Extended Producer Responsibility and Circular Economy: Three Design Flaws

Walter Vermeulen,Kieran Campbell-Johnston,Kaustubh Thapa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14512/oew370121

2022-02-28

Abstract:The existing system of Extended Producer Responsibility focuses on waste generation on the national level. To account for the international trade of waste and second-hand products the concept of Ultimate Producer Responsibility is a promising approach.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Stakeholder Views on Extended Producer Responsibility and the Circular Economy

Nathan Kunz,Kieren Mayers,Luk N. Van Wassenhove

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125617752694

2018-02-12

California Management Review

Abstract:Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regulations require that producers organize and pay for treatment and recycling of waste arising from their products at end of life. EPR has been effective in implementing some aspects of circular economy. In Europe, 35% of e-waste and 65% of packaging waste have already been recycled (or reused in some cases). This article analyzes the challenges of implementing EPR and provides useful insights for what has worked well and what challenges remain. Identifying and addressing these challenges will be crucial for framing legislation that will move industry and society toward a more circular economy.

management,business
Extended Producer Responsibility and Its Role in the Development of Circular Economy

ZHANG Xiao-hua,LIU Bin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2005.02.005

2005-01-01

Abstract:Circular economy is a concrete practical mode for the achievement of neo-industrialization and also one of the important means to harmonize social progress, economic development, resources utilization and environmental protection. Extended Producer Responsibility is coincident with the basic principle of circular economy and is one of the important policies for the development of circular economy. Starting with the definition and goal of EPR, this paper argued that extending producer responsibility is not the aim but the means. Since the dominant role of producers in the product life chain, EPR can share the burden of waste product treatment among different stakeholders effectively and minimized the total cost.
Circular economy through waste reverse logistics under extended producer responsibility in Finland

Bening Mayanti,Petri Helo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X231168801

Abstract:Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is commonly implemented as a strategy in waste management. The core of the concept itself is a waste reverse logistics (WRL), which dictates how the collection, inspection and processing of end-of-life products are performed. Existing studies of EPR mainly focused on single products instead of using broader perspective on national level. Its contribution towards circular economy through slowing and closing the loops also has not been widely discussed. This study examined the system architecture of the policy instruments used in the EPR and the similarities of the WRL networks across different products. A case study was used to investigate six products: portable batteries and accumulators, paper, packaging, vehicles, electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) and tyres. The study generated a WRL framework. It is also observed that closing the loop through recycling is the primary circular strategy and is found in all products, whereas closing and slowing the loop strategy through reuse/repair, remanufacture and repurposing is found in packaging, tyres, vehicles and EEE. This study shows that EPR can close the material loop, although improvement in design for the environment is necessary. It creates challenges and opportunities for the government, producer responsibility organization and producers to improve existing conditions by implementing new initiatives such as design for the environment indicators, standardization, tax and subsidy systems and tariffs for disposal fees.
Concretising the role of extended producer responsibility in European Union waste law and policy through the lens of the circular economy

Kleoniki Pouikli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-020-00596-9

2020-02-10

ERA Forum

Abstract:Abstract The aim of this paper is to shed light on the main aspects of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), a widely used principle of environmental policy, looking through the lens of EU waste law and policy, as this is currently evolving. The main discussion will revolve around the opportunities of moving towards a more effective EPR and adopting more effective policy instruments. Emphasis will be given to the definition of EPR, to its content and to implementation schemes in EU law especially as regards the role of EPR in achieving the challenging targets which exist relating to waste management and product design requirements under the Circular Economy Package, while at the same time highlighting the inter-relationship between waste and product laws.
Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products

Isil Alev,Vishal Agrawal,Atalay Atasu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2477943

