IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v11y2007i3p113-131.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic, Financial, and Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility in Europe: A Producer Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • C. Kieren Mayers

Abstract

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) legislation, making producers responsible for financing and organizing take‐back and recycling of waste batteries, packaging, end‐of‐life vehicles (ELVs), and waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), has been or is currently in the process of being implemented in 29 different countries in Europe following introduction of European Union directives. This article reviews the potential impacts of EPR for waste batteries, packaging, and WEEE on producers distributing products in Europe through a case study of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE)—responsible for marketing and distribution of PlayStation products. There are presently more than 250 producer responsibility organizations (PROs) established to meet EPR obligations in Europe, which contrasts to the single national recycling schemes founded in the late 1990s. SCEE estimates it avoided anetcostof €408,000 in 2005 by introducing competitive review of PRO services (against a total net take‐back cost of €401,000).To meet increasingly extensive compliance obligations, SCEE has initiated new activities, with considerable implications for the company's legal, sales data administration, procurement, accounting, and product and packaging approval practices. Considering the ultimate aim of EPR to establish economic incentives for improved product design, several significant political and practical obstacles are described from SCEE's case and industry situation. Although the principle of EPR is indeed interesting, its practical application in Europe may require refinement. Producers, given adequate support by policy makers, still have opportunities to develop new processes under the WEEE Directive to facilitate design for the environment.

Suggested Citation

  • C. Kieren Mayers, 2007. "Strategic, Financial, and Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility in Europe: A Producer Case Study," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 11(3), pages 113-131, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:11:y:2007:i:3:p:113-131
    DOI: 10.1162/jiec.2007.1228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1162/jiec.2007.1228
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1162/jiec.2007.1228?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael W. Toffel & Antoinette Stein & Katharine L. Lee, 2008. "Extending Producer Responsibility: An Evaluation Framework for Product Take-Back Policies," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-026, Harvard Business School.
    2. Caroline Orset & Nicolas Barret & Aurélien Lemaire, 2017. "How consumers of plastic water bottles are responding to environmental policies?," Post-Print hal-01500900, HAL.
    3. Hickle, Garth T., 2014. "An examination of governance within extended producer responsibility policy regimes in North America," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 55-65.
    4. Helen Micheaux & Franck Aggeri, 2021. "Eco-modulation as a driver for eco-design: a dynamic view of the French collective EPR scheme," Post-Print hal-03106882, HAL.
    5. Brouillat, Eric & Oltra, Vanessa, 2012. "Extended producer responsibility instruments and innovation in eco-design: An exploration through a simulation model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 236-245.
    6. Corsini, Filippo & Rizzi, Francesco & Frey, Marco, 2018. "Institutional legitimacy of non-profit innovation facilitators: Strategic postures in regulated environments," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 69-78.
    7. Krikke, Harold & Hofenk, Dianne & Wang, Yacan, 2013. "Revealing an invisible giant: A comprehensive survey into return practices within original (closed-loop) supply chains," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 239-250.
    8. Wang, Huaidong & Gu, Yifan & Li, Liquan & Liu, Tingting & Wu, Yufeng & Zuo, Tieyong, 2017. "Operating models and development trends in the extended producer responsibility system for waste electrical and electronic equipment," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 159-167.
    9. Işıl Alev & Ximin (Natalie) Huang & Atalay Atasu & L. Beril Toktay, 2019. "A Case Discussion on Market‐Based Extended Producer Responsibility: The Minnesota Electronics Recycling Act," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(1), pages 208-221, February.
    10. Florin Constantin Mihai & Maria-Grazie Gnoni & Christia Meidiana & Chukwunonye Ezeah & Valerio Elia, 2019. "Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE): Flows, Quantities, and Management—A Global Scenario," Post-Print hal-02276468, HAL.
    11. Massarutto, Antonio, 2014. "The long and winding road to resource efficiency – An interdisciplinary perspective on extended producer responsibility," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 11-21.
    12. Rita Sousa & Elsa Agante & João Cerejeira & Miguel Portela, 2018. "EEE fees and the WEEE system – A model of efficiency and income in European countries," NIPE Working Papers 03/2018, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    13. Marinella Favot, 2014. "Extended producer responsibility and e-waste management: do institutions matter ?," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(1), pages 123-144.
    14. George, Gerard & Schillebeeckx, Simon J.D., 2022. "Digital transformation, sustainability, and purpose in the multinational enterprise," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(3).
    15. Lai, Kee-hung & Wong, Christina W.Y., 2012. "Green logistics management and performance: Some empirical evidence from Chinese manufacturing exporters," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 267-282.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:11:y:2007:i:3:p:113-131. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.