"As highlighted by Monier et al. (2014) there is a consensus that EPR schemes (and PRO fees) should cover the costs of collecting and treating waste that is pre-sorted by households minus the revenues from recovered materials. However, there is debate concerning the allocation of other costs: costs for the collection and treatment of waste that is not pre-sorted by households (e.g. collected by municipalities via the residual mixed waste bag); costs for awareness raising campaigns; costs for clean-up of litter; costs for enforcement and monitoring of the EPR scheme (including auditing and measures against free-riding); and finally R&D investment in DfE."

Meta-Actor: QUANGO

Source Document: http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=ENV/EPOC/WPRPW(2014)6/FINAL&docLanguage=En

Date: October 8, 2015

_______________________

"Comments on proposed ``Electronic Waste Research and Development Act'' The primary reason that the U.S. does not have a comprehensive e-waste recycling program is disagreement between manufacturers as to how such a system would be funded. Each manufacturer has opposed a system whose funding would put them at a competitive disadvantage with respect to their competitors. As a result, each possible system is opposed by one or more powerful manufacturers and the result is no system."

Meta-Actor: Government

Source Document: http://www.electronicsrecycling.org/public/UserDocuments/Omelchuck_Testimony%202-11-09.pdf

Date: February 8, 2009