Extended producer responsibility
mandates are often carried out by collective non-profit Producer Responsibility
Organizations (PROs) that discharge individual brand owner
responsibilities. The makeup of the PRO
governing board can determine the extent to which an EPR program serves broader
commercial interests and achieves outcomes in the public interest.
PRO governing boards should
include multi-stakeholder representation. This provides for more robust
discussion around the board table, which is where the real decisions are made.
It broadens the discussion to include important issues like the environment, in
which producers have little expertise or often even interest. Purely producer
PROs tend to focus on compliance and economic efficiency unless there is a broader
conscience on the board. This conscience can be provided by other stakeholders.
At the same time, the list of
stakeholders is likely best to not include those directly benefitting financially
from the legislation, such as the recyclers/ haulers who are directly paid by
the organization. This is just good board governance not to have these
stakeholders at the table. However, their input is still desirable, so this is
where an advisory group can come in. That way their input is still incorporated
but not in a potentially conflicted way.
However, advisory groups can end
up being a token gesture if there are no stakeholders on the governing board
other than producers. There is no mechanism that requires the governing board
to take the advisory board’s input into consideration.
Producers can be threatened by
the notion of other stakeholders on their board. But, there are examples of
multi-stakeholder boards that operate effectively. I think the best model is
one where no single group has a majority vote, requiring more consensus
building around the table. However, it may be necessary to compromise by giving
producers a majority vote. This may provide them with the feeling of control
they want, while still bringing broader opinions and expertise to the table.
An example of a multi-stakeholder
stewardship board with broad representation is the
Alberta Recycling Management Authority.
This board manages the tire, electronics and paint stewardship programs in
Alberta.
Board
representation includes one member from each of the tire, electronics and
paint industries, as well as urban and rural municipalities, professional
engineers association, environmental services association, Recycling Council of
Alberta, Alberta Environmental Network, and public at large. In addition, there
are three industry councils to address issues specific to tires, electronics or
paint, and present recommendations to the Board.
An example of an
industry-oriented board that incorporates some external stakeholder
representation is the
BC
Used Oil Management Association. Its board is comprised of seven industry
members from manufacturers, brand owners and retailers, as well as one
municipal member and one from the public-at-large. The other used oil
management boards across the country have similar board make-up.
It is somewhat intuitive that
broader stakeholder representation will raise a wider range of issues at the
board table, as well as bring an increased range of skills and expertise to the
decision-making process. Getting the
right mix on the governing board is an important consideration in enabling
legislation or regulations.
Farmer Guide - CleanFARMS, established in 2010, took over the pesticide container
program and has now expanded it to include liquid fertilizers. It is now
extending its reach to establish permanent programs for a variety of products
such as grain storage bags, bale/silage wrap, twine and netting. To assist
farmers in Ontario, CleanFARMS, with funding from the Ontario Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, produced a ‘GUIDE
TO RECYCLING NON-NUTRIENT AGRICULTURAL WASTE IN ONTARIO’. This guide offers a one-stop reference to
permanent programs available to Ontario farmers.
