Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Waste
45a)
HOUSE OF COMMONS ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL
AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE INQUIRY INTO THE WASTE STRATEGY FOR ENGLAND
2007
A RESPONSE FROM
DEFRA TO
REQUEST FOR
SUPPLEMENTARY EVIDENCE
Q1 Despite good progress on the 2010 landfill
diversion target, there remains a question mark over meeting the
2013 target. How is Defra ensuring infrastructure is developed
at the necessary pace?
A1 To accelerate the building of the infrastructure
needed to treat residual waste without compromising efforts to
minimise waste and support increasing recycling levels, Defra
established the Waste Infrastructure Delivery Programme (WIDP).
WIDP provides Local authorities with high quality procurement
support and generic guidance.
Defra supports infrastructure development though
Private Finance Initiative (PFI) credits; by supporting the demonstration
of new technologies (New Technology Demonstrator Programme); and
through the Waste Infrastructure Capital Grant (£185 million
2008-09—2010-11) to local authorities in recognition of
the need to get front-end waste infrastructure.
Q1a Is the current economic downturn causing
Defra to re-evaluate assumptions about the pace of infrastructure
development?
A1a The economic downturn poses some new challenges
for those managing waste, especially because of volatility in
markets; and we are keeping a very close watch on the situation.
We are also aware that banks are looking carefully at what they
can finance in current circumstances, including PFI proposals
for waste infrastructure. However, given the credit standing of
local authorities, waste infrastructure under PFI should generally
stack up well for them.
WIDP maintains a projection of the likelihood of
meeting the landfill diversion targets in 2010, 2013 and 2020.
This looks at the expected growth in waste arisings ("demand")
and the forecast treatment capacity ("supply") that
will be available to deal with it. The demand forecast relies
on economic modelling (including the effect of the economic downturn
on waste growth), on forecast recycling rates and on an assessment
of the proportion of household waste that is biodegradable. The
supply forecast is based on an assessment of the likelihood of
timely operational delivery of treatment plants being procured
by local authorities, and the estimated technical/operational
efficiency of those plants. These forecasts will help WIDP determine
how best to match PFI funding with delivery of the appropriate
treatment capacity. Based on its initial assumptions Defra expects
to meet the 2010, 2013 and 2020 targets. These assumptions will
be kept under review in discussion with stakeholders.
Q1b Should the Government provide the industry
with greater certainty for investment by setting out long term
plans for landfill tax levels now?
A1b The Government is giving certainty regarding
the level of the standard rate of landfill tax, which will enable
businesses and the waste management industry to make investments
in more sustainable waste management options. Decisions on rates
beyond 2010-11 will be taken nearer the time, although the Government
has stated that it expects the standard rate of landfill tax to
continue to rise after 2010-11.
The evidence shows that the Government's policies
to tackle waste, including the landfill tax, are having a positive
impact, encouraging waste producers to explore ways of minimising,
re-using and recycling waste. Figures show that since 1997-98,
the volume of waste disposed to registered landfill sites has
fallen by almost one third. It is having an effect, but it needs
to have more. That is why the Government has given plenty of notice
that the standard rate of landfill tax will significantly increase
over the next few years.
Q2 The Committee has had extensive evidence
that the planning system provides a barrier to timely development
of infrastructure. What can Defra do to ensure that the planning
system works to deliver the right infrastructure at the right
time?
A2 The planning system is, of course, the
responsibility of CLG. It was significantly strengthened in mid-2005
with the introduction of a new Planning Policy Statement for waste
(PPS10) which reinforces the duties on all participants in the
planning system to make adequate provision for waste in Regional
Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks. We are now
in an implementation phase, and by no means all authorities have
yet implemented the reforms introduced in 2005, with the result
that waste planning is yet to reap the full benefit. Defra shares
CLG's view, however, that the planning system is fundamentally
sound in the way it deals with the great majority of waste projects.
The very largest waste projects will benefit from the reforms
to major infrastructure planning introduced by the Planning Act
2009.
Delays may happen because local decision-takers are
reluctant to publish Local Plans which identify sites for unpopular
development, or to support those developments when they are put
forward. Such problems are a reflection of political responses
to public perception of waste facilities as undesirable neighbours.
It is not clear that further changes to the planning system would
assist with this problem.
Q3 Is the Government's use of the PFI process
effective in ensuring the delivery of waste infrastructure which
will meet the longer term needs of communities?
A3 Waste Disposal Authorities have statutory
responsibility for arranging for disposal of municipal waste.
