-
首页
-
【朗润专栏】周咏梅：全球行动，减少海洋塑料
发布日期：2021-04-29 03:23 来源：
自第二次世界大战后商品化以来，塑料就以其耐用性，重量轻，柔韧性和低成本等吸引人的特性而成为我们生活中无处不在的材料。但是，未经处理的塑料垃圾已经造成了生态，人类健康和经济灾难：海洋动物摄入塑料和微塑料，或被废弃的鱼网绞缠；通过食物链进入人体的塑料危害我们的健康；部分城市和农村地区的卫生条件因与日俱增的塑料垃圾而恶化；渔业和旅游业直接受到影响。
根据皮尤慈善信托基金会和Systemiq于2020年发布的《打破塑料浪潮》研究报告，如果我们继续当前的趋势，每年流入海洋的塑料废物量将从2016年的1100万吨增加到2040年的2900万吨。“ 2900万吨”意味着什么？想象世界上的整个海岸线，然后想象到2040那年每年每米海岸线将有50公斤塑料废物进入海洋。这是我们一定要避免的未来。
海洋塑料是没有国界的，但是我们可以优先考虑能产生最大影响的国家和行业。从塑料泄漏到海洋中的源头国家的地理分布来看，具有较大沿岸人口和固体废物管理较差的中收入发展中国家，即中国，印度尼西亚，菲律宾越南，斯里兰卡，泰国，埃及，马来西亚，尼日利亚，孟加拉国（Jenna R. Jambeck，2015年）。在这些国家减少使用一次性塑料包装，提高塑料垃圾的收集，回收和处置非常重要。
但是仅仅投资于固体废物管理是不够的。在全球范围内，塑料生产和废物的增长远远超过了建设废物管理设施和提供服务的速度。目前，一二十亿人没有享受废物管理服务。世界各地的市政当局已经对他们必须管理的固体废物（尤其是塑料废物）的数量感到不知所措。在低收入国家，固体废物管理的费用约占市政预算的19 ％，在中等收入国家中占11％，在高收入国家中占4％（Silpa Kaza，2018年）。2018年中国禁止可回收物的进口之后，后续其他一些东南亚国家也陆续禁令。发达国家中曾经依赖出口的地方政府来说现在也在探索国内解决办法。
我们设计政策，就是要找办法激励生产商减少原始塑料的产量和用量，并建立符合循环经济理念的产品设计和商业模式。
我们的首要重点是软包装（袋，薄膜，袋等）和多层和多材料的塑料产品（小药囊，纸尿布，饮料盒，等等）。在所有塑料类型中，它们最容易泄漏。虽然它们只占塑料产量的59％，但是占塑料泄漏的80％（皮尤慈善信托基金会和Systemiq，2020年）。政策重点应针对快速消费品和零售产业，激励他们在材料、设计和销售模式上的创新。
比如，2019年联合利华作出承诺，到2025年会1)减少总塑料使用10万吨以上，并减半原始塑料在其包装产品中的用量；2）收集和处理的塑料包装量要超过其当年销售的塑料包装；c）确保100%的塑料包装设计可重复使用，可回收或可堆肥；d）再生塑料材料在其包装中的使用率要达到25％以上。制定艰巨的目标激发了企业在材料选择，产品包装设计，新的重复使用和再填充业务模型方面的创新。
我们需要大量的企业推动这类创新。政府可以通过让公司承担产品的环境成本来刺激这种创新。自1990年代初，欧洲和北美各国都采用了生产者延伸责任（EPR）的政策原则。这是瑞典的Thomas Lindhqvist最初提出的政策原则，就是要让产品制造商的责任落实到产品的整个生命周期，包括产品回收，循环利用和最终处置。
1991年，德国通过了《包装条例》，开始实施生产者延伸责任。企业支付牌照费后加入一个独立负责他们产品废物管理流的行业联盟，并根据材料类型和重量缴纳管理费用。会员有权在产品包装上标签行业联盟签发的绿点，表示他们已经对产品垃圾的收集和处理成本承担了责任。1991-97年间，德国的包装每年减少3％；与之相比，该法令之前几年包装每年增加2-4％。此后，生产者延伸责任的政策原则已被其他欧美国家采用。在这个原则框架下，各国的立法和具体执行方法有很多不同。有些国家也在努力协调政策框架，以降低企业的合规成本。
治理塑料垃圾污染的基本经济原则就是要让污染者对自己的污染负责。这包含对环境造成最大破坏的企业和造成大量垃圾的消费者。发展中国家在快速的城市化过程中面临艰巨的固体废物治理的挑战。在收入匮乏的市政府的背景下，资本密集型方法通常既不可行也不合乎需要。那么南南国家之间有哪些可以互相借鉴的地方呢？许多发展中国家有相当多的拾荒者，对回收利用做出了重要贡献。据估计，全球60％的回收利用是由世界各地的1100万垃圾收集者完成的。南南交流可以比较各国政府如何将拾荒者纳入政策和计划设计的框架。例如，如何支持拾荒合作社，促进他们可预期地获得废物流，促进与买家的商机，提高工作安全性。
印度浦那市政府与一家名为SWaCH的拾荒者合作社之间的公私合作伙伴关系展示了双赢的伙伴关系。2008年，双方签署了谅解备忘录，由SWaCH收集城市中60%的地区中的50万个家庭，企业和机构的源头分离废物，向他们收取使用费，在政府提供的大棚里对垃圾分类，之后将不可回收垃圾投放到制定地点，自行销售可回收垃圾并保留收入。这个伙伴关系每年为市政府节省了790万美元，并达到9％的废物回收率，是个双赢的安排。
