ARTICLE
16 October 2024

Minimising The Plastic Waste Generated By Food Delivery Platforms – A Look At The EPR Guidelines

SA
Sarthak Advocates & Solicitors

Contributor

Sarthak Advocates & Solicitors is a pan India law firm with a strong focus on corporate and commercial laws. Our firm delivers advisory, transaction support services along with strategizing, and representing clients in disputes and arbitration. Our values and aspirations are derived from the word ‘Sarthak’, which in the Sanskrit language means ‘meaningful’.
Since the emergence of e-commerce food delivery platforms, consumers have been spoilt for choice as far as their choice of cuisines is concerned. At present, the global online food delivery service...
India Environment

Since the emergence of e-commerce food delivery platforms, consumers have been spoilt for choice as far as their choice of cuisines is concerned. At present, the global online food delivery service is valued at USD 126.91 billion.1 Food delivery platforms benefit consumers as well as restaurants.2

However, the emergence and growth of food delivery platforms is having an effect on the environment that is often being overlooked: the increased production of food waste and plastic packaging waste.3 For the purpose of this article, the latter will be the focal point. According to industry estimates, food delivery aggregators alone generate approximately 22,000 metric tons of plastic waste since they process roughly 40 million orders a month.4

Food delivery platforms appear to have recognized the issues with the generation of plastic waste. In India, the efforts to minimize plastic waste by food delivery platforms have largely focused on 'green nudges' or gentle persuasions to influence environment friendly behaviors among the consumer.5 For example, as a part of their sustainability efforts, Zomato introduced 100% plastic-neutral deliveries from April 2022.6 This was achieved by changing the default delivery option to 'no cutleries required', which reduced the cutlery demand by 74%.7 Similarly, delivery platform Swiggy has also encouraged the use of recyclable packing material, discouraging the use of single use cutlery etc.8

In 2023, a study was conducted by the University of Hong Kong in collaboration with Eleme, Alibaba's food delivery platform to analyze customer-level response to green nudges on the platform: changing the default to 'no cutlery' and setting up a reward system where points can be redeemed for planting trees in China's deserts.9 The outcome of this study led to a 648% increase in the share of no-cutlery orders and could have significant benefits for the environment.10

Other models which have been suggested to mitigate the generation of plastic waste by the food delivery platforms include:

  1. Subscription based packaging services: Inspired by the success of Mumbai Dabbawalas, who deliver food across the city in stainless steel containers, this model has been suggested where food delivery platforms can deliver the food using stainless steel tiffin boxes which consumers can borrow for a fee.11 The container can be collected back during the next purchase.12 The structural integrity of each package can also be monitored at the central hub before each re-use.13 The user profiles, QR codes/RFID tags on the packaging and a mobile application can be employed to track the packaging.14The entire process can be monitored through artificial intelligence-based algorithms to improve the model's efficiency.15 On the other hand, there is a likelihood of increase in costs of delivery under this model.
  2. Waste bank models: In countries like Indonesia, the concept of a waste bank is followed. Waste bank models refer to the recovering, sorting and transacting waste to reduce the waste volume, including the fraction that mobilises into the environment.16 The concept is assessed as a potential solution to recover e-commerce packaging plastic waste wherein the consumers can opt for "waste deposit", which notifies the delivery agent of the request.17 The delivery agent collects and returns the waste packaging to their last-mile delivery hub or a designated collection point, accumulating the waste from that area.18 The collected packaging plastic is sorted and sent to registered e-commerce businesses for reuse or recyclers for further processing.19 Since this is an opt-in service, the customers can be prompted to sort the waste actively.20 The primary benefit of this model is that it utilizes the existing supply chain networks, which do not require the development of a separate waste collection network.21

Legislative Framework vis-à-vis plastic waste management for food delivery platforms:

On 16 February 2022, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) issued the first set of EPR guidelines on plastic packaging. It was the MoEFCC's first attempt to articulate the roles and responsibilities of producers, importers, brand owners, the Central and State Pollution Control Board, recyclers and waste processors. As per the definition of "brand owner" even an online/ e-commerce platform would be covered if it is selling any commodity under a registered brand label or trademark.

Various EPR models have been discussed and debated for adoption by producers, importers and brand owners (PIBO's), such as:

  1. Fee-based Model: The primary responsibility of collecting, segregating, and disposing of the waste is handled by Urban Local Bodies. This model prioritizes the informal sector's strengthening and formalizing by integrating them into the waste management process. The producers, importers or brand owners who utilize less quantity of plastic in packaging (cut-off quantity shall be decided by the Government after the registration process) shall contribute to the EPR corpus fund at the central level.22
  2. PRO-based model: Producers can co-operate with the Producers Responsibility Organisations (third party organizations that facilitate plastic waste management on behalf of the PIBO's) to fulfil their complete operational responsibilities. In this model, the producer is not required to recycle their packaging, but they must ensure that equivalent amounts of waste are recovered or recycled to meet their obligations.23
  3. Plastic Credit Model: Packaging waste is not recycled by the producers, while they are asked to ensure and provide evidence of an equivalent amount of packaging waste that has been recovered and recycled.24

However, in the final form of the EPR Guidelines, annual targets have been specified for the PIBOs. These targets may be met either on its own or deficit may be achieved through trading of EPR certificates.