They are best placed to plan and deliver necessary waste infrastructure
for their communities. This includes how best to manage waste
and landfill allowances, to meet targets set in the Waste Strategy
for England 2007 and to consider whether PFI or a different type
of procurement is most effective for their needs. Defra requires
all local authorities applying for PFI credits to explore the
options of working with their neighbours to avoid any inefficiencies
that might arise if each authority procured independently.
Applicants are required to show how their project
will move them up the waste hierarchy at all relevant levels.
Whilst Defra does not specify preferred technologies we do insist
that no new infrastructure proposals should be at the expense
of reduction, reuse and recycling of waste (as illustrated by
the waste hierarchy in the Waste Strategy for England 2007). All
projects are expected to consider the carbon footprint of their
technology choice, and are encouraged to achieve the greatest
carbon benefits through combined heat and power (CHP), where feasible.
Q3a Is the PFI process too inflexible to enable
authorities to respond to changing waste management needs?
A3a A common criticism of long term waste
PFI contracts is that they are inflexible and potentially "crowd
out recycling". This is based on the argument that because
the cost of the assets will be incurred regardless of whether
the service is used, which could potentially provide a disincentive
to recycle. However, it is important to note that it is standard
practice to protect against this risk by including contractual
incentives for the contractor to exceed expected recycling rates
and by providing financial incentives to promote the substitution
of other waste into the facility to make up any shortfall from
the local authority.
Q4 Given the divergent views on energy from
waste plant, do we need a national debate about the number and
location of new facilities? Do other government policies, such
as planning and energy strategies, have sufficient regard to the
fact that energy from waste facilities could be a key element
in delivery of waste strategy objectives?
A4 Defra is carrying out work to draw up strategies
for renewable energy and heat, and plans to maximize the yield
of renewable energy from waste food and waste wood will feature
strongly in these plans. Our Waste Infrastructure Development
Programme is also developing a market in Secondary Recovered Fuel,
which will enable energy to be derived from residual waste by
energy-intensive industrial users in an efficient way.
Q5 Do we have the regulatory framework right
to ensure that maximum use is made of heat produced by energy
from waste plant? What is Defra doing on this?
A5 Overall responsibility for policy on heat
rests with DECC, and the issues involved in making sure waste
heat from, say, incinerators is utilised are no different from
those associated with any other large combustion process. DECC's
Heat Strategy is considering, for example, the scope to use such
heat in district heating schemes, as already happens with the
incinerators at Sheffield and elsewhere. Defra is working closely
with DECC on these issues.
There are, in addition, some waste-specific issues
in heat policy. In particular, Defra officials are liaising closely
with their DECC counterparts to ensure that the design of the
proposed Renewable Heat Incentive takes appropriate account of
the nature of waste processes, many of which use a steam cycle
for which realistic efficiency criteria need to be set.
Q6 The Environmental Permitting Programme
aims to cut costs and burdens on businesses but we have evidence
from some sectors that it is doing the opposite. What is Defra's
assessment of the impact of EPP in its first six months of operation?
A6 The new Environmental Permitting system
came into force in England and Wales in April 2008. It is too
early to draw definitive conclusions about the extent to which
the system is delivering the benefits which the published Regulatory
Impact Assessment anticipated would accrue over a number of years.
A post implementation review to address this question is scheduled
for April 2010, by which time sufficient evidence should be available.
Transition to the new system has proceeded relatively
smoothly. Guidance is in place and staff training is complete
for Local Authorities and the Environment Agency (EA). Initial
anecdotal feedback from EA regulated industry suggests that a
number of those with experience of the previous systems regard
the new arrangements as a welcome improvement in several respects.
Defra and the EA will continue to monitor the experience of regulated
industry in operating the new system and will consider any adjustments
that might be necessary in the light of feedback received.
Q6a Isn't there a case for looking again at
the thresholds to ensure that smaller scale activity is exempt
from the permitting system?
A6a We have just consulted upon proposals
to revise the exemptions from environmental permitting. The consultation
included proposals for new exemptions as well as amendments to
the thresholds of some existing exemptions. The aim is to deliver
regulatory control that is proportionate to the risk posed by
waste operations. Defra seeks to encourage lighter touch regulation
of small scale low risk waste recycling and recovery operations
through exemptions and at the same time ensure the Environment
Agency regulates larger scale and higher risk waste operations
through environmental permits. It is anticipated revised exemptions
will be in place by October 2009.
