* -<<SWjl*ji 
-tr ir COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 30.07.1996 
COM(96) 399 final 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
on die review of the Community Strategy 
for Waste Management 
DRAFT 
COUNCIL RESOLUTION 
on waste policy 
(presented by the Commission) 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Executive summary 
1. INTRODUCTION 
2. THE CONTEXT 
3. OBJECTIVES 
3.1 Tjffi GENERAL PHILOSOiMY OF THE COMMUiVn^ 
3.1.1 The hierarchy of principles of waste management policy 
3.1.2 Producer responsibility 
3.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES 
3.2.1 Prevention 
3.2.2 Recovery 
3.2.3 Final disposal 
3.3 PRIORITY WASTE STREAMS 
3.4 THE SHIPMENT OF WASTE 
4. INSTRUMENTS 
4.1 REGULATORY INSTRUMENTS 
4.2 ECONOMIC INSTRUMENTS 
4.3 WASTE STATISTICS 
4.4 OTHER MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS 
4.4.1 Implementation, enforcement and monitoring of existing 
provisions 
4.4.2 Management plans 
4.4.3 Committees 
4.4.4 Life-cycle analyses, eco-balances 
5. ACTORS 
6. CONCLUSIONS 
Executive summary 
The review establishes as the general objective of the community waste management policy the 
need to ensure a high degree of environmental protection without distorting the functioning 
of the internal market with a view to promoting sustainable developmenl. To reach this twofold 
objective the review spells out the following elements as being of paramount importance: 
* A comprehensive and integrated legal framework 
* Appropriate definitions of waste related concepts. 
* Suitable rules and principles: proximity and self-sufficiency. 
* Reliable and comparable data. 
The review confirms the hierarchy of principles established by the strategy document of 1989 
that prevention of waste shall remain the first priority, followed by recovery and finally by 
the safe disposal of waste. The implementation of this hierarchy should be guided by considering 
the best environmental solution taking into account economic and social costs. 
As regards the prevention principle, the following measures should be particularly developed: 
promotion of clean technologies and products, reduction of the hazardousness of wastes, the 
establishment of technical standards and possibly EC-wide rules to limit the presence of 
certain dangerous substances in products, the promotion of reuse and recycling schemes, the 
appropriate use of economic instruments, eco-balances, eco-audit schemes, life-cycle analysis 
and actions on consumer information and education as well as the development of the eco-
label system. 
Within the recovery principle, where environmentally sound, preference should in general be 
given to the recovery of material over energy recovery operations. This reflects the greater 
effect on the prevention of waste produced by material recovery rather than by energy 
recovery. 
Concerning final disposal, particular care should be taken to avoid as much as possible 
incineration operations without energy recovery. Uncontrolled landfilling and contaminated 
sites are two problems requiring special and strong actions at different levels. 
-1*.-
The strategy addresses the question of producer responsibility. Considering the life cycle of a 
product from manufacture until the end of its useful life, producers, material suppliers, trade, 
consumers and public authorities share specific waste management responsibilities. However it is 
the product manufacturer who has a predominant role since he talces key decisions concerning his 
product which largely determine its waste management potential. This principle will, thus, be 
integrated in future measures, on a case by case basis, taking into account the specific 
responsibilities of the different economic operators. 
The reviewed strategy on the priority waste streams programme suggests that the approach has 
not been sufficiently successful to replace the traditional preparatory stage of the institutional 
decision making process; therefore, in principle, no new specific projects will be initiated. Rather, 
waste streams and material flows will be examined on a case by case basis. 
The strategy reaffirms the need for appropriate control of shipment of waste within the legal 
framework set up by Regulation (EEC) No 259/93. Particular attention is to be paid to achieve the 
double objective of ensuring a high level of environmental protection without distorting the 
functioning of the internal market. Appropriate application of the proximity and self-sufficiency 
principles is needed. These principles entail that waste must be disposed of in one of the nearest 
appropriate installations and that waste which is generated within the Community should not be 
disposed of elsewhere. However, these principles only apply to waste destined for disposal, not to 
waste for recovery. 
The new document includes a chapter on the instruments which are to be used, at all different 
levels, in order to achieve the objectives fixed by the strategy, namely regulatory and economic 
instruments, reliable and comparable statistics on waste and other management instruments such 
as waste management plans, appropriate enforcement of legislation and impartial use of life cycle 
analysis and eco-balances. 
As far as actors are concerned, the strategy recognizes the need for an active role of all economic 
operators involved in the pursuit of waste policy objectives. Indeed, these cannot be achieved 
without the participation of public authorities, private and public companies, environmental 
organizations and, in particular, individuals as citizens and consumers. 
-•&-
1. INTRODUCTION 
1 Waste is a form of pollution of growing concern. However, sound and appropriately planned 
waste management policies can contribute both to the conservation of scarce natural 
resources and protect the quality of the environment, and thus effectively contribute to 
sustainable development. 
2 In September 1989, the Commission made a Communication to the Council and to the 
European Parliament on a Community strategy for waste management (SEC(89) 934 final 
of 18.9.89). Council and Parliament approved this strategy in their respective Resolutions of 
7 May 1990 (OJC 122/2, 18.5.90) and 19 February 1991(OJC 72/34, 18.3.91). Furthermore, 
Parliament advocated, in a second Resolution of 22 April 1994, the need for further 
development of the Community strategy on waste management (OJ C 128/471, 9.5 94). 
3 The present Communication on the Community waste strategy aims at reviewing the 
Commission's Communication of 1989 and to adapt it to the requirements of the next five 
years1. Indeed, a number of very important events and factors have intervened since 1989 
influencing the attitude of national and Community administrations and economic operators 
in the waste area. These suggest the Commission should reaffirm and/or adapt the principles 
which will guide its waste policy. 
\ First, the Community has adopted a whole number of new legal instruments on waste. 
Second, the European Court of Justice has issued a series of judgments on cases that affect 
wastes. These assist with the orientation of national and Community waste management 
measures. Further, the Treaty on European Union and the adoption of the Fifth Environment 
Action Programme, currently being reviewed, have determined the framework within which 
waste management activities inside the European Community are exercised. Furthermore, 
economic, social, technical and environmental factors have evolved and strongly influenced 
the waste management policy. Also, the European Union is preparing for enlargement with 
applicant countries from Central and Eastern Europe, as well as Cyprus and Malta. Finally, 
on the international level, both the Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment 
and Development (Agenda 21) and the conclusion of the Basel Convention on the control of 
transboundary movements of hazardous waste and their disposal, stressed the need to prevent 
and/or minimize the generation of hazardous wastes as well as to manage those wastes in 
such a way that they do not cause harm to health and the environment. 
1 This review ttocs nflj çoyej ratioftotive waste, 
- lc -
Seven years after the first Communication on waste strategy, it is appropriate now to inform 
the European Parliament and the Council as well as the Economic and Social Committee and 
the Committee of the Regions, public authorities, economic operators, environmental and 
consumer organizations of the review of the 1989 waste strategy. The Commission has 
recently adopted and transmitted to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on 
the measures taken since the adoption of the first Communication (COM(95) 522 final of 
8.11.95). 
When putting the present Communication into operation, full account will be taken of the 
Community's obligations under international law, in particular as regards trade, as well as of 
the principles governing other EC policies. 
