Stéphane Arditi and Piotr Barczak from the European Environmental Bureau outline how Europe could benefit from an 'ambitious' waste policy revision.
The European Environmental Bureau (EEB) has recently released a report that makes the case for Europe’s transition towards a resource efficient, circular economy. ‘Advancing Resource Efficiency in Europe’ maps the benefits for Europe of an ambitious waste policy revision, which starts with the ongoing review of the EU’s waste targets.
The potential is impressive: a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to 400 million tonnes of CO2 by 2025, which is what the entire Emissions Trading Scheme is supposed to deliver by 2020;[1] the creation of 750 000 jobs by 2025, which is more than the European Commission estimates its trade agreement with the US will generate; and financial savings above €70 billion through food waste reduction by 2030, which amounts to half of the EU’s budget for 2013[2].
By reusing textiles and furniture, we can also achieve significant water and cropland use savings, as well as a big reduction in the use of pesticides and hazardous chemicals. These are conservative estimates that build on a wide range of available data. We are confident the actual figures are even more impressive.
But unleashing the potential of an ambitious waste policy at European level requires certain decision-makers to think more innovatively than they have done until now. And there is a need to start walking the walk as well as talking the talk.
First they need to consider waste prevention and recycling as positive drivers of the European economy and its industries. Too often, waste prevention and recycling targets are seen as obstacles to growth and as a burden on businesses. Waste management is thought of as a necessary yet undesirable activity, a sector which doesn’t require technology investments or competences development in the way other industries do, but as a chore we have to carry out at the lowest cost possible. This mindset needs to change drastically. Reuse and remanufacturing require knowledge and techniques in the same way other manufacturing processes need them. Smart design is essential not only to manufacture a product, but also to dismantle it, repair it, upgrade it, and make the best possible reuse of its materials.
Secondly, we need to avoid falling into the implementation gap, which can also be described as an implementation trap. Every time a proposal is made for extra ambition in waste policy, our governments, various industries and EU-level politicians complain about the poor implementation of current waste policy. Their argument is that we need to correctly implement what we already have before starting to think of boosting ambition levels. Yet, there is no evidence that adopting more ambitious policies creates obstacles for the enforcement of current waste laws. On the contrary, all the best performers in Europe are the most ambitious. They mobilise a set of economic instruments combined with regulatory targets, which provide long-term certainty, and have requirements for infrastructure, such as selective kerbside collection and container parks. They also involve civil society in developing waste management plans, while dedicating efforts and resources to proper implementation and enforcement. So, using the argument about implementation to resist ambition is ill-considered and ends up killing so much untapped potential.
EU cohesion funds should support new infrastructure that encourages recycling and reuse, and not landfills or incinerators. Clearly, we need to implement existing waste policy. But that is a perennial objective which should not hinder the adoption of new, ambitious waste policy proposals. In our report, we are clear that target deadlines for individual European countries have to be adapted to the specific situation on the ground, based on each country’s landfilling rates today.
Waste prevention and recycling in a circular economy model are essential for climate change mitigation and for reducing the impact of human activity on the environment. They can also boost our economy and revitalise our industry. Reuse and recycling are ways to secure Europe access to secondary materials which, in turn, make our economy more resilient to resource shortages and price hikes. We must change the conventional perception that waste management is a burden and turn it into an opportunity. We have to make sure its potential isn’t wasted away.
Read the ‘Advancing Resource Efficiency in Europe’ report.
Stéphane Arditi (pictured above) is Policy Manager and Piotr Barczak is Policy Officer at the European Environmental Bureau.
Footnotes
[1] B. Wesselink, R. Harmsen, W. Eichhammer (2010). Energy savings 2020, how to triple the impact of energy saving policies in Europe, Ecofys and
Fraunhofer ISI.
Get our weekly digest
resource.co article ai
How will the government and DMOs address the challenges of including glass in DRS while ensuring a level playing field across the UK?
There's no easy solution to include glass in the DRS while maintaining a level playing field. Potential approaches include a phased introduction of glass, potentially with higher deposits to reflect its logistical challenges. The government and DMOs could incentivise innovation in glass packaging design and subsidise dedicated return points for glass-handling. Exemptions for smaller businesses unable to handle glass might also be necessary. Any successful solution will likely blend several approaches. It must address the differing priorities of devolved administrations, balance environmental benefits with logistical and cost implications, and be supported by robust consumer education campaigns emphasizing the importance of glass recycling.