Implementing EPR as a Tool for Addressing Environmental Issues in Vietnam

Thi Yen Anh Tran; Kinh Thi Kieu; Sunil Herat; Prasad Kaparaju

doi:10.21625/essd.v8i2.1041

Thi Yen Anh Tran , Kinh Thi Kieu , Sunil Herat , Prasad Kaparaju

https://doi.org/10.21625/essd.v8i2.1041

Issue
Vol. 8 Issue 2 (2023): Urban Planning and Sustainability: Navigating Environmental Challenges

Submitted
October 29, 2023

Accepted
November 26, 2023

Published
December 31, 2023

Keywords:

Extended producer responsibility (EPR), Vietnamese regulations, waste management, sustainable development

PDF XML

Abstract

The Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme has emerged as a critical environmental policy instrument around the world, holding great promise for addressing significant environmental challenges in Vietnam, a country undergoing fast economic expansion and industrialization. This literature review proceeds to describe Vietnam’s EPR program, focusing on its regulations and implementation procedures. By highlighting several obstacles and directions in Vietnam, this review emphasizes the importance of aligning EPR strategies with the country's socio-economic context to achieve sustainable management of waste and a circular economy.

Full text article

Generated from XML file

References

Abhishek Gaur, S. K. G., Sangeeta Chaudhary. (2022). Circular system of resource recovery and reverse logistics approach: key to zero waste and zero landfill. In Advanced Organic Waste Management

Sustainable Practices and Approaches. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-85792-5.00008-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-85792-5.00008-3

ADB. (2022). Agriculture, Natural Resources and Rural Development Sector Assessment, Strategy and Road Map - Viet Nam 2021–2025. https://www.adb.org/documents/viet-nam-2021-2025-agriculture-sector-assessment-strategy-road-map

Atasu, A., & Subramanian, R. (2012). Extended Producer Responsibility for E-Waste: Individual or Collective Producer Responsibility? Production and Operations Management, 21(6), 1042-1059. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2012.01327.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2012.01327.x

Barbara Siuta-Tokarska, A. T., Krzysztof Hornicki. (2022). The Concept of Extended Producer Responsibility in the Field of Packaging Industry and the Energy Sector in the Light of the Circular Economy—The Example of Poland. Energies. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/en15239060 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/en15239060

Bening Mayanti, P. H. (2023). Circular economy through waste reverse logistics under extended producer responsibility in Finland. Waste Management & Research. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X231168801 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X231168801

Cai, Y.-J., & Choi, T.-M. (2021). Extended Producer Responsibility: A Systematic Review and Innovative Proposals for Improving Sustainability. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 68(1), 272-288. https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2019.2914341 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2914341

Campbell‐Johnston, K., de Munck, M., Vermeulen, W. J. V., & Backes, C. (2021). Future perspectives on the role of extended producer responsibility within a circular economy: A Delphi study using the case of the Netherlands. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(8), 4054-4067. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2856 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2856

Căpriță, D. (2019). Extended producer responsibility - The answer to implementing Circular Economy Third International Scientific Conference on Economics and Management-EMAN 2019: How to Cope with Disrupted Times, DOI: https://doi.org/10.31410/EMAN.2019.689

Chang, X., Wu, J., Li, T., & Fan, T.-J. (2019). The joint tax-subsidy mechanism incorporating extended producer responsibility in a manufacturing-recycling system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 210, 821-836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.300 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.300

Chu, T. T. H. (2018). Environmental pollution in Vietnam: Challenges in management and protection. Journal of Vietnamese Environment, 9(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.13141/jve.vol9.no1.pp1-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.13141/jve.vol9.no1.pp1-3

Duc Quang Nguyen, V. H. H., Trung Hai Huynh. (2016). Impact assessment of the Extended Production

Responsibility implementation in Vietnam: a study on electronic waste management. Journal of Science and Technology, 42-48.

EUROPEN. Factsheet Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) forused Packaging. https://www.europen-packaging.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/EUROPEN-factsheet-on-EPR-for-used-packaging.pdf

Forslind, K. (2005). Implementing extended producer responsibility: the case of Sweden's car scrapping scheme. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(6), 619-629. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2003.12.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2003.12.017

Frithjof Laubinger, A. B., Maarten Dubois, Peter Börkey. (2021). Modulated fees for extended producer responsibility schemes. https://one.oecd.org/document/ENV/WKP(2021)16/En/pdf#:~:text=EPR%20fee%20modulation%20is%20the,of%2Dlife%20costs%20by%20firms.

Gokce Esenduran, A. A., Luk Van Wassenhove. (2002). Valuable E-Waste: Implications for Extended Producer Responsibility. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2694819 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2694819

Gottberg, A., Morris, J., Pollard, S., Mark-Herbert, C., & Cook, M. (2006). Producer responsibility, waste minimisation and the WEEE Directive: case studies in eco-design from the European lighting sector. Sci Total Environ, 359(1-3), 38-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.07.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.07.001

Gui, L. (2020). Recycling Infrastructure Development under Extended Producer Responsibility in Developing Economies. Production and Operations Management, 29(8), 1858-1877. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13202 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13202

Gupt, Y., & Sahay, S. (2015). Review of extended producer responsibility: A case study approach. Waste Manag Res, 33(7), 595-611. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X15592275 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X15592275

Hoang, N. H., Ishigaki, T., Kubota, R., Tong, T. K., Nguyen, T. T., Nguyen, H. G., Yamada, M., & Kawamoto, K. (2021). Financial and economic evaluation of construction and demolition waste recycling in Hanoi, Vietnam. Waste Manag, 131, 294-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.06.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.06.014

Hoang, T. C., Black, M. C., Knuteson, S. L., & Roberts, A. P. (2019). Environmental Pollution, Management, and Sustainable Development: Strategies for Vietnam and Other Developing Countries. Environ Manage, 63(4), 433-436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01144-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01144-z

Hoi, H. T. (2020). Current Situation of Water pollution in Vietnam and Some Recommendations. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/442/1/012014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/442/1/012014

Hosoda, E. (2004). Evaluation of EPR programmes in Japan. In Economic aspects of extended producer responsibility (pp. 151). https://doi-org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/10.1787/9789264105270-en

Huang, X., Atasu, A., & Toktay, L. B. (2019). Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products. Management Science, 65(6), 2573-2590. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3072 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3072

Huynh Trung Hai, H. V. H., Nguyen Duc Quang. (2017). An overview of electronic waste recycling in Vietnam. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management volume(19), 536–544. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-015-0448-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-015-0448-x

I. A. Ajania, I. O. K. (2019). Implementation of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Policy in Nigeria: Towards Sustainable Business Practice. Nigerian Journal of Environment and Health 44-56.

Işıl Alev, V. V. A., Atalay Atasu. (2019). Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 22. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2018.0742 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2018.0742

Jana Brinkmann, T. V., Wassim Chaabane, Stephan Löhle (2022). Assessing the role and impact of EPR in the prevention of marine Plastic Packaging Litter. https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/giz2022-en-epr-plastic-packaging-litter.pdf

Johannes, H. P., Kojima, M., Iwasaki, F., & Edita, E. P. (2021). Applying the extended producer responsibility towards plastic waste in Asian developing countries for reducing marine plastic debris. Waste Manag Res, 39(5), 690-702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X211013412 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X211013412

Jones, D. H. C. S. J. P. M. H. A. M. P. (2020). <2020 - Study to Support Preparation of the Commission's Guidance for EPR schemes.pdf>. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/08a892b7-9330-11ea-aac4-01aa75ed71a1/language-en

Julian Ahlers, M. H., Sophia Hibler, Jürgen Hannak. (2021). Analysis of Extended Producer Responsibility Schemes. Adelphi.

Kalimo, H., Lifset, R., Atasu, A., Van Rossem, C., & Van Wassenhove, L. (2015). What Roles for Which Stakeholders under Extended Producer Responsibility? Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 24(1), 40-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12087 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12087

Kawai, K., Osako, M., Matsui, S., & Dong, N. T. (2012). Identification of junk buyers' contribution to recycling of household waste in Hanoi, Vietnam, through a physical composition analysis. Waste Manag Res, 30(7), 681-688. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X12444895 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X12444895

Kim Thi Thuy Ngoc, N. T. T., Dang Thi Phuong Ha, Nguyen Duc Quang, Dinh Quang Hung. . (2023). Đánh giá tính khả thi và mức độ sẵn sàng tham gia Chương trình Trách nhiệm mở rộng của nhà sản xuất (EPR) tại Việt Nam. INSTITUTE OF STRATEGY AND POLICY ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT. https://isponre.gov.vn/vi/news/doi-thoai/danh-gia-tinh-kha-thi-va-muc-do-san-sang-tham-gia-chuong-trinh-trach-nhiem-mo-rong-cua-nha-san-xuat-epr-tai-viet-nam-2197.html

Kojima, M., Yoshida, A., & Sasaki, S. (2009). Difficulties in applying extended producer responsibility policies in developing countries: case studies in e-waste recycling in China and Thailand. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 11(3), 263-269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-009-0240-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-009-0240-x

Kolk, A., Walhain, S., & van de Wateringen, S. (2001). Environmental reporting by the Fortune Global 250: exploring the influence of nationality and sector. Business Strategy and the Environment, 10(1), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0836(200101/02)10:1<15::Aid-bse275>3.0.Co;2-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0836(200101/02)10:1<15::AID-BSE275>3.0.CO;2-Y

Lai Van Manh, N. N., G. Collins, Nguyen Trong Hanh, Tran Thanh Hung. (2021). The role of systemic investing in viet nam’s transition to a circular economy.

Le, N., Nguyen, T., & Zhu, D. (2018). Understanding the Stakeholders’ Involvement in Utilizing Municipal Solid Waste in Agriculture through Composting: A Case Study of Hanoi, Vietnam. Sustainability, 10(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072314 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072314

Legislation. EPR Vietnam. https://epr.monre.gov.vn/vi/thu-vien/van-ban-phap-luat.html

Lockrey, S., Nguyen, H., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2016). Recycling the construction and demolition waste in Vietnam: opportunities and challenges in practice. Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 757-766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.175 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.175

Mark Hilton, C. S., Andrew McCarthy, Peter Börkey. (2001). Extended Producer Responsibility. A Guidance Manual for Governments.

Mark Hilton, C. S., Andrew McCarthy, Peter Börkey. (2019). Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and the Impact of Online Sales. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/19970900 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/19970900

MONRE. (2017). Circular No. 34/2017/TT-BTNMT on recall and treatment of discarded products.

MONRE. (2021). 2016-2020 National Environmental Assessment Report (in Vietnamese). https://moit.gov.vn/upload/2005517/fck/files/20211108_Bao_cao_HTMT_2016-2020_F_a4980.pdf

N. Kunz, K. M., L. V. Van Wassenhove. (2018). Stakeholder Views on Extended Producer Responsibility and the Circular Economy. https://www.oecd.org/environment/extended-producer-responsibility.htm DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125617752694

Nathan Kunz, A. A., Kieren Mayers, Luk Van Wassenhove. (2014). Extended Producer Responsibility: Stakeholder Concerns and Future Developments. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260146056_Extended_Producer_Responsibility_Stakeholder_Concerns_and_Future_Developments

Nguyen Duc Quang, Hung, H. V., Eiji, Y., & Huynh, T.-H. (2017). Material Flows from Electronic Waste: Understanding the Shortages for Extended Producer Responsibility Implementation in Vietnam. Procedia CIRP, 61, 651-656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.184 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.184

Nguyen Duc Quang, H. V. H., Huynh Trung Hai. (2016). Impact assessment of the Etended Production

Responsibility implementation in vietnam: A study on electronic waste management. Journal of Science and Technology 54, 42-48. https://doi.org/10.15625/2525-2518/54/2A/11908 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15625/2525-2518/54/2A/11908

Nguyen Khanh Bui, T. L. N., Khanh Duong Phan, and Anh Thu Nguyen. (2020). Legal framework for recycling domestic solid waste in Vietnam: situation and recommendation. E3S Web of Conferences, 164. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016411009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016411009

Nguyen, M. K. (2023). Suggestions on extended producer responsibility mechanism in Vietnam from international experiences. Ministry of Science and Technology, Vietnam, 65(2), 57-64. https://doi.org/10.31276/vmostjossh.65(2).57-64 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31276/VMOSTJOSSH.65(2).57-64

Nguyen, T. (2022a). EPR Implementation in Viet Nam. https://rkcmpd-eria.org/epr-for-plastics-in-viet-nam-challenges-and-opportunities/#:~:text=Mr%20Nguyen%20Thi%2C%20Principal%20Official,or%20making%20a%20financial%20contribution.

Nguyen, T. (2022b). Thực hiện trách nhiệm mở rộng của nhà sản xuất: Áp dụng các nguyên tắc thị trường hướng tới mục tiêu phát triển bền vững. EPR Vietnam. https://epr.monre.gov.vn/vi/bai-viet/chi-tiet/thuc-hien-trach-nhiem-mo-rong-cua-nha-san-xuat-ap-dung-cac-nguyen-tac-thi-truong-huong-toi-muc-tieu-phat-trien-ben-vung.html

Nguyen, T., Lin, T.-H., & Chan, H.-P. (2019). The Environmental Effects of Urban Development in Hanoi, Vietnam from Satellite and Meteorological Observations from 1999–2016. Sustainability, 11(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061768 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061768

Nguyen, T. H., Nguyen, H., Nguyen, T. T., Le, T. T. T., & Nguyen, T. H. Y. (2021). Recyclable waste collection by informal sector in Vietnam: Dataset from Vinh, Nha Trang, Buon Ma Thuot, Da Nang, Ho Chi Minh and Hanoi Cities. Data Brief, 36, 106979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2021.106979 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2021.106979

Nguyen Van Dao, V. H. V. (2020). Population Explosion and the Environment in Developing countries. A case study of Vietnam. 29(4), 202-218. https://doi.org/10.24205/03276716.2020.822

Nguyen, X. P., Le, N. D., Pham, V. V., Huynh, T. T., Dong, V. H., & Hoang, A. T. (2021). Mission, challenges, and prospects of renewable energy development in Vietnam. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2021.1965264 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2021.1965264

OECD. (2001). Extended Producer Responsibility. A guidance manual for governments. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264189867-en

OECD. (2014a). Global Forum on Environment: Promoting Sustainable Materials Management through Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). https://www.oecd.org/environment/waste/Global%20Forum%20Tokyo%20Issues%20Paper%2030-5-2014.pdf

OECD. (2014b). The State of Play on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR): Opportunities and Challenges. https://www.oecd.org/environment/waste/Global%20Forum%20Tokyo%20Issues%20Paper%2030-5-2014.pdf

OECD. (2016a). Extended Producer Responsibility. Updated guidance for efficient waste management. https://www.oecd.org/environment/waste/Global%20Forum%20Tokyo%20Issues%20Paper%2030-5-2014.pdf

OECD. (2016b). Extended Producer Responsibility: Updated Guidance for Efficient Waste Management. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264256385-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264256385-en

OECD. (2021). Modulated fees for extended producer responsibility schemes https://one.oecd.org/document/ENV/WKP(2021)16/En/pdf

Office of the Government. (2016). Conclusion of Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc at the National online conference on strengthening pollution control and environmental protection (in Vietnamese).

Opoku, H. N. (2004). Policy implications of industrial ecology conceptions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 13(5), 320-333. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.417 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.417

Park, J., Díaz-Posada, N., & Mejía-Dugand, S. (2018). Challenges in implementing the extended producer responsibility in an emerging economy: The end-of-life tire management in Colombia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 189, 754-762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.058 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.058

Phuong, N. H. (2021). Policy effectiveness assessment of selected tools for addressing marine plastic pollution. https://www.iucn.org/sites/default/files/2022-08/viet_nam_policy_assessment_marine_plastics_marplasticcs.pdf

Pouikli, K. (2020a). Concretising the role of extended producer responsibility in European Union waste law and policy through the lens of the circular econom. https://doi.org/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12027-020-00596-9

Pouikli, K. (2020b). Concretising the role of extended producer responsibility in European Union waste law and policy through the lens of the circular economy. ERA Forum, 20(4), 491-508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-020-00596-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-020-00596-9

Rémi De Bercegol, J. C. a. A. N. T. H. (2017). Waste Municipal Service and Informal Recycling Sector in Fast-Growing Asian Cities: Co-Existence, Opposition or Integration? Resources, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040070 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040070

S T Pham Phu, T. F., P V Dinh, and Hoa K T. (2018). Waste Recycling System for a Tourism City in Vietnam: Situation and Sustainable Strategy Approach – Case Study in Hoi An. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/159/1/012046 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/159/1/012046

Salhofer, S., Jandric, A., Soudachanh, S., Le Xuan, T., & Tran, T. D. (2021). Plastic Recycling Practices in Vietnam and Related Hazards for Health and the Environment. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 18(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18084203 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18084203

Shibuya, S. (2018). Urbanization, jobs, and the family in the mekong delta, vietnam. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 49, 93–108. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44873430 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/jcfs.49.1.93

Stephanie Newman, E. W., Andrew Farmer, Patrick ten Brink, Jean-Pierre Schweitzer. (2015). The Economics of Marine Litter. In (pp. 367-394). https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_14?utm_source=getftr&utm_medium=getftr&utm_campaign=getftr_pilot DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_14

The Government of Vietnam. (2022a). Decree No. 08/2022/ND-CP of Government on elaboration of several articles of the law on environmental protection.

The Government of Vietnam. (2022b). Decree No. 45/2022/ND-CP of the Government on penalties for violations administration in the field of environmental protection.

The National Assembly. (2005). Law on Environmental Protection No. 55/2014/QH13 (in Vietnamese).

The National Assembly. (2020). Law on Environmental Protection No. 72/2020/QH14

The Prime Minister. (2013). Decision No. 50/2013/QD-TTg on rescribing retrieval and disposal of discarded products (in Vietnamese).

Thomas, L. (2000). Extended Producer Responsibility in Cleaner Production: Policy Principle to Promote

Environmental Improvements of Product Systems

Tojo, N. (2004). Extended Producer Responsibility as a Driver for Design Change - Utopia or Reality?

Tong, Y. D., Huynh, T. D. X., & Khong, T. D. (2021). Understanding the role of informal sector for sustainable development of municipal solid waste management system: A case study in Vietnam. Waste Manag, 124, 118-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.01.033 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.01.033

Tran Chung Duc, & Petrus, S. S. (2016). Analysis of recycling structures for e-waste in Vietnam. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 20(1), 110-126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-016-0549-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-016-0549-1

Walls, M. (2006). Extended producer responsibility and product design: economic theory and selected case studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.901661

Wang, Y. (2012). Research on Reverse Logistics Mode and Implementation of EPR. Applied Mechanics and Materials 253-255, 1032-1035. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.253-255.1032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.253-255.1032

World Bank. (2023). The World Bank In Vietnam - Overview. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/vietnam/overview

World Bank Group. (2022). Vietnam country climate and development report. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/37618

World Bank in Vietnam. (2018). Solid and industrial hazardous waste management assessment. Options and actions to implement the national strategies (in Vietnamese).

WWF. Extended producer responsibility fact sheet. https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/epr_briefing_for_governments_and_businesses_updates.pdf

WWF. (2020a). How to implement Extended Producer Responsibility (epr). A briefing for governments and businesses.

WWF. (2020b). How to implement Extended Producer Responsibility. A briefing for governments and businesses. https://wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/how_to_implement_epr___briefing_for_government_and_business.pdf

WWF Philippines. (2022). Toolkit 1: The EPR System and Policy Landscape - Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Law Toolkits for the Philippines. https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/41842.

Yasuhiko Hotta, S. H., Magnus Bengtsson, and Hideyuki Mori (2009). Extended producer responsibility policy in East Asia in consideration of International resource circulation. . https://www.iges.or.jp/en/publication_documents/pub/policyreport/en/1661/compiled.pdf

Yuqi Peng, Y. D., Sriram Venkataraman, Sining Song. (2020). Does Extended Producer Responsibility Improve Eco-Innovation: An Empirical Study of Product Take-Back Programs. SSRN. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3687582 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3687582

Authors

Thi Yen Anh Tran

PhD. Candidate, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia

[email protected] (Primary Contact)

Kinh Thi Kieu

Associate Professor, Environmental Management, University of Science and Education, University of Danang, Vietnam

Sunil Herat

Associate Professor, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia

Prasad Kaparaju

Professor, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia

Tran, T. Y. A., Kieu, K. T., Herat, S., & Kaparaju , P. (2023). Implementing EPR as a Tool for Addressing Environmental Issues in Vietnam. Environmental Science & Sustainable Development, 8(2), 70–89. https://doi.org/10.21625/essd.v8i2.1041

Download Citation

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:

Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;

With the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher's final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher's request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author's own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:

The Work is the Author's original work;
The Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
The Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
The Work has not previously been published;
The Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
The Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.

The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author's breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 7 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher's use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Received 2023-10-29
Accepted 2023-11-26
Published 2023-12-31

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Gam Pham Thi, Thang Nguyen Trung, Sunil Herat, Tung Nguyen Thanh, Management of Marine Plastic Waste Generated from Land-Based Sources in Viet Nam: Problems, Constraints, and Solutions , Environmental Science & Sustainable Development: Vol. 6 Issue 1 (2021): Sustainable Cities and Communities
Sri Umami Parlina, Sunil Herat, Hospital Food Waste: Contributing Factors of Waste Generation and Strategy for Waste Minimization , Environmental Science & Sustainable Development: Vol. 9 Issue 1: Special Issue (2024): Integrated Approaches to Sustainable Development and Environmental Management in Developing Regions

1. Introduction

The extended producer responsibility (EPR) is defined by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development as "An environmental policy in which a producer's responsibility for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product's life cycle" (O.E.C.D., 2001). EPR represents a paradigm shift in environmental governance, with the core principle of placing the onus of responsible product management squarely upon producers. By doing so, EPR aims to curtail the externalities of production and consumption, mitigate the environmental impacts of waste generation, and foster resource efficiency. Its adoption marks a significant shift in global environment strategies (Pouikli, 2020), offering promising avenues to address environmental issues and transition toward a circular economy (Jana Brinkmann et al., 2022).

Vietnam is in the stages of development (Bank, 2023) and undergoing rapid industrialization and urbanization (Nguyen et al., 2019)(Shibuya, 2018). It is one of the ASEAN region's fastest-developing economies (Hoang et al., 2019). However, this growth has resulted in the degradation of the environment (Chu, 2018). The rapid growth of the population is outpacing the provision of essential resources such as clean water, adequate housing, and green spaces (Dao, 2020). Vietnam used to emit very low greenhouse gas emissions, but in the last two decades, it has had some of the world's fastest emissions growth rates (Group, 2022). Moreover, water pollution is particularly acute in urban and surrounding industrial areas, and river basins exhibit concentrated water quality degradation in their midstream and downstream regions (A.D.B., 2022)(Hoi, 2020)(M.O.N.R.E., 2021). Furthermore, Vietnam is shifting from an energy exporter to an energy importer because the finite supplies of fossil fuels continue to be depleted (Nguyen et al., 2021). This country is also under enormous strain from solid waste since infrastructure and management are unable to keep up with the increasing volumes of waste, which have doubled in less than 15 years (Government, 2016). More especially, the Vietnamese government subsidizes almost 80% of solid waste management costs (Vietnam, 2018). Therefore, with the burgeoning challenges of environmental degradation, resource depletion, and waste management in Vietnam, the introduction of EPR offers a timely opportunity to redress these issues and promote circular economies.

This review, by synthesizing and critically evaluating the existing body of scholarly work, seeks to delineate the theoretical foundations of EPR and present its regulations, implementation process, and potential challenges in the Vietnamese context. Additionally, its purpose is to identify gaps in the current research and present avenues for future actions, contributing to the effort to develop sustainable environmental management practices and policy development in Vietnam.

2. Overview about EPR

2.1. EPR concept.

Establishing a clear and accurate notion of EPR within the scope of environmental management is essential. Introduced by Thomas Lindqvist in 1990 in a report to the Swedish Ministry of Environment (Abhishek Gaur & Chaudhary, 2022); (Thomas, 2000)), EPR is defined by the OECD as an environmental policy that broadens a producer's responsibility for an item to the post-consumer phase during the product's life cycle. This shift means that producers are now accountable, either partially or fully, for products environmentally, moving responsibilities from local government to producers and incentivizing eco-conscious product design ((Kunz et al., 2018); (O.E.C.D., 2014)). According to the EPR concept, its scope covers extends beyond financial responsibility for producers; it also encompasses accountability for information dissemination, transportation, waste management, and environmentally conscious product design (Nathan Kunz et al., 2014). In addition, as an environmental strategy, EPR can be implemented using different policy instruments (Forslind, 2005). At its foundation, EPR is a commitment by manufacturers and producers to assume responsibility for their products throughout their entire lifecycle. It encompasses not only the producing and distributing phases but also the crucial post-consumer stage, which includes product collection, recycling, and proper disposal. ((Gupt & Sahay, 2015); (O.E.C.D., 2014)).

By doing so, EPR not only reduces the detrimental environmental effects of products but also encourages a more circular economic system in which resources are preserved and used efficiently. EPR recognizes the complex relationship between production, consumption, and environmental repercussions, highlighting that efficient environmental management requires the active participation of those who introduce new items to the marketplace (Cai & Choi, 2021). Therefore, it is a strategic tool for addressing the rising environmental challenges faced by contemporary society.

