Walk into any grocery store in Canada, and you will find non-alcoholic beverages produced by companies with deep roots in communities across the country. These beverage manufacturers and bottlers are proud to invest in manufacturing and support tens of thousands of jobs. But now they are absorbing exponentially increasing recycling costs.
In 2024, Canada’s beverage sector contributed $5.8 billion to GDP, supported more than 45,000 jobs, and generated $2.3 billion in tax revenues across all levels of government.[1] Beverage producers invest in their local communities and are deeply integrated, with $0.80 in additional GDP for every $1 of output.[2] When the sector is competitive, beverage companies invest in communities, generate tax revenue and hire locally, strengthening the middle class. But this contribution depends on a coherent, predictable policy landscape.
In an environment of cost escalation, including in direct beverage inputs and supply chains, one source is entirely within government control. Provincially led Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs designed to strengthen our circular economy have inadvertently brought mounting costs on businesses, driven by fragmented design and a critical lack of national alignment. Without shared definitions, aligned system design, and a nationwide market for recycled content, EPR has become an internal trade barrier rather than a driver of circularity.
A Well-Intentioned Framework with Unintended Consequences
EPR is built on a sensible principle: companies that put packaging into the market should help fund its recovery and recycling. The Canadian Beverage Association has been a longstanding supporter of that principle, with our member companies more than willing to pay their fair share to support recycling systems. What we cannot support is the trajectory of costs due to inconsistent EPR policies.
In some provinces, EPR has been a success, with British Columbia and Alberta’s deposit-return system (DRS) achieving beverage container recovery rates from 77 per cent to 85 per cent.[3] Although many of these programs are meeting recovery and cost targets, some systems are not managing rapidly escalating costs. In Ontario, net system costs have nearly tripled over 18 years while recovery rates remain flat at roughly 53 percent.[4] Annual costs for Ontario’s at-home Blue Box recycling program – a program in its initial full year of EPR - are projected to rise from $135 million to $600 million each year, a nearly five-fold increase since it began in 2023.[5]
Across the country, ten provinces have adopted EPR programs — each with distinct definitions, reporting requirements, and fee structures. This inconsistent approach burdens beverage companies with complex, costly compliance and fragments the market for recycled materials. In addition, obligations like the Federal Plastics Registry add further administrative burden, diverting more capital from investments in sustainability, innovation, and manufacturing. Because most non-alcoholic beverage producers operate coast to coast, cost increases concentrated in one province are distributed nationally, impacting markets across Canada.
A One Canadian Economy Approach
Amid broader economic uncertainty, EPR cost escalation arrives at a moment when competitiveness in manufacturing and affordability are the defining lenses through which Canadians are evaluating their government. To mitigate EPR costs from impacting markets nationwide, the government has a genuine opportunity to bring a national focus to recycling and remove real friction from the circular economy.
To this end, the Canadian Beverage Association is calling on the federal government to champion a “One Canadian Economy” approach to recycling in the Spring Economic Statement. This is not a call to override provincial jurisdiction. It is a call for federal leadership to align and establish a common system of definitions for recyclable materials, shared reporting categories, and realistic evidence-based collection targets. It also means using federal-provincial forums, like the Canadian Council of Environment Ministers, to build affordability assessments into EPR design.
A National Recycling Framework would dismantle this unintentional internal trade barrier while strengthening domestic recycled material supply, supporting Canadian manufacturing, and helping producers meet recycled content targets. It is achievable, efficient, and capable of delivering better environmental outcomes at lower cost. Above all, it is a practical, non‑partisan step to ensure EPR delivers on its full environmental and economic potential.
—
Krista Scaldwell is President of the Canadian Beverage Association.
[1] https://www.signal49.ca/product/economic-footprint-of-the-non-alcoholic-beverage-sector_nov2025/
[2] Ibid.
[3] https://eunomia.eco/reports/ontario-drs-system-modeling/
[4] https://www.retailcouncil.org/topics/sustainability/overview-of-ontarios-blue-box-regulation/
[5] https://www.retailcouncil.org/topics/sustainability/overview-of-ontarios-blue-box-regulation/