Beslutsprocesser : om beslut i ett öppnare Europa
Mr Johan Gråberg at the Ministry of the Environment was of the opinion that Sweden is one of the best countries in the world when it comes to recycling electronic waste. Mr Gråberg also said that it would be good for Sweden if the Swedish system could be used in other countries in Europe. However, the Swedish model only considers the responsibility of the producers for collecting and recycling electrical and electronical products. There is no consideration of the impact on the infrastructure and the environment caused by the increased transportations. This lack of consideration to the increased transports and use of heavy traffic is the reason that the Swedish model cannot be used in the rest of Europe (Kallunki & Eknor 2005, s. 39-41). This goes against the environmental goals and policies that are used in Europé (Nationalkommittén för Agenda21 and Habitat 2002, s. 37-39), as well as to the environmental goals set up in Sweden (prop. 1997/98:145, s. 44-162). With this background, the authors wished to study why the Swedish government created a law to solve the problem with collecting electronic waste, while the same law did not consider the consequences, especially the unnecessarily large needs for transportation, which goes against some of the environmental goals set up by the Swedish government.Swedish leadership is based on the attempt of reaching consensus when taking decisions, a leadership which calls for dialogue and a mutual acceptance of a common understanding (Edström & Jönsson 2000, s. 166-167). This leaves an opening for interests to take part in the construction of new laws. When constructing the responsibility of the producer for collecting waste, many parties with separate interests and at different levels in the hierarchy were involved. However, by far the strongest opposition during the process of the decision in Sweden was found between the economical and the ecological interests.The tension between the two idea systems was thus reinforced by the way the government allowed those who would be burdened by the decision to partake in the construction of the decision. When the government turned over the responsibility of setting the goals for the responsibility of the producer to a delegation of recycling, the Kretsloppsdelegationen, consisting of all different interest groups, the conflict of interest between the economical and the ecological parties arose. In good Swedish spirit the solution to this conflict turned into a compromise. The long term goal would, according to the directive from the government to the Kretsloppsdelegationen and the predominant idea of growth, be to create a system with as little impact as possible on the environment. However the short term goal turned out to be a nation wide collection system, implemented as soon as possible and with the highest possible level of collection. Due to this speedy implementation the transportation issue was out of the picture. The transportation interests were excluded from the network that was working with the law, thus solving one problem but creating another one. Once the El-Kretsen was founded in order to solve the problems with the collection of the waste, geographical coverage and a high level of collection were the only bench-marks considered.
Source Type:Master's Thesis
Keywords:weee waste of electrical and elektronic equipment
Date of Publication:06/20/2005