TITLE:
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Regulations: A Comprehensive Literature Review for Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) in Kenya
AUTHORS:
Eunice Atieno, Francis Ikapel, Joseph Birundu, Leonard Tampushi, Caroline Ayuma, Emmanuel Tanui, Nebat Momanyi, Kenneth K’oreje, Kenneth Esau
KEYWORDS:
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), Regulatory Impact Assessment, Sustainable Waste Management, Circular Economy, Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs), Recycling, Waste Diversion, Environmental Sustainability, Financial Sustainability
JOURNAL NAME:
Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection,
Vol.14 No.2,
February
13,
2026
ABSTRACT: Environmental accountability and protection has gained traction in the recent past. Sustainable waste management has become the point of interest for many stakeholders. Different jurisdictions have developed regulations on waste management to safeguard the planet and future generations. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) has emerged as the center of policy debate around the world, as it is considered a policy tool for promoting circular economy (CE) practices that transfer post-consumer waste management obligations from governments to producers. EPR ensures producers and manufacturers take responsibility for the physical end-of-life products they place on the market. The gazettement of the Sustainable Waste Management EPR Regulations, 2024, in Kenya, marked a significant regulatory milestone, mandating producer registration, take-back schemes, eco-design, and financial contributions for waste recovery and management. This review focused on the EPR framework and its implementation by synthesizing empirical studies, policy reports, and global best practices, and evaluating their implications on environmental performance, economic outcomes, and institutional capacity. It analyzed the alignment of Kenya’s EPR framework with international benchmarks, compliance levels, product design innovation, recycling rates, job creation, and financial sustainability, focusing on a number of key waste actors at policy and implementation levels. The literature consisted of 551 articles and reports extracted from key academic databases: Web of Science, Scopus, Springer, and grey sources. Boolean logic and keyword combinations, systematic screening, and content analysis was used. The PRISMA model was applied. The findings hint at limited downstream waste management effectiveness, pointing to opportunities such as enhanced waste collection and diversion, recycling, and value recovery. The results also showed existence of the primary challenge of conflict between the EPR policy intent and implementation. While the policy is intended to shift the burden of waste management from public sector to private producers, the effort is undermined by resistance to change, lack of awareness, enforcement gaps, and legal disputes. Additionally, there is limited policy and enforcement framework, misalignment of responsibility between producers, manufacturers and importers on the management of end-of-life products upstream. Consequently, strong stakeholder involvement, clear sharing of responsibilities by producers, setting waste management targets for collection, recovery, and recycling, a progressive legal framework, public education and awareness, formalization of the informal sector, adoption of differentiated EPR fees, waste segregation at source, and targeted waste stream implementation is recommended.