At the start of each year, producers must report their product quantities to RINKI, a service company working for the PROs, and the fee they pay (EUR/kilo) is determined using the previous year's data. Fee levels differ between consumers and businesses (B2B) for packaging, with B2B fees generally lower due to a less complex collection system. Material composition also influences fee levels, with initial steps taken toward modulated fees, primarily tied to material recyclability. In 2022, the recycling fee for consumer packaging for plastic was 0.18 EUR/kilo. In 2023, the recycling fee has been raised to between 0.27 EUR/kilo and 0.395 EUR/kilo depending on the plastic material (RINKI, n.d.).
To ensure compliance, the Pirkanmaa ELY Centre, that works closely to the Ministry of Environment, holds the responsibility of overseeing and conducting regular monitoring of producer responsibility. PROs are mandated to meet legislative targets. If these targets are not met, the ELY-center can inquire about improvement plans, although no sanctions are imposed.
The challenge of meeting targets becomes more apparent in plastics, where despite progress, new reporting rules, applicable to all EU countries, have led to a significant drop in the recycling rate. While previous calculations indicated a 45% recycling rate for plastic, the application of new rules resulted in a rate of 29% in 2021. Similar trends of declining recycling rates are also seen in other countries due to the new reporting rules.
Changes/new regulation
Notably, there has been a shift in the criteria for who bears producer responsibility. Previously, it was only applicable to those with turnovers exceeding EUR 1 million. Starting in 2024, this requirement will extend to all producers, irrespective of their turnover.
Finland is in the process of implementing the SUP directive where new obligations for companies with producer responsibility include paying a SUP fee and informing consumers. The 2023 costs are covered by a SUP fee which is invoiced from the companies in 2024 and varies by product group.
The SUP directive also increases the reporting obligations of producers when data on SUP products put on the market per SUP product group are needed for monitoring the SUP requirements. The separate packaging reporting as part of the regular packaging data reporting begins in 2024 when packaging data for 2023 is reported. (RINKI, 2022)
Barriers/success factors
The fee for packaging has been increasing in the last few years and will increase even more with the SUP directive. This poses a significant issue for the producers and could potentially affect the attitudes of the entire system. For instance, local decision-makers now seem to value low waste fees instead of improvements of the waste collection services that instead could increase costs (Salmenperä, 2021). Additionally, the new reporting rules from the EU directive have intensified the workload, as now reporting is required for various materials and categories.
The cost increase presents a dilemma, particularly in encouraging more producers to join a PRO. However, PROs lack the authority to enforce participation, leading to a percentage of "free riders," estimated at around 15%. With the removal of the turnover requirement, more companies may join PROs from 2024, although their size may only represent around 5% of the market volume. A majority of the market's influence is held by about 10% of responsible producers.
An advantage that has been highlighted is that the system is structured to be producer-driven, where PROs can only be initiated by producers and must operate on a non-profit basis. This arrangement empowers producers by providing them with obligations and authority within the system.
5.3 Norway
EPR implementation
EPR has been an important environmental policy instrument since the mid-1990s in Norway. Today, Norway has extended producer responsibility for electrical and electronic waste, discarded vehicles, tires, batteries, packaging (including beverage packaging), and insulated glass panes containing PCBs.
Regarding packaging, companies that produce or import a minimum of 1 000 kg of a packaging type are required to participate in a return scheme and become members of an approved recycling company. This obligation also extends to companies that import goods with packaging (Miljødirektoratet, 2023a). Through their membership, the companies contribute financially to the collection, sorting, material recycling and other treatment of used packaging and packaging waste. In 2021, approximately 28% of plastic packaging from Norwegian households and businesses was recycled.
Changes/new regulation (proposals)
In 2020, the Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment (Klima- og miljødepartementet, KLD) commissioned the Norwegian Environment Agency (Miljødirektoratet) to review and propose improvements to the extended producer responsibility systems. The assignment has been divided into a three-part mission, with the first two sub-missions already reported (Miljødirektoratet, 2022a).
In the first part of the assignment, challenges with the current system were identified, along with the need for changes to ensure compliance with the minimum requirements of the EU’s waste directive. In part two, recommendations for how the systems can become more efficient, more robust, and better support a circular economy were suggested.
One key recommendation to clarify who has the obligation to be a member of an approved recycling company is to change the definition of who is a producer to “who professionally imports packaging or packaged products to the Norwegian market or in Norway manufactures packaging for the Norwegian market”. The recommended definition is expected to reduce the number of liable producers and consequently decrease instances of free riding. Another recommendation to identify free riders is to establish a producer register. It is also recommended to assess whether the 1 000 kg limit should be changed or possibly removed. Additionally, the compensation that the producers pay to the recycling companies is recommended to be differentiated to a greater extent.
Part three of the assignment, which is ongoing, focuses on proposing rule changes for producer responsibility for packaging in line with the recommendations from part two of the assignment. Key areas include financing the waste management of packaging (and beverage packaging), assessing the lower limit for producers’ obligation to be a member of an approved recycling company, refining the definition of a producer, mandating waste prevention reporting, and reducing the number of free riders.
