Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Getting Interesting

The discussions on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) are getting interesting. While there is little controversy over EPR for hazardous items which have no economic value and pose threats to public health and the environment, there is grave concern about EPR for materials that have robust markets, paper, plastic, organic, metal and glass materials. Advocates of EPR for these materials controlled by stewardship associations dominated by the largest consumer product corporations has been challenged by innovative new policies established by the Berkeley Zero Waste Commission and the City Council, and new policy recommendations by the Global Recycling Council of the California Resource Recovery Association.  The latter call for local government control over EPR initiatives. One of the reasons for this reconsideration of EPR has been the roll out of corporate dominated stewardship in British Colombia, Canada which threatens the established recycling and reuse infrastructure. In RI and MN, proposed corporate run EPR programs for paper and packaging have been rejected.

Do we want this kind of market and political dysfunction in the U.S.?

This recent article in the Surrey Leader newspaper in British Columbia outlines the local business rejection of the BC EPR program.

See more ILSR articles on EPR

Follow Neil Seldman:
Neil Seldman

Neil Seldman, Ph.D, directs the Recycling and Economic Growth Initiative. He specializes in helping cities and businesses recover increasing amounts of materials from the waste stream and add value to the local economy through new processing and manufacturing facilities. He is a co-founder of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance and is a member of ILSR's Board of Directors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *