Does a new government develop upon the progress of the departed party? Or is everything thrown out and a fresh approach taken? This article shall briefly present two key documents dictating waste policy in England; Labours “Waste Strategy for England 2007” (WSE) and the Coalitions “Government Review of Waste Policy in England 2011” (RWP).
Recycling rates in England have “nearly quadrupled” to 27% by 2005-06 whilst land-filling of waste fell 9% between 2000-01 and 2004-05 [1] due, according to the WSE to the Landfill tax escalator and Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS, is to be withdrawn after the 2012/2013 year with increasing landfill tax encouraging cleaner, greener waste management practices).
Labours WSE set 5 key objectives:
- Decouple waste growth from economic growth and put more emphasis on prevention and reuse.
- Meet and exceed landfill directive diversion targets for biodegradable municipal waste in 2010, 2013 and 2020.
- Increase diversion from landfill of non-municipal waste and secure better integration of treatment for municipal and non-municipal waste.
- Secure investment in infrastructure needed to divert waste from landfill and for the management of hazardous waste.
- To get the most environmental benefit from that investment through increased recycling of resources and recovery of energy from residual waste using a mix of technologies.
The delivery of this strategy relies upon core proposals which bear heavy attention within the WSE as well as the RWP and shall be compared to explore how government attitudes, ambitions and objectives to each have evolved:
- Incentivise efforts to: reduce, reuse, recycle and recover energy from waste.
- Reform regulation to drive the reduction of waste and divert resources from landfill.
- Develop markets for recovered materials that will maximise the value of materials and energy recovered.
Like the WSE, the RWP cements its ambitions and commitments in adhering with the Waste Hierarchy; aiming to first reduce waste, before reusing, recycling, recovering and finally, disposing of materials. Throughout the review, early contrasts are clear. The current coalition government promote and maintain that “innovation” will boost recycling and success within the markets. It is difficult however, to understand quite what is meant by this “innovation” as scant development of the idea is given – new technology? New thinking? New opportunities? Secondly, the RWP explores the economics of waste (the costs of waste, savings of future policies and the economic privileges to be reaped from newer practices) in greater attention absent from the WSE. It is perhaps a sign of the times – of stringent economic restraint – that a change of focus is now apparent; from the socio-environmental comfortable collaboration of the WSE, to the brutally economically minded foci of the RWP. The article shall take the three intentions for the WSE and contrast the interpretations and visions of the previous Labour government and new Conservative-Liberal coalition.
1 – “Incentivise efforts to: reduce, reuse, recycle and recover energy from waste.”
Waste Strategy: The WSE promotes a strong sense of stakeholder involvement; of conversation and partnership. The government aims to seek common ground in a bid to understand concerns behind the creation of the WSE. Labours commitment to stakeholder involvement has led to provisions of resources to enable stakeholder engagement – adhering with demands set within the EU Waste Framework Directive, Rio Declaration and Aarhus Convention. Plaudits are due on this success and the party committed to furthering the ability of stakeholders to contribute to policy creation. Secondly, challenges are acknowledged early; packaging waste is seen as the key concern to be tackled via: agreements with relevant industries, establishment of a products and materials unit within DEFRA and, finally, the development of schemes to promote producer responsibility. In short, the WSE appears to promote a sociological “knitting” together of societal comradery and light business responsibility, led by central government towards greener practices and behaviours.
Review of Waste Policy: The review applauds the acceptance of recycling as an everyday “social norm” but emphasises the need for waste reduction. Prevention of waste – to save businesses, consumers and local authorities financial hardship – is deeply embedded throughout the review. The review suggests a radical “production line overhaul” to remove hazardous materials and improve greener efficiency where possible. In addition, the paper places confidence in the claim that awareness changes to purchasing patterns would help drive innovation in the production sectors. The government plans to improve production methods and awareness through; a small waste prevention fund allowing businesses to undertake waste prevention schemes, developing a suite of waste prevention toolkits, promoting sustainable procurement and, finally, to redesign business models to wean firms from high resource dependency. The coalitions review centres deeply upon the economical aspect of sustainable development in delivering a focussed and deeply committed outline to detach responsibility from central government. With a determined eye to implement producer responsibility, the coalition shows unwavering commitment to tighten court proceedings and fines for firms who commit malpractice. Despite a national “tightening of the belts”, current fines for householder misuse of recycling resources are to be scrapped, being replaced by civil penalties. Whilst the coalition seem deeply economically entrenched in their approach, so too do they intend to explore the potential to financially reward high performing households – a very warmly welcomed policy which, it is expected, shall increase recycling significantly. The great emphasis upon the economics of current waste – and future waste management – is open to interpretation and opinion. Many may see it as self-serving moneymaking forsaking the environment, whereas others may applaud the deep attention and realism adopted here in tough economic times.
