Led by circular economy specialist Kirsten Barnes, the panel of experts included:
Drawing on learnings from EPR in the packaging space, Williams kicked off the discussion by outlining the transition from voluntary to mandatory EPR.
Francis then took over and touched on the strengths and challenges of mandatory EPR from the producer responsibility organisation (PRO) perspective.
As the age of the mandatory EPR dawned on the packaging industry, there was more participation as required by law. Additionally, everyone knew what was expected of them with clear targets.
Additionally, the reporting requirements meant that there were better systems in place to track the impact, which gave the data more integrity.
Regarding social development, the mandated EPR placed greater emphasis on SMEs in the value chain, recognising the informal sector and collection.
While those are some of the positives of mandatory EPR, Francis outlines some of the negatives.
Citing an ‘atmosphere of uncertainty’, he says that government interference is a big hindrance, with another round of proposed amendments to the regulations published at the end of year three in a five-year term.
Moreover, he says there’s also a feeling within the PRO sector that the regulations are too ominous and, at times, too prescriptive.
“I think within our space, because of ambiguity, we've had different PRO bodies run different models, which I feel has created a lot of confusion in the sector,” says Francis.
While collaboration is the name of the game, Francis says that the legislation has unintentionally created a competitive environment.
He says that some PROs potentially look at ways of improving the value offerings of funds, undermining each other to build market share.
At the end of the discussion, Koor and Patel looked at the brand owners' perspective on EPR development.
They highlighted the need for better compliance, the high cost of recycling, and the challenges of managing diverse materials in the textile industry.
Koor believes that the legislation needs clearer definitions, especially related to the word ‘producer’.
“You cannot have a brand owner as a producer and the packaging manufacturer as a producer and the filler as a producer,” he warns.
He adds that when it comes to developing EPR in the textile industry, there needs to be clarity regarding fees and who’s responsible for it.
Adding that at the moment, it's becoming unworkable, which he believes will create greater complexity.
He advises the textile space that, as an industry, you need to understand your material flows and have a good sense of the data, including the packaging manufacturer, the filler, the importer, and the brand owner and retailers who also have their own brands.
Patel then touched on the complexity of the fashion industry and referred to the various aspects of a simple garment.
A bra, for example, has multiple components and multiple types of materials (metal, plastics and fabrics) that could come from different parts of the world.
Barnes called on those in the textile industry – big and small – to be part of the conversation.
“Be part of the design, if you get involved now, where you can be part of the design. We need to hear every voice, because it's the system we need to change,” she urged.
While the country is in the process of developing EPR for the fashion and textile industry, there are initiatives led by GreenCape, the SA Plastics Pact, as well as the Retail–Clothing Textile Footwear Leather Master Plan 2030.
Get involved and drive the conversation, understand the cost of recycling, know your materials, know your data, know your supply chain, and speak to each other.
