Presentado por Derek Stephenson en el marco del Taller de Responsabilidad Extendida del Productor.

1. Esquemas Inclusivos de
Responsabilidad Extendida del
Productor (REP):
Aprendizajes, Desafíos y Oportunidades
February 5, 2015
Bogotá, Colombia

2. 2
What this presentation will cover
• Brief introduction
• The underlying drivers of EPR
• Examples of different EPR approaches
• Role of waste pickers
• Some lessons learned

3. Strategy Matters Inc.
• My background:
– Research Director Is Five Foundation (1972 Canada)
– Founder & President RIS (1974 Canada, USA, Europe)
– Founder & Managing Director Enviros-RIS (1998 UK)
– Founder & President Strategy Matters Inc. (2001 Canada)
– Senior Vice-President Corporations Support Recycling (2004 Canada)
– Founder & President StewardEdge Inc.(2008 Canada, USA & international)
– Director Global Solutions, the Reclay Group (2013 Germany)
• Expertise:
– Design and implementation of materials recycling programs
• from facility level to national scale
– Developing public policy, legislation and corporate strategies
– Design and implementation of product stewardship & EPR programs
3

4. 3 billion more middle-class consumers will fuel
future demand & waste generation
4
Global middle class1
Billions of people
ROW
2030
3.23Latin America
4.88
3 billion
Asia-Pacific
North America
Europe
2020
3.25
1.74
2009
1.85
0.53
1 Based on daily consumption per capita ranging from $10 to $100 (in purchasing power
parity terms)
Source: OECD (2011), Perspectives on Global Development: Social Cohesion in a Shifting
World
0.03

5. 5
2 billion New Urban Residents by 2030,
3 Billion by 2050
Reference: World Urbanization Prospects, 2011 Revision (United Nations, 2012)

6. 6
Cities are adding 1,500,000 Residents
each Week
Shenzen in 1987 Shenzen today
Reference: WHAT A WASTE: A GLOBAL REVIEW OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT, World Bank, 2012

7. 7
Enormous Growth coming:
Global Peak Waste unlikely Before 2100
Reference: WHAT A WASTE: A GLOBAL REVIEW OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT, World Bank, 2012

8. 8
Global Waste Market
• € 310 billion/yr: The global municipal waste market
• including collection and recycling
• equals the GDP of Denmark
• Not including the sizeable informal sector
• In developed countries waste management ~ 2% of GDP
• 4 billion tpy waste of which 1.9 billion from households
• 40 million people work in waste management sector
worldwide
• 50% are informal
Source: ISWA estimates, 2014

9. 9
Search for “Global Solutions” is on
Six “big ideas” for accelerating reduction, reuse & recycling
1. Enable and empower people locally to adopt “best practices”
2. Green taxes to expand services and change consumer
behavior
3. Tradable credits (incent existing recycling industry to do more)
4. Make the producer responsible through EPR (fully or shared )
5. Collaborative consumption
6. Circular economy (rethink fundamental economic paradigm)
Common objective to scale up perceived best practices

10. 10 OECD, 2001
What is “EPR”?
What is “Product Stewardship”?
§ Encompasses EPR and a
wider range of public policies
and corporate activities
§ This concept allows for
greater flexibility and
opportunity to find effective
solutions most appropriate
to specific market conditions
§ Includes both voluntary and
regulated initiatives.
§ An environmental policy
approach in which a
producer's responsibility for
a product, physical and/or
financial, is extended to the
post-consumer stage of a
product's life cycle.
§ A wide range of EPR models
have been implemented by
legislation globally. (OECD
(2001))
Product StewardshipEPR

11. 11
Core recommendations of the OECD
• OECD recommends the implementation of EPR,
leading to:
o Increased collection and recycling rates
o Reduction of public spending on waste management
o Reduction in overall waste management costs
o Design for environment (DfE) innovations
• OECD guidelines now under revision and changes
will likely include:
o Full costs of managing used products should be
allocated to producers
o Realities of informal waste collection in developing
countries must be considered in EPR program design

12. • Packaging
• Products with potentially hazardous chemicals:
– Paints, solvents, cleaners, pharmaceuticals,
pesticides, fertilizers, etc.
• Lubricating oil
• Tires
• Waste Electric and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)
• End of Life Vehicles
• Batteries
• Bulky wastes
12
Product groups

