Developing Theoretic Strategies of Sharing Corporate Social Responsibility Conduct in a Closed-loop Supply Chain System

Due to the environmental impacts and economic benefits, establishment of business strategies for sustainable development is getting increasing attention both in industry as well as in academia. In order to improve the coporate social responsibility (CSR), we develop an Extend Producer Responsibility (EPR) model which refers to original equipment manufacturer (OEM) takeback in a closed-loop supply chain system under incentive-dependent demand and return. The performance analysis of the system dynamics simulation model will indicate that the inclusion of incentive offer enhances the demand, collection and remanufacturing process. A numerical example and sensitivity analysis on the optimal results are presented to validate the proposed model

State-Led Approaches to Electronic Waste Management in the U.S.: A Study of Stakeholder Involvement in Take-Back Legislation Efficiency

Information technology has proliferated over the past two decades, and waste from electronics represents the fastest growing waste stream in the world. The production and disposal of electronics, from cradle to grave, pose critical threats to human health and the environment. The management of electronic, or e-waste, streams poses a particular set of challenges for solid waste management, hazardous waste management, and economic development in the United States. As e-waste accumulates, state governments, municipalities and private landfills are refusing to accept the responsibility for its disposal. To address this problem, the federal and state governments must find a safe and economically feasible way to process e-waste. This thesis analyzes the lessons learned from both the European Union’s e-waste programs and from a set of US e-waste cases. These range from state-led e-waste programs to manufacturer-led and voluntary e-waste programs. Based on this comparative case method, a set of key barriers emerge in the US cases that undermine e-waste management policies: the perception that US manufacturers will recycle electronic products properly, the power of the electronics industry to block policies, the lack of public consumer education about the environmental consequences of e-waste disposal, and the fact that recycling e-waste is more expensive than extracting raw materials. These factors reflect political and socio-economic realities within the US, including the power of the electronics industry, the perceived capacity of municipal solid waste systems, and the salience and the perception of consumers that US federal laws appropriately manage e-waste disposal. Part of the issue is that e-waste falls into regulatory gaps across major waste management federal laws. This thesis argues that state-led e-waste management policies are not adequate because of the lack of cooperation from all e-waste stakeholders from the federal government, state government, electronics industry, third party processors, and consumers

Planning the Funeral at the Birth: Extended Producer Responsibility in the European Union and the United States

This Article examines how governments in the world\u27s two largest economies are diverging in their approaches to regulating hazardous products and packaging, with major ramifications for manufacturing, waste management, and trade. The European Union is implementing product-oriented environmental regulation based on the principle of Extended Producer Responsibility ( EPR ), which assigns responsibility to manufacturers to take back their products after consumers discard them. In theory, EPR could dramatically alter production practices by internalizing externalities from products and providing incentives for environmentally friendly design. However, practical problems of implementation raise questions about the effectiveness of EPR as a policy tool. This Article explores the European experience with EPR, the reasons for apparent resistance to EPR in the United States, and the implications of a move toward product-oriented environmental law. It critiques EPR on the grounds that the transaction costs of EPR may outweigh its environmental benefits and that practical problems of implementation may preclude the achievement of expected product design incentives. Given the substantial cost and technical hurdles to establishing the legal underpinnings of EPR programs, this Article recommends that the United States consider alternative policy instruments to address environmental externalities from products

Differential Game for Environmental-Regulation in Green Supply Chain

[[abstract]]This paper demonstrates that a proper design of environmental-regulation pricing strategies is able to promote Extended Product Responsibility for green supply chain firms in a competitive market. A differential game model comprising Vidale-Wolfe equation has been established in light of sales competition and recycling dynamics as well as regulation related profit function. Analytic solutions of Markovian Nash equilibriums are provided with the necessary condition derived from Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equations. We found that governments should opt to gradually raise regulation standards so that rational manufacturers will gradually improve its product recyclability, and, in turn, Extended Product Responsibility will get promoted

Product Design and Supply Chain Coordination Under Extended Producer Responsibility

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72335/1/j.1937-5956.2009.01018.x.pd

Circular economy through waste reverse logistics under extended producer responsibility in Finland

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is commonly implemented as a strategy in waste management. The core of the concept itself is a waste reverse logistics (WRL), which dictates how the collection, inspection and processing of end-of-life products are performed. Existing studies of EPR mainly focused on single products instead of using broader perspective on national level. Its contribution towards circular economy through slowing and closing the loops also has not been widely discussed. This study examined the system architecture of the policy instruments used in the EPR and the similarities of the WRL networks across different products. A case study was used to investigate six products: portable batteries and accumulators, paper, packaging, vehicles, electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) and tyres. The study generated a WRL framework. It is also observed that closing the loop through recycling is the primary circular strategy and is found in all products, whereas closing and slowing the loop strategy through reuse/repair, remanufacture and repurposing is found in packaging, tyres, vehicles and EEE. This study shows that EPR can close the material loop, although improvement in design for the environment is necessary. It creates challenges and opportunities for the government, producer responsibility organization and producers to improve existing conditions by implementing new initiatives such as design for the environment indicators, standardization, tax and subsidy systems and tariffs for disposal fees.© The Author(s) 2023. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed

Effective Implementation of WEEE Take-back Directive: What Types of Take-back Network Patterns in China

AbstractThis paper further explains the context of this new legislation and describes, compares and then analyzes the four alternative strategies to reducing end-of-life waste, i.e., repairing, reconditioning, remanufacturing or recycling. It also presents a more robust definition of remanufacturing, which differentiates if from repair and reconditioning engineering. By using a two-stage sequential decision game model, the economic behavior of the main stakeholders under three different types of take-back modes are presented; based on the objective of social welfare maximization, the issues of take-back network, recycling targets setting, recovery catalogs sorting and, supervision and stimulation of take-back models are discussed. Our conclusions demonstrate that: manufacturers, recyclers and consumers do not always share the same preference over three patterns, but the mode of manufacture-leading take-back can reach maximum social welfare; the most efficient network system should be around the manufacturer individual take-back responsibility to build; the take-back level and the recovery catalogs must synthesize the factors involve environmental impact of product, take-back cost/benefit, and recycling and manufacturing industries’ market structure etc.; the supervision and stimulation decision matrix associated with the Producer Responsibility Organization is as an effective tool to balance the environmental benefits and social welfare

Extending Producer Responsibility: An Evaluation Framework for Product Take-Back Policies

Manufacturers are increasingly being required to adhere to product take-back regulations that require them to manage their products at the end of life. Such regulations seek to internalize products' entire life cycle costs into market prices, with the ultimate objective of reducing their environmental burden. This article provides a framework to evaluate the potential for take-back regulations to actually lead to reduced environmental impacts and to stimulate product design changes. It describes trade-offs associated with several major policy decisions, including whether to hold firms physically or financially responsible for the recovery of their products, when to impose recycling fees, whether to include disposal and hazardous substance bans, and whether to mandate product design features to foster reuse and recycling of components and materials. The framework also addresses policy elements that can significantly affect the cost efficiency and occupational safety hazards of end-of-life product recovery operations. The evaluation framework is illustrated with examples drawn from take-back regulations promulgated in Europe, Japan, and the United States governing waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE).