IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/115145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Practicalities of Individual Producer Responsibility under the WEEE Directive

Author

Listed:
  • Rotter, Vera Susanne
  • Chancerel, Perrine
  • Schill, Wolf-Peter

Abstract

In theory, individual producer responsibility (IPR) creates incentives for "design-for-recycling". Yet in practice, implementing IPR is challenging, particularly if applied to waste electric and electronic equipment. This article discusses different options for implementing IPR schemes and producers' under German WEEE legislation. In addition, practical aspects of a German "return share" brand sampling scheme are examined. Concerning "new" WEEE put on the market after 13 August 2006, producers in Germany can choose between two different methods of calculating take-back obligations. These can be determined on the basis of "return shares" or "market shares". While market shares are regularly monitored by a national clearing house, the "return share" option requires sampling and sorting of WEEE. Herein itis shown that the specifics of the German WEEE take-back scheme require high sample sizes and multi-step test procedures to ensure a statistically sound sampling approach. Since the market share allocation continues to apply for historic waste, producers lack incentives for choosing the costly brand sampling option. However, even return share allocation might not imply a decisive step towards IPR, as it merely represents an alternative calculation of market shares. Yet the fundamental characteristics of the German take-back system remain unchanged: the same anonymous mix of WEEE goes to the same treatment operations. In the future, radio frequency identification-based sorting options could foster IPR and incentives for changes in product design.

Suggested Citation

  • Rotter, Vera Susanne & Chancerel, Perrine & Schill, Wolf-Peter, 2011. "Practicalities of Individual Producer Responsibility under the WEEE Directive," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 29(9), pages 931-944.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:115145
    DOI: 10.1177/0734242X11415753
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/115145/1/Rotter_2011_Practicalities-Individual-Producer.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0734242X11415753?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. Thomas Lindhqvist & Reid Lifset, 2003. "Can We Take the Concept of Individual Producer Responsibility from Theory to Practice?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 7(2), pages 3-6, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.

    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. 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. Nnorom, I.C. & Osibanjo, O., 2008. "Overview of electronic waste (e-waste) management practices and legislations, and their poor applications in the developing countries," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(6), pages 843-858.
    3. 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.
    4. M. Dubois & J. Eyckmans, 2015. "Efficient Waste Management Policies and Strategic Behavior with Open Borders," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(4), pages 907-923, December.
    5. Leticia Antunes Nogueira & Louise Brøns Kringelum & Julia Olsen & Finn Arne Jørgensen & Bjørn Vidar Vangelsten, 2022. "What would it take to establish a take‐back scheme for fishing gear? Insights from a comparative analysis of fishing gear and beverage containers," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(6), pages 2020-2032, December.
    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. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese & Shucheng Luo & Antonino Sgalambro, 2023. "A game-theoretic multi-stakeholder model for cost allocation in urban consolidation centres," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 324(1), pages 663-686, May.
    8. Ameli, Mariam & Mansour, Saeed & Ahmadi-Javid, Amir, 2016. "A multi-objective model for selecting design alternatives and end-of-life options under uncertainty: A sustainable approach," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 123-136.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Mateo Cordier & Walter Hecq & José A. Pérez Agúndez, 2015. "The problem of high restoration costs of marine habitats damaged in the past decades by harbour facilities: Extended Producer Responsibility as an option," Working Papers CEB 15-045, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

    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:zbw:espost:115145. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.