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

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) legislation, making producers responsible for financing and organizing take-back and recycling of waste batteries, packaging, end-of-life vehicles (ELVs), and waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), has been or is currently in the process of being implemented in 29 different countries in Europe following introduction of European Union directives. This article reviews 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.
There are presently more than 250 producer responsibility organizations (PROs) established to meet EPR obligations in Europe, which contrasts to the single national recycling schemes founded in the late 1990s. SCEE estimates it avoided anetcostof €408,000 in 2005 by introducing competitive review of PRO services (against a total net take-back cost of €401,000).To meet increasingly extensive compliance obligations, SCEE has initiated new activities, with considerable implications for the company's legal, sales data administration, procurement, accounting, and product and packaging approval practices.
Considering the ultimate aim of EPR to establish economic incentives for improved product design, several significant political and practical obstacles are described from SCEE's case and industry situation. Although the principle of EPR is indeed interesting, its practical application in Europe may require refinement. Producers, given adequate support by policy makers, still have opportunities to develop new processes under the WEEE Directive to facilitate design for the environment.     

Comparative Analysis of Extended Producer Responsibility Policy in the United States and Canada

This article analyzes the policy choices and programmatic elements of extended producer responsibility (EPR) as implemented in the United States and Canada. The article traces the historical development of EPR in each country and defines common features of EPR in each nation. The U.S. states and the Canadian provinces have assumed the primary role, rather than the federal governments, for enacting producer responsibility requirements in their respective countries. However, the paths taken demonstrate several fundamental differences, including the prevalence of individual versus collective responsibility and the financing mechanisms implemented for EPR. Given the deepening experience with EPR and the breadth of its application to a widening array of products in the United States, the Canadian model for EPR is starting to receive more examination from policy makers in the United States, indicating that the policy and programmatic differences between the two nations may eventually be narrowing. The comparative policy analysis is illustrated through the lens of EPR regulatory efforts for waste electronics, with particular profiles of the programs in the State of Minnesota and Province of Ontario. Both approaches broadly reflect many of the policy considerations and governance and programmatic themes that dominate EPR programs in each country. Finally, the article offers recommendations for collaborative work between the United States and Canada to explore consistency between programs and other complementary strategies to support producer responsibility activities.     

End‐of‐life product management as a resilience driver for developing countries: A policy experiment for used tires in Ecuador

Over the last decades, a number of new environmental policies have been designed to improve waste management. Among them, extended producer responsibility (EPR) has introduced a mechanism to shift the environmental and financial burden of end‐of‐life products from public management to producers. Recently, EPR has been adopted by a growing number of developing countries, but this policy often struggles in being effectively implemented in such contexts, missing the opportunity of using waste management as a sustainability driver. By discussing the EPR for end‐of‐life tires (ELTs) in Ecuador, this paper proposes a different approach in designing and implementing EPR schemes in developing countries: it recommends consideration of social sustainability, rather than merely copying foreign management frameworks. To address this point, two case studies on socially directed ELT applications were designed and carried out. The case studies aimed at improving resilience of vulnerable populations to natural disasters by increasing the resistance of housing and settlements against catastrophic events using civil engineering applications. The analysis of the case studies’ outcomes brings to light possible policy adjustments, in which social sustainability goals are taken into account within the national EPR scheme. The Ecuadorian case also highlights the benefit of employing an adaptive governance approach when dealing with challenging urban management topics, such as informality (a widespread phenomenon in developing countries) and resilience.     

