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.     

Disaggregating the Power Generation Sector for Input‐Output Life Cycle Assessment

The electric power industry plays a critical role in the economy and the environment, and it is important to examine the economic, environmental, and policy implications of current and future power generation scenarios. However, the tools that exist to perform the life cycle assessments are either too complex or too aggregated to be useful for these types of activities. In this work, we build upon the framework of existing input‐output (I‐O) models by adding data about the electric power industry and disaggregating this single sector into additional sectors, each representing a specific portion of electric power industry operations. For each of these disaggregated sectors, we create a process‐specific supply chain and a set of emission factors that allow calculation of the environmental effects of that sector's output. This new model allows a much better fit for scenarios requiring more specificity than is possible with the current I‐O model.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

A Supply‐Use Approach to Waste Input‐Output Analysis

In this article, we extend Namakura and Kondo's waste input‐output (WIO) framework by incorporating a supply‐use formalism, resulting in waste supply‐use tables (WSUTs). We present the theoretical underpinnings of the WSUT and, in particular, the transition from Nakamura and Kondo's WIO form to the new WSUT form. Further, we offer a mathematical proof of the equivalence of WIO and WSUT multipliers. We illustrate the workings of the WSUT calculus using economic and waste data for the Australian economy in 2008–2009.     

Input‐Output‐based Life Cycle Inventory

An input‐output‐based life cycle inventory (IO‐based LCI) is grounded on economic environmental input‐output analysis (IO analysis). It is a fast and low‐budget method for generating LCI data sets, and is used to close data gaps in life cycle assessment (LCA). Due to the fact that its methodological basis differs from that of process‐based inventory, its application in LCA is a matter of controversy. We developed a German IO‐based approach to derive IO‐based LCI data sets that is based on the German IO accounts and on the German environmental accounts, which provide data for the sector‐specific direct emissions of seven airborne compounds. The method to calculate German IO‐based LCI data sets for building products is explained in detail. The appropriateness of employing IO‐based LCI for German buildings is analyzed by using process‐based LCI data from the Swiss Ecoinvent database to validate the calculated IO‐based LCI data. The extent of the deviations between process‐based LCI and IO‐based LCI varies considerably for the airborne emissions we investigated. We carried out a systematic evaluation of the possible reasons for this deviation. This analysis shows that the sector‐specific effects (aggregation of sectors) and the quality of primary data for emissions from national inventory reporting (NIR) are the main reasons for the deviations. As a rule, IO‐based LCI data sets seem to underestimate specific emissions while overestimating sector‐specific aspects.     

Charging up Battery Recycling Policies: Extended Producer Responsibility for Single‐Use Batteries in the European Union,Canada, and the United States

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) policies have proven effective at raising consumer awareness, expanding waste collection infrastructure, and shifting costs of end‐of‐life (EOL) management from municipalities to stewardship organizations. Yet, such policies have been less successful in advancing waste management programs that ensure a net environmental benefit. This article analyzes how EPR policies for single‐use batteries in the European Union (EU), Canada, and the United States address the environmental costs and benefits of EOL management. Considering these EPR policies is instructive, because single‐use batteries have high collection costs and are of relatively low economic value for waste processors. Without deliberate planning, the environmental burdens of collecting and recycling such batteries may exceed the benefits. This article considers how EPR policies for single‐use batteries integrate performance requirements such as collection rates, recycling efficiencies, and best available techniques. It argues that for such policies to be effective, they need to be extended to address waste collection practices, the life cycle consequences of EOL management, and the quality of recovered materials. Such strategies are relevant to EPR policies for other products with marginal secondary value, including some textiles, plastics, and other types of electronic waste.     

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.     

Differences in Perception of Extended Producer Responsibility and Product Stewardship among Stakeholders: An International Questionnaire Survey and Statistical Analysis