尽管塑料废物在发达国家主要是城市问题，但大多数发展中国家在农村地区也面临着日益严重的塑料废物挑战。今天的泄漏量中有45％来自农村地区。针对收入低且现金流量有限的大量客户，快速消费品的生产商将其产品包装在小的一次性软塑料包装中。这些包装使用后很容易变成泄漏的垃圾。南南交流可以促进如何促进包装和销售方式的创新，农村人群行为改变，并建立负担得起的基础设施进行垃圾收集，回收和处置。
作为最大的塑料废物排放者，最大的塑料生产商和大型贸易伙伴，中国需要做更多的事情。不管我们喜不喜欢，全球对塑料问题的民间运动已经兴起。我们在欧洲和北美的贸易伙伴也早晚会要求我们的出口公司采用更环保的设计和包装并分担垃圾收集、回收和处置的经济责任。当前中国城市废物分类和回收工作浪潮是一个良好的开端。但是我们需要实证研究垃圾分类及禁塑令之类的行政措施的效力，并尝试其他政策手段，例如税收，收费，可交易的许可证。我们需要在包装业、快速消费产品和零售业探索如何用生产者延伸责任的原则促进绿色创新。
作为研究型和教学型大学，我们可以建立全球性的研究和学习网络，以加速全球进步并培养下一代绿色发展的领导者。参考书目
Jenna R. Jambeck, R. G. (2015, Feb 13). Plastic Waste Inputs from Land Into the Ocean. Science, Vol 347, Issue 6223, 768-771.
Pew Charitable Trusts and Systemiq. (2020). Breaking the Plastic Wave.
Silpa Kaza, L. Y.-T. (2018). What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Washington, DC: World Bank.作者：周咏梅，北大国发院、南南学院实践教授、南南学院全球伙伴关系主任
文章英文版
Global Actions to Reduce Marine Plastics
Since its commercialization after the Second World War, plastics has become a ubiquitous material in our lives due to its attractive features of durability, light weight, flexibility and low cost. However, unmanaged plastic waste has caused an ecological, human health and economic disaster. Marine animals ingest plastic and microplastic or trapped by abandoned nets. Our health is harmed by the plastic that enters our bodies through the food chain and the worsening sanitation conditions in cities and countryside alike. Fishery and tourism are directly affected.According to the Breaking the Plastic Wave study by Pew Charitable Trust and Systemiq published in 2020, if we continue the current trend, the annual flow of plastic waste into the ocean will have increased from 11 million tons in 2016 to 29 million tons by 2040. What does “29 million tons” mean? Imagine the entire coastline of the world, and then imagine for each meter of coastline 50 kg of plastic waste will be going into the ocean every year by 2040. That is a future we need to avert.
