germany in 1991, many EU Countries followed. This resulted in a complex network of schemes that differ from one member state to another. This paper brings together the three latest studies describing the current flows of PPW across the waste value chain from Austria (reference year 2013), Germany and the Netherlands (reference year 2017). With this aim, the models of the three single studies have been adapted to fit into a common model, allowing to perform a comparative analysis. Although with a relatively comparable product market, the three countries have different management systems (e.g., separate collection systems, target sorting products and treatment of residual waste), reflecting different national strategies to achieve the circular economy targets. Recycling rates (in terms of washed milled goods at the output of the recycling process) for the three countries resulted in 23%, 43% and 30% of the total mass of PPW generated in, respectively, Austria, Germany and the Netherlands. The fraction of mixed recycled plastics, relevant for Germany and the Netherlands only, was determined to be one of the major determinants of the differences in recycling rates. Furthermore, the discussion revolves around new political targets that have the potential to contribute to addressing the issue of tradeoff between quantity and quality of recycled plastics placed on the market, with measures such as design-for-recycling and eco-modulation of EPR fees playing a critical role, while also pointing out the aspects that inevitably hinder closed-loop recycling.

Extended Producer Responsibility and Product Design: Economic Theory and Selected Case Studies

Abstract: A core characteristic of extended producer responsibility (EPR) policies is that they place some responsibility for a product’s end-of-life environmental impacts on the original producer and seller of that product. The intent is to provide incentives for producers to make design changes that reduce waste, such as improving product recyclability and reusability, reducing material usage, and downsizing products. This paper assesses whether the range of policies that fall under the EPR umbrella can spur this “design for environment” (DfE). It summarizes the economics literature on the issue and describes conceptually how policies should affect design. It then analyzes three case studies in detail and two more case studies more briefly. The conclusion reached is that some DfE—especially reductions in material use and product downsizing—can be achieved with most EPR policies, including producer take-back mandates and combined fee/subsidy approaches. However, none of these alternative policies as they are currently implemented are likely to have a large impact on other aspects of DfE.

Individual Producer Responsibility: A Remaining Challenge under the WEEE Directive1

Abstract: The regulatory approach of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive explicitly places ‘producer responsibility’ on the centre stage. The producer is obliged to ‘take into full account and facilitate’ primarily function-maintaining measures, such as ‘repair’ and ‘upgrading’ as well as ‘reuse’; only subsequently are material-maintaining measures mentioned in the form of ‘disassembly and recycling’. The main incentive established by the Directive is the allocation of costs. Every producer ‘shall be responsible for financing the operations . . . relating to the waste from his own products’. In practice, however, individual producer responsibility is transferred to a collective system in which the financial incentive for function-maintaining measures only has a minimal effect. If one wants to encourage the producer to decide in favour of individual producer responsibility, the machine-readable identification of products is needed to allocate costs according to the polluter-pays principle. At the same time, it also allows for improved monitoring of product and waste flows, on the basis of which illegal waste shipments would also become easier to detect. This article describes the basic legislative provisions of product responsibility and their practical implementation using the example of Germany. It also shows the ways in which a machine-readable identification and information system is needed to support the environmental effectiveness of the WEEE system and discusses the necessary legal adaptation that is required.

International regulations and treaties on electronic waste (e-waste)

Abstract: Different policies are being developed worldwide to deal with electronic waste (e-waste) which is one of the fastest growing waste streams in modern society. European Union's Directives on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) and Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) are pioneers on the issue. Japan, China and Korea have implemented similar laws. In addition Japan, Canada and State of California in the USA have adopted Advanced Recycling Fee systems. United Nations through Basel Convention adopted the Nairobi declaration on e-waste in 2006. The paper deals with latest developments on the major international laws, regulations and activities related to e-waste.