2.2. Theoretical framework for EPR

The theoretical basis for the EPR initiative is rooted in several key concepts and principles, as follows:

Firstly, EPR is grounded in the principle of producer responsibility, requiring the producer or importer to be accountable for their product’s impact on the environment. This notion is based on the premise that individuals who deliver goods to the market should bear responsibility for every phase of their lifecycle, including disposal and environmental repercussions (Kunz et al., 2018). Furthermore, it aligns with the Polluter Pays Principle, which states that those who cause environmental harm or pollution should share the expense of mitigating or controlling that damage. In the framework of EPR, producers contribute financially to the collection, recycling, or secure disposal of their goods in order to reduce environmental effects ((Barbara Siuta-Tokarska & Hornicki, 2022); (Pouikli, 2020)). Additionally, EPR is closely related to the theories of a circular economy, striving to reduce waste while increasing resource efficiency. It promotes the development of items that are easy to either refurbish or reuse, thereby lowering the requirement for virgin resources and decreasing the harmful effects on the environment ((Bening Mayanti, 2023); (Căpriță, 2019); (Kunz et al., 2018); (Pouikli, 2020)). Lastly, EPR emphasizes the importance of stakeholder engagement and collaboration among different parties, such as producers, government organizations, consumers, and waste management organizations, which is essential for successful EPR implementation. The framework highlights the significance of working together to achieve environmental goals. ((W.W.F., 2020); (Philippines, 2022)).

Overall, the theoretical framework for EPR is built on the principles of producer responsibility, circular economy, economic incentives, and stakeholder collaboration. It provides a structured approach to addressing environmental challenges associated with product lifecycles while promoting sustainable production and consumption practices.

2.3. The benefits and challenges of EPR implementation

The deployment of EPR programs brings a range of advantages and, concomitantly, confers certain disadvantages. The manifestation of these advantages and disadvantages is contingent upon the precise program configuration, industrial sector, and regulatory framework. Herein, a synopsis of the advantages and drawbacks associated with the operationalization of EPR initiatives is provided.

2.3.1. Benefits of EPR implementation

The EPR program is an innovative procedure for product management that provides several benefits. In this overview, the main advantages of EPR, such as waste reduction, resource conservation, pollution avoidance, economic growth, environmentally friendly design, transparency, and a greater public understanding… are described. These advantages highlight the critical role that EPR plays in establishing a more sustainable and environmentally conscious future.

EPR programs have made significant contributions to waste collection and recycling efforts. Under this scheme, collection and recycling rates of products can be increased due to the financial support for proper waste management (Julian Ahlers et al., 2021). EPR provides a financial incentive for companies to build more efficient recycling systems by putting the responsibility for end-of-life product management on them (Campbell‐Johnston et al., 2021). For example, between 1997 and 2000, container and packaging trash recycling in Japan rose by 27% (1.25 to 1.59 million tonnes) (O.E.C.D., 2014). Moreover, the percentage of waste that is recycled in the EU climbed from 47% (EU15) to 65% (EU27) between 1998 and 2012 (EUROPEN).

EPR programs emerge as influential drivers of economic benefits for both producers and governments. According to (Atasu & Subramanian, 2012), carrying out technical innovation within EPR schemes helps producers minimize product costs and boost economic benefits in terms of ecological design, regenerative raw materials, and recycling. For example, the EPR program in Japan led tea companies to stop using colored PET bottles and to start producing thinner ones, helping them reduce waste collection costs (Hosoda, 2004). From the perspective of local authorities, EPR can play a pivotal role in mitigating the financial burden of waste management ((O.E.C.D., 2014);(Walls, 2006),(W.W.F., 2020)). Through the strategic transfer of responsibility for end-of-life product management from government officials to producers, EPR effectively curtails the volume of waste managed by local authorities, thereby alleviating the associated financial costs (Campbell‐Johnston et al., 2021).

In addition, one of the most significant benefits of the EPR program is its unwavering encouragement of sustainable product design. (Tojo, 2004) argues that mandatory EPR programs have positive effects on the environmental design strategies of enterprises. EPR is an opportunity for manufacturers to imbue items with the values of durability, recyclability, and resource efficiency (Davies, 2023). (Yuqi Peng et al., 2020) and (Chang et al., 2019) also show that implementing EPR programs motivates producers to develop eco-innovation. This emphasis on eco-friendly design fits in perfectly with global efforts to reduce negative environmental repercussions.

EPR programs aim to reduce waste generation by encouraging responsible product disposal, recycling, and reuse (Wang, 2012). (Opoku, 2004) proposed that EPR promotes waste prevention and reduction during the manufacturing phase by connecting all phases of the product's life cycle and supporting actions for product improvement. It significantly reduces the quantity of waste that ends up on dumping grounds and burning facilities (Stephanie Newman et al., 2015). EPR incentivizes manufacturers to create goods with incredible lifespans and lower ecological impact, aligning with sustainability aims. EPR helps conserve to reduce resource consumption by promoting the recovery and recycling of materials (W.W.F., 2020). It minimizes the demand for virgin resources while also conserving natural resources (Ajania & K, 2019). The methodical recovery and reuse of materials adhere to the fundamentals of a circular economy, in which resources are efficiently conserved and reused, decreasing the strain on ecosystems and supporting sustainable resource management.

These advantages are supported by empirical research and scientific evidence, elucidating the favorable repercussions of EPR programs on environmental, economic, and societal domains.

2.3.2. Challenges of EPR implementation

EPR initiatives have been introduced across the globe to address the environmental consequences of product endof-life. However, in addition to their benefits, EPR programs have several limitations and obstacles.

The implementation of EPR programs requires significant financial investments on the part of both governments and manufacturers (O.E.C.D., 2021). Governments must budget for program development, database collection, regulatory compliance, and administrative tasks. Meanwhile, manufacturers are dealing with increased compliance costs, which include trash collection, recycling facilities, and reporting obligations. These interconnected financial repercussions can put pressure on the government and small and medium-sized enterprises. As a result, determining the exact expenses of program implementation and balancing the involvement of both government and business becomes critical to optimizing the efficiency of EPR projects.

EPR programs can overburden SMEs, which usually lack the necessary administrative and financial resources to handle the complexities of compliance (Yasuhiko Hotta et al., 2009). This circumstance can lead to decreased competitiveness and, in the worst-case scenario, business closures. SMEs may need assistance in completing reporting requirements, complying with recycling guidelines, or reacting to changes in packaging and product design. Addressing the compliance costs for SMEs is critical to maintaining a fair playing field and encouraging broad participation in EPR initiatives.

EPR regulations vary in complexity and scope across jurisdictions, posing significant obstacles to enterprises operating in numerous regions (Kolk et al., 2001). Regulatory differences in types of products, recycling goals, and reporting techniques create confusion and increase compliance costs. To address this challenge, manufacturers need to spend time understanding and responding to the demands of each jurisdiction in which they operate. Striking for EPR regulation harmonization at the regional, national, or global levels is a promising answer for reducing complexity and streamlining compliance for geographically diversified organizations.

Despite the intention of EPR programs to hold manufacturers responsible for end-of-life goods management, the potential of cost-shifting to consumers arises (Gottberg et al., 2006). Manufacturers may respond to increased compliance costs by raising product pricing, essentially shifting the financial responsibility back to end consumers. Striking a careful balance between responsibility for producers and customer affordability becomes a critical factor in EPR program design. Effective regulatory monitoring and methods to avoid cost pass-through to customers are critical to achieving EPR goals without placing an undue financial burden on the public.

One other possible challenge of EPR programs is the creation of free riders who benefit from the process without fully contributing or accurately disclosing their duties. These free riders can jeopardize the program's finances by avoiding their fair share of the expenditures connected with managing end-of-life products (Kalimo et al., 2015). Appropriate auditing and enforcement systems are essential for preventing free rider behavior and ensuring that the burden of duty is divided evenly among all participating enterprises.

Unintended consequences of EPR programs may happen (Gokce Esenduran & Wassenhove, 2002)(Işıl Alev & Atasu, 2019), including the relocation of waste disposal to places where EPR standards do not apply, the creation of illegal and informal recycling activities, or the transformation of the product design... Both businesses and consumers can look for solutions to avoid the financial consequences of EPR that may cause damage to the environment if not adequately controlled. Furthermore, whereas collection and recycling goals appear to be equivalent EPR adoption levers to raise total material recycled, they have opposite effects on influencing producer decisions regarding design. To illustrate, a calibrated numerical study of the photovoltaic panel industry demonstrates that more strict EPR standards can result in a PVP technology choice that has less recyclability and more excellent durability, resulting in higher greenhouse gas emissions (Huang et al., 2019). Through extensive program design and continuing evaluation, regulators and policymakers must anticipate and avoid these unforeseen impacts.

Some industries and manufacturers may be resistant to EPR programs because they see them as a financial burden, time-consuming for the organizations, and an obstacle to their existing business methods (Campbell‐Johnston et al., 2021). It is essential to engage all stakeholders, including producers, the government, and environmental groups, in developing and implementing EPR initiatives to overcome this resistance. Demonstrating the tangible benefits of EPR, such as reduced environmental impact and improved resource efficiency, is vital to convincing these entities of its value. Collaborating closely with industry leaders to create rules that balance ecological effectiveness and financial viability is also crucial. This collaborative approach ensures that EPR is tailored to fit different industries' unique needs and circumstances, making it more acceptable and sustainable in the long run.

Environmental managers in the government and other public authorities grapple with many challenges because they take charge of regulations, governance, and enforcement of the EPR program, manage waste management operators, connect producers, consumers, waste management operators, etc... ((O.E.C.D., 2014); WWF). It is more challenging for some who still need to familiarize themselves with the EPR concept in some countries. They spearhead the implementation of EPR programs, so high attention and support for them are necessary.

These restrictions highlight the significance of carefully developing and monitoring EPR programs to maximize benefits while minimizing unanticipated negative impacts. When well-designed and efficiently implemented, the benefits of EPR frequently outweigh the negatives. Addressing these possible downsides through deliberate program design, the involvement of stakeholders, and robust enforcement mechanisms can assist EPR programs in gaining tremendous success and sustainability.

3. Overview about the EPR scheme in Vietnam

3.1. Environmental policies and regulations related to EPR scheme in Vietnam

This is clarified in Decision No. 50/2013/QD-TTg dated September 8, 2013 of the Prime Minister (then replaced by Decision No. 16/2015/QD-TTg dated May 22, 2015)((The National Assembly, 2005); (Minister, 2013)). After that, based on Decision No. 16/2015/QD-TTg, the Vietnamese Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment issued Circular No. 34/2017/TT-BTNMT dated October 4, 2017, on the recall and treatment of discarded products in detail. However, this circular only stipulates in detail Clause 13, Article 5, and Clause 1, Article 9 of Decision No. 16/2015/QD-TTg; other relevant instructions, especially the recovery rate, recycling, or disposal by the manufacturing enterprise, are not specifically regulated (M.O.N.R.E., 2017).

In 2020, Law on Environmental Protection No. 72/2020/QH14 was approved by the National Assembly on November 17, 2020 (effective from January 1, 2022), stipulating in more detail to promote EPR in Vietnam in Articles 54 and 55. According to Article 54, products of producers and importers with recycling value must be collected for postuse recycling at the mandatory recycling rates. Moreover, Article 55 provides that "Organizations and individuals manufacturing and/or importing packages including hazardous materials, which are not recyclable or impede the collection and treatment, must contribute finance to assist with daily-life waste treatment operations" (The National Assembly, 2020). These provisions are guided in detail in Chapter VI of Decree No. 08/2022/ND-CP. Specifically, Articles 77 to 82 of this decree regulate the waste recycling responsibilities of manufacturers and importers of products and packaging, including objects, implementation roadmap, recycle rate, mandatory recycling regulations, implementation methods, registration of plans and reporting of recycling results, financial contributions to the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund. Articles 83 to 85 of this Decree provide detailed regulations on waste collection and treatment responsibilities of producers and importers, including objects and levels of financial contributions, implementation procedures, and waste treatment activities support (Vietnam, 2022). Registering plans recycling results reports and financial contributions declaration to the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund are specified in Article 78 and Article 79 of Circular No. 02/2022/TT-BTNMT (M.O.N.R.E., 2017). Compliance with the EPR scheme is stipulated in Decree No. 45/2022/ND-CP of the Government, detailing penalties for administrative violations administration in the field of environmental protection (Vietnam, 2022).

Figure 1.Process of EPR regulations in Vietnam

In addition, there are some other documents related to the EPR program in Vietnam including Decision No.1316/QD- TTg dated July 22, 2021 of the Prime Minister on strengthening management of plastic wastes in Vietnam; Directive No. 33/CT-TTg dated August 20, 2020 on strengthening of management, reuse, recycling, disposal and reduction of plastic waste; Decision No. 491/QD-TTg issued May 07, 2018 related to approve adjustments to national strategy for general management of solid waste to 2025 with vision towards 2050; Joint Circular No. 05/2016/TTLT-BNNPTNT- BTNMT on guiding the collection, transportation, and treatment of after-use pesticide packages; Decision No.687/QD-TTg on June 7, 2022 of the Prime Minister approving the circular economy development scheme and setting a number of ambitious targets for the period ahead; Decision No. 1746/QĐ-TTg dated December 4th, 2019 of the Prime Minister on promulgating the National Action Plan on Marine Plastic Debris Management by 2030; Circular No. 44/2011/TT-BTNMT dated December 26, 2011 of Minister of Natural Resources and Environment on defining the national technical regulations on environment. ((Duc Quang Nguyen & Huynh, 2016); (Huynh Trung Hai & Quang, 2017); (Kim Thi Thuy Ngoc et al., 2023); (Legislation, n.d.))

