Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of 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 Community - Generation, treatment and transboundary shipment of hazardous waste and other waste in the Member States of the European Union, 2001-2006 {SEC(2009) 811}
Date: 2009-06-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: cross-border transport, environmental protection, export of waste, hazardous waste, international agreement, transport of dangerous goods, waste management

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 24.6.2009 
COM(2009) 282 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

on the implementation of 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 
Community 

Generation, treatment and transboundary shipment of hazardous waste and other waste 
in the Member States of the European Union, 2001-2006 

{SEC(2009) 811} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

on the implementation of 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 
Community 

Generation, treatment and transboundary shipment of hazardous waste and other waste 
in the Member States of the European Union, 2001-2006 

{SEC(2009) 811} 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
SUMMARY REPORT:  
DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING THE GENERATION, TREATMENT AND SHIPMENT 
OF HAZARDOUS WASTE AND OTHER WASTE IN THE EU MEMBER STATES, 
2001-2006 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Waste  exports  and  imports  are  governed  at  international  level  by  the  Basel  Convention  of 
22 March  1989  on  the  control  of  transboundary  movements  of  hazardous  wastes  and  their 
disposal.  The  European  Community  is  a  party  to  this  Convention  and  has  transposed  it  by 
Council  Regulation  (EEC)  No  259/931,  known  as  the  Waste  Shipment  Regulation.  The 
purpose of this regulation is to organise the supervision and control of shipments of wastes in 
a  way  which  takes  account  of  the  need  to  preserve,  protect  and  improve  the  quality  of  the 
environment and of human health. 

Based  on  the  guiding  principles  of  the  Community's  strategy  on  waste  management,  the 
Regulation  lays  down  a  series  of  rules  which  should  enable  the  Community  as  a  whole  to 
dispose of its own waste and also enable the Member States individually to move towards that 
goal, taking into account geographical circumstances and the need for specialised installations 
to handle certain types of waste. 

The Regulation has introduced a number of measures for achieving control of the shipments 
of waste within, out of and into the Community. In particular: 

– 

– 

– 

it establishes common definitions and terminology concerning shipments of waste; 

it  lays  down  rules  for  the  export,  import  and  transit  of  wastes  for  disposal  or 
recovery; 

it  specifies  the  information  which  the  Member  States  and  the  Commission  must 
supply. 

Article 41 of the Regulation states the following: 

(1) 

(2) 

"Before  the  end  of  each  calendar  year,  Member  States  shall  draw  up  a  report  in 
accordance with Article 13(3) of the Basle Convention and send it to the Secretariat of 
the Basel Convention and a copy thereof to the Commission. 

The Commission shall, based on these reports, establish every three years a report on 
the  implementation  of  this  Regulation  by  the  Community  and  its  Member  States.  It 
may  request  to  this  end  additional  information  in  accordance  with  Article  6  of 
Directive 91/692/EEC." 

A first Commission report on the transboundary shipment of wastes covering the years 1997-
20002  was  published  in  2006.  Most  of  the  Member  States  had  sent  their  annual  reports  for 
2001-2006  to  the  Commission  by  end  of  2008.  The  table  in  the  general  introduction  of  the 

1 

2 

Of 1  February  1993 on  the  supervision  and  control of  shipments  of waste  within,  into  and  out of  the 
European Community, OJ L 30, 6.2.1993, p. 1, repealed by the new Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of 
the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 on shipments of waste, applicable since 12 
July 2007. This new regulation is extraneous to this survey. 
Report  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  on  the  implementation  of 
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  Community.  Generation,  treatment  and  transboundary 
shipment of hazardous waste and other waste in the Member States of the European Union, 1997-2000 
{SEC(2006) 1053}, 1.8.2006. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
accompanying  working  document  contains  a  list  of  the  Member  States  (EU-25;  without 
Bulgaria  and  Romania).  This  table  reflects  the  Member  States'  reactions  to  their  reporting 
obligations. 

The questionnaire of the Basel Convention Secretariat includes questions on legal provisions, 
implementation and measures of environmental protection. On the basis of Article 41(2), the 
Commission in 1999 adopted a Decision3 requiring additional information to be supplied by 
Member States in the form of a questionnaire. The Commission questionnaire mainly includes 
questions  on  shipment  restrictions,  monitoring,  measures  against  illegal  shipments,  and 
financial  coverage.  Unlike  the  first  Commission  report,  the  current  report  already  includes 
information from the said questionnaire (cf. Working Document, General Introduction). 

Section 2 of the report is an analysis of both the form and the content of the Member States' 
replies.  More  detailed  information  on  the  Member  States'  comments  on  both  questionnaires 
can  be  found  in  sections  B  and  E  of  the  working  document.  Subsequently  the  main 
conclusions  will  be  drawn  from  the  Member  States'  quantitative  data  on  waste  generation, 
treatment  and  shipment.  The  underlying  data  are  to  be  found  in  section  A  of  the  working 
document. 

It should be noted that the Basel Convention uses the terms "import" and "export" for every 
shipment into and out of an individual country that is Party to the Convention. Under EU law 
these terms apply only to shipments into and out of the European Union as a whole; therefore 
they are not used in this report to refer to shipments between Member States. However, in the 
interest  of  readability,  they  appear  between  quotes,  and  are  used  occasionally  for  waste 
shipments in general. Both terms do appear, however, in the working document in the sense in 
which they are used in the Basel Convention. 

2. 

REPORTING BY MEMBER STATES 

For  this  report,  all  of  the  Member  States'  replies  to  both  the  Basel  and  Commission 
questionnaires for the years 2001-2006 were utilised. 2004 was selected as the reference year, 
as some important reports for 2005/2006 were still missing at the end of 2008. Due to their 
relevance,  however,  all  quantitative  data  were incorporated,  and  aggregates  were  also  given 
for 2005 where possible. Out of 300 potential replies 219 replies containing yes/no answers, 
verbal  explanations  and  figures  were  received.  This  feedback  proved  sufficient  for  the 
purposes of a qualitative and quantitative analysis. 

The response rate to the Basel questionnaire was 73%, and the response to the Commission 
questionnaire  was  67%.  A  further  4%  of  the  collected  replies  to  the  more  complex  Basel 
questionnaire  were  incomplete  or  unusable.  The  quantitative  analysis  of  data  on  waste 
requires  that  primary  data  should  be  supplied  in  a  consistent  format.  Most  replies  were 
submitted  electronically,  although  in  some  cases  only  following  a  specific  enquiry.  In  the 
synoptic table, all of the fully completed and usable questionnaires are marked with the letter 
"Y", whereas the remainder of the returned questionnaires are marked with a "P" (cf. Working 
document, General Introduction). 

Most  of  the  reports  were  supplied  one  to  two  years  after  the  reference  year.  In  many  cases 
Member States corrected their own data in later reports. As regards the 31% of Commission 
questionnaires that were categorised as "missing", it should be pointed out that, prior to 2004, 
the "new" EU Member States (EU-10) were not obliged to reply. Quantitative data for Malta 
are missing from this report, since no Basel report was available from Malta. Greece did not 

3 

Commission Decision 1999/412/EC of 3 June 1999, OJ L 156, 23.6.1999, p. 37. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
supply  the  Commission  questionnaire  for  the  years  in  the  period  2001-2006.  In  a  very  few 
cases, gaps were filled using information from adjacent years. 

The  quality  of  responses  was  variable.  Reporting  on  specific  incidents/accidents  and/or 
stopped  illegal  waste  shipments  was  inconsistent  and  presumably  not  realistic.  It  was 
sometimes  unclear  whether  or  not  there  had  been  an  occurrence  of  an  illegal  shipment  or 
whether  the  state  of  knowledge  was  considered  insufficient.  Detailed  statements  from 
Member States such as Finland, Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom suggest that this 
is an important point for future improvements (cf. Section B, Table 9). 

All  of  the  responding  Member  States  reported  extensively  on  measures  to  prevent  waste 
generation.  Measures  focused  primarily  on  legislation,  followed  by  national  strategies  (cf. 
Section  B,  Question  5).  Measures  taken  to  reduce  waste  shipment  were  less  frequent  (cf. 
Section  B,  Question  6,  and  Section  E).  Essential  administrative  data  were  complete  and 
accurate throughout (cf. Section B, Questions 4, 7, Tables 1, 2, 3, Section C, and Section E). 

The survey revealed no significant differences between EU-15 (the 15 "old" Member States) 
and EU-10 with regard to completeness, timeliness and quality of their annual reports. 

3. 

GENERATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTES 

The  Basel  Convention  questionnaire  asks  all  countries  to  provide  information  on  the  total 
amount  of  hazardous  wastes  and  "other  wastes"  generated.  "Other  wastes"  in  this  context 
means  wastes  collected  from  households,  and  residues  arising  from  the  incineration  of 
household  wastes  -  which  are  two  categories  of  wastes  requiring  special  consideration  and 
being subject to similar controls as hazardous wastes under the Basel Convention (Annex II to 
the Convention, entries Y46 and Y47)4. Hazardous wastes are defined according to a list of 
waste  streams  and/or  constituents  (entries  Y1-18  and  Y19-45)  and  certain  hazard 
characteristics  (Annex  III).  However,  if  waste  is  considered  as  hazardous  by  the  domestic 
legislation  of  an  export,  import  or  transit  state,  it  also  falls  under  that  definition  for  the 
purposes of the Convention. 

All  Member  States  except  for  Malta  have  supplied  information  on  total  generation  of 
hazardous  waste.  Compared  to  the  first  Commission  report,  data  on  waste  generation  have 
improved  (cf.  Section  A,  Table  1);  supplementary  data  and  extrapolations  were  largely 
avoided. 

As in previous years, Germany had the largest quantities of hazardous waste. The noticeable 
increase up to a steady annual amount of about 19 million tonnes since 2002 is related to the 
implementation  of  the  new  European  waste  list.  During  the  period  2001-2006,  Germany, 
Estonia, France, Italy and the United Kingdom produced the largest amounts, while quantities 
rose significantly in the Netherlands and Belgium (cf. Section A, Table 1). In terms of waste 
generation  per  capita  Belgium  and  the  Netherlands  were  once  again  on  top  in  2005;  taken 
over a longer period, Germany and Finland are in the lead. The lowest quantities per capita 
were recorded in Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal and Greece (cf. Section A, Table 2). 

The  chronological  development  is  difficult  to  assess,  since  some  Member  States  reported 
major increases in 2001-2006. Such developments do not necessarily reflect a real growth in 
waste  production;  they  can  also  be  related  to  changes  in  waste  legislation.  The  arithmetical 
increase  in  the  amount  of  hazardous  waste  generated  by  EU-15  between  2000  and  2005  is 
22% (corresponds to 4% p.a.), whereas it is only 10% for the Community (EU-25) as a whole. 

4 

See Section D of the accompanying working document 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The available data also indicate that the amount of hazardous waste generated within EU-25 
was not significantly greater than in 2002. The EU-25's hazardous waste generation per capita 
was approximately 140 kg per year (complete tables are available for 2003 and 2005 only), 
with a higher average in the new Member States. 

The  Y-codes  for  waste  under  the  Basel  Convention  were  used  very  differently  by  Member 
States;  an  international  comparison  is  therefore  not  meaningful  (cf.  Section  A,  Table  3,  for 
selected examples). Some Member States, such as Denmark and Lithuania, almost exclusively 
reported wastes collected from households (Y46) and residues arising from the incineration of 
household wastes (Y47). 

4. 

SHIPMENT OF HAZARDOUS WASTES OUT OF MEMBER STATES 

Transboundary  shipment  of  waste  has  to  cope  with  the  potentially  conflicting  principles  of 
proximity  of  waste  generation  and  treatment,  self-sufficiency  at  Community  and  national 
levels,  and  reliable  waste  disposal.  Not  all  Member  States  have  sufficient  capacity  to  deal 
with  their  own  waste  (cf.  Section  B,  Tables  2  and  3).  Some  specific  waste  streams  require 
specialised  treatment  facilities  for  environmentally  sound  recovery  or  disposal.  Therefore, 
data  on  transboundary  shipment  of  hazardous  waste  between  the  EU  Member  States  are  an 
indicator of the level of waste management within the Community. 

All  Member  States  apart  from  Malta  have  submitted  information  on  outbound  shipment 
("exports" within the meaning of the Basel Convention) of hazardous waste for at least four 
years  within  the  period  2001-2005;  data  for  2005  are  complete.  The  data  now  available  for 
1997-2000  indicate  that  the  corresponding  figures  in  the  first  Commission  report  were  too 
high. This can be explained by the more comprehensive data pool, as well as corrections made 
by the Member States. 

Shipment of hazardous waste out of Member States shows a clear trend. From 1997 to 2001 
the quantity doubled, and it almost doubled again from 2001 to 2005. The total amount for the 
EU-25 was 5.6 million tonnes in 2005, with the share shipped out of the EU-10 being only a 
marginal 3% (cf. Section A, Table 4). 

In  2005,  the  biggest  "exporter"  by  far  was  the  Netherlands,  which  saw  its  "exports"  rising 
from 241,000 tonnes in 1997 to 2.6 million tonnes in 2005. Second was Belgium, followed by 
Italy, France and Ireland. Germany, which was ranked first in 1997 with 601,000 tonnes, has 
recently  reported  steady  or  even  slightly  decreasing  amounts.  Shipments  out  of  Germany  in 
2005 were 70% lower than in 1997. The Netherlands is also in the lead regarding outbound 
shipment  of  waste  in  kg  per  capita;  runners-up  are  Luxembourg,  Belgium,  Ireland  and 
Lithuania (cf. Section A, Table 5). 

The first Commission report stated that smaller countries would ship more of their hazardous 
waste abroad, as they did not have sufficient treatment facilities. However, the last few years 
have not shown any kind of clear trend for the EU-25. The Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, 
Latvia,  Poland  and  Slovakia  shipped  significantly  low  per  capita  quantities  in  2005,  while 
Italy's "exports" have been steadily increasing. 

In 2005, 91% of the Community's hazardous waste was treated in the country of origin. The 
countries with a very high "export" rate of approx. 50% were Luxembourg, the Netherlands, 
Belgium, Ireland (cf. Section A, Figure 6), and potentially Portugal (cf. Section A, Table 1 for 
the years 2001 and 2003). 

Unlike the findings of the previous Commission report for the period 1997-2000, the period 
from 1997 to 2005 indicated that the share of notified shipments out of both EU-15 and EU-

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
25 for "other waste" within the meaning of the Basel Convention (i.e. mixed household waste 
and incineration residues) ranged between 40% and 50% (cf. Section A, Tables 4 and 7). 

As  regards  the  categories  of  waste  in  terms  of  the  Y-codes  under  the  Basel  Convention,  it 
must be pointed out that many Member States specified their "exported" wastes more exactly 
than  in  previous  years.  The  mixture  of  Y-codes  ("mix")  remained  virtually  unused.  Waste 
without a specification ("not classified") was shipped out of Germany and Ireland (accounting 
for  over  50%  of  their  shipments  in  2005),  the  Netherlands,  France,  Italy  and  Denmark  (cf. 
Section A, Figure 9 and Table 9). 

Specific  data  from  ten  EU-15  countries  on  outbound  waste  shipments  assigned  to  Y-codes 
show  that  the  temporary  increase  of  "not  classified"  waste  between  1997  and  2000  did  not 
continue and was even reversed, whereas the group Y1-18 has increased steadily since 1997, 
and in 2004/2005 already represented the biggest "export" fraction (cf. Section A, Figure 10 
and Table 10). 

The bulk of the hazardous waste and other waste shipped out of Member States (both EU-15 
and EU-25) was treated in a recovery operation (cf. Section A, Tables 11 and 12). In 2004 and 
2005, 78% of the EU-15's shipped waste was recovered. High percentages and total amounts 
of  waste  shipped  abroad  for  recovery  came  from  the  Netherlands,  Germany,  Belgium  and 
France. In 2005, Portugal, Greece, Slovenia and Denmark shipped their wastes predominantly 
for disposal, although only the large quantities from Denmark are relevant for EU statistics. 
Italy shipped more than 1 million tonnes of waste abroad, 45% of it for disposal. However, 
the share of "exported" waste for recovery vs. disposal is not a direct indicator of a Member 
State's level of waste management, as most of the waste is treated in the country of origin (e.g. 
Italy 2005, 90%). 

As  already  mentioned  in  the  first  Commission  report,  shipment  of  hazardous  waste  out  of 
Member States is restricted. Exports of waste for disposal to non-EU/EFTA countries and of 
hazardous  waste  for  recovery  to  non-OECD  countries  are  prohibited  under  the  new  Waste 
Shipment Regulation5. In their reports to the Basel Convention Secretariat, the Member States 
provided  information  on  the  country  of  destination  for  the  exported  hazardous  waste. 
According to these reports, the vast majority of the hazardous waste and other waste shipped 
across borders from 1997 to 2005 went to other EU Member States. In the period 2000-2005, 
more than 90% of the shipped waste remained within the EU-15; at least 98% of the EU-15's 
shipments since 2001 were destined for EU-25 and EFTA countries (cf. Section A, Table 14). 
This  means  that  the  principles  of  proximity  and  self-sufficiency  have  grown  in  popularity 
during the past few years. 

The  situation  in  the  new  Member  States  is  difficult  to  assess  because  of  the  considerably 
smaller amounts of shipped waste (cf. Section A, Table 7), and the shorter monitoring period. 
Although on average the majority of shipments out of the EU-10 in 2000-2005 went to EU-15 
countries,  a  remarkably  high  percentage  of  shipments  also  went  from  EU-10  to  non-OECD 
countries. Future analyses will show whether there has been a reverse trend since the EU-10's 
accession  (as  2004/2005  data  indicate)  and  whether  waste  shipment  to  the  EU-25  is  on  the 
increase. 

5. 

SHIPMENT OF HAZARDOUS WASTES INTO MEMBER STATES 

All  Member  States  apart  from  Cyprus,  Lithuania  and  Malta  have  submitted  information  on 
inbound shipment ("imports" in the Basel sense) of hazardous waste, although the overall data 

5 

See footnote 1. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
quality was clearly lower than for the "exports" level. Little information is available for the 
new  Member  States,  although  the  data  for  2005  are  complete  (except  aforementioned 
countries). In parallel to the shipments out of Member States, the quantity of hazardous waste 
shipped into Member States also increased. Reported total amounts of "imports" were always 
one  third  below  "exports",  although  a  comparison  of  the  data  indicates  that  the  available 
"import" data are plausible. As in the case of outbound shipments, the EU-10 countries play a 
lesser  role  (cf.  Section  A,  Table  15).  In  2005,  3.5  million  tonnes  of  hazardous  waste  were 
reported as shipped to the EU-25. 

Over the period 2000-2005, the EU countries with the largest quantities of hazardous waste 
taken  from  abroad  were  Germany,  Belgium,  France and  the Netherlands.  Their share  of the 
total waste shipped to the Community in 2005 was 80%. In 2004, German "imports" exceeded 
1  million  tonnes  for  the  first  time.  Belgium  is  in  the  lead  as  regards  inbound  shipment  of 
hazardous  waste  per  capita;  it  is  followed  by  the  Netherlands,  Sweden,  Germany  and 
Denmark (cf. Section A, Table 16). Amongst Member States with lower "import" quantities, 
the smaller countries predominate, presumably due to a lack of capacity for disposal. 

The  shipments  of  "other  waste"  into  the  Community  have  taken  the  lion's  share  since  1999 
(cf. Section A, Tables 15 and 17). Some 78%, i.e. 4.6 million tonnes, of all waste shipments to 
Germany in 2005 were classed as "other waste". Unlike the EU-25 figures for "imports" and 
"exports" of hazardous waste alone, the corresponding figures for hazardous waste and "other 
waste"  combined  compare  very  closely  with  each  other  (cf.  Section  A,  Tables  5  and  15  vs. 
Tables 7 and 17). 

As regards the Y-codes of waste shipped to Member States, waste without specification ("not 
classified")  predominated;  the  mixture  of  Y-codes  ("mix")  again  remained  virtually  unused. 
Waste without specification was shipped mainly to Germany, Italy, France, Sweden and the 
United Kingdom. In 2005, "not classified" waste made up approx. 60% of all shipments to the 
Community, Y1-18 20%, Y19-45 13%, and Y46-47 6% (cf. Section A, Table 19). The large 
quantity of "not classified" waste suggests that the Y codes contained in Annex I to the Basel 
Convention are not sufficient to describe every possible stream of hazardous waste. For this 
reason, the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention considered in its Decision IV/9 
that  the  codes  in  list  A  of  Annex  VIII  and  in  list  B  of  Annex  IX  to  the  Basel  Convention 
provide  an  efficient  means  of  facilitating  the  implementation  of  the  Convention,  while  the 
Basel  questionnaire  provides  the  possibility  of  reporting  these  codes.  Moreover,  in  their 
Decision  VIII/15,  the  Parties  to  the  Convention  agreed  on  a  procedure  for  the  review,  or 
adjustment, of the aforementioned lists, if necessary. 

Data  from  ten  Member  States  on  inbound  waste  shipments  assigned  to  Y-codes  show  a 
relatively steady increase for all groups in the years 1997-2005. The largest increase was seen 
in the "not classified" waste group. This group accounted for more than half of all "imports" 
since 2001, mainly due to the amounts of not classified waste shipped to Germany. 

The major part of the waste shipped into Member States was treated in a recovery operation. 
In 2001-2005, the recovery rate was even higher than in previous years; on average, 85% of 
waste shipped into the EU-15 was recovered, adding up to a total amount of about 40 million 
tonnes  (cf.  Section  A,  Table  21).  The  inbound  shipments  of  waste  for  disposal  likewise 
increased, although starting from a much lower level. 

The  available  data  show  significant  differences  between  Member  States  as  regards  the 
percentage of recovery vs. disposal (cf. Section A, Figure 22). In 2005, approx. 38% of the 
waste  shipped  to  Austria  was  intended  for  disposal,  whereas  in  Finland,  Luxembourg  and 
Spain the figure was actually in excess of 50%. Germany, with 631,000 tonnes, reported the 
highest  amount  of  "imported"  waste  for  disposal,  although  this  accounted  for  only  13%  of 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
Germany's waste "imports" in 2005. The aforementioned high figures for disposal may be due 
to particular treatment facilities in the "importing" countries. 

As  mentioned  in  the  first  Commission  report,  shipment  of  hazardous  waste  into  Member 
States is subject to certain restrictions, although these are less rigorous than the restrictions on 
exports. In their reports the Member States provided information on the country of origin of 
the imported hazardous waste.  

According to these reports, in the years 1997-2005 by far the majority (89% average for EU-
15)  of  waste  shipped  to  the  Member  States  came  from  other  Member  States.  This  rate 
changed  only  marginally  over  the  period  as  a  whole.  At  least  96%  came  from  EU-25  and 
EFTA  countries,  while  only  1%  came  from  non-OECD  countries  (cf.  Section  A,  Table  24). 
This is in line with the principles of proximity and self-sufficiency at Community level. 

6. 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

On the basis of the reports received from the Member States, the following conclusions can be 
drawn: 

•  Reporting 

Member  States  have  generally  submitted  sufficient  information  on  waste  shipments  within, 
out of and into the Community. The response rate for both questionnaires was around 70%. A 
relatively large number of replies to the Basel questionnaire were flawed. Most of the reports 
were supplied 1 to 2 years after the reference year. Apparently, Member States did not regard 
Article 41(1) of the Regulation as a statutory time limit. 

The problems encountered with the transmission and evaluation of the quantitative data point 
to a need for a more standardised approach to collection and transmission, comparable to the 
requirements  of  the  Waste  Statistics  Regulation.  There  were  no  major  differences  between 
EU-15 and EU-10 with regard to their reporting, although very little information on inbound 
shipments is available for EU-10. 

•  Data quality 

The  quality  of 
reporting  on 
incidents/accidents and/or illegal shipments was inadequate. Future improvements in this field 
seem to be vitally necessary. 

responses  was  variable.  With  a 

few  exceptions, 

The  overall  data  quality  for  waste  "exports"  was  higher  than  for  "imports";  however,  a 
comparison of the data indicates that "import" data are also feasible. Data for 2001-2006 are 
significantly better than for the previous period. 

•  Waste classification 

Member States used the Y-codes for waste under the Basel Convention very differently, and a 
significant amount of "not classified" waste was reported. Member States used codes from the 
two different systems of waste classification interchangeably (European waste legislation vs. 
Basel Convention). 

•  Waste generation 

The chronological  development over  the period 2001-2006 is difficult to assess, since some 
Member States reported major increases due to changes in waste legislation. The amount of 
hazardous  waste  generated  by  EU-15  rose  by  22%  in  2000-2005,  i.e.  by  4%  per  annum. 
Available  data  indicate  that  the  amount  of  waste  generated  within  EU-25  has  not  increased 
significantly since 2002. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
•  Waste shipment 

From  1997  to  2001,  shipments  of  hazardous  waste out of Member States doubled and from 
2001  to  2005  they  almost  doubled  again.  The  total  amount  for  the  EU-25  in  2005  was  5.6 
million tonnes. Despite this increase, 91% of the Community's hazardous waste in 2005 was 
treated in the country of origin. Inbound shipments increased in similar fashion. According to 
their reports, the EU-10 countries play a minor role in waste shipment. 

The  major  part  of  the  shipped  waste  was  treated  in  a  recovery  operation.  In  2001-2005,  an 
average of  85%  of  the waste shipped into the  EU-15  was  recovered,  i.e.  approx.  40  million 
tonnes. The few major EU-15 "imports" for disposal were due to the existence of particular 
treatment facilities in the "importing" countries. 

From 1997 to 2005, the vast majority of waste shipments took place within the EU's borders. 
In 2000-2005, more than 90% of the shipped waste remained within the EU-15; at least 98% 
of the EU-15 shipments since 2001 went to EU-25 and EFTA countries. The data for inbound 
shipments indicate that 96% of all EU-15 "imports" came from EU-25 and EFTA countries, 
while only 1% came from non-OECD countries. 

EN 

10 

   EN