2016-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Problem definition: We study how Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation implementations for durable products should differ from those for non-durable products. Academic and Practical Relevance: Certain unique characteristics of markets for durable products, which make designing EPR implementations more challenging, have not been explored to date in academia and practice. We fill this void by investigating the effect of EPR on durable goods markets. Methodology: We develop a game-theoretic model to analyze durable goods producers' secondary market strategy under EPR and analytically explore its environmental implications. Results: The implications of EPR are not straightforward for durable products. On one hand, despite being focused on recycling, EPR may lead to an unintended benefit in the form of higher reuse levels by reducing producers' secondary market interference. On the other hand, EPR can also induce or increase secondary market interference by producers. This diminishes environmental goals such as reducing new production and increasing reuse levels, two key environmental goals with higher priority than increasing recycling. Policy Implications: We offer insights for how the environmental effectiveness of EPR for durable products can be improved by appropriately choosing its implementation parameters. We show that implementation approaches that may be considered successful for non-durable products (e.g., packaging or end-of-life batteries), may not be suitable for durable products such as electronics. For example, more stringent collection targets and infrastructure requirements can backfire in EPR implementations for durable products.
Extended Producer Responsibility to Reconstruct the Circular Value Chain

Xin Tong,Tao Wang,Jinling Li,Xuejun Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cec.2024.100076

2024-01-01

Circular Economy

Abstract:This research explores the role of extended producer responsibility (EPR) as an enabler of circular value chain in the Chinese context. The driven forces and key stakeholders were identified to extend producer responsibility in developing the national-circular-economy strategies. An evaluation system was established to link the eco-design strategy of the producer with the downstream-recycling performance of products. The eco-design information was retrieved from the self-disclosure information in the sustainable development report of producers. The downstream-waste-flow information comes from multiple platforms of reuse and recycling companies. The aim of reforming the EPR system is to establish an open forum for competition and cooperation among different stakeholders to achieve a continuously-improving target of circularity and life cycle environmental performance of the products. With the evaluation results, the producers are encouraged to fully explore all opportunities in the circular value chain instead of focusing only on the final disposal or disassembly of waste. The conclusion suggests that EPR policies should break the restrictions on eco-design and innovation in business models by creating and capturing values of circularity along with the world's collective climate change mitigation efforts.
Using Plastic Wastes to Exemplify Justice Dimensions of Extended Producer Responsibility

Katrien Steenmans,Rosalind Malcolm

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21926/aeer.2301024

2023-03-10

Advances in Environmental and Engineering Research

Abstract:Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) places liability, physical, financial, and/or informative responsibility for a product throughout its life cycle on its producer. Implementing such schemes is expected to result in many environmental and social benefits. Yet, academic and practitioner discussions on the mechanisms focus on environmental impacts, whereas social dimensions of EPR are often side-lined. This short communication contributes to addressing this gap by establishing a research agenda for the justice dimensions of EPR. For this purpose, initial links between EPR and justice – specifically waste colonialism, procedural justice, recognition justice, distributive justice, intra- and intergenerational equity, waste justice, and corrective justice – are set out, including where it affects products in their life cycles and examples of which stakeholders may be impacted, with plastic waste used to provide examples.
Recent Advances in Extended Producer Responsibility Initiatives for Plastic Waste Management in Germany and UK

Brindha Ramasubramanian,Jovan Tan,Vijila Chellappan,Seeram Ramakrishna

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42824-023-00076-8

2023-05-12

Materials Circular Economy

Abstract:Extended producer responsibility (EPR) initiatives have shown success in enhancing the independent collection of plastic waste, but the existing recycling industry framework poses challenges to achieving optimal recyclability levels. For addressing this issue, various legislative strategies, including non-profit EPR, door-to-door collection systems, and deposit refund schemes (DRS), have been implemented in some countries such as the UK and Germany. As plastic waste management responsibility is shared between consumers and producers in Europe, with consumers generating 40% of plastic waste and producers being responsible for the remaining 60%, this review examines the impact of EPR and DRS programs on consumer and producer behaviors. The article also explores the potential for circularity and sustainability of recycling technologies, including their challenges and limitations. The significance of this study lies in its examination of the impact of EPR and DRS programs on consumer and producer behaviors, providing insight into sustainable practices that promote waste minimization and foster the adoption of recycling methods. Ultimately, the review recommends quick action in four crucial areas, including standardization, infrastructure investment, partnership models, and the production of higher-value recycled materials, all of which require supply chain collaboration.
Is Extended Producer Responsibility living up to expectations? A systematic literature review focusing on electronic waste