Q7 What is Defra's estimate of the costs of
enforcing waste regulation borne by its agencies and local authorities?
Is there a funding shortfall?
A7 Local Authority expenditure on waste management
is insufficiently disaggregated to be able to provide an assessment
of their expenditure on enforcement of waste regulations. Revenue
payments from central government to local government are paid
via the Revenue Support Grant (RSG) and include provision for
waste services. The Revenue Support Grant settlement is not ring-fenced
and not hypothecated, maximising the freedom and flexibility of
local authorities to allocate these resources according to the
priorities in their area.
The Government worked closely with local authorities
during the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR07) in order to identify
the pressures on waste over the next three years and the ways
that they can be managed. The Local Government Finance Settlement
provides a fair and affordable settlement for councils in a tight
financial climate and allows authorities to deliver effective
services, including those in the area of waste management.
The costs the Environment Agency are estimated
in the following extract from their Corporate Plan 2008-11
| 2008-09 (budget) |
(A) Total Waste Regulation expenditure:
| £117 million |
(B) Funded by: |
|
Income from Waste charges (including Hazardous Waste)
| £67.3 million |
Grant in Aid (Defra and WAG)
| £46.9 million |
BREW (see below) | £2.8 million
|
(C) Of which, some £20 million GiA is spent on Waste enforcement.
|
| |
However, these amounts do not take account of charges raised
for regulation of landfill sites, as these are regulated under
IPPC and so not included as waste income in the Environment Agency's
Corporate Plan resources summary.
The Environment Agency will receive £2.8 million funding
from Business Resource Efficiency and Waste (BREW) programme in
2008-09.
On top of this the Environment Agency has received £1.3
million from BERR to tackle "WEEE freeriders" and £1.3
million from Defra to cover the enforcement of Green List transfrontier
waste movements during 2008-09.
Q7a Should regulation be paid for by fees and charges on
the regulated industry of is there a case for using other funding
resources?
A7a Government policy is to encourage the Environment
Agency to recover its costs of regulation. This is largely achieved
through a system of fees and charges for determining applications
for environmental permits and the inspection and assessment of
permitted activities. Charging operators of waste management facilities
in this way is consistent with the European Waste Framework Directive's
"polluter pays principle" and means that the burden
properly falls on those disposing of waste.
Q8 Are the powers and duties set out in legislation strong
enough to tackle the litter problem?
A8 Yes. The powers available to local authorities to tackle
littering were recently enhanced by the Clean Neighbourhoods and
Environment Act 2005. That legislation was introduced following
extensive consultation including with local authorities who requested
some of the changes brought in by the Act. Defra continues to
work with local authorities to explain the range of powers available
to them and has produced extensive guidance on their use.
Q8a Only 25 out of 354 English Local Authorities handed
out 62% of fines for dropping litter. Is enforcement of these
powers being taken seriously enough by bodies such as local authorities?
A8a Defra will continue to encourage local authorities to
improve their performance. Some 233 out of 354 authorities in
England issued at least one fixed penalty notice for littering
in the year 2006-07—an increase from the 197 authorities
issuing fixed penalty notices in 2005-06. Overall in 2006-07 over
43,000 fixed penalty notices for littering were issued, up from
33,000 in the preceding year. It is down to local authorities
to determine the most appropriate way to use the powers available
to them to tackle the problem of litter in their area. Defra supports
local authorities through its third sector delivery partner ENCAMS
which provides advice, guidance and training and opportunities
to share best practice.
Q8b Are other bodies such as Network Rail, the Highways
Agency, the Environment Agency etc using their powers sufficiently?
A8b The Environmental Protection Act 1990 identifies several
bodies as designated statutory undertakers. This includes rail
and road, river and canal undertakings. The Act does not provide
the power for these bodies to issue fines for littering but they
have similar duties to local authorities to keep their relevant
land clear of litter and refuse. Recent reports of the Local Environmental
Quality Survey of England have shown comparatively good results
on litter for transport infrastructure areas (eg platforms and
bus shelters). The picture for litter on main and other roads
is unsatisfactory. Roads can present particular difficulties for
cleansing, with health and safety considerations a primary concern.
Defra is funding ENCAMS to run a campaign on littering from vehicles
in summer 2009.
Q8c Should there be increased government funding for anti-litter
campaigns or for a more formal network of volunteer action?
A8c Defra already spends some £1.2 million each year
through ENCAMS on behaviour change campaigns which include campaigns
on fast food litter and The Big Tidy Up to get communities involved
in cleaning their areas. A further £0.7 million, funded by
the chewing gum manufacturing industry, is spent on campaigning
against the irresponsible disposal of gum. These campaigns are
evaluated and are consistently shown to be effective in the areas
in which they operate, however, sustaining the improvement after
the campaign ends is a challenge.
Q9 What practical steps is Defra taking to ensure that
growth in composting does not compromise soil quality or animal
health? Will any of these constrain the ability to develop composting
markets?
A9 Composting, as a waste treatment process, is governed by
the Waste Framework Directive and regulated by Environment Agency
who must also apply the Animal By-Products Regulations (ABPR)
where catering or household waste contains meat products. The
objective of these controls is to ensure that the composting of
waste is carried out in a way which protects the environment,
as well as human and animal health.
WRAP supported the development of the revised BSI PAS100 (2005),
which is the recognised standard for good quality green waste
compost. This covers the range of materials used to make the compost,
their quality and traceability, the minimum requirements for the
process of composting and the quality of the end product. It has
also worked with the Environment Agency to develop a Quality Protocol
for the production and use of quality compost from source segregated
biodegradable waste. Finally, it has also supported development
of a quality protocol for digestate, the compost-like residue
arising from anaerobic digestion, which can also be used as a
soil fertiliser. Development of this protocol is now advanced;
it will mandate limits on harmful contaminants and require producers
to specify nutrient content. All these quality standards will
improve market confidence in the quality of compost, encouraging
higher levels of composting.
Q9a How could education work such as WRAP's "Love
food, hate waste" campaign, be supported with wider practical
measures to change behaviour (such as food waste collection by
councils, development of markets for compost)?
A9a Trials offering separate collections of food waste
to over 94,000 households have shown high levels of public support
for diverting food waste from landfill. Following these trials,
some local authorities have already decided to roll out these
collections on a permanent basis. Consumer surveys conducted by
WRAP showed 78% of residents were satisfied with the collection
service they received and in around half of the areas where participation
monitoring was conducted, 70% of households were taking part in
the service. The collected food waste was either composted at
in-vessel facilities or treated by anaerobic digestion. The results
of these trials show that if consumers are given the right tools
and support, they will participate in initiatives to cut waste
being sent to landfill. Development of markets for compost and
digestate has been one of WRAP's core activities for several years.
Q9b Should Defra work with retailers to improve information
on "use by" and "sell by" dates to stop consumers
being over cautious about using up food whilst eating safely?
A9b Defra agrees that action is needed. Consumers need to
be well informed about the different date marks so that they can
make a proper decision about the risk of consuming a food product.
We are discussing the nature of this action with WRAP and the
Food Standards Agency.
Q10 If minimisation of retail packaging has now gone as
far as it can, should more effort now be going into making it
easier to recycle packaging?
A10 There are many examples of companies who have minimised
the packaging used on specific products. However, that is not
to say that packaging has, as a whole, been minimised as far as
possible. It is debatable whether on their own market forces sufficiently
drive businesses to make full use of innovation in technology
or materials to minimise packaging.
WRAP has developed a "best in class" database which
shows the spread of weight for specific packaging product and
pack sizes used for food and drink on UK supermarket shelves.
It shows that there are very significant differences in the weight
of packaging which fulfils the same function.
We believe that moving towards the "best in class"
product weights has many advantages for businesses as well as
the environment, including minimising the use of valuable resources,
reducing costs and reducing energy consumption. So, in line with
the waste hierarchy, we should continue to focus on source reduction.
To deliver this, WRAP will over the next few months' scope
out a programme of work to identify priority sectors and work
with Government, trade organisations and key business partners
to negotiate the next generation of voluntary agreements to reduce
packaging.
Turning to recyclability, the forthcoming packaging strategy
will address this issue and explore ways to ensure that more of
the packaging is designed with re-use, recycling or recovery in
mind.
Q11 Has the retail sector done enough to minimise use of
single use carrier bags?
A11 Not yet, but many of them have announced very ambitious
plans to do so. We are optimistic that this level of ambition
will soon be reflected in a much tougher voluntary agreement to
succeed the existing one.
Q11a How will Defra now take forward the power to impose
charges?
A11a We have always been clear that we would only use the
powers if retailers were not prepared to take voluntary action
on a sufficient scale. The progress which retailers are currently
making and planning to make—especially in the current economic
climate—looks extremely encouraging and we do not, as a
result, expect to be making early use of our powers. But we will
keep the issue under review.
