3 Recycling rates in England
Current
performance
23. The EU Waste Framework Directive states that
the United Kingdom must recycle at least 50% of its household
waste by 2020. England achieved a recycling rate of 43.2% in 2012/13
and has improved its recycling rate by more than three times since
2000.[31] However, in
recent years, the rate of increase has started to slow and Defra
statistics show that the rate of increase in the last year is
insufficient to meet the 50% EU target by 2020.[32]
24. The Government is committed to meeting the EU
target[33] but, based
on the current trajectory of recycling rates, most witnesses were
concerned that England will miss the target unless some significant
additional Government interventions are made. As explained by
Dr Liz Goodwin, CEO of WRAP:
There is a significant risk that we will not
[reach the target by 2020] and that we need a concerted effort
if we are going to do anything about that […] certainly in
the last three years or so, the growth has slowed down to the
extent where it looks as though it has plateaued at the moment.
Something needs to be done to address that, otherwise we will
not meet the recycling rates.[34]
SITA UK told us that:
the evidence suggests that the current suite
of Defra policies has run its course. Higher recycling targets
will only be achieved by introducing a refreshed set of policies
and policy instruments.[35]
25. We are concerned that the 2020 EU target of
50% household recycling will not be met in England without clear
Government leadership and renewed policy drivers and support from
Defra.
26. To put England's recycling rate in context, Wales
achieved a recycling rate of 52% in 2012/13;[36]
Scotland achieved 41.2% in 2012;[37]
and Northern Ireland achieved 38.7% in 2012/13.[38],
[39] It is difficult
to make direct comparisons between countries as the methods of
recording recycling rates are not consistent across the board[40]
and it is notable that the present rate of increase in Scotland
and Northern Ireland is higher than in England. Nonetheless, as
Wales implemented an ambitious set of targets through its Towards
Zero Waste Strategy in 2010 and has already met the 50% target,
we focused on the Welsh approach to determine whether there are
any lessons to learn.
27. Dr Andy Rees, Head of Waste Strategy Branch at
the Welsh Government, told us that the main area of focus for
the Welsh Government has been on setting statutory recycling targets
which have "very much focused the minds of local authorities".[41]
In addition, the Welsh Government has developed a mix of interventions
to meet the targets that it has set, including additional funding
support to local authorities through the Sustainable Waste Management
Grant (totalling £66 million this year), a twin-tracked communications
campaign (national and local) and a series of programmes to support
the changes that need to be made.
28. We urge Defra to work alongside WRAP and industry
to develop a comprehensive plan to be implemented in the event
that England's recycling rate continues to slow. We recommend
that Defra learns from successful approaches in countries such
as Wales and Ministers consider introducing refreshed policies
and re-introducing requirements such as statutory recycling targets
for local authorities alongside the requisite funding support.
Promoting best
practice
29. Recycling rates in local authorities across England
range between 12% and 67%.[42]
The disparity stems from the numerous and differing challenges
which they face and which are likely to vary depending on the
particular local circumstances. As a generalisation, inner-city
urban areas tend to have the lowest recycling rates[43]
which is commonly attributed to transient populations, high-density
housing with little space for recycling receptacles, and a lack
of householder engagement and understanding.[44]
Other common barriers faced by local authorities with low recycling
rates include insufficient infrastructure and recycling facilities,
challenges of costs and funding, and problems with accessing output
markets.[45]
30. During our inquiry, we investigated a number
of approaches aimed at improving household recycling rates in
order to determine whether there are any overarching lessons to
be learnt from strong performers. We discuss a sample of these
below.
SEPARATE FOOD WASTE COLLECTIONS
31. When we explored the reasons behind higher recycling
rates, separate food and garden waste collections was often suggested
as an answer. This is reflected in the proportion of green waste
being recycled by the highest and lowest performing councils in
2012/13: being over 56% and 0% respectively.[46]
Dr Rees told us that separate food waste collections have "probably
added around five to six percentage points"[47]
to the recycling rate in Wales. He explained:
In terms of the funding that we have provided
to local authorities, the key difference that it has made is for
them to provide separate collection of food waste…and as
a result, 96% of our households in Wales have had a separate collection
service for food waste put in place by their local authorities.[48]
32. However, we also received evidence against separate
collections of food waste due to the high cost of implementation
and low participation rates by householders leading to low volumes
being collected.[49]
Currently, about 45% of households have access to a food waste
collection (with around half of those being food waste only and
half being mixed with garden waste) but only 10% of food waste
is collected.[50] In
practice, local authorities can struggle with the costs created
by separate food collections, as demonstrated by Tamworth and
Lichfield local councils which have recently stopped separate
food waste collection services in order to save a total of £400,000
per year.[51] Councillor
Gary Porter, Vice Chair of the Local Government Association (LGA),
argued that "it is for the local council, with their local
population, to work out the best methods of collection in their
area".[52]
33. We agree with the overall explanation given by
ESA:
In general terms, higher recycling rates require
the expansion of existing services and the introduction of new
ones (e.g. separate food waste collections). Different services
may be more or less appropriate for differing local circumstances.