Marco Compagnoni

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133101

IF: 11.1

2022-09-20

Journal of Cleaner Production

Abstract:Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is an environmental policy principle conceived for the incorporation of total product life-cycle (PLC) costs into production and consumption decisions. Consequently, EPR is expected to enhance the circularity of the value chains affected by this regulation. The lack of comprehensive evaluations of EPR achievements hampers the possibility to assess the actual alignment of the policy impacts with Circular Economy (CE) objectives. This is true also in the context of electronic waste (WEEE), which has been prioritized by EPR regulations and scientific investigations. This paper provides the first systematic literature review aiming to comprehensively examine the outcomes of EPR implementation in the WEEE scope, by adopting a PLC perspective. The review highlights the accomplishment of important downstream goals of EPR on WEEE, such as the increase of waste collection rates and the development of stable waste management systems. On the other hand, the review highlights limited upstream effectiveness of the policy, which is due to the insufficient allocation of individual responsibility to electronics producers to systematically drive them towards eco-design strategies. Discrepancies between CE goals and EPR achievements and implementation are classified into seven areas, covering the entire PLC and also representing domains of policy recommendations. Finally, the paper identifies a number of future research directions that would support the alignment of EPR policies and CE objectives in the electronics value chain.

environmental sciences,green & sustainable science & technology,engineering, environmental
Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products

Ximin Huang,Atalay Atasu,L. Beril Toktay

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3043985

2017-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:We analyze product design implications of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)-based take-back legislation on durable goods. In particular, we observe that durable product design incentives under EPR may involve an inherent trade-off that has not been explored to date: Durable goods producers can respond to EPR by making their products more recyclable or more durable, where the former decreases the unit recycling cost and the latter reduces the volume the producer has to recycle. When these two design attributes do not go hand-in-hand, as is the case for many product categories, product design implications of EPR can be counterintuitive. We nd that more stringent collection targets (defined as the portion of total product volume to be collected) or recycling targets (defined as the portion of each collected product unit to be recycled) may imply reduced recyclability or durability. Moreover, although collection and recycling targets appear to be similar EPR implementation levers for increasing the total amount of materials recycled, they in fact have opposing eects in driving producers' design choices. As a result, EPR may have unintended consequences for the environment. A calibrated numerical study on the Photovoltaic Panel (PVP) industry allows us to show that more stringent EPR requirements (such as those proposed by the recent recast of the WEEE Directive) can lead to a PVP technology choice with lower recyclability and higher durability, and consequently result in higher greenhouse gas emissions. These results call for a careful analysis of the benefits of EPR legislation in the context of durable goods.
Sustainable Transition and Extended Producer Responsibility

TONG Xin,YAN Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2012.08.008

2012-01-01

Abstract:This paper reviews the status and trends of Extended Producer Responsibility worldwide with the framework of multi-level perspective of transition theory.We compare the innovation-oriented regime design advocated by EPR theorists and the cost-efficiency analysis on EPR policies in practice,and point out that the conflict between them is whether the radical sustainable transformation should be treated as the basic policy objectives of EPR.The conflict comes from the difficulty in observing and measuring the impacts of EPR program on technological change.Thus,it leads to divergence in policy improvements for EPR practice.The former insists that EPR system should be based on the principle of individual responsibility to encourage the producers to redesign their products,as well as to promote the transition of production and consumption patterns.The later emphasizes on simplifying management and regulation under the existing regulatory framework,and improving the recycling infrastructure and its efficiency.This divergence does not only affect the evolution of the EPR system of developed countries,but also the transplantation and construction of EPR system in developing countries.In conclusion,we propose a framework to study the evolution of Chinese WEEE management system with three levels of observation,including: ① the technological choices at firm level,② the dynamics in supply chain governance,and ③ transformation of recycling sector at large.
Operational Perspectives on Extended Producer Responsibility

