Skip to main content.

Case studies of New Zealand product stewardship schemes

Background

As part of the process to develop product stewardship policy, in 2006 the Ministry for the Environment commissioned the following five case studies of existing or planned product stewardship schemes in New Zealand.

  • TyreTrack (tracking of end-of-life tyres)
  • AgRecovery (takeback of used farm chemical containers)
  • Fisher & Paykel and Electrolux (takeback of end-of-life whiteware)
  • Resene Paintwise (takeback of end-of-life paint and packaging)
  • Vodafone and Telecom (takeback of end-of-life cell phones)

The Ministry chose these schemes because they represent a range of situations, such as structure of the sector, nature of the product, whether schemes were industry-wide or based on just one company, scope of the schemes and stakeholders involved.

We asked stakeholders involved in each of these schemes to work with a consultant to present their view of how the schemes were performing and what opportunities they saw for improving them.

The purpose was to see what the impact a product stewardship policy could have on the schemes – where it could help and how it had to be designed to avoid interfering in areas where it wasn’t needed. The case studies aimed to get an idea of how such a policy could perform at a detailed, “shop-floor” level and give an indication of what the costs were of a scheme and how they were distributed.

These case studies were not designed to work out how to regulate a particular scheme or product and they generated a mixture of responses to this issue. The conclusion of some of the case studies was that regulatory assistance was not needed, in others it was concluded that assistance was necessary.

Nor should the findings from each case study be interpreted as government policy for that particular product. Any potential assessment by the Government as to whether intervention is required for a product will consider a broad range of information.

Results

The case studies provided valuable information which is now being used to help further inform product stewardship policy.

Part of the value was from the different situations and solutions discussed in each – there is real benefit to reading these studies as a set to get an overall idea of product stewardship in New Zealand.

The case studies showed that New Zealand businesses have used a huge range of approaches to assist or provide for sustainable disposal of their products. As well as achieving environmental benefits, they see this stewardship providing added value to their customers or as a method to win over competitors’ customers.

Encouragingly, participants in all cases were looking towards expanding their schemes – providing greater coverage, increasing the proportion recovered or extending the scope of the scheme. In some cases, they looked to government assistance to achieve this, either through non-regulatory measures (such as consumer education, disseminating best-practice information or assisting schemes with existing regulations) or regulatory measures (such as material bans, landfill bans, advanced disposal fees or landfill charges).

A limitation discussed was the difficulty in obtaining reliable data. There was often only sparse information concerning the total amount of product being sold, how much was being disposed of and where to, what the impact of disposal was on the environment and what were the monetary benefits and costs of the schemes.

Below are links to the five case studies. Please note that these are the views of the stakeholders and consultants involved and do not necessarily represent those of the entire sector or the Government. 

During the same period, the Ministry co-funded a report, e-Waste in New Zealand: taking responsibility for end-of-life computers and TVs, written by the Computer Access New Zealand (CANZ) Trust. The report investigated the potential for a takeback scheme for computers and televisions.

For more information on these case studies please contact product.stewardship@mfe.govt.nz

Last updated: 9 February 2007