Marine plastics has no national boundaries, but we can prioritize progress in countries and industries that contribute the most to this global problem. In terms of geographic distribution of plastic leakage into the ocean, middle-income developing countries with large coastal populations and low capacity for solid waste management rank on top, namely China, Indonesia, the Philippines Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Egypt, Malaysia, Nigeria, Bangladesh (Jenna R. Jambeck, 2015). Reducing the use of single-use plastic packaging, improving the collection, recycling and managed disposal of plastic waste in these countries is key to reducing marine plastics.
Source:“Plastic Waste Inputs from Land Into the Ocean”, by Jambeck et al, Science vol347, issue 6223, Feb 13, 2015.But investing in solid waste management alone is not enough. Globally, the speed of building waste management infrastructure and delivering services is far outpaced by the growth of plastic production and waste. Currently, two billion people do not have waste collection services. Municipal governments around the world are already overwhelmed by the amount of solid waste (esp. plastic waste) they have to manage. After China banned the import of recyclables and waste in 2018 and subsequent bans of other Southeast Asian countries, municipal governments in developed countries that used to export the problem now have to find domestic solutions.
Policies need to provide incentives for producers to reduce virgin plastic production and adopt designs and business models that help us build a circular economy. What does it mean concretely?
Our first priority should be flexible packaging (bags, films, pouches, etc.) and multi-layer and multi-material plastics (sachets, diapers, beverage cartons, etc.). Among all the plastic types, they are the most susceptible to leakage. Even though they account for 59% of plastic production, they contribute to 80% of plastic leakage. (Pew Charitable Trusts and Systemiq, 2020). Policies need to stimulate innovations by the fast-moving consumer goods and retail businesses in the way they design and package products.
In 2019, Unilever made a commitment that by 2025 it will a) halve the amount of virgin plastic used in its packaging and achieve an absolute reduction of more than 100,000 tons in plastic use; b) help collect and process more plastic packaging than it sells; c) ensure that 100% of its plastic packaging is designed to be fully reusable, recyclable or compostable; d) increase the use of post-consumer recycled plastic material in its packaging to at least 25%. Hard targets generate innovations in material choice, product packaging design, a new reuse and refill business model.
Widespread innovations are needed. Government can stimulate such innovations by making companies bear the environmental cost of their products. Since early 1990’s, countries in Europe and North America have adopted a policy strategy called Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). Originally coined by Thomas Lindhqvist in 1990, EPR extends the responsibilities of the manufacturer of a product to the entire lifecycle of the product and especially for the take-back, recycling and final disposal of the product.
EPR implementation started in Germany in 1991 when it adopted the Packaging Ordinance. Firms pay annual license fees to an industry consortium, which manages a separate waste management stream for their products. Variable fees are assessed based on materal type and weight. Members use a Green Dot label on their products to indicate they have contributed to the cost of collecting and processing waste. Germany achieved 3% annual reduction in packaging between 1991-97, as compared to 2-4% annual increase prior to the ordinance. EPR has since spread to other European countries and beyond. EPR legislations differ across countries and local governments within a country, and efforts are underway to harmonize the EPR framework in order to reduce compliance cost for business.
Developing countries also need to make polluters pay, whether they are the businesses with the most environmentally damaging products or consumers who generate a lot of waste.Beyond the lessons we learn from developed countries, what can the developing countries learn from each other that is directly relevant for their context of rapid urbanization and overwhelming challenge of managing solid waste? Solid waste management costs about 19% of municipal budget in low-income countries, 11% in middle-income countries, and 4% in high-income countries (Silpa Kaza, 2018). A capital-intensive approach is often neither feasible nor desirable in the context of revenue-poor municipal governments. Many developing countries have a sizable informal sector of waste pickers who are turning waste into economic livelihood. It is estimated that 60% of global recycling is done by 11 million waste pickers around the world. South-south learning can study how to incorporate the role of waste-pickers into policy and program design. For example, how to support waste picker cooperatives and facilitate their access to predictable sources of waste as well as buyers of recyclables and protecting these workers from workplace hazards.
