sou · H9B324 · 2021-04-15 00:00:00 — As described in Chapters 4 and 3.1, waste management in both municipal, private and public sectors in is basically regulated in the Pollution Act from 13 1981, with supplementary rules given for specific sectors, eg. WEEE waste, packaging waste, small boats, , scraped vehicles, scrapped concrete and tiles from etc, for waste deposits and incineration, import and export of waste, transport of waste etc. The present definition of household waste was introduced through Ot.prop nr 87 (2001-02) pkt 2.5.21, where the was made a change from consumer waste (forbruksavfall) to household waste where the origin of the waste was the basis for the definition, and not the type of waste or composition of waste (Bratteng 2020). According to Ot.prop nr 87 (2001-02), the background for and aim of the changes in definition from consumer waste to household and business waste, was two-fold: 1.To give the business sector a clearer responsibility for and more flexibility in finding solutions for treatment of their own waste, and not be dependent on the available service and solutions for waste handling in different municipalities. 2.To make the definition of household waste and private waste clearer, so the share of responsibilities between municipalities and private waste entrepreneurs is practised more homogenous in different parts of . The proposed changes in the Pollution Act was approved by the Parliament in 2003, and was made operative from 1 2004. The main text from the Ot.prop 87 is shown in Norwegian It has been proposed to establish mandatory sorting and separate collection of plastic packaging waste and food waste in since the new waste strategy in 2016, both for household waste and waste from the service industry. This was first proposed by the (Miljødirektoratet) in in January 20172 and several investigations of the impacts of such a regulation have been done (Raadal et al. 2016, et al. In October 2020, a revised proposal from 2018 is still waiting for final approvement by the and the Government according to Avfall Norge3. A new action plan with strategies to implement a circular economy in the Norwegian society was planned to be released from the Government at the end of 2020 but has now been announced to be postponed to Spring 2021. This action plan would probably also deal with food and plastic waste sorting. 3.3 Producer responsibility schemes (PRS) A key element in the waste management system in are the PRSs for a number of different waste fractions. The system was established through a to the Parliament in 1992 (St.melding 44 (1991-92)), and started with the different types of packaging and packaging materials (beverages; glass and metal, plastic, cardboard, , etc). Later followed PRSs for WEEE, for vehicle scrapping, wheels, glass windows, etc. The latest example is the negotiated 2https:///aktuelt/nyheter/2017/januar-2017/foreslar-obligatorisk-sortering-av-mat-- og-plastavfall/ 3https://avfallnorge.no/bransjen/nyheter/ny-forskrift-til-utsortering-av-plast-og-matavfall agreement for food waste prevention from 2017, established as a negotiated agreement between 12 food business associations and 5 Ministries. The PRS system in has a set of elements that are quite general all types of waste fractions: -There is a negotiated agreement where both sides sign up clear targets for waste reduction and waste recycling within a given time set, eg recycling of plastic packaging or reduction in food waste before 2030, but where the business sector has freedom to fine the most optimal solution to achieve the goals. -One or several PRS organisations are established with membership from companies being responsible for bringing products that can end up as waste to the market. It is in principle mandatory to be member of a PRS organisation, but without a regulation (forskrift) as a basis, there has been problems with «free riders» among many sectors. It is the PRS organisations that are the negotiating partner with the Government on behalf of the members. -All members pay a fee (PRS fee) to the PRS organisation, based in how much materials or products they are putting into the market. -Municipalities are operating collection of waste of all types from households according to the national regulations and are then compensated for collection of separately sorted waste from households according to a common compensation system, per tonne of material send to recycling. The Norwegian system is thus different from , where (as far as known) the PRS organisation themselves are responsible for collection of sorted waste from households. et al (2013) have made a survey of Norwegian PRS-systems with regard to total cost covering by the different systems. It is concluded that most treatment costs are covered by the funding municipalities are given by the different , but that costs related to collection, sorting and transport of waste is to a varying degree covered by the system. It should be noted however, that the total cost of waste handling will be covered by the inhabitants/consumers in some or another way, as the PRS system is financed by a fee on products when bought by the consumer, and the rest of the cost is covered by the annual waste fee (avfallsgebyr) to the municipality. 