LED BY:
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FOR ELECTRONICS
RECYCLING PROGRAMS
How Can We Measure
Effectiveness?
Jason Linnell, National Center for Electronics Recycling
Jennifer Nash, Product Stewardship Institute
E-SCRAP 2009 • TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22 • 1pm–4pm
ABOUT US
National Center for Electronics Recycling
 A 501(c)(3) non-profit organization formed in 2005
 Dedicated to the development and enhancement of a national infrastructure for
the recycling of used electronics in the U.S.
 The NCER is ready to assist in the implementation of recycling programs across
the country and believes that national and regional approaches offer the best
way forward.
Product Stewardship Institute
 National non-profit membership-based organization located in Boston,
Massachusetts
 Works with state and local government agencies to partner with manufacturers,
retailers, environmental groups, federal agencies, and other key stakeholders to
reduce the health and environmental impacts of consumer products.
 Encourages product design changes and mediating stakeholder dialogues
CURRENT METRICS
Current Performance Metrics in State
Electronics Recycling Programs
Jason Linnell, NCER
 Types of Metrics in Legislation
 Results So Far
 What Are We Missing?
WORKSHOP GOALS
 Dialogue on effective performance measures
 Develop a plan to incorporate them into data
and analysis
 Agenda Overview
 Overview presentations/questions
 Current metrics for electronics recycling
 Stakeholder panel
 Discussion
States With E-Waste Laws
Rhode
Island
NYC
Percentage of Population
Covered by E-waste Law
States With Producer Responsibility Laws
% Not
Covered,
50.5%
% Covered,
49.5%
States With ARF (Consumer Fees) Laws
States With Landfill Disposal Fee
States With Disposal Ban/No E-Waste Law
CURRENT METRICS
Most Recent Collection Volumes
250,000,000
216,000,000
200,000,000
150,000,000
100,000,000
50,000,000
27,500,000
5,200,000
37,500,000
19,100,000
8,100,000
0
California
Maine
Maryland
Minnesota*
Washington**
Oregon**
*Time period
Jul 08- Jun 09
** annualized
California is the best program in the nation!
OR….
CURRENT METRICS
Pounds Per Capita
7
6
5.88
5.73
5.36
5.03
5
4.01
4
3
2
1.45
1
0
California
Maine
Maryland
Minnesota*
Washington**
Oregon**
*Time period
Jul 08- Jun 09
** annualized
California is (barely) the best program in the nation!
BUT…
CURRENT METRICS
Major Differences:
 Patchwork of Products and Entities!
 10 different sets of product lists
 8 Sets of “covered entities”
 All cover monitors, TVs, laptops + allow households
 Non-Scientific Deductions to normalize (cumulative)
 – 10% desktops
 – 5% small peripherals/printers/VCRs/DVDs etc
 And (choose 1):
• – 35% allow all entities (including business)
• – 15% allow small businesses, school districts, local governments
• – 10% all small business/non-profits only

CURRENT METRICS
Adjusted, Non-Scientific Per Capita Results
5
4.56
4.3
4.5
4
3.82
4.02
4.01
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.31
1.5
1
0.5
0
California
Maine
Maryland
Minnesota
Washington
Oregon
Minnesota is the best program in the nation!
CURRENT METRICS
How Can & Should
We Measure
Performance??
PERFORMANCE GOALS
Performance Goals Overview
Jennifer Nash, PSI
 Effective Metrics
 Types of Performance Metrics
 Use of Performance Metrics in other Stewardship
Programs
BREAK
BREAK
PANEL
Panel Members
 Garth Hickle, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
 Carole Cifrino, Maine Dept. of Environmental
Protection
 Mike Watson, Dell
 Lorraine Kerwood, NextStep Recycling
OPEN FORUM
What Are The Desired Metrics for
Electronics Recycling Programs?
 What are the best metrics?
 Other Metrics – What is feasible and what would they tell us?
 What are the key challenges in harmonizing performance
metrics?
 Is it necessary to harmonize all program elements at once, or
can metrics be harmonized as a first step?
 Plan for follow-up action on performance measures