Atalay Atasu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12816

2018-10-04

Journal of Industrial Ecology

Abstract:We revisit three important assumptions about extended producer responsibility (EPR) that originate from academia, policy, or practice: (1) A central objective of EPR should be to induce product designs for the environment; (2) collective EPR implementations mute incentives to design for the environment; and (3) more stringent EPR policy parameters will generate better environmental outcomes. We discuss the potential shortcomings of these assumptions from an operations perspective and their implications for academic and policy research.

environmental sciences,green & sustainable science & technology,engineering, environmental
Ultimate producer responsibility for e‐waste management–A proposal for just transition in the circular economy based on the case of used European electronic equipment exported to Nigeria

Kaustubh Thapa,Walter J. V. Vermeulen,Pauline Deutz,Olawale Olayide

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.222

2022-09-07

Business Strategy & Development

Abstract:Used European electric and electronic equipment (UEEE) has multiple use cycles in various countries, including Nigeria. Although the EU‐Nigeria e‐waste trade is illegal under EU and Nigerian law, previous research shows that some imported equipment is only fit for disposal. Imported UEEE has a short lifespan. Such European e‐waste exports imported to Nigeria have sustainability and circularity implications for both places and raise questions about justice and equity. Using a transdisciplinary approach, we identify existing practices and challenges in Nigeria and co‐create actionable solutions towards a sustainable, circular and fairness‐driven UEEE and e‐waste value chain. We find current extended producer responsibility (EPR) does not focus on the entire global value chain, is linear, and lacks transparency, accountability, and consideration for spatial equity. To overcome these shortcomings, we propose ultimate producer responsibility (UPR). UPR aids sustainability and circularity transition while paying attention to justice and equity. The research adds global and social dimensions to the European circular economy (CE), otherwise primarily focused on national material cycles.
Product Design and Supply Chain Coordination Under Extended Producer Responsibility

Ravi Subramanian,Sudheer Gupta,Brian Talbot

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2009.01018.x

IF: 4.638

2009-05-01

Production and Operations Management

Abstract:Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation focuses on the life‐cycle environmental performance of products and has significant implications for management theory and practice. In this paper, we examine the influence of EPR policy parameters on product design and coordination incentives in a durable product supply chain. We model a manufacturer supplying a remanufacturable product to a customer over multiple periods. The manufacturer invests in two design attributes of the product that impact costs incurred by the supply chain—performance, which affects the environmental impact of the product during use, and remanufacturability, which affects the environmental impact post‐use. Consistent with the goals of EPR policies, the manufacturer and the customer are required to share the environmental costs incurred over the product's life cycle. The customer has a continuing need for the services of the product and optimizes between the costs of product replacement and the costs incurred during use. We demonstrate how charges during use and post‐use can be used as levers to encourage environmentally favorable product design. We analyze the impact of supply chain coordination on design choices and profit and discuss contracts that can be used to achieve coordination, both under symmetric and asymmetric information about customer attributes.

operations research & management science,engineering, manufacturing
Extended Producer Responsibility for Waste Management Policy

Dinni Septianingrum,Kosuke Mizuno,Herdis Herdiansyah

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i5.3469

2023-05-31

Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA

Abstract:Solid waste management, which always ends in landfills, causes various environmental and socio-economic impacts. Tegal City also experiences overcapacity landfill conditions because the waste management model focuses on landfills. This study aims to identify existing waste management regulations and how EPR can become a policy framework to achieve waste management beyond landfills. The result explains that by regulation, the government has regulated the flow of solid waste management by prioritizing the 3R principles, starting from the transportation process, sorting at TPS/TPST, and even processing to become a product with economic value. However, in the end, all this waste still ends up in landfill. From the government's perspective, this is due to the need to integrate responsibilities between the government, society, and producers. Producer responsibility must be fully implemented in waste management. However, several regulations have yet to regulate the form of waste management that producers can carry out the responsibility of producers as specifically to be responsible for the product until it ends up as waste. In addition, this study illustrates that EPR as a policy framework for waste management can be applied in other cities, primarily if the government's point of view supports the division of responsibilities for waste management.
Producer responsibility for e-waste management: key issues for consideration - learning from the Swiss experience

