ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUNDATION
VISIT EMF.ORG
But collection, sorting, and recycling of packaging typically costs more to do than the money it makes. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is the only proven and likely way to provide funding that is dedicated, ongoing, and sufficient. Through EPR schemes, companies putting packaging on the market are required to pay for its collection, sorting, and recycling after use.
For the first time, more than 150 leading businesses and other organisations from across the packaging value chain, publicly recognise that without EPR, packaging collection and recycling is unlikely to be meaningfully scaled and tens of millions of tonnes of packaging will continue to end up in the environment every year.
including: Beiersdorf, Borealis, Berry Global, Danone, Diageo, DS Smith, Ferrero, FrieslandCampina, H&M, Henkel, Inditex, Indorama Ventures, L'Oréal, Mars, Mondi, Nestlé, PepsiCo, Pick n Pay, Reckitt, Schwarz Group, Tetra Pak, The Coca-Cola Company, Unilever, Veolia, and Walmart.
"We support this statement on the important role that well-designed EPR systems can play in keeping packaging material out of the environment and in the circular economy. Good EPR schemes can motivate businesses and help us achieve our circular economy targets.”
“Setting up Extended Producer Responsibility schemes creates new markets for recycling. It is challenging to set up but, if successful, it is a game-changer in the global transition towards a circular economy.”
“In the Netherlands, we see the positive impact of EPR in the value chains where it is implemented. I consider EPR an essential instrument to accelerate the transition towards a circular economy.”
“GIZ highly welcomes this paper on EPR as a means to stimulate the transition to a circular economy worldwide. EPR is needed to translate principles into action and is therefore crucial for a circular economy, contributing to sustainable development.”
“Extended Producer Responsibility schemes are a vital part of any nation’s path towards achieving a circular plastics economy.”
"We believe mandatory EPR schemes are central to the establishment of a circular packaging economy, in which waste is a valuable resource used to address a range of economic, social and environmental challenges."
To solve the packaging waste and pollution crisis, a comprehensive circular economy approach is required. We must: eliminate the packaging we don’t need; innovate to ensure all the packaging we do need is reusable, recyclable, or compostable; and circulate all the packaging we use, keeping it in the economy and out of the environment. This circular economy approach would lead to significant economic, environmental, and social benefits¹ and contribute to addressing major global challenges, such as plastic pollution, climate change, and biodiversity loss.
Circulation of packaging that cannot be eliminated or reused involves collection, sorting and recycling.² However, this process comes at a net cost for practically all packaging formats in most geographies.³ Over time, the economics can be improved significantly through better design, technological advancements, and economies of scale. However, for many years to come, mechanisms that ensure dedicated, ongoing, and sufficient funding will be necessary to cover that net cost. Without such funding mechanisms, it is unlikely that packaging collection and recycling will scale to the extent required, and tens of millions of tonnes of packaging will continue to end up in the environment every year.
While, in theory, there could be many ways to provide this funding, in practice, the only proven and likely pathway to ensure dedicated, ongoing, and sufficient funding at scale is through mandatory, fee-based EPR schemes, in which all industry players introducing packaging to the market provide funding dedicated to collecting and processing their packaging after its use. The alternatives – relying on funding from public budgets or from voluntary contributions – are unlikely to scale to the extent required and fall short of being dedicated, ongoing, and sufficient.
Furthermore, EPR schemes are more than a funding mechanism, and can bring many additional benefits, such as enhancing the efficiency and transparency of the system, and incentivising upstream packaging solutions. The design and implementation of EPR schemes are crucial for their effectiveness. No existing EPR scheme is perfect and many elements need to be taken into account during the design and implementation of EPR schemes, including the local context and broader circular economy policy agenda. Therefore, we are committed to constructively working with other stakeholders to make EPR work in different geographies around the world, because we recognise it is a necessary part of the solution to packaging waste and pollution.
Finally, we recognise that, while EPR is a necessary and vital part of the solution to packaging waste and pollution, it is by itself insufficient and needs to be complemented by a wider set of policies, and voluntary industry action and innovation towards a circular economy for packaging.
With this statement, we publicly express our support for the implementation of EPR schemes for packaging and commit to:
Ensure our entire organisation is aligned on, and our actions are inline with, this statement
Be constructive in our engagement with governments and other stakeholders: advocating for the establishment of well-designed EPR policies and being supportive in working out how to implement and continuously improve EPR schemes in the local context
Engage with our peers and the relevant associations and collaborations we are part of to work towards aligning their positions and actions accordingly.
Endorsed by
EPR requires all industry players who introduce packaging to the market to provide funding dedicated to collecting and processing their packaging after its use. Without EPR, it’s unlikely that packaging collection and recycling will scale to the extent needed, and tens of millions of tonnes of packaging will continue to end up in the environment every year.
Our Statement and Position Paper, Extended Producer Responsibility - a necessary part of the solution to packaging waste and pollution, sets out why EPR is needed to make the economics work for effective sorting, collection and recycling of packaging materials.
.png)
The EPR statement and position paper launch episode, featuring a live panel with the Government of Chile, OECD and Unilever.
The Ellen MacArthur Foundation has set out five universal circular economy policy goals that provide a framework for national governments, cities and businesses to create a transition that fosters innovation and decouples growth from finite...
In a joint report, The Business Case for a UN Treaty on Plastic Pollution, WWF, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and Boston Consulting Group, set out the opportunity for a new global UN treaty on plastic pollution.
The problem with plastic starts long before it reaches our oceans, rivers, and beaches, and so must the solutions. Through the Global Commitment, businesses and governments commit to change how we produce, use, and reuse plastic.
The Plastics Pact is a network of local and regional (cross-border) initiatives which brings together key stakeholders to implement solutions towards a circular economy for plastic.