-2 
2. THE CONTEXT 
7 Wastes are material objects. The European Community has established an internal market 
where national borders are no longer economic borders and where the free circulation of 
goods is of paramount importance. Member States are under an obligation to respect the 
provisions of the EC Treaty, such as those on the free movement of goods in Articles 30-36 
with regard to national rules and administrative practices when applying and interpreting 
Community law. The European Court of Justice has stipulated that the term "goods" for the 
purposes of the Treaty covers goods irrespective of their value, nature, characteristics and 
purpose. In this context, waste must be considered as goods under Article 30 irrespective of 
whether they will be reused, recycled or disposed of (case C-2/90, Commission v Belgium). 
However, the European Court of Justice noted that wastes are goods of a specific nature 
which may constitute a risk to the environment. Therefore, in light of Article 36 and on the 
basis of the principle that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source, 
the free movement of waste may be limited for reasons of environmental protection in 
accordance with existing legislation. 
8 As a step in this direction, the 1989 waste strategy introduced elements of the proximity 
principle. This means that waste must be disposed of "in one of the nearest appropriate 
installations". Furthermore, it proclaimed the principle of self-sufficiency in waste disposal, 
in the first instance for the Community as a whole, reflecting the general idea that waste 
which is generated within the Community should not be disposed of outside the Community. 
Legislation enacted since then takes due account of these principles in applying them to the 
disposal of all waste, not however to the recovery of waste. 
9 In the past, a number of Member States have relied to a large extent on the principles of 
proximity and self-sufficiency in order to establish and maintain adequate and sustainable 
waste management systems. The Commission is of the opinion that these national 
considerations and practices can have a valid role provided they comply with the provisions 
of the Treaty and respect the principles of the internal market, where these apply. 
10 Community waste legislation has tried to strike a balance between the need for a high level 
of environmental protection - now required by Article 130r of the EC Treaty - and the need 
for an appropriate level of regulation to ensure the functioning of the internal market. This 
would allow economic operators to act within the Community while creating a level playing 
field for waste by establishing common rules yet respecting the legitimate wish of Member 
States to define and implement waste policies and waste management measures at national 
level. This diversity of objectives has manifested itself in that a number of Community waste 
directives are based on Article 100a of the EC Treaty, while others have taken Article 130s 
as their legal basis. It is the aim of this strategy to contribute, in the area of waste, to the 
achievement of a high protection of the environment within the internal market. The 
Commission is determined to achieve this objective and appeals to all interested parties to 
support this effort. 
-3 -
11 The Community policy on environment aims to provide a high level of protection. Therefore, 
emissions from installations to the environment (air, water, soil) should be reduced as much 
as possible and in the most economically efficient way. The environmental impact of a given 
emission has the same potential irrespective of the emitting process. Consequently, there is 
no reason to set up different standards for different sectors (industry and waste treatment 
facilities) as long as the input material and process is comparable. The same strict standards 
should, in principle, apply for waste whether it is treated in industrial installations or in waste 
treatment installations (recovery or disposal). The Commission work in future will aim at 
achieving this. Also, care must be taken to ensure that standards which are fixed to limit 
emissions into one environmental medium (air, water or soil) do not lead to an increase of 
emissions into other media. This basic philosophy, set out in the proposal for a Directive on 
Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) for industrial installations, including waste 
treatment installations, must also guide any Community strategy on waste. 
12 The Commission is convinced that only very strict environmental standards for all waste 
management installations can help to overcome the far-spread concern of the population 
which finds its concrete application in the NIMBY syndrome (not in my back yard). 
13 The discussion on the distinction between waste and goods has been going on for almost 
twenty years now. No satisfactory definition has yet been found to determine when a material 
becomes waste and when waste becomes a good again. A sometimes favoured solution has 
been to consider a material as a good when it has economic value. This would not be in line 
either with the EC-definition of waste or with the opinion of the Court of Justice which has 
specified that the definition of waste is independent of the economic value that the discarded 
object may have and declared wastes without an economic value to be goods in the sense of 
Article 30 of the EC Treaty, though of a specific nature. Notwithstanding the inherent 
difficulty of this question, practical implications necessitate further efforts involving all 
parties concerned, including international organisations, towards finding such a definition. 
14 The definitions of "waste" and of "hazardous waste", given in Council Directives 
75/442/EEC, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC, and 91/689/EEC did not solve all the 
problematic cases of distinction between wastes and goods which have arisen. Nevertheless 
they have aimed at serving the double objective of environmental protection and functioning 
of the internal market. 
15 When implementing EC legislation Member States have adopted rather different notions of 
waste and hazardous waste and established different waste lists. For this reason, the 
Commission believes that the realisation of the above objective will only be achieved where 
all Member States incorporate the EC definitions of waste and hazardous waste and the 
respective lists in their national legislation This would avoid the use of widely different 
terminology - industrial waste, ultimate waste, secondary raw material, special waste etc -
which only contributes to difficulties for economic operators and administrations. At the same 
time, there would, in principle, be only one EC-wide list for "waste" and for "hazardous 
waste", a situation which would considerably increase transparency, planning and economic 
security for all parties involved. 
In the context of the pre-accession strategy, special attention will be paid to the countries of 
Central and Eastern Europe that are preparing to become Members of the Union. Along with 
the adaptation of legislation to Community level, practical measures to ensure enforcement 
and application will need to be strengthened. 
16 Where Member States are of the opinion that the lists are not completely or correctly 
reflecting the different "wastes" or "hazardous wastes", they are at present entitled to adopt 
or maintain more stringent national provisions; furthermore it should be noted that a waste 
not featuring on the Community list may be covered by some other relevant EC legislation. 
However, these measures must be notified to the Commission. A specific, simplified 
committee procedure exists in order to adapt the EC lists to any new requirement. 
17 According tp the recent publication Europe's Environment: Statistical Compendium for the 
Dobris Assessment, in 1990 the total amount of waste generated in the 15 Member States 
purported to be about 910 million tonnes (excluding agricultural waste); of those 22 million 
tonnes were hazardous. The potential environment impact of these quantities is enormous. 
However, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to draw up a consistent picture across 
different countries within a given time-frame to indicate any clear trend in the area of 
quantitative aspects of waste for the last 10 years. Little data is available before 1985 and 
the figures available more recently are patchy and hard to compare or aggregate. This 
reflects the lack of a systematic data collection at the Community level, using a standard and 
uniform scope, coverage, definitions and nomenclature. The issue of statistical data will be 
tackled in more detail in chapter 4.3. 
-5-
3. OBJECTIVES 
3.1 THE GENERAL PHILOSOPHY OF THE COMMUNITY WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICY 
3.1.1 The hierarchy of principles of waste management policy 
18 As significant as they are for any waste policy, recovery and disposal of waste do not 
constitute the most important elements of such a policy. Indeed, the generation of waste is 
a form of pollution and at the same time a "waste" of resources. Therefore the key objective 
of any Community waste policy based on the precautionary and preventive principle must be 
to prevent the generation of waste and, furthermore, to reduce the content of hazardous 
materials in waste. This simultaneously avoids any risk to human health and the environment. 
In the long term such a policy will require the integration of any waste-related problem 
already into the production phase and thus help to promote sustainable development. 
19 The recovery concept has to be considered in its triple dimension: re-use, recycling and 
energy recovery. Waste which cannot be avoided should be recovered according to one of 
these methods. Final disposal has to be safe and limited to waste for which no possibility of 
recovery exists. 
20 The Commission therefore confirms the hierarchy of principles established by the strategy 
document of 1989 that prevention of the generation of waste shall remain the first priority, 
followed by the recovery of waste and finally by the safe disposal of waste. Obviously this 
hierarchy has to be applied with a certain flexibility. The implementation of this hierarchy 
should be guided by considering the best environmental solution taking into account 
economic and social costs. A sound waste management strategy should refer to analytical and 
decision-making techniques assessing the benefits and costs of action or lack of action for 
the environment. However, the Commission believes that in any case waste prevention must 
be considered preferable to any other possible solution. 