Different perceptions of the concept of extended producer responsibility and product stewardship (EPR/PS) have tended to lead to prolonged policy disputes and have likely affected the design of EPR/PS policies. We therefore surveyed stakeholders’ perceptions of the concept of EPR/PS, including its aims, application, and rationales, and analyzed 376 responses with regression analysis and cluster analysis. The results clearly demonstrated the diversity in stakeholders’ perceptions and identified/confirmed several patterns between stakeholders’ perceptions and attributes. Concerning aims, our analysis showed that stakeholders from middle‐/low‐income countries placed more importance on proper treatment and waste reduction in EPR/PS policy, while those from Europe, North America, Japan, and the rest of Asia had different perceptions on seven aims of EPR/PS, especially for increasing collection and shifting responsibility to producers, and paid varying attention to upstream and downstream improvement (e.g., better product design and recycling, respectively). Our analysis also confirmed that respondents perceiving lack of capability of local governments regarding waste management advocated EPR/PS more and respondents positive about information acquisition put more importance on physical responsibility. The largest contributing variables to the perception of EPR/PS were 14 specific EPR/PS mechanisms/issues, suggesting that discussion about specific mechanisms of EPR/PS policy is a key if common and better understandings of the EPR/PS concept are to develop. The dominant rationale of EPR/PS agreed upon by the respondents was producers’ capability, but the concept of beneficiary bears was also supported by 58% of respondents, especially by national governments and North Americans. Finally, implications of the results for EPR/PS policy development were discussed.     

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.     

Considering Variations in Waste Composition during Waste Input‐Output Modeling

Concentrations of pollutants vary in wastes from different sources. However, existing waste input‐output (WIO) models do not take these differing concentrations into account. This article proposes a new category of model, which we are calling a waste input‐output model at the substance level (WIOS model). The WIOS model considers variations in waste composition. These variations potentially affect the life cycle inventory of the waste treatment stage. The proposed model is expected to produce more accurate results than existing WIO models that do not consider variations in the composition of wastes. In addition, the proposed model provides a method to trace substances undergoing waste treatment. In this article, use of the WIOS model is illustrated by simulating the overall environmental loads of total organic carbon from wastewater treatment at a facility in Germany. The results show that variations in the composition of wastes entering treatment significantly affect the modeled estimates of total environmental loads caused by wastewater treatment. In addition, the results of the proposed model are different from results given by existing hybrid input‐output WIO models that do not consider variations in the composition of wastewater as it undergoes treatment.     

Developing the Chinese Environmentally Extended Input‐Output (CEEIO) Database

Environmentally extended input‐output (EEIO) databases are increasingly used to examine environmental footprints of economic activities. Studies focusing on China have independently, repeatedly developed EEIO databases for China. These databases are usually not publicly available, leading to repeated efforts, inconsistent with one another using different approaches, of limited environmental accounts, and lacking transparency, preventing continuous updating. We developed a transparent, comprehensive, and consistent Chinese EEIO database covering a wide period of time (currently 1992, 1997, 2002, and 2007 for which benchmark input‐output tables [IOTs] are available), sector classifications (original sector classifications in benchmark IOTs, a 45‐sector classification commonly used in China's environmental and energy statistics, and a 91‐sector classification with maximized sector resolution ensuring temporal consistence), and environmental satellite accounts for 256 types of resources and 30 types of pollutants in this study. Moreover, the environmental satellite accounts cover households in addition to sectors, allowing developing closed models. We make this database publicly available with open access for broader dissemination ( www.ceeio.com ). We demonstrate the database by evaluating environmental pressures of Chinese products in 2007. Comparisons of our database with previous studies validate its rationality and reliability.     

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.     

Assessing the Greenhouse Gas Savings Potential of Extended Producer Responsibility for Mattresses and Boxsprings in the United States

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) legislation in the United States, which currently only exists on the state level, now includes three mattress EPR acts, which intend to shift the financial and operational burden of mattress end‐of‐life (EOL) management away from local and state government. It is important to keep in mind, however, that the original objective behind EPR is to reduce the environmental life cycle impacts of products. This article therefore quantifies the greenhouse gas (GHG) savings potential of mattress and boxspring recycling and reuse in the United States and also discusses labor implications and mattress design issues. We find that all three acts are unlikely to generate redesign incentives, but are expected to dramatically increase mattress collection and recycling. The collection and recycling of all 35 million EOL mattress and boxspring units estimated to reach the end of their lives in the United States every year would generate in the order of 10,000 jobs and GHG savings between 1 and 1.5 million metric tonnes.     

