Legal Solutions to Reduce the Environmental Burdens of Disposables. A Comparison of EU, Canadian and Swiss Law

This thesis compares the legal solutions regulating disposables in the European Union (EU), Canada, and Switzerland. It analyzes whether they explicitly intend or implicitly are capable of reducing environmental burdens caused by producing, using, and disposing of such goods. Contrary to common practice, this thesis advocates the use of the term «disposable» or «throwaway», instead of «single-use», for describing the group of products or goods which have been designed and, thus, intended to be used only once, a few times, or for a short period of time. The research findings illustrate that numerous existing legal solutions are beneficial for preventing environmental harm, yet, many of them should be revised in order to have an even greater impact. None of the three jurisdictions examined provide satisfactory, effective and sufficient legal provisions: Environmental costs generated by manufacturing, using and disposing of disposables are not sufficiently internalized; too few incentives exist for inducing people to replace disposables with reusables; disposables need nowhere be replaced by reusables; there is a great lack of implementation of the waste priority order as well as the principle of sustainability, the precautionary principle, and the polluter pays principle; and the transition to a circular economy is not sufficiently pursued. The three jurisdictions as well as their existing legal solutions are far from best practice with respect to protecting the environment from harm caused by manufacturing, using, and disposing of disposables. Nevertheless, there are certain aspects entailed in some of the existing legal provisions which should be adopted by all three. The findings in this thesis allow the conclusion that the EU, Canada, and Switzerland only have a very fragmented approach and a holistic concept is missing. Moreover, Switzerland is the country lagging behind the most.