21 In this respect the internalisation of external (environmental) costs approach may be helpful. 
External costs are the costs of natural and material resources not yet reflected in their 
market prices and the costs (damages) to environmental quality that arise throughout the 
product cycle including the management of the waste streams. Valuing these external cost 
elements in monetary terms and internalising them to the product price at its various life-
cycle stages would, in principle, bring about via the market mechanism an environmentally 
and economically optimal Waste management system. In practice a range of practical 
difficulties limits the implementation of an overall internalisation strategy for the time being. 
6-
22 The Commission will continue to promote this hierarchy in the coming years, by establishing 
legal, economic and administrative instruments which allow these principles to be pursued 
throughout the Community. 
23 With a view to substantially reducing the amount of waste generated as well as to generally 
achieve high waste recovery objectives, the Commission will make proposals in areas where 
quantitative targets may be fixed at Community level. In this context, it will be very 
important to ensure that the quantities of waste which are generated in the different industrial 
processes are properly monitored and made transparent so that the effectiveness of the 
different measures can be assessed. Furthermore, economic operators are encouraged to set 
quantitative targets for waste reduction and recovery at the level of individual production 
units. Finally there is a considerable potential for reducing and recovering municipal waste 
in a more sustainable fashion for which new targets also will be set. 
3.1.2 Producer responsibility 
24 A preventive waste policy which aims at preventing generation of waste must begin with the 
product and production process. Waste management concerns have to be fully taken into 
account from the product's design or conception phase. To be effective, it implies that action 
is necessary at all stages of a product's life cycle from production, through use to collection, 
re-use, recycling and final disposal. 
25 In the past, the concept of waste management in terms of costs and related responsibilities 
for the disposal of products that became waste was traditionally born either by the 
environment itself or by the tax payer. This approach is not compatible with the principles 
of Article 130r of the EC Treaty, in particular the precautionary and prevention principles as 
well as that the polluter should pay and that environmental impairment should be rectified 
at source. 
26 These basic principles aim at closing the life cycle of substances, components and products 
from their production through their useful life until they become waste. The objective can 
only be attained if responsibility rests with the economic operators who may make the most 
efficient contribution towards the protection, preservation and improvement of the quality of 
the environment. 
-7-
27 Considering the life cycle of a product from manufacture until the end of its useful life, 
producers, material suppliers, trade, consumers and public authorities share specific waste 
management responsibilities. However it is the product manufacturer who has a predominant 
role. The manufacturer is the one to take key decisions concerning the waste management 
potential of his product, such as design, conception, use of specific materials, composition 
of the product and finally its marketing. The manufacturer is therefore able to provide the 
means not only to avoid waste by a considered utilization of natural resources, renewable raw 
materials or non-hazardous materials, but also to conceive products in a way which facilitates 
proper re-use and recovery. Marking, labelling, the issue of instructions for use and of data 
sheets may contribute to this aim. 
28 This approach is compatible with the concept of shared responsibility as proposed in the Fifth 
Environment Action Programme. Indeed, this concept underlines that progress in 
environmental policies can only be achieved when action is taken by all actors involved in 
a coherent way. 
29 The Commission intends to integrate and practically implement the above-mentioned 
principles in all future measures, on a case by case basis, which it proposes or undertakes in 
the waste area, taken into account the specific responsibilities of the different economic 
operators. 
3.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES 
3.2.1 Prevention 
30 The environmental impact of a product or an installation is not limited to the generation of 
waste. Therefore, the impact of a specific material object on the environment should be 
evaluated during its whole life cycle. The burden on the environment should thus normally 
be determined by the use of "cradle-to-grave approaches", i.e. by assessing the impact of the 
extraction of virgin raw materials, through processing, manufacturing, transporting, using and 
handling as waste. The aim of such an approach is to conserve raw materials and energy on 
the one hand, and to reduce the generation of waste, in particular its hazardousness, on the 
other hand. A higher degree of dematerialisation in processes, products and services should 
be achieved in the long term. 
31 Methods for life-cycle analyses for products do not yet exist in a sufficiently consolidated 
form. However, with further developments, these methods should, in future, prove to be very 
useful for strategic waste planning. 
32 The strategy document of 1989 indicated that the prevention of the generation of waste 
should mainly be assured by the use of clean technologies in the production process and by 
an action on products, for which it suggested the introduction of an eco-label system at EC 
level. 
33 It cannot be denied that the Community's achievements in the prevention of waste generation 
are not satisfactory. Indeed, waste quantities have on average continued to grow. 
34 The Commission will continue to promote clean technologies in the context of the different 
funding facilities which are available (e.g. LIFE, Environment and Climate Programme, 
Industrial and Materials Technologies Programme) and to influence their adoption by Member 
States and economic operators where possible, for instance by instruments such as the 
proposal for a Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control. The Commission will 
seek to improve the environmental dimension of technical standards in the framework of the 
European Committee for Standardization (CEN), in order to ensure that product standards 
already incorporate the problems which occur when the product reaches the end of its useful 
life-time. The Commission will promote and favour the reuse and recycling, where 
environmentally sound and economically viable, since mis reduces the need to produce new 
products and thus new (future) waste. 
35 In particular cases, waste prevention might lead to the need for EC-wide rules to limit the 
presence of heavy metals in products or in the production process or ban specific substances 
in order to prevent, at a later stage, the generation of hazardous waste. This might be the case 
where neither the reuse nor the recovery or the safe disposal of that substance is an 
environmentally acceptable solution. 
36 An important element for promoting the prevention of waste is certainly the price element. 
Where the price of natural resources is low, more waste is generated; also, where the price 
of waste disposal is significant, waste generators are likely to avoid these costs by making 
efforts to reduce the generation of wastes. Finally, economic instruments such as charging 
products which are neither reusable nor recyclable, are methods which are used in some 
Member States in order to orient consumers' preference to other products. The Commission 
will endeavour to promote the use of economic instruments in the waste sector in accordance 
with the rules of the internal market. 
37 Other ways to contribute to the prevention of waste are eco-audit schemes for economic 
operators which increase awareness of the amount of waste generated and thereby constitute 
an incentive to develop waste prevention strategies. The EC Regulation on eco-audit 
constitutes a basic instrument on which Member States can build. Also the eco-label 
Regulation may be applied to the waste management area to promote products which generate 
less waste It is recognized, though, that with regard to these instruments, the particular 
concerns of small and medium sized enterprises need to be taken into consideration. 
-9-
38 More generally, considerable achievements in waste prevention might be gained where 
consumers can be encouraged to acquire products which pollute less, which come from 
recovered materials or which themselves can be reused or recycled. The Commission will 
endeavour to promote consumer information and education in this area and thus contribute 
to progressive changes in the consumption patterns. 
39 The Commission will continue to establish at Community level the appropriate legal and 
institutional framework to promote prevention of waste generation. However, the success of 
this strategy requires the determination of Member States, economic operators and consumers 
alike. Joint efforts of local, regional, national and Community authorities are necessary in 
order to prove that waste prevention pays in terms of price and consumer satisfaction as well 
as environmental protection. 
3.2.2 Recovery 
40 Recovery of waste is at the core of any sustainable waste management policy. Therefore, 
where the generation of waste cannot be avoided, it should be reused or recovered for its 
material or energy. 