Method for endogenizing capital in the United States Environmentally‐Extended Input‐Output model

Each year businesses, governments, and homeowners in the United States invest around one fifth of gross domestic product into the creation of capital assets such as buildings, machinery, and software to enable production and consumption. Use of capital is typically included to some extent in environmental life cycle assessments of goods and services but is not incorporated into most environmentally extended input‐output (EEIO) models, including the US Environmental Protection Agency's USEEIO. Capital assets are typically created in years prior to their use, so a challenge lies in distributing the impacts of their creation over time. In this work, a highly detailed capital flow matrix approach is followed to distribute the use of fixed capital assets to consuming industries. Data from the US Bureau of Economic Analysis's Fixed Asset Accounts is merged with its Industry Accounts data by the creation of concordance tables. Public highways and streets are partially reallocated to industries operating vehicles. The resulting capital use matrix is later combined into a modified USEEIO. “Housing” is found to be the largest consumer of fixed assets, followed by general government, fossil fuel extraction, and financial industries involved in leasing. Construction, vehicles, and machinery are mostly used by industries in the form of fixed assets. The types of fixed assets used by industries are consistent with expectations: housing is dominated by structures, transport by equipment, and information industries by intellectual property products.     

Effects of Using Heterogeneous Prices on the Allocation of Impacts from Electricity Use: A Mixed‐Unit Input‐Output Approach

Economic input‐output life cycle assessment (IO‐LCA) models allow for quick estimation of economy‐wide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with goods and services. IO‐LCA models are usually built using economic accounts and differ from most process‐based models in their use of economic transactions, rather than physical flows, as the drivers of supply‐chain GHG emissions. GHG emissions estimates associated with input supply chains are influenced by the price paid by consumers when the relative prices between individual consumers are different. We investigate the significance of the allocation of GHG emissions based on monetary versus physical units by carrying out a case study of the U.S. electricity sector. We create parallel monetary and mixed‐unit IO‐LCA models using the 2007 Benchmark Accounts of the U.S. economy and sector specific prices for different end users of electricity. This approach is well suited for electricity generation because electricity consumption contributes a significant share of emissions for most processes, and the range of prices paid by electricity consumers allows us to explore the effects of price on allocation of emissions. We find that, in general, monetary input‐output models assign fewer emissions per kilowatt to electricity used by industrial sectors than to electricity used by households and service sectors, attributable to the relatively higher prices paid by households and service sectors. This fact introduces a challenging question of what is the best basis for allocating the emissions from electricity generation given the different uses of electricity by consumers and the wide variability of electricity pricing.     

Data Acquisition for Applying Physical Input‐Output Tables in Chinese Cities

The physical input‐output table (PIOT) is a useful tool for analyzing the environmental sustainability of cities. Taking Chinese statistical sources as an example in this study, we discuss data acquisition methods for applying the PIOT to cities. We propose several methods and present a case study of Suzhou City to illustrate the proposed methods. These methods can provide foundations for constructing the PIOT of cities in other countries.     

Investigating Reasons for Differences in the Results of Environmental,Physical, and Hybrid Input‐Output Models

It is vital to find reasons for differences in the results of environmental input‐output (EIO), physical input‐output (PIO), and hybrid input‐output (HIO) models for industrial and environmental policy analysis. Using EIO, PIO, and HIO models, China's industrial metabolism is calculated. Four reasons were found to account for differences in the results of analysis using EIO, PIO, and HIO models: the manner in which they deal with residential consumption, service sectors, and waste recycling, and the assumption of unique sector prices. The HIO model, which treats residential consumption as sectors of the intermediate delivery matrix, is preferred to the EIO and PIO models for analyzing industrial and environmental policies. Moreover, waste recycling in five sectors—agriculture; the manufacture of paper, printing, and articles for culture, education, and sports activities; the manufacture of nonmetallic mineral products; smelting and pressing of metals; and construction—should be comprehensively considered when using the HIO model to study problems related to these five sectors. Improvements in the EIO, PIO, and HIO models and future work are also discussed.     

Organization Environmental Footprint through Input‐Output Analysis: A Case Study in the Construction Sector

The implementation of global sustainability has gained worldwide attention in recent years. The Organization Environmental Footprint, which encompasses 14 impact categories, is a multicriteria measure of the environmental performance of goods and services provided by an organization from a life cycle perspective. In this article, the focus is on quantifying the Organization Environmental Footprint of a construction company in Spain. By applying an environmentally extended input‐output approach, its total footprint and impacts along the supply chain from two consecutive years were calculated. The results show that the environmental impacts from the second year of implementation were significantly higher than those from the first year. The impact category climate change was found to have experienced the greatest increase from one year to the other, with a 31% increase. This work provides an overview of 14 environmental impact categories of the company assessed, as well as recommendations for the implementation of this indicator in companies and public procurement. This approach could pave the way to shape organizations’ action plans and meet the European environmental challenges.