The EPR guidelines on plastic packaging are a significant step towards addressing the plastic waste generated by food delivery platforms. However, the guidelines lack clarity on aspects such as 'End of life disposal' which involves the use of plastic waste for the generation of energy and includes co-processing or waste to oil or for road constriction as per the Indian Road Congress guidelines.25 As far as plastic waste is concerned, the guidelines fail to specify the maximum limit of plastic waste that can be sent to each kind of end-of-life disposal.

On the other hand, the Plastic Waste Management Amendment Rules, 2023 has substituted the term 'Muli-layered packaging' with 'plastic packaging in several sections. This means that a wider range of plastic items such as single-use plastic bags and food packets, tetra packs, any packing or bio-degradable material that have any layers of plastic will now be included under the rules.26 This could potentially compel leading e-commerce platforms to begin adopting paper-based or cardboard-based packing wherever possible to avoid multilayer packaging wherever possible.27

Conclusion:

Food delivery platforms have taken cognizance of the plastic waste they generate, resorting to the use of green nudges. They could potentially look to incorporate subscription-based packaging services or use a waste bank model to address the issue of plastic waste. While the EPR guidelines for plastic packaging spell out the obligations of PIBO's, the guidelines are still nebulous insofar as the maximum limit of plastic waste that is to be sent to each kind of end-of-life disposal. On the other hand, the substitution of the term multilayered packaging with plastic packaging has not only allowed for a wider range of plastic items to now be included in the rules but has also nudged e-commerce food delivery platforms to start resorting to paper or cardboard based packing wherever possible.

Footnotes

1 'The Other Side of Convenience: Reducing Food Waste and Carbon Footprint for Food Delivery Services' (NASSCOM, 14 August 2023) <https://community.nasscom.in/communities/esg-sustainability/other-side-convenience-reducing-food-waste-and-carbon-footprint-food> accessed 06 September 2024.

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid.

4 Pushpa Girimaji, 'Food delivery platforms must check the plastic waste that they generate: Opinion' (The Hindustan Times, 25 June 2019) <https://www.hindustantimes.com/opinion/food-delivery-platforms-must-check-the-plastic-waste-that-they-generate-opinion/story-pk9yBaUPoSn1zi6gNRRpfO.html> accessed 06 September 2024.

5 Priyali Prakash, 'Can green nudges in online food deliveries lead to lesser pollution? A study conducted in China thinks so' (The Hindu, 15 September 2023) <https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/energy-and-environment/green-nudges-help-reduce-plastic-pollution-caused-by-disposable-cutlery-in-online-food-deliveries-in-china-study/article67310723.ece> accessed 06 September 2024.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 S.A. Syed Ali et al, 'Packaging plastic waste from e-commerce sector: The Indian scenario and a multi-faceted cleaner production solution towards waste minimisation,' Journal of Cleaner Production 447 (2024) 141444.

9 Prakash (n.5)

10 Ibid.

11 Ali (n. 8)

12 Ibid.

13 Ibid.

14 Ibid.

15 Ibid.

16 Salim, 'Waste not, want not: "waste banks" in Indonesia' (World Bank Blogs, 19 December 2013) <https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/eastasiapacific/waste-not-want-not-waste-banks-indonesia> (accessed 06 September 2024).

17 Ali (n.8)

18 Ibid

19 Ibid.

20 Ibid

21 Ibid.

22 MoEFCC, 'Guideline Document: Uniform Framework for Extended Producer Responsibility under Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016' (June 2020) < https://www.igtrahd.com/NewsEvents/264/Final-Uniform-Framework-on-EPR-June2020-for-comments.pdf> accessed 27 September 2024.

23 Ibid.

24 Ibid

25 Rule 3d, Plastic Waste Management Amendment Rules, 2022 (G.S.R. 133(E), 16 February 2022)

26 Gayathri Gireesh et al, 'Plastic Waste Management in India with special emphasis on multilayered packaging' (CEERA-NLSIU, Bangalore) <https://ceerapub.nls.ac.in/plastic-waste-management-in-india-with-special-emphasis-on-multilayered-packaging/> accessed 06 September 2024.

27 Ibid.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Find out more and explore further thought leadership around Environmental Law

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More