4 Definition and composition of waste flow Definitions of waste in follow to a large extent the definitions in the of EU, as has to implement laws and regulations of EU as member states have, according to the EEA agreements. However, 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. It is thus made a clear distinction between household waste and waste from the service industry, without operating with the term «household and similar waste types from private and public sector» as has been used by the EU. As mentioned in Chapter 3.2, this definition was introduced in 2001, and is based in a classification of the origin of waste and not the type of waste as such. Household waste is all type of waste that origin from private households, separated from organisations that do business, either in private sector, public sector or as voluntary organisations. As discussed by Brattvåg (2020), there are some grey zones that have been clarified by the environmental authorities and by judgements in Courts: -from rehabilitation of private households is considered as household waste if the waste is delivered by private persons, but as business waste if it is delivered by a company who do the rehabilitation. -from student apartments are considered as household waste, whereas waste from elderly institutions and similar, is defined as business waste -from the private part of farms are considered as household waste, whereas waste from the farming as such, is defined as business waste. The main distinguish between household waste and business waste in those cases seems according to Brattvåg (2020) to be if it is the persons themselves that are responsible for and do waste handling, or if this is taken care of by professional people. 5.1 Responsibilities of the municipalities 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. This includes thus only those materials that have their origin in private households, and also only materials that are defined as or regarded as wasteFeil! 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, in accordance with the Pollution Act and other relevant regulations. This does not mean that municipalities have to do the work themselves, they can perfectly well out-source the service to private companies or to inter-municipal organisations, who operate on behalf of the municipalities (see Chapter 5.1). Each municipality have thus monopoly on collection of household waste (but not household-like waste; see Chapter 4) within their own territory, which means that nobody else can organize collection of waste without permission from the municipality. Different from where FTIR is responsible for collection of packaging waste from households, this is also the responsibility of municipalities in . Municipalities will normally get a compensation from PRS organisations per ton of sorted waste that are collected. Again, there is a grey zone towards textiles which are given to organizations who collect and sort such textiles for reuse through second-hand shops. Each municipality in can develop and approve own local regulations (kommunale forskrifter) that give more detailed rules for how waste collection, transport, sorting and treatment). Such rules can give details on how citizens should sort their waste, where it should be stored from an hygienic point of view, how it will be collected, etc. Although municipalities have the rights to collect all household waste, they do not have the responsibility to treat all waste which is generated in their own territory by themselves. Their duty is to find the best treatment of waste, fulfilling both laws and regulations, as well as intentions described in the negotiated agreements. 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. In the first case, they can use the system with “granted exclusive rights” (tildelt enerett), where a treatment plan that are owned by the municipalities can choose to send their waste to a biogas plant or an incineration plan that is owned by themselves, to be sure to have waste to make their own plant efficient. In the second case, municipalities are committed to follow rules and regulations for public procurement, giving strict requirements to choose the offer with the best performance according to the criteria which was announced (for public procurement of 17 2016 (§5 about environmental duties), replacing an older version of the law from 30.6 1999). Municipalities and intermunicipal organisations do thus not have a right to collect, handle and evt treat waste from private and public organisations. This can however be done by equipment, staff and facilities that otherwise is used for handling of municipal waste, in fair competition with private waste entrepreneurs. In such cases, municipalities are required to organize this type of waste handling with separate accounting from their ordinary waste handling according to the Pollution act (see Chapters 6.1 and 6.2), not to come in conflict with the rules for the “selvkost” principle with regard to waste from households (see chapter 6.1). 5.2 Responsibilities of private companies 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. There are some general exceptions for waste being generated in primary production (agriculture, fisheries and forestry), first of all opportunities to bring organic materials back to soil locally, rather than transporting to some type of treatment (biogas, composting, incineration). There are also openings for the responsible environmental authorities (national or on county level) to give permission for other types of treatments (if they are documented to have very high cost) or to give orders to private or public organisations to send their waste to municipal treatment facilities. The background for this clear separation of household waste and waste from business sectors in , is a decision made by the court in 1998 on an initiative from the