Deepali Sinha Khetriwal,Philipp Kraeuchi,Rolf Widmer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.08.019

Abstract:E-waste, a relatively recent addition to the waste stream in the form of discarded electronic and electric equipment, is getting increasing attention from policy makers as the quantity being generated is rising rapidly. One of the most promising policy options to address this issue is to extend the producers responsibility for their products beyond the point of sale, until end-of-product-life. This paper briefly introduces the concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR) and its applicability in the area of the end-of-life management of electronic and electrical equipment (EEE). It then examines the decade-long experience of Switzerland in using EPR to manage its e-waste, elaborating on the experience of the Swiss system in overcoming specific issues, and finally wrapping up with a synopsis of the lessons for policy makers. We consider each issue as an enquiry of questions confronting a policy maker and the choices that may present themselves. The five issues discussed are: (i) the challenges in getting an EPR based system started; (ii) securing financing to ensure a self-sustaining and smooth functioning system; (iii) organising a logistics network for the take back and collection of the e-waste; (iv) ensuring compliance of the various actors involved; and finally (v) reducing the threat of monopolistic practices.
The Implications of Recycling Technology Choice on Extended Producer Responsibility

Morvarid Rahmani,Luyi Gui,Atalay Atasu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13279

IF: 4.638

2020-10-30

Production and Operations Management

Abstract:We study recycling technology choice, a critical factor that has received little attention in the context of extended producer responsibility, and its interaction with product design‐for‐recycling in driving the environmental benefits of recycling systems. Collective recycling systems have long been criticized for restricting the environmental benefits of extended producer responsibility because of free riding issues among producers, which can undermine incentives for product design‐for‐recycling. We revisit and refine this assertion by analyzing the interaction between recycling technology and product design‐for‐recycling choices. We develop game‐theoretic models where producers and processors decide on product design‐for‐recycling and recycling technology choices, respectively. We then compare the equilibrium benefits of recycling in collective and individual systems. The key result in this paper is that when recycling technology choice is taken into account, collective recycling systems can lead to higher environmental and economic benefits than individual recycling systems. This is because collective recycling systems provide stronger incentives for recycling technology improvements. In turn, these improvements can help overcome the drawbacks associated with inferior product design‐for‐recycling outcomes caused by free riding concerns among producers in collective recycling systems. In light of these results, we posit that an exclusive focus on product design‐for‐recycling to assess the environmental benefits of extended producer responsibility‐based recycling systems may need scrutiny. Producers and policy makers may need to evaluate recycling systems with respect to the incentives they provide for both product design‐for‐recycling and recycling technology improvements.

operations research & management science,engineering, manufacturing
Theoretical Framework for Plastic Waste Management in Ghana through Extended Producer Responsibility: Case of Sachet Water Waste

Ebo Quartey,Hero Tosefa,Kwasi Danquah,Ilona Obrsalova

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120809907

IF: 4.614

2015-08-20

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract:Currently, use and disposal of plastic by consumers through waste management activities in Ghana not only creates environmental problems, but also reinforces the notion of a wasteful society. The magnitude of this problem has led to increasing pressure from the public for efficient and practical measures to solve the waste problem. This paper analyses the impact of plastic use and disposal in Ghana. It emphasizes the need for commitment to proper management of the impacts of plastic waste and effective environmental management in the country. Sustainable Solid Waste Management (SSWM) is a critical problem for developing countries with regards to climate change and greenhouse gas emission, and also the general wellbeing of the populace. Key themes of this paper are producer responsibility and management of products at end of life. The paper proposes two theatrical recovery models that can be used to address the issue of sachet waste in Ghana.
Informal E-Waste Flows in Montréal: Implications for Extended Producer Responsibility and Circularity

Stéphanie H Leclerc,Madhav G Badami,Badami, Madhav G.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-023-01857-2