Q12 Considering that the construction industry is responsible
for a third of overall waste arising, should the targets in the
Sustainable Construction Strategy for a 50% reduction in Construction,
Demolition and Excavation (CDE) waste by 2012 sent to landfill
be more challenging?
A12 Although Construction, Demolition and Excavation waste
accounts for around a third of overall waste arisings over half
of the hardcore waste is reused or recycled as aggregates, including
on site of production. Nevertheless, it remains an uncomfortable
fact that around 25 million tonnes of CD&E waste is disposed
of in landfill every year.
The 2012 halving waste to landfill target was confirmed in the
Sustainable Construction Strategy as a stepping stone towards
a longer-term ambition of ending the disposal of CD&E waste
in landfill (except for the limited waste types where landfills
remain the least environmentally damaging option). The 2012 target
is ambitious but realistic. Further work over the next few years
on, for example, life cycle assessments, increased capacity and
alternative disposal options, will allow the government and industry
to assess better how much more ambitious we could be beyond 2012
and how close we might get to ending the disposal of CD&E
waste in landfill in the longer-term.
During the Minister's evidence session, the Committee asked
when the Sustainable Construction Strategy was published. The
Strategy was published on 11 June 2008. It was launched at an
event opened by BERR Minister, Dame Shriti Vadera, and attended
by 150 leading members of the construction industry. There was
good coverage of the event in the trade press. Copies of the Strategy
were placed in the Libraries of the House and can be found at:
www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/sectors/construction/index.html.
Q12a How is progress against the targets being monitored
and who is ensuring industry compliance? Do the targets need to
be backed up with more rigorous powers of enforcement?
A12a Measurement of the overall volumes of CD&E waste
going to landfill will be conducted by Defra, drawing on a range
of available data sources including landfill operator returns
and, potentially, on-site surveys. Under the Strategic Forum for
Construction umbrella, sector level organisations will monitor
progress against their own commitments and targets, collating
aggregated data from individual businesses where appropriate.
Similarly, the Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) will
co-ordinate individual companies' progress against the halving
waste to landfill target.
The halving waste to landfill target is a collective industry
and government commitment. While the target itself will not be
"enforced", the introduction in April 2008 of a mandatory
requirement for construction projects costing over £300,000
to have a Site Waste Management Plan gives local authorities and
the Environment Agency an important new tool for ensuring that
individual companies are looking at the minimisation and sustainable
management of CD&E waste in England.
Q13 Will Defra provide a detailed supplementary note on
the overall strategy for waste minimization and how the detailed
work streams contribute to this, together with information on
plans for the publication of further information on this?
A13 The Waste Strategy establishes the primacy of waste
prevention in the waste hierarchy, placing much more emphasis
on waste prevention than previous strategies.
The UK is already producing less waste per head than some of our
European neighbours, as shown in chart 1 for municipal waste,
but, as the Strategy recognises, we have progress to make.
Chart 1
MUNICIPAL WASTE COLLECTED (KG PER HEAD) (2006)
Government can secure reduction in waste through a number
of measures, both direct and indirect. The Strategy sets out a
very wide range of these measures to help drive waste prevention
including economic incentives, regulation and voluntary and awareness
measures. Several in both categories are sector-specific. In the
category of measures which directly target waste prevention is
the new national household residual waste reduction target which
is strongly reflected in the selection of local area agreement
targets by local authorities. Also on household waste reduction
there are the proposed new powers for local authorities for financial
incentives for household waste minimisation and recycling, and
site waste management plans for construction waste. Examples of
other direct measures are:
— A range of voluntary targets set in the retail
and food areas. The Courtauld commitment, for instance, sets specific
targets for reduction of retail packaging by 2010; and the Food
Industry Sustainability Strategy contains a target of reducing
the food manufacturing industry's waste by 15-20% by 2010. On
food, we have been focusing strongly on raising awareness of the
need to reduce household food waste (see table below).
— Defra is providing around £45 million funding
for business support on waste minimisation and resource efficiency
through WRAP, NISP, Centre for Remanufacture and Reuse, and the
BREW Centre for Local Authorities.
— WRAP target for 2008-09 to stop 8 million tonnes
of waste materials from the household, industrial and commercial
waste streams going to landfill.
— NISP target to deliver 750,000 tonnes of diversion
from landfill in 2008-09.
— BREW Centre for local authorities will fund 12-16
local authority projects between £30,000 and £210,000
in 2008-09.