A public-private partnership between the Pune Municipal Corporation in India and a waste picker cooperative called SWaCH demonstrates a win-win partnership. In 2008, SWaCH signed a MoU with Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) to collect source-separated waste from households, businesses and institutions, charging them user fees, sorting them in the sheds provided by PMC, depositing the waste at designated collection points, and selling recyclables and keeping the revenue. Covering 60% of the areas in the city and more than half a million households, this arrangement saved the PMC $7.9 million a year and diverted 9% of waste to recycling.
While plastic waste is predominantly an urban issue in developed countries, most developing countries are facing the plastic waste challenge in rural areas as well. 45% of today’s leakage is from rural areas. With a large clientele with low income and limited cash flow, producers of fast-moving consumer goods sell their products in small single-use plastic packaging, which is often found littering in nature after use. South-south dialogues can facilitate learning about inducing behavioral change in this context and establishing affordable infrastructure for collection, recycling and disposal in less densely populated areas.China needs to do more as the largest emitter of plastic waste into the ocean, the largest plastic producer and a large trading partner. Whether we like it or not, a global movement such as the Break Free from Plastic Movement is building. Our trading partners in Europe and North America will ask our export companies to adopt greener design and packaging. The current wave of city-level effort in sorting and recycling waste is a good start. And we need to go beyond administrative measures such as ban and experiment with a variety of policy instruments such as tax, charges, tradable permits. We need EPR for the packaging industry and green innovations by businesses.
As research and teaching universities, we can build a global research and learning networks to accelerate global progress and to nurture the next generation of leaders.Bibliography：
Jenna R. Jambeck, R. G. (2015, Feb 13). Plastic Waste Inputs from Land Into the Ocean. Science, 768-771.
Pew Charitable Trusts and Systemiq. (2020). Breaking the Plastic Wave.
Silpa Kaza, L. Y.-T. (2018). What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Washington, DC: World Bank.【Prof. ZHOU Yongmei is a Professor of Practice in Public Policy at the National School of Development and Institute of South-South Cooperation and Development. She worked at the World Bank for 21 years before joining the PKU.】
国家发展研究院官方微信
Copyright© 1994-2012 北京大学 国家发展研究院 版权所有, 京ICP备05065075号-1
保留所有权利，不经允许请勿挪用
