Legislative approach for controlling solid waste in UK and EU

Compare and contrast the legislative approach taken to controlling solid waste in your own country and the European Union (EU). If your own country does not have legislation in this area you should compare the approach taken within the EU with that taken in the United States of America. Where possible, you should discuss to which category of the three major environmental policy making categories (i. command and control regulation; ii. market based instruments; iii. voluntary regulation) the legislation identified from your country would belong?

Waste management policy has been the buzz word which is becoming a major political and social issue being faced by the countries all round the globe. However, a little has been done by the local governments of the EU and UK in respective of the waste management agenda. The project aim sat investigating the solid waste management policy and approach of the local governments of EU and UK. Local practices relating to the management of solid waste as produced by the industries in the countries includes the availability of the landfill, funding, staffing levels and relative costs involved with the management options of the respective countries (Gharfalkar et al 2015).  The project deals in providing a report based on the legislative approach as followed by the EU and UK in respective of controlling the solid waste as produced in the countries. The among objective of the report is to evaluate the legislations of the selected countries by critically analyzing the enforcement provisions for controlling the environment within the countries

UK

UK alone produces 29 million tons of municipal waste every year out of which 2.6 million tones are incinerated for energy generation. The energy as produced from the waste in the UK is estimated to increase to around 25% of the total municipal solid waste from the current level of 9%,  by the end of 2020 (Shiers et al 2014). The EU Directive 1999/31/EF policy helps in minimizing the muas the safest method for waste disposal in the coast owing to the naturally impermeable ground conditions. Moreover, the landfill tax rate in respective of active waste has been seen to be increased by £ 15 per ton in2004 which reached to  £ 32 per ton in 2008/09. According to a recent survey, it is estimated that the tax to be increasing to £ 48 per ton in the near future, and thus, making the country to be in line with Denmark and Sweden (Hildebrand 2013).

Figure 1: Hierarchy related to the waste management in the UK

Source: (Jamasb and Nepal 2012)

The European Commission Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) defines two waste management decisions including the methods related to the reduction of the waste being produced and disposal of the same. The disposal options include the utilization of the sanitary landfill sites, incinerating waste with the energy production, and recycling materials. From the above figure, the waste management in UK can be comprised of five step hierarchy which serves as the flexible principle instead of rigid requirement related to the waste policy.

Current waste management legislation

According to Jamasb and Nepal (2012), the successful waste manage policy helps in addressing a link between the economic growth as well as the waste growth. This implies the reduction in the waste intensity of the GDP as the availability of the resources for the manufacturing of products and services are being minimized in the long run. As far as UK is concerned, the waste has grown less than its GDP in the year 2000. Moreover, the municipal waste had increased by about 3.5 % in 2000 which slowed down to around 1.5% per year since then. The estimated amount of waste in the UK is predicted to be lying in between 32 and 42 million tons by 2020 based on the annual growth rates of 0.7 to 2.3% respectively (Jamasb and Nepal 2012).

According to Mühle  and Cheeseman (2012), the waste hierarchy gives overall priority in reducing down the waste stream. In the perspective of the UK, it is estimated that around 10 tones of the resources are being utilized for producing 1 tone of the products. This signifies ‘resource inefficiency’ from the perspective of 3.75 million UK organizations.  In addition, the waste reduction is the most difficult approach to manage the waste in the UK. According to Jamasb and Nepal (2012), the methods to reduce down on the produced waste are to charge the industries with variable costs related to the rubbish collection based on their weight, volume and material content. This strategy can be beneficial in the product packaging sector of the organizations. The strategy has become more popular as it does not directly by the public. In 2005, major retailers in the UK had signed up with the WRAP (Waste and Resources Action Program) in order to collaborate on finding technologies and packaging solutions in order to reduce waste. They agreed to deliver reductions in the packaging and to identify efficient methods to reduce down the solid waste being produced in the process.

According to Pirers and Chang (2013), EU (European Union) is a political and economic union of 27 member states which together with Norway and Switzerland help manage their waste management issued by the application of solid waste management legislation. The pursuing of the solid waste management strategy would lead to the conformity with the current standards for both waste management and the EU government agencies as well.

In 2001, the European Council adopted the first EU sustainable development strategy with the overall aim to promote and support actions in order to enable the EU to improve the quality of life for bit the future and current organizations. According to Pirers and Chang (2013), this improvement of quality of life is expected to be achieved by creating suitable communities that are capable of efficient management of the resources ensuring prosperity social cohesion and environmental protection as well.  These changes would be essential for establishing a sense of energy in respective of the solid waste management. Though, the short term action is required for managing the and tackling the operation issues in respective of the solid waste management, long term perspective of the solid waste management should also be established (Williams 2013).

