EPR Summit II Overview

THE FUTURE 500 | (415) 294-7775 | www.future500.org
Extended Producer
Responsibility
Summit II
Strategy for Packaging EPR
Meeting Overview
Westin Peachtree Hotel
Atlanta, Georgia
August 25, 2011

EPR Summit II is the second inner-circle meeting with a wider
set of stakeholders. The meeting was convened to further
develop our:
Vision
Objective
Goals
Core Principles
Strategic and Policy Considerations
State Outreach
Messaging
Next Steps

Key Introductory Remarks
▪ Need to crystallize the scope and focus of this groups’ process
▪ How far can we actually move the needle?
▪ A coalition like this needs to be action oriented
▪ Need a better understanding of what the group considers EPR
▪ Just do it! Don’t want this to just be a discussion without
follow through
▪ This group needs to act as a lightning rod; create motivation
and energy

Updates
Attendees updated the group on EPR developments since Summit I:
Other EPR processes
 EPA: Process has concluded, report on funding options which should address EPR is
delayed due to internal wrangling about its contents
 Ameripen: Research and fact-finding, but no EPR advocacy as yet
 SPC: SPC has created two EPR workgroups – one to address metrics/definitions and
one on communications
 Pac Next: Up-and-coming Canadian association
Key Points: How can we align our efforts with these groups? How is our process
different? Who are the key people at each group that we should reach out to?
RFK to lead new EPR campaign clearinghouse
 Purpose: Intensively support state packaging EPR campaigns
 Structure: 501(c)3 separate from F500 process (but an outgrowth of it), Paul Gardner
appointed as Executive Director
 Board: A few major strategic supporters: business, foundation, NGO/SRI
 Function: Campaign clearinghouse – will not duplicate other EPR groups
 Funding: Foundation, corporate, individual – recruiting begins now
 Timing: Public launch early 2012

VISION
The Bigger Picture
We envision an approach to recycling that will:
 Advance energy independence
 Help free us from oil addiction
 Create jobs and profits
 Grow domestic manufacturing
 Fight climate change
 Respond to the changing fiscal climate
 Internalize environmental costs –
to privatize costs, not just subsidize them with public $

The Objective
―To implement a strategy to develop and promote model
multi-material packaging EPR policy in a non- deposit
state that will increase the volume of recyclables
collected in a more economically-efficient manner”

Core Principles
(Draft Version)
To be economically, politically, and environmentally viable, EPR
policy needs to reflect three shared principles:
1. Internalize Costs — When pollution and waste costs are externalized,
pollution and waste increases. But when the costs are internalized, businesses
and consumers implement the most cost-effective means of achieving the
desired outcomes.
2. Brand Owner Financing — Because brand owners make front-end
design decisions, they are best positioned to pay the external costs, and have
the best opportunity and incentive to reduce them.
3. Brand Owner Management — Government may set the
performance standards, monitor progress and create a level playing field for
EPR, but brand owners are best positioned to design and manage the program
to achieve those goals.

Goals
(Draft Version)
Preliminary goals include (but not limited to):
1. Policy must meet the three core principles: cost
internalization, brand-owner financing, and brand-owner
management.
2. Address packaging and printed paper. Need mechanisms to
build markets for recyclable materials that currently don’t have
markets.
3. Achieve high rates and quality, to meet the needs of the
materials sector: aluminum (75%), glass, plastic, and paper.
4. Closed loop system – keep enough volume in domestic market
to serve as raw materials for new packaging.

Potential Policy Considerations
 EPR is a free market process. Be careful to keep the system lean and allow the
market to dictate the structure of system
 EPR is a Materials Management Strategy, to meet domestic manufacturing needs
 EPR internalizes environmental costs – privatize externalities, don’t subsidize
 Meet environmental goals - Make sure it can deliver needed recovery by
materials sector
 Recycling rates not diversion rates – reduce overall footprint, maintain quality
 Quality is key - Make sure collected materials can be recycled
 Keep it retailer-friendly – low cost, and no take-back mandates
 Ensure a level the playing field – prevent free riders
 Address at-home and away-from-home
 Packaging and printed paper only, not framework legislation
 VT proposal will be the starting point - build it out for the model legislation
 Make it expandable - Consistent state-to-state, as feasible
 Promote continuous best practices and continuous improvement
 Be clear about who is paying what, how EACH entity pays
 Role of government is to set aggressive recovery goals - monitor performance and
provide incentives (such as penalties) to meet those goals