3.2. EPR scheme in Vietnam

3.2.1 Previous EPR program

As described above regarding the process of EPR regulations, the EPR system used in Vietnam from 2005 to 2020 can be stated to be based on a voluntary method. Without enforcement, this EPR model could not promote the desired effect and could not create a sustainable financial mechanism for the recovery and disposal of products and packaging after use; it has no impact on the process of using raw materials and product design. According to the laws at that time, a business could be considered to have discharged its responsibility for recovering discarded products when it set up locations for product recovery and disclosed requirements for recovery. Several surveys stated that the number of recovery places for discarded products set up by producers was small, while the rules notified for the retrieval appear to be highly rigorous. For example, Panasonic Vietnam has designed two sites for recovering its products in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City. This company receives only authentic items or undamaged goods without broken or missing parts. It requires consumers to personally transport their products to the recovery points and does not offer any promotional benefits for exchanging products. Moreover, the country's recovery process is relatively challenging, exemplified by Toyota Vietnam, which employs a 10-stage recovery process. As a result, despite over 15 years of implementing legislation on the duty for recovering discarded, producers and importers in Vietnam have yet to recover any product. (Nguyen, 2022)

3.2.2. Ongoing EPR program

To transition from a voluntary to a mandatory EPR framework, the Law on Environmental Protection in 2020 in Vietnam established some principles and methods for implementation. Firstly, the obligatory recycling rate and criteria were established. Secondly, methods for producers to fulfill their recycling duties based on the principles of the market were regulated. Thirdly, implementing the EPR scheme through consensus among many stakeholders, including the government, businesses, and environmental and social parties, is controlled. Fourth, the estimation of payment rates for gathering and disposing of household wastes based on volume to increase at-source sorting of household wastes (the primary source of used items and package generation) was issued. Fifth, regulations for promoting the construction of infrastructure needed for solid waste collection and disposal, improving the recycling industry, providing support and incentives for environmental protection actions, and encouraging circular economy development were implemented and developed (Nguyen, 2022). Since the enactment of the Environmental Protection Law of 2020, starting in 2021, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment in Vietnam has been actively conducting various workshops and training sessions. These educational events are designed to familiarize producers and importers with the new regulations, ensuring they understand and are prepared to implement them.

The Environmental Protection Law in Vietnam in 2020 requires EPR in two circumstances, including (1) products and packages that can and must be collected for recycling and (2) non-recyclable, dangerous products and packaging that must be collected for treatment (The National Assembly, 2020). Mandatory frameworks in the Vietnamese EPR program are shown in detail below.

a) Waste recycling obligations

Concerning the recycling obligations imposed on manufacturers and importers, Article 77 of Decree No. 08/2022/NĐ-CP outlines the specific categories subject to regulation, encompassing packaging, batteries, accumulators, lubricants, tires, electrical and electronic products, and vehicles. Effective January 1, 2024, recycling responsibilities apply to packaging (depending on the scale), batteries, lubricants, and tires. The implementation for electrical and electronic products is slated for 2025, while vehicles fall under this regime from 2027 onwards.

The scope of packaging extends to six distinct groups: food, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, fertilizers, animal feeds and veterinary drugs, detergents, preparations for household, agricultural, and medical use, and cement. Furthermore, specific exemptions are stipulated in some instances, relieving manufacturers and importers from recycling duties.

Each type of packaging or product designated for recycling will be subject to mandatory recycling rates, contingent upon considerations such as product or packaging life cycle, disposal rate, collection rate, national recycling objectives, adherence to environmentally friendly standards, and socioeconomic factors. A triennial assessment will be conducted to evaluate and adjust recycling requirements as needed to ensure the efficacy of these recycling efforts.

Producers of items or packaging covered by Product Recycling Responsibilities and Packaging Recycling Obligations (called "Recycling Obligations") will be able to choose among the following options:

Recycling their products or packaging on their own.
Using a recycling service to do the recycling.
Appointing a qualified third-party organization to handle recycling.
Combining the three techniques listed above or contributing to the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund with the norm of a fee (Fs) issued by the Prime Minister.

Manufacturers and importers who do not perform or perform incorrectly or incompletely their recycling obligations according to the provisions of the law will be handled for each specific violation.

All producers and importers who are under recycling obligations will have an annual requirement to register and report their recycling activities or declare their contribution to the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund. In cases where producers or importers entrust a third party to manage recycling on their behalf, it is the responsibility of the third party to carry out the registration and report on the recycling activities.

The financial contribution, which serves as an alternative to direct recycling, will be determined based on several factors. These factors include the specific recycling rate applicable to the product or packaging, the volume of products and packaging produced or imported, and the per-unit recycling cost. This per-unit cost encompasses various expenses, including sorting, collection, transportation, and recycling processes, as well as management and administrative costs ((Nguyen, 2022);(Phuong, 2021))

Figure 2.EPR operational scheme for recycling responsibility in Vietnam

b) Waste treatment obligations

Regarding waste treatment responsibility, manufacturers and importers are required to adhere to the regulations outlined in Article 83 and Appendix XXIII of Decree 08/2022/ND-CP (Vietnam, 2022). These regulations pertain to specific products, including pesticides (with packaging), single-use batteries, chewing gum, cigarettes, and items containing synthetic plastic components, such as balloons, children's toys, disposable plastic goods, utensils, furniture, construction materials, and small plastic bags... Effective January 1, 2022, these manufacturers and importers must make financial contributions to the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund, aimed at supporting waste collection and treatment efforts.

To fulfill this responsibility, producers and importers must engage in a self-declaration process and submit the relevant financial contribution declaration forms as per the guidelines issued by the Vietnam Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. This submission should be made to the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund within the stipulated timeframe. The calculation of the financial contributions is based on the production volume in the market and the number of products and packaging imported in the previous year. Notably, the party responsible, whether it is the manufacturer, importer, or an authorized representative, bears the duty of ensuring the accuracy and completeness of the information provided in the declaration (Nguyen, 2022).

Figure 3.EPR operational scheme for treatment responsibility in Vietnam

3.3. Key challenges in EPR implantation and research gaps in this sector in Vietnam

The significance of the EPR scheme is crucial in the context of environmentally friendly waste management and environmental protection. For a rapidly developing country like Vietnam, the endeavor to actualize the efficacious implementation of EPR is concerned with a distinctive array of challenges and opportunities. The ensuing sections are dedicated to an in-depth examination of the principal challenges encountered during EPR implementation in Vietnam, thereby highlighting the existing research gaps in this domain. Through the systematic resolution of these challenges and the bridging of research gaps, a pathway towards the establishment of more streamlined and sustainable EPR practices that harmonize with Vietnam's environmental objectives and socio-economic circumstances can be forged.

3.3.1. Recycling Infrastructure Development

Vietnam's waste management and recycling system reflects the linear economy's dominance and systemic failure, with only 10-15% of municipal solid waste being reused or recycled. Recycling often occurs in low-tech "craft villages", leading to pollution (Manh et al., 2021). Nguyen (Nguyen Khanh Bui et al., 2020) notes that most recycling facilities are small in scale, outdated, and need more management and control from environmental protection authorities. (Phu et al., 2018) states that while Hoi An City has a high potential for improving recycling, the recycling system is simple with rudimentary facilities and low effectiveness. Overall, Vietnam's recycling infrastructure needs improvement in terms of technology, management, and policy support. Therefore, the establishment of robust waste management and recycling infrastructure stands as a formidable challenge in the implementation of the EPR frameworks within the Vietnamese context.

The existence of adequate infrastructure that includes waste collection, segregation, and recycling assumes is vital for the seamless functioning of EPR programs (Gui, 2020). In the absence of a well-developed waste management system, the effective execution of EPR becomes a problematic endeavor. Realizing this underscores the need for substantial investments directed toward the construction of recycling facilities, the development of transportation networks, and the establishment of waste processing facilities. Furthermore, the adaptation of these systems to accommodate the frequently diverse and rapidly evolving product landscape poses a multifaceted challenge.

Vietnam's recycling infrastructure is still in its early stages of development. Current research on the country's recycling capabilities is limited and tends to concentrate on specific areas such as electronic waste, plastics, and construction debris. (Lockrey et al., 2016) discuss the inefficiencies in handling construction and demolition waste in Vietnam, emphasizing the lack of proper classification, delegation, and regulation of waste streams by private companies. Similarly, (Hoang et al., 2021) state that the absence of a formal recycling industry exacerbates the inadequacy of construction and demolition waste management in Hanoi. Studies regarding plastic recycling and Ewaste in Vietnam reveal that these activities are predominantly conducted in informal settings, particularly in smallscale craft communities. Due to a lack of modern recycling technology and organization, the typical processes pose health risks to individuals as well as an increased risk of environmental pollution ((Salhofer et al., 2021); (Duc & Petrus, 2016)). Consequently, comprehensive studies and assessments are very necessary to find out the most suitable locations for recycling facilities and create recycling processes that are adapted to Vietnam's specific features.

3.3.2. Informal sector integration

In developing countries, the informal sector often shoulders a substantial portion of waste management tasks, a trend to which Vietnam is no exception (Johannes et al., 2021). According to (Tong et al., 2021), Vietnam's waste management system heavily relies on the informal sector, which handles the bulk of recycling efforts. Their study emphasizes that this sector not only contributes to income diversification for the impoverished but also actively participates in waste recycling, advocating for its integration into the overall waste management process. (Nguyen et al., 2021)provide data on the activities of informal waste workers and aggregators in several Vietnamese cities, demonstrating their presence and spatial allocation. (Bercegol, 2017) discusses the co-existence, opposition, and potential integration of the informal recycling sector with municipal waste services in fast-growing Asian cities, including Hanoi in Vietnam. Moreover, junk buyers in Hanoi play a significant role in recycling, accounting for 8.8% of recycling by weight or 26.0% by volume and specifically recycling 25.5% of containers and packaging waste (Kawai et al., 2012). These findings underscore the significance of the informal sector in waste recycling in Vietnam and the need for recognition and integration into waste management policies.

Introducing EPR programs may engender disruptions to these informal systems, potentially resulting in job displacement and the emergence of social tensions (O.E.C.D., 2016). As Vietnam has only recently begun mandating EPR policies, there is an urgent need for studies that explore the seamless integration of the informal waste management sector into the formalized EPR framework in Vietnam. To date, no research has been found on this specific issue. Such investigations could include identifying opportunities for integration and assessing the socioeconomic impacts of such integration. This endeavor promotes environmentally friendly waste management practices in Vietnam, which constitutes a holistic and multifaceted approach to the difficult problems with EPR implementation.

3.3.3. Stakeholder engagement

The absence of essential stakeholders is one of the common challenges in the implementation of the EPR scheme in developing countries (Johannes et al., 2021)(Park et al., 2018). Therefore, in the context of Vietnam, this difficulty is likely to surface.

To effectively engage stakeholders, evidence-based approaches are essential, and these approaches can be facilitated through the provision of empirical data obtained from scientific research. Such data serves as the cornerstone for informed dialogue among stakeholders. This evidence-based dialogue, in turn, fosters a conducive environment for collaboration, ultimately leading to the development of more effective and widely accepted EPR schemes.

There are few studies related to the roles of stakeholders in waste management, particularly in the EPR scheme in Vietnam. (Le et al., 2018) highlight the importance of stakeholder involvement in sustainable waste management and identify local authorities as the primary stakeholders responsible for managing municipal solid waste in agriculture in Hanoi. (Nguyen Duc Quang & Hai, 2016) and (Quang et al., 2017) found that the function of intermediate stakeholders, the facilities for E-waste treatment, and monetary distribution flows under the lack of legislation are the primary elements that contributed to the failure of the EPR system's implementation in Vietnam. (Nguyen, 2023) synthesizes the experience of some countries in organizing and managing registration agencies for packaging manufacturers and importers, clarifies the roles of relevant parties, and offers potential recommendations for Vietnam in applying the EPR scheme. Therefore, a research direction of notable relevance involves analyzing the influence of stakeholder engagement tactics within certain industries to mitigate resistance to EPR adoption in Vietnam. This study intends to investigate the complex relationship between stakeholder engagement strategies and successful resistance mitigation throughout the implementation of EPR efforts in Vietnam. The goal of the study is to shed light on practical strategies that can raise the acceptance and efficiency of EPR programs within the Vietnamese context.

