The document discusses emerging guidance areas for extended producer responsibility (EPR) policies based on case studies and the changing waste management context. It identifies 10 areas that guidance could address: governance issues like roles and transparency; economic concerns like competition assessments and cost recovery; and emerging issues like integrating informal waste sectors and anticipating new market conditions. Case studies show EPR increasing recycling but also challenges like cost transfers and free-riding. The document argues policy guidance should help tailor EPR instruments to specific country and product contexts.
2. • The changing context since 2001
• What are we learning from case studies
• Initial emerging areas for policy guidance
Outline
3. Changing context for EPR since 2001
2014
Intrinsic value of waste
International trade of waste
Globalisation of value
chains and producers
Urgency of waste accumulation
in non-OECD countries
Internet sales and new
market opportunities
2001
More countries developing EPR
5. Some lessons from case studies
Increasing
recycling rates
Cost transfers
Better recycling
technologies
Competition and
trade concerns
Free-riding
Leakage Low data quality
and transparency
If concerns are adequately
addressed in EPR policies
Main challenges Main achievements
Better
recyclability
Not reducing
overall waste Consumer
awareness
6. 10 areas for guidance emerging
Governance Economic Emerging issues
Overall
EPR instruments tailored to specific product and country context
7. 10 areas for guidance emerging
Governance
Clear roles and
responsibilities
Early and full
consultations
Adequate transparency
level
Economic
Multi-level
competition
assessment
Clear performance
targets & full cost
recovery
Encouraging “DfE”
and waste prevention
Emerging issues
Integrating the
informal waste sector
Anticipating impacts of
changing waste value
Free riding and
ownership in new
market conditions
Overall
EPR instruments tailored to specific product and country context
9. Need for regular
policy assessments of
multi-layered
competition concerns
Seeking a balance
between competition
and a stable,
predictable
investment
framework
Competition concerns on three levels
Product
market
impact
Competition
among
PROs
Impacts on
collection,
sorting,
treatment
markets
Competition
concerns
10. • Understand the role of informal and/or illegal actors
EPR design should seek to provide greater incentive
than local materials markets
Build on existing informal networks where possible
Provide strong regulation to eliminate harmful
practices and to ensure non-valuable waste is captured
Integrating the informal waste sector
• A challenge for OECD and non-OECD countries
UK Ghana
11. • Recyclability and waste prevention as separate objectives
• Key policy challenges :
– Globalised production – can one country’s EPR make a
difference to global design?
– Differentiated fees and individual producer
responsibility: can they be cost effective and efficient?
Policy design should consider how differential fees can
help to target individual producer recycling costs
International (and national!) co-ordination of policy
where possible to maximise influence on product design
Encouraging design for environment
Collective
responsibility:
uniform fees
Individual financial
responsibility: fully
differentiated fees
Partly
differentiated /
modulated fees
Increasing strength of design change incentive
12. 10 areas for guidance emerging
Governance
Clear roles and
responsibilities
Early and full
consultations
Adequate transparency
level
Economic
Multi-level
competition
assessment
Clear performance
targets & full costs
recovery
Encouraging “DfE”
and waste prevention
Emerging issues
Integrating the
informal waste sector
Anticipating impacts of
changing waste value
Free riding and
ownership in new
market conditions
Overall
EPR instruments tailored to specific product and country context
14. Anticipating new market conditions
• Internet and other new market outlets: ensuring
EPR definitions and enforcement can capture new actors
• Increasing value of waste:
– Reassessing need for EPR when waste streams reach positive
value
– Beyond average value: understanding heterogeneity in the
waste stream
– Considering how to support new ownership structures
(leasing and services)
Need for continuous evaluation of the environmental
and social value of EPR policies and periodically assess
scheme boundaries
Notes de l'éditeur
Would like to hear from other countries! Please contact us.
Main points: whilst we spend a lot of time discussing the challenges facing EPR, important to reflect on the achievements of existing successful schemes.
The case studies are highlighting some successes as well as challenges.
Some of the key achievements and challenges are shown here. The aim of policy guidance is to tip the balance towards more opportunities.
We can never be 100% about the causality of EPR being the sole driver of these changes, but we can observe where positive conditions exist where EPR has been implemented
10 areas divided into 4.
Overall – horses for courses point. Heard about product and country differences yesterday. Where else would you consider drinks cans, computers and cars in the same policy area?
Other 3 areas are just one way to cut the cake.
The red and green areas are all covered in some detail in the original guidance – the challenge now is to update that guidance based on recent experience.
The purple area covers new and emerging issues which received less attention in the original guidance.
I don’t have time to go through all of these now. I will focus on competition, because the OECD Competition policy has worked in this area.
And I will focus on DfE because it remains the “holy grail” of EPR policy.
And I will focus on intergrating the informal sector as this is a key challenge for dvg countries
Lord’s cricket ground. It is not flat and never has been.
Beware a playing field that is not level even when it initially appears to be so!
Products: impacts of producers in a collective scheme price-fixing fee they pass on to consumers. Lack of competition leading to higher price than necessary passed on to consumer. Reduced competition within prod market due to increased info between firms
Among PROs: evidence of increased efficiency with multi PROs (DE), especially once market was established. But multi WEEE PROs in the UK with high fees and not much switching – onerous exit clauses conneceted with strong legal liabilities
Downstream: long contracts with PROs can exclude other waste mgt companies and, conversely, can exclude entry of other PROs because the existing PRO has snapped up the only provider able to enter the market. Conditions can change over time, especially as waste streams start to increase in value.
A key recommendation is therefore for regular policy review at all these levels. EPRs at different levels of maturity may operate more efficiently with differing levels of competition and liberalisation.
Informal sector is an issue in both OECD and non-OECD countries. Make distinction between illegal operators in an otherwise strictly enforced OECD country, and true informal sector in non-OEC D. But both are challenging for EPR.
Informal actors tend to be responsive to what money can be made on secondary materials markets, so an objective for EPR policy in dvg ctries is to identify those markets and to seek to offer incentives that are at a higher price than offered on informal markets.
Build on systems in place – in particular collection processes
Important Note: experience shows that diff fees can in some cases lead to high compliance cost that outweigh incentive provided by differential. Very careful and ongoing assessment of market impacts required.
Mention also value of waste – notably e-waste – what can policy-makers do to encouarge new business models – leasing, servicing – are there fiscal options , for example?
The red and green areas are all covered in some detail in the original guidance – the challenge now is to update that guidance based on recent experience.
The purple area covers new and emerging issues which received less attention in the original guidance.
I don’t have time to go through all of these now. I will focus on competition, because the OECD Competition policy has worked in this area.
And I will focus on the more emerging issues.