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.

E-waste Recycling in Taiwan

Abstract: In the year of 1998, the “Recycling Management Fund” was founded by Taiwan Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to be in charge of all the recycling and treatment items in accordance with WDA due to the extended producer responsibility (EPR) from the importers and manufactures. Manufacturers, importers, and sellers must pay a recycling fee as the resource Recycling Management Fund based on the sales or import amount and the rate approved by EPA. Taiwan is a key player in the global information and communications technology (ICT) industry including notebook computers, wafer contract foundries, IC encapsulation testing, and IC design. Yet, Taiwan is not only a leader in the IC technologies; it has also seen successes in reducing waste. The average volume of e-waste recycling amount increased from 30,087 ton/year in 2005 to 54,248 ton/year in 2014. Although EU legislation restricting the use of hazardous substances on waste electrical and electric equipment (WEEE) and promoting the collection and recycling of such equipment since 2003, a high percentage of e-waste collected in the west for recycling is still continuous exported to the developing countries in Asia. At the same time, a “Zero Waste” Policy for establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society (SMC) had been proposed by Taiwan government in 2008. The recycling scheme has clearly defined the roles among the government, producers, retails, and customers. This paper described the Taiwan model to recycle the e-waste, the recycling fee, subsides, and the related recycling system. The “Green Differential Fee Rate” was proposed in 2014, in order to encourage the environment-friendly product development, which might reduce the rate for recycling for the producers of green products. Obviously, “Green Differential Fee Rate” may form the driving force among stakeholders toward establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society (SMC) in the future.

EPR in a non-OECD Context: An introduction to research projects on the management of WEEE

Abstract: There has been an upsurge of interest in the principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR) among policy makers and scholars in non-OECD countries. The principle has been applied and its impacts studied rather extensively in various OECD countries. However, similar experiences are largely lacking in non-OECD countries. This paper presents some ongoing research and preliminary findings on the management of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). The research aims to explore both potentials and limitations of EPR under non-OECD conditions. Hitherto, there have been four projects in three countries: India, Thailand, and Argentina. The first project in India in 2007 investigated the specificity of this non-OECD context and the explanatory boundary of the principle. The second phase of the research studies a WEEE policy development in the three countries. At the time of writing, they appear to follow different courses of action. The India Government issued a guideline suggesting an incorporation of WEEE under the existing Hazardous Waste Rules. The Thai Government shows particular interest in economic instruments, such as product fees and deposit-refund system, and has been working on a draft law that would govern the use of these instruments for the management of some WEEE and other used products. In Argentina, a senator proposed a dedicated WEEE framework law based on EPR. Our analysis identifies collection of post-consumer WEEE as a major practical bottleneck particularly when there is a strong presence of the so-called informal sector. EPR can be a driving force for improvements by mobilising resources from producers and channelling them to end-of-life management. In addition, in a long run, it can lead to design changes in products and product systems. However, market anomalies in a non-OECD context such as sizeable black/grey markets for several product groups and/or illegal import of used products can put identifiable legal producers at a disadvantageous position and retard feedback mechanisms in an EPR programme. Thus, the applicability of policy alternatives should be assessed against the conditions of particular contexts. We also discuss the importance of problem definition in policy processes.