PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT IN SPAIN
Marc MILIAN and Tsunemi WATANABE
Kochi University of Technology

ABSTRACT: In Spain in the old times municipal solid waste (MSW), which includes predominantly
nonhazardous domestic waste, was practically non existent and predominantly biodegradable. Therefore, it
was not a problem for society nor did it require special attention.
However, since the development of the economy and the subsequent increase of the standard of living,
the amount of MSW has grown continuously, by 40% between 1996 and 2003 (Spanish Ministry ofEnvironment). Also, the composition of the waste has changed from being predominantly organic tocontaining an important amount of non-biodegradable materials, mainly packaging (26%. Source: Spanish
Ministry of Environment). As a result, MSW has become an important environmental issue in Spain and asource of social concern.
This complex situation makes MSW management a challenge for at least the near future. The purposes ofthis paper are to describe the present situation of Spanish MSW management and its evolution during the last
15 years, and then, to suggest some possible measures to improve the situation.
Regarding the present situation, it is clear that management has not been effective. Most of the goals set
in the 2000-2006 National MSW Plan have not been reached. The main failures have been the inability to
discourage the creation of waste (the first step, according to the law itself) and also the misuse of the organic
portion of MSW due to an inefficient composting. In addition, the data provided by the government andother organizations are not all based on the same criteria. Information is incomplete and usually its
publication is delayed by several years. These facts complicate having a clear view of the situation and,
therefore, its management.
Several measures are suggested against these issues, but especial focus is set on how citizen’s behaviour
can be changed in a more ecological direction. In answering this question, environmental education isconsidered one important tool.

KEYWORDS: MSW, Spain, waste

1. INTRODUCTION

emissions,excessive

resources

extraction

or

persistent organic pollutants release. Waste is one ofPreserving a good natural environment is essential

them. Particularly, MSW creates special concern

for a good health and quality of life (Ministry ofamong the general public due to its close

Environment of Spain, 2006). However, at present,

relationship with the daily life of the lay person.

the environment is damaged all around the world byseveral main factors, such as global warming gases

In Spain, the increase of MSW generation beganduring the second half of the 20th century, with theeconomic development after the post civil war

rocks, debris...
- Composite:

toys….

depression. The increase becomes obvious during
the last quarter, with the modernization of Spain- Hazardousand toxic: paints, light bulbs,
fluorescent tubes, spray cans, fertilizer andpesticide containers, batteries…

after its democratization and its membership of the
EU. The deterioration of the waste problem isreflected in the proliferation of MSW related protest
sent to the Ombudsman of Spain during the last part

clothing and similar, Tetra Paks,

It should be noted that from a legal point of view
waste is defined and classified within the European
Union by the European Directive 91/156/CEEthof the 20 century. (Ombudsman bureau of Spain,(European Waste Catalogue).

2000).
1.1. Objectives

The purposes of this paper are to describe thepresent situation of Spanish MSW management andits evolution during the last 15 years, using official
data from the Spanish government and othersources; and then to suggest some possible measures
to improve the situation.
1.2. Paper layout

This document is organized as follows: First,
background information about the nature of MSW

The amount and nature of MSW produced in acommunity depends on the characteristics of the area.
On an economically developed urban modern region
the amount of MSW will be much higher than in adeveloping rural area. In the same way, waste
produced in a developed region will have a highpercentage of plastic and packages, contrasting withthe predominantly biodegradable waste in poorer
regions (OECD, 2007) (Fig. 1).

24000

and the basic Spanish legislation on MSW

22000

management is introduced. Then, we present the20000

main data that characterizes MSW situation in Spain

18000

from 1990 to 2005, and subsequently make

Greece

26000

Total MSW (50 tons)
GDP per capita ($)

16000
14000

comments on this information. After that, we
propose some actions to improve the situation.
2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

12000
10000
1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005 Year

Norway50000
45000

2.1. What is MSW?

40000

MSW is the waste produced by households

35000(domestic waste) and commerce collected inside a

30000

Total MSW (100 tons)
GDP per capita ($)

25000

municipal area. Nowadays it typically includes thesekinds of waste:- Biodegradable: food and kitchen waste, green

waste…
- Recyclable material: paper, glass, cans, certain

plastics, etc.
- Inert: construction and demolition waste, dirt,

20000
15000
10000
1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Year

Fig 1. MSW and GDP per capita in Greece and Norway
These countries are in the opposite sides of Europe(geographically, economically, and culturally), but bothshow a correlation between GDP and MSW. We can finda similar correlation in other European countries.

of the packaging they produce. Previously, only

2.1.1. Why is MSW a problem?

In the past, the amount of waste was relatively

glass bottles were widely reused or recycled bylow, and mainly of organic nature. Because of this,means of “deposit and return” systems, managed

and also because the common lack of understanding

directly by each producer, following a 1981 Royalof the public health problems that an improper

Decree (Law: legislative power; Royal Decree:management of MSW can cause, as pointed out

executive power, less preference than a Law).

during 19th century (USEPA, 2007) waste was not,or was not seen, as a problem. Therefore, little effort
was done to manage MSW. Indeed, the main
problems of MSW, pollution of aquifers and land,
visual impact and bad smell, as well as the related
popular protest against the construction of newlandfills

orincinerators,

arerelatedtothecontinuously increasing amount of waste and thegrowing percentage of non-biodegradable materials(Greenpeace Spain, 2006).

