Producer responsibility at a turning point?

  • 08/09/2008

  • Journal of Industrial Ecology

At the heart of the original vision for extended producer responsibility (EPR) was the desire for a policy strategy that could provide ongoing incentives for the incorporation of environmental concerns into the design of products. If producers were made responsible for end-of-life management (i.e., reuse, recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and/or final disposal) of products, they would find it in their self-interest to anticipate end-of-life costs and obligations and design their products to minimize those costs. Prices of new products would reflect those end-of-life obligations, and producers that were successful in competing in this manner would be able to sell their products more cheaply than those that did not engage in design for environment (DfE). In this respect, EPR would also provide incentives to consumers, because product prices could reflect the producers