India's E‐Waste Rules and Their Impact on E‐Waste Management Practices: A Case Study

India, like many other developed and developing countries, has adopted an extended producer responsibility (EPR) approach for electronic waste (e‐waste) management under its E‐waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011. Under these rules, producers have been made responsible for setting up collection centers of e‐waste and financing and organizing a system for environmentally sound management of e‐waste. In this article, we use the implementation of these rules in Ahmedabad in western India as a case study to conduct a critical analysis of the implementation of India's Rules. Interviews of main stakeholder groups, including a sample of regulated commercial establishments, regulatory agencies enforcing the Rules, informal actors involved in waste collection and handling, as well as publicly available information on the implementation constitute data for our case study. Our results indicate that while there has been an increase in the formal waste processing capacity after the implementation of the Rules, only 5% to 15% of the total waste generated is likely channeled through formal processing facilities. While the EPR regulation forced the producers to take action on a few relatively inexpensive aspects of the Rules, the collection and recycling system has not been made convenient for the consumers to deposit e‐waste in formal collection and recycling centers. Based on our findings, we argue that Indian EPR regulation should go beyond simple take‐back mandates and consider implementing other policy instruments such as a deposit‐refund system. An important implication for developing countries is the need for careful attention to instrument choice and design within EPR regulations.     

An Input‐Output Model of Extended Producer Responsibility

Under an extended producer responsibility (EPR) system, when a producer delivers a product to the market it must also pay a takeback fee, which is used to cover the costs of end‐of‐life disposal. EPR systems are currently used in Europe and beyond to manage a variety of products, including packaging and used tires. In this article we develop an input‐output (IO) model that is able to assess the impacts of an EPR system, and is based on the waste IO (WIO) model. The WIO model is itself a hybrid‐unit model extension of the Leontief model that is able to capture the substitution effect between recycled/recovered material/energy from waste treatment and their non‐waste cognates. The resulting EPRIO model, besides the conventional direct and indirect effects of the Leontief model and the substitution effects of the WIO model, is able to capture the opportunity costs of financing the EPR system, and additionally requires the specification of an alternative waste management policy, with its own opportunity costs. The impact of an EPR policy is thus the difference between the impacts of the reference EPR and the alternative waste treament policies. The resulting model is illustrated with a simple example of a used tire management EPR system.     

Extended Producer Responsibility in Thailand

Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) sheds light on the dimmer side of production and consumption patterns in modern societies. The rapid increase in its quantity and complexity contribute to the challenges it poses to solid waste management systems. Several members of the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) have relied on the principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR) to tackle the issue, with varying degrees of success. Several non‐OECD countries, including Thailand, are now developing WEEE programs and are looking for lessons from these first movers. This case study aims to provide an understanding both of this context and of the EPR program for WEEE proposed for Thailand. It finds that EPR mechanisms in general, and the proposed buy‐back system financed by product fees in Thailand in particular, have a strong potential to consolidate WEEE collection for the formal recycling sector by offering end users monetary incentives. On the negative side, this is an expensive combination of policy instruments, and the institutional design of the governmental fund is rigid. The policy proposal also contains no mechanism for product redesign—one of the objectives in the national WEEE strategy. This article suggests that the effectiveness of the policy might benefit from more flexibility at the compliance scheme level, in order to lessen the monopoly of the governmental fund, as well as the introduction of differentiated fees to promote environmentally friendly products.     

From Legal Transplants to Sustainable Transition

Extended producer responsibility (EPR), which assigns significant responsibility to producers to take back their end‐of‐life products to create incentives for redesign of products with lower life cycle environmental impacts, has come to a crossroad facing a trade‐off between the original innovation‐oriented regime design and the cost‐efficiency challenges in practice. This is particularly true in its implementation in non‐Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) countries as they are trying to transplant the “best practices” from OECD countries, for there is increasing skepticism as to whether EPR is suitable for developing countries at all. As an important producer of electronic products and destination of electronic waste (e‐waste) flows in the world, China has been expected to play a vital role in the evolution of global governance based on the idea of EPR, either to create new ways for producers to perform their end‐of‐life strategies, or to reshape the mode of production and consumption with its fast‐growing market. However, the establishment of EPR in China has been long and full of difficulties. This article reviews the status and trends in the establishment of an EPR system for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) management in China. We use the framework of a multilevel perspective of transition theory in our analysis to characterize the complex interactions among various agents in the evolution of the Chinese system from initial innovation‐oriented design to the current efficiency‐oriented version. An ongoing research framework for evaluation of the EPR program in China is outlined as the research agenda in coming years.     

