legal and policy instruments and zero waste: reflections on the past 30 years david mcrobert zero...
TRANSCRIPT
Legal and Policy Instruments and Zero Waste: Legal and Policy Instruments and Zero Waste: Reflections on the Past 30 yearsReflections on the Past 30 years
David McRobert
Zero Waste Conference, Lakehead University
Orillia, Ontario
August 11, 2014
““Garbage” LawyerGarbage” Lawyer Worked for 16 years at the Environmental
Commissioner of Ontario Part-time professor at FES, York, 1994-2009 Became fascinated with waste working as a bus boy
in 1975 Worked as waste and climate change campaigner at
Pollution Probe, 1990-91 Strong connections between two areas; e.g. climate
change crisis shows atmosphere has become the great garbage dump in the sky
At MOE worked on 3Rs regs. and enabling law
OverviewOverview
Object of the study and MethodPolicy ContextOntario Blue Box DealPerformance of the BB System and
various consequencesHow to improve the situationSummary
Object of the studyObject of the studyThe object of the study is to analyse
changes in public policy related to waste diversion in the past 25 years.
To conserve time the focus of this presentation will be on Ontario examples
What is law reform about?What is law reform about?Legal change is not the same as social
change; we must change hearts and minds as well as laws otherwise the reforms do not take hold.
This is hard work!Similarly, good laws start with good
meta-policies that are coherent and durable- must be integrated
What are metapolicies??What are metapolicies??A metapolicy - otherwise known as a
‘policy on policies’ – provides a framework that sets out to define the range of compliance documents (e.g. regulations, policies, procedures, protocols) and establish a classification system which groups them (e.g. financial, information technology).
More on metapoliciesMore on metapoliciesIn addition, it identifies and describes
the processes by which the compliance documents are developed, reviewed and made available to stakeholders.
Metapolicy – Overarching Policies– Sub-policies; Laws; Regs; Guidelines;
project approvals
Metapolicies underpin lawsMetapolicies underpin lawsValues and long term sustainability
goals must inform the core meta-policies underpinning laws
Take a specific challenge e.g. e-waste, wet waste, and work on Meta-policy
Promoting positive law reformPromoting positive law reformHow can we promote positive law
reform? (hint: with good meta-policies)In short, good process plus good
content, leads to positive law reformExamples; Pay Equity, Gay Rights, etc.Waste Reduction Act will likely become
law in Ontario but process was poor and result seems highly questionable
What is the current metapolicy?What is the current metapolicy?Post-industrial capitalism,
supercharged by Developing Nation (China, India, etc.) desire to sell us plastic junk
Waste generation assumed and facilitated by relatively cheap energy
Goods shipped hither and yon, contributing to climate change
Current metapolicyCurrent metapolicyRepair of products, clothing, etc.
discouraged by manufacturers and retailers such as Walmart, Target and Costco
E.g. Optical retailers at Loblaw’s Superstores “unable” (according to management) to obtain replacement arms for damaged eyeglasses after 18-24 months
Guilt reliefGuilt reliefNorth Americans ship many bicycles in
disrepair to Cuba instead of refurbishing them here. In Sweden and other European nations, bikes now are being repaired
Similarly we ship eyeglassesUndermines development of local
capacity and true sustainability
Consequences (1)Consequences (1)Skills in repair businesses lostPossibility of strengthening local
economies underminedScrap metal and plastic dealers are
thriving in small communitiesIn Peterborough, hoards of men
collecting welfare drive around in trucks scooping up marketable wastes
Consequences (2)Consequences (2)Waste generation, energy consumption
pollution, CO2, etc. are increasingMost consumers don’t understand it is
in their best interests to buy durable and repairable products. Some do; hence the popularity of well built cars in the past two decades
Consumers and government are failing to deliver vital signals to market
But Query …But Query …Does Walmart or big business really
care? Selling disposable junk is their business model
Similalrly local government waste management and recycling programs have enabled the continued distribution of throwaway products because of lack of EPR laws by senior levels of government
Zero waste is a metapolicyZero waste is a metapolicy
Zero waste is a meta-policy, a path, a direction, a target; it’s a process, a way of thinking, a vision
See Paul Connett’s excellent 2013 book, The Zero Waste Solution
It’s Not Garbage CoalitionIt’s Not Garbage CoalitionBased out of Pollution Probe 1988-1992
and its members included CELA, Greenpeace, TEA, etc.
