“I like to think of the circular economy as a jacked-up \u201creduce, reuse, recycle\u201d system. The hope is to keep materials in use for as long as possible with minimal waste, and to do so on a much wider scale.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Right now, there are two main reasons why a lot of what we recycle doesn\u2019t ever actually get made into new things: It\u2019s either prohibitively expensive to do, or we just don\u2019t know how to recycle that material yet (like most plastics). A circular economy also would aim to prevent waste from happening in the first place by designing products made to be recycled.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
…<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“The most obvious approach to see \u2014 but the most difficult for governments to implement \u2014 is to pass regulations that ensure compliance for labor and the environment. Every company that produces would have to adhere to some kind of law that outlines how the waste and the extraction of new materials should be handled. Governments would also have to invest in infrastructure to make it possible to meet those tougher rules, whether that\u2019s scaling up recycling facilities or providing subsidies for innovators to solve a complex recycling problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One public policy idea that\u2019s gaining traction is extended producer responsibility (EPR), which shifts the end-of-life management of products away from consumers and governments back to the corporations that sell those products.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Right now, you and I likely pay taxes to our municipal and state governments to handle trash and recycling. EPR laws would require companies to front money for the products they sell into a responsible entity \u2014 like a nonprofit organization or government agency \u2014 that helps pay for recycling infrastructure, collection, sorting, processing, and sale of recovered materials. (EPR can also look like voluntary take-back programs, where consumers can return their used stuff to the company to recycle into other things.)” <\/p>\n\n\n\n