Producer Responsibility Organizations Development and Operations

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) regulations are now in effect in 27 European Union member states and are applicable to up to 100 million tonnes of waste packaging, batteries, automobiles, and electrical and electronic products annually. This article investigates the implementation of EPR through a case study of European Recycling Platform (ERP) UK Ltd., the UK arm of one of the largest producer responsibility organizations (PROs) in Europe, recycling more than 1.5 million tonnes of waste electrical and electronic equipment to date. Previous research is extremely limited on the detailed operations of PROs. This case is presented as an example illustrating typical operational challenges PROs face in implementing EPR, such as how PROs gain an understanding of the waste management infrastructure and legislation in each country, collect sufficient volumes of waste using cost‐effective arrangements, and maintain uninterrupted collection, treatment, and recycling services. The case study provides new insights and context on the practical implementation of EPR regulations relevant for both policy makers and researchers.     

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

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 different 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, potentially 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 products. 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 implementation 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.     

Stakeholders Influence and Internal Championing of Product Stewardship in the Italian Food Packaging Industry

Environmental management is becoming a top issue on managers' agendas in several industries. The adoption and implementation of a sound "green" strategy involves following product stewardship practices. Product stewardship is the idea that manufacturers, rather than consumers, governments, or waste companies, ought to take responsibility for the recycling and disposal of their products at the end of their life cycle. This article is aimed at investigating the relationships between the adoption of product stewardship practices and the involvement of different actors in the decision-making process. By means of discriminant analysis, 120 firms have been classified into two different environmental profiles. Results indicate that firms that are more committed to product stewardship differ from less-committed firms in the influence exerted by different stakeholders and in the supportive role played by the management at different hierarchical and functional levels. In general, it appears that top management involvement in the decision-making process is a critical condition for the successful championship of product stewardship. In addition, the effective implementation of product stewardship along the product life-cycle stages is correlated to a strong commitment on the part of chief technical officers and development engineers rather than of manufacturing or marketing managers.     

Operational Perspectives on Extended Producer Responsibility

We revisit three important assumptions about extended producer responsibility (EPR) that originate from academia, policy, or practice: (1) A central objective of EPR should be to induce product designs for the environment; (2) collective EPR implementations mute incentives to design for the environment; and (3) more stringent EPR policy parameters will generate better environmental outcomes. We discuss the potential shortcomings of these assumptions from an operations perspective and their implications for academic and policy research.     

With a Little Help from EPR?: Technological Change and Innovation in the Norwegian Plastic Packaging and Electronics Sectors

In this article we discuss the interplay between extended producer responsibility (EPR) and technological change and innovation (TCI) in Norway. We ask whether Norwegian EPR policy has an effect on TCI and, if so, whether it makes any difference how the EPR policies are designed. By carrying out a comparative study between the plastic packaging (PP) sector and electrical and electronic (EE) sector in Norway, we conclude that there is a correlation between Norwegian EPR policy and TCI, but the causality is rather weak. EPR has an effect on downstream activities through increased recycling and indirectly through institutional innovation and learning. It does not, however, make a significant difference how the policies are designed, because they are considered similar by a majority of actors contributing financially to the EPR schemes. As for technological change and innovation upstream, the role of Norwegian EPR policies in the observed trends is not significant. Other factors such as the EPR-based Restriction on Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive promulgated by the European Union (EE sector) and the need for competitiveness (PP sector) seem far more important. In order to make collective EPR policies more powerful in inducing technological change and innovation, decision-makers should consider more specific measures that directly address the core businesses of the producers.     

