epr summit ii overview

THE FUTURE 500 | (415) 294-7775 | www.future500.org

Extended Producer Responsibility Summit II Strategy for Packaging EPR Meeting Overview Westin Peachtree Hotel Atlanta, Georgia August 25, 2011


EPR Summit II is the second inner-circle meeting with a wider set of stakeholders. The meeting was convened to further

develop our:

Vision

Objective

Goals

Core Principles

Strategic and Policy Considerations

State Outreach

Messaging

Next Steps


Key Introductory Remarks

▪ Need to crystallize the scope and focus of this groups’ process

▪ How far can we actually move the needle?

▪ A coalition like this needs to be action oriented

▪ Need a better understanding of what the group considers EPR

▪ Just do it! Don’t want this to just be a discussion without follow through

▪ This group needs to act as a lightning rod; create motivation and energy


Updates Attendees updated the group on EPR developments since Summit I:

Other EPR processes

EPA: Process has concluded, report on funding options which should address EPR is delayed due to internal wrangling about its contents

Ameripen: Research and fact-finding, but no EPR advocacy as yet

SPC: SPC has created two EPR workgroups – one to address metrics/definitions and one on communications

Pac Next: Up-and-coming Canadian association

Key Points: How can we align our efforts with these groups? How is our process different? Who are the key people at each group that we should reach out to?

RFK to lead new EPR campaign clearinghouse

Purpose: Intensively support state packaging EPR campaigns

Structure: 501(c)3 separate from F500 process (but an outgrowth of it), Paul Gardner appointed as Executive Director

Board: A few major strategic supporters: business, foundation, NGO/SRI

Function: Campaign clearinghouse – will not duplicate other EPR groups

Funding: Foundation, corporate, individual – recruiting begins now

Timing: Public launch early 2012


VISION The Bigger Picture

We envision an approach to recycling that will:

Advance energy independence

Help free us from oil addiction

Create jobs and profits

Grow domestic manufacturing

Fight climate change

Respond to the changing fiscal climate

Internalize environmental costs –

to privatize costs, not just subsidize them with public $


The Objective

―To implement a strategy to develop and promote model

multi-material packaging EPR policy in a non- deposit

state that will increase the volume of recyclables

collected in a more economically-efficient manner”


Core Principles (Draft Version)

To be economically, politically, and environmentally viable, EPR policy needs to reflect three shared principles:

1. Internalize Costs — When pollution and waste costs are externalized, pollution and waste increases. But when the costs are internalized, businesses and consumers implement the most cost-effective means of achieving the desired outcomes.

2. Brand Owner Financing — Because brand owners make front-end design decisions, they are best positioned to pay the external costs, and have the best opportunity and incentive to reduce them.

3. Brand Owner Management — Government may set the performance standards, monitor progress and create a level playing field for EPR, but brand owners are best positioned to design and manage the program to achieve those goals.


Goals (Draft Version)

Preliminary goals include (but not limited to):

1. Policy must meet the three core principles: cost internalization, brand-owner financing, and brand-owner management.

2. Address packaging and printed paper. Need mechanisms to build markets for recyclable materials that currently don’t have markets.

3. Achieve high rates and quality, to meet the needs of the materials sector: aluminum (75%), glass, plastic, and paper.

4. Closed loop system – keep enough volume in domestic market to serve as raw materials for new packaging.


Potential Policy Considerations

EPR is a free market process. Be careful to keep the system lean and allow the market to dictate the structure of system

EPR is a Materials Management Strategy, to meet domestic manufacturing needs

EPR internalizes environmental costs – privatize externalities, don’t subsidize

Meet environmental goals - Make sure it can deliver needed recovery by materials sector

Recycling rates not diversion rates – reduce overall footprint, maintain quality

Quality is key - Make sure collected materials can be recycled

Keep it retailer-friendly – low cost, and no take-back mandates

Ensure a level the playing field – prevent free riders

Address at-home and away-from-home

Packaging and printed paper only, not framework legislation

VT proposal will be the starting point - build it out for the model legislation

Make it expandable - Consistent state-to-state, as feasible

Promote continuous best practices and continuous improvement

Be clear about who is paying what, how EACH entity pays

Role of government is to set aggressive recovery goals - monitor performance and provide incentives (such as penalties) to meet those goals


The Coalition Currently, the primary goal of this group is to provide a productive discussion

forum for stakeholders interested in exploring EPR. Participation does not constitute endorsement of a specific piece of legislation – only the principles to which the group agrees.