41 Re-use of a product should, where environmentally sound, be further encouraged, since it 
helps to avoid waste generation. Waste can otherwise be recovered mainly by means of 
material recovery, which means that some or all materials contained in the waste are 
reprocessed in order to make new products, or by energy recovery operations, where the 
energy is extracted by the use of the waste as a fuel. 
42 Material recovery implies the separation of wastes at the source. This involves end-users and 
consumers in the waste management chain and makes them more aware of the necessity and 
the ways to decrease the generation of waste. Indeed, it is the end-users and consumers who 
should carry out the separation of wastes before disposal in order to reintroduce recyclable 
wastes in the production cycle. Furthermore, energy strategies relying on waste supplies 
should not be detrimental to the principles of prevention and material recovery. Indeed, in 
many cases it can be assumed that by retaining the existing material structure of the 
recoverable waste, it will be possible to minimise the additional material and energy necessary 
to produce a new product. Also, material recovery addresses the concerns about emissions 
from waste incineration installations. 
In view of the above, preference should be given, where environmentally sound, to the 
recovery of material over energy recovery operations. This general rule is based on the fact 
that material recovery has a greater effect on waste prevention than energy recovery. It will 
nevertheless be necessary to take into account the environmental, economic and scientific 
effects of either option. The evaluation of these effects could lead, in certain cases, to 
preference being given to the energy recovery option. 
- 10 
Material recovery 
43 As regards material recovery, it seems fair to state that the complexity of products, in terms 
of material composition and structure, has considerably increased over the years. However, 
the recycling industry is often characterized by the fact that it only handles more simple 
products. It will therefore be an important task to develop a recycling industry which is based 
on modern methods and technologies, which allow an economically profitable reprocessing 
of discarded products. 
44 Closer liaison should be established between all the economic operators of the production and 
distribution chain, in order to improve and promote recyclability of materials and products. 
In particular, materials used should be easily separable and compatible when recycled, and 
products should be designed in such a way that their disassembly is facilitated. 
45 The creation of outlets for materials and products of recycling activities should also be 
promoted all over the Community. This implies that economic operators and consumers are 
convinced that materials and products which come in part or in full from recycled materials 
satisfy the same standards for health, safety and the environment as "new" products. Public 
procurement requirements can play an important part in promoting recycled products. 
Energy recovery 
46 As a source of energy, waste recovery operations are of growing importance. However, there 
remain considerable problems in detail. Some Member States have adopted different 
definitions as regards the distinction between waste incineration with and without energy 
recovery. The Commission thus envisages further action to clarify definitions within this area. 
In this context, in the future it may have to be considered whether there should be EC quality 
requirements to define when a given incineration operation is a recovery or a disposal 
operation. Furthermore, as regards terminology, the notion of "recycling" should be limited 
to material recovery and, as Council Directive 94/62/EC already stated in the area of 
packaging and packaging waste, not include energy recovery operations. 
47 Energy recovery operations should be carried out by using the produced energy in the most 
efficient way. This implies that consideration will have to be given to whether only waste 
being able to provide a net calorific gain should be considered as waste for energy recovery. 
48 Emissions of energy recovery plants must be minimized and comply with EC regulations; 
particular attention will have to be paid to installations which originally had not been 
designed to use waste as fuel substitute. In all installations incineration must be carried out 
in a way that the material residues can be disposed of in an environmentally sound manner. 
- 11 -
3.2 .3 Final disposal 
49 Final disposal of waste is carried out mainly by waste incineration without energy recovery 
and landfill of waste. Sometimes the dumping or the discharge of waste at sea is also 
considered as an option. In conformity with several international conventions, the 
Commission is of the opinion that the discharge of waste into the sea or the seabed is not a 
desirable option and should be avoided. This applies to all forms of waste, including end-of-
life ships and other bulky wastes. 
50 According to Directive 75/442/EEC, Member States are required to take appropriate measures 
to establish an integrated and adequate network of waste disposal installations which will 
allow the Community to become self-sufficient as regards the disposal of waste. Without 
doubt, the waste management plans, which all Member States have to elaborate, will 
contribute to progressively establishing this EC-wide network. 
51 Frequently, the cost of waste disposal does not reflect the true costs of the environmental 
damage caused. For instance, the costs for the whole life-time of a landfill - a hundred years 
or more - are often not taken into consideration. Low prices for waste disposal offer no 
incentive to recovery operations or the pre-treatment of waste. Therefore Member States 
should, in the long run, ensure that the price to be paid for these operations is made more 
transparent. In particular, the objective should be that the price accurately reflects the full cost 
of disposal, for example as regards the closure and aftercare of a facility. This would restore 
the balance between costs for waste disposal operations, which at present tend to be too low, 
and costs for other treatment methods, e.g. environmentally sound recovery operations which 
are relatively high. 
52 Incineration of waste reduces the volume of waste. Nevertheless, incineration without energy 
recovery does not contribute to saving resources. Consequently, energy recovery should be 
promoted for all incineration installations. Where incineration takes place, the emission of 
pollutants must be minimized, in particular as regards heavy metals, dioxin and furan; strict 
monitoring of the installations is necessary as regards compliance with existing legislation and 
in particular the recently adopted Directive 94/67/EC. Again, installations which were not 
originally designed to incinerate waste need special attention. 
53 The landfilling of waste should, in principle, be seen as the last - and least best - solution. 
It has a negative impact on the environment, in particular where the long-term effects of 
landfill are being taken into consideration. This does not exclude that, in particular cases, 
landfill is the only reasonable form of waste disposal. However, waste strategies should take 
serious efforts to prevent and, should that not be possible, to minimize the quantities of waste 
that goes to landfill. Means to achieve this are in particular waste prevention and recovery 
operations. Also, waste should be sorted and/or pre-treated before it is landfilled, in order to 
reduce quantities of waste and/or eliminate hazardous wastes going to landfill. In the mid­
term, the Commission considers that only non recoverable waste and inert waste should be 
accepted in landfills. 
12 
54 Following the rejection by the European Parliament of the common position of the Council 
for a Directive on landfill, the Commission will shortly present a new proposal which will 
fix strict requirements/for authorizing landfill sites. The Directive will progressively be put 
into practice in Member States and allow for better environmental protection against 
contamination and other risks stemming from landfill. The Commission will ensure over the 
coming years that the Directive is fully put into operation, 
55 There is a considerable potential for damage to the environment which comes from 
contaminated sites such as old landfills, unauthorized discharges of waste, abandoned 
industrial or military sites etc.. These sites will need special attention and efforts with a view 
to their cleaning-up. Also, particular care will have to be taken of old mines and other 
underground sites, where the permanent storage of waste might, from an environmental point 
of view, constitute the same or even a more serious risk to the environment than the ordinary 
landfill. 
56 Some Member States have started with clean-up measures for contaminated sites, which often 
reveal to be expensive and difficult. The Commission is of the opinion that the identification 
and rehabilitation of such contaminated sites is first of all the task of Member States, which 
will also have to consider to what extent the polluter-pays-principle should be made 
operational for such cases. In future, an exchange of experience, of know-how and of clean­
up technologies among Member States is desirable. This problem is likely to be of particular 
importance in Central and Eastern Europe. 
3 J PRIORITY WASTE STREAMS 
57 Following the Council Resolution of 7 May 1990, which asked for EC-wide actions for 
particular types of waste, the Commission developed a priority waste streams programme. The 
action concentrated on used tyres, end-of-life vehicles, healthcare waste, construction and 
demolition waste and waste from electrical and electronic equipment. 