Extended Producer Responsibility in the United States

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is a policy approach that requires manufacturers to finance the costs of recycling or safely disposing of products consumers no longer want. This article describes the evolution of EPR policies in the United States, focusing on the role of states as policy actors. For their part, federal lawmakers have not embraced EPR policies except to remove some barriers to state‐level initiatives. In the two‐decade period from 1991 to 2011, U.S. states enacted more than 70 EPR laws. In addition, manufacturers have implemented voluntary programs to collect and recycle products, but those efforts have proven largely ineffective in capturing significant quantities of waste products. With the help of new coalitions of diverse interest groups, recently states have renewed efforts to establish effective EPR programs, enacting 40 laws in the period 2008–2011. Several state initiatives suggest a more promising future for EPR.     

From Cradle to Grave: Extended Producer Responsibility for Household Hazardous Wastes in British Columbia

Household hazardous wastes (HHWs), the discarded pesticides, solvents, paints, lubricating oil, and similar products common to residences throughout the industrial world, create problems for governments charged with managing solid waste. When disposed of improperly in landfills or incinerators or if dumped illegally, HHW may contribute to soil and water contamination. A most common management tool for HHW is a special collection effort that segregates HHW from normal trash and disposes of it in an approved manner, all at a higher cost to the governmental jurisdiction. The Canadian province of British Columbia (BC) has undertaken a different approach, based on the use of extended producer responsibility (EPR). BC's efforts began in 1992 with adoption of a regulation on used lubricating oil (lube oil). More than 40 million liters (L) of used lube oil have been collected annually through the EPR system established under this regulation. A regulation establishing producer responsibility for postconsumer paints followed in 1994. BC enacted an additional regulation establishing EPR in 1997 for solvents/flammable liquids, domestic pesticides, gasoline, and pharmaceuticals. As a result of the application of EPR to HHW, local government costs for managing HHW and the amount of HHW identified in municipal waste have declined. Although the regulations appear to have mixed success in prompting consumers to avoid products that result in HHW, there are indications that they may be more effective than conventional management efforts. Based on BC's experience with EPR, key factors for successful implementation include maintaining flexibility in program design, creating viable funding alternatives, aggressive enforcement to provide a level playing field, and adopting policies that maximize diversion of HHW from landfills, while minimizing waste generation, setting targets for reuse and recycling, promoting consumer awareness and convenience, involving local government jurisdictions, and monitoring outcomes.     

A Case Discussion on Market‐Based Extended Producer Responsibility: The Minnesota Electronics Recycling Act

In this article, we analyze the Minnesota Electronics Recycling Act to explore the benefits and potential drawbacks of a market‐based extended producer responsibility (EPR) legislation implementation with operational flexibility for manufacturers. Based on publicly available reports and stakeholder interviews, we find that the Minnesota Act attains two key goals of market‐based EPR (i.e., higher cost efficiencies and substantial landfill diversion); however, this may come at the expense of selective collection and recycling, an increased burden on local governments, and a loss of balance in contractual power between stakeholders. We observe that these concerns arise because of specific flexibility provisions afforded to manufacturers that allow them to operationalize their EPR compliance with a cost‐efficiency focus. Thus, we conclude that EPR goals must be carefully translated into operating rules in order to achieve goals while avoiding unintended consequences.     

Implementing Extended Producer Responsibility Legislation

The goal of this article is to contribute to the understanding of how the multiple, and sometimes conflicting, stakeholder perspectives and prevailing conditions (economic, geographic, etc.) in the implementation locality shape extended producer responsibility (EPR) “on the ground.” We provide an in‐depth examination of the implementation dimension of EPR in a specific case study by examining concrete activities at the operational front of the collection and recycling system, and probing the varying stakeholder preferences that have driven a specific system to its status quo. To this end, we conduct a detailed case study of the Washington State EPR implementation for electronic waste. We provide an overview of various stakeholder perspectives and their implications for the attainment of EPR policy objectives in practice. These findings shed light on the intrinsic complexity of EPR implementation. We conclude with recommendations on how to achieve effective and efficient EPR implementation, including improving design incentives, incorporating reuse and refurbishing, expanding product scope, managing downstream material flows, and promoting operational efficiency via fair cost allocation design.     

