Editing Extended producer responsibility (section)

===Advantages===

When producers face either the financial or physical burden of recycling their electronics after use, they may be incentivized to design more sustainable, less [[electronic waste|toxic]], and more easily recyclable electronics.<ref name="Sierra Club"/><ref name="epa">{{cite web |url=http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/partnerships/stewardship/basic.htm |title=Basic Information &#124; Product Stewardship &#124; US EPA |access-date=2010-05-27 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100806123116/http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/partnerships/stewardship/basic.htm |archive-date=2010-08-06}}</ref><ref name="seven">{{cite web |url=http://72.10.40.168/commentaries/scarlett_20001004.shtml |title=Reason Foundation Commentary: E-Waste Politics |access-date=2010-05-27 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20070812124841/http://72.10.40.168/commentaries/scarlett_20001004.shtml |archive-date=2007-08-12}}</ref> Using fewer materials and designing products to last longer can directly reduce producers' end-of-life costs.<ref name="epa"/><ref name="epr">{{cite web |url=http://www.eprworkinggroup.org/ |title=EPR Working Group |access-date=2010-05-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091125001503/http://www.eprworkinggroup.org/ |archive-date=2009-11-25 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Thus, extended producer responsibility is often cited<ref>{{cite web |author-last=Prakash |author-first=Bhavani |title=The Light Bulb Conspiracy: The Story of Planned Obsolescence |url=http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2011/08/26/the-light-bulb-conspiracy-the-story-of-planned-obsolescence/ |publisher=Eco Walk the Talk |access-date=2012-06-06 |archive-date=2012-01-30 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120130070308/http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2011/08/26/the-light-bulb-conspiracy-the-story-of-planned-obsolescence/ |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Annie Leonard interview & "Story of Electronics" release|url=http://www.nourishthespirit.com/annie-leonard-interview-story-of-electronics-release/ |publisher=Nourish the Spirit |access-date=2012-06-06 |archive-date=2013-05-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130509041737/http://www.nourishthespirit.com/annie-leonard-interview-story-of-electronics-release/ |url-status=live}}</ref> as one way to fight [[planned obsolescence]], because it financially encourages manufacturers to design for recycling and make products last longer. In addition to fighting planned obsolescence, by allocating part of the financial responsibility for paying for and managing waste on the producer, the pressures placed on governments may be alleviated. Currently, many governments bear the weight of disposal and spend millions of dollars on collecting and removing electronic waste.<ref name=":2">{{cite web |url=https://www.wastetodaymagazine.com/article/extended-producer-responsibility-us-product-stewardship-institute/|title=Building capacity for EPR in the US |website=Waste Today |language=en |access-date=2020-03-02 |archive-date=2019-12-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191208183641/https://www.wastetodaymagazine.com/article/extended-producer-responsibility-us-product-stewardship-institute/ |url-status=live}}</ref> However, these plans usually fail because governments do not have enough money to create and enforce them properly.<ref name=":2"/> Placing responsibility on producers to dispose of their products can give governments more freedom to create legislation which benefits sustainability with little cost to both parties, while also raising awareness about the issues EPR seeks to solve.<ref name=":2"/>

One of the advantages of EPR is that it becomes more and more effective as the EPR policy puts pressure on countries that export their E-waste. The regulation of this E-waste forces infrastructure to deal with the waste or implement new ways of creating products from the producers.<ref>{{cite web |author-last= |author-first= |date=2018-07-06 |title=Could the Chinese National Sword inspire global recycling innovation? |url=https://recycling.tomra.com/blog/chinese-national-sword-inspire-global-recycling-innovation |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200302191111/https://recycling.tomra.com/blog/chinese-national-sword-inspire-global-recycling-innovation |archive-date=2020-03-02 |access-date=2020-03-02 |website=recycling.tomra.com |language=en}}</ref> As more countries adopt these policies it restricts other countries from ignoring the issues. For example, when China stopped importing E-waste from the U.S., a build-up of waste was formed at ports.<ref name=":3">{{cite thesis |title=Extended Producer Responsibility in Cleaner Production: Policy Principle to Promote Environmental Improvements of Product Systems |url=https://portal.research.lu.se/portal/en/publications/extended-producer-responsibility-in-cleaner-production-policy-principle-to-promote-environmental-improvements-of-product-systems(e43c538b-edb3-4912-9f7a-0b241e84262f).html |publisher=Lund University |date=2000 |language=en |author-first=Thomas |author-last=Lindhqvist |access-date=2020-03-02 |archive-date=2020-03-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200302191111/https://portal.research.lu.se/portal/en/publications/extended-producer-responsibility-in-cleaner-production-policy-principle-to-promote-environmental-improvements-of-product-systems(e43c538b-edb3-4912-9f7a-0b241e84262f).html |url-status=live}}</ref> The lack of infrastructure around recycling E-waste in the US has been possible because of the ability to export and the negligence of producers. The pressure of this growing dump of E-waste forces countries to have their own infrastructure and will force more regulations from the government, state and federal, to be placed on producers.<ref name=":3"/>