58 The working method was inspired by Dutch experience which had led to the conclusion of 
Dutch covenants on specific types of wastes; such covenants are agreements between the 
Government, economic operators and possibly non-governmental organisations, which agree 
to the achievement of targets for waste reduction or recovery that were set by the 
Government. However, at EC level, no targets were fixed. The working groups included 
representatives from national governments, the Commission services, raw material producers, 
manufacturers, product retailers, environmental and consumer protection associations etc. 
13 
59 The initial idea to obtain a consensus of participants on quantified objectives for the different 
waste streams was only partially realised. Possible reasons for this include the lack of proper, 
EC-wide statistics both in quantities and in quality of the waste in question and its 
environmental impact, the unbalanced preparation of the parties to consider all waste 
management aspects and implications of the stream, the lack of or incomplete methodology 
to evaluate the economic aspects which would allow to determine the environmental benefits 
and costs of the wastes, and the absence of a mandate both to Member States, industry and 
NGO representatives to fully negotiate, accept and agree on certain decisions. 
60 The general conclusion of the priority waste stream projects is that they contributed to more 
insight and more information concerning the various waste streams and their possible 
solutions, including better product design and production processes. However, the specific 
priority waste stream project approach has not always been sufficiently successful to replace 
the traditional preparatory stage of the institutional decision making process. It cannot be 
neglected that the merits of this approach also involve considerable time and effort. 
61 In view of the above, new specific projects under this approach will not, in principle, be 
initiated by the Commission, However, the Commission will examine other waste streams or 
material flows such as heavy metals or certain organic compounds on a case by case basis. 
For the existing projets an adequate follow-up will be assured. 
3.4 THE SHIPMENT OF WASTE 
62 The Community has equipped itself with detailed legislation concerning the shipment of 
wastes, by adopting Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 and ratifying the Basel Convention 
on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous waste and their disposal. 
Furthermore, the Community is currently working on the integration into EC legislation of 
the agreements on international transport of dangerous goods, including waste, set up under 
the umbrella of the UN Recommendations on this issue. It is obvious, though, that 
considerable work will be needed in order to fine-tune the shipment of wastes within the EC 
on the one hand and the shipment of wastes from and to third countries on the other. 
Particular attention will need to be paid to ensure that countries that have applied to become 
members of the EU co-operate fully on the application and enforcement of EU and 
international rules applicable to shipment of waste. 
63 The principle of selfTSufficiency has already been touched upon. It applies only to disposal 
activities and aims in particular at ensuring that wastes are not exported to non-EC countries. 
Within the EC, this principle also aims to avoid shipments for disposal between Member 
States. It largely depends on Member States, if and to what extent they use this facility; 
generally, no further regulatory interventions seem necessary at this moment for this type of 
shipment of wastes. 
14-
64 Wastes which are shipped for recovery operations are, as indicated above, to a large extent 
submitted to the principles of the internal market. Member States are entitled to oppose this 
kind of shipment under certain, specific circumstances. The argument of ensuring the security 
of waste supply to national installations cannot justify the refusal to authorise shipments for 
recovery. However, the environmentally sound management of waste for recovery must also 
be ensured. To this end, it is essential mat the conditions for waste treatment are based on 
the same strict standards throughout the Community. Thus, a level playing field for recovery 
operations needs to be provided in order to avoid shipments to those parts of the Community 
where lower environmental standards entail lower treatment costs. Consequently, the 
Commission is of the opinion that efforts in the area of approximation of environmental 
standards should be increased with the objective of establishing, where appropriate, common 
environmental standards for recovery operations. The Commission believes that the above 
considerations will best reconcile environmental arguments with the rules on the free 
circulation of goods. 
65 In this context, the Commission notes that there is at present an ongoing debate within the 
Community as to whether wastes that are destined for incineration with recovery of energy 
should rather follow the principles of free circulation, or whether Member States should be 
allowed to generally prohibit the shipment of wastes for such purposes. It is noted, however, 
that further restrictions to the circulation of waste for recovery may require a change in the 
present Community legislation. Furthermore, particular attention will have to be paid to a 
proper enforcement of the provisions on the shipment of waste, in order to further reduce 
illegal shipments and criminal activities related to these, in particular as regards shipments 
from one country to another. 
66 As regards waste exports, the EC has already banned exports of all wastes for disposal to 
other countries, except to EFTA-States who have given written consent to their specific 
import. Exports of hazardous waste for recovery to non-OECD countries shall be phased out 
by 1998. This initiative follows a 1995 decision taken in the context of the Third Conference 
of the Parties of the Basel Convention on the shipment of hazardous waste. 
67 Since then several third countries voiced concern as to the economic and trade potential 
which might be affected by such a decision. For that reason, and in particular in order to 
avoid confusion of exporters and importers about which waste will actually be covered by 
the export ban, the Basel Convention decided to adopt in 1997 lists of wastes which are 
hazardous and wastes which are not subject to the Convention. 
68 It remains to be seen to what extent such a list will find the right balance between wastes 
which may be shipped under control requirements and hazardous wastes, which shall no 
longer be shipped from industrialized to non-industrialized countries. The EC has interest in 
seeing trade in waste for recovery not unduly hampered, while particular care must be taken 
in order to avoid that under the cover of "shipments for recovery" hazardous waste is 
exported, the handling of which exceeds the capacity of non-OECD countries. 
15 
4. INSTRUMENTS 
4.1 REGULATORY INSTRUMENTS 
69 In the terminology of the Court of Justice waste is a "good", though with certain specific 
characteristics. An internal market for goods/products, which may circulate freely within the 
EC is hardly conceivable without EC-wide rules which regulate these products at the end of 
their useful life-time. Therefore, EC-wide rules for waste will continue to be necessary. These 
rules should take account of the economic and social development of the Community as a 
whole and the balanced development of its regions. Since Member States too have a genuine 
responsibility to protect the environment, particular care will have to be taken to elaborate 
EC-wide rules for waste, which respect the principle of subsidiarity and ensure at the same 
time a high level of environmental protection all over the Community. Equally, emphasis 
should be given to the harmonised application of Community rules in order to facilitate the 
exchange of recoverable waste. This will encourage a competitive European recycling 
industry able to progressively develop sounder technologies. 
70 In the future, the Community and Member States should set targets for the reduction or the 
recovery of wastes. Targets translate key principles of waste policy into calculable 
obligations. They allow for the achievement of specific objectives, for instance on recovery 
or recycling within a given time. They are not an end in themselves, but rather part of a more 
general framework. They send strong, clear and reliable messages to administrations and 
economic operators, which may then design their own policy with a view to achieving these 
targets. Decision to set targets are essentially political and need to be based on reliable, up-to-
date information on both environmental and economic aspects. They should be reviewed at 
regular intervals, in order to allow constant management of waste policies. It is for this reason 
that Council Directive 94/62/EC, which fixes, for the first time at EC-level, targets for 
recovery of packaging waste, provides for a review mechanism within five years. 
71 Until now most Community and national instruments to orient behaviour as regards waste 
have consisted in the adoption of regulatory measures. At EC level, there is only one 
recommendation on waste (Council Recommendation of 3 December 1981 concerning the re­
use of waste paper and the use of recycled paper), which appeals to voluntary action. 
Regrettably, this Recommendation is little known, hardly respected and has had scarce impact 
on economic operators or consumers. 
72 Recently, particular interest has arisen for the possible use of agreements between public 
authorities and economic operators to achieve environmental objectives. This possibility may 
be explored also with reference to the waste sector. These agreements might be considered 
either as a tool to implement certain objectives established by EC legislation or as EC-wide 
agreed programmes to achieve certain targets. Particular attention needs to be paid to 
conditions guaranteeing sufficient participation throughout the Community, dealing with "free 
riders" and independent monitoring and verification. 