Knowledge,perceptions and willingness to control designated invasive tree species in urban household gardens in South Africa

Many biological invasions result in negative impacts on the environment and human livelihoods, but simultaneously some also provide benefits that are valued differently by various stakeholders. To inform policy and management of invasive species it is important to assess landowners’ and broader society’s knowledge and perceptions of invasive species, something which is lacking in many contexts, especially in urban settings. In this study we interviewed 153 householders living in a medium-sized South African town who had declared invasive alien trees in their gardens. Less than half of the respondents could identify the invasive tree on their property and only one-third knew that it was an invasive alien species. There was a positive association between income and education levels with exposure to media about invasive alien species and respondents’ ability to identify the species and name any other invasive alien tree species. Knowledge levels were unequal across species. Amongst those who knew the tree was an invasive alien species, reasons why they retained it in their gardens included that it would be costly or too much effort to remove, they liked the tree, that it was not causing any harm and that the property was rented and so its removal was not their responsibility. However, the majority of people (83 %) were willing to have it removed from their garden if done for free by appropriate agencies, which is promising for compliance with new regulations on invasive species implemented at the end of 2014 in South Africa. The results also highlight the need for targeted and appropriate education and awareness programs amongst urban householders on invasive alien species, relevant legislation and their obligations.     

A Statistical Analysis of Prices of Electrical and Electronic Equipment after the Introduction of the WEEE Directive

In January 2003, the European Union (EU) issued a directive on e‐waste (waste from electrical and electronic equipment; WEEE) to deal with increasing quantities and the included hazardous components. The WEEE Directive is based on the principle of extended producer responsibility, which shifts the responsibility for end of life of products away from municipalities toward producers. This led some researchers to state that, in theory, the costs of waste treatment are passed on to consumers in terms of higher prices. This work addresses two fundamental questions: (1) Did the introduction of the WEEE Directive increase consumer prices of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE)? and (2) how much is this price increase? We carry out, for the first time in the literature, a quantitative research on price variation of the vast majority of EEE sold in the EU after the introduction of producers’ financial responsibility. The panel data include 972 price level indices, namely, six categories of EEE for 27 member states for six years. The main result is that the average variation of the prices for each category of EEE investigated actually increased and the variation was between 0.71% and 3.88%, depending on the specific category of EEE. The average increase of 2.19% is in line with the previous studies that estimated the impact of the WEEE Directive up to a 3% increase of the product price. The t‐test performed on the data shows a good statistical significance, which strengthens the relevance of the results. Finally, future directions for research are included.     

Water Justice and Integrated Water Resources Management: Constitutionality Processes Favoring Sustainable Water Governance in Mexico

This research analyzes four ongoing water conflicts in Jalisco state, Mexico, through the lens of constitutionality. Constitutionality refers to a bottom-up institution building process based on the activation of emic perceptions of people who are often marginalized in policymaking, as well as on alliances with external actors, with the aim of achieving recognition by the state of self-created institutions. Results show that the constitutionality concept helps to link analysis of local people’s resistance movements against top-down water policies with an emerging process of institutional innovation that aims for more sustainable water governance. Local institutional innovations embody the principles of water justice; these are recognized by the state as being part of its own Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) policy, and thus find their way into state policy arenas. This analysis provided the basis for the formulation of a conceptual framework that integrates water conflicts, water justice, and IWRM into the concept of constitutionality.     

Class,race – and place: immigrants’ self-perceptions on inclusion,belonging and opportunities in Stockholm and Barcelona

Based on eighty-one in-depth interviews with immigrants and stakeholders performed in Stockholm and Barcelona, this article examines whether the relationship to place can mitigate the negative effects of rejection that racialized immigrants and minorities perceive from the ethnic majority society. The immigrant respondents’ perceptions and lived experiences of exclusion and discrimination lend support to the argument that it is necessary to link race and class in order to understand the particular “immigrant disadvantage,” but also reflect how attachment to the city or neighbourhood where they live can contribute to a sense of belonging: the respondents overall feel more included in Barcelona, where every day interethnic contacts are more frequent than in Stockholm.