Extended Producer Responsibility Program Research Articles

Implementing EPR as a Tool for Addressing Environmental Issues in Vietnam

The Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme has emerged as a critical environmental policy instrument around the world, holding great promise for addressing significant environmental challenges in Vietnam, a country undergoing fast economic expansion and industrialization. This literature review proceeds to describe Vietnam’s EPR program, focusing on its regulations and implementation procedures. By highlighting several obstacles and directions in Vietnam, this review emphasizes the importance of aligning EPR strategies with the country's socio-economic context to achieve sustainable management of waste and a circular economy.

Extended producer responsibility: An empirical investigation into municipalities' contributions to and perspectives on e‐waste management

AbstractThe development and implementation of extended producer responsibility (EPR) policies to manage e‐waste provide multilevel governance frameworks for achieving greater material circularity. However, the roles and responsibilities that are allocated to various stakeholders under these policies, which are crucial for program effectiveness, often vary across jurisdictions, and consensus is lacking about the best types of relationships and collaboration that should govern municipalities' contributions to EPR programs. Against this backdrop, and since this issue is poorly researched, we conducted an empirical investigation to identify the main drivers and barriers influencing municipalities' collaboration with an e‐waste EPR program in a Canadian province where municipalities are free to decide whether or not to engage with the program. Based on our study, we explore policy implications for similar programs in other jurisdictions, and propose questions for further research. Our findings identify key motivations for collaboration, including perceived program legitimacy, program funding, and logistical efficiencies. Conversely, a lack of program transparency, failure to support local employment, a focus on recycling instead of reuse, and limited program scope are identified as disincentives to program participation. Policymaking for e‐waste management and circularity need to consider municipalities' interests and contributions to ensure successful implementation.

Examining potential business impacts from the implementation of an extended producer responsibility program for printed paper and packaging waste in Nova Scotia, Canada

Mismanagement of recyclable materials contributes to an inefficient economy and demands use of more raw resources, while wasting valuable secondary resources in the process. Historically, the onus for coordinating recycling programs has fallen onto taxpayers and governments, which requires significant capital financing and labour for solid waste management. Large volumes of packaging and printed paper (PPP) materials in the marketplace has municipalities, including in the Atlantic Canadian province of Nova Scotia, shouldering the burden of residential recycling programs that are increasingly costly to the administer. A waste management approach known as the extended producer responsibility (EPR) principle leverages financial resources of producers to fund the recycling of their products. Several EPR for PPP programs already exist across Canada, and efforts are underway by local governments across Nova Scotia to pursue EPR for PPP. This research examined potential impacts of EPR for PPP on Nova Scotia's business community, comprised of many small enterprises. Through a combination of literature review, classification of national steward data, and analysis of provincial business data, findings show that a small subset of industries are most impacted by EPR for PPP across Canada, and higher grossing businesses are required to fund EPR for PPP, and less so small, local enterprises. Analysis revealed that only 8.3% of all businesses operating within Nova Scotia would likely become obligated stewards in the province's proposed program. Lastly, recommendations are proposed to both reduce detrimental impacts on provincial businesses, and to gain the maximal benefits of EPR for PPP for improved recycling systems. Recommendations focussed on fair exemption conditions appropriate to the local region, harmonization of EPR for PPP across Atlantic Canada, developing material specific fees, and investments in local recycling end-markets.

PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE CANADIAN STEWARDSHIP PROGRAMS ON EMPTY PLASTIC BEVERAGE CONTAINERS IN SASKATCHEWAN AND ALBERTA PROVINCES

Stewardship programs are gradually being phased out in favor of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes, which are used in various forms in different Canadian provinces. An example is the British Columbia province's EPR program on empty plastic beverage containers. Provinces like Saskatchewan and Alberta, on the other hand, continue to rely on stewardship programs and are in the process of incorporating the EPR policy as a program into their waste management regulations. Therefore, this study will discuss how stewardship program policies have helped to solve a portion of the plastic waste problem; however, negotiations to fully integrate the EPR program into Saskatchewan and Alberta waste management policies are still ongoing. The significance of this study has demonstrated how stewardship programs in Saskatchewan and Alberta have promoted the reuse and recycling economy of plastic management to a limited extent in these respective provinces. A case study method was used to analyze and investigate the stewardship program, with a focus on plastic bottle management. Field observations were conducted at selected recycling companies (Sarcan recycling and Alberta beverage container recycling corporation) in Saskatchewan and Alberta to correlate the data gathered during the investigation, as presented in this research outcome. Implementing the EPR program, according to the study's findings, may be the most effective way for Canada to achieve a circular economy of plastic waste management.

