The SHAR law, effective in 2001, provides for the take-back of refrigerators, air conditioners, TVs, and washing machines. Approximately 80% of the items covered under the SHAR law had already been collected under the 1991 amendments to the Waste Management Law. The new law was enacted in order to increase recovery of the remaining 20% of covered goods.
The SHAR law divides responsibility for covered products among producers
and/or importers, retailers, local governments, and consumers. The law
requires retailers and local governments to accept covered end-of-life
appliances from consumers, for a fee. Retailers must take back products
they themselves sold and old products when they sell similar new products.
Local governments must collect covered appliances retailers will not accept.
The government set the fees to cover industry's actual costs for take-back,
transportation, and recycling. They are (in U.S. dollars): washing machine,
$24; air conditioner, $35; refrigerator, $46; and television, $27. Manufacturers
and importers must assume physical responsibility, including collection
from retailers and local governments and recycling, for their brands of
end-of-life products. Manufacturers and importers must create and fund
designated legal entities for the recovery of orphaned products (products
of brands no longer produced or imported into the country). Many Japanese
manufacturers began pilot collection and recycling projects prior to 2001
in anticipation of the EPR mandate. 9
The SHAR law sets recycling targets for iron, copper, and aluminum from all collected products and glass from televisions. The targets are more than 60% for air conditioners, 50% for washing machines and refrigerators, and 55% for televisions.
One of the reasons the Japanese government allows industry to pass financial responsibility for household appliance recycling to consumers is the hope that they may realize how much it costs to throw away a product. The cost may lead consumers to reconsider disposing of a product that still functions or is repairable. No research has verified whether the fees have had this effect. Such an effect may be difficult to detect because consumers may still replace products but simply choose to stockpile older products in order to avoid the fees.
The SHAR law has spurred manufacturers to invest in appliance recycling
facilities and explore "design for the environment" practices. For example,
Panasonic has reduced the number of components in its televisions and
the number of plastic resin types in many of its products in order to
facilitate recycling. In fact, a Japanese researcher reported that three
out of five companies interviewed said that the enactment of the SHAR
Law was a strong incentive for them to promote Design for the Environment.
10
As of May 2001, it was too early to evaluate the impact of this law on recovery levels.
Return to Table of Contents
Return to EPR home page