The Norwegian Environmental Agency has additionally proposed two new schemes (Miljødirektoratet, 2022b). The first scheme targets plastic waste from fisheries, aquaculture, and recreational fishing. The second scheme aims to hold producers responsible for covering costs for waste management and cleaning up litter from single-use plastic products in public spaces. For the latter, the Norwegian Environment Agency has so far submitted a proposal for a regulation to the Ministry of Climate and Environment and are now waiting for response from the ministry before the proposal can be sent for consultation (Miljødirektoratet, 2023b). The Norwegian Pollution Control Act § 28 already contains a prohibition on littering and the basis of the regulation is that the litterer, the one who throws it away, should cover the cost of clean-up themselves (Lovdata, 2023). The littering ban is general, and therefore also applies to the single-use plastic products that end up as litter. However, it is only the municipality’s costs for cleaning up littering of the single-use plastic that must be covered by the producers within the extended producer responsibility for single-use plastic (Miljødirektoratet, 2023b).
Barriers/success factors
A Deloitte report (2020) has highlighted weaknesses within the current legal framework for EPR for plastics in Norway, aligning with the Norwegian Environment Agency’s findings. Among the identified issues are the unclear definition of the producer that is subject to the EPR obligations, limited cost coverage and transparency, and insufficient incentives for creating a circular value chain for plastic packaging within the current framework. In line with the recommendations from the Norwegian Environment Agency, Deloitte identified necessary changes, such as holding producers with the most influence on product design responsible for the products they put on the market and introducing requirements for modulating fees based on true lifecycle costs.
5.4 Iceland
EPR Implementation
Iceland has had an EPR scheme for plastic and paper packaging since 2005, and for all other packaging types since the 1st of January 2023. In addition, there are also EPR schemes for other materials. The EPR systems are operated by the Icelandic Recycling Fund (IRF), a government-owned agency established in 2003 that uses economic incentives to increase recycling. The fund charges manufacturers and importers with a recycling fee, directing these fees toward enhancing recycling efforts. The IRF’s board includes representatives from various stakeholders, including municipalities and producers, with the Ministry of Environment holding the decisive vote.
The EPR scheme implemented differs from those in other countries and is viewed as a valuable tool to enable higher recycling rates (Mager, Traxler, Fischer, & Finger, 2022). The system is set up so that producers and importers of specific products pay a recycling fee to the customs office, based on weight. The fee is collected to cover the cost of transport and recycling. The fee level is determined by the actual costs of waste management and the amount of waste collected, to accurately capture waste treatment expenses linked to the product rather than mirror the product’s environmental impact. This implies that when environmental ambitions change, i.e., the recycling targets, then the fee level changes. For instance, the fee for plastic packaging has recently been raised from 40 ISK per kilo to 82 ISK per kilo, as it now also includes separate collection. The fee level differs between different categories of products and is, for example, 42 ISK per kilo for paper packaging and 10 ISK per kilo for wood packaging.
From 1 January 2023, producers are also responsible for the costs of cleaning up plastic products when they have become litter as well as informing consumers and preventing waste. A fee of 27 ISK/kg is imposed on wet wipes, tobacco products with filter, balloons, and other single-use plastic products, all of which fall under the scope of extended producer responsibility (Úrvinnslusjóður, 2022).
Changes/new regulation
Initially, the focus of the system leaned more toward waste management than prevention, a perspective that was not incorporated into the fund system. Today initiatives are taken by the fund to increase public awareness to prevent waste. Municipalities play a central role in public awareness, being the key actor in the operative waste collection. Public awareness campaigns, often utilizing social media platforms and influencers, constitute the primary approach to achieve higher collection rates.
Barriers/Success factors
While the separate collection was relatively recently implemented, Iceland encountered challenges during the initial phase. The response so far has not been as positive as hoped, but there is optimism that these challenges will be progressively resolved.
Overall, the fund system is considered to have been relatively successful, not particularly controversial. Since it is mandatory for producers to pay the fee, either at the customs office when they import, or by reporting the amount they produce to the tax office, compliance is good. Thus, there is no problem with free riders.
The IRF’s overarching goal aligns with meeting the minimum requirements of the waste directive. Thus far, Iceland has met the targets for plastic recycling but is still striving to attain the target of 50% for 2025. However, a drawback of the fund system is the absence of penalties for not meeting the targets.
Another issue is the inflexible tariff codes that cannot be modified for customers. Currently, there is only one tariff, regardless of whether the material is environmentally friendly or not. These tariffs lack differentiation between sustainable and less sustainable resources. However, a significant fee modulation based on the products durability, reusability, dismantlability, and recyclability shall be implemented (Mager, Traxler, Fischer, & Finger, 2022).
5.5 Denmark
EPR implementation
In Denmark, there is currently no Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme in place for managing plastic packaging. However, EPR schemes for batteries, used vehicles, and WEEE have been implemented. Denmark' complies primarily to the packaging targets set by the EU through a national action plan for a circular economy, which consists of a national plan for the prevention and management of waste for 2020–2032. Furthermore, there is a political agreement on climate change relating to waste management, which includes initiatives to support increased recycling and thereby will support EU-targets on packaging waste.