At some point, participants who would like to move into more of an advocacy role can engage at a higher commitment level with EPR.org (spearheaded by RFK and Paul Gardner). -------------------------------

To build both of these initiatives, we will reach out in good faith to a comprehensive set of strategic potential allies. We will seek to meet their legitimate needs, and those of all stakeholders, whether or not they join the coalition.

The following represents an optimal coalition – we recognize some within the following sectors may not join the coalition, but we will endeavor to invite them: NGO’s SRI’s Materials Sector Food and Beverage Retail Consumer Packaged Goods State and Local Govt Waste Management Companies *Other EPR Groups/Dialogues


Strategic Considerations

1. Develop state legislation – we are an action oriented group

2. Campaign in 2-3 states simultaneously (West, Midwest, East)

3. Secure core business supporter(s) in each state

4. Tie into a national campaign or issues: climate, energy, etc.

5. Consider states that: would be replicable; border other prospective states; have a referendum process

6. Advance quality legislation – recognizes the needs of all stakeholders, even opponents

7. Research and Education: proposal-specific data for industry and consumers

8. Pressure: coordinated asks from SRIs + NGOs


The Target States

Data Foundation: Paul Gardner’s state analysis

SIX PROSPECTIVE STATES: The first set of filters winnowed the field to - Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Washington.

FOUR PRIORITY STATES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Delaware

OTHER STATES TO CONSIDER: New Jersey, South Carolina, Rhode Island and Wisconsin may merit further consideration.


Brainstorming & Messaging

Key Points:

Our goal is to communicate effectively so others will be willing to participate in the dialogue/join the coalition

Consider an alternative to the term EPR

Think first of the audiences we want to reach and tailor our messaging

Biggest winners don’t necessarily know they are the winners

We need a positive message, not just about threat of legislation

Clearer statement about who we are and what were about

Business case: must be economically viable partnered with the ―angel case‖

Potential names presented:

Full Cycle ▪ ShaREcycle ▪ ReCycolution

Revolution ▪ Recycling Made Easy ▪ Close the Loop


NEXT STEPS

1. National Campaign Coalition - Work with RFK to launch the national ―epr.org‖ coalition.

2. Model Legislation – Distribute Vermont proposal (2011) as our first-cut model, convene a sub-group to do a deeper dive (see slide 15). End-users will review and suggest needed refinements.

3. State Analysis – Conduct deeper analysis, convene a sub-group to do a deeper dive (see slide 15). Future 500 and others will reach out to state contacts. Site visits may be conducted.

4. VPR and VPR+ - Explore the concept of a voluntary EPR program as a potential legislative model.

5. SRI/NGO Outreach - develop a common ―ask‖ to encourage additional companies at the table.

6. Funding – Convene a funding meeting and reach out to foundations and corporate prospects.


Upcoming Meetings

State Teleconference: Hosted by Future 500, lead by Paul Gardner Goal - Deep dive on slide 12 Invitees - Attendees of Summit I & II Date – Mid to late October

Policy Teleconference: Hosted by Future 500, lead by Garth Hickle Goal - Deep dive on slides 7-9 Invitees - Attendees of Summit I & II Date – Mid to late October

EPR Summit III: Hosted and lead by Future 500 Goal – Expand on Summit I & II, strengthen group, engage new members, continue building momentum Invitees – Current group + new members (stakeholders interested in a constructive dialogue on EPR)


Key Closing Remarks

Great day and great group

Very encouraged, feel motivated by the discussion

Our focus is becoming clearer and were moving in the right direction

We need tangible next steps, assigning tasks to members would be helpful

Key is broadening participation; who do we want at the table and who of us should invite them?

Impressed with the level of expertise

We need to tell our story better and share that story with others


You are here.


San Francisco – Tokyo – Beijing

335 Powell Street, San Francisco, CA 94102

(415) 294-7775 www.future500.org