Paying for Waste

The American biologist, Barry Commoner once proposed as his fourth law of ecology, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.” Everything we produce and consume has both an economic cost and a cost to the environment.  What goes down our drains and into our landfills will eventually place a burden somewhere on someone, or on some part of nature.  Unfortunately, our throw away culture often forgets this fact.  As a result, the communities who end up paying the costs of our garbage are often far removed in space and time from those who produced it.

What’s New? Consultations

This month, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment launched a consultation on a Canada-wide Action Plan on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). EPR refers to strategies that promote including the environmental costs of products, including the costs of recycling, reusing or disposal, into its price. This can help force companies to take responsibility for their products beyond the factory gates.  Here in Manitoba, an industry group called Multi-Materials Stewardship Manitoba has been working with the Provincial Government to overhaul producer responsibility regulations.  RCM is working with both the Province and with industry to ensure that fundamental principles of ecological fairness are represented in new Provincial regulations and in the Canada Wide Action Plan.

Extended Producer Responsibility

Environmental costs considered in EPR may include the costs of reducing pollution that stems from the manufacturing process, but also the expenses of dealing with the garbage that results after the consumer has finished with the product.  EPR can be used to shift the responsibility of paying for recycling and garbage programs away from municipalities and onto the companies that produce the waste.  One result of this is that it provides an incentive for the producers of waste to develop more environmentally friendly designs.  For example, since the introduction of EPR laws in Japan and Europe, many electronic manufacturers have shifted to lower use of plastics for many appliances, to reduce the difficulties in recycling. 

An everyday example of EPR is when garbage from a local coffee shop is found littering the neighbourhood. We may ask the owners to clean up this problem.  The owners in this case are easy to identify, since their logo is on the cups and napkins. The problem is local, and owners may be eager to comply to build their reputation within the community.  Unfortunately, for many types of packaging, the producer is anonymous and located far away, often in a different country.  The garbage they produce is buried in landfills, and so less visible. Moreover, the manufacturers of packaging often do not have a direct market relationship with consumers, but sell their products only to retailers, manufacturers and other corporate clients. In these situations, a framework is needed to ensure that companies take responsibility for their waste.

What others are doing?

Germany has been a leader in waste reduction for twenty years.  The 1991 German Packaging Ordinance was the first national system to set mandatory minimum requirements for recycling and require retailers to take back packaging at the point of sale. Distributors and producers share responsibility for the sorting collection and management of waste.  The system set as a priority the reduction of packaging, with reuse and recycling considered ahead of other forms of waste disposal.  A goal of 65% recovery of waste was achieved within a decade.  In Manitoba, only 15% of garbage is recycled.

Japanese companies have implemented significant changes in their product design in recent years.  These changes include reducing the amount of material used, making products that last longer, and are easier to reuse, repair, or recycle.  Surveys of producers found that EPR regulations, both within Japan and abroad, were major factors influencing these changes.  Manitoba companies could be missing out on important export markets without a local environment that fosters conservation. 

Within Canada, British Columbia has set the standard for producer responsibility.  Programs exist for a range of products including paint, drink containers and motor oil.  Producer stewardship programs form an important part of the province’s waste reduction strategy.  For example, while Manitobans only recycle 30 percent of beverage containers, in BC the recycling rate is 78%.  A beverage industry study found that refundable deposits were the major factor influencing differences in recovery rates across Canada.

RCM’s Position on Extended Producer Responsibility

Consultations at the federal level and changes in provincial legislation could provide an opportunity to reshape Manitoba producer stewardship programs to be in line with the best in the world.  Some of the first steps are easy.  We need to establish a program of refundable deposits on beverage containers, in line with majority of Canadian provinces.  We should establish a charge on plastic bags, starting at 25 cents per bag to discourage use, and fund education and waste reduction programs.  RCM also argues that for other products, fees should be charged directly to the producer, and not tacked on as visible surcharges for the consumer.  Since it is companies that make decisions on the design of products, they should take responsibility for their environmental costs.  In order to encourage innovation, where possible we recommend individual take back programs, where large producers individually take ultimate responsibility for their own products. 

Aside from these general principles, RCM demands that the province engage in meaningful consultations with consumer groups, environmental organizations and the general public.  Other stakeholders need to be given equal weight in consultations as industry.  Finally, any program we develop must have enforceable targets and standards.  Companies can become more socially and environmentally responsible, but they need a framework that holds them financially and legally accountable.  Manitoba should set goals that will bring us to the front of the pack in waste reduction.  The important point will be stick to these standards.

To Participate:

To join the CCME consultation on producer responsibility, click here. You can also contact the Provincial government's Green Manitoba program, or Minister Stan Struthers of Conservation Manitoba for more information.

Other Resources:

Germany, Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (2005) “Ordinance on the Avoidance and Recovery of Packaging Wastes,” Federal Law Gazette: Bonn.

John Jackson “Why Targets are Critical for EPR Programs: A paper prepared for Canada’s 5th National Workshop on Extended Producer Responsibility”

Manitoba Conservation and Environment Canada, (2002). “Proceedings for the 2^nd National Workshop on EPR Winnipeg: Manitoba Conservation.”

Resource Conservation Manitoba (2008) “Sorting Through Plastic Bags”

Chris van Rossem, Naoko Tojo, Thomas Lindhqvist (2006). “Extended Producer Responsibility: An examination of its impact on innovation and greening products,” Amsterdam: Greenpeace. 

CM Consulting (2004). An Overview of Plastic Bottle Recycling in Canada, Toronto: Environment and Plastics Industry Council (EPIC).