Assessing the recycling performance of extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs: A case study of the steel can packaging recycling system in South Korea

ABSTRACT Research on the extended producer responsibility (EPR) program in South Korea has been expanding since the program was first implemented in 2003, but no study has yet assessed the performance of the steel can packaging EPR program. The current study thus evaluates the performance indicators for steel can packaging EPR and assesses those factors that may affect its performance over a 13 year period. The findings indicate that the recycling performance of this EPR program must be re-evaluated because metal can steel plate manufacturers are not subject to EPR although they are also recycling steel can waste. The findings also suggest that the Ministry of Environment (MOE) formula for calculating the mandatory steel can recycling target rate fails to account for fluctuations in the market price of steel can waste, demonstrating the need to increase the contribution fee of producers obligated to recycle (POR) under the EPR system. Implications: This study has examined the various factors that affect the performance of the steel can packaging EPR program in Korea. This study shows that, future research and practice need to re-assess the performance indicators of the EPR program and revise the standards for the contribution fee of producers obligated to recycle (POR) depending on the market price of steel can waste.

Life-cycle modeling framework for electronic waste recovery and recycling processes

Policies and regulations such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) have been implemented to potentially increase the recycling rate of electronic waste (e-waste), but the cost and environmental impacts of associated collection, transportation, material recovery, material re-processing, and disposal could outweigh the benefits of recycling if the e-waste management system is not effectively designed and implemented. This paper presents a quantitative, holistic framework to systematically estimate life-cycle impacts and costs associated with e-waste management. This new framework was tested using data from the state of Washington's EPR program to represent e-waste collection, transportation, processing and disposal. Sensitivity of process-level life-cycle model outputs to parameter and input variability was also conducted. Drop-off using fossil-fuel-powered personal vehicles was found to be a key contributor to cost and carbon dioxide emissions. Decision-makers must account for drop-off and consider the feasibility of alternate e-waste aggregation strategies to ensure life-cycle benefits of e-waste recycling are maximized.

Extended producer responsibility for E-waste management: Policy drivers and challenges

Abstract A range of extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs have been developed for managing electronic waste. In Canada, where efforts have led to more harmonised EPR programs, one province (Quebec) has introduced regulatory measures beyond those adopted elsewhere in the country. We investigate the causes for this different approach, and stakeholder interests and interactions that influenced EPR design and implementation, in Quebec. We also discuss how various actors have been affected by, and have responded to, Quebec’s EPR program, and provide an update on how it has fared since coming into force in 2011. We conclude with some questions for further research. Quebec’s regulation demonstrates a greater demand for and supply of support for maintaining local employment through refurbishing and reuse, and reducing the environmental impacts of products through modulated fees, both due to the regulator’s ideology and interest, and vocal stakeholders on the demand side. The Quebec case shows that jurisdictions in which local firms and employment are least affected by regulation may be the most likely to experiment with novel policy instruments. At the same time, the fact that many provisions in the regulation are facing hurdles, five years after coming into force, demonstrates the hard realities of policy making and implementation, beyond the mere passing of legislation.

Mitigating Hazards by Better Designing a Recycling Program: Lessons Learned from South Korea

As an effort of mitigating hazards, pro-environmental programs have been vigorously activated with regard to solid waste recycling. It is beneficial for both the environment and resource saving, but implementation and enforcement are hard to achieve voluntarily. The South Korean Government first implemented the Deposit Refund System (DRS) and later the Extended Producer Responsibility Program (EPR) to reduce waste and encourage recycling in South Korea. Un-der the DRS, producers would pay for recycling the wastes of the products. The government then repealed the DRS and implemented the EPR program. Under this program, the producers recycle as much as the Ministry of Environment determines or pay a penalty for an excessive amount of the waste. In the broader perspective of disaster management, such policy programs can mitigate environmental hazards. This paper compares those two programs that facilitated the level of recycling, focusing on how such programs regulate producers and how they were operated from the perspective of implementation and enforcement.

