| 来源类型 | Report |
| 规范类型 | 报告 |
| Development of Guidance on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) | |
| Lucas Porsch | |
| 发表日期 | 2014 |
| 出版年 | 2014 |
| 语种 | 英语 |
| 概述 | This study, launched in October 2012, seeks to identify performing EPR schemes for different waste streams (e.g. ELV, WEEE, Batteries, Packaging, Paper, Used Oil) and prepare detailed case studies, in order to identify common characteristics across schemes, which could serve as a guide for improving the effectiveness of such schemes. The study should allow the Commission to formulate new proposals to ensure an optimal use of EPR schemes. The study is available for download. |
| 摘要 | class="field field-name-field-master-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"> This study, launched in October 2012, seeks to identify performing EPR schemes for different waste streams (e.g. ELV, WEEE, Batteries, Packaging, Paper, Used Oil) and prepare detailed case studies, in order to identify common characteristics across schemes, which could serve as a guide for improving the effectiveness of such schemes. The study should allow the Commission to formulate new proposals to ensure an optimal use of EPR schemes. The study is available for download. |
| 目录 | Table of Contents: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1. CONTEXT, OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH 1.1 Context and objectives 1.2 Methodological approach 1.2.1 Panorama of EPR schemes in EU-28 1.2.2 Selection of waste streams and case studies 1.2.3 In-depth analysis of 36 case studies 1.2.4 Exploration of four main issues related to EPR design and implementation 1.2.5 Guiding principles 1.2.6 Stakeholder consultation CHAPTER 2. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF EPR SCHEMES IN THE EU 2.1 Existing EPR schemes in EU-28 2.2 Performance of EPR schemes in the EU 2.2.1 Batteries 2.2.2 ELVs 2.2.3 Oils 2.2.4 Packaging 2.2.5 WEEE 2.3 Focus on 36 case studies 2.3.1 EPR systems functioning 2.3.2 Systems performance 2.4 Is there such thing as a ‘best performing’ EPR model? CHAPTER 3. MAIN TOPICS CONSIDERED FOR GUIDANCE 3.1 Share of responsibilities and dialogue between stakeholders 3.1.1 Issues under consideration 3.1.2 Findings from the case studies 3.1.3 Taking stakeholders' expertise into account 3.1.4 Towards guiding principles 3.2 Cost coverage and true cost principle 3.2.1 Issues under consideration 3.2.2 Findings from the case studies 3.2.3 Taking stakeholders’ expertise into account 3.2.4 Towards possible guiding principles 3.3 Fair competition 3.3.1 Issues under consideration 3.3.2 Findings from the case studies 3.3.3 Taking stakeholders’ expertise into account 3.3.4 Towards possible guiding principles 3.4 Transparency and surveillance 3.4.1 Issues under consideration for transparency 3.4.2 Issues under consideration for surveillance 3.4.3 Findings from the case studies 3.4.4 Taking stakeholders’ expertise into account 3.4.5 Concluding remarks 3.4.6 Towards possible guiding principles CHAPTER 4. GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Statement n°1: Clarification of the definition and objectives of EPR 4.1.1 Guiding principle 4.1.2 Policy options 4.2 Statement n°2: The shared responsibilities principle 4.2.1 Guiding principle 4.2.2 Policy options 4.3 Statement n°3: The full net cost coverage principle 4.3.1 Guiding principle 4.3.2 Policy option 4.4 Statement n°4: The true end-of-life costs principle 4.4.1 Guiding principle 4.4.2 Policy options 4.5 Statement n°5: The fair competition principle 4.5.1 Guiding principle 4.5.2 Policy options 4.6 Statement n°6: The transparency principle 4.6.1 Guiding principle 4.6.2 Policy options 4.7 Statement n°7: The reporting harmonisation principle 4.7.1 Guiding principle 4.7.2 Policy options 4.8 Statement n°8: The monitoring and surveillance principle 4.8.1 Guiding principle 4.8.2 Policy options CHAPTER 5. ANNEX 5.1 Preliminary analysis of EPR in the EU 5.2 Organisational aspects and share of responsibilities between actors 5.2.1 Type of PRO responsibility 5.2.2 What exactly does the PRO do? 5.2.3 Role of Local Authorities 5.3 True cost principle and cost coverage 5.3.1 Organisational costs coverage 5.3.2 Which kind of costs are taken into account? 5.3.3 Is there a minimal level of service and/or geographical coverage defined by legislation? 5.3.4 True cost: to which extent does the fee reflect the real ‘end-of-life’ cost of products? 5.3.5 Comparing technical performances 5.3.6 Comparing cost-effectiveness 5.4 Fair competition 5.4.1 Is there competition among PROs? 5.4.2 Is there competition among WM operators? 5.5 Transparency and surveillance 5.5.1 Transparency 5.5.2 Monitoring of free riding 5.5.3 Surveillance of collection and treatment operations 5.5.4 Surveillance of PROs 5.6 Recommendations |
| 标签 | Report ; Industry ; Resources |
| 关键词 | product stream batteries ELVs graphic paper oils packaging WEEE Europe analysis case study questionnaire |
| URL | https://www.ecologic.eu/15139 |
| 来源智库 | Ecologic Institute (Germany) |
| 资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/36542 |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Lucas Porsch. Development of Guidance on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). 2014. |
| 条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 | |||||
| 个性服务 |
| 推荐该条目 |
| 保存到收藏夹 |
| 导出为Endnote文件 |
| 谷歌学术 |
| 谷歌学术中相似的文章 |
| [Lucas Porsch]的文章 |
| 百度学术 |
| 百度学术中相似的文章 |
| [Lucas Porsch]的文章 |
| 必应学术 |
| 必应学术中相似的文章 |
| [Lucas Porsch]的文章 |
| 相关权益政策 |
| 暂无数据 |
| 收藏/分享 |
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