The legal framework for waste management in Denmark is established by the Environmental Protection Act, with specific Statutory Orders governing packaging and packaging waste. In Denmark, municipalities have the general responsibility for waste management from households, whereas handling of business waste is generally privatized. Municipalities often collaborate on waste management through public companies. Denmark did not implement EPR schemes for packaging waste previously as other member states did because the existing municipal system was considered efficient. In fact, Denmark has already reached the 2025 EU recycling target for glass and wood packaging and in 2021, 23% of plastic packaging waste, 71% of fiber packaging waste and 66% of metal packaging waste was recycled.
In 2021, new legislation on waste collection was implemented, which streamlined municipal waste collection. All households are now required to sort waste into ten different waste types, including plastic. This means that recyclable packaging waste is generally mixed with recyclable non-packaging waste in the collection system. Municipalities are obliged to collect selected recyclables curbside, but there is also access to public recycling stations. Waste management costs are covered by a municipal waste fee paid by citizens, with a few exceptions. Littering is, for instance, financed through taxes. Businesses are obliged to sort waste in the same ten waste types as households, and they also have access to public recycling stations. Small businesses may use household collection systems provided by municipalities.
Denmark also employes a deposit-return system for a beverage packaging and refillable bottles. The deposit-return system has very high recycling rates and was recently expanded to include juice containers.
In Denmark waste handlers are obliged by law to report waste data to the national waste data system in Denmark (ADS), including the amount of waste collected. The data from ADS forms the basis for mandatory reports to Eurostat and national statistical reports of waste which are published annually. The latest report regarding packaging waste includes data from 2021. (Miljøstyrelsen, 2023)
Producer responsibility for tobacco product filters was implemented in the beginning of 2023 and was the first of eight product groups becoming subject to producer responsibility, and the producers now have the financial responsibility to pay for the cleaning up of this type of litter. Moreover, the producer responsibility extends to marking and providing information on the product. Producers are also obliged to register with the Danish Producer Responsibility (DPA), report to the Danish Environmental Protection Agency as well as to pay a fee. From the 4th quarter of 2023, the fee is 0.0092 DKK per filter put on the Danish market.
Most producers in Denmark use PROs, known as collective systems in Denmark, to fulfill their producer responsibility.
Changes/new regulation
In 2022, necessary adjustments for minimum requirements according to the WFD for WEEE and ELVs were made. Currently, Denmark is in the process of implementing EPR schemes for packaging and single-use plastic products (under the SUP Directive). This is expected to be fully implemented in 2025. From 2025, EPR for fishing equipment will also be implemented, but this will not entail a responsibility for cleaning up litter.
There is a widespread political consensus regarding the impending regulation for producer responsibility for packaging waste. In line with this, Denmark is expected to implement a hybrid model for EPR on packaging waste, where municipalities continue to collect waste from households while producers take over the organizational responsibility for waste treatment. For business waste, businesses will continue to be responsible for waste collection and treatment while producers will bear the financial responsibility. Administrative tasks such as the producer register and allocation of waste to producers or PROs will handle by a private non-profit organization, the Danish Producer Responsibility (DPA), established in 2005. The Danish Environmental Protection Agency will be responsible for guidance, oversight, and enforcement. Ultimately, there is an expectation that most producers will join PROs to fulfill their responsibilities and that there will be three or four competing PROs on packaging waste.
The Danish Parliament has decided that producer responsibility for packaging should lie with the person who has the most significant influence over packaging design, which is usually not the packaging manufacturer but the person who orders the packaged product. (European Union, 2022) However, prior to going into effect, the “producer” term needs to be defined more precisely at the executive level. In this regard, Denmark is also looking into current EU negotiations on a new packaging regulation, in which a common producer definition is on the table.
Barriers/success factors
Denmark has lower plastic packaging recycling rates compared to other Nordic countries, which may be due to the following reasons. Firstly, municipalities in Denmark have mainly collected plastic waste at local recycling stations, and not by the household (curbside), and the country is still waiting to see the full results of the streamlining of waste collection. Secondly, Denmark has relatively few sorting facilities for packaging waste, probably due to the country’s relatively small amount of waste compared to other EU countries. This may also explain the significant portion of Danish plastic waste exported to EU countries such as Germany.
According to the latest report regarding packaging, which includes data from 2021, Denmark exports about 21% of plastic packaging. (Miljøstyrelsen, 2023) The streamlining combined with producer responsibility is expected to result in greater and more uniform amounts of waste, which is expected to encourage companies to invest in sorting facilities in Denmark and result in increased recycling. There is currently a private sorting facility for plastics and metal waste under construction in Esbjerg, which is expected to open in 2025.
As previously mentioned, Denmark has a specific deposit-refund scheme for beverage packaging and refillable bottles This deposit-refund scheme has been largely successful. (McKinsey & Company, 2019)