IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v27y2023i6p1500-1520.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unraveling the complexity of extended producer responsibility policy mix design, implementation, and transfer dynamics in the European Union

Author

Listed:
  • Jakob T. Pruess

Abstract

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) for packaging was introduced to achieve closed‐loop end‐of‐life management and design for recyclability and is an integral part of the European Union's (EU) environmental policy mix. Despite common objectives, EPR systems differ across EU member states in design and implementation. Existing cross‐country comparisons often fall short of systematizing EPR and reflecting its complexity. Understanding the components and interdependencies of EPR is crucial for adjusting policy design. This article links previously isolated components of EPR and studies the design, implementation, and transfer of EPR systems in 25 European countries through a developmental approach. It extends EPR theory by systematizing EPR design features at three hierarchical levels: system scope, responsibility allocation, and instrument type. It then tests the approach by systematically examining similarities and differences, including a uniform coding process and cluster analysis. My results indicate that EPR for plastic packaging is becoming increasingly fine‐grained and diverse. I show that ‘‘path‐dependencies’’ emerge between certain features at the responsibility allocation level. I also find common implementation patterns across countries revolving around, for example, EPR market structure or producer responsibility type. System scope converges across countries, while instrument types are becoming increasingly multi‐faceted. I find that policy transfer mechanisms, such as first‐mover dynamics and geographic proximity, have likely influenced existing landscapes of EPR design across the EU. These insights provide an intriguing first step toward deeper analysis of EPR design and, if further extended, can be operationalized for future ex ante or ex post policy analysis of EPR system setups.

