Take Back

Consumer societies around the world are producing an ever-growing amount of waste. Resources are being depleted, and communities are beginning to choke from overflowing waste disposal sites. According to studies, well over 95 percent of all materials that go into the production of consumer goods end up as waste within a month. Most materials wasted, furthermore, not only come from nonrenewable resources, but could have been reused or recycled. Ordinarily, producers have little or no responsibility for what happens to the materials that go into producing the goods they sell, or the materials used for packaging. Take-back campaigns and legislations are spreading globally, and all have a simple goal: to reduce the amount of waste. Through both voluntary requests and mandates, producers are asked to take back their products at the end of their life cycles in order to reuse and/or recycle them. Ideally, take-back campaigns and legislations are geared toward a substantial reduction of materials used in the first place.

Take-back schemes have largely come about due to increased pressures on municipal waste site capacity and as a means of reducing the amount of toxic waste sent to landfill or incineration. There is also a growing recognition of the scarcity of natural resources. The electronics waste stream, for instance, has grown rapidly. This has been further exacerbated by a decline in product lifespan (companies increase profits through planned obsolescence) that has brought about an increased frequency of production and consumption. According to estimates, for example, a computer purchased in 1992 would have lasted 4.5 years, whereas the average life span of a computer bought in 2005 was little more than 2 years.

There is also growing pressure to undertake take-back under the premise of Extended Producer/Product Responsibility (EPR). In some countries EPR is mandatory through legislative requirements. According to the latest count, some 30 countries worldwide now have laws that mandate companies to be actively involved in the “end-of-life cycle” of their products. The European Union, for instance, has directives on the books such as the Waste Electronic and Electrical Equipment (WEEE) Directive or the End-of-Life Vehicles Directive (ELV). Other recorded examples of international take-back laws include the following:

• Norway, which requires that up to 90 percent of all electrical and electronic products must be recovered by their producers for reuse or recycling
[Page 506]
• The European Union, which has laws that requires automobile manufacturers to take back their old vehicles free of charge, and to reuse or recycle at least 85 percent of their content
• Brazil, which has a National Solid Waste Policy that requires corporations to obtain an “Environmental Operating License” that includes take-back requirements

The fundamental rationale behind take-back laws is not only to enforce corporate responsibility, but rather to create an incentive for producers to pay more attention to the design stage of their product or packaging life cycle. Studies show that most energy and resources are used at the production stage: the more incentive to cut down on materials used at the outset, the fewer problems at the end-of-life cycle of the product.

...