ESA believes that responsibility for household waste and recycling
collections rightly reside with the local authorities. There may
however be some scope for increased service standardization between
local authority areas.[53]
34. On balance, we conclude that local authorities
should remain responsible for addressing the specific challenges
and barriers to increasing recycling rates that they face at a
local level. However, there is scope for guidance and best practice
to be shared at a national level in order to move towards a more
standardised approach and to assist local authorities to improve
their individual performance.
35. Defra should facilitate and encourage learning
from best practice actions to help local authorities gravitate
towards the best possible service in their area. Working with
the Local Government Association, we urge Defra to share information
on successful approaches with local authorities to enable them
to develop the most effective services for their particular local
circumstances.
COMMUNICATION
36. We were told that that only about 24% of householders
are recycling correctly.[54]
The householder plays a key role in helping to improve recycling
rates but, in general, has no direct financial incentive to do
so. On average, each household pays £3 per week for its waste
and recycling services and most will be unaware of this relatively
low cost breakdown as it is rolled up as part of council tax payments.[55]
Keep Britain Tidy have found that:
Households have a critical and often forgotten
role in municipal waste recycling. Our recent Recycling Inquiry
in partnership with SITA UK found that although infrastructure
and services have a large role to play, without clear, consistent
and continual communication and information that motivates households
to recycle more and better, there is a disconnection with the
real underlying need and recycling commitment and capability is
reduced.[56]
37. WRAP carried out the Recycle Now communication
campaign at a national level to encourage recycling. This has
been developed and managed by WRAP since 2004 and comprises direct
consumer messaging and indirect communications through organisations,
such as major retailers, local authorities and community groups,
adopting and using the brand. Despite the success of this high-profile
campaign, Defra has cut funding for WRAP from £53.5 million
in 2010/11 to £17.9 million in 2014/15. An even greater proportional
funding reduction has occurred for Keep Britain Tidy, from £4.8
million in 2010/11 to £0.5 million in 2014/15.[57]
38. Dr Goodwin reassured us that despite WRAP's budget
cuts, work relating to food waste reductions and recycling continues.
Nevertheless, as explained by Green Alliance:
WRAP has had a very big role in successful campaigns,
but what we also understand is you have to keep repeating it.
The messages and communications have to keep coming forward. As
soon as they stop people are liable to slip back into previous
habits.[58]
39. Successful communication campaigns must be
sustained to keep householders engaged. We commend the work of
WRAP and Keep Britain Tidy and strongly believe that the research,
advice, support and information provided by these organisations
is invaluable.
40. We are concerned that, despite the significant
achievements of both organisations, Defra's funding for WRAP and
Keep Britain Tidy has reduced over recent years. We urge Defra
to increase the funding if evidence suggests it necessary in the
lead up to 2020.
41. As well as high-profile national communication
campaigns, specific local issues need to be addressed at a local
level. We identified three common issues faced at an individual
or householder level, each of which could be addressed with targeted
communications:
a) confusion
about what can and cannot be recycled;
b) a lack
of confidence in the end destination of recyclables; and
c) contamination
of recyclables.
42. First, confusion is common because there is not
a standardised approach to recycling across England. There are
up to 400 different collection and recycling schemes in England
which means that each time an individual moves areas, either permanently
or temporarily (for example moving house or travelling from home
to work or school each day) they need to learn and adapt to a
new system.[59] Phil
Barton, Chief Executive of Keep Britain Tidy, told us that "despite
quite a lot of goodwill and basic values supporting the idea of
recycling, there is a disconnect and people are confused".[60]
43. Councillor Porter emphasised that simplicity
of the collection regime and clear communication are important,[61]
but need to be done on a local basis: "councils do know their
people better than any national organisation; it is just the nature
of the beast".[62]
Whilst acknowledging that there is no silver bullet to standardise
schemes across the country, Dr Liz Goodwin did suggest that the
400 different schemes ought to be able to consolidate down to
"five or six models of recycling schemes".[63]
This further substantiates our findings on separate food waste
collections and our earlier recommendation to move towards more
standardised best practice approaches, while acknowledging that
services must be tailored to local circumstances.
44. Secondly, we are concerned that there seems to
be a lack of public confidence in the end destination of the rubbish
put in recycling bins: a remaining cynicism that separated recycling
still goes to landfill.[64]
A YouGov survey found that 73% of UK adults sampled said they
did not know where materials go (in terms of plants or geography)
and 32% said they would be much more likely or more likely to
recycle if more information was available.[65]
RPS Planning and Development assured us that
there was more information that could usefully be provided to
people so that they understood what the consequences of their
actions were and what the benefits were.[66]
Defra acknowledges this problem and, as such, is supportive of
the Resource Association's End Destination of Recycling Charter.[67]
The Charter is a voluntary scheme whereby local authorities and
private companies involved in the recycling chain publish an annual
Register of End Destination of Recyclates, with the aim of improving
transparency in the recycling supply chain and enhancing public
confidence in recycling.
45. Thirdly, the raw material sent to be recycled
(known as recyclate) can be rejected from recycling plants if
it is contaminated, which causes a lower actual recycling rate.
Data for England show that 226,770 tonnes of contaminated recyclate
was rejected out of a total 10,457,329 tonnes of recyclate collected
in 2012/13. This is 59,973 tonnes more contaminated recyclate
rejected than in 2008/09.[68]
Contamination is caused by waste that cannot be recycled being
put in recycling bins (e.g. food waste and certain types of plastic)
or waste that could be recycled being too dirty or damaged to
be processed. Defra is looking for local authorities to promote
recycling through effective communications and making it easier
for householders to do the right thing e.g. by making it easier
to know which plastics can go in the recycling bin.[69]
46. Householders have a key role to play in increasing
recycling rates, but household engagement must be improved in
order to tackle the common challenges of householder confusion,
lack of confidence in the process, and contamination of recyclates.
Recycling rates could be significantly improved by the provision
of consistent, simple and concise information.
47. Communication needs to be tailored to local
circumstances but Defra should engage with local authorities and
provide support at a national level, particularly in relation
to common issues and problem areas. We recommend that Defra considers
compulsory publication of an annual Register of End Destination
of Recyclates by all local authorities and waste management companies
involved in the recycling chain, in order to improve access to
information and public confidence.
REWARDS AND RECOGNITION
48. Other ways to improve householder engagement
are either to provide rewards and recognition for good recycling,
or to make it compulsory for householders to recycle. The majority
of our witnesses were not in favour of compulsory recycling, although
it was noted that there is insufficient data available in England
to determine the precise impact that this approach could have
on England's overall recycling rates.[70]
Significantly, many more witnesses noted the benefits that reward
and recognition could bring. A Keep Britain Tidy survey found
that about 90% of the public said that they would like to see
some sort of reward coming back to the community to acknowledge
good recycling.[71] This
could be in the form of improvements to the local environment
(playgrounds, parks or trees) or a rebate on an individual's council
tax. The LGA emphasised individual cash incentive schemes and
gave the example of Wokingham Borough Council seeing an initial
increase of 28% in the tonnage of recycling collected after introducing
a recycling rewards scheme in April 2012.[72]
49. In line with the overall endorsements for rewarding
positive behaviour, Defra has launched the Reward and Recognition
Fund in partnership with SERCO, as a pilot to test innovative
ideas to encourage positive behaviour. Funding has been provided
to 28 projects (including recycling) and a final analysis report
will be published by Defra in 2015.
50. We support Defra's Reward and Recognition
Scheme and expect Defra to use the results to identify and support
best practice schemes to be used as prototypes for other local
authorities to follow.
Ambition for the future
51. A recent European Commission Communication Towards
a circular economy: zero waste programme for Europe[73]
identifies EU waste policy and targets as key drivers for shifting
to a circular economy. The Commission is proposing new targets
on waste recycling, including 70% for municipal waste by 2030.
