sou · H9B324 · 2021-04-15 00:00:00 — (note: paper, cardboard, plastic, glass and metal fraction include both pack- aging and non-packaging materials. •Use of unified pictogram for waste containers in households and businesses oThe pictograms have been developed by in associa- tion with waste companies and municipalities) •Demand for source separation -> separate collection (collection, where waste streams are kept apart by type and nature to enable specific treatments) oThis clarifies the objective of source separation – to ensure that recyclable wastes are kept separated throughout the collection and treatment process. •Removed ‘Significant share’ from demands for recycling of recyclable waste. oThis removed the ambiguity of ‘significant share’ from the demand, and indicates that all separately collected wastes should be recycled. •Waste producing companies must ensure a high level of ‘real’ recycling of their recyclable waste, and be able to document such. oThis increases the documentation demands on businesses, with the aim of ensur- ing that the collected waste is actually recycled, rather than, as is often the case, only a portion of the waste is actually recycled after preliminary and secondary sorting. When responsibility is handed over to a waste collection or treatment company, the responsibility to document ‘real’ recycling is also transferred to the waste collection or treatment company. New waste management plan and associated legislation is primarily a response to the and associated Directives. 2.7Climate plan for green waste sector and circular economy, 20206 In 2020, the Danish government entered into an agreement with most parties in the parlia- ment about the future of the waste sector. The Climate plan for a green waste sector and circular economy (Klimaplan for en grøn affaldssektor og cirkulær økonomi) outlines a vision for the sec- tors, including increased and streamlined waste sorting, more recycling of plastic waste, a stronger recycling sector, less waste incineration and less import of waste for incineration, re- duced waste generation and more circular economy, an energy and climate-neutral water sector and describes a host of associated initiatives designed to create a climate-neutral waste sector. 5Registering and reporting the data for this in accordance with the data demands of the packaging waste directive targets is, as such problematic. There are separate waste codes for plastic waste and plastic packaging waste (as for the other fractions), but when collected together they will be reported under a single code. In practice, however, it is relatively easy to define what col- lected waste is and is not packaging. Paper is typically not, plastic collected from households is, cardboard collected form house- holds is, metal collected from households is, and glass collected from households is. The respective fractions collected at recycling centers are typically not ‘packaging’. Although some may have a dedicated container for plastic packaging, while cardboard is al- most always packaging. 6Klimaplan for en grøn affaldssektor og cirkulær økonomi, 2020 The Climate Plan marks a significant reinforcement of the ongoing liberalisation of the Danish waste sector. It calls for municipality owned and run waste treatment and sorting facilities to be incorporated (extracted from public administration) and compete on an open and level market with other private facilities. This means that while the municipality will retain responsibility for waste management, the actual activities involved in the management of waste (collection, treat- ment) must be in private hands. This should be achieved within a five-year period. All companies will be able to use private collection and treatment services for residual as well as recyclable waste. Municipalities currently have the duty to direct residual waste from businesses and man- date the use of municipal residual waste collection systems for business waste (although many also allow the use of private waste collection services).7 Companies that generate waste in quan- tity and composition similar to household waste will be able to use the municipal collection sys- tems for recyclable waste. inspection will also be strengthened. This aims to ensure that companies meet the re- quirements for source separated waste collection. It is anticipated that most of the effort at mu- nicipal level will be in supporting business and capacity rather than enforcement. These changes have yet to be incorporated in to the coming changes in the relevant waste legisla- tion, and the process of revision predates the commitments made in the Climate Plan for a and Circular Economy. However, a majority of parties have agreed to authorise the changes when they are put before . Figure 1 illustrates the recycling rates for municipal waste, household waste and waste from the service sector toward 2018. This is the primary and currently best indicator of the environmental performance of a waste recycling system. service sector () Figure 1 -Recycling rates form 2005 – 2018 Municipal waste (), 2012-2018 household waste and service sector (Affaldsstatistik, 2018). NOTE: there is a gap in data between 2009 and 2011. This is due to the change from the previous waste data system (ISAG) to the current waste data system (Affaldsdatasystemet – ADS). The new system is considerably more robust and provide a much more accurate account of the waste flows in . Indeed, data from before 2012 is not suitable for direct comparison, particularly within sectors (for example, households and service sector), which exhibit wildly fluctuating recycling rates in the years before 7 nr 1753 af 27/12/2018 §8 og §12 This fluctuation is understood to be a function of poor data quality rather than actual changes in activity. As such, they have not been included here. Between them, the service