EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY: OVERVIEW, RECENT TRENDS AND FORUM OBJECTIVES

Shardul Agrawala Head, Environment and Economy Integration DivisionOECD Environment Directorate

Outline

• Defining Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)

• Goals, policy instruments and the product life cycle

• 2001 OECD Policy Guidance

• Trends since 2001: Adoption, literature, emerging issues

• Key issues and objectives of the Global Forum

Two related features: • shifting of responsibility upstream to

the producer and away from municipalities

• to provide incentives to producers to incorporate environmental considerations in the design of their products.

Defining Extended Producer Responsibility

..an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility, physical and/or financial …is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle

EPR Goals

• Source reduction

• Waste prevention

• Design for environment

• Closure of material loops (increased recycling)

Policy Instruments

Take-back with recycling targets

Economic Instruments

Deposit/refund

Advance disposal fees

Virgin material taxes

Upstream combined tax and subsidy

Recycling content standards

EPR policy instruments in product cycle

Virgin material

Extraction

Primary production

Consumption

Recycled goods

Waste

Manufacturing

Virgin Materials Tax

Recycling content

standards

Deposit/refund

ADF

UCTSTake-back

Definition, goals, framework conditions

Policy instruments, complementary policies

Roles and responsibilities

Trade and competition aspects

Free riding and orphan products

2001 OECD Guidance Manual

Recent Trends in EPR adoption

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 20150

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Cumulative EPR adoption

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

poli

cie

s ad

op

ted

Extended Producer Responsibility by product type and instrument

Packaging17%

Electronics35%

Vehicles/auto batteries

12%

Tires18%

Other18%

EPR by product type

Take-back70%

Deposit/Refund11%

ADF17%

Other2%

EPR by policy

Great deal of information on impact of EPR on recycling rates.

Not enough on cost-effectiveness

Not enough known about the potential to address waste prevention through EPR

Relatively few EPR systems oriented towards incentivising eco-design

Recent trends and some open issues

Significant additional experience since 2001:

o More product groups (e.g furniture, textiles)o More diverse approaches (e.g recycling certificates)o More information on environmental effectiveness

and on competition issueso Adoption in more countries, including emerging

economies

Further rationale for update of Guidance

Literature review and typology of EPR schemes

Case studies :Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, France, Japan, Korea, Slovakia, United States, and building on EU studies

Views exchanged here at the Global Forum in Tokyo

Financial support from Japan and EU

12

Towards updating policy guidance

Take stock of recent experience

Identify key challenges in design and implementation

Identify measures to meet these challenges

Begin to identify key areas where guidance can be developed

Global Forum Objectives

Day 1• Session 1 – Scene setting• Session 2 – Challenges and approaches in OECD countries• Session 3 – Challenges and approaches in emerging economies

Day 2• Session 4 – Towards guidance for policy makers

– 4 break-out groups

• Feedback and wrap-up

Day 3• Morning: Moving forward – Focus on Asia• Afternoon: Site visits

Global Forum Agenda

www.oecd.org/env/waste

www.oecd.org/env/policies

www.oecd.org/env/taxes

◦

Further information