International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

38.3 Examples
38.3.1 French Unwanted Mail Decree
The French government took decisive action in 2006 in the form of an extended
producer responsibility scheme to attempt to reduce the volume of junk mail sent to
households each year. Distributors of junk mail have to pay for the recycling of the
resultant waste under a decree agreed by the council of ministers. This sector has
been informed that if it fails to comply with the decree, the government will introduce
a tax on junk mail.
The decree states that the participants can either pay into a fund that will be used to
pay for recycling by local authorities or they can pay for advertising to encourage
consumers to recycle. Payment levels were set in late 2006 after meetings between
the government and interested parties.
38.3.2 Voluntary Agreements
The UK has had a voluntary agreement between DEFRA and the Direct Mail
Association since 2003, aimed at increasing recycling rates. They increased from
13% in 2003 to 28% in 2005, although this should be seen in context of a general
increase in recycling levels. The amount of addressed direct mail has fallen by around
5% since 2003, according to DEFRA.
The mailing preference service (MPS) is a significant part of the industry’s response to
concerns and allows householders to register to opt out of receiving direct mail. One
way in which a policy could be designed to increase the effectiveness of the service
would be to mandate the promotion of it on direct mail items.
38.3.3 Enforcing the ‘No Junk Mail’ Sticker
In Australia, the opt out has been strengthened by legislative reinforcement: it is
legally binding to respect the no junk mail sticker on householders’ doors. The
Distribution Standards Board maintains a database of all known addresses that carry
a restrictive sign on the letterbox.
38.3.4 Postage Levy
An increase in the cost of postage, or a waste level on bulk mailings would increase
the cost of direct mailings, with the aim of increasing the targeting, and the decrease
in waste. There may be a question mark over the price elasticity of demand, and this
policy would only impact mailed items, rather than hand delivered. There do not
appear to be any examples of this policy having been implemented.
38.3.5 Extended Producer Responsibility
Extended producer responsibility would oblige the direct mail industry to cover the
cost of separate collection and recycling of junk mail. The revenue from such a policy
would be redistributed to local authorities to support the costs of junk mail. Making
the real cost of these marketing materials fall on those responsible would incentivise
600
29/09/09