Revisiting the extended producer responsibility program for metal packaging in South Korea

Recently, developed and emerging countries have increasingly adopted the principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR) to reduce waste. In 2003, South Korea replaced the waste deposit recycling (WDR) program with the EPR program. Previous comparative analyses between the WDR and EPR programs have been qualitative evaluations and have not yet quantitatively shown whether the change has increased benefits. The aim of this paper is to explore which program brings larger net benefits. Because of limited data availability, here we focus on metal packaging exclusively. We find that the recycling rate dropped from 59% in 2000 to 40% in 2011 and recycling volume dropped accordingly. Cost-benefit incidence analysis shows that net social benefits decreased by 2.8 billion won (2.5 million US dollars), while the net benefits to producers increased by 1.9 billion won (1.7 million US dollars) under the EPR program compared with the WDR program. The government of South Korea should set an ambitious recycling target and narrow the scope of the exemption from the mandatory recycling requirement.

Determining heavy metals in spent compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) and their waste management challenges: Some strategies for improving current conditions

From environmental viewpoint, the most important advantage of compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) is reduction of green house gas emissions. But their significant disadvantage is disposal of spent lamps because of containing a few milligrams of toxic metals, especially mercury and lead. For a successful implementation of any waste management plan, availability of sufficient and accurate information on quantities and compositions of the generated waste and current management conditions is a fundamental prerequisite. In this study, CFLs were selected among 20 different brands in Iran. Content of heavy metals including mercury, lead, nickel, arsenic and chromium was determined by inductive coupled plasma (ICP). Two cities, Tehran and Tabriz, were selected for assessing the current waste management condition of CFLs. The study found that waste generation amount of CFLs in the country was about 159.80, 183.82 and 153.75 million per year in 2010, 2011 and 2012, respectively. Waste generation rate of CFLs in Iran was determined to be 2.05 per person in 2012. The average amount of mercury, lead, nickel, arsenic and chromium was 0.417, 2.33, 0.064, 0.056 and 0.012mg per lamp, respectively. Currently, waste of CFLs is disposed by municipal waste stream in waste landfills. For improving the current conditions, we propose by considering the successful experience of extended producer responsibility (EPR) in other electronic waste management. The EPR program with advanced recycling fee (ARF) is implemented for collecting and then recycling CFLs. For encouraging consumers to take the spent CFLs back at the end of the products’ useful life, a proportion of ARF (for example, 50%) can be refunded. On the other hand, the government and Environmental Protection Agency should support and encourage recycling companies of CFLs both technically and financially in the first place.

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. (Less)

The Impacts of Sharing Responsibility for Product Recovery across the Supply Chain

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs typically hold the producer - a single actor defined by the regulator - responsible for the environmental impacts of end-of-life products. This is despite emphasis on the need to involve all actors in the supply chain in order to best achieve the aims of EPR. In this paper, we examine the important economic and environmental implications of sharing EPR program costs. We use a steady-state, two-echelon supply chain model to determine the impacts of product collection and recycling mandates on the incentive to recycle, and resulting profits in the integrated and decentralized supply chains. For the decentralized supply chain, we demonstrate how the sharing of EPR program costs between the echelons can improve total supply chain profit and suggest a contract menu that can Pareto-improve profits in the decentralized supply chain. To examine both the economic and environmental performance associated with the sharing of program costs, we propose a social welfare construct that includes supply chain profit, consumer surplus, and the externalities associated with virgin material extraction, product consumption, and disposal of non-recycled products. Using a numerical example, we discuss how EPR program cost sharing may or may not improve social welfare. The results of this paper are of value to firms either anticipating or subject to product recovery legislation, and to social planners that attempt to balance the economic and environmental impacts and ensure the fairness of such legislation.