In 1998 the second National MSW Law wasapproved. The responsibility and obligations of eachparty was clearly established, in contrast with thevague 1985 Law. Selective collection of recyclable
materials was enforced at municipal level andnational recovery and recycling targets were defined.
Now, municipalities had to establish an Integrated
System of Management (ISM) in order to achievethese goals. One option was to work with Ecoembes,
a non-profit organization created by the main

2.2. Main legislation

manufacturers to manage the ISM nationwide. The

In Spain, it was not until 1985, when the firstother option was to apply for Green Dot funds

National MSW Law was passed, that the problem of

directly and create their own strategy, although thisMSW was confronted at national scale. This new

alternative is not so popular (Morton Barlaz et al.,law forced most municipalities to manage their

2002).

waste and protect the environment. To do so,
attempts have been made of following a unified
criterion and improving coordination although thelaw ambiguity reduced its actual affectivity (Morton
Barlaz et al., 2002). In the following years, otherwaste related regulations were approved, most ofthem being incorporations into national law of thecorresponding European Directives.
One fundamental law was the 1997 packaging
law, which established a model of Extended
Producer Responsibility: forcing manufacturers to be
responsible for recovering and managing the
products they place on the market. This brought thecreation of a “Green Dot” system. Under thismanagement scheme, manufacturers pay a fee
destined to compensate municipalities for the extra
cost of recovery and recycling over direct landfilling

The 2000-2006 MSW Plan, supported by the1998 Law, introduced new specific goals andprovided funds to develop infrastructures, launch
information campaigns and promote R&D. This plan
was a milestone in MSW management development
in Spain.
3. SITUATION 1990-2005
3.1. Data

To observe the state of MSW we are going to look at
the evolution of the amount of MSW generated, its
composition and the treatment it received. There isno comprehensive national information before 1990,
and even after this point data is not always available
or it can vary depending on the source (Environment
ministry, National Statistics Institute or Eurostats).
Additionally, the data publication is typicallydelayed by several years. (Greenpeace Spain, 2006).

close to 30% of this 9%) (Greenpeace Spain, 2006).

In spite of this drawback it is still possible to obtain

3.2% ends in illegal dumping sites, a clear

an overall image of the situation.

improvement from 11% in 1997. From the organic
MSW sent to composting plants only 10% is

3.1.1. Generation

actuallycomposted

due

to

its

low

quality

According to data from the Spanish Ministry of(Greenpeace Spain, 2006) rendering effectively aEnvironment, the amount of MSW produced at theminimum of 87.2% (49% directly landfilled, 7%

beginning of the 1990s was about 325 kg/hab/year,

incinerated, 28% rejected compost, and 3.2% illegal

lower than the European average. However fromdump) of the total MSW being eliminated, not1990 to 2004 MSW production grew incessantly

recycled or valorized. Incineration, even with energy

reaching 525 kg/hab/year, a 62% increment.

recovery, is not considered valorization according to

Additionally, the growth rate was superior to that ofa decision of the European Commission in 2003.

the EU average (Ministry of Environment of Spain,2006), making it probably converge by 2006 (Fig. 2).
Kg/person/year

EU 15
EU 25

Spain

Fig. 2 MSW evolution in Spain, EU 15 and EU 25 from1990 to 2004 (Environment Ministry of Spain)

Rejected
compost25%

Incinerat.
6%

Recovery12%

Total eliminated88 %Illegal
dump
4%

Legal
dump
53%

Fig. 3 Treatment of the MSW in Spain. Only 12% isreused or recycled. The other 88% of MSW is eliminatedby incineration or landfilling (Environment Ministry)

3.2. Data commentary

3.1.2. Composition

The constant growth of MSW is a problem by itself,

There is also limited data regarding the composition

but more important is the fact that the efforts toof municipal solid waste. Only 2 limited studies

address the problem have not been effective. The

have been performed, in 1996 and 1999. The later1998 MSW Nation Plan, which was supposed to be

indicates that almost half (49%) of MSW is organic

the fundamental tool to solve the waste issue, set anmatter, 18% is paper, 12% is plastics (1% increase

objective of reducing overall MSW by 6% (fromfrom 1996) and 8% glass. Therefore 77% of MSW

1996) before 2004. However, it increased by 40%

are potentially recyclable or recoverable.

in that period. Similarly, the growth estimated by the

3.1.3. Treatment

OECD for 2010, based on 1996 data, was alreadyHowever, the reality, according to the Spanish
Environment Ministry, is that 49% of MSW (2004)
is directly landfilled and 7% incinerated (doubled
from 1995 to 2003). 31% is sent to composting
plants and 9% is selectively collected (the final
amount actually recycled is unknown, but could bereached in 2001. Recycling rates followed a similar
trend. This failure indicates that in spite of the 1998
law introducing prevention as the first measure to
take

in

order

to

manageMSW issue,

theinterventions actually focused on the “end of thepipe”, and not on prevention and reduction of wastegeneration. This maybe due to the business createdaround the waste problem (Greenpeace Spain, 2006).
At the same time, relatively simple and effective
solutions, as an improvement in the composting
efficiency has not been achieved. Note that due tothe organic matter being 50% of the total, even asmall improvement would render in a noticeable
overall reduction of landfilled waste.

Fig 4. Incineration in Spain (tons per year). From 1995
to 2003 (Environment Ministry of Spain)

As seen above the data is not reliable. The figures
vary from source to source and they are frequently
obtained from estimates or limited-coverage surveys.

Prevention

Most favoured
options

Minimization

This results in a reduced amount of information toplan a suitable MSW management strategy, andtherefore is also one of the main issues to beresolved.

Reuse
Least
favoured
options

Lastly, we have to pay attention to the increase of

Recycling
Incineration

incineration as MSW treatment (Fig. 4). Incineration
Disposalcan produce up to 200 dangerous substances which
pollute the air, water and soil and have harmful
effects on human health (Greenpeace Spain, 2006,
EU Directive 2000/76/EC). Theoretically, modern

Fig 5. An example of a waste hierarchy pyramid. Incinerationand disposal are both considered elimination in EU

4. PROPOSALS

incinerators have low emissions of contaminants, but
the fact is that in many cases even if these pollutants

4.1. Regulations(that vary depending on the waste burned) are not

Although nearly 50% of the total amount of MSW

going into the atmosphere, they remain in the ashes,is organic, more than 90% of it is ultimatelythat are typically sent to a landfill. “Precautions

landfilled. Thus, one of the first steps should be to

must be taken to prevent their dispersal into theset up selective recovery of organic waste forenvironment and tests must be carried out tocomposting. This would improve the efficiency of

establish their polluting potential” (EU Directive

the composting plants as well as the quality of the

2000/76/EC). The energy recovery, mandatorycompost, reducing the amount of MSW sent tonowadays, accounts for less than 30% of the energy

landfills and also opening more possibilities of usethat would be saved by recycling or reuse of thefor the compost produced.

products burned (Greenpeace Spain, 2006). In fact,incineration,

even

with

energyrecovery,isconsidered elimination by the EU. Therefore theincreased incineration in Spain not only is opposedto the waste hierarchy (Fig.5 ), but also does notoffer environmental guarantees.

Regardingpackaging,“container

deposit”

systems, especially for bottles and other reusable
items, should be introduced. This method is usuallymore effective than the “colored containers” system(United States Senate, 2002) regarding the amountrecovered. It allows direct reuse of the collecteditems, as they are perfectly sorted and not damaged.

(results) on these eco-actions (Kruse, 1995).

The system should be convenient for consumers,

Following this idea, the main tools to promote theallowing return of items at any point of sale, notdegree of eco-action would be environmental

only the original seller. Additionally, fiscal measures

education (at school for children, and in mass media

should be taken to discourage excessive packaging

for the general public) and information (of theand packaging which is difficult to reuse or recycle.

situation and of the results of the citizen’s actions).
Environmental knowledge and values, which can be

To assure the regular collection of comprehensive
and reliable data, an independent department of theEnvironment Ministry should work exclusively on
the compilation of data, issuing annual reports
without unnecessary delays.

given through environmental education, explain
40% of the variance of ecological behaviour
intention which, in turn, predicts 75 per cent of thevariance of general ecological behaviour (F. G.
Kaiser et al., 1999). Transparency in the information

Finally, any kind of measure or law would be

is also important, as it will increase the sense ofuseless without a response in the case it is not abided.

control over the problem and thus raise the

Therefore, the department of the environment

participation level (Fleming and Baum, 1993).

ministry in charge of controlling the application of

However, even nowadays it is not uncommon to

the law should have more resources and more power

have the idea among the general public that sorting

to directly act in case of violation of regulations or

waste at home is useless (“Because even if I do, thein case that a municipality or province fails toother people will not”), that nothing can be done toachieve the goals.