2023-07-25

Environmental Management

Abstract:Environmental agencies around the world have adopted policies to manage e-waste and reduce the negative environmental impacts associated with its collection, sorting, dismantling, and recycling. In many OECD countries, where adequate policies and processing technologies exist, those who manage extended producer responsibility programs claim performance challenges due to competition from various actors collecting and managing e-waste "under the radar". While the material and economic losses attributed to such informal activities have been estimated by previous research, a detailed understanding of who is involved in these activities, why and how they operate, and with what social and environmental impacts, is often lacking. Our research offers an in-depth investigation into Montréal's informal e-waste flows. Whereas e-waste research and advocacy posit a dichotomy between "formal" and "informal" e-waste flows, our research reveals a more nuanced situation, with no water-tight separation between these flows. Formal and informal flows are often blurred, and change over time; and many actors are involved in both formal and informal activities. We reveal mechanisms whereby actors inadvertently contribute to informal activities because of inadequate incentives, limited program scope, reuse, parts harvesting, and documentation issues. This nuanced understanding helps identify policy loopholes, program shortcomings, and strategies for more sustainable e-waste flows, taking account of more ambitious circularity objectives and a just transition.

environmental sciences
From Legal Transplants to Sustainable Transition

Xin Tong,Yi Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12013

2013-01-01

Journal of Industrial Ecology

Abstract:Summary Extended producer responsibility (EPR), which assigns significant responsibility to producers to take back their end‐of‐life products to create incentives for redesign of products with lower life cycle environmental impacts, has come to a crossroad facing a trade‐off between the original innovation‐oriented regime design and the cost‐efficiency challenges in practice. This is particularly true in its implementation in non‐Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) countries as they are trying to transplant the “best practices” from OECD countries, for there is increasing skepticism as to whether EPR is suitable for developing countries at all. As an important producer of electronic products and destination of electronic waste (e‐waste) flows in the world, China has been expected to play a vital role in the evolution of global governance based on the idea of EPR, either to create new ways for producers to perform their end‐of‐life strategies, or to reshape the mode of production and consumption with its fast‐growing market. However, the establishment of EPR in China has been long and full of difficulties. This article reviews the status and trends in the establishment of an EPR system for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) management in China. We use the framework of a multilevel perspective of transition theory in our analysis to characterize the complex interactions among various agents in the evolution of the Chinese system from initial innovation‐oriented design to the current efficiency‐oriented version. An ongoing research framework for evaluation of the EPR program in China is outlined as the research agenda in coming years.

Extended Producer Responsibility and Circular Economy: Three Design Flaws

Stakeholder Views on Extended Producer Responsibility and the Circular Economy

Extended Producer Responsibility and Its Role in the Development of Circular Economy

Circular economy through waste reverse logistics under extended producer responsibility in Finland

Concretising the role of extended producer responsibility in European Union waste law and policy through the lens of the circular economy

Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products

Extended Producer Responsibility to Reconstruct the Circular Value Chain

Using Plastic Wastes to Exemplify Justice Dimensions of Extended Producer Responsibility

Recent Advances in Extended Producer Responsibility Initiatives for Plastic Waste Management in Germany and UK

Is Extended Producer Responsibility living up to expectations? A systematic literature review focusing on electronic waste

Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products

Sustainable Transition and Extended Producer Responsibility

Operational Perspectives on Extended Producer Responsibility

Ultimate producer responsibility for e‐waste management–A proposal for just transition in the circular economy based on the case of used European electronic equipment exported to Nigeria

Product Design and Supply Chain Coordination Under Extended Producer Responsibility

Extended Producer Responsibility for Waste Management Policy

Producer responsibility for e-waste management: key issues for consideration - learning from the Swiss experience

The Implications of Recycling Technology Choice on Extended Producer Responsibility

Theoretical Framework for Plastic Waste Management in Ghana through Extended Producer Responsibility: Case of Sachet Water Waste

Informal E-Waste Flows in Montréal: Implications for Extended Producer Responsibility and Circularity

From Legal Transplants to Sustainable Transition