Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility Legislation

Luyi Gui, Ximin (Natalie) Huang, Atalay Atasu, L. Beril Toktay

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Take-back legislation based on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) holds producers responsible for proper end-of-life treatment of their products. In addition to diverting waste products from landfills, EPR legislation has the potential advantage of incentivizing eco-design of products. However, evidence suggests that product design outcomes of EPR legislation can be significantly influenced by its implementation. In this chapter, we survey the research on this topic, focusing on design impacts associated with several key operational considerations in supply chains. We show that intended design incentives under EPR legislation may be weakened, muted, or even negated as a result of operational factors such as design trade-off, market competition, and recycling resource sharing. Accordingly, we develop insights as to how the design potential of EPR legislation may be realized.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationSpringer Series in Supply Chain Management
PublisherSpringer Nature
Pages339-358
Number of pages20
DOIs
StatePublished - 2016
Externally publishedYes

Publication series

NameSpringer Series in Supply Chain Management
Volume3
ISSN (Print)2365-6395
ISSN (Electronic)2365-6409

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, Springer International Publishing Switzerland.

Keywords

  • Cost Allocation
  • Design Implication
  • Design Improvement
  • Design Incentive
  • Supply Chain

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility Legislation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this