private service sector by ICA, that they have the right and ownership to own waste, and can choose freely which service they want, as long as it is within common laws and regulations. ICA lost the decision in the Court, but this initiated a discussion that ended up in a change in the Pollution Act. The background was that especially the retail and wholesale sector in , being only a few companies with business all over the country, meant that they could organize this better internally with country-wide services, rather than having to send their waste to each of more than 400 municipalities in . They saw increased potential value in waste fractions that could be sorted and treated separately with good quality, which was easier to establish internally or in collaboration with big private suppliers of waste services like Norsk Gjenvinning, , Veidekke, etc. They could also for some waste fractions use return-transport with their trucks who distribute food and goods out to retail shops, and transport waste back to larger depots at their own wholesale distribution centres, which also could reduce costs and increase the values of waste fractions. Since the change in the in 2004, more or less all those elements have been implemented by at least some of the actors in the retail and wholesale sector in , which seems to have influenced also the recycling rate of waste from this sector over time (see chapter 7.3). competition between waste entrepreneurs to win contracts especially with the larger companies and organisations covering many facilities and regions, but also smaller organisations being located in more densely populated areas, where there will be quite large volumes of waste to collect within shorter distances. With large areas with sparse populations in rural areas, it is not difficult to see that combined collection of household waste and waste from private companies will be more effective in those areas than in the more urban cities (see Chapter 8). 5.3 Responsibilities of public sector 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. That means that waste from public organisations must be open for fair competition between waste entrepreneurs in the same as from private service industries, and that municipalities not can handle waste from their own facilities together with waste from households. 6 Economic preconditions for waste management Municipalities carry out waste management services on behalf of their inhabitants and collecting and managing waste is a duty which is paid for by households besides other types of taxes. For the municipalities, all costs related to collection, sorting, transport, storing and treatment of household waste shall be paid for by the households through an annual fee, based in the so-called “self-cost principle” (selvkostprinsippet) . This means that municipalities should not be underfinanced with regard to waste management but cannot calculate profits on waste management fees to subsidize other services in the municipalities, according to §34 in the Pollution Act from 1981. The total economy of municipalities is based in a number of cost and income factors: -Incomes are first of all generated through the waste management fee (årsgebyr) which is paid by all households. The average waste management fee per household in in 2019 was , which represented an increase of 6,from in 2015 or 1,per year, which is quite low. In addition, municipalities get a compensation for doing collection and treatment of sorted waste of packaging and some other fractions from the PRS organisations, normally calculated per ton of waste delivered to recycling. Finally, municipalities might also get some value back from waste fractions that are “sold” as a new resource. This is first of all metals, but can also be the situation for very clean fractions of cardboard, PET plastic etc. It should be noted that the compensate from PRS organisations are financed through fees on packaging, , electronic equipment’s etc., which again are paid by the consumers when buying products. At the end, most of the income are thus coming from households, either as waste management fees or through product or packaging fees. -Costs are all types of costs related to waste management, from equipment’s like waste bins, containers and igloos for waste collection, purchasing and operation of vehicles, use of and other infrastructure, salaries to operators and administration, information and campaign costs, costs related to transport of waste to final treatment as well as treatment costs. If waste collection is outsourced to private companies or taken care of by an intermunicipal organisation, those costs are also part of the self-cost regime. The municipal fee covers both waste being collected at homes through curb side collection, waste that evt have to be brought to distributed places for collection at igloos or containers (mostly textiles, but also glass and metal packaging in many municipalities) and waste that is brought to central municipal waste collection sites, as garden waste, larger WEEE waste, hazardous waste as well as used furniture, waste from rebuilding, etc. This can be free for delivering waste from households but can also be paid for if there are larger volumes, eg. If one come with private car with trailer. Household fees can be either a fixed fee per year, or it can be differentiated according to size of waste bins, if you compost food waste at home or in some cases also weight-based, to give incentives for reducing residual waste. It is recommended to have some differentiation in household