UK

New Waste Directive 2008/98/EC as published by the European Commission is the forts legislation which reflects on the solid waste management of the European Commission thus, bringing new challenges to the waste management system. These new definitions for the waste by products require the selection of appropriate technologies that aims at proving protection to the human health and environment, prompting recycling and reuse, and enhancing EPR (Extended Produce Responsibility) as well (Laurent et al 2014). According to Pirers and Chang (2013), the sustainable production and consumption in respective of the waste management has gained wider attention in the resource conservation process including the recovery and reuse of the waste materials. The population growth, migrations and other resource factors becomes essential for the forecasting of the waste generation in an accurate manner. The public health needs to be included through the application of an appropriate QAS (quality assurance system for product control. According to (Mühle and Cheeseman 2012), the improved knowledge base helps in influencing the advancement of the waste collection, resource usage, and disposable alternative practices. The theatric strategy related to the recycling and prevention of waste is one of the examples of policy change. This policy as imposed by the EU would help in improving the existing legislations, promoting recovery, recycling and disposal activities with modernization and simplification effects on waste definition. The solid waste management at the EU level includes the promotions of the GHS emissions reduction through diversification form the landfills utilization, improving energy efficiencies at disposal facilities. the EU regulations has made it mandatory  to implement MSW (Municipal Solid Waste) Management like the SEA directive for initializing the participation of the public  in order to draw certain plans and programs in respective of controlling the environmental issues in the future (Christensen 2014).

Figure 2: Trends of Solid waste management by UK and other EU countries

Source: (Jamasb and Nepal 2012)

From the analysis of the above figure depicting the trends of Solid waste management by UK and other EU countries, it can be evident that the UK is relying mostly on the land filling approach as the primary method of reducing frown the solid waste. This can be related to the historical circumstance of the geology where the country is having large holes owing to the mining activities in the country making easy to use land filling sites (White and Hindle 2012).

Conclusion

The project deals in providing a report based on the legislative approach as followed by the EU and UK in respective of controlling the solid waste as produced in the countries. The report helps in familiarizing with the legislations as enforced by the countries dealing with the environment. The project helps in understanding the provisions as made by the countries in respective of controlling the solid waste as evident in the countries is complied with. The report deals in comparing and contrasting the legislative approach in respective of controlling the solid waste related as produced in the UK and EU. The main objective of the report is to evaluate the legislations of the selected countries by critically analyzing the enforcement provisions for controlling the environment within the countries. The report also deals in categorizing the legislation as identified in the countries in respective of the environment policy as applicable.

References

Antonopoulos, I.S., Perkoulidis, G., Logothetis, D. and Karkanias, C., 2014. Ranking municipal solid waste treatment alternatives considering sustainability criteria using the analytical hierarchical process tool. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 86, pp.149-159.

Aydi, A., Zairi, M. and Dhia, H.B., 2013. Minimization of environmental risk of landfill site using fuzzy logic, analytical hierarchy process, and weighted linear combination methodology in a geographic information system environment. Environmental earth sciences, 68(5), pp.1375-1389.

Gharfalkar, M., Court, R., Campbell, C., Ali, Z. and Hillier, G., 2015. Analysis of waste hierarchy in the European waste directive 2008/98/EC. Waste Management, 39, pp.305-313.

Hildebrand, S.H., 2013. The Future is Nigh: Norwegian waste governance regimes from 1860 to 2010 and an analysis of current waste prevention policies.

Jamasb, T. and Nepal, R. (2012). Issues and options in waste management: A social cost–benefit analysis of waste-to-energy in the UK. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(12), pp.1341-1352.

Laurent, A., Bakas, I., Clavreul, J., Bernstad, A., Niero, M., Gentil, E., Hauschild, M.Z. and Christensen, T.H., 2014. Review of LCA studies of solid waste management systems–Part I: Lessons learned and perspectives. Waste management, 34(3), pp.573-588.

Marshall, R.E. and Farahbakhsh, K., 2013. Systems approaches to integrated solid waste management in developing countries. Waste Management, 33(4), pp.988-1003.

Mühle, S., Balsam, I. and Cheeseman, C. (2012). Comparison of carbon emissions associated with municipal solid waste management in Germany and the UK. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(11), pp.793-801.

Pires, A., Martinho, G. and Chang, N. (2013). Solid waste management in European countries: A review of systems analysis techniques. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(4), pp.1033-1050.

Shiers, D., Weston, J., Wilson, E., Glasson, J. and Deller, L., 2014. Implementing new EU environmental law: the short life of the UK Site Waste Management Plan Regulations. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 57(7), pp.1003-1022.

White, P., Dranke, M. and Hindle, P., 2012. Integrated solid waste management: a lifecycle inventory. Springer Science & Business Media.

Williams, P.T., 2013. Waste treatment and disposal. John Wiley & Sons.