13. ?
?
?
? V
Overview of EPR
landscape worldwide
Proposed/Expected
EPR or Product Stewardship in Place

14. 14
What are the Key Drivers of EPR?
• EPR a reflection of broader transition underway
– Quantifying environmental impacts
– Internalizing these costs to producers & users
• Driven by converging forces
– Government systemic financial stress
– Commercial pressures for greater transparency along
the supply chain
– Securing supplies of key strategic materials
– Policy innovation & adoption across the OECD
• Recognition that cradle-to-cradle management
essential to sustainability

15. Some EPR Examples

16. “Classic” European EPR Model
Government
Institutions
Recycling
Companies
Obligated Companies
Fees
Collection
Companies
Proof of recycled
amounts to be
delivered
Agreement on the
design of the local
system
Approval
Local
Authorities
Call for
tender
Exemption from
obligations
Authorized System
Call for
tender
Sorting
Companies Public/
Consumer
Awareness
raising /
education
Take back + recycling
obligations

17. No two national programs are exactly the same
After 20+ years experience in Europe
Markets with a single
producer controlled
shared responsibility
scheme
Markets with a single
producer controlled full
responsibility scheme
Markets with competing
compliance services
France
Spain
Cyprus
Greece
Italy
Belgium
Netherlands
Ireland
Finland
Denmark
Norway
Sweden
Luxemburg
Czech Republic
Portugal
Germany
Great Britain
Poland
Turkey
Estonia
Romania
Lithuania
Latvia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Bulgaria
Malta
Austria

18. Typical Recycling Model Operated in
Europe
18

19. EPR is becoming an integral part of national
Resource Efficiency Strategies throughout Europe
19
Waste
reduction
Resource
efficiency
strategy
Evolving national resource strategies
Packaging
directive in
Germany
1991
1994
EU packaging and
packaging waste
ordinance
2004
EU directive on
WEEE
2008
EU packaging
directive
2012
Resource efficiency
program in Germany
covering waste reduction
and secondary raw
materials

20. 20
Example of Canada
• No national waste management or single market
legislation
• Provinces & states take their own unique approach
to EPR
– Performance goals
– Designated materials
– Financial responsibility
• “Framework” EPR legislation
vs. material specific
• Industry driving harmonization

21. white-washed symbols
= program proposed or
under consideration
full-colour symbols =
program in place or
pending
see
inset
2012 Status
21
EPR Programs in Canada

22. 22
Current Approach in USA to EPR
• Limited federal government role: waste
management regulated at state level
• Municipal recycling programs financed
primarily by local government
– state grants
– property taxes, assessments, disposal levies
• EPR being applied to “difficult to manage”
products – paint, WEEE, mattresses, etc.
• No national or state legislation on printed
paper & packaging

23. Broad Application of EPR in the U.S.
Source: Product Stewardship Institute 23

24. 24
Chile – Draft Law in Congress
• Make value recovery from waste a priority in
Chile’s waste management strategy
• Introduce EPR as an economic mechanism to
increase the recycling rate of packaging and
products for at least 9 categories of goods set
by the Ministry of Environment (article 9):
1. Packaging
2. Lubricating oils
3. Tires
4. WEEE/light bulbs
5. Batteries
6. Vehicles
7. Newspapers and magazines
8. Expired medicines
9. Pesticides

25. 25
Industry responsibilities
• Register the quantity of obligated products supplied into
Chile in national database
• Organize and finance the collection of priority products waste
in all the national territory
o individually (self-compliance)
o through an authorised collective management system
• Deliver their waste to a manager authorised to process it
unless the producer handles the waste itself
– Solid household or comparable waste shall be delivered to the
relevant municipality or an authorised manager
• The penalties for infringements of the law range from
significant fines (up to 10 times the waste management
costs) to temporary prohibition of sale of the priority product

26. 26
A blend of global experience
• Chile‘s approach to formulating a general framework EPR
law followed by product specific regulations reflects
international best practices
• Recognizes the need to involve the informal recycling
sector
• Introduces other supporting mechanisms that will make
EPR more effective and efficient
• List of “priority products” noted in the legislation would
make Chile one of the leading EPR jurisdictions in the
world
• Agreeing on general framework for EPR is not easy.
Working out product specific regulation through decrees
is even more difficult

