Origins and definition

The UN Guidelines for Consumer Protection came into existence in 1985. Following a mandate given by the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in 1995, the text of the Guidelines was revised at Sao Paulo in January 1998. The revised Guidelines had some added text on sustainable consumption and production. This text was debated at the intersessional meetings for CSD-7 and a consensus was arrived at. Although text on sustainable consumption was agreed to, all reference to sustainable production was either diluted or removed. The onus for consuming sustainably cannot lay wholly on the consumer hence sustainability is also required in production patterns. The reasons are:

•      Significantly, about a billion people of the world do not have the purchasing power to influence producer decisions and 
       accept whatever is available.

•      Most consumers are also not aware of the environmental, economic, social and other impacts of his/her purchasing 
       decisions.

•      The consumer is not able to get optimal information about the product for various reasons, e.g. illiteracy, or technical 
       issues associated with the product, etc.

This leads us to the concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR). EPR, which is a legislative initiative of clean production, focuses on product systems and has the aim to encourage producers to prevent pollution and reduce resource and energy use at each stage of the product life cycle. In simple terms this mean that producers should also be producing sustainably with their responsibility extending in each stage of the product lifecycle i.e. starting from raw materials till the disposal of the product.

EPR was first initiated in Germany under its Packaging Ordinance of 1991. This, in effect, shifted responsibility for packaging waste, one-third of the municipal waste stream, from local government to private industry. The concept has been subsequently endorsed by the European Union (EU) and is being implemented in EU member countries for packaging and other products. The idea has also spread around the world, including Asia, where Japan passed EPR legislation for packaging in 1995. The government of Japan has been funding studies to document EPR programs in the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

However, there is no "one size fits all" model for EPR programs. They vary by country and by the products being targeted. Germany shifted full responsibility for packaging waste to industry, whereas in Japan and France government and private industry share this responsibility. There is great variation in the level of recycling mandates and in the definitions of recycling and "producer." EPR is most often applied to packaging, but it is also being employed for products such as end-of-life vehicles, electric and electronic goods, paints, batteries, and graphic papers.

According to one nuance definition producer responsibility is the principle that producers bear a degree of responsibility for all environmental impacts of their products.  This includes upstream impacts arising from the choice of materials and from the manufacturing process and downstream impacts, from the use and disposal of products. Producers accept their responsibility when they accept legal, physical, or economic responsibility for the environmental impacts that cannot be eliminated by design. 

Redefining EPR

Thomas Lindhquist, said to be the father of EPR, had identified five basic types of producer responsibility:

•   Liability- producer is responsible for environmental damage caused by the product in question

•   Economic responsibility - producer covers all or part of costs for collection, recycling or final disposal of products 
    they manufacturers.

•   Physical responsibility - manufacturer is involved in physical management of the products or of the effect of the 
    products. This can range from merely developing the necessary technology to managing the total "take back" system for  
   collecting or disposing of products they manufacture.

•  Ownership- producers assumes both physical and economic responsibility

•  Informative responsibility- producer is responsible for providing information on the product or its effects at various 
   stages of its life cycle

While we agree that extended producer responsibility is essential we differ with the limited scope it offers by singling out environment impact as the only form of impact that irresponsible production can have.  What is needed in redefining EPR is a widened scope to include sustainability. That is producers should produce in a way that sustainable consumption can be ensured and not only protection of the environment. Environment protection is not a sufficient condition to guarantee that producers are producing responsibly but it is necessary. The sufficient condition for EPRs is sustainability.

Key definitional components

To extend the logic developed in the previous paragraph extended producer responsibility can be said to include two key components: responsibility and extended responsibility

Responsibility:  A producer is producing responsibly when his production of goods and services does not adversely affect the consumption of future and present generations.

`Extended’ responsibility: By extended responsibility it is meant that producers are responsible not only for the product (throughout its useful life) but also for the raw materials used and the disposal/recycling of the product and possibilities for its reuse and repair.

Caveats and recommendations

Type II (Public-Private partnership) initiatives to implement Agenda 21 will give greater power to private organisations. In this new situation, shifting back of the responsibility to producers needed to be done cautiously with some caveats. The same is mentioned below:

•       Instruments that are used to ensure EPR should not become barriers to trade within mutually acceptable limits

•       All regulatory, economic and information instruments that are used to enhance producer responsibility should be within 
        the context of the multilateral covenants and conventions 

•       Similar measures for achieving EPR across nations can often be more acceptable than unilateral imposition of 
        regulations (and expecting these will be reciprocated) by nations or economic groupings

•       Extended producer responsibility should not degenerate to becoming a mere green wash

•       Extended producer responsibility will achieve the avowed objective of promoting sustainable consumption only if 
        regulatory measures and independent review mechanisms are instituted

•       The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities between and among nations vis-à-vis producers should
        apply  when regulatory instruments are designed to ensure that producers are responsible

•       Responsible advertising that is information neutral