The outcomes of the paint stewardship program in British Columbia are examined to assess whether the objectives of the program and the principles of product stewardship are being achieved. The objectives are to: 1) compel the paint industry and consumers to take responsibility for waste paint; 2) minimize the volume of paint landfilled; 3) raise consumer awareness about the impacts on the environment of excessive waste generation, and the need to opt for environmentally friendly practices.' The methods of research used include secondary literature, a survey and interviews. Due to the unavailability of some crucial data, I could not carry out a proper program assessment. The following are some insights into the program: 1) waste paint collected increased from 1,300,000 equivalent litre containers in 1995 to nearly 3,000,000 in 1997. However, without knowing the volume of paint sold annually, these figures reveal little about the effectiveness of the program; 2) Of the residual paint collected in 1997, 51% was recycled into products other than paint, 30 % involved energy recovery, 11% was landfilled, while 8% was reused. I discussed the need to increase the volume of paint reused as doing so prevents the problem of waste paint from arising in the first instance. There are both benefits and flaws associated with the process of recycling. Compared to reuse, recycling does relatively little to solve the problem of waste reduction; 3) In the absence of crucial data, the objective of compelling the paint industry and consumers to take responsibility for waste paint is so far merely theoratical. The paint program is consumer funded and industry operated. In practice, a 50c ecofee/litre paint has not served as an incentive to encourage consumers to bring residuals to a depot. Nor has it resulted in meaningful changes in consumption habits. A 50c ecofee also means that paint sales will not likely be affected. It appears the industry is charging this low fee despite the fact that it does not lead to the achievements of the objectives outlined for the program. While a paint program is now in place for the processing of residual paint, the program cannot be assessed based on its objectives. To enable meaningful program evaluation, the primary recommendation is for the authorities monitoring the program to collect the relevant data over time in order improve program effectiveness.

The outcomes of the paint stewardship program in British Columbia are examined to assess whether the objectives of the program and the principles of product stewardship are being achieved. The objectives are to: 1) compel the paint industry and consumers to take responsibility for waste paint; 2) minimize the volume of paint landfilled; 3) raise consumer awareness about the impacts on the environment of excessive waste generation, and the need to opt for environmentally friendly practices.' The methods of research used include secondary literature, a survey and interviews. Due to the unavailability of some crucial data, I could not carry out a proper program assessment. The following are some insights into the program: 1) waste paint collected increased from 1,300,000 equivalent litre containers in 1995 to nearly 3,000,000 in 1997. However, without knowing the volume of paint sold annually, these figures reveal little about the effectiveness of the program; 2) Of the residual paint collected in 1997, 51% was recycled into products other than paint, 30 % involved energy recovery, 11% was landfilled, while 8% was reused. I discussed the need to increase the volume of paint reused as doing so prevents the problem of waste paint from arising in the first instance. There are both benefits and flaws associated with the process of recycling. Compared to reuse, recycling does relatively little to solve the problem of waste reduction; 3) In the absence of crucial data, the objective of compelling the paint industry and consumers to take responsibility for waste paint is so far merely theoratical. The paint program is consumer funded and industry operated. In practice, a 50c ecofee/litre paint has not served as an incentive to encourage consumers to bring residuals to a depot. Nor has it resulted in meaningful changes in consumption habits. A 50c ecofee also means that paint sales will not likely be affected. It appears the industry is charging this low fee despite the fact that it does not lead to the achievements of the objectives outlined for the program. While a paint program is now in place for the processing of residual paint, the program cannot be assessed based on its objectives. To enable meaningful program evaluation, the primary recommendation is for the authorities monitoring the program to collect the relevant data over time in order improve program effectiveness. / Applied Science, Faculty of / Community and Regional Planning (SCARP), School of / Graduate