3.3.4. Free-riding and orphan products

The Asian developing countries' EPR scheme is facing challenges, one of the primary ones being the identification of producers. This difficulty is pronounced because many producers in these regions, especially in developing nations, operate as small, unregistered businesses. These entities, often referred to as EPR "free riders" (Kojima et al., 2009), evade the formal regulatory frameworks established to manage and reduce environmental impact. Their status as "free riders" allows them to avoid contributing to the environmental costs associated with the life cycles of their products, a responsibility central to the EPR principle. This avoidance not only undermines the environmental objectives of these schemes but also creates an imbalance in the market, putting compliant businesses at a disadvantage. Forcing unregistered small-scale traders or small industries to participate in the EPR system presents a formidable challenge, especially when they represent a substantial portion of the market. Notably, the challenges of free-riding and managing orphan products often emerge prominently in the initial stages of implementing EPR schemes (O.E.C.D., 2014). Therefore, devising pertinent strategies to address these intricacies within the context of Vietnam is not merely important but, in fact, imperative.

The endeavor to combat free-riding and manage orphan products within EPR systems represents a challenge necessitating a comprehensive approach. Numerous studies have explored and proposed different strategies to mitigate the issues of orphan products and free riding within EPR systems on a global scale. According to (Frithjof Laubinger et al., 2021); and (Mark Hilton et al., 2001),(Mark Hilton et al., 2019), fee modulation schemes must be carefully designed to eliminate free-riding issues. Mark Hilton (2019) states that a lack of awareness, and the insufficient and complex enforcement of the EPR rules can lead to free riding and orphan products, so awareness campaigns are needed. Peer pressure and the disclosure of free riders can serve to discourage free riding and the final owner pays after the point of consumption, providing a finance option for orphan items (Mark Hilton et al., 2001). Monitoring is a critical way of guaranteeing compliance with an EPR program and ensuring that free-riding is minimized (O.E.C.D., 2001).In addition, because multi-seller platforms contribute significantly to free riding, (Jones, 2020) suggests that online platforms should be held responsible if they cannot demonstrate that an organization that sells an item on their site makes an "eco-contribution".

Given that Vietnam is in the transition stage towards a mandatory EPR program, it is crucial to start research to identify strategies for reducing free-riding and dealing with orphan products, which will improve the effectiveness of the EPR system. The main goal of this research is to develop and seek strategies to reduce free-riding and deal with orphan products within the EPR system, thereby improving the program's environmental and economic outcomes. Vietnam could benefit a lot from the experiences of both developed and developing countries to choose an appropriate strategy that will help the EPR framework be successfully established.

3.4. Suggestions for promoting the EPR scheme in Vietnam

Advancing the EPR scheme in Vietnam requires a strategic and well-planned approach. Below are some primary recommendations with well-defined objectives, effective and practical solutions, clear organizational responsibilities, and robust measurement methods for promoting EPR in Vietnam effectively.

3.4.1. Recycling infrastructure

There are four primary solutions for improving recycling infrastructure.

Investments in improving recycling facilities are needed, encompassing the modernization of existing infrastructure and the maintenance of equipment to ensure optimal operation. Responsible organizations, including the government and waste management agencies, play a crucial role in implementing and overseeing these initiatives. Methods for measuring implementation include monitoring metrics such as recycling rates, waste diversion, and cost savings and comparing these data to the past. Additionally, conducting a waste audit provides insights into waste generation and processing efficiency. Furthermore, evaluating the financial impact of recycling infrastructure investments involves assessing the return on investment, cost savings, and revenue generation. It is equally important to measure the impact on job creation, the local environment, and economic growth resulting from these investments.
Encourage public-private partnerships need to be encouraged in recycling activities in order to share costs and mitigate risks associated with recycling infrastructure projects. The government, private companies, and non-profit organizations all play critical roles in this effort. Metrics such as increased recycling rates, waste diversion, cost savings, revenue generation, and the number of participants can be used to assess implementation success. Furthermore, reviewing partnership agreements will ensure that all parties involved are fulfilling their roles, responsibilities, and goals. Following that, conducting financial audits tracks the allocation of resources, funding, and expenditures within the partnership. Moreover, gathering feedback from the community and relevant stakeholders serves to assess their satisfaction with the partnership.
Incentives for private sector participation, which can be achieved through tax benefits, subsidies, performance- based contracts, and regulatory support, should be provided. The government is the accountable organization in this case. Ways to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation include comparing metrics such as the number of private sector participants, the amount of investment attracted, job creation, and increased recycling rates to past data. Additionally, gathering feedback from participating private sector organizations, government agencies, and other stakeholders is crucial to assessing their satisfaction with the incentive programs and identifying areas for enhancement. Subsequently, it is essential to evaluate the quality and quantity of the incentives.
New technologies in recycling systems, such as IoT (Internet of Things) sensors, automated sorting systems, data analytics software, mobile apps, artificial intelligence (AI), and geographic information systems (GIS), should be integrated. The government, private companies, and waste management agencies are all accountable organizations. Methods for evaluating implementation success include comparing data related to technology integration objectives such as increased recycling rates, reduced operational costs, improved resource recovery, and reduced environmental impact. Concurrently, equipment performance must be monitored to ensure alignment with integration goals. Additionally, evaluating the environmental benefits of technology integration, such as reductions in carbon emissions, energy savings, and resource conservation, is crucial. Finally, assessing the financial impact of technology integration involves comparing technology implementation costs with the resulting savings or revenue generated.

3.4.2. Informal sector

Six proposed solutions aimed to address the challenges in the informal sector are presented.

It is necessary to raise awareness and education in the informal sector about the EPR program and its benefits and impart skills and knowledge in waste sorting, handling, and safety. Relevant organizations, such as local governments and non-profit organizations, play an essential role in carrying out these activities. Some methods for measuring implementation effectiveness include conducting surveys or quizzes to assess the knowledge and understanding of informal sector workers before and after educational campaigns. As a result, comparing the results allows for the measurement of awareness improvements. Simultaneously, tracking attendance and participation rates in workshops, seminars, training sessions, and informational events organized for the informal sector provides valuable insights. Additionally, measuring quantifiable improvements in the informal sector's behavior and practices, such as increased adoption of recycling and proper waste disposal, adherence to regulations, and changes in collection and sorting methods, ensures a comprehensive evaluation of the educational programs.
Explicit legal provisions and regulations that recognize and formalize the role of the informal sector within the EPR framework, potentially incorporating licensing and registration procedures, should be established. The government will implement these measures. Methods for assessing achievement include assessing the extent to which informal sector workers and organizations are formalized and integrated into the EPR system. The new regulations include determining the number of unregistered, licensed, or recognized informal workers. Simultaneously, tracking and comparing informal sector workers' participation rates in EPR activities before and after the regulations' implementation is critical. Additionally, gathering feedback from the informal sector and other stakeholders assesses their satisfaction with the regulations. As a result, conducting a financial analysis for both producers and informal sector workers aids in evaluating the economic impact of formalizing the informal sector within the EPR framework. Furthermore, evaluating recycling rates, waste diversion, and environmental effects of including the informal sector in the EPR scheme.
It is necessary to establish appropriate collection points where informal sector workers can quickly bring recyclables and receive compensation from producers. Waste management agencies, producers, and importers are responsible for implementing these solutions. Measurement methods for operation include conducting routine audits and inspections of the designated collection points to ensure they are set up and maintained in accordance with the plan and provide an effective and safe workspace for informal sector workers. Simultaneously, tracking the number of informal sector workers, the frequency of visits, and the volume of recyclable waste brought in provides valuable data. Monitoring the compensation process also ensures that workers in the informal sector are fairly compensated for their contributions. In addition, gathering feedback from informal sector workers about their experiences with the collection points, including their satisfaction, suggestions for improvements, and any issues they encounter, provides insights. Furthermore, monitoring the allocation of resources, including funds and infrastructure, to establish and maintain collection points ensures their efficient use.
Financial incentives and mechanisms to ensure that informal sector workers receive fair compensation for their collection and recycling efforts should be developed. The government and waste management agencies are responsible for implementing these suggestions into action. Methods for monitoring the achievement of goals include maintaining and keeping track of the amounts, frequency, and consistency of payments made to informal sector workers as part of the financial incentive program. Simultaneously, conducting regular audits and inspections ensures that producers and recycling companies comply with their obligations to provide fair compensation to informal sector workers. Additionally, implementing measures to ensure transparency in the compensation process involves making payment records publicly accessible and establishing mechanisms for workers to verify the accuracy of their compensation. To further enhance transparency, collecting data through surveys and interviews gauges the satisfaction of informal sector workers with the financial incentive system, assessing whether they consider the compensation to be fair. Furthermore, comparing the compensation offered to informal sector workers with industry or regional standards evaluates its competitiveness and fairness within the local context.
Collaboration among government agencies, producers, and informal sector businesses, as well as encouraging partnerships and dialogue, should be encouraged in order to create a cohesive approach to EPR implementation. The responsible organizations for implementing these solutions are the government and waste management agencies. Measuring the level of engagement and participation of informal sector businesses in EPR programs, which includes attendance at meetings, workshops, and collaborative events, is one way of determining implementation success. Concurrently, conducting surveys and interviews with stakeholders gauges their perceptions of the collaborative efforts. This multifaceted approach enables for a comprehensive assessment of the involvement of informal sector businesses in EPR programs.
Mechanisms to monitor compliance and enforce regulations are in place, ensuring that the informal sector's rights and contributions are protected. The government and waste management agencies are the organizations responsible for implementing these solutions into reality. The strategies for measuring how well implementation goals are met include conducting regular compliance audits to ensure that producers, recycling companies, and other stakeholders follow the laws designed to protect the rights and contributions of the informal sector. Furthermore, assessing the number of workers who have obtained legal status or permits under the regulations involves assessing the degree to which informal sector workers and organizations are formally recognized and integrated into the EPR system. In addition, obtaining opinions from workers in the informal sector and other interested parties helps determine their satisfaction with protecting their rights and applying the law.

3.4.3. Stakeholders

The following are six major approaches for boosting stakeholder engagement.

All relevant stakeholders, both internal and external, should be identified, and their interests, needs, and concerns about the EPR system should be understood. These ideas must be implemented by the government and local governments. Creating and updating a stakeholder map that identifies all relevant stakeholders is one way to assess implementation success. Concurrently, conducting surveys, interviews, or focus group discussions with stakeholders aids in understanding and assessing their concerns and needs regarding the EPR system.
A plan for effective and regular communication should be established and followed, providing stakeholders with regular updates on the status of EPR implementation, its benefits, and each stakeholder's contribution to its success. Local governments must implement the suggestions. Methods for observing implementation outcomes include gathering stakeholder opinions to determine the impact of communication activities and comprehending their information needs. Simultaneously, determining whether participants feel involved is critical. Furthermore, conducting surveys and analyzing perception data assists in determining how well stakeholders understand the EPR system, its progress, and the value it provides, as well as whether they are aware of their role in its success.
Stakeholders should be involved in the planning and decision-making processes by forming cross-functional teams comprised of representatives from various stakeholder groups to gather input and ensure that all perspectives are considered. The responsible organizations for implementing these solutions are the government and local authorities. Maintaining records of stakeholder participation in planning and decision-making processes, such as meetings, workshops, and advisory committees, is one method used to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation. Moreover, it is also critical to track the frequency and diversity of stakeholder engagement. Obtaining feedback from stakeholders also aids in assessing their experiences and satisfaction with their involvement in planning and decision-making, as well as determining whether their input is valued and acted upon. Furthermore, determining the extent to which stakeholder input influenced decision-making and planning is critical for a thorough evaluation.
Stakeholders should have access to training and educational resources to help them understand the features and benefits of the EPR system, which should be tailored to the specific needs of each group, such as clinicians, administrative staff, or patients. Local governments will implement the ideas. Maintaining records of stakeholder participation in training programs and educational initiatives is an option for determining the effectiveness of implementation. Simultaneously, tracking the number of participants, their roles, and the frequency of their engagement is critical. Furthermore, feedback from stakeholders who have received training should be collected to help determine the effectiveness and relevance of the educational resources, and whether they feel more informed and prepared to engage with the EPR system. Furthermore, conducting assessments or surveys assesses stakeholders' knowledge gained after participating in training programs, comparing their understanding before and after the training. Furthermore, evaluating the quality and understandability of educational materials ensures that the EPR system's features and benefits are effectively communicated. Lastly, evaluating whether or not stakeholder behavior and practices have changed because of the training, with a focus on actions aligning with EPR goals, such as improved recycling practices, completes the comprehensive measurement approach.
Mechanisms for stakeholders should be established to provide feedback, ask questions, and resolve conflicts among themselves. User-friendly channels such as online portals or suggestion boxes are recommended to facilitate this. The responsible organizations for implementing these solutions are the government and local authorities. Methods for measuring the implementation include maintaining records of feedback and questions submitted through established mechanisms and tracking the frequency, source, and nature of inquiries and feedback. Simultaneously, the response time to stakeholder feedback and questions should be measured, evaluating whether responses are timely and adequately address concerns or queries. Additionally, conducting surveys or collecting feedback can gauge stakeholder satisfaction with the mechanisms, assessing accessibility and effectiveness. Furthermore, analyzing the content of feedback and questions helps identify common themes, concerns, and issues raised by stakeholders, informing decision-making and process improvement. The evaluation extends to the efficiency of communication channels used for feedback and questions, such as online forms or hotlines, ensuring accessibility. Moreover, gauging the perceived transparency of the organization's response to feedback and questions is vital for stakeholders to feel valued. Lastly, the ability of feedback mechanisms to handle conflicts or disputes effectively is evaluated, measuring the success rate of conflict resolution.
Milestones and accomplishments should be recognized and celebrated throughout the EPR implementation process to keep stakeholders motivated and engaged. Local governments are the bodies in charge of putting these solutions into action. Measurement strategies for implementation include gathering feedback from numerous partnerships to assess their satisfaction with the recognition of milestones and achievements. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine whether the recognition has had a positive impact on stakeholder motivation and engagement.
Simultaneously, trends in stakeholder participation and engagement in EPR-related activities are examined, comparing the periods before and after the implementation of milestone recognition initiatives. Furthermore, an evaluation is carried out to determine whether the recognition of achievements has increased stakeholder commitment, enthusiasm, and contributions to the EPR system.