16 
73 The Commission is interested in the potential of the conclusion of environmental agreements 
in the waste sector, provided that there are sufficient safeguards to ensure that tangible results 
are achieved. Such agreements may offer some advantage with regard to traditional forms of 
standard-setting, such as increased participation and integration of economic operators in the 
elaboration of the agreement, increased acceptability of the objectives that are fixed, more 
flexible means of ensuring compliance and therefore, at the end of the day, better and quicker 
results for an improved protection of the environment. In the near future, the Commission will 
send a communication to the Parliament and the Council on mis subject. 
4.2 ECONOMIC INSTRUMENTS 
74 The Fifth Environment Action Programme promotes the use of economic instruments in 
environmental policy. Economic instruments in the waste sector allow to reflect in the market 
price system die scarcity of environmental resources and the external costs related to the 
generation and management of waste. Since economic operators take decisions on the basis 
of economic considerations, such a policy can have the effect of influencing producers' and 
consumers' behaviour and direct them towards adopting more environmentally friendly 
attitudes. 
75 Economic instruments may take different forms, such as fiscal measures, financial incentives 
or deposit-refund schemes and can play a very considerable role in contributing to the 
achievement of the different objectives of the waste strategy. They can be used to encourage 
prevention efforts or to discourage the least desirable disposal practices, to fill the cost gap 
between recovery and disposal, as well as to avoid that the negative consequences of 
environmentally unfriendly treatment and disposal practices are born by the society as a 
whole, in contradiction with the polluter^pays-principle. 
76 In the waste sector economic instruments have, until now, only exceptionally and in general 
terms been promoted by Community directives. National experience shows, though, that they 
may be useful tools to influence behaviours of economic operators or consumers; for instance, 
policies favouring refundable deposits help to ensure that products are, at the end of their 
useful life-time, effectively taken back and then directed towards the appropriate recovery, 
treatment or final disposal installation. The Commission will endeavour to promote the use 
of economic instruments in the waste sector, though it remains obvious, mat many economic 
instruments - in particular charges and levies, fiscal incentives or disincentives or State 
funding - will first of all be used at the level of Member States. 
77 It is obvious, though, that the use of the above instruments at national level might have an 
impact on the internal market since economic measures could have a similar impact on 
commercial transactions as technical measures. Until the need for concerted action at EC level 
becomes generally accepted, common guidelines could be an effective tool to ensure a 
coherent use of such instruments by Member States while fully preserving the functioning of 
the internal market and avoiding distortions to competition. 
17 
78 Community funding for environmental waste measures - in the form of assistance from the 
structural funds, the Cohesion Fund, or the environmental fund LIFE - constitute a relatively 
small financial complement to funding by Member States in this sector. More initiatives that 
promote clean technologies for products, recycling possibilities for different forms of waste, 
clean-up means for contaminated sites and other demonstration or pilot projects are desirable. 
However, the success of such efforts also depends on the support of economic operators who 
are invited to make further contributions to a modern waste management policy. 
79 In 1983, the Commission suggested EC-wide rules on liability for damage caused by waste. 
The Council could not agree to that proposal and declared that it would decide on a liability 
scheme for waste, based on a new proposal from the Commission, before the end 1987. The 
proposal was submitted in 1989, but never really discussed by the Council. In 1993 the 
Commission presented a green paper on environmental liability which was no longer limited 
to damage caused by waste but included all environmental sectors. In view of this broader 
approach, the Commission does not intend, at present, to pursue its efforts in the waste sector 
alone, though it remains convinced that liability provisions are of paramount importance for 
an effective protection of the environment. 
4.3 WASTE STATISTICS 
80 Waste statistics constitute an important instrument of management. Information based on 
reliable data allows on the one hand the formulation of realistic objectives, and on the other 
the assessment of the current situation, in particular as far as the achievement of objectives 
is concerned. 
81 At present, only a limited set of waste statistics is reported on a voluntary basis to the EC 
Statistical Office (Eurostat) via the joint Eurostat-OECD questionnaire, which is sent to 
Member States every two years (1990, 1992, 1994, 1996 ...). In response to the latest 
questionnaire for which data have been processed (1994), most Member States were able to 
provide data up to 1992, 1993 or 1994. The national data are based on a combination of 
regular surveys, ad hoc surveys and administrative data linked to waste regulations. These 
data are not harmonised between Member States and there are important differences in the 
coverage, level of detail and accuracy of the data between countries. 
- 18 
82 For the most recent available figures (1990), the following overview can be given. Data on 
all 15 Member States is available only for the manufacturing industry and for municipal 
waste. Data on agricultural waste must be excluded since the figures are based on particularly 
disparate definitions. For these reasons, it is not permissible to add the figures to a total for 
all wastes produced in EU15. In order of decreasing importance, the following sectors 
contributed to total waste amounts (in million tonnes) in 1990: 352 mining and quarrying 
waste, 336 manufacturing waste, 132 municipal waste, 57 energy production waste, 33 from 
other economic sectors, and 22 hazardous waste all sectors. A breakdown by disposal and 
recovery operations shows that in 1990, 68% of municipal waste was landfilled, 18% was 
incinerated, 5% composted and only 2% recycled. The amount of hazardous waste represents 
2.4% of the total amount of waste, 10% of which is classified as waste oils, 7% as clinical 
and pharmaceutical waste, 4% under the term organic solvents and another 4% under resins 
and latex. The generating source of the remaining hazardous waste is heterogeneous. 
83 The most serious problems as regards statistics are, firstly, the non-harmonisation of their scope, 
and, secondly, the different definitions and classifications systems used in Member States. The 
European Waste Catalogue was adopted end 1993 and a Community-wide list of hazardous waste 
end 1994. In addition, since 1990, the Commission has carried out a series of studies aiming at 
preparing a Community system for regular, harmonised waste statistics. The Commission will 
examine the appropriate instruments to be used with a view to establishing a regular flow of data 
on waste generation and disposal by firms and households. The resulting system should produce 
comparable statistics of reasonable quality at a total cost which is not much greater than the present 
set of uncoordinated national waste statistics. Eurostat, together with the European Environment 
Agency, will continue to work towards a system ôf waste statistics which provides the information 
needed for policy at the lowest public and private cost. Active co-operation from Member States 
is indispensable to support these efforts. 
4.4 OTHER MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS 
4.4.1 Implementation, enforcement a^d monitoring of existing provisions 
84 There are considerable EC-wide provisions on waste which have been elaborated over the past 
twenty years. Within the years to come particular care will be taken to ensure that existing waste 
rules are completely and effectively applied and to ensure that they can be applied without creating 
inconsistency within the provisions of EC legislation on waste nor with other Community 
legislation. Indeed nothing affects the credibility of any waste policy more than the adoption of 
rules which are not respected. The Commission will therefore make sure that sufficient transparency 
on compliance issues is achieved. 
19-
85 This includes the publication of implementation reports on the different directives on waste. Though 
such reports should have been published regularly since 1978, no report on a specific directive has 
yet been published. The Commission will improve this situation and publish reports urging Member 
States to submit information on their national situation. The concentration of harmonized definitions 
and waste lists and their permanent updating and the availability of good and reliable data on all 
aspects of waste management will contribute to make EC waste policy and law more transparent. 
86 The different waste management measures adopted at Community level are to be implemented by 
Member States. The Commission must ensure that the Community provisions are applied. 
