Industrial Implementation of Extended Producer Responsibility in an Industrial Ecology Perspective

The purpose of this thesis is to identify key conditions for successful industrial implementation of collective extended producer responsibility (EPR) programmes in the Norwegian plastic packaging system, according to an industrial ecology perspective. ‘Key condition’ is defined as those factors, both drivers and barriers, which are critical for the outcome of industrial implementation of EPR. As we have seen there are several key conditions to be identified. We have studied this by first developing a theoretical framework based on the industrial ecology perspective and combined with a modified understanding on categories for EPR policy instruments we have developed an analytical framework which combines a material flow approach and an actor approach. Based on this we have carried out a case study of the Norwegian EPR system for plastic packaging, organised by the producer responsibility organisation Plastretur. We have shown the complexity of this system by doing analysis on various levels, both with respect to material flows and to actors. Our conclusions are primarily valid for this system only, but we have shown how our results correspond to existing literature, both theoretically and in practice. The overall conclusion from this case study is that the Plastretur EPR scheme has proven to be successful with respect to recycling ratios and costs, while it has been less successful concerning dematerialisation and design for recycling. This conclusion is contrary to what is considered to be the strength of EPR policies, but it provides empirical evidence for the arguments put forth by for instance Veerman (2004) on the Dutch system, claiming that EPR has mainly effects downstream. We argue that one of the reasons to this controversial result is that previous studies have not to a sufficient extent taken into account the need for identifying the causality between EPR policy instruments and the observed effects. We have provided this through a detailed case study on various analytical levels

Does Industrial Ecology provide any new Perspectives?

The research question in this report was, as the title alludes: Does industrial ecology provide any new perspectives? If yes, what are the new aspects? To answer these questions, a literature study has been conducted. The answer to the first question is yes. We claim that what is new about industrial ecology is the expansion of the system borders within which the actors operate. Bearing this in mind, it is proposed that the most important issue in industrial ecology is to unite the two main interests; ecological sustainability on the macro level and business- economy profit on the micro level. This means that knowledge from different actors and disciplines are needed to implement necessary processes of change. This may well be old knowledge that is applied to new issues or new knowledge which is created by blending existing knowledge from various areas. This relates particularly to the understanding of how the interaction among the actors is, as we also attempt to understand the ecological system. As Kiushi (1997) claims, the result of the interaction among the actors gives the system its value, not the value of the individual actors

Status for industriell økologi i norsk næringsliv - sammendrag av undersøkelse gjort høsten 1997

Industriell økologi ble fra januar 1998 et av satsingsområdene i forskningsprogrammet Produktivitet 2005. I en forberedende fase frem til september 1998 skal det utarbeides en "state of the art"-rapport knyttet til sentrale utfordringer og kunnskapsbehov på området industriell økologi innenfor vareproduserende industri. Høsten 1997 ble det gjennomført en kartlegging av hvilken status industriell økologi har i norsk næringsliv. Her ble det spesielt fokusert på hvor bedriftene mener det er behov for kunnskapsproduskjon knyttet til industriell økologi. Betydelige deler av utvalget for denne undersøkelsen er hentet fra vareproduserende industri, og funnene fra undersøkelsen har således relevans for industriell økologi i P2005. Dette skrivet er en komprimert utgave av sluttrapporten for undersøkelsen høsten 1997, og går inn som en del av forprosjektet for industriell økologi i P2005

Extended Producer Responsibility Stimulating Technological Changes and Innovation : Case Study in the Norwegian Electrical and Electronic Industry

Technology plays an essential role in all industrial activities. When different technologies bring comfort and convenience to our lives, the rapid material consumption also results in various forms of environmental deterioration. Gradually, it is realized that pushing technological development in an environmentally-friendly direction is an important task, and public policy is one of the major driving forces. Among various types of environmental policies, extended producer responsibility (EPR) is a relatively new and market-oriented approach. OECD (2001) defines it as “an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility, physical and/or financial, for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle”. When resources are drawn from the upstream actors, i.e. the producers, to the downstream waste management activities, there exists potential for innovation to occur at both sides. The producers may make product changes in order to reduce their cost, and the waste managers receive more support, either financial subsidies or an enlarged market for example, to have their job done. In this paper, we aim to look for empirical evidence regarding how EPR stimulates technological changes. In Norway, some EPR policy instruments have come into force for the electrical and electronic (EE) industry since 1999: the EE Regulation and the EE Covenant. To fulfill their obligations accordingly, the Norwegian producers have collectively set up a national return system for their end-of-life products and pay a fee when introducing new products in the market to producer responsibility organizations (PROs), who then take over the physical responsibility to coordinate the collection and treatment of scrapped EE products. At the moment, there are three major PROs in the Norwegian EE industry. At the EU level, two directives regarding EE products were promulgated in October 2002: the Directive on waste electrical and electronic equipment (the WEEE Directive) and the Directive on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment (the RoHS Directive). The former requires producers to take back and recycle their waste, while the latter basically demands that new EE products should not contain six hazardous substances. The above-mentioned domestic and international policy instruments, together with some others, bind on the Norwegian EE industry. It is then of our research interest to find out whether these EPR instruments have driven technological change among actors in the sector. A web-based survey entitled “Green” technological changes in the Norwegian EE sector was conducted. 71% answered “yes” when asked whether there have been technological changes in the products or processes during the last 10 years to deal with environmental problems. Based on those who answered yes, the driving forces were identified as: “environmental regulations in EU” (68%), “environmental awareness and commitment in the organization” (59%), “environmental regulations in Norway” (55%), and “market demand” (50%). In spite of the survey results, interviews with staff from PROs and industry associations revealed that the upstream actors in the Norwegian EE industry are not yet very active in carrying out environmentally-friendly product changes. Reasons to this can be that, first, Norway is only a small market with no big producers, and second, there is no clear mechanism to stimulate “green products” in the pricing structure of the collective scheme. However, the implementation of the RoHS Directive drew rather high attention and participation from the producers to remove focal substances from their products. Though the Norwegian national EPR scheme does not bring out much of the upstream actors, the resources that are collected and flow into waste management motivate the downstream actors. To date, several EE waste treatment plants can be found national-wide. They are preoccupied to find technological solutions to process tricky EE products and increase their process efficiency. Three company cases were selected to be closely examined, in order to see the mechanism of policy influence. In Osram AS, lead was removed from their production of incandescent lamps, and the RoHS Directive was the main cause. Research activities in the mother company even started some years before the directive was finally promulgated. WEEE Recycling AS put together “the most modern recycling plant in the world” for EE waste, and Elektronikkgjenvinning AS possessed “the world’s first facility capable of processing SF6” from some sealed-forlife electrical switch gears. For these process changes, the Norwegian EPR regulations have everything to say

Promoting Industrial ecology by extended Producer Responsibility- Principles and Practices

An important part of the concept of Industrial ecology aims at understanding and improving the metabolic pathways of materials in society. Extended producer responsibility is one of the recent, and indeed important, obligations towards industry and recycling structures. Until now this responsibility has mainly been implemented in the sector of packaging, but there are initiatives to expand to more sectors such as electronic and electrical products as well. What we see when examining the present practices of producer responsibility is that there is developing a complex and comprehensive infrastructure for materials separation and recycling. These efforts are much needed, however, they are to some extent reactive oriented if the manufacturing industries are not also focusing on preventative options related to product design, product environmental quality, product recyclability and product function in the use phase. This paper gives an introduction to the principles of producer responsibility and describes how this is implemented in Norway in terms of recycling efforts and material companies