3.4.4. EPR compliance

For managing EPR compliance, there are seven necessary solutions.

A detailed plan for EPR compliance monitoring should be developed, defining the aspects to be monitored, the frequency, and assigning responsibilities. The government is responsible for these. Implementation assessment methods include developing a comprehensive plan, followed by a review and evaluation of the plan's completeness and clarity. This ensures that the plan includes all necessary components and complies with regulatory requirements.
Systems for collecting information on EPR compliance, such as product quantities, collection and recycling rates, and financial contributions from producers, should be developed. It is the responsibility of the government. A systematic approach is required for measuring implementation strategies. First, the effectiveness of the data collection system is determined. As a result, an assessment of precision and dependability ensures the accuracy and consistency of the gathered data. An examination of reporting methods follows to determine clarity and transparency, with data made available to stakeholders. Moreover, feedback is used to refine data processes, ensuring adaptability and efficiency in response to evolving demands.
Regular independent audits should be implemented to uphold data accuracy provided by producers, ensuring transparency, and preventing misreporting. The relevant organizations, particularly the government and municipal governments, play an important role in conducting this process. The frequency and scope of these audits must be assessed, to ensure adherence to legal standards and a comprehensive examination of the information submitted by producers to assess the implementation. Additionally, evaluating the quality and content of audit reports is pivotal, ensuring a thorough examination of data accuracy. The effectiveness of corrective actions taken by producers in response to audit findings should be assessed, ensuring identified discrepancies are rectified. Moreover, the measurement includes evaluating whether independent audits have contributed to an ongoing improvement in the accuracy of data provided by producers.
Penalties for non-compliance and simultaneously considering incentives for compliance should be defined. The accountable organization, in this case, is the government. For the purpose of evaluating implementation, it is crucial to verify that penalties are consistently and impartially enforced, ensuring that non-compliant parties face the consequences as specified in the regulations. Additionally, the assessment includes an evaluation of whether the defined penalties align with the applicable legal and regulatory framework and are proportionate to the severity of non-compliance. Subsequently, the measurement involves assessing whether the existence of defined penalties has acted as a deterrent for non-compliant behavior among producers and other stakeholders. Furthermore, the impact of defined penalties on compliance rates, recycling rates, waste reduction, and program success is assessed, determining whether non-compliant parties have improved their practices over time.
Consumers and the public should be encouraged to report non-compliant products or practices, and a system for receiving and investigating consumer complaints should be established. The responsible units are the government and consumers. In order to assess the operation, the number of complaints, their type, and how they were handled must be registered and tracked. Simultaneously, an evaluation is conducted on the accessibility, user-friendliness, and responsiveness of the reporting mechanisms, such as online platforms, hotlines, or complaint forms. The measurement also involves assessing the response time to consumer and public reports, ensuring timely responses, and adequately addressing reported issues. Furthermore, the assessment encompasses the public awareness of the reporting mechanisms and the ease with which consumers can find information on reporting non-compliance. Conclusively, data analysis collected from consumer and public reports is conducted to identify patterns, joint issues, and trends related to non-compliance.
Transparency and accessibility of information regarding EPR compliance, audits, and penalties to the public should be ensured, as transparency fosters trust and encourages compliance. The government and local authorities are the responsible organizations. Methods to check applications include evaluating the accessibility of information related to EPR compliance, audits, and penalties. Ensure that this information is readily available to the public through websites, publications, or other channels. Simultaneously, assess the perceived transparency of the information provided to the public. Determine whether the public believes EPR compliance, audits, and penalties are reported openly and comprehensibly. Additionally, examine the clarity and transparency of compliance reports, ensuring they are easy to understand and provide comprehensive information on producer compliance with EPR regulations. Furthermore, evaluate the transparency and comprehensibility of audit reports, ensuring that they communicate audit findings and compliance assessments clearly and informally. Conclusively, verify that data related to EPR compliance, audits, and penalties are provided in user-friendly formats and can be easily accessed and analyzed by interested stakeholders.
Training and resources to the enforcement authority and relevant stakeholders should be provided to improve their capacity for monitoring and enforcing EPR compliance. The government is in charge. A systematic approach is given to measure implementation. It involves maintaining records of training sessions conducted, including details such as the number of participants, topics covered, and training dates. Simultaneously, participant feedback collection is emphasized to assess the effectiveness of the training programs, gauging whether the participants found the training informative and relevant to their roles. Additionally, the evaluation extends to measuring the improvement in the capacity and skills of the enforcement authority and stakeholders involved in monitoring and enforcing EPR compliance. This includes assessing their ability to perform tasks related to compliance oversight. Furthermore, the measurement includes assessing the impact of the training on the enforcement authority's ability to impose penalties, sanctions, or corrective actions on non-compliant producers and stakeholders. Conclusively, the evaluation encompasses the improvement in data collection, reporting, and documentation capabilities of both the enforcement authority and stakeholders, ensuring a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of the training initiatives.

4. Discussion

The adoption of EPR in Vietnam has a high potential for promoting sustainable production and consumption, environmental conservation, and economic growth. In addition to introducing the EPR framework, this research recognizes the opportunities and obstacles involved with its implementation around the world in general and in Vietnam in particular. Furthermore, the review paper identifies and emphasizes the significance of certain research directions and practical solutions that should be pursued soon. It is possible to successfully apply EPR in Vietnam by bridging research gaps and implementing these recommendations.

This literature review on the implementation of EPR in Vietnam is critical for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and scholars. Policymakers can use the findings to develop and implement effective EPR policies. Industry stakeholders, armed with knowledge about Vietnamese EPR regulations and obstacles, can design strategic engagement plans. Furthermore, this literature review provides comprehensive suggestions for promoting the EPR initiative and ways for measuring these implementations. It enables authorities to identify each organization's responsibility, avoid overlapping between stakeholders, and understand strategies to assess these implementations appropriately. Researchers can use the review to define future paths by filling research gaps and investigating other areas of EPR deployment. Finally, it promotes international collaboration by providing a basis for exchanging experiences and working on research initiatives, thus increasing the overall effectiveness of environmental stewardship in Vietnam.

While the research carried out on implementing EPR in Vietnam is informative, it does have several shortcomings that lead to fields for future investigation. A lack of empirical data limits this study, so future research should involve more comprehensive data collection through interviews, surveys, or case studies to provide a more detailed and accurate understanding of waste management and EPR practices in Vietnam. In addition, this paper needs to go into detail about the long-term impact of EPR implementation on environmental, economic, and social effects in Vietnam to assess the success and sustainability of EPR policies. Furthermore, this study does not compare the EPR program with alternative policies or combinations of policies; therefore, tackling these limitations through future research efforts would provide more nuanced knowledge of the problems and opportunities associated with implementing EPR in the Vietnamese context.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, this comprehensive literature review has provided the overall picture of the EPR framework implementation for solving environmental challenges in Vietnam.

Through the exploration of Vietnam's unique regulations and plans, it has become evident that the efforts of the Vietnamese government on environmental protection can be recognized. The existence of free-riders and orphan products, the popularity of the informal sector workers, the specific challenges associated with waste management infrastructure, and stakeholders’ participation demand suitable solutions. By understanding these challenges and advocating for further research to develop context-specific solutions, Vietnam can harness the full potential of EPR as a powerful instrument to mitigate environmental challenges, enhance resource efficiency, and advance its sustainability objectives.

As Vietnam continues its commitment to addressing pressing environmental impacts, EPR emerges not merely as a theoretical concept, but also as a practical solution. Thoughtfully adapting and integrating the above recommendations into the nation's policy framework, promoting environmental responsibility, and advancing a more sustainable future for Vietnam and its citizens will be achieved.

Acknowledgments

Not applicable.

Funding declaration:

This research did not receive any specific grants from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors/individuals.

Ethics approval:

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest:

The authors declare that there is no competing interest.