Furthermore, the Commission will have to ensure that national waste management policies do not 
impinge on general Community objectives such as the functioning of the internal market for goods 
and services or a system of undistorted competition. The main tools available to the Commission 
in this context are die monitoring of existing EC provisions through committees and the publication 
of regular reports on the implementation of existing legislation. 
4.4.2 Management plans 
87 Since 1975 EC directives require Member States to elaborate waste management plans. In the past, 
Member States were reluctant to meet this obligation. Even today, it is rather exceptional that up-to-
date waste management plans exist for a specific Member State which cover the whole of the 
territory of that Member State. Where such plans have been drawn up, they sometimes take the 
form of strategy papers which determine a waste policy, or of operational plans which address 
details. The Commission will intensify its efforts to see that these management plans be drawn up 
in all Member States, that they contain all elements that are required under the Community 
provisions and that they are used and regularly updated. Where necessary, the Commission will take 
initiatives to develop these plans into a waste management tool in order to attain waste policy 
objectives. With reference to Central and Eastern Europe, the Commission's Phare Programme is 
assisting with the development of waste management strategies of a number of applicant countries. 
These efforts will be further strenghtened and, where relevant, extended to other applicant countries. 
4.43 Committees 
88 Community waste policy does not consist only of legislative instruments such as regulations and 
directives. Since this policy implies a regular monitoring of legal, economical and political 
developments within and - more and more - outside the Community, several committees were set 
up at Community level to promote integrated waste management at Community level. The 
theoretical work division among the different committees is clear: while a number of committees 
have the task to adapt the waste legislation to technical and scientific progress, the waste manage­
ment committee advises the Commission on matters of waste policy or management; the industry 
and NGO committees help to liaise with economic operators and environmental organisations. 
-20-
89 In practice, the representativeness of these committees could be considerably improved. It seems 
that the necessity to conceive, elaborate and implement an integrated waste management policy at 
EC level, which pursues the objective of attaining a high level of environmental protection within 
the internal market, has not been perceived everywhere. This leads to omissions in communication 
which, at a later stage, increase the difficulties in finding EC-wide solutions. 
90 The Commission is convinced that improvements in communication within the different committees 
are necessary and possible and will try to improve the impact and the performance of these 
committees. 
4.4.5 Life-cycle analyses, eco-balances 
91 The hierarchy of priorities in the field of the waste management - prevention, recovery, final 
disposal - is generally accepted. In this context, it might be appropriate to evaluate the 
environmental impact of a product during all its life cycle in order to identify the best 
environmental waste management solution by using the "cradle-to-grave" approaches. In this type 
of integrated system the design and production stages constitute a central moment since they will 
determine the general impact of a product or of an activity on the environment. 
92 Eco-balances of waste management, used at the same time as the analysis of the life cycle of a 
product, have a considerable potential for the evaluation and the exploration of alternatives of waste 
management and can contribute appreciably to reduce the impact of these products and of their 
waste on the environment. 
93 Council Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste includes a recital indicating that 
life-cycle analysis should be completed as soon as possible in order to better evaluate priorities 
between reusable, recyclable and recoverable packaging. It stipulates that the European Parliament 
and the Council will have to examine the results of scientific research and evaluation techniques 
such as eco-balances. The approach of the priority waste streams also takes these evaluation 
instruments as a central element. 
94 Lastly, these instruments can contribute to improving implementation of waste management 
priorities. The potential of these evaluation techniques is still to be developed but it is particularly 
promising. The Commission Will promote their development and will take care that they are applied 
in an impartial way. 
21 
5. ACTORS 
95 The Fifth Environment Action Programme recognizes the need for an active role of all economic 
operators involved in the pursuit of sustainable development. Indeed, the above objectives can not 
be achieved without the participation of public authorities, private and public companies, 
environmental organizations and, in particular, individuals as citizens and consumers. 
96 With this Communication the Commission appeals to Community, national, regional and local 
authorities to display the necessary political will and provide the appropriate resources for the 
establishment of a sound waste management policy. Local and regional environment and energy 
agencies can also play an important role in this respect. It is fundamental that the waste 
management plans are set up and effectively implemented. 
97 Taking into account the key role of industry in waste management, it should, together with all other 
operators concerned, fully assume its responsibility in waste reduction and recovery. Its particular 
contribution should focus, inter alia, on the development of clean technologies and products as well 
as on active participation in waste management. It needs to be recognised that small and medium-
size enterprises, both producers and economic operators in the retail and distribution sector, can 
effectively contribute to the waste management objectives, provided that they are given appropriate 
assistance to achieve this aim and are not overburdened with excessive administrative obligations. 
98 Waste concerns all citizens. Indeed, they are more and more concerned with the environmental 
dimension of modern society. They strongly contribute to the success of recycling and re-use 
programmes, particularly by sorting the waste at the source, thus taking their part of responsibility 
in the waste management. This calls for appropriate and wide-spread information to be provided 
by economic operators and public authorities. 
-22-
6. CONCLUSIONS 
99 Waste management policy is one of the key sectors identified by the Fifth Environment Action 
Programme whose primary goal is the achievement of sustainable development. The Community 
strategy for waste management establishes the guidelines for the Community waste policy, namely, 
priority to prevention, promotion of recovery, minimization of final disposal and regulation of 
waste shipments. Future Community actions will have to concentrate on appropriate t 
implementation and enforcement of existing legislation, promotion and use of a broad range of 
non-legislative instruments and exploration of other fields for actions such as promotion of 
markets for recycled products, minimization and prevention of specific waste streams, etc.. 
100 The principles and guidelines presented above are intended to serve as basis for both future 
Community actions in the waste sector and the establishment of environmentally sound 
management strategies throughout the European Union. Their effective implementation will require 
the full involvement and support of all concerned parties. 