Goal was zero waste for disposal Received tens of thousands in
participant funding for IWA process in 1993-1994.
Waste Reduction in OntarioWaste Reduction in OntarioSee David McRobert et al., Five Years
of Failure on Waste Reduction in Ontario (August 1990); Published by Pollution Probe
Led in part to election of NDP government, banning of incineration and long distance export of garbage in 1991
Waste Reduction in OntarioWaste Reduction in OntarioImpetus for establishment of the WRO
at MOE (1991-1994)Impetus for quick enactment of the
Waste Management Act (1992), formation of the Interim Waste Authority in 1991 and the passage of the 3Rs regs in March 1994
Also: funding to RCO for 3Rs education and social marketing (cut in 1995)
Design for SustainabilityDesign for SustainabilityDesign for Sustainability: Products should be made for a
prolonged life and capable of easy disassembly and repair
Packaging should be designed for reuse; Too many products are designed to be thrown away.
Redesigning and managing products to be repairable
Getting to Design for DisassemblyGetting to Design for DisassemblyRedesign requires collective
responsibility by:individualscommunitiesindustriesprofessionalspoliticians
How do we get to Zero Waste?How do we get to Zero Waste?Decision makers need to work with the
public to find solutionsRecommending better industrial
designs to industry on packaging and products
Getting to zeroGetting to zeroBest practices for waste reduction and
avoidance strategies from around the world – decision makers and businesses
Redesign incorporated into the 3 R’s (fourth R)
1992 reforms to Ontario EPA1992 reforms to Ontario EPAIn 1992 while working at the WRO of
MOE I helped to draft provisions (contained in the Waste Mgt Act, 1992) that amended the EPA that allowed MOE to ban or regulate products that “posed waste management problems”
We intended to target disposable diapers, tetrapaks (and other multimaterial packaging)
Case Study Notes – Product Stewardship Issues Related to Vacuum Cleaner and Small Appliance Repair in the 2010s By David McRobert and Meghan Robinson
Products and services that pose waste Products and services that pose waste problems circa 2014problems circa 2014
Obvious culprits remain:Disposable diapers, razors, cameras,
smart phones and other e-waste, etc.Less obvious: advertising industry,
politicians, Cdn. Senators, Toronto Maple Laughs, etc
Case Study 1 – Vacuum CleanersCase Study 1 – Vacuum CleanersSee separate draft hand outCase Study Notes – Product
Stewardship Issues Related to Vacuum Cleaner and Small Appliance Repair in the 2010s
By David McRobert and Meghan Robinson, August 8, 2014
Case Study Notes – Product Stewardship Issues Related to Vacuum Cleaner and Small Appliance Repair in the 2010s By David McRobert and Meghan Robinson
Case Study 2: the BB SystemCase Study 2: the BB SystemSee David McRobert, My Municipal
Recycling System Made me Fat and Sick (June 2012, available on Amazon)
See also blog posts for Solid Waste and Recycling Magazine
See www.davidmcrobert.ca
Method and MethodologyMethod and Methodology
Nothing as practical as a good theory.
The theoretical framework I use is ecological history, the approach I developed in 1983 for my Master’s work at the Faculty of Environmental Studies for his MES degree (1984). The analytical method is informed by the work of economic historians such as Harold Innis and the Annales school (Braudel).
Approach to analysisApproach to analysisTo locate environmental and related
waste policy in the context of social, technological and economic changes that have taken place in the past century
Focus on development of the Blue Box system (BBS) in Ontario
Examine whether there was evidence of regulatory capture of Ontario MOE
Previous workPrevious work Ontario's Blue Box System: A Case Study of
Government's Role in the Technological Change Process, 1970-1991
Extracted from: David McRobert, Labour Relations, Technological Change and Sustainability: Resolving the Structural Issues. Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, October 1994.http://www.lacieg2s.ca/public/law/bluebox.htm
Used Materials Economy, pre 1900Used Materials Economy, pre 1900Prior to 1900s, trash or MSW was not
the norm in citiesWith goods and money scarce,
everything possible was recycled or reused.