Suggested Citation

  • Jakob T. Pruess, 2023. "Unraveling the complexity of extended producer responsibility policy mix design, implementation, and transfer dynamics in the European Union," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(6), pages 1500-1520, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:27:y:2023:i:6:p:1500-1520
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.13429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13429
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.13429?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walls, Margaret, 2006. "Extended Producer Responsibility and Product Design: Economic Theory and Selected Case Studies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-06-08, Resources for the Future.
    2. Atalay Atasu, 2019. "Operational Perspectives on Extended Producer Responsibility," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(4), pages 744-750, August.
    3. Choi, Taelim, 2017. "Environmental impact of voluntary extended producer responsibility: The case of carpet recycling," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 76-84.
    4. Wilts, Henning & O'Brien, Meghan, 2019. "A Policy Mix for Resource Efficiency in the EU: Key Instruments, Challenges and Research Needs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 59-69.
    5. Garth T. Hickle, 2013. "Comparative Analysis of Extended Producer Responsibility Policy in the United States and Canada," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 17(2), pages 249-261, April.
    6. Leonore Haelg & Sebastian Sewerin & Tobias S. Schmidt, 2020. "The role of actors in the policy design process: introducing design coalitions to explain policy output," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 309-347, June.
    7. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2019. "Policy-mix evaluation: Governance challenges from new place-based innovation policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    8. Huang, Ping, 2019. "The verticality of policy mixes for sustainability transitions: A case study of solar water heating in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    9. Ciprian Cimpan & Eivind Lekve Bjelle & Anders Hammer Strømman, 2021. "Plastic packaging flows in Europe: A hybrid input‐output approach," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(6), pages 1572-1587, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Michael Howlett & Joanna Vince & Pablo del Río, 2017. "Policy Integration and Multi-Level Governance: Dealing with the Vertical Dimension of Policy Mix Designs," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 69-78.
    12. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    13. Henning Wilts & Nadja Von Gries & Bettina Bahn-Walkowiak, 2016. "From Waste Management to Resource Efficiency—The Need for Policy Mixes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-16, July.
    14. Tomohiro Tasaki & Naoko Tojo & Thomas Lindhqvist, 2019. "Differences in Perception of Extended Producer Responsibility and Product Stewardship among Stakeholders: An International Questionnaire Survey and Statistical Analysis," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(2), pages 438-451, April.
    15. da Cruz, Nuno F. & Ferreira, Sandra & Cabral, Marta & Simões, Pedro & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2014. "Packaging waste recycling in Europe: is the industry paying for it?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59755, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. S. Ferreira & M. Cabral & N.F. da Cruz & P. Simões & R.C. Marques, 2017. "The costs and benefits of packaging waste management systems in Europe: the perspective of local authorities," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(5), pages 773-791, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Benjamin Cashore & Michael Howlett, 2007. "Punctuating Which Equilibrium? Understanding Thermostatic Policy Dynamics in Pacific Northwest Forestry," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(3), pages 532-551, July.
    19. Schmidt, Tobias S. & Sewerin, Sebastian, 2019. "Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – An empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    20. Christoph Knill & Kai Schulze & Jale Tosun, 2012. "Regulatory policy outputs and impacts: Exploring a complex relationship," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(4), pages 427-444, December.
    21. Bulmer, Simon & Padgett, Stephen, 2005. "Policy Transfer in the European Union: An Institutionalist Perspective," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 103-126, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Omri Carmon & Itay Fischhendler, 2021. "A friction perspective for negotiating renewable energy targets: the Israeli case," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(2), pages 313-344, June.
    2. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    3. Berthet, Alice & Vincent, Audrey & Fleury, Philippe, 2021. "Water quality issues and agriculture: An international review of innovative policy schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. Meng, Jia-Hui & Wang, Jian, 2023. "The policy trajectory of dual-use technology integration governance in China: A sequential analysis of policy evolution," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    5. Huang, Ping, 2019. "The verticality of policy mixes for sustainability transitions: A case study of solar water heating in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    6. Xieao Chen & Ping Huang & Zhenhong Xiao, 2022. "Uncovering the verticality and temporality of environmental policy mixes: The case of agricultural residue recycling in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(5), pages 632-653, September.
    7. Malhotra, Abhishek, 2022. "Trade-offs and synergies in power sector policy mixes: The case of Uttar Pradesh, India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    8. Karoline S. Rogge & Elisabeth Dütschke, 2017. "Exploring Perceptions of the Credibility of Policy Mixes: The Case of German Manufacturers of Renewable Power Generation Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-23, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    9. Jiang, Zihao & Shi, Jiarong, 2023. "Government intervention and technological innovation in the wind power industry in China: The role of industrial environmental turbulence," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 344(C).
    10. Daniel Béland & Michael Howlett & Philip Rocco & Alex Waddan, 2020. "Designing policy resilience: lessons from the Affordable Care Act," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 269-289, June.
    11. Filiou, Despoina & Kesidou, Effie & Wu, Lichao, 2023. "Are smart cities green? The role of environmental and digital policies for Eco-innovation in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    12. Borozan, Dj, 2022. "Detecting a structure in the European energy transition policy instrument mix: What mix successfully drives the energy transition?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    13. Bjerkan, Kristin Ystmark & Seter, Hanne, 2021. "Policy and politics in energy transitions. A case study on shore power in Oslo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    14. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Knoeri, Christof & Hoppmann, Joern & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "Beyond innovation and deployment: Modeling the impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies in Germany's solar policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    15. Andrea Molocchi, 2021. "Circular Economy and Environmental Sustainability: A Policy Coherence Analysis of Current Italian Subsidies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-38, July.
    16. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    17. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    18. Brendan Moore & Andrew Jordan, 2020. "Disaggregating the dependent variable in policy feedback research: an analysis of the EU Emissions Trading System," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 291-307, June.
    19. Trotter, Philipp A. & Brophy, Aoife, 2022. "Policy mixes for business model innovation: The case of off-grid energy for sustainable development in sub-Saharan Africa," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    20. Ewa Mazur-Wierzbicka, 2021. "Towards Circular Economy—A Comparative Analysis of the Countries of the European Union," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-25, May.

    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:27:y:2023:i:6:p:1500-1520. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.