-
首页
-
【朗润专栏】周咏梅：全球行动，减少海洋塑料
发布日期：2021-04-29 03:23 来源：
自第二次世界大战后商品化以来，塑料就以其耐用性，重量轻，柔韧性和低成本等吸引人的特性而成为我们生活中无处不在的材料。但是，未经处理的塑料垃圾已经造成了生态，人类健康和经济灾难：海洋动物摄入塑料和微塑料，或被废弃的鱼网绞缠；通过食物链进入人体的塑料危害我们的健康；部分城市和农村地区的卫生条件因与日俱增的塑料垃圾而恶化；渔业和旅游业直接受到影响。
根据皮尤慈善信托基金会和Systemiq于2020年发布的《打破塑料浪潮》研究报告，如果我们继续当前的趋势，每年流入海洋的塑料废物量将从2016年的1100万吨增加到2040年的2900万吨。“ 2900万吨”意味着什么？想象世界上的整个海岸线，然后想象到2040那年每年每米海岸线将有50公斤塑料废物进入海洋。这是我们一定要避免的未来。
海洋塑料是没有国界的，但是我们可以优先考虑能产生最大影响的国家和行业。从塑料泄漏到海洋中的源头国家的地理分布来看，具有较大沿岸人口和固体废物管理较差的中收入发展中国家，即中国，印度尼西亚，菲律宾越南，斯里兰卡，泰国，埃及，马来西亚，尼日利亚，孟加拉国（Jenna R. Jambeck，2015年）。在这些国家减少使用一次性塑料包装，提高塑料垃圾的收集，回收和处置非常重要。
但是仅仅投资于固体废物管理是不够的。在全球范围内，塑料生产和废物的增长远远超过了建设废物管理设施和提供服务的速度。目前，一二十亿人没有享受废物管理服务。世界各地的市政当局已经对他们必须管理的固体废物（尤其是塑料废物）的数量感到不知所措。在低收入国家，固体废物管理的费用约占市政预算的19 ％，在中等收入国家中占11％，在高收入国家中占4％（Silpa Kaza，2018年）。2018年中国禁止可回收物的进口之后，后续其他一些东南亚国家也陆续禁令。发达国家中曾经依赖出口的地方政府来说现在也在探索国内解决办法。
我们设计政策，就是要找办法激励生产商减少原始塑料的产量和用量，并建立符合循环经济理念的产品设计和商业模式。
我们的首要重点是软包装（袋，薄膜，袋等）和多层和多材料的塑料产品（小药囊，纸尿布，饮料盒，等等）。在所有塑料类型中，它们最容易泄漏。虽然它们只占塑料产量的59％，但是占塑料泄漏的80％（皮尤慈善信托基金会和Systemiq，2020年）。政策重点应针对快速消费品和零售产业，激励他们在材料、设计和销售模式上的创新。
比如，2019年联合利华作出承诺，到2025年会1)减少总塑料使用10万吨以上，并减半原始塑料在其包装产品中的用量；2）收集和处理的塑料包装量要超过其当年销售的塑料包装；c）确保100%的塑料包装设计可重复使用，可回收或可堆肥；d）再生塑料材料在其包装中的使用率要达到25％以上。制定艰巨的目标激发了企业在材料选择，产品包装设计，新的重复使用和再填充业务模型方面的创新。
我们需要大量的企业推动这类创新。政府可以通过让公司承担产品的环境成本来刺激这种创新。自1990年代初，欧洲和北美各国都采用了生产者延伸责任（EPR）的政策原则。这是瑞典的Thomas Lindhqvist最初提出的政策原则，就是要让产品制造商的责任落实到产品的整个生命周期，包括产品回收，循环利用和最终处置。
1991年，德国通过了《包装条例》，开始实施生产者延伸责任。企业支付牌照费后加入一个独立负责他们产品废物管理流的行业联盟，并根据材料类型和重量缴纳管理费用。会员有权在产品包装上标签行业联盟签发的绿点，表示他们已经对产品垃圾的收集和处理成本承担了责任。1991-97年间，德国的包装每年减少3％；与之相比，该法令之前几年包装每年增加2-4％。此后，生产者延伸责任的政策原则已被其他欧美国家采用。在这个原则框架下，各国的立法和具体执行方法有很多不同。有些国家也在努力协调政策框架，以降低企业的合规成本。
治理塑料垃圾污染的基本经济原则就是要让污染者对自己的污染负责。这包含对环境造成最大破坏的企业和造成大量垃圾的消费者。发展中国家在快速的城市化过程中面临艰巨的固体废物治理的挑战。在收入匮乏的市政府的背景下，资本密集型方法通常既不可行也不合乎需要。那么南南国家之间有哪些可以互相借鉴的地方呢？许多发展中国家有相当多的拾荒者，对回收利用做出了重要贡献。据估计，全球60％的回收利用是由世界各地的1100万垃圾收集者完成的。南南交流可以比较各国政府如何将拾荒者纳入政策和计划设计的框架。例如，如何支持拾荒合作社，促进他们可预期地获得废物流，促进与买家的商机，提高工作安全性。
印度浦那市政府与一家名为SWaCH的拾荒者合作社之间的公私合作伙伴关系展示了双赢的伙伴关系。2008年，双方签署了谅解备忘录，由SWaCH收集城市中60%的地区中的50万个家庭，企业和机构的源头分离废物，向他们收取使用费，在政府提供的大棚里对垃圾分类，之后将不可回收垃圾投放到制定地点，自行销售可回收垃圾并保留收入。这个伙伴关系每年为市政府节省了790万美元，并达到9％的废物回收率，是个双赢的安排。
尽管塑料废物在发达国家主要是城市问题，但大多数发展中国家在农村地区也面临着日益严重的塑料废物挑战。今天的泄漏量中有45％来自农村地区。针对收入低且现金流量有限的大量客户，快速消费品的生产商将其产品包装在小的一次性软塑料包装中。这些包装使用后很容易变成泄漏的垃圾。南南交流可以促进如何促进包装和销售方式的创新，农村人群行为改变，并建立负担得起的基础设施进行垃圾收集，回收和处置。
作为最大的塑料废物排放者，最大的塑料生产商和大型贸易伙伴，中国需要做更多的事情。不管我们喜不喜欢，全球对塑料问题的民间运动已经兴起。我们在欧洲和北美的贸易伙伴也早晚会要求我们的出口公司采用更环保的设计和包装并分担垃圾收集、回收和处置的经济责任。当前中国城市废物分类和回收工作浪潮是一个良好的开端。但是我们需要实证研究垃圾分类及禁塑令之类的行政措施的效力，并尝试其他政策手段，例如税收，收费，可交易的许可证。我们需要在包装业、快速消费产品和零售业探索如何用生产者延伸责任的原则促进绿色创新。
作为研究型和教学型大学，我们可以建立全球性的研究和学习网络，以加速全球进步并培养下一代绿色发展的领导者。参考书目
Jenna R. Jambeck, R. G. (2015, Feb 13). Plastic Waste Inputs from Land Into the Ocean. Science, Vol 347, Issue 6223, 768-771.
