Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
EASY–ECO 2010 Sustainable Development Evaluations in Europe: From a Decade of Practices, Politics and Science to Emerging Demands Brussels , 17-19 November 2010
The limits of indicators in public
policy evaluation:
The case of e-waste.
Cédric Gossart
The Holy Grail of policy evaluation
« Is my policy evaluation
going to be of any use?
page 2
The e-waste problem
WEEE = Waste of Electrical
and Electronic Equipment
Hazardous waste
40 000 000 tonnes (world)
300% growth rate in
developing countries
Illegal exports
page 3
E-waste policies
1. Europe: WEEE Directive 2002/96/EC
2. USA: State patchwork (NCER: 20% collection rate)
3. China: China WEEE effective in 2011
4. Switzerland: since 1994 (>80% collection rate)
5. France: since 2006 (25% collection rate)
page 4
5
Best E-waste Policies project
Initial aim: To comparatively
evaluate different national
policies and legislation on e-
waste and, from this, to
come up with legal and
policy recommendations for
“best e-waste policies”...
6
Aim: To explore how indicators can be used to
identify best e-waste policies.
• Step 1: Collect indicators to build the e-waste profile of
different countries,
• Step 2: Compare these profiles and identify key factors
conducive to best e-waste policies.
The indicators project
« Best » e-waste policy?
Policy which outcomes meet the objectives defined in the
official ewaste policy of a given country.
No one-size-fits-all:
• The definition of “good” results varies across countries,
• A policy producing good results in country A may not produce
the same results in country B.
The criteria upon which e-waste policies are to be evaluated is
the outcome of a democratic choice that cannot be determined by
experts evaluating these policies (e.g. costs of the take back
system, or collection and treatment rates).
8
Method
1. Collect indicators:
• Explore several cases (European countries: to find data more
easily => mostly early movers: Switzerland, Belgium,
Netherlands, France),
• Build framework for e-waste profile based on collected
indicators,
• Test framework on one early moving country (Switzerland).
2. Identify key factors supporting best e-waste
policies:
• Questionnaire to stakeholders (data analysis not enough)
Results
1) E-waste profile of Switzerland
2) Mapping available indicators (.../…)
3) Objective data analysis difficult to identify factors
=> Questionnaire for subjective analysis of factors
conducive to best e-waste policies.
1) E-waste profile of Switzerland
2) Mapping of available indicators
Conclusions (1/2)
Andrew Jordan (UEA)
- Implementation lies in the hands of member states
- Need common evaluation criteria that go beyond mere economic efficiency
John Hontelez (EEB)
- Simple indicators may have more impact on the policy-
making process than complex indicators sets.
page 12
1. The Holy Grail of policy evaluation does not exist.
2. My evaluation has been useful if somebody has
learned something along the way.
3. I learned how to reach the saturated ears of
policy-makers and citizens:
• The E-waste Solutions Index (ESI) …/…
page 13
Conclusions (2/2)
page 14Source: StEP @ project internal document, please do not quote.
page 15
Thank you
Cédric Gossart
Associate Professor, Telecom Institute
ETOS research group
9, rue Charles Fourier - 91011, Evry Cedex – France
Tel. : +33 (0)1 60 76 46 69
Fax : +33 (0)1 60 76 42 86
Email: [email protected]
http://etos.it-sudparis.eu/membres/CedricGossart/Home.htm
page 16
The E-waste Solutions Index (ESI).
page 17 http://www.step-initiative.org
page 18