solve the problem (“So, why bother?”) or even thatthe kerbside collection trucks eventually unload the4.2. Encourage ecological behavior

sorted materials in the general MSW landfill instead

Although all this regulations or other up-to-of in a recycling plant (Example: Moore, M., 2001).

bottom approaches are needed, they are not enough.
In the end, anonymous individuals of the society
have the final responsibility to make the system
works, for example, by sorting waste for recycling
or reducing waste generation. Even if regulations
encourage or try to enforce these kinds of activities,
eco-responsibility and its associated behaviours are
crucial to solve or diminish many of the waste

Therefore, an important effort to provide
education and information to the society is needed tochange these and other perceptions and to promote
the eco-behaviours among the individuals andcommunities. Especial emphasis should be given toencouragecommunity

level

actions,astheparticipation level will probably be higher, due tothe additional values, as mutual support andrelated problems.

approval or the perception of an increased possibility
This eco-behaviour is influenced by factors as theperception

of

the

environmental

conditions,of success (control), that the group dynamic brings
implicitly.

knowledge about how the environment works,
external conditions (social approval, reduced taxes,

5. CONCLUDING REMARKSor even outside temperature (Olsen, 1981) and homecharacteristics (Verhallen & Van Raaij, 1981)), theopportunities to act and the existence of feedback

As we have seen, the situation concerning MSW isless than optimal. During the last 15 years it has notbeen improved. Actually it has become even worse

F. G. Kaiser et al., 1999. Environmental attitudein spite of the several Laws and Plans aimed

and ecological behaviour, Journal of Environmental

specifically at solving the issue. This could mean

Psychology, Academic Press. (journal article)

that there is a fundamental flaw in the way thesePlans and Laws are designed or executed, asGreenpeace Spain, 2006. La situación de lasbasuras en España. www.greenpeace.es (report)suggested above.

Greenpeace Spain, 2007. Revisión Crítica del II
In this paper an attempt is made to point out
some of the most important problems and a few

Plan Nacional de Residuos Sólidos Urbanos 20072015. www.greenpeace.es (report)

general ideas on how to improve the condition. Mostof these issues have been already recognized in the

Kruse, L., 1995. Globale Umweltver¨anderungen:(draft of the) 2007-2011 National MSW Plan, and ineine Herausforderung f¨ur die Psychologie - Global

fact some of the measures proposed in the plan areenvironmental changes: a challenge for psychology.

similar to the ones we proposed. However there is

Psychologische Rundschau 46 (journal article)

already doubt about the likelihood of success of thisnew Plan. According to a Greenpeace report(Greenpeace Spain, 2007), the Plan fails to provide

Ministry of Environment of Spain, 2006. National
MSW Plan 2007-2011 (draft). www.mma.es (lawreport)concrete measures, it is too weak to achieve its goalsof waste reduction and, at the same time, promotes a

Ministry of Environment of Spain, 2006. Perfil

raise in MSW incineration as a solution. As

ambiental de España 2006. www.mma.es (report)

explained previously, any type of incineration isconsidered elimination according to the European

Moore, M., 2001. Stupid White Men, Chapter 6,

commission.

page 120-121. Harper Perennial editors (book)

The future of MSW in Spain at this point is

Morton Barlaz, Daniel Loughlin, and Jon Williams

uncertain. Even if the new MSW plan is effective, it

Department of Civil Engineering North Carolina

will take many years to achieve a stable andState University, 2002. Strengthening Markets for

acceptable waste condition. In the meantime, a lot ofRecyclables

works are needed by not only the government side

(report)but also the society side.

Olsen, M. E., 1981. Consumers’ attitudes toward

A

Worldwide

Perspective:

Spain.

energy conservation. Journal of Social Issues 37
REFERENCES(journal article)

Baum, Fleming, 1993. Implication of Psychologicalresearch on stress and technology accidents.

Ombudsman bureau of Spain, 2000. La gestion delosAmerican Psychologist (journal article)

residuos

urbanosen

España.

www.defensordelpueblo.es (Report)
Europeanparliament,

2000.

EU

2000/76/EC. http://ec.europa.eu (law)Directive
Organisationfor

Economic

Co-operation

andDevelopment, 2007. Key environmental indicators
2007. www.oecd.org (report)

The University of Technology Sydney, 2004.
Container Deposit Legislation for New South Wales”
Chapter 3 (report)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007.
Milestonesinhttp://www.epa.gov/msw/timeline_alt.htm

Garbage.
(Onlineresource)
United States senate, 2002. Hearing before thecommittee on environment and public works, 107th
congress, p. 124. (report)
Verhallen, T. M. M. & Van Raaij, W. F., 1981.
Household behaviour and the use of natural gas forhome heating. Journal of Consumer Research 8(journal article)