The presentation discusses the French practices related to extended producer responsibility schemes. It was delivered at the meeting on "Economic instruments for greener products in Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia" (EaP GREEN).
Gwalior Call Girls 7001305949 WhatsApp Number 24x7 Best Services
EaP GREEN: Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) - The French Experience
1. www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr
Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy
Crédit photo : Arnaud Bouissou/MEDDTL
Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR)
The French experience
Economic Instruments for Greener
Products in Eastern Partnership
Countries
OECD, 7 March 2014
2. 20/02/14
2
Key principles and rules
• EPR: producers (product makers or importers) are in charge of
managing waste from their products
• French law specifies which categories of products fall under an EPR
obligation
• For these categories producers must set up individual or collective
schemes
Each producer pays a financial contribution to the collective scheme,
depending on the volume of products marketed
Collective schemes (PROs – Producer Responsibility
Organisations) are:
• Not-for-profit private companies
• Set up and governed by producers themselves
• Approved by the French Government for periods up to 6 years
3. 20/02/14
3
14 EPR schemes in France
Typically 1 single collective scheme for each waste flow
Generally household waste, but some professional too
4 new schemes launched in 2012 and currently getting operational
4. 20/02/14
4
Two models of operation
• ‘Financial’ scheme – municipalities remain in charge
e.g. household packaging; graphic papers
• ‘Organisational’ scheme – producers directly in charge
e.g. WEEE; batteries and accumulators; tyres
Collective
scheme
Producer Municipality
Waste
management
company
€ €
€
Waste
management
company
Collective
scheme
Producer
€ €
5. 20/02/14
5
Participative governance
• Specific terms of reference for collective schemes
– Re-negotiated every 6 years among all stakeholders
• Government approval for periods up to 6 years
– Collective schemes commit to abide by the terms of reference
• Dialogue remains intense during these 6-year periods
– Meetings every 3 months – mutual information, troubleshooting
Producers Municipalities
Waste
management
operators
NGOs
(Environmental,
consumers)
Government
6. 20/02/14
6
Growing financial flows
• ~1.4 bn€ collected by 2015
• Of which ~700 M€ redistributed to municipalities
• (Total costs for municipal waste management: ~9.4 bn€)
8. 20/02/14
8
EPR schemes…
and municipalities
• Who bears the costs? (in ‘financial schemes’)
Municipalities demanded the schemes to reduce their costs
But they remain attached to their ‘free administration rights’
What is the balanced ‘cost coverage’?
e.g. household packaging:
• Where does this take us?
Producers want more ‘operational’ models to optimise costs
Municipalities reluctant – free administration, local employment
Government – positive for public interest, but careful
Collective scheme
80%
Municipality
20%
9. 20/02/14
9
• Competition issues
• Waste management operators now face a single buyer
• Could hamper innovation and ‘biodiversity’ of operators
• Collective schemes operate in a central position
• A normal consequence of the EPR principle
• Also a way to optimise the system and make it more professional
• But other stakeholders consider this a ‘distortion of competition’
Regulation is key to bring balance to the system (terms of
reference, day-to-day control, sanction when necessary)
EPR schemes… and waste
management operators
10. 20/02/14
10
EPR schemes and Government:
an efficient policy instrument
• Producers really take over
– Responsibility is centralised
– Brings results! e.g. for collection and reuse/recycling rates
– Built-in cost internalisation and optimisation
• A versatile tool for the Government…
– Of course public control is key
– Re-negotiating the ‘terms of reference’ regularly allows a
detailed piloting of the system and helps set the bar higher
– A tool with environmental, economic, social dimensions (but
which requires focus!)
• Dialogue per se takes us foward
Producers choose between collective schemes and individual schemes to fulfil their obligations.
The caracteristics of the WEEE industry from private household:
In practice, producers for households equipment take part in one of the four collective schemes and producers of professional equipment built individual schemes :
Producers pay to the collective schemes a financial contribution,
They provide the governance of those schemes
AND they transfer to them requirements collection and waste management.
Those eco-organization are for a maximal 6 years duration approved by the french administration.
Since 2006, 4 collective schemes have been approved :
- Ecologic / Eco-Systèmes / ERP-Recycling / Recylum