waste fee, to give incentives for waste reduction and better sorting of waste for material recycling. How municipalities or municipal companies calculate their prices for waste services that are in potential competition with private companies, is regulated in a §15 in the regulation (), approved by the Government and made operative from 1 January 2015. This paragraph define the basis for pricing the monopoly services of the municipality, which shall be based in a non-profit regime where all costs are covered (“selvkost-systemet”) in § 15.3. §15.4 says that municipalities cannot cross-subsidy private services with economic resources from municipal monopoly services, and that the municipality have to operate with separate economy and accounting systems for the monopoly services and free market services. Prices for common resources that are used in both monopoly services and free market services (facilities, cars, , administrative resources) shall be allocated between the two types of services on a fair basis (§15.4). This paragraph is a result of a decision given in the court against from February 2013.4 6.2 Private and public economy Private and public organisations of all types have both ownership and responsibility for their own waste fractions, which for the service industries are mostly household-like waste fractions. Those organisations can thus choose how to treat their own waste, as long as it is permitted according to international laws and agreements (EC regulations and convention), national laws and regulations and local rules. Each organisation will thus normally ask for offers from private waste entrepreneurs, which over the last years in have been much fewer and larger, due to merging and company take-overs of small companies by the larger national and international corporations (Norsk Gjenvinning, , etc). They will often offer private and public organisations different solutions to different prices, where competition between the actors and a high focus on price, often ends up with low degrees of sorting and much residual waste to incineration. A quite high share of residual waste has been exported to for incineration (also from households through municipal systems) due to lower prices for waste treatment compared to Norwegian incineration plants. Private service companies thus have freedom to choose who to deliver waste management services, including waste treatment system. It is thus mostly up to the environmental policy of the waste generators, which treatment system they prefer and accordingly which costs they have to pay. Many companies, especially in the retail sector, but also companies in the hospitality sector and larger organisations with well developed environmental management systems, have high ambitions for waste management internally and to contribute to a circular economy. They are to some extent willing to pay extra for having access to services which makes it easier to sort waste at source and to 4https:///newsroom/updates/state-aid-norway-must-change-financing-municipal-waste- collectors:nb reduce the amount of unsorted waste to incineration. Examples are food waste from retail companies that ends up in biogas plants with substitution of diesel, instead of being incinerated. As mentioned in Chapter 5.2, some companies have also seen that they in fact can reduce their own costs related to waste treatment, by sorting out those waste fractions that either have a positive economic value in the market, or which give lower mass of residual waste, which can be costly to treat (especially materials). Municipal companies can also offer services to private companies in open competition with private entrepreneurs, but such services must be clearly separated from management of own, ordinary household waste within the self-cost regime. The reason is that municipalities cannot cross-subsidy services to private and public organisations with income from monopoly waste within the self cost activities, which will give unfair competition. 7 generation from the different sectors in over time In , Statistics compile national statistics on waste accounting every year, at least from some sectors. Data from municipalities are reported every year through the so-called Kostra-system, whereas private and public sector report data from waste entrepreneurs and other sources. The statistics are managed by Statistics , who develop the annual waste accounting for , including household waste and all types of business waste. Total mass of household waste in in 2019 was reported by Statistics to be 2,4 mill or about per capita (Table 1). Of this, about 900 000 were registered as residual waste going to incineration directly, with wood waste (materials etc; 275 000 ), paper and cardboard (239 000 ), wet organic waste (mostly food waste; 200 000 ) and park- and gardening waste (148 000 ) are the most dominant fractions from a mass basis. In addition, discarded vehicles (179 000 ) from private persons were also an important type of waste. Table 1 composition households waste in 2019 (Source: SSB Statstikkbanken) of waste in total from households 2019 (1000 ) Park- and gardening waste Cinders, dust bottom ash and fly ash Total amount of household waste has increase steadily in since 2005, from about per capita to about per capita in 2019 (bank). The way household waste has been treated has also changed a lot over the time period. Until 2009, about of all household waste was going to landfills, but with the banning of landfills of organic waste from 1 2009, this changed rapidly as shown in Figure 1.