Comparison of three E-Waste take-back policies

被引:11
|
作者
Shan, Feifei [1 ]
Xiao, Wenli [2 ]
Yang, Feng [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sci & Technol China, Sch Management, Int Inst Finance, Hefei 230026, Peoples R China
[2] Univ San Diego, Sch Business Adm, San Diego, CA 92110 USA
关键词
Take-back legislation; Product recycling; Extended producer responsibility; Advanced recycling fee; Pre-disposal fee; PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY; RECOVERY; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108287
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
In this study, we compare three primary forms of product take-back legislation: advanced recycling fee (ARF), extended producer responsibility (EPR), and pre-disposal fee (PDF). With ARF policy, the government is responsible for product recycling and charges consumers a recycling fee at purchase. EPR legislation makes manufacturers responsible for product recycling and financial support of the take-back system. A PDF policy also makes manufacturers responsible for product recycling but charges consumers a disposal fee when they return used products for recycling. With these three policies as our focus, we examine the impact of important parameters and compare them from the perspective of the manufacturer, the product's environmental impact, and social welfare. Though manufacturers have expressed concern over potential harm to sales under an ARF policy, we find this is the best policy in most cases, from the perspective of social welfare or the manufacturer.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A Game Theoretic Approach for Eco-Design and Remanufacturing Considering Take-Back Policy
    Chang, Xiaoxiao
    Xu, Guangye
    Wang, Qian
    Zhong, Yongguang
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (17)
  • [22] VARYING LIFECYCLE LENGTHS WITHIN A PORTFOLIO FOR PRODUCT TAKE-BACK
    Zhao, Yuan
    Pandey, Vijitashwa
    Kim, Harrison
    Thurston, Deborah
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASME INTERNATIONAL DESIGN ENGINEERING TECHNICAL CONFERENCES AND COMPUTERS AND INFORMATION IN ENGINEERING CONFERENCE, VOL 8, PTS A AND B, 2010, : 323 - 335
  • [23] An Analysis of Monopolistic and Competitive Take-Back Schemes for WEEE Recycling
    Toyasaki, Fuminori
    Boyaci, Tamer
    Verter, Vedat
    PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, 2011, 20 (06) : 805 - 823
  • [24] Decision Making in a Closed-Loop Supply Chain with a Waste Management Program: Manufacturers' Take-Back Activity and Governmental Subsidies for Remanufacturing
    Lee, Doo-Ho
    Park, Eun-Hee
    Lee, Jui-Yuan
    Jiang, Zhigang
    Ke, Chao
    Wang, Yan
    PROCESSES, 2023, 11 (11)
  • [25] Take-back regulation policy on closed loop supply chains: Single or double targets?
    Chen Xintong
    Li Bangyi
    Li Zonghuo
    Mark Goh
    Wei Shanting
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 283
  • [26] Remanufacturing and e-Waste Management: An Environmental Perspective
    Wang, Lan
    Rajapakshe, Tharanga
    Vakharia, Asoo J.
    PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, 2024, 33 (12) : 2311 - 2327
  • [27] Global perspectives on e-waste
    Widmer, R
    Oswald-Krapf, H
    Sinha-Khetriwal, D
    Schnellmann, M
    Böni, H
    ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 2005, 25 (05) : 436 - 458
  • [28] Original Equipment Manufacturers' Participation in Take-Back Initiatives in Brazil An Analysis of Engagement Levels and Obstacles
    Frota Neto, Joao Quariguasi
    Van Wassenhove, Luk N.
    JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY, 2013, 17 (02) : 238 - 248
  • [29] Optimal Consumer Electronics Product Take-Back Time with Consideration of Consumer Value
    Fang, Yi-Tse
    Rau, Hsin
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2017, 9 (03):
  • [30] Towards Holistic Governance of China's E-Waste Recycling: Evolution of Networked Policies
    Yang, Xiuli
    Miao, Xin
    Wu, Jinli
    Duan, Ziwei
    Yang, Rui
    Tang, Yanhong
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2020, 17 (20) : 1 - 21