Abstract for BHC 2006.
Bottle bills were introduced in many markets from the 1970s to remedy some of the environmental impacts of the beverage industry. The bills were intended to reduce litter, ease the burden on solid waste facilities, and encourage recycling activities. This paper will examine the introduction of bottle bills in two markets, Norway and New York. I will show how conflicting interests between breweries, grocers, consumers, environmental policy makers, and equipment vendors led to two highly different deposit systems. I will argue for the vital role of business in developing a well-functioning system.
Tomra Systems, the world’s leading producer of Reverse Vending Machines for the return of empty bottles and cans in grocery stores, had to walk a precarious path when establishing themselves in these markets. Tomra not only had to handle an ever increasing flow of empty bottles and cans; they also had to handle the various interest groups in order to create a market for their RVMs.
Tomra’s attempts to establish a sociotechnical space for the return of empty bottles and cans met with varying success in the two markets. In Norway today, returning your bottles is as natural as checking your mail. More than 99% of all refundable beverage containers are returned. In New York, however, the resistance to bottle bills has been much higher and the results are mixed.
By examining how business and the public responded to the highly contested bottle bills, this paper will show how Tomra had to maneuver through, negotiate and stabilize a complex network of social, cultural, economical, political, technical and environmental factors. Tomra’s success in one deposit market, but not in the other, can not be properly explained without considering the wider cultural and environmental context within which the company operated.