References

Abhishek Gaur S.K.G., Chaudhary Sangeeta. Advanced Organic Waste Management. 2022.
Sustainable Practices and Approaches.DOI
A.D.B.. Agriculture, Natural Resources and Rural Development Sector Assessment, Strategy and Road Map. 2022. Publisher Full Text
Atasu A., Subramanian R.. Extended Producer Responsibility for E-Waste: Individual or Collective Producer Responsibility?. Production and Operations Management. 2012; 21(6):1042-1059. DOI
Barbara Siuta-Tokarska A.T., Hornicki Krzysztof. The Concept of Extended Producer Responsibility in the Field of Packaging Industry and the Energy Sector in the Light of the Circular Economy—The Example of Poland. Energies. 2022. DOI
Bening Mayanti P.H.. Circular economy through waste reverse logistics under extended producer responsibility in Finland. Waste Management & Research. 2023. DOI
Cai Y.-J., Choi T.-M.. Extended Producer Responsibility: A Systematic Review and Innovative Proposals for Improving Sustainability. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 2021; 68(1):272-288. DOI
Campbell‐Johnston K., Munck M., Vermeulen W.J.V., Backes C.. Future perspectives on the role of extended producer responsibility within a circular economy: A Delphi study using the case of the Netherlands. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2021; 30(8):4054-4067. DOI
Căpriță D.. Extended producer responsibility - The answer to implementing Circular Economy Third. International Scientific Conference on Economics and Management-EMAN 2019: How to Cope with Disrupted Times. 2019.
Chang X., Wu J., Li T., Fan T.-J.. The joint tax-subsidy mechanism incorporating extended producer responsibility in a manufacturing-recycling system. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 210:821-836. DOI
Chu T.T.H.. Environmental pollution in Vietnam: Challenges in management and protection. Journal of Vietnamese Environment. 2018; 9(1):1-3. DOI
Duc Quang Nguyen V.H.H., Huynh Trung Hai. Impact assessment of the Extended Production. 2016.
Responsibility implementation in Vietnam: a study on electronic waste management. Journal of Science and Technology.42-48.
E.U.R.O.P.E.N.. Factsheet Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) forused Packaging.Publisher Full Text
Forslind K.. Implementing extended producer responsibility: the case of Sweden's car scrapping scheme. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2005; 13(6):619-629. DOI
Frithjof Laubinger A.B., Dubois Maarten, Börkey Peter. Modulated fees for extended producer responsibility schemes. 2021. Publisher Full Text
Gokce Esenduran A.A., Wassenhove Luk. Valuable E-Waste: Implications for Extended Producer Responsibility. 2002. DOI
Gottberg A., Morris J., Pollard S., Mark-Herbert C., Cook M.. Producer responsibility, waste minimisation and the WEEE Directive: case studies in eco-design from the European lighting sector. Sci Total Environ. 2006; 359(1-3):38-56. DOI
Gui L.. Recycling Infrastructure Development under Extended Producer Responsibility in Developing Economies. Production and Operations Management. 2020; 29(8):1858-1877. DOI
Gupt Y., Sahay S.. Review of extended producer responsibility: A case study approach. Waste Manag Res. 2015; 33(7):595-611. DOI
Hoang N.H., Ishigaki T., Kubota R., Tong T.K., Nguyen T.T., Nguyen H.G., Yamada M., Kawamoto K.. Financial and economic evaluation of construction and demolition waste recycling in Hanoi. Vietnam. Waste Manag. 2021; 131:294-304. DOI
Hoang T.C., Black M.C., Knuteson S.L., Roberts A.P.. Environmental Pollution, Management, and Sustainable Development: Strategies for Vietnam and Other Developing Countries. Environ Manage. 2019; 63(4):433-436. DOI
Hoi H.T.. Current Situation of Water pollution in Vietnam and Some Recommendations. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2020. DOI
Hosoda E.. Economic aspects of extended producer responsibility. 2004. Publisher Full Text
Huang X., Atasu A., Toktay L.B.. Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products. Management Science. 2019; 65(6):2573-2590. DOI
Huynh Trung Hai H.V.H., Quang Nguyen Duc. An overview of electronic waste recycling in Vietnam. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2017; 19:536-544. DOI
Ajania I.A., K I.O.. Implementation of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Policy in Nigeria: Towards Sustainable Business Practice. Nigerian Journal of Environment and Health. 2019;44-56.
Işıl Alev V.V.A., Atasu Atalay. Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. 2019; 22DOI
Jana Brinkmann T.V., Chaabane Wassim, Löhle Stephan. Assessing the role and impact of EPR in the prevention of marine Plastic Packaging Litter. 2022. Publisher Full Text
Johannes H.P., Kojima M., Iwasaki F., Edita E.P.. Applying the extended producer responsibility towards plastic waste in Asian developing countries for reducing marine plastic debris. Waste Manag Res. 2021; 39(5):690-702. DOI
Jones D.H.C.S.J.P.M.H.A.M.P.. <2020 - Study to Support Preparation of the Commission's Guidance for EPR schemes.pdf>. 2020. Publisher Full Text
Julian Ahlers M.H., Hibler Sophia, Hannak Jürgen. Analysis of Extended Producer Responsibility Schemes. 2021.
Kalimo H., Lifset R., Atasu A., Rossem C., Wassenhove L.. What Roles for Which Stakeholders under Extended Producer Responsibility?. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law. 2015; 24(1):40-57. DOI
Kawai K., Osako M., Matsui S., Dong N.T.. Identification of junk buyers' contribution to recycling of household waste in Hanoi, Vietnam, through a physical composition analysis. Waste Manag Res. 2012; 30(7):681-688. DOI
Kim Thi Thuy Ngoc N.T.T., Ha Dang Thi Phuong, Quang Nguyen Duc, Hung Dinh Quang. tại Việt Nam. INSTITUTE OF STRATEGY AND POLICY ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT. 2023. Publisher Full Text
Kojima M., Yoshida A., Sasaki S.. Difficulties in applying extended producer responsibility policies in developing countries: case studies in e-waste recycling in China and Thailand. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2009; 11(3):263-269. DOI
Kolk A., Walhain S., Wateringen S.. Environmental reporting by the Fortune Global 250: exploring the influence of nationality and sector. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2001; 10(1):15-28. DOI
Manh N.N., Collins G., Hanh Nguyen Trong, Hung Tran Thanh. The role of systemic investing in viet nam’s transition to a circular economy. 2021.
Le N., Nguyen T., Zhu D.. Understanding the Stakeholders’ Involvement in Utilizing Municipal Solid Waste in Agriculture through Composting: A Case Study of Hanoi. Vietnam. Sustainability. 2018; 10(7)DOI
Legislation. EPR Vietnam.Publisher Full Text
Lockrey S., Nguyen H., Crossin E., Verghese K.. Recycling the construction and demolition waste in Vietnam: opportunities and challenges in practice. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016; 133:757-766. DOI
Mark Hilton C.S., McCarthy Andrew, Börkey Peter. Extended Producer Responsibility. A Guidance Manual for Governments. 2001.
Mark Hilton C.S., McCarthy Andrew, Börkey Peter. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and the Impact of Online Sales. 2019. DOI
M.O.N.R.E.. 2017.
M.O.N.R.E.. 2016-2020 National Environmental Assessment Report (in Vietnamese. 2021. Publisher Full Text
Kunz N., M. K., Wassenhove L.V.. Stakeholder Views on Extended Producer Responsibility and the Circular Economy. 2018. Publisher Full Text
Nathan Kunz A.A., Mayers Kieren, Wassenhove Luk. Extended Producer Responsibility: Stakeholder Concerns and Future Developments. 2014. Publisher Full Text
Quang Nguyen Duc, Hung H.V., Eiji Y., Huynh T.-H.. Material Flows from Electronic Waste: Understanding the Shortages for Extended Producer Responsibility Implementation in Vietnam. Procedia CIRP. 2017; 61:651-656. DOI
Nguyen Duc Quang H.V.H., Hai Huynh Trung. Impact assessment of the Etended Production. 2016.
Responsibility implementation in vietnam: A study on electronic waste management. Journal of Science and Technology. 54:42-48. DOI
Nguyen Khanh Bui T.L.N., Phan Khanh Duong, Nguyen Anh Thu. Legal framework for recycling domestic solid waste in Vietnam: situation and recommendation. E3S Web of Conferences. 2020; 164DOI
Nguyen M.K.. Suggestions on extended producer responsibility mechanism in Vietnam from international experiences. Ministry of Science and Technology, Vietnam. 2023; 65(2):57-64. DOI
Nguyen T.. EPR Implementation in Viet Nam. 2022. Publisher Full Text
Nguyen T.. Thực hiện trách nhiệm mở rộng của nhà sản xuất: Áp dụng các nguyên tắc thị trường hướng tới mục tiêu phát triển bền vững. EPR Vietnam. 2022. Publisher Full Text
Nguyen T., Lin T.-H., Chan H.-P.. The Environmental Effects of Urban Development in Hanoi, Vietnam from Satellite and Meteorological Observations from 1999–2016. Sustainability. 2019; 11(6)DOI
Nguyen T.H., Nguyen H., Nguyen T.T., Le T.T.T., Nguyen T.H.Y.. Recyclable waste collection by informal sector in Vietnam: Dataset from Vinh, Nha Trang, Buon Ma Thuot, Da Nang, Ho Chi Minh and Hanoi Cities. Data Brief. 2021; 36DOI
Dao V.H.V.. Population Explosion and the Environment in Developing countries. A case study of Vietnam. 2020; 29(4):202-218. DOI
Nguyen X.P., Le N.D., Pham V.V., Huynh T.T., Dong V.H., Hoang A.T.. Mission, challenges, and prospects of renewable energy development in Vietnam. Energy Sources, Part A. 2021. DOI
O.E.C.D.. Extended Producer Responsibility. A guidance manual for governments. 2001.
O.E.C.D.. Global Forum on Environment: Promoting Sustainable Materials Management through Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR. 2014. Publisher Full Text
O.E.C.D.. The State of Play on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR): Opportunities and Challenges. 2014. Publisher Full Text
O.E.C.D.. Extended Producer Responsibility. Updated guidance for efficient waste management. 2016. Publisher Full Text
O.E.C.D.. Extended Producer Responsibility: Updated Guidance for Efficient Waste Management. 2016. DOI
O.E.C.D.. Modulated fees for extended producer responsibility schemes. 2021. Publisher Full Text
Government Office. Conclusion of Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc at the National online conference on strengthening pollution control and environmental protection. 2016.
Opoku H.N.. Policy implications of industrial ecology conceptions. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2004; 13(5):320-333. DOI
Park J., Díaz-Posada N., Mejía-Dugand S.. Challenges in implementing the extended producer responsibility in an emerging economy: The end-of-life tire management in Colombia. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018; 189:754-762. DOI
Phuong N.H.. Policy effectiveness assessment of selected tools for addressing marine plastic pollution. 2021. Publisher Full Text
Pouikli K.. Concretising the role of extended producer responsibility in European Union waste law and policy through the lens of the circular econom. 2020. DOI
Pouikli K.. Concretising the role of extended producer responsibility in European Union waste law and policy through the lens of the circular economy. ERA Forum. 2020; 20(4):491-508. DOI
Bercegol J.C.a A.N.T.H.. Waste Municipal Service and Informal Recycling Sector in Fast-Growing Asian Cities: Co-Existence. Opposition or Integration? Resources. 2017; 6(4)DOI
Phu S.T.Pham, F. T., Dinh P.V., T Hoa K.. Waste Recycling System for a Tourism City in Vietnam: Situation and Sustainable Strategy Approach. Case Study in Hoi An. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2018. DOI
Salhofer S., Jandric A., Soudachanh S., Le Xuan T., Tran T.D.. Plastic Recycling Practices in Vietnam and Related Hazards for Health and the Environment. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(8)DOI
Shibuya S.. Urbanization, jobs, and the family in the mekong delta, vietnam. Journal of Comparative Family Studies. 2018; 49:93-108. Publisher Full Text
Stephanie Newman E.W., Farmer Andrew, Brink Patrick, Schweitzer Jean-Pierre. In. 2015:367-394. Publisher Full Text
Vietnam The Government. 2022.
Vietnam The Government. 2022.
The National Assembly. 2005.
The National Assembly. 2020.
Minister The Prime. 2013.
Thomas L.. Extended Producer Responsibility in Cleaner Production: Policy Principle to Promote. 2000.
Environmental Improvements of Product Systems.
Tojo N.. Extended Producer Responsibility as a Driver for Design Change - Utopia or Reality?. 2004.
Tong Y.D., Huynh T.D.X., Khong T.D.. Understanding the role of informal sector for sustainable development of municipal solid waste management system: A case study in Vietnam. Waste Manag. 2021; 124:118-127. DOI
Duc Tran Chung, Petrus S.S.. Analysis of recycling structures for e-waste in Vietnam. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2016; 20(1):110-126. DOI
Walls M.. Extended producer responsibility and product design: economic theory and selected case studies. 2006.
Wang Y.. Research on Reverse Logistics Mode and Implementation of EPR. Applied Mechanics and Materials. 2012; 253-255:1032-1035. DOI
Bank World. The World Bank In Vietnam - Overview. 2023. Publisher Full Text
Group World Bank. Vietnam country climate and development report. 2022. Publisher Full Text
Vietnam World Bank. Solid and industrial hazardous waste management assessment. Options and actions to implement the national strategies. 2018.
W.W.F.. Extended producer responsibility fact sheet.Publisher Full Text
W.W.F.. How to implement Extended Producer Responsibility (epr). A briefing for governments and businesses. 2020.
W.W.F.. How to implement Extended Producer Responsibility. A briefing for governments and businesses. 2020. Publisher Full Text
Philippines W.W.F.. Toolkit 1: The EPR System and Policy Landscape - Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Law Toolkits for the Philippines. 2022. Publisher Full Text
Yasuhiko Hotta S.H., Bengtsson Magnus, Mori Hideyuki. Extended producer responsibility policy in East Asia in consideration of International resource circulation. 2009. Publisher Full Text
Yuqi Peng Y.D., Venkataraman Sriram, Song Sining. Does Extended Producer Responsibility Improve Eco-Innovation: An Empirical Study of Product Take-Back Programs. 2020. DOI

Plum Analytics

Read Counter : 2396 Download : 982

Share Now

[BIBR-1] Abhishek Gaur S.K.G., Chaudhary Sangeeta. Advanced Organic Waste Management. 2022.

[BIBR-2] Sustainable Practices and Approaches.DOI

[BIBR-3] A.D.B.. Agriculture, Natural Resources and Rural Development Sector Assessment, Strategy and Road Map. 2022. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-4] Atasu A., Subramanian R.. Extended Producer Responsibility for E-Waste: Individual or Collective Producer Responsibility?. Production and Operations Management. 2012; 21(6):1042-1059. DOI

[BIBR-5] Barbara Siuta-Tokarska A.T., Hornicki Krzysztof. The Concept of Extended Producer Responsibility in the Field of Packaging Industry and the Energy Sector in the Light of the Circular Economy—The Example of Poland. Energies. 2022. DOI

[BIBR-6] Bening Mayanti P.H.. Circular economy through waste reverse logistics under extended producer responsibility in Finland. Waste Management & Research. 2023. DOI

[BIBR-7] Cai Y.-J., Choi T.-M.. Extended Producer Responsibility: A Systematic Review and Innovative Proposals for Improving Sustainability. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 2021; 68(1):272-288. DOI

[BIBR-8] Campbell‐Johnston K., Munck M., Vermeulen W.J.V., Backes C.. Future perspectives on the role of extended producer responsibility within a circular economy: A Delphi study using the case of the Netherlands. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2021; 30(8):4054-4067. DOI

[BIBR-9] Căpriță D.. Extended producer responsibility - The answer to implementing Circular Economy Third. International Scientific Conference on Economics and Management-EMAN 2019: How to Cope with Disrupted Times. 2019.

[BIBR-10] Chang X., Wu J., Li T., Fan T.-J.. The joint tax-subsidy mechanism incorporating extended producer responsibility in a manufacturing-recycling system. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 210:821-836. DOI

[BIBR-11] Chu T.T.H.. Environmental pollution in Vietnam: Challenges in management and protection. Journal of Vietnamese Environment. 2018; 9(1):1-3. DOI

[BIBR-12] Duc Quang Nguyen V.H.H., Huynh Trung Hai. Impact assessment of the Extended Production. 2016.

[BIBR-13] Responsibility implementation in Vietnam: a study on electronic waste management. Journal of Science and Technology.42-48.