sector (of MSW) and households (of MSW) account for of MSW. This means that the service sector accounts for about of the non-household munic- ipal waste in . Affaldsstatistik 2018 includes waste generation and treatment statistics for the service sector, both aggregated at sector level and for subsectors. This indicates that the service sector also generates a significant volume of waste that is not considered MSW: the sec- tor generates 1.78 million of waste, of which 1.27 million is considered municipal waste. Detailed data is presented on the service sector waste as a whole, but not for the portion that is considered MSW. The service sector recycling rate in 2018 was , up from in 2014. The recycling rate of wastes from service sector is increasing, but so is the overall recycling rate for municipal waste and the recycling rate for household waste (illustrated above). As such, it is difficult to draw direct cause and effect between increased recycling rates for business waste and the liberalisation of the market. Although the changes in Danish waste data system in 2010-2011 mean that direct comparisons between before and after market liberalisation are not possible, there are indications that there was no dramatic change in recycling rates. A study on the impact of liberalisation on the market indicates that waste sector actors do not feel that liberalisation has had a significant impact on recycling rates for business waste (Deloitte, 2016). The table below provides an indication of the share of different waste types coming from house- holds and businesses that are included in the term ‘Municipal waste’. Table 1 - MSW waste from businesses and households, 2018 (affaldsstatistik, 2018) biodegradable waste (garden waste) kitchen waste (food waste) paper, cardboard incl. metal and metal packaging glass and glass packaging plastic and plastic packaging medicine solvents chemicals and paint There have been no significant economic effects of liberalisation. However, mobility in the mar- ket is relatively high (many waste generators and collections regularly change the final destina- tion of the collected waste. Around change service providers per year, which indicates that companies are aware of the opportunity to change as well as relatively intense market competi- tion (Deloitte, 2016). No information is available on average contract lengths, although it is antici- pated that they include sufficient flexibility to enable change of provider. Liberalisation appears to have had impact on the price of waste management. This could be down to only partial implementation on the part of municipally owned facilities, Ineffective com- munication about the possibilities for waste management, the roles and responsibilities of the re- spective actor and uncertainty about the future capacity of existing municipal treatment facilities. In and near urban centres, there is reliable availability of commercial waste services. This availa- bility can be more challenging in geographically remote regions where the low density of com- mercial waste producers means that it can be unprofitable for waste management companies to provide collection and treatment services. This has been an issue in – for example in Lol- land and Falster the lack of commercial waste services and the expense related to delivering waste directly to other regions means that businesses often simply deliver otherwise recyclable waste to the regional incineration facility8. , on the other hand, has begun to move to- wards zero waste: the should be waste free by 20329. There are private waste collectors on the and, where there is an absence of local treatment, recyclable wastes must shipped to suitable facilities off the . There are indications that the private waste collection and transportation companies have a posi- tive opinion about the service and price of private treatment facilities. In an analysis conducted by Deloitte in 2016, of the responding collectors and transporters indicated that they pre- ferred the price of private facilities, compared to only that preferred municipal facilities, while preferred the services provided by private facilities compared to only that preferred mu- nicipal facilities (Deloitte, 2016). It also appears that the liberalisation of the market for recyclable municipal waste from busi- nesses has not had a notable impact on innovation within waste treatment in the private sector, and also evidence of large-scale public-private cooperation in the area (Deloitte, 2016). These are linked issues, and the new changes to the framework conditions – most notably streamlining and unifying the recyclable waste fractions to be collected, thus creating larger vol- umes of individual waste types – seek to improve the grounds for innovation and public-private partnerships. 8https://folketidende.dk/Lokal-nyt/Erhvervsaffald-gaar-til-spilde/artikel/565966 (in Danish) 9https://bofa.dk/zerowastebornholm/ (in Danish) Inspection and enforcement is currently weak. The responsibility for inspecting business prem- ises and enforcing waste legislation falls on municipalities. Municipalities have to no re- sources to finance sufficient inspection and enforcement in the arena of business waste manage- ment. In principle, companies that: 1) do not source separate their waste, and 2) do not ensure that a significant share of their source separated waste is recycled, face a fine. In practice, the inspec- tion and enforcement of this is largely absent. This means that there is reason for companies to make significant efforts to separate and recycled their wastes, and there is of recourse from not doing so. There has been no evidence of widespread influence of organised crime in the market for recycla- ble municipal waste from businesses. These issues tend to be more strongly felt in specific high- value waste streams like WEEE and high-volume