The Coalition
Currently, the primary goal of this group is to provide a productive discussion
forum for stakeholders interested in exploring EPR. Participation does not
constitute endorsement of a specific piece of legislation – only the principles to
which the group agrees.
At some point, participants who would like to move into more of an advocacy
role can engage at a higher commitment level with EPR.org (spearheaded by RFK
and Paul Gardner).
-------------------------------
To build both of these initiatives, we will reach out in good faith to a
comprehensive set of strategic potential allies. We will seek to meet
their legitimate needs, and those of all stakeholders, whether or not
they join the coalition.
The following represents an optimal coalition – we recognize some within the
following sectors may not join the coalition, but we will endeavor to invite them:
NGO’s SRI’s
Materials Sector Food and Beverage
Retail Consumer Packaged Goods
State and Local Govt Waste Management Companies
*Other EPR Groups/Dialogues

Strategic Considerations
1. Develop state legislation – we are an action oriented group
2. Campaign in 2-3 states simultaneously (West, Midwest, East)
3. Secure core business supporter(s) in each state
4. Tie into a national campaign or issues: climate, energy, etc.
5. Consider states that: would be replicable; border other
prospective states; have a referendum process
6. Advance quality legislation – recognizes the needs of all
stakeholders, even opponents
7. Research and Education: proposal-specific data for industry and
consumers
8. Pressure: coordinated asks from SRIs + NGOs

The Target States
Data Foundation: Paul Gardner’s state analysis
 SIX PROSPECTIVE STATES: The first set of filters winnowed
the field to - Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina,
Pennsylvania, and Washington.
 FOUR PRIORITY STATES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:
Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Delaware
 OTHER STATES TO CONSIDER: New Jersey, South Carolina,
Rhode Island and Wisconsin may merit further consideration.

Brainstorming & Messaging
Key Points:
 Our goal is to communicate effectively so others will be willing to
participate in the dialogue/join the coalition
 Consider an alternative to the term EPR
 Think first of the audiences we want to reach and tailor our messaging
 Biggest winners don’t necessarily know they are the winners
 We need a positive message, not just about threat of legislation
 Clearer statement about who we are and what were about
 Business case: must be economically viable partnered with the ―angel
case‖
Potential names presented:
 Full Cycle ▪ ShaREcycle ▪ ReCycolution
 Revolution ▪ Recycling Made Easy ▪ Close the Loop

NEXT STEPS
1. National Campaign Coalition - Work with RFK to launch the
national ―epr.org‖ coalition.
2. Model Legislation – Distribute Vermont proposal (2011) as our
first-cut model, convene a sub-group to do a deeper dive (see
slide 15). End-users will review and suggest needed refinements.
3. State Analysis – Conduct deeper analysis, convene a sub-group
to do a deeper dive (see slide 15). Future 500 and others will
reach out to state contacts. Site visits may be conducted.
4. VPR and VPR+ - Explore the concept of a voluntary EPR
program as a potential legislative model.
5. SRI/NGO Outreach - develop a common ―ask‖ to encourage
additional companies at the table.
6. Funding – Convene a funding meeting and reach out to
foundations and corporate prospects.

Upcoming Meetings
 State Teleconference: Hosted by Future 500, lead by Paul
Gardner
Goal - Deep dive on slide 12
Invitees - Attendees of Summit I & II
Date – Mid to late October
 Policy Teleconference: Hosted by Future 500, lead by Garth
Hickle
Goal - Deep dive on slides 7-9
Invitees - Attendees of Summit I & II
Date – Mid to late October
 EPR Summit III: Hosted and lead by Future 500
Goal – Expand on Summit I & II, strengthen group, engage
new members, continue building momentum
Invitees – Current group + new members (stakeholders
interested in a constructive dialogue on EPR)

Key Closing Remarks
 Great day and great group
 Very encouraged, feel motivated by the discussion
 Our focus is becoming clearer and were moving in the right
direction
 We need tangible next steps, assigning tasks to members
would be helpful
 Key is broadening participation; who do we want at the table
and who of us should invite them?
 Impressed with the level of expertise
 We need to tell our story better and share that story with
others

You are here.

San Francisco – Tokyo – Beijing
335 Powell Street, San Francisco, CA 94102
(415) 294-7775 www.future500.org

EPR Summit II Overview

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

En vedette

En vedette (16)

Similaire à EPR Summit II Overview

Similaire à EPR Summit II Overview (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

EPR Summit II Overview