See S. Strasser, Waste and Want (1999)Deposits on used containers became
the norm because they were perceived as so valuable
Industrial ChangeIndustrial Change For decades, energy and raw materials have
been perceived by North Americans as cheap, labour as expensive
In part this was because of large government subsidies to resource extraction industries, especially to oil and gas, mining and forestry
Some marxist critics such as Drache, Glasbeek and Panitch have argued this was a deliberate economic policy in some developed nations to reduce bargaining power of labour unions
Subsidies and Resource IndustriesSubsidies and Resource Industries Subsidies to resource industries were: 1. were intended to maintain legitimacy of NA
urban industrial growth model; 2. helped facilitate tech change in
workplaces because management has legal control of technology, use of energy, etc; and
3. Provided a type of industrial policy because Canada had developed on the Staples model (per Innis), despite calls for value added production
Case Study: Small Appliance RepairCase Study: Small Appliance RepairVacuum cleaner repair
Case Study: the BB SystemCase Study: the BB System
Policy Context for Blue BoxPolicy Context for Blue Box
In 1962 the inexorable march from refillable soft drink (SD) containers to non-refillables begins – the first steel pop can sent to Korea by US military
Policy Context (2)Policy Context (2) Industry sought to redesign its
manufacturing processes and distribution networks to reduce labour costs by increasing reliance on resources, increasing packaging waste (fewer bulk goods are sold, fewer meat butchers)
Industry, govts and some ENGOs say recycling is answer to packaging waste
But economic “barriers” were apparent in the 1970s; see Probe’s 1984 report called Breaking the Barriers to recycling
Policy Context (3)Policy Context (3) Trend toward disposable products after WW
II to fuel economic growth and promote consumer convenience
Desire to use storage space in garage for “stuff” rather than used bottles
SD industry wanted "packaging freedom": freedom to use cheaper packages for their products, freedom to concentrate ownership, challenge unions, get rid of deposits
Ontario Blue Box Deal, 1985Ontario Blue Box Deal, 1985 ENGOs accept the concept of packaging
freedom and reliance on disposable plastic bottles and aluminum cans in return for greater SD industry support for recycling.
using more valuable materials like aluminum to subsidize curbside recycling seemed like a way to break the cost barriers that had been encountered since removing subsidies to raw materials and energy seemed unlikely.
Relax SD refills to 40 percentRelax SD refills to 40 percent participants involved in the multi-stakeholder
consultation agreed to relax the refillable quota to 40 percent, that is, down from 75 percent (1978), if the SD industry contributed $1 million to expand the Blue Box system (BBS). Eventually increased to $20 million.
Meanwhile refillables disappeared as SD companies and retailers reduced prices for non-refillables
Performance – has BBS worked?Performance – has BBS worked?In many respects, yes, from an
environmental perspectiveBlue Box made mandatory for Ontario
municipalities (above 5000) in 1994Thunder Bay in NW Ontario resisted,
saying it wanted its bottling plants backMust look at the Social, Economic, and
Labour implications in context of Environmental Performance
Economic ImpactsEconomic ImpactsThe BBS resulted in the loss of
thousands of jobs in the refillable soft drink network (e.g. Pop Shoppe) that dominated most NA jurisdictions prior to the late 1960s.
Many unionized local jobs in smaller communities were lost as local bottlers were closed; negative in terms of community economic development
Economic Impacts (2)Economic Impacts (2) In 1985 SD industry estimated to be saving
$85 million/year, probably higher now the SD industry was able to reduce the price
of soft drinks Retailers able to sell more product;
eliminated jobs associated with pop bottle returns
SD industry obtained approx. $10 million in tax breaks from feds investing in enviro tech between 1985 and 1991
Economic Impacts (3)Economic Impacts (3) Jobs also were created by municipalities and
industry to promote recycling and 3Rs but most of these would have been created anyway if a coherent 3Rs framework had been developed (e.g. to conserve landfill space, reduce incineration)
Related to NIMBY protests; govts forced to commit to better 3Rs programs
Other structural changesOther structural changesCoke and Pepsi developed massive
centralized distribution and marketing infrastructure, perfectly suited to selling bottled water when that became a high demand product in the 1990s
Unredeemed SD deposits unavailable for funding system, unlike other provinces such as Quebec where they are clawed back by province
Environmental PerformanceEnvironmental Performance Overall BBS increased paper, metal and
glass recycling Rates vary considerably all over Canada Awareness about environmental benefits has
grown significantly, partly because of the emphasis put on educating children who then “educate” (read guilt?) adults
CSNY lyric - “teach your parents well”
Capturing the embodied energyCapturing the embodied energy How do we best recapture the embodied
energy and material value in used containers?
