Kolekt has launched the EPR Regulation Wizard, an online tool that helps governments design an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) system and produce a draft regulation in just three days.

For policymakers considering Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) implementation, a fundamental question arises: who exactly should pay these EPR fees? Is it the Producer, Importer or Brand Owner, or the company that puts the product on the local market who should bear the financial responsibility?

For policymakers seeking to implement effective Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regulations, the technical decisions they must make hold profound implications for success. This article looks at the two different approaches to how companies report their market inputs.

This article looks at how ‘VAT discrimination’ against informal collectors not only deprives these vital actors of much-needed income, but also undermines the efficiency and effectiveness of EPR schemes in emerging markets, where their contribution to recycling is paramount.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) offers a serious solution for the financing of waste management. But, is an Industry or Government-led approach better? And what are the consequences of making the wrong choice?

Kolekt Director, Thierry Sanders, who spoke at the summit, reflects on the discussions at the Plastic Free Rivers and Seas: A Vision for South Asia Regional Roundtable, held in Sri Lanka this week.

Extended producer Responsibility (EPR) offers a serious solution for the financing of waste management. Here we weigh up the policy options of Mandatory and Voluntary EPR, and look at the consequences of making the wrong choice.