metal waste. There has been an increase in ille- gal shipments of particularly plastic waste since 2018 to SE Asian countries from Europe and North (, 2020), although or waste from has not been directly implicated it this process. oWhen remote areas are not large enough to support private enterprise in either collection services or treatment facilities. oIs difficult to find sufficient capacity within municipal activities, and difficult to un- oCan be difficult to separate waste inspection from other environmental inspection. Could be formally combined. •Challenges getting SMEs to source separate waste. oTypically requires significant effort on the part of the municipality oUnified waste sorting practices are seen as a potential solution, as is support from municipal services. •Flexibility of system to address mixed commercial and residential properties oPragmatic approach required when only some of the waste collection services are liberalised. •Clear division of responsibility (who is responsible for waste management, including in- spection and enforcement), •Roadmap for change (allow for a transition period to enable investments to be recouped), •Capacity planning (ensure that sufficient treatment capacity is in place for the anticipated waste quantities). Deloitte (2016) Evaluering af de politiske aftaler om organisering af affaldssektoren, 2016, nr 224 af 08/03/2019 nr 1753 af 27/12/2018 Bekendtgørelse om affaldsregulativer, -gebyrer og -aktører m.v. LBK nr 1218 af 25/11/2019 Bekendtgørelse af lov om miljøbeskyttelse (EU)/2018/851 (EU) 2018/852 Strategic Analysis Report: Emerging criminal trends in the global plastic waste market since January 2018. Regeringen (2020) Klimaplan for en grøn affaldssektor og cirkulær økonomi, 2020 nr 357 af 29/03/2019 Bekendtgørelse om pant på og indsamling m.v. af emballager til visse Report on collection and management of municipal-like waste from the business sector/private companies Background for the report............................................................................................................... How the work has been carried out................................................................................................ Regulations and measures in waste regulation in ............................................................. The Norwegian model for waste politics in general................................................................ Laws and regulations – national and local rules...................................................................... Producer responsibility schemes (PRS) ................................................................................... Definition and composition of waste flow ...................................................................................... Responsibilities of the municipalities...................................................................................... Responsibilities of private companies..................................................................................... Responsibilities of public sector............................................................................................ Economic preconditions for waste management ......................................................................... Private and public economy .................................................................................................. generation from the different sectors in over time ............................................. from private and public service sector....................................................................... Discussion and conclusion............................................................................................................. This short report has been developed on request from Regjeringskanselliet in , as a basis for the public investigation of how household-like waste can be managed in . The Norwegian model for regulation of waste management has two main elements: -The General with general regulation of waste management practise by alle relevant actors in the society -The producer-responsibility schemes (PRS), normally based in negotiated agreements between the Government (represented by the ) and private business associations, on behalf of private companies Definitions of waste in follow to a large extent the definitions in the of EU. In the Norwegian Pollution Act from 13th 1981, with the latest update from 1 2019, it is stated clearly in Chapter 5, § 27A that household waste in is defined as all types of waste coming from private households, whereas business waste is all types of waste originating from all types of private and public sectors. In Chapter 5 of the Pollution Act from 13 1981, it is clearly defined both the role, the responsibilities and the rights of municipalities regarding household waste. Each municipality has on one side the ownership and right to utilize all types of household wastes from all living houses and summerhouses within their own territories. Ownership and rights are also followed by a responsibility for making systems available for collection, sorting, storing and treatment of waste from all households in their territories. Municipalities can either establish treatment capacity themselves or in collaboration with others through intermunicipal organisations, or they can send out tenders through public journals to ask for offers from private companies or evt also from other municipalities. Chapter 5 in the Pollution Act does also regulate the responsibilities of business actors in , including both private and public organisations. Those organisations have the same rights as municipalities to their own waste, both ownership to and rights to this waste, but also the responsibility to manage their waste according to laws and regulations. This means that private and public organisations