Professor Kuishuang Feng’s Team Publishes in One Earth on Strategic EPR to Boost China’s EV Battery Recycling

A research team co-led by Professor Kuishuang Feng from the Department of Geography at The University of Hong Kong, together with collaborators from Shandong University, the University of Maryland, Newcastle University, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences, has published a new study in One Earth (Cell Press) that demonstrates how a strategically designed extended producer responsibility (EPR) system could dramatically improve the formal recycling of retired electric vehicle (EV) batteries in China. This paper, titled “Strategic extended producer responsibility can double China’s formal electric vehicle battery recycling with improved sustainability,” shows that a coordinated policy could direct over 90% of end‑of‑life batteries into formal recycling channels by 2060, while reducing environmental damage by 44% to 73% compared with the baseline scenario.

China is the world’s largest EV market, with sales accelerating rapidly over the past decade. However, the country’s battery recycling infrastructure has lagged far behind. More than 75% of retired EV batteries are currently handled by informal recyclers including small workshops that often use crude dismantling methods, release toxic electrolytes into the environment, and expose workers to serious health hazards. These practices could result in the loss of valuable critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, while also causing significant soil, water, and air pollution. Under the existing EPR framework introduced by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology in 2018, formal recycling has made modest progress. The study’s baseline projections indicate that the formal recycling share would plateau at around 53% after 2030, leaving nearly half of all retired batteries to be processed outside regulated systems.

To understand how policy interventions can alter this trajectory, the research team developed an integrated modeling framework that combines evolutionary game theory, system dynamics, GCAM‑based stock‑flow projections, and life cycle impact assessment. This approach captures complex, dynamic interactions among four key stakeholder groups: governments, producers (EV manufacturers), consumers, and informal recyclers. It also incorporates feedback mechanisms such as changes in battery retirement volumes, shifts in consumer environmental awareness, and variations in compliance costs over time. By simulating these interactions from 2020 to 2060 under different policies and market scenarios, the model provides a quantitative basis for evaluating the effectiveness of various regulatory strategies.

The results reveal that a “consolidated” EPR strategy, characterized by strict early enforcement, adaptive subsidies and penalties, producer‑to‑consumer incentives, and market‑conditioning measures that lower compliance costs and raise consumer participation, could raise the formal recycling share from a plateau of 53% to more than 92% by 2060. In absolute terms, this translates into up to 47.3 million battery units being formally recycled per year by mid‑century under the strongest policy package, compared with only 27.5 million units under the business‑as‑usual scenario. Notably, the enhanced policy measures have the greatest impact during the first two decades (2020–2040), when they can accelerate the transition and establish a self‑sustaining formal market. After that period, as formal recycling becomes increasingly profitable for manufacturers and consumer engagement grows, the system can gradually shift from external enforcement to internal market drivers. The study also finds that government subsidies can be reduced by 10% per year after 2040 without losing most of the gains, thereby reducing long‑term fiscal burdens.

The environmental benefits of the consolidated EPR pathway are substantial. Compared with the baseline, the strategy could reduce the environmental impacts of informal pre-treatment by 44% to 73% across three categories: impacts on human health (measured in disability-adjusted life years), ecosystem damage (in species-year equivalents), and natural resource depletion (in monetary terms). The largest reductions occur in ecosystem damage, followed by human health and resource depletion. Although the advantage of enhanced regulation diminishes after 2060 as formal systems mature, early intervention proves critical for maximizing cumulative avoided damage over the entire study period. Scenarios that combine strong regulation with rapid technological improvement and high consumer awareness yield the greatest environmental gains.

The study offers several practical policy recommendations for China. First, it calls for strengthening traceability through the newly implemented “one battery, one code” system, which can help track batteries throughout their life cycle and reduce leakage into informal channels. Second, it suggests legally reclassifying retired lithium‑ion batteries as hazardous waste, which would clarify liability, raise penalties for mishandling, and close regulatory loopholes. Third, the authors propose integrating informal collectors into a tiered licensing system, allowing them to perform low‑risk collection and transport tasks while ensuring that hazardous dismantling and pre‑treatment are confined to certified facilities. This approach would preserve the collection agility of informal networks while improving environmental and occupational safety. Fourth, aligning China’s domestic standards with international frameworks, such as the EU Battery Regulation and its digital battery passport, would enhance the global competitiveness of China’s battery industry and facilitate trade with major markets. Taken together, these measures provide a roadmap for building a robust, sustainable, and socially inclusive battery recycling system that can serve as a model for other rapidly electrifying economies.

The full paper is available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2026.101701