Many local authorities also have explicit waste prevention
policies, especially in relation to household waste such as home
composting, publicity campaigns to minimise food waste in the
home and encouraging re-use.
There are also several broader measures which have an important
indirect effect on waste prevention. Waste prevention is being
achieved through: raising the costs of landfill the landfill tax
escalator; landfill regulation including pre-treatment requirements;
and the Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme.
Our focus on waste prevention will be partly monitored through
a new target to reduce household residual waste per head by half
by 2020 compared with 2000.
We will be publishing further information and plans as and
when appropriate, for example in relation to further development
of the specific policy measures set out below.
Measure | How it can contribute
|
| Landfill tax escalator | This increases the cost of waste disposal so, for waste that cannot easily be recycled or recovered, provides an incentive for businesses to minimise waste.
|
Landfill allowance trading scheme (LATS)
| Provides an incentive for councils to encourage waste prevention in their area in order to reduce amount of waste needing to be diverted from landfill and reduce costs of treatment.
|
Performance targets for councils |
Local authorities have a set of three waste indicators which they may include in their local area agreements. 38 local authorities have selected the residual household waste indicator and have set a target which requires waste minimisation.
|
Allowing councils to incentivise recycling and waste prevention including through revenue-neutral financial incentives
| This provides an incentive for the householder to reduce or re-use waste.
|
Zero Waste Places | We are supporting six places in England to test solutions to achieving zero waste to landfill. A report on the evidence these places gather will be published in 2009.
|
Implementation of EU sectoral directives:
— End of Life Vehicles
— Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
— Batteries
| For waste that is relatively expensive to recycle the recycling requirements in this Directives will indirectly drive waste minimisation.
|
| Packaging | Courtauld Commitment—set a target to reduce growth in retail packaging by 2008, which it has hit, and is now working on a target to reduce packaging waste by 2010. Also working to secure a voluntary agreement to cut the amount of food wasted in the supply chain and the home.
New legislative packaging recovery targets for the UK—these indirectly encourage prevention for waste that is relatively expensive to recycle.
WRAP work with retailers to support efforts to lightweight packaging.
|
Food waste | The Courtauld signatories and WRAP are working to secure a voluntary agreement to cut the amount of food wasted in the supply chain and the home.
WRAP's "Love Food: Hate Waste" campaign highlights the amount of food we throw away and encourages householders to avoid food waste. WRAP are also supporting local authorities in trials of separate food waste collection and in promoting home composting, both of which measures will reduce food waste.
|
Direct mail | We have a voluntary agreement with the Direct Marketing Association, to allow opt out from receiving direct mail plus a commitment to increase recycling of direct mail to 70% by end 2013. Since promotion of the mailing preference service opting out has risen from about 1.1 million to about 4 million people.
|
Site waste management plans | Mandatory for construction projects over £300,000, these encourage minimisation and better management of waste throughout the design and construction process.
|
Guidance and awareness measures | More visible recycling facilities in public places, activities with schools etc. These will encourage waste prevention, including through stressing resulting economic gains and through behaviour change.
|
Government product procurement targets
| Waste prevention is included in the targets for sustainable operation of the government estate; in addition the SOGE has targets for recycling which provide indirect stimulus to waste prevention for waste that is relatively expensive to recycle.
|
Research | Over the last four years, Defra's Waste and Resources Evidence Programme (WREP) has commissioned a comprehensive portfolio of research projects exploring household waste prevention. The scope of work has varied from understanding consumer behaviour, through evaluating how different local initiatives work, to the development of technical solutions. Details about ongoing and completed projects, and reports already published are available on the Defra website at http://randd.defra.gov.uk.
|
| |
Q14 What are the reasons for the delay in publishing a
consultation on further restrictions on the landfilling of biodegradable
wastes or recyclable materials?
A14 The Government stated that a decision to consult
on further restrictions on the landfilling of biodegradable and
recyclable waste would be subject to further analysis as to whether
such further restrictions would make an effective contribution
to meeting the Waste Strategy 2007 objectives.
Consultants are currently carrying out a series of case studies
into how other Member States have imposed restrictions, including
their practical application and perceived benefits. The consultants'
draft report is scheduled for early 2009 and we will discuss their
findings with stakeholders. Once the report has been assessed
Defra will decide whether to formally consult on proposals for
further restrictions. The Waste Strategy 2007 also stated that
any consultation will be linked to further work on priority waste
materials, which is ongoing.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
December 2008
| 