can treat their waste in a way that minimize cost for treatment, as long as this is done within international, national and local regulations. Public sector, including both municipal, county and state organisations who generate waste in their own facilities, have the same responsibilities and rights according to waste treatment as private service industries. Total amount of household waste has increase steadily in since 2005, from about per capita to about per capita in 2019. Total recycling of household waste (material recycling, composting and biogas production based in food waste) has increased from about 37,up to 40,from 2015 to 2019, still far away from the national goal of and the new EU goals of before 2035. Too a large extent, one can conclude that both the total amount of waste (about 2,3-2,4 mill ) and the composition of waste is quite similar between households and the service sector. The service industry in total was as shown earlier about on the same level as household waste, regarding share of residual waste, ending up mostly in incineration plants. There are however, big differences between subsectors in the service industry, as shown in Figure 6. The wholesale and retail sectors have reduced share of residual waste from about in 2008 to about in 2018, being far ahead to most other subsectors in sorting out waste for material recycling. The other subsectors are all more or less on the same levels in 2018 as they were in 2008. There are no indications that the annual waste fee for households has been increased extra as a consequence of the change in definition of waste in 2004, and there are as far as I know no systematic studies on how efficient the system with separate treatment of waste from households and private and public business sectors have been in since 2004. Summarizing the main findings in the report, it can be concluded that: -There are distinct roles and responsibilities for waste generated in households and waste generated in private service industry in , based in national regulations. -Municipalities have both the ownership to and the rights and responsibilities for collecting and handling waste from private households, and the same is the situation for private service companies and public organisations regarding their waste. -originating from households and from private and public business sector is quite similar in composition, and there is more or less similar amounts of waste being generated per year from the two sectors. -Recycling rates are about the same for both sectors, but there are big differences both between municipalities and between sectors in private and public service sectors. Retail and wholesale companies has increased their recycling rate significantly compared to most other sectors. -It has been proposed to introduce mandatory recycling schemes for both food waste and plastic waste in households and private businesses, but this is still waiting for final approvement by the Government. -There are no indications that the changes in definition in the EU directive towards municipal waste will have any influence on responsibilities of or organisation of collection of waste from households nor from the service industry. -There has not been seen a big change in annual average waste fees for Norwegian households due to separation of responsibilities of handling of municipal and private waste since 2004. 1 Background for the report This short report has been developed on request from Regjeringskanselliet in , as a basis for the public investigation of how household-like waste can be managed in . This report looks on experiences with treatment of household-like waste in , but cover also household waste in general as well as waste from the service industry and public sector in , to get a total picture. 2 How the work has been carried out The work has been done with basis in three different methodological approaches: -To use available research that the author has been involved in or is well known with from waste studies in over the past 30 years. -To search for and get access to available literature, documents (public reports, governmental documents etc) etc., and go through and document information from those in the report. -To use the statistical data bank of Statistics , to combine different data sets and make analyses of waste generation, waste flows, waste treatment, cost factors etc. The report has been written in the period from 20.11 to 7.12 2020. 3 Regulations and measures in waste regulation in 3.1 The Norwegian model for waste politics in general The Norwegian model for regulation of waste management has two main elements: -The General with general regulation of waste management practise by alle relevant actors in the society and for some specific types of waste fractions, more specific rules and regulations (forskrifter) for how to manage specific waste fractions (e.g. WEEE, packaging waste, etc). -The producer-responsibility schemes (PRS), normally based in negotiated agreements between the Government (represented by the ) and private business associations, on behalf of private companies. This instrument is described more in detail beyond. It should be noted that there are differences between the PRS system in and at least in the packaging area, as the PRS actors in are not responsible for collection of packaging waste from households, but do their work through the municipalities (see Chapter 3.3). In most sectors, the PRS system can be seen as an agent for the authorities in a principal-agent system, based in agreed targets for waste management and waste prevention. The Pollution Act with connected sector-wise regulations represent a system with minimum requirements to the business actors, who themselves can find the best strategies and measures to achieve the common defined targets. 3.2 Laws and regulations – national and local rules