SERA’s waste policy effort is focused on the commercial, industrial and municipal waste stream, particularly the latter, for 3 key reasons:
need to improve environmental performance
degree of public interest in the run up to the general election
significance to the general political debate on ‘cutting waste and inefficiency’
Need to improve environmental performance
It is widely accepted that it is on municipal waste where environmental performance on waste reduction, re-use and recycling most needs to be improved1. The UK generates around 29m tonnes of solid municipal waste every year, and the following recycling and landfill rates provide illustration of the need for improvement:
Public interest in waste policy debate is primarily focused on municipal waste. There is much evidence for this, including the ongoing public debate over the projected growth of unpopular municipal waste incineration facilities, reflected in local election results. The 2001 DEFRA Waste Summit3 and the subsequent Strategy Unit inquiry also focused primarily on municipal waste.
Significance to the general political debate
In terms of the general political debate on ‘cutting waste and inefficiency’, the management of municipal waste involves government spending of around £1.6 billion / year4. Moreover, the amount of UK municipal waste is presently increasing at a rate of approximately 3 - 4% a year5. At this rate, the amount of municipal waste produced will double by 2020, with the associated government spending also projected to increase to £3.2 billion per annum6.
Waste policy at a crossroads
These trends are clearly not sustainable, but how can they be reversed? Labour deserves credit for putting in place a number of policy instruments in an attempt to create a sustainable waste management framework – for example, the landfill tax escalator and the provisions of the Municipal Waste Recycling Act 2003. However, as current practice highlights, a significant danger remains that the UK Government will still fail to meet its recycling targets or to deliver its more challenging ambitions to establish a “world class” approach to waste and resource management, as set out in the Government’s Strategy Unit waste report.
Policy priorities
SERA has 5 key waste policy priorities:
1. Reward those households that produce less waste through variable charging
The obvious way to get people to create less waste is to introduce ‘variable charging’ - rewarding those who produce less waste or recycle their waste effectively, and charging more to those who produce more waste. Regressive impacts arising from variable charging can be avoided through the local design of the charge, or through the wider tax and benefits system.
Any extra waste charges could be matched by credits available for recycling, making the overall package revenue neutral. It could be envisaged, for example, that households are charged £1 for every "black sack" and credited £1 for every full "green box”. As many studies on household waste variable charging in the US, EU and Australia7 show, this kind of dual approach would not only increase recycling but would also to reduce waste, and hence reduce the costs of waste disposal, saving taxpayers money – a theme important in terms of the wider debate on ‘cutting waste and inefficiency’. Such studies also demonstrate the need for action rather than yet more generic Whitehall analysis.
2. Improve economic incentives – introduce a waste disposal tax and tradable credits for recycling
The Government’s Waste Strategy established recycling targets requiring at least 25 per cent of household waste to be recycled by 2005 and 30 per cent by 20108. Actual progress on recycling, however, suggests we are not on track to meet these targets9, which is in part due to a lack of incentives and some ‘perverse incentives’. For example, recycling is subject to the full climate change levy whilst incineration is not, creating an incentive for local authorities to choose incineration ahead of recycling.
Reforming the Landfill Tax into a wider waste disposal tax, including a smart tax on incineration, would help to encourage recycling and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the waste sector – an important area given the Government’s commitment to review the climate change strategy and keep the UK on track in this key area. Targeted tax exemptions or discounts could apply to allow for the smart incineration of specific separated waste streams – but general mass burn incineration must become secondary to Labour’s 3rd term drive for recycling, waste minimisation, and improved resource efficiency. Maintaining pressure on the government to escalate landfill tax to £35 a tonne by 2010 is essential if the provision of more sustainable waste management provisions are to be economically viable.
The political debate on making efficient use of taxpayers money is relevant here - the UK Government’s current policy approach to improve recycling places considerable emphasis on the provision of centrally co-ordinated residual waste reduction funds10. However, it is not clear that this approach is providing an efficient and effective means of stimulating greater waste reduction, re-use, and recycling. Tradable credits to encourage recycling should also be considered to ensure delivery of the Government’s recycling targets in the most economically efficient manner possible – such an approach would reward those local authorities that exceeded the Government recycling target, as they could sell their surplus credits to other authorities.
3. Commit to developing a new long term vision for waste, building on Labour’s vision on climate change
Avoiding EU fines and delivering the Landfill Directive will require new waste facilities, and communities must be won over to support such development. However, Labour faces a choice between simply aiming to deliver the EU minimum and, on the other hand, aiming to deliver a “world class” approach to waste management, as called for by the Strategy Unit report. If local communities are to be convinced of the case for substantial new facilities in the short-medium term, a commitment to develop and deliver a new long term vision for waste – based around a long term challenging targets on recycling and decoupling waste growth from wider economic growth – is now needed. Such a vision for waste could usefully draw on Labour’s impressive record on climate change, where Labour is seeing the benefits of leading rather than following EU public policy development.
4. Encourage more strategic dialogue within government and industry on an integrated production policy
A holistic waste management policy must be considered in relation to the closed loop economy and resource efficiency. Most strategic thinking on resource productivity emanates from within the EU. The thematic strategy for Waste, the IPPC directive, the WEEE directive and Packaging directives all include aspects of producer responsibility and an integrated production policy. The UK needs to consider a inter- departmental strategy for integrating broad resource management policies effectively.
5. Waste and climate change
The bioligical waste treatment can make a significant contribution towards a low carbon economy. The technologies are avaliable for methane capture and energy generation from landfilled waste. In order to encourage the accession of such technologies onto the market the government must consider the relationship between waste and ROC’s and enforce the escalation of the landfill tax.