Energy equivalent of half a gallon of gasoline used to make an aluminum SD can from raw materials (bauxite)
Deposits are a proven economic instrument, recapturing between 70% and 98% depending on amount, system architecture, etc (5 cents vs 40)
Hierarchy of “Recycling”
Container is Returned and Refilled
Clean Segregated Material is Re-made into a New Container
Material Recovered in Blue BoxRe-processed and “down-cycled”
Container is Lost toLandfill or Burned
LCBO Glass Recycling Pre 2007(excluding refillable beer with deposits)
Refilled
Re-made
Recovered & “down-cycled”
Lost to the Landfill
Zero
20%
< 48%
32% +
PET Recycling in BB
Refilled
Re-made*
Recovered & “down-cycled”
Lost to the Landfill
Zero
55%
45%
Zero
Aluminum Can Recycling
Refilled
Re-made
Recovered & “down-cycled”
Lost to the Landfill
Zero
Zero
55%?
45-50%
Aseptic Carton Recycling
Refilled*
Re-made*
Recovered & “down-cycled”
Lost to the Landfill
Zero
13% - 25%
75%+
Zero
Energy and SD DistributionEnergy and SD DistributionCentralized production means that SD
industry ships product much farther to its markets
E.g. a can of pop which is 98% water is shipped to northern Ontario, whereas previously SDs was bottled and distributed locally, conserving energy
Threshold distance for equivalent LCA performance: approx. 300 kms
Health Consequences Health Consequences Cheap prices allowed SD companies to
capture a larger share of the stomachs of Canadian consumers, encouraging a shift from milk and juice consumption to much cheaper soft drink products.
adults and children began to consume cheap soft drinks on a daily basis (sometimes many cans or bottles in a single day).
Health Consequences (2)Health Consequences (2)Cheap soft drinks have contributed
significantly to rising obesity levels in North America
But cheap SDs only were one factor in rising obesity levels – rise of gaming, internet, etc also very important
prompted the current Ontario government to establish a Ministry of Health Promotion in 2004
Social ConsequencesSocial Consequences Women always have been more deeply
involved than men in the domestic economy and sorting repairables and reuseables (see Strasser, 1999)
Empirical evidence is not available but the success of Blue Box and Green Bin programs now also rests largely on women who undertake more sorting and washing of recyclables which benefits municipalities and the private sector purchasers of recycled materials
Social Consequences (2)Social Consequences (2) BBS Cost structure meant that municipalities
were forced to divert from money from social services such as day care, etc. to pay for programs
Some anecdotal evidence men also shifted their behaviour in the past twenty five years; and no longer feel the need to help carry heavier glass bottles home from the grocery store, hence they no longer shop as much
Consequences for workersConsequences for workers Collecting solid waste and recyclables at
curbside and processing them in material recovery facilities (MRFs) is dangerous work
In cities car drivers can be impatient near waste service trucks, and workers are injured in collisions
musculoskeletal injuries (MSIs) from repetitive motions such as sorting and lifting, slipping on ice, etc are frequent
Consequences for workers (2)Consequences for workers (2)injuries from broken glass and other
sharp materialsWorkers are killed in machineryInjury rates lead to pressure for
privatization of garbage and waste to reduce OHS and Worker Comp claims
In contrast, injury rates at the Beer Stores tend to be much lower because bottles are sorted in a different manner
On OHS issues, seeOn OHS issues, see Occupational Health and Safety in Ontario's
3Rs Sector: Emerging Issues and An Overview of the Workplace Health and Safety Agency, Presentation to the 15th Annual Conference of the Recycling Council of Ontario, Hamilton, Ontario, October 5-7, 1994, M. Levitsky, D. McRobert et al
http://www.lacieg2s.ca/public/law/3r-wkplc-safety.htm
Political consequencesPolitical consequences In Ontario, NDP were unable (and unwilling)
to reverse the deal struck by the Liberals in 1985 (political commitment in 1990 election)
Despite pressure for refillable PET to conserve energy, SD industry insists it’s stuck with its current technological model
other options for increasing producer responsibility, despite success in Europe, have been resisted by industry
MOE policy capacity was reduced by Harris govt and remains very weak
Political Consequences (2)Political Consequences (2)Free trade puts pressure on Ontario
beer industry – cheap US beer in cans to be collected in BBS
In 1991-1992, 5-6000 jobs threatenedBeer Can Tax is implemented in