[BIBR-14] E.U.R.O.P.E.N.. Factsheet Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) forused Packaging.Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-15] Forslind K.. Implementing extended producer responsibility: the case of Sweden's car scrapping scheme. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2005; 13(6):619-629. DOI

[BIBR-16] Frithjof Laubinger A.B., Dubois Maarten, Börkey Peter. Modulated fees for extended producer responsibility schemes. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-17] Gokce Esenduran A.A., Wassenhove Luk. Valuable E-Waste: Implications for Extended Producer Responsibility. 2002. DOI

[BIBR-18] Gottberg A., Morris J., Pollard S., Mark-Herbert C., Cook M.. Producer responsibility, waste minimisation and the WEEE Directive: case studies in eco-design from the European lighting sector. Sci Total Environ. 2006; 359(1-3):38-56. DOI

[BIBR-19] Gui L.. Recycling Infrastructure Development under Extended Producer Responsibility in Developing Economies. Production and Operations Management. 2020; 29(8):1858-1877. DOI

[BIBR-20] Gupt Y., Sahay S.. Review of extended producer responsibility: A case study approach. Waste Manag Res. 2015; 33(7):595-611. DOI

[BIBR-21] Hoang N.H., Ishigaki T., Kubota R., Tong T.K., Nguyen T.T., Nguyen H.G., Yamada M., Kawamoto K.. Financial and economic evaluation of construction and demolition waste recycling in Hanoi. Vietnam. Waste Manag. 2021; 131:294-304. DOI

[BIBR-22] Hoang T.C., Black M.C., Knuteson S.L., Roberts A.P.. Environmental Pollution, Management, and Sustainable Development: Strategies for Vietnam and Other Developing Countries. Environ Manage. 2019; 63(4):433-436. DOI

[BIBR-23] Hoi H.T.. Current Situation of Water pollution in Vietnam and Some Recommendations. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2020. DOI

[BIBR-24] Hosoda E.. Economic aspects of extended producer responsibility. 2004. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-25] Huang X., Atasu A., Toktay L.B.. Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products. Management Science. 2019; 65(6):2573-2590. DOI

[BIBR-26] Huynh Trung Hai H.V.H., Quang Nguyen Duc. An overview of electronic waste recycling in Vietnam. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2017; 19:536-544. DOI

[BIBR-27] Ajania I.A., K I.O.. Implementation of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Policy in Nigeria: Towards Sustainable Business Practice. Nigerian Journal of Environment and Health. 2019;44-56.

[BIBR-28] Işıl Alev V.V.A., Atasu Atalay. Extended Producer Responsibility for Durable Products. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. 2019; 22DOI

[BIBR-29] Jana Brinkmann T.V., Chaabane Wassim, Löhle Stephan. Assessing the role and impact of EPR in the prevention of marine Plastic Packaging Litter. 2022. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-30] Johannes H.P., Kojima M., Iwasaki F., Edita E.P.. Applying the extended producer responsibility towards plastic waste in Asian developing countries for reducing marine plastic debris. Waste Manag Res. 2021; 39(5):690-702. DOI

[BIBR-31] Jones D.H.C.S.J.P.M.H.A.M.P.. <2020 - Study to Support Preparation of the Commission's Guidance for EPR schemes.pdf>. 2020. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-32] Julian Ahlers M.H., Hibler Sophia, Hannak Jürgen. Analysis of Extended Producer Responsibility Schemes. 2021.

[BIBR-33] Kalimo H., Lifset R., Atasu A., Rossem C., Wassenhove L.. What Roles for Which Stakeholders under Extended Producer Responsibility?. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law. 2015; 24(1):40-57. DOI

[BIBR-34] Kawai K., Osako M., Matsui S., Dong N.T.. Identification of junk buyers' contribution to recycling of household waste in Hanoi, Vietnam, through a physical composition analysis. Waste Manag Res. 2012; 30(7):681-688. DOI

[BIBR-35] Kim Thi Thuy Ngoc N.T.T., Ha Dang Thi Phuong, Quang Nguyen Duc, Hung Dinh Quang. tại Việt Nam. INSTITUTE OF STRATEGY AND POLICY ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT. 2023. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-36] Kojima M., Yoshida A., Sasaki S.. Difficulties in applying extended producer responsibility policies in developing countries: case studies in e-waste recycling in China and Thailand. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2009; 11(3):263-269. DOI

[BIBR-37] Kolk A., Walhain S., Wateringen S.. Environmental reporting by the Fortune Global 250: exploring the influence of nationality and sector. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2001; 10(1):15-28. DOI

[BIBR-38] Manh N.N., Collins G., Hanh Nguyen Trong, Hung Tran Thanh. The role of systemic investing in viet nam’s transition to a circular economy. 2021.

[BIBR-39] Le N., Nguyen T., Zhu D.. Understanding the Stakeholders’ Involvement in Utilizing Municipal Solid Waste in Agriculture through Composting: A Case Study of Hanoi. Vietnam. Sustainability. 2018; 10(7)DOI

[BIBR-40] Legislation. EPR Vietnam.Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-41] Lockrey S., Nguyen H., Crossin E., Verghese K.. Recycling the construction and demolition waste in Vietnam: opportunities and challenges in practice. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016; 133:757-766. DOI

[BIBR-42] Mark Hilton C.S., McCarthy Andrew, Börkey Peter. Extended Producer Responsibility. A Guidance Manual for Governments. 2001.

[BIBR-43] Mark Hilton C.S., McCarthy Andrew, Börkey Peter. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and the Impact of Online Sales. 2019. DOI

[BIBR-44] M.O.N.R.E.. 2017.

[BIBR-45] M.O.N.R.E.. 2016-2020 National Environmental Assessment Report (in Vietnamese. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-46] Kunz N., M. K., Wassenhove L.V.. Stakeholder Views on Extended Producer Responsibility and the Circular Economy. 2018. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-47] Nathan Kunz A.A., Mayers Kieren, Wassenhove Luk. Extended Producer Responsibility: Stakeholder Concerns and Future Developments. 2014. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-48] Quang Nguyen Duc, Hung H.V., Eiji Y., Huynh T.-H.. Material Flows from Electronic Waste: Understanding the Shortages for Extended Producer Responsibility Implementation in Vietnam. Procedia CIRP. 2017; 61:651-656. DOI

[BIBR-49] Nguyen Duc Quang H.V.H., Hai Huynh Trung. Impact assessment of the Etended Production. 2016.

[BIBR-50] Responsibility implementation in vietnam: A study on electronic waste management. Journal of Science and Technology. 54:42-48. DOI

[BIBR-51] Nguyen Khanh Bui T.L.N., Phan Khanh Duong, Nguyen Anh Thu. Legal framework for recycling domestic solid waste in Vietnam: situation and recommendation. E3S Web of Conferences. 2020; 164DOI

[BIBR-52] Nguyen M.K.. Suggestions on extended producer responsibility mechanism in Vietnam from international experiences. Ministry of Science and Technology, Vietnam. 2023; 65(2):57-64. DOI

[BIBR-53] Nguyen T.. EPR Implementation in Viet Nam. 2022. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-54] Nguyen T.. Thực hiện trách nhiệm mở rộng của nhà sản xuất: Áp dụng các nguyên tắc thị trường hướng tới mục tiêu phát triển bền vững. EPR Vietnam. 2022. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-55] Nguyen T., Lin T.-H., Chan H.-P.. The Environmental Effects of Urban Development in Hanoi, Vietnam from Satellite and Meteorological Observations from 1999–2016. Sustainability. 2019; 11(6)DOI

[BIBR-56] Nguyen T.H., Nguyen H., Nguyen T.T., Le T.T.T., Nguyen T.H.Y.. Recyclable waste collection by informal sector in Vietnam: Dataset from Vinh, Nha Trang, Buon Ma Thuot, Da Nang, Ho Chi Minh and Hanoi Cities. Data Brief. 2021; 36DOI

[BIBR-57] Dao V.H.V.. Population Explosion and the Environment in Developing countries. A case study of Vietnam. 2020; 29(4):202-218. DOI

[BIBR-58] Nguyen X.P., Le N.D., Pham V.V., Huynh T.T., Dong V.H., Hoang A.T.. Mission, challenges, and prospects of renewable energy development in Vietnam. Energy Sources, Part A. 2021. DOI

[BIBR-59] O.E.C.D.. Extended Producer Responsibility. A guidance manual for governments. 2001.

[BIBR-60] O.E.C.D.. Global Forum on Environment: Promoting Sustainable Materials Management through Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR. 2014. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-61] O.E.C.D.. The State of Play on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR): Opportunities and Challenges. 2014. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-62] O.E.C.D.. Extended Producer Responsibility. Updated guidance for efficient waste management. 2016. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-63] O.E.C.D.. Extended Producer Responsibility: Updated Guidance for Efficient Waste Management. 2016. DOI

[BIBR-64] O.E.C.D.. Modulated fees for extended producer responsibility schemes. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-65] Government Office. Conclusion of Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc at the National online conference on strengthening pollution control and environmental protection. 2016.

[BIBR-66] Opoku H.N.. Policy implications of industrial ecology conceptions. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2004; 13(5):320-333. DOI

[BIBR-67] Park J., Díaz-Posada N., Mejía-Dugand S.. Challenges in implementing the extended producer responsibility in an emerging economy: The end-of-life tire management in Colombia. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018; 189:754-762. DOI

[BIBR-68] Phuong N.H.. Policy effectiveness assessment of selected tools for addressing marine plastic pollution. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-69] Pouikli K.. Concretising the role of extended producer responsibility in European Union waste law and policy through the lens of the circular econom. 2020. DOI

[BIBR-70] Pouikli K.. Concretising the role of extended producer responsibility in European Union waste law and policy through the lens of the circular economy. ERA Forum. 2020; 20(4):491-508. DOI

[BIBR-71] Bercegol J.C.a A.N.T.H.. Waste Municipal Service and Informal Recycling Sector in Fast-Growing Asian Cities: Co-Existence. Opposition or Integration? Resources. 2017; 6(4)DOI

[BIBR-72] Phu S.T.Pham, F. T., Dinh P.V., T Hoa K.. Waste Recycling System for a Tourism City in Vietnam: Situation and Sustainable Strategy Approach. Case Study in Hoi An. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2018. DOI

[BIBR-73] Salhofer S., Jandric A., Soudachanh S., Le Xuan T., Tran T.D.. Plastic Recycling Practices in Vietnam and Related Hazards for Health and the Environment. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(8)DOI

[BIBR-74] Shibuya S.. Urbanization, jobs, and the family in the mekong delta, vietnam. Journal of Comparative Family Studies. 2018; 49:93-108. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-75] Stephanie Newman E.W., Farmer Andrew, Brink Patrick, Schweitzer Jean-Pierre. In. 2015:367-394. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-76] Vietnam The Government. 2022.

[BIBR-77] Vietnam The Government. 2022.

[BIBR-78] The National Assembly. 2005.

[BIBR-79] The National Assembly. 2020.

[BIBR-80] Minister The Prime. 2013.

[BIBR-81] Thomas L.. Extended Producer Responsibility in Cleaner Production: Policy Principle to Promote. 2000.

[BIBR-82] Environmental Improvements of Product Systems.

[BIBR-83] Tojo N.. Extended Producer Responsibility as a Driver for Design Change - Utopia or Reality?. 2004.

[BIBR-84] Tong Y.D., Huynh T.D.X., Khong T.D.. Understanding the role of informal sector for sustainable development of municipal solid waste management system: A case study in Vietnam. Waste Manag. 2021; 124:118-127. DOI

[BIBR-85] Duc Tran Chung, Petrus S.S.. Analysis of recycling structures for e-waste in Vietnam. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2016; 20(1):110-126. DOI

[BIBR-86] Walls M.. Extended producer responsibility and product design: economic theory and selected case studies. 2006.

[BIBR-87] Wang Y.. Research on Reverse Logistics Mode and Implementation of EPR. Applied Mechanics and Materials. 2012; 253-255:1032-1035. DOI

[BIBR-88] Bank World. The World Bank In Vietnam - Overview. 2023. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-89] Group World Bank. Vietnam country climate and development report. 2022. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-90] Vietnam World Bank. Solid and industrial hazardous waste management assessment. Options and actions to implement the national strategies. 2018.

[BIBR-91] W.W.F.. Extended producer responsibility fact sheet.Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-92] W.W.F.. How to implement Extended Producer Responsibility (epr). A briefing for governments and businesses. 2020.

[BIBR-93] W.W.F.. How to implement Extended Producer Responsibility. A briefing for governments and businesses. 2020. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-94] Philippines W.W.F.. Toolkit 1: The EPR System and Policy Landscape - Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Law Toolkits for the Philippines. 2022. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-95] Yasuhiko Hotta S.H., Bengtsson Magnus, Mori Hideyuki. Extended producer responsibility policy in East Asia in consideration of International resource circulation. 2009. Publisher Full Text

[BIBR-96] Yuqi Peng Y.D., Venkataraman Sriram, Song Sining. Does Extended Producer Responsibility Improve Eco-Innovation: An Empirical Study of Product Take-Back Programs. 2020. DOI

Implementing EPR as a Tool for Addressing Environmental Issues in Vietnam

Abstract

Full text article

References

Authors

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

Address

Social Media

Article Sidebar

Abstract

Full text article

References

Authors

Article Details

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles