The document discusses market-based recycling through extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs. EPR programs shift the financial responsibility of recycling from taxpayers to producers and brands by requiring them to fund recycling programs based on their market share. This avoids issues of differing state laws creating compliance headaches for national brands and reduces government spending. Properly implemented EPR programs could substantially increase recycling rates and transition the US to a more accessible and industry-financed recycling system. Legislation is needed to ensure all brands contribute fairly and oversight of the programs.

1. MARKET-BASED RECYCLING
Increase Re-Cycling Rates; Lower Re-Cycling Costs

2. MARKET-BASED RECYCLING
A Strong Tool to Move the Needle on Recycling Rates
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) offers a
comprehensive way to boost recycling. Companies have
made commitments to use more recycled content and to
recover more of their end-of-life packaging, they are looking
for ways to boost recycling.
Due to minimal federal involvement in solid waste policy in
recent decades, most policy changes have taken place at the
state and local level. When states pass wildly different laws to
address the same issue – the e-waste laws in half the states
come to mind – it is a costly compliance headache for national
and global brands.
EPR offers an opportunity for them to guide the design of an
efficient national or regional system with minimal government
involvement.

3. Implementation of producer-financed EPR recycling programs
for packaging and printed paper would substantially increase
recycling rates, reduce government spending, and use private
sector efficiencies to work to reduce the overall cost of
recycling.
The ultimate goal is to progress to a new recycling paradigm
in the U.S., making it highly accessible to all citizens and
financed by industry through consumer purchases, not by the
general taxpayer or ratepayer. Current financing of recycling
by households using fees and line-item taxes has to go away
in exchange for shifting the cost of recycling to the price of
new products (e.g., no “double dipping”).

4. To learn more about this and other innovative solutions
Go to OceanExchange(dot)Org
Industry Needs Legislation to Make It Work
Legislation would provide a level playing field for all brands by
ensuring that all contribute to the system according to their
market share. This avoids a free-rider problem in which some
brands would pay into the system but all brands receive the
benefits. Legislation is also necessary to set up State oversight
and to ensure fairness among brand owners in the governance
of the system, which promotes the public interest.
EPR’s highest priority should be about diverting the greatest
amount of recyclable material from disposal in the most
efficient and cost-effective way possible. In addition EPR
should:
• Harmonize what materials are collected through an entire state, so that the
brands’ recyclable packaging will actually be accepted for recycling everywhere.
• Keep waste material out of retail stores and maximize use of existing recycling
systems like curbside collection.