Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if he will publish a comparative analysis of Extended Producer Responsibility schemes in other advanced economies, including any measures taken to prevent disproportionate cost burdens on the beer and pub sector.

International comparisons of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes are challenging due to differences in waste infrastructure across countries. The UK’s pEPR scheme covers more costs than those in other countries. For example, many European countries rely on 'bring sites' for glass recycling, which lowers collection costs. Furthermore, UK glass fees are likely to be higher due to the full inclusion of the costs associated with managing residual waste—waste not disposed of by consumers in recycling bins—something not included in the pEPR schemes of other countries. While the costs for different materials are apportioned accordingly, the UK aims to balance environmental objectives with the interests of all sectors, including the beer and pub industry.