-23-
DRAFT 
COUNCIL RESOLUTION 
on waste policy 
-&-
COUNCIL RESOLUTION 
on waste policy 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, 
Having regard to the resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the 
governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 1 February 1993 on 
a Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and 
sustainable development (fifth Environment Action Programme)1, 
Having regard to the Commission communication to the Council and to the European 
Parliament on a Community strategy for waste management of 18 September 19892, and 
to the review of this strategy of 3 , 
Having regard to the Council Resolution of 7 May 1990 on waste policy4 and resolutions 
of 19 February 1991 and 22 April 1994 of the European Parliament in relation thereto5, 
Having regard to the existing Community legislation in the field of waste management, 
in particular Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July on waste6, as amended by 
Directive 91/156/EEC7, Council Directive 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 on 
hazardous waste8, Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the 
supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the European 
Community9, and Council Decision of 1 February 1993 on the conclusion, on behalf of 
the Community, of the Convention on the control of transboundary movements of 
hazardous waste and their disposal (Basel Convention)10, 
10 OJNoC 138, 17,05.1993, p. 1 
SEC(89) 934 final of 18.09.1989 
COM(96) ... final of.. .. 1996 
OJNoC 122, 18.05.1990, p. 2 
OJ No C 72, 18.03.1991, p. 34 and OJ No C 128, 09.05.1994, p. 471 
OJ No L 194, 25.07.1975, p. 39 
OJ No L 78, 26.03.1991, p. 32 
OJ No L 377, 31.12.1991, p. 20 
OJNoL30, 06.02.1993, p. 1 
OJ No L 39, 16.02.1993, p. 1 
-<*5-
Having regard to the Commission Report to the Council and to the European Parliament 
on waste management policy of 8 November 1995", 
Whereas the Community shall aim at establishing a coherent and generally accepted waste 
management policy, ecologically rational and economically viable with a view to 
promoting sustainable development; whereas this policy shall be based on a harmonized 
terminology as regards waste definitions and classifications, as well as on the common 
principles of priority for prevention, promotion of recovery, environmentally sound 
disposal of waste and control and minimisation of waste shipments; 
Whereas this policy shall provide for a high level of environmental protection throughout 
the European Union as well as for the functioning of the internal market, where 
appropriate with respect to transboundary transactions with waste; whereas this twofold 
objective cannot be achieved without the appropriate implementation of the principles of 
proximity and self-sufficiency; whereas these principles mean that waste destined for 
disposal, must be disposed of in one of the nearest appropriate installation and that waste 
which is generated within the Community should not be disposed of elsewhere; whereas 
there is a need to establish a Community-wide integrated and adequate network of 
disposal and treatment installations; 
Whereas a whole range of legislative, economic and management instruments shall be 
efficiently used at all local, regional, national and Community levels in order to solve 
waste related problems; whereas particular attention shall be paid to the implementation 
and enforcement of existing legislation, the adoption and appropriate implementation of 
the waste management plans and the development of Community waste statistics; 
1. Welcomes and supports the Commission Communication on the Review of the 
Community Strategy for Waste Management and considers it a valid guideline for 
actions to be undertaken within the next years throughout the European Union in the 
waste sector; 
2. Considers that, since the adoption of the first Community strategy for waste 
management in September 1989, institutional, legislative, economic and technical 
progress has taken place in the waste area and influenced national and Community 
administration as well as economic operators and consumers; 
3. Recognizes that, despite the considerable efforts made during the last few years, waste 
generation has on average continued to grow; 
4. Notes and shares the increasing concern of the population as regards waste-related 
problems throughout the European Union; 
COM(95) 522 final of 08.11.1995 
-*-
5. Emphasizes the important role that statistics can play while identifying waste-related 
problems, assessing management priorities and formulating and achieving realistic 
objectives within the framework of waste management policies; 
regrets the fact that, at present, neither regular nor harmonized waste-related data is 
produced at Community level; 
urges the Commission to establish, in cooperation with the European Environment 
Agency and Member States, a Community-wide reliable system of data collection for 
waste, which should be based on common terminology, definitions and classifications 
as well as on a harmonized methodology, taking into consideration the special 
concerns and difficulties that small and medium-size enterprises may have in this 
regard; 
6. Considers that any strategy for waste management should be guided by considering 
the best environmental solution which should take into consideration the potential 
benefits and costs of action or lack of action for the environment; 
considers that waste management solutions should be fully taken into consideration 
from the conception phase of a product; 
believes that, without prejudice of the polluter pays principle, which should be fully 
applied, the producer of a product bears specific responsibilities within the waste 
management chain; 
invites the Commission to submit to the Council proposals where these 
responsibilities are translated into practical actions; 
7. Reiterates its conviction that waste prevention should be the first priority of any 
rational waste policy, as regards the generation of waste and, where appropriate, as 
regards the hazardous character of such waste; 
considers that efforts made in this respect need to be increased; 
invites Member States and economic operators to fix quantitative targets for waste 
prevention and to pursue this goal, particularly by promoting clean technologies and 
products which can be recovered, by improving the environmental dimension of 
technical standards, by reducing the presence of dangerous substances in products, by 
using economic instruments and eco-audit schemes and by promoting changes in 
consumption patterns by means of consumer information and education; 
8. Insists on the need for promoting waste recovery with a view to reducing the quantity 
of waste and saving natural resources, in particular by reuse, recycling, composting 
and recovering energy from waste; 
believes that,-at present and until scientific and technological progress is made and 
life cycle analyses are further developed, as regards recovery operations, reuse and 
material recovery, when environmentally sound, should in general be considered 
preferable in terms of environmental impact over other forms of recovery and final 
disposal; 
-Jt>-
calls on the Commission to promote the elaboration of a Community methodology for 
life cycle analyses and ecobalances which is scientifically sound in order to improve 
the identification of future waste management priorities; 
calls on Member States to promote return, collection and recovery systems; 
requests the Commission and Member States to take concrete actions with a view to 
promote markets for recycled products that comply with Community requirements, 
in particular as regards safety, health and environmental protection; 
9. Underlines the need for Community standards for waste treatment operations, 
particularly energy recovery operations, in order to provide for a level playing field 
in the waste sector and thus to ensure a high level of environmental protection 
throughout the Community while respecting the rules of the internal market as regards 
waste destined for recovery, and in this respect 
identifies the importance of standards concerning the use of waste, in particular as a 
fuel or other source of energy; 
is of the opinion that, as long as the input material and process is comparable, 
emission standards for the incineration of waste should be the same, whether waste 
is burnt in incineration installations or other installations; 
10. Draws attention to the need for minimizing waste disposal and thus establishing an 
adequate and integrated network of disposal facilities, as foreseen by Directive 
91/156/EEC on waste; 
concludes that Community standards on air, water and soil emissions coming from 
incineration installations should be strictly respected; as regards existing incineration 
plants, particular monitoring measures should be envisaged; adequate information of 
the concerned population needs to be provided; and incineration operations not 
entailing recovery of energy should if possible be avoided; 
11. Considers that, in the future, only safe and controlled landfill activities complying 
with the requirements of the future directive on landfill should be carried out 
throughout the Community; 
requests the Member States to take the necessary measures in order to ensure proper 
rehabilitation of old landfill and contaminated sites; 
12. Takes note of the conclusions drawn up by the different project groups within the 
framework of the priority waste streams programme initiated by the Commission on 
end-of-life vehicles, used tyres, healthcare waste, demolition and construction waste 
and waste from electrical and electronic equipment, and in this regard 
invites the Commission to come forward as soon as possible with proposals to give 
the appropriate follow-up to these projects; 
-ix-
invites the Commission t0 further explore whether and how other waste streams, such 
as heavy metals, plastic, textiles or waste from ships, should be dealt with at 
Community level; 
13. Believes that Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 is an important legal instrument to control 
and minimize waste shipments; 
calls on the Member States to increase and improve cooperation, in particular in the 
field of illegal shipments and the fight against environmental crime; 
reiterates its commitment taken in the context of the Basel Convention to prohibit, 
in addition to the already existing prohibition of shipments of hazardous waste for 
final disposal, shipments of hazardous waste for recovery to developing countries, and 
thus 
invites the Commission to present a proposal for ratification of the relevant 
amendment to the Basel Convention; 
14. Invites the Commission to ensure that existing and future legislation is fully 
implemented by Member States and enforced throughout the European Union; 
15. Emphasizes the importance of appropriate waste management planning at all 
competent levels; 
urges Member States, where they have not yet done so, to establish, forward to the 
Commission and implement waste management plans, as requested by Directive 
91/156/EEC on waste; 
16. Encourages Member States to use a broad range of instruments, particularly economic 
instruments, with a view to achieving their waste policy objectives, in the most 
coherent way and in full respect of the provisions of the EC Treaty; 
17. Recognizes, in line with the Commission White Paper on growth, competitiveness 
and employment, the potential that the protection of the environment, and in 
particular a coherent and sound waste management policy, may have as regards job 
creation, and therefore 
calls on Member States to orientate their waste management policies in the direction 
of activating these potentialities; 
recognizes the need to institute support measures for small and medium-size 
enterprises in order to encourage responsible waste management policies; 
18. Invites the Commission to report to the Council on the progress made in the areas 
covered by this Resolution at the latest by the end of 2000; 
-tt-

"•""•""•B"TSSIW25^i475 
COM(96) 399 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 14 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-426-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-07986-3 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg 
- lv-