27. Chile study tour Spain

28. Chile study tour Germany

29. Household collection Santiago

30. Santiago sorting

31. Santiago sorting

32. Brazil cooperative

33. The Essential Role of “Waste Pickers”
• Worldwide, millions of waste pickers manually remove recyclable items
from landfills and urban areas (including in all developed countries):
• India: 1.5 million (2010), mostly women and
marginalized groups
• Colombia: 18,000 “recicladores”
• Uruguay: 15,000 “clasificadores”
• Argentina: 42,000 “cartoneros”
• Brazil: 229,000 “catadores”
• Provide essential separation of valuable recyclable materials sold into
global markets
• Often working under hazardous conditions
33

34. How are some CPG companies responding?

35. 35
“¿Puede sentirse orgulloso de esta
cadena de valor?”
“Is This A Supply Chain to be Proud of?”

36. 36
Key issues for industry
1. Scale up projects at a quicker rate
2. Waste picker well-being
3. Operational efficiency
4. Procurement & quality of material
5. Design of packaging & products
6. Promote multi-material approaches to recovery & recycling
7. Ground recovery and recycling projects within broader
sustainability thinking
8. Institutional development
9. Legislation
10.Regional/cultural issues

37. Broad Waste Recovery GoalsCompany Goal(s)
v Recover 50% of equivalent cans and bottles by 2015. Aiming for 75 percent
recovery of the Coca-Cola bottles and cans introduced into developed markets by
2020
v Double the global recycling rate of its’ used beverage cartons by 2020
v Contribute to the collection of materials used in the packaging of Danone products,
and when this is not yet in place, try out new collection systems
v Zero manufacturing waste going to landfills: Working to eliminate or reduce solid
waste from production processes; identifying ways to repurpose waste as useful
raw materials (“Waste-to-Worth”); designing more material-efficient delivery
systems
v a 10 percent absolute reduction in total waste disposed off-site using 2010 total off-
site waste disposal as a baseline
v 2020 goal: pilot studies in both developed and developing markets
v Increase recycling and recovery rates on average by 5% by 2015, and by 15% by
2020 in our top 14 countries.
v Double the amount of aerosols that gets recycled around the world by 2020.
v Committed to increasing the recyclability of our packaging, increasing recycling of
post-industrial packaging related to our products and making sure our containers
utilize materials that are compatible with accessible recycling systems

38. How does this relate to EPR?
Before
After
38

39. Full Public Sector
Responsibility
Full Private Sector
Responsibility
Shared
Responsibility
• Managed by the state
or municipalities
• Financed through taxes
• Public service
• Private management
• Financed through
producers
contributions (fees)
• Independent system
• Shared management
• Public-Private
Financing
• Mutual initiative:
Government & private
sector
Post Consumer Waste Management Systems

40. Full public sector
responsibility
Full private sector
responsibility
Shared
responsibility
Post Consumer Waste Management Systems
• Consumer pays and the
government manages the
system
• There are no direct
financial incentives to
improve the type of
packaging or product
supplied by the producer.
• The producer has full financial
and operational responsibility
for the operation of the
recycling system
• The producer has a direct
financial incentive to improve
the recyclability of the
packaging to reduce end of
life management costs
• The producer pays for part
of the total system cost
and responsibility is shared
with local governments
• Both producer and the
consumer/local
government have an
incentive to improve the
efficiency of recycling
programs

41. 41
Choosing the right approach
• You cannot simply copy and paste an EPR model from
another country
• Need a solid fact base to ensure that the objectives of
the law are achievable
• Test many different program elements to learn what
works best
• Ensure that the regulations and financing systems
encourage recycling program effectiveness and efficiency
– Regional programs provide economies of scale
• Training and motivating citizens to properly sort priority
products for separate collection is the key to success
– Most successful national programs build a common recycling
“brand”

42. Keys to Successful EPR
42

43. 43
Producer Responsibility Legal
Frameworks Demonstrate Clear Benefits
• If combined with other policies: comprehensive solid waste
management legislation; charging generators for waste
collection services, mandatory recycling; bans from disposal
• Drives establishment and enhancement of collection
infrastructure, sorting technology, and recycling capacities
• Fosters investment in modern technology for sorting and
recycling
• Enables competition, and therefore system efficiencies
Thinking about how to link producer responsibility/product
stewardship legislation and the informal recycling sectors is just
beginning

44. 44
Contact information
Derek Stephenson
Strategy Matters Inc.
Phone: +41 79 195 40 77
derek@strategy-matters.ca