The Extended Producer Responsibility System (EPRS)
In an effort to substantially reduce the waste generation and promote waste recycling, the Extended Producer Responsibility System (EPRS) has been officially implemented in Korea beginning January of 2003. The Extended Producer Responsibility, or EPR, is a system based on the premise that the primary responsibility for waste generated during the production process and after the product is discarded, is that of the manufacturer of the product. It establishes a waste management system that is recycling-focused and increases the overall rate of recycling.
EPR has been fully embraced as a concept in many other industrialized countries, in many different forms of programs and systems, but with a common underlying concept of placing responsibility on producer of a product to reduce the environmental impact throughout the entire life-cycle of the product.
Evolution of EPR
The EPR was first initiated in Germany under its Packaging Ordinance of 1991. The country was then faced with a severe landfill shortage, with packaging waste amounting to about 30%. Under this Ordinance, the so called Dual System (DSD - Duales System Deutschland AG) was established, where the producers of all kinds of packaged products were required to take back their packaging and be responsible for handling its packaging waste. DSD charged for its green dot label to producers, who then printed green dots on plastics metals, and composites, which were collected in yellow bins or bags located at households.
In Germany, since its packaging ordinance in 1991, 30 million metric tons of packaging wastes have been recovered, amounting to 5.6 million metric tons in 1998. Between 1991 and 1998, the per capita consumption of packaging was reduced from 94.7 kg to 82 kg, a reduction of 13.4%.
Since then, the German EPR concept has subsequently spread to other European countries in many different forms. In 1994, the European Commission developed a packaging waste directive aimed to reduce packaging waste generation by 50% throughout Europe by 2001, and recently passed legislation that will force electronics manufacturers to pay for the recycling and disposal of their products. Most members of the EU countries have now adopted this system. The system also spread to North America and Asia, including Japan, which passed the EPR legislation for packaging in 1995.
Basic Concept and Operation of EPR
Although the operation of EPR varies with different EPR programs around the world, the basic underlying concept is the same. In Korea, under this system, the government sets the amount of waste that must be recycled by each producer, after taking into account the collection of recyclable resources and other recycling conditions, where the producers must reach their recycling target. The total mandatory recycling amount of a recyclable item is multiplied by the ratio of a business in the total production of the item to produce the mandatory recycling amounts by business. The manufacturers will collect and recycle their products after consumers use and discard them, or pay for the full cost needed for recycling. The original aim is not only to promote recycling, but also force manufacturers to improve product design so that waste generation is minimized and recycling becomes easier.
The different types of responsibility in EPR, which were first introduced in the report to the Swedish Ministry of the Environment, by Thomas Lindhqvist in 1991, the following definitions were given:
Liability refers to a responsibility for environmental damages caused be the product in question. The extent of the liability is determined be legislation and may embrace different parts of the life-cycle of the product, including usage and final disposal.
Economic responsibility means that the producer will cover all or part of the costs for e.g. the collection, recycling or final disposal of the products he is manufacturing. These costs could be paid for by a special fee.
Physical responsibility is used to characterize the systems where the manufacturer is involved in the physical management of the products or of the effects of the products. In some cases this only means that he has developed necessary technology. In other cases the manufacturer is managing the total system, but on strictly commercial grounds, which may mean that he is charging for collecting or disposing the products he has manufactured.
Informative responsibility signifies several different possibilities to take an extended responsibility for the products through mainly informative measures.
Background and EPR in Korea
In Korea, continuous efforts have been made to promote recycling and reduce waste over a period of many years. Under the Producer Deposit System of 1992, producers of home appliances, tires, lubricants, batteries, paper goods, and metal cans had to pay deposit to the government to receive refunds proportional to the amount of recycled products and product waste. This system, however, was limited in promoting recycling because it did not place enough recycling responsibility directly on the producers.
EPR was first introduced as part of a government aim to establish an economic system of cyclical resources, where waste generation is minimized through resource conservation and efficient resource use, and where the generated waste is recycled as much as possible.