Pew Charitable Trusts and Systemiq. (2020). Breaking the Plastic Wave.
Silpa Kaza, L. Y.-T. (2018). What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Washington, DC: World Bank.作者：周咏梅，北大国发院、南南学院实践教授、南南学院全球伙伴关系主任
文章英文版
Global Actions to Reduce Marine Plastics
Since its commercialization after the Second World War, plastics has become a ubiquitous material in our lives due to its attractive features of durability, light weight, flexibility and low cost. However, unmanaged plastic waste has caused an ecological, human health and economic disaster. Marine animals ingest plastic and microplastic or trapped by abandoned nets. Our health is harmed by the plastic that enters our bodies through the food chain and the worsening sanitation conditions in cities and countryside alike. Fishery and tourism are directly affected.According to the Breaking the Plastic Wave study by Pew Charitable Trust and Systemiq published in 2020, if we continue the current trend, the annual flow of plastic waste into the ocean will have increased from 11 million tons in 2016 to 29 million tons by 2040. What does “29 million tons” mean? Imagine the entire coastline of the world, and then imagine for each meter of coastline 50 kg of plastic waste will be going into the ocean every year by 2040. That is a future we need to avert.
Marine plastics has no national boundaries, but we can prioritize progress in countries and industries that contribute the most to this global problem. In terms of geographic distribution of plastic leakage into the ocean, middle-income developing countries with large coastal populations and low capacity for solid waste management rank on top, namely China, Indonesia, the Philippines Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Egypt, Malaysia, Nigeria, Bangladesh (Jenna R. Jambeck, 2015). Reducing the use of single-use plastic packaging, improving the collection, recycling and managed disposal of plastic waste in these countries is key to reducing marine plastics.
Source:“Plastic Waste Inputs from Land Into the Ocean”, by Jambeck et al, Science vol347, issue 6223, Feb 13, 2015.But investing in solid waste management alone is not enough. Globally, the speed of building waste management infrastructure and delivering services is far outpaced by the growth of plastic production and waste. Currently, two billion people do not have waste collection services. Municipal governments around the world are already overwhelmed by the amount of solid waste (esp. plastic waste) they have to manage. After China banned the import of recyclables and waste in 2018 and subsequent bans of other Southeast Asian countries, municipal governments in developed countries that used to export the problem now have to find domestic solutions.
Policies need to provide incentives for producers to reduce virgin plastic production and adopt designs and business models that help us build a circular economy. What does it mean concretely?
Our first priority should be flexible packaging (bags, films, pouches, etc.) and multi-layer and multi-material plastics (sachets, diapers, beverage cartons, etc.). Among all the plastic types, they are the most susceptible to leakage. Even though they account for 59% of plastic production, they contribute to 80% of plastic leakage. (Pew Charitable Trusts and Systemiq, 2020). Policies need to stimulate innovations by the fast-moving consumer goods and retail businesses in the way they design and package products.
In 2019, Unilever made a commitment that by 2025 it will a) halve the amount of virgin plastic used in its packaging and achieve an absolute reduction of more than 100,000 tons in plastic use; b) help collect and process more plastic packaging than it sells; c) ensure that 100% of its plastic packaging is designed to be fully reusable, recyclable or compostable; d) increase the use of post-consumer recycled plastic material in its packaging to at least 25%. Hard targets generate innovations in material choice, product packaging design, a new reuse and refill business model.
