WEEE management in Europe: learning from best practice

Romàn, Elisabeth

doi:10.1533/9780857096333.5.493

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The research presented in this paper evaluates EPR systems for lamps in the Nordic countries of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden 2 . The Nordic countries have been recognised for best practices in the area of end-of-life management of WEEE (Román, 2012;Ylä-Mella, et al, 2014a;Ylä-Mella, et al, 2014b) and as such also provide good cases for a deeper analysis of EPR for lamps in particular. Such analysis can provide further insight into how to address the unique challenges for this waste stream and the factors that potentially contribute to better attainment of EPR goals and a more circular economy for this key product category.…”

Section: Research Aimmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the first version of the WEEE directive collection rates differed widely between member states, with ten countries failing to meet the 4kg per capita target in 2010 but most exceeding and the Nordic countries well exceeding the target (EU Commission, 2013). Ylä-Mella et al (2014a) and Román (2012) describe the performance of WEEE systems in the Nordic countries as exemplary, citing their high collection rates in Nordic countries (ranging from 8 kilograms/capita/year in Finland to over 20 kilograms/capita/year in Norway) despite low population densities and high transport distances, especially in the northern parts of Norway, Sweden, and Finland. Such per capita collection rates rank Nordic countries all in the top five performing countries in Europe.…”

Section: Findings and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The initiative is being led by municipal waste companies and is partially financed by producer compensation to municipalities for collection of WEEE. (A. Persson, personal communication, 9 September 2014).3.1.2 Collection and Recycling PerformanceThe general WEEE system architectures in the Nordic countries are described as best examples and perform well in relation to the WEEE Directive goals(Román, 2012;Ylä-Mella et al, 2014a). The general architecture also encourages high performance in the category of gas discharge lamps with the Nordic countries among the top five in Europe in 2012 (figure 2) when measuring collection in terms of kilograms per capita.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Extended producer responsibility for lamps in Nordic countries: best practices and challenges in closing material loops

Richter

Koppejan

2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes are adopted not only to promote collection and recycling of waste products but also to close material loops and incentivise ecodesign. These outcomes are also part of creating a more circular economy. Evaluations of best practices can inform how to further optimise systems towards more ambitious collection, recycling and recovery of both hazardous and critical materials. Gas discharge lamps in particular are a key product category in this regard, considering both the presence of mercury and of rare earth materials in this waste stream. Nordic countries in particular are known for advanced collection and recycling systems and this article compares the EPR systems for gas discharge lamps. The EPR systems for lamps are evaluated using theory-based evaluation approaches to analyse both the performance of lamp EPR systems and challenges perceived by key stakeholders. The cases were constructed based on primary and secondary literature, statistical data, and interviews with stakeholders. The findings indicate that the collection and recycling performance is generally still high for gas discharge lamps in the Nordic countries, despite some differences in approach and structure of the EPR systems, but there remain opportunities for further improvement. In terms of EPR goals, there is evidence of improved waste management of these products as a result of the systems; however, there also remain significant challenges, particularly in terms of ecodesign incentives. The key factors for best practice are discussed, including aspects of the rule base, infrastructure, and operations. The particular characteristics of this waste category, including the rapidly changing technology, also pose challenges for EPR systems in the future.

show abstract

Section: Research Aimmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Findings and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Extended producer responsibility for lamps in Nordic countries: best practices and challenges in closing material loops

Richter

Koppejan

2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The current definition of WEEE in Norwegian legislation is broader than in EU. In addition to ten categories established according to the WEEE Directive 2002/96/EC, the Norwegian legislation also includes the following four extra categories comprising WEEE mainly from industry and business [37]: (11) automatic machines for selling beverages, food, cash points, and equipment delivering automatic products, [37]. Take-back companies are required to ensure free collection from enterprises, distributors, and municipalities collecting WEEE and confirming that the collected WEEE is treated pursuant to the requirements of the Norwegian waste regulation.…”

Section: Weee Recovery In Norwaymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the good functionality of the system, WEEE resources are not utilized optimally because most of the treatment facilities are located near Oslo, the capital in the southern part of the country, causing long and demanding transportation conditions for WEEE. Therefore, some unexplored potentials for new business and reverse chain management of WEEE still exists [37].…”

Section: Weee Recovery In Norwaymentioning

confidence: 99%

Overview of the WEEE Directive and Its Implementation in the Nordic Countries: National Realisations and Best Practices

Ylä-Mella

Poikela

Lehtinen

et al. 2014

Journal of Waste Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electronic devices and mobile applications have become a part of everyday life. Fast technological progress and rapid product obsolescence have led to the rapid growth of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Due to hazardous substances and also substantial amounts of valuable materials contained in electrical and electronic equipment, the European Union has implemented Directives related to WEEE, in order to reduce negative environmental and health impacts and to improve material recovery of valuable substances from WEEE. This paper provides an overview of the WEEE Directive and its implementation to national legislations in Finland, Sweden, and Norway and, further, describes how the nationwide WEEE recovery infrastructures in the Nordic countries have been built. The Nordic WEEE management systems are evaluated from the point of resource efficiency and best practices. Evidently, the WEEE management systems as established in the Nordic countries have advantages because the WEEE collection rates in 2012 were 12 kg/inhab./year, in Finland, 16 kg/inhab./year, in Sweden, and 27 kg/ inhab./year, in Norway, despite their sparsely populated nature. The Swedish and Norwegian experiences, especially, with long history of WEEE recovery indicate that increasing consumer awareness leads to more environmentally sound behaviour and improves recovery efficiency.

show abstract