Incentives are needed to encourage more producers to invest in eco-friendly designs while legislation will help curb egregious waste of resources.
THE recent implementation of the mandatory extended producer responsibility (EPR) project is one of the major strategies highlighted in the Malaysian Plastics Conservation Framework 2021-2030 as part of the country's endeavour to find a solution to post-consumer wastes such as plastics.
In recognising the importance of effective waste management strategies, EPR emerges as a practical solution – encouraging producers to take responsibility for the entire lifecycle of their products.
It was reported that fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies in the country have been placed as among the leaders for environmental sustainability agenda in Malaysia.
There needs to be a multi-sectoral approach to EPR which is why the establishment of the Malaysian Recycling Alliance (Marea) in January 2021 is in line with the Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change Ministry’s (NRECC) goal to achieve a recycling rate of 25% of post-consumer plastic packaging by 2025.
By shifting the onus of waste management onto producers, EPR promotes a circular economy, where resources are conserved, waste is minimised and environmental impacts are reduced.
Understanding EPR
EPR is a policy approach that holds producers accountable for the environmental impacts of their products throughout their entire lifecycle, including disposal and recycling.
Under EPR, producers are responsible for the design, production and end-of-life management of their products.
This approach aims to internalise the costs of waste management – incentivising producers to adopt sustainable practices, reduce waste generation and promote recycling and resource efficiency.
One example of EPR in the food and beverage (F&B) industry is the development of environmentally safe straws made from metal, wood, rice, or even paper.
By incorporating environmental considerations into product design like “design for disassembly”, EPR encourages producers to use eco-friendly materials and implement sustainable production methods.
KPMG Sustainability Advisory Services head Phang Oy Cheng has reportedly described the EPR as “being responsible not only for the quality of the product, but what happens after. How it is disposed of, how it is recycled, and what happens to it.”
In a talk organised by Futurise, she pointed out that voluntary EPR does not work in Malaysia.
She said that that has been attempted time and time again, for example with the aluminium recycling programmes back in the 1990s, and more recently wastes sorting programmes.
She stressed on the need for legislation and how we should also focus on food waste and other areas, and not just plastics with the EPR framework.
Legislative encouragement
To achieve successful implementation of EPR in Malaysia, governments and municipalities need to develop robust legislation that mandates EPR implementation across various sectors.
The legislation should clearly define the responsibilities of producers, establish recycling targets, and outline penalties for non-compliance. It should also encourage collaboration among government agencies, industry players, and stakeholders.
In WWF-Malaysia’s EPR Policy Review Booklet published in 2021, the review examined existing policies and laws related to EPR for packaging in Malaysia and other countries, highlighted potential legal barriers to implementation of EPR in Malaysia, and provided policy recommendations for EPR schemes for packaging waste in Malaysia.
The review also listed gaps in our current segregation, collection and recycling of municipal solid waste (MSW) and plastic including:
> Unstandardised waste collection system due to the different jurisdictions, legal mechanisms for MSW management in Malaysia.
> Lack of enforcement and awareness of waste segregation or waste separation at source.
> Inefficient environmental laws in plastic waste management.
> Insufficient recycling facilities and infrastructure.
> Lifestyle considerations like high single-use packaging use for take-away and food delivery.
> Absence of market and technology for collection and recycling of low-value recyclables.
> Absence of producer responsibility in waste management.
> Absence of subsidies, incentives or rewards for producers to apply ecodesigns in products and recycling initiatives such as take-back programmes.
Legislation will play a key part in spurring investment and divestment into eco-design and product innovation on the producer end.
For instance, IPC Shopping Centre has been running its Recycling and Buy-Back Centre (RBBC) since 2009. The centre started with six recyclable categories – cardboard, newspaper, paper, plastics, metal, and aluminium. It has since upgraded to a digitalised version to accept a wider variety of recyclables such as drink cartons, polystyrene and textiles.
Legislation also signals to investors to explore new markets like recycling infrastructure and channel funds to develop a well-established collection and recycling infrastructure to support EPR objectives.
This includes establishing convenient collection centres, promoting separate waste streams, and investing in recycling facilities and technologies to encourage the establishment of material recovery facilities to maximise resource recovery.
As Malaysia embraces the vision of a circular economy, implementing some form of framework on EPR will be crucial. Legislation can foster collaboration, promote eco-design, drive investment in the appropriate infrastructure so we can move towards a low carbon, circular economy sooner rather than later.
