Island lessons for a more circular car sector

Martinique’s ELV experience shows circularity works when rules are practical and locally owned. After helping collect and recycle 15,000 abandoned vehicles, Théo Esteve argues Europe needs clear, standardised EPR (extended producer responsibility) procedures for EV batteries and parts, plus trusted local partnerships. Crucially, new processes should be trialled in real yard conditions before scaling.

Municipal police and local stakeholders attend a briefing in Martinique on tackling abandoned end-of-life vehicles (ELVs). p — Théo Esteve

Théo Esteve, a circular economy consultant, reflects on seven years building an ELV scheme in Martinique, a small French overseas territory. He explains how local partnerships, clear rules and workable EPR systems for batteries and parts can help recyclers, manufacturers and authorities turn high-level circular economy goals into practical, on-the-ground results.

From Martinique to Europe: a local view on ELVs, batteries and circularity

My experience of the end-of-life vehicle (ELV) sector is rooted in the French overseas territories, particularly Martinique. The island context, isolation, limited outlets and strong local specificities mean that some of the topics now debated at European level have not yet reached us in the same way. My perspective is therefore that of a small, remote territory that has had to build practical ELV solutions step by step.

Building an ELV system in an isolated territory

Since 2018, I have been working in Martinique on behalf of automobile manufacturers, who are required to take responsibility for abandoned vehicles. I was employed by the local car dealers’ association (TDA-VHU), chaired by Christophe MEDLOCK, which manufacturers rely on to meet their regulatory obligations.

Over this period, we organised the collection and recycling of more than 15,000 abandoned vehicles. In parallel, I trained local authorities to help them structure their response to the illegal sector, and we regularly visited schools to raise awareness among students.

I left my position in August 2025 to begin studies in the agricultural field, with the goal of starting my own market gardening business. However, I remain passionate about the ELV sector, stay in contact with manufacturers, and closely follow regulatory and operational developments.

EV batteries and EPR: turning principles into workable logistics

As electric vehicles gain market share, I believe extended producer responsibility (EPR) frameworks must give ELV centres clear, standardised procedures for handling batteries and other complex components.

Given the diversity of technologies and manufacturer-specific processes, ELV operators need harmonised rules: what can be removed, how it should be stored, who takes custody next, and where batteries are ultimately treated. Without this clarity, even well-designed EPR systems will struggle at implementation stage.

It is also important to recognise that battery management is not limited to the automotive sector. Addressing it through a broader, cross-sectoral framework is positive, as it can help create shared infrastructure and expertise.

In Martinique today, no electric vehicle batteries can be shipped off the island because shipping companies refuse this type of cargo, citing fire risk. Local stakeholders, therefore, have high expectations for the new organisational framework around batteries, hoping it will offer a viable and safe solution.

Beyond the strategic importance of battery recycling, ELV centres are looking for simplified waste management procedures. Making battery flows administratively and logistically simpler will be key to ensuring high collection rates and sustainable treatment.

Metals, plastics and spare parts: where producer responsibility can help

I am not a technical expert, so I cannot comment in depth on process efficiencies. However, working with car repairers in Martinique has given me a practical view of the main bottlenecks.

For metals, repairers generally have no major difficulty finding competent recyclers. In contrast, for plastics, I have not yet identified any company interested in recycling automotive components such as headlights or dashboards. When a recycling stream is not profitable, or does not yet exist, even motivated workshops have very few options.

In these cases, extending producer responsibility could help structure the value chain and require manufacturers of these parts to integrate recyclability from the design stage. As with batteries, many of the challenges around automotive plastic waste are shared with other sectors, which again argues for cross-industry solutions.

One option could be to establish an EPR system for spare parts, under which equipment manufacturers would be required to organise the recycling of their products. This could encourage design choices that favour material recovery and create the scale needed to make recycling economically viable.

Design for today’s recyclers, not tomorrow’s technologies

On vehicle and component design, my view is simple.

Manufacturers should focus on designing products that can be recycled using the technologies available today, rather than assuming that future generations will find solutions later. If recyclability is built in from the start, ELV centres and recyclers can deliver higher-quality reuse and recycling rates without relying on hypothetical future innovations.

Lessons from Martinique: partnership, trust and real-world testing

From my experience in Martinique, success can be summarised in a few words: local partnership, community involvement, engagement of authorities, concrete solutions and trust.

I consider the manufacturers’ action plan we implemented from 2018 onwards to be a success. There is still work to do, but we have created positive momentum. This was only possible thanks to the strong involvement of local economic stakeholders, who are deeply committed to preserving their island’s environment.

The regulatory framework was essential to bringing all manufacturers together and aligning them with common objectives. But without the conviction and commitment of local representatives, regulation alone would not have delivered the same results.

We demonstrated to local authorities and ELV centres that they had a direct interest in improving their practices, with long-term environmental and economic benefits. Being on a small, isolated territory actually made this easier: the consequences of everyone’s actions are visible and directly affect local communities.

We spent a lot of time talking with citizens, public authorities and ELV centres to understand their practical needs. Through this work, we built trust between all stakeholders. That trust is now fundamental, as we know we are moving in the same direction.

This logic of trust is harder to implement in the wider industry, where the scale is much larger. The hostility of some French ELV centres towards the 2022 reform, establishing the eco-organisation and individual systems, clearly reflects a lack of trust between actors in the sector.

Finally, in Martinique, many processes and initiatives came directly from the field. We tried to simplify procedures as much as possible and to ensure that all stakeholders accepted them before implementation. There is nothing worse than an unworkable process.

For me, one key lesson for the broader ELV industry is clear: processes proposed at national or European level must be tested in real conditions before being deployed on a larger scale. Only then can they support both regulatory objectives and the operational realities in the yard.