Social responsibility for pesticide packaging waste management

Agricultural waste, particularly in major production regions such as the Central Highlands, is silently accumulating and leaving long-term consequences for soil and the environment. Behind bumper “golden harvests” are tens of thousands of tons of pesticide packaging and solid waste generated each year, while collection rates remain very low - around 30%, and even below 10% in remote areas. Most of this waste returns to the environment, gradually seeping into soil and water sources, causing ecosystem degradation.

Primary responsibility lies with manufacturers and distributors

At the Forum on “Disseminating EPR Regulations and Support Mechanisms for Pesticide and Fertilizer Packaging Disposal” held on April 14, Dr. Pham Tuan Anh, former Director of the Dak Nong Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, pointed out that the system breakdown lies in the lack of post-collection treatment, along with financial gaps in transportation and hazardous waste processing.

“We should not only measure agricultural output but also account for the volume of waste generated and soil health as indicators of sustainable development. I propose that manufacturers contribute resources across the entire product lifecycle, including the post-use stage. Specifically, EPR funds should be made transparent and directly allocated to grassroots collection groups instead of being delayed by administrative procedures; responsibility for packaging recovery should be tied to the business conditions of distributors. At the same time, we should pilot an environmental deposit-refund mechanism, in which enterprises are reimbursed based on actual recovery rates,” he said.

Agreeing with this view, Mr. Tran Duc Thanh, Director of Dak Lak High-Tech Agro-Industrial Development JSC, emphasized that responsibility should not be placed on farmers. The primary responsibility must lie with packaging manufacturers and the distribution system, in which dealers should take part in collecting used packaging, with support from local authorities.

In reality, due to the lack of mechanisms and resources, many farmers still burn packaging waste, causing environmental pollution. Therefore, Mr. Thanh proposed two solutions. First, manufacturers handle treatment, intermediaries (dealers) take charge of collection, and local authorities coordinate support. Second, enterprises could allocate a portion of revenue from product sales to support farmers or authorize dealers to purchase back the waste.

“Even, if granted recycling rights and provided with sufficient funding, enterprises would be willing to take the lead in purchasing and recycling all waste. For dealers who lack commitment in collection, strict penalties should be imposed to establish a solid mechanism, delivering dual benefits for both farmers and the environment,” he stated.

Clear mechanisms for funding allocation and coordination are needed

The Viet Nam Pesticide Association (VIPA) has expressed strong interest in how funds are allocated for the collection and treatment of packaging waste. Mr. Nguyen Van Son, Chairman of VIPA, emphasized the need to clarify cost components within the EPR mechanism, particularly resources for collection and transportation, as well as to clearly define the authority responsible for licensing and organizing transport, along with the roles of local authorities and the dealer network.

“The disposal process needs to be standardized, from collection and storage to final treatment. I propose strengthening training and capacity-building with well-structured curricula, from resource investment to grassroots communication efforts to raise public awareness. In addition, it is necessary to establish a system of standards and closely monitor the entire process, alongside incentive policies to ensure synchronized implementation,” he stated.

The VIPA Chairman also underscored the importance of close coordination between regulatory agencies and local authorities, affirming that businesses remain committed to supporting the collection and treatment of pesticide packaging waste to enhance efficiency and sustainability.

Drawing from practical experience in Dak Lak, Mr. Nguyen Hac Hien, Head of the Sub-Department of Plant Production and Protection, emphasized that communication efforts must be more substantive, with clear, easy-to-understand content closely linked to practice. Training sessions should provide hands-on guidance on proper collection, classification, and safe disposal. In addition, it is necessary to promote integrated pest management (IPM), increase the use of biological pesticides, and develop clean agricultural production zones to reduce reliance on chemicals.

“Inspection and monitoring must be carried out more regularly. Environmental violations should be handled strictly to ensure deterrence. In terms of infrastructure, priority should be given to investing in collection tanks and temporary storage facilities, as well as repairing degraded structures. Rural transport systems also need to be improved to facilitate waste transportation. The province should allocate stable annual funding, while commune-level authorities take a proactive role in organizing collection and treatment in accordance with regulations,” he said.

Between 2022 and 2024, nearly 2,500 tons of used pesticide packaging were collected nationwide. Of this, only about 1,400 tons were properly treated, more than 500 tons were self-disposed by farmers, and over 20% remain untreated.