2 – Reform regulation to drive reduction of waste and divert resources from landfill
Waste Strategy: Labour acknowledge that businesses should take responsibility for the environmental impacts of products they place on the market. In response, the government plans to work with the industry to amend the producer responsibility regulations to minimise packaging, whilst “keeping in mind businesses commercial objectives”. Whilst E.U objectives to recover 60% of packaging and recycle 55% are expected to be met, the Labour government is committed to bringing forth legislative measures to enforce cleaner, greener action from business whilst committing to work in partnership to support and advise when necessary. As discussed previously, the tact of labour appears one of companionship and a progressive partnership, the commitment to enhancing the accountability of producers is a key aspect, however this is given far greater attention within the RWP
Review of Waste Policy: The policy review believes that “better environmental outcomes can, in many circumstances, be delivered in the least burdensome way through a voluntary approach rather than legislation”. Instead the government intends to develop “voluntary business deals” to encourage agreed changes with businesses. It is not stated whether this will be a business-by-business approach or an industry-wide approach, however it clearly presents a detachment from central government with responsibility placed upon business and society; a pre-emptive, preventative approach as opposed to a reactive “tidying up” approach. However, with this in mind, it does show a short contradiction of earlier authoritative guarantees to enhance court proceedings and punishments. Is the vision to work with co-operative businesses but crack down on those who do not comply? Does that short-change the notion of “voluntary”?
3 – Stimulate investment in collection, recycling and recovery infrastructure and develop markets for recovered materials that will maximise the value of materials and energy recovered.
Waste Strategy: Energy recovery from waste is an exceptionally strong theme in both papers and so rightly merits attention. The WSE states that reusing waste for energy production is “essential”, an argument supported by rising energy costs and instability of supplies. However the strategy also acknowledges – or purports – that the public fears over alleged health effects remain a core hindrance to such energy production methods. The need for suitable markets for waste produce and/or energy production is of paramount importance to drive sustainable progress. WRAP – created by the Labour administration – increased prospects by developing profitable applications for recycled materials, investing in the recycling sector and providing analysis for businesses and will undertake consultation with arena stakeholders with further support from the government. Whilst providing greater attention to the issue than the RWP, the WSE seems void of any great detail, vision or substantiated plans which could cause concern, scepticism and a wavering of confidence amongst business leaders and society.
Review of Waste Policy: A green economy is essential to energy security, resource efficiency and resilience to climate change. With an admirable and ambitious vision for a “zero waste economy”, a long term market in waste materials is essential. The recycling market is worth “£11billion and forecast to grow by approximately 3-4% a year for at least the next few years”, offering immense wealth with the industry expected to grow by 37% by 2020. In this respect, we can see where the commitment to “innovation” could find a footing to develop effective, efficient and sustainable energy recovery markets. The coalition government make a commitment to invest in, and communicate, the range of technologies available to seek commercially viable business plans and markets whilst working collaboratively with authorities and businesses to overcome barriers or promote the aspirations of the Anaerobic Digestion Strategy (a policy aiming to overcome barriers and maximise the potential of energy recovery initiatives). The RWP provide brief – but credibly detailed – discussion on both the current and potential future for energy production, providing a mix of realistic – and fascinating – visions and solutions to existing and potential problems.
Conclusion
This article has sought to provide a brief comparison between the vision and strategy of a previous labour government, with that of the current conservative-liberal coalition. There is indeed common ground beyond these points above, for example, both are deeply committed to public awareness campaigns with each acknowledging the importance of a well informed public. However as suggested here, there is variation in the interpretation, vision and strategy each paper adopts. Regardless of the direction in which each seeks to travel, or when or how it shall come about, one thing is clear; Both are committed to the same outcome; A cleaner, greener Britain that can benefit from a new “Green Economy”.
References:
Waste Strategy for England 2007: http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/strategy/strategy07/documents/waste07-strategy.pdf
Government Review of Waste Policy in England 2011: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13540-waste-policy-review110614.pdf