Widespread innovations are needed. Government can stimulate such innovations by making companies bear the environmental cost of their products. Since early 1990’s, countries in Europe and North America have adopted a policy strategy called Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). Originally coined by Thomas Lindhqvist in 1990, EPR extends the responsibilities of the manufacturer of a product to the entire lifecycle of the product and especially for the take-back, recycling and final disposal of the product.
EPR implementation started in Germany in 1991 when it adopted the Packaging Ordinance. Firms pay annual license fees to an industry consortium, which manages a separate waste management stream for their products. Variable fees are assessed based on materal type and weight. Members use a Green Dot label on their products to indicate they have contributed to the cost of collecting and processing waste. Germany achieved 3% annual reduction in packaging between 1991-97, as compared to 2-4% annual increase prior to the ordinance. EPR has since spread to other European countries and beyond. EPR legislations differ across countries and local governments within a country, and efforts are underway to harmonize the EPR framework in order to reduce compliance cost for business.
Developing countries also need to make polluters pay, whether they are the businesses with the most environmentally damaging products or consumers who generate a lot of waste.Beyond the lessons we learn from developed countries, what can the developing countries learn from each other that is directly relevant for their context of rapid urbanization and overwhelming challenge of managing solid waste? Solid waste management costs about 19% of municipal budget in low-income countries, 11% in middle-income countries, and 4% in high-income countries (Silpa Kaza, 2018). A capital-intensive approach is often neither feasible nor desirable in the context of revenue-poor municipal governments. Many developing countries have a sizable informal sector of waste pickers who are turning waste into economic livelihood. It is estimated that 60% of global recycling is done by 11 million waste pickers around the world. South-south learning can study how to incorporate the role of waste-pickers into policy and program design. For example, how to support waste picker cooperatives and facilitate their access to predictable sources of waste as well as buyers of recyclables and protecting these workers from workplace hazards.
A public-private partnership between the Pune Municipal Corporation in India and a waste picker cooperative called SWaCH demonstrates a win-win partnership. In 2008, SWaCH signed a MoU with Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) to collect source-separated waste from households, businesses and institutions, charging them user fees, sorting them in the sheds provided by PMC, depositing the waste at designated collection points, and selling recyclables and keeping the revenue. Covering 60% of the areas in the city and more than half a million households, this arrangement saved the PMC $7.9 million a year and diverted 9% of waste to recycling.
While plastic waste is predominantly an urban issue in developed countries, most developing countries are facing the plastic waste challenge in rural areas as well. 45% of today’s leakage is from rural areas. With a large clientele with low income and limited cash flow, producers of fast-moving consumer goods sell their products in small single-use plastic packaging, which is often found littering in nature after use. South-south dialogues can facilitate learning about inducing behavioral change in this context and establishing affordable infrastructure for collection, recycling and disposal in less densely populated areas.China needs to do more as the largest emitter of plastic waste into the ocean, the largest plastic producer and a large trading partner. Whether we like it or not, a global movement such as the Break Free from Plastic Movement is building. Our trading partners in Europe and North America will ask our export companies to adopt greener design and packaging. The current wave of city-level effort in sorting and recycling waste is a good start. And we need to go beyond administrative measures such as ban and experiment with a variety of policy instruments such as tax, charges, tradable permits. We need EPR for the packaging industry and green innovations by businesses.
As research and teaching universities, we can build a global research and learning networks to accelerate global progress and to nurture the next generation of leaders.Bibliography：
Jenna R. Jambeck, R. G. (2015, Feb 13). Plastic Waste Inputs from Land Into the Ocean. Science, 768-771.
Pew Charitable Trusts and Systemiq. (2020). Breaking the Plastic Wave.
Silpa Kaza, L. Y.-T. (2018). What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Washington, DC: World Bank.【Prof. ZHOU Yongmei is a Professor of Practice in Public Policy at the National School of Development and Institute of South-South Cooperation and Development. She worked at the World Bank for 21 years before joining the PKU.】
访问学者申请
EMAIL
北京大学
ENGLISH