Status of EPR in Korea
According to the system, product manufacturers take the full responsibility for the recycling and disposal of their products. Products subject to EPR includes electronic appliances like televisions, refrigerators, washing machines, tires, lubricants, fluorescent lights, and packaging materials such as cans, glass bottles, and plastic bottles. As the system has taken a full effect as of 2003, the list of recyclable materials to be separately collected has further expanded to include PCs, plastic bags and wrappers, styrofoam materials, and cellular phones.
In 2002, a pilot project for the EPR was launched for home appliances and fluorescent light bulbs. Three major home appliance manufacturers and fluorescent light bulb manufacturers collected and recycled their products after the consumers used and discarded them. The results of the pilot project indicated that this measure not only promotes recycling, but also forces manufacturers to improve product design so that waste generation is minimized and recycling becomes easier. With its official launch in 2003, EPR was extended to include product packaging, batteries, and tires, and the list of recyclable materials will be further expanded.
The volume-based waste system is in place in Korea and most residents separate recyclable goods from garbage. Local governments also encourage separation of recyclable waste and are encouraged to set up waste storage containers and facilities. If Korean producers could make the design and packaging of goods a bit more environment-friendly throughout the product life-cycle, recycling can take a stronger root in the Korean society as a whole, making the EPR that much more effective.
Examples of EPR Programs Around the World
Germany's Ordinance on the Avoidance of Packaging Waste (the "Green Dot" program), the first mandated EPR program, placed the financial responsibility for collecting and reducing packaging waste on manufacturers.
Sweden, Norway, Taiwan, and Switzerland adopted legislation, that requires manufacturers of electronic and electrical goods to provide free end-of-life care for their products through licensed handlers. The Norwegian law allows consumers to take discarded white goods, personal computers, telephones, cables, electronic and industrial electrical materials free of charge to dealers of local authority collection points; financed by a "recycling charge" on such products at the point of sale.
Netherlands has created Automobile Recycling Netherland (ARN), a group that organizes materials-recovery and recycling. The Dutch have also transformed their road tax into a vehicle ownership tax that people must pay until the car is officially recycled
United States implemented effective EPR programs on a state level, through mandates imposed by state laws, regulations or policies. Some of the problems include, advanced disposal feels, deposit refund systems, such as bottle bills, and mandatory take back systems for rechargeable nickel-cadmium batteries
Japan implemented take back programs requiring refrigerators, air conditioners, TV's, and washing machines, but allows the companies to charge end user for the "service"
Conclusion
EPR is a strategic approach to decrease total environmental impact from a product by making the manufacturers of the product be responsible for the entire stages of a product's life cycle.
Today, more than a dozen countries have some form of mandated EPR, and many environmentally-conscious corporations have adopted their own form of take-back programs. In Korea, during the trial period of EPR System, recycling rates have increased from 48% to 87% for home appliances and 82% to 91% for metal cans. Through the official launch in 2003, the Ministry of Environment expects a significant increase in the overall recycling rates, minimized waste generation, as well as more environmentally-conscious product designs.
In order to further foster cleaner, and more sound environment, EPR programs should be established firmly in every part of the nation and all around the globe, so that it is recognized as not just an obligation, but become a natural part of our lifestyle.
References were made from the following articles and books:
Green Korea 2002: Special Edition 1999-2002, The Ministry of Environment, Republic of Korea,
McNabb, John, Extended Producer Responsibility Putting Responsibility Where It Belongs, MA Coalition to Reduce Waste, Clean Water Action Alliance, Dec. 1999
Hanisch, Carola, Is Extended Producer Responsibility Effective?, American Chemical Society, April, 2000
Rijswijk, Gerard van, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Is This Concept Environmentally and Economically Sound?, Association of Liquidpaperboard Carton Manufacturers Inc.
Lindhqvist, Thomas, Extended Producer Responsibility, Proceedings of an invitational expert seminar, Trolleholm Castle, Sweden, 4-5 May 1992