response – refillables policy and environmental protection used to protect jobs and $2 billion in revenues
Aluminum companies challenge tax
Political consequences (3)Political consequences (3) Legislative framework contained in the WDA,
the regulations, approved programs all shaped by BBS
Flaws highlighted last summer with haz waste eco tax which had to be rescinded by Ont. govt
WDO a very small and politically weak organization dealing with large powerful groups
Large complex network of consultants and lobbyists has developed to support industry
Political consequences (4)Political consequences (4)LCBO bottles used the Blue Box
system until 2007 but the municipalities didn’t want the containers in there
Pressure to move containers to deposit return and depots/The Beer Store
New program a success - supports clean cullet for remaking bottles and other value added products – also gets more folks back to Beer Store
How do we improve the situation?How do we improve the situation? Direct evidence of regulatory capture is hard
to identify but the regulatory process was seriously flawed re: policy options
Technology and environmental assessment is required before new technologies such as the BBS are implemented
For used containers look at half-back deposits like New Brunswick or Beer Can Tax in Ontario to incent consumers to use refillables
How do we improve situation? (2)How do we improve situation? (2)
Taxes on raw materials (aka “virgin materials”)
Increase cost of energyProducer responsibility for waste, as
implemented in EuropeLess focus on “end of pipe” solutions
such as the Blue Box, more on waste reduction and changing behaviour to reduce consumption
How do we improve situation? 3)How do we improve situation? 3)
A Deposit – Return system for all containers – using depots or the Beer Stores– Job creation for youth or disabled peoples
at depots–makes refilling glass or PET possible– will increase capture of PET, aseptic
cartons and aluminum for recycling
In Summary …In Summary …The present BBS does not incent
reduction or reuse or the refilling of containers
D/R would improve the environmental performance and outcomes
BBS has helped promote rising obesity levels
The History - continuedThe History - continued 1997 City of Toronto files an EBR review and
passes a by-law requiring deposits (by-law neutralized by MMAH regulation)
1998 LCBO provides $4 million in Blue Box funding
1999 ECO AR discusses deposit-return 2002 LCBO ups contribution to $5 million 2005 Beverage Alcohol System Review Panel
recommends: keep beer D/R, do independent study of the life cycle of LCBO containers to determine best system
Consequences of Policy ChoicesConsequences of Policy ChoicesImpacts
Coke and Pepsi developed massive centralized distribution and marketing infrastructure, perfectly suited to selling bottled water
The Issue: LCBO ContainersThe Issue: LCBO Containers
Inextricably interwoven with the soft drink container issue
Issue: How do we best recapture the embodied energy and material value in these containers?
We presently use the Blue Box but it’s not working well and the municipalities don’t want the containers in there
The Issue: LCBO ContainersThe Issue: LCBO Containers
Inextricably interwoven with the soft drink container issue
How do we best recapture the embodied energy and material value in these containers?
We presently use the Blue Box but it’s not working well and the municipalities don’t want the containers in there
How would we pay for D/R?How would we pay for D/R?
Unredeemed depositsEnvironmental levy - $65 million
collected by MOF to “encourage use of refillable containers”
$5 million LCBO BB contribution
How do we improve the situation?How do we improve the situation?
Prescribe the LCBO under the EBR so its decisions would be subject to public review and comment
the public would be able to file ‘Request for Review’ applications re their policy decisions as they impact the environment
Object of the studyObject of the studyThe object of the study is to analyse
changes in public policy related to waste diversion in the past 25 years.
focus will be on Canadian examples also will discuss international
developments on producer responsibility, waste reduction and re-use.
The HistoryThe History 1962 the inexorable march from refillable soft
drink containers to non-refillables begins – the first pop can!
1991 the MCCR tries to make the LCBO introduce refillables – fails
1994 Blue Box made mandatory 1997 ECO recommends MCCR study refillable
PET for LCBO containers 1997 municipalities begin calling for deposits
on LCBO containers