Both Wales and Scotland already have national recycling targets
of 70% by 2025, but England does not. The Minister stressed the
importance of seeing the evidence base for any future European
targets to ensure that they are achievable[74]
and commented on the recent Communication as follows:
To move on to 70% in a further 10 years would
certainly be challenging. That is not to say it is impossible,
but it would certainly take a lot of different ways of doing things—different
ways of incentivising and pushing that.[75]
52. Evidence we received acknowledged that increased
recycling targets would be challenging and require some serious
Government intervention in order to meet them. Steve Lee, CEO
of CIWM, summarised his views as follows:
I am absolutely convinced that there is nothing
special about the United Kingdom or England that means that we
could not hit exactly the same sorts of recycling targets as other
European member states.[76]
53. Also included in the proposals is a ban on the
landfilling of recyclable waste (plastics, metals, glass, paper
and cardboard and biodegradable waste) with the objective to move
towards virtual elimination of landfilling municipal waste by
2030.[77] Whilst the
UK is on track to meet its current EU landfill diversion targets
by 2020, about 8.5 million tonnes (or 34%) of local authority
managed waste still went to landfill in 2012/13.[78]
54. In accordance with the waste hierarchy, we
encourage a move towards banning the landfilling of all recyclable
waste by 2025 as landfill should only be used for wastes for which
there is no better recovery option. However, any such proposals
must be signalled well in advance, with appropriate support and
alternative infrastructure put in place to guard against disproportionate
cost burdens.
55. Meeting a 70% recycling target in England
for all household waste by 2030 would be challenging but Defra
should aspire to achieve recycling rates at the maximum feasible
level, with or without European targets.
31 Defra, Statistics on waste managed by local authorities in England in 2012/13,
7 November 2013. Back
32
Defra, Statistics on waste managed by local authorities in England in 2012/13,
7 November 2013, page 2 Figure 1 Back
33
Defra [WME 0072] para 3.2 Back
34
Q327 Back
35
SITA UK [WME 005] para 5 Back
36
StatsWales, Local Authority Municipal Waste Management 2012-13 Back
37
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, Household waste summary reports
(2012) Back
38
Northern Ireland Local Authority Collected Municipal Waste Management
Statistics, Annual Report 2012/13 Back
39
In 2010, the average EU municipal recycling rate was 39%. Examples:
Romania recycled 1% of municipal waste, Portugal recycled 19%
of municipal waste, Denmark recycled 42% of municipal waste and
Germany recycled 62% of municipal waste. See European Environment
Agency, Managing municipal solid waste, EEA Report No 2/2013 Back
40
For example, Scotland calculated its recycling rates as local
authority collected municipal waste until 2010/11. However, since
2012 only household waste is included in the recycling rate calculation. Back
41
Q132 Back
42
Defra, Statistics on waste managed by local authorities in England in 2012/13,
7 November 2013. In 2012/13, Ashford Borough Council had the lowest
rate of recycling at 12% and Rochford District Council had the
highest recycling rate at 67%. Back
43
Q10 and Q194 Back
44
Local Government Association [WME 0078], para 4 Back
45
Q9 [Jacob Hayler] Back
46
Defra, Statistics on waste managed by local authorities in England in 2012/13,
7 November 2013 Back
47
Q135 Back
48
Q134 Back
49
See Babcock and Wilcox Volund [WME 004] Back
50
Q352 Back
51
Let's Recycle, Cost cutting sees councils drop food waste services,
17 July 2014 Back
52
Q203 Back
53
Environmental Services Association [WME 0045] para 10 Back
54
Q333 Back
55
Environmental Services Association [WME 0045] para 16, based on
data in the Department for Communities and Local Government, Local Authority Revenue Expenditure and Financing: 2012-13 Final Outturn, England
18 February 2014 Back
56
Keep Britain Tidy [WME 0057] para 4.2 Back
57
Defra [WME 0074] Back
58
Q101 [Julie Hill] Back
59
Q334 Back
60
Q6 Back
61
Q189 Back
62
Q190 Back
63
Q334 Back
64
Q7 [Phil Barton] and Q247 [Dr Church] Back
65
Resource Association, Where Does the Recycling Go?, June 2012
Back
66
Q63 Back
67
Q247 [Dr Colin Church] Back
68
Defra, Response to Freedom of Information Request, 17 April 2014.
166,797 tonnes of contaminated recyclate was rejected out of 10,199,392
tonnes of recyclate collected in 2008/09. Back
69
Defra [WME 0072] para 3.5 Back
70
Chartered Institution of Wastes Management [WME 0073] para 35
and Local Government Association [WME 0078], para 1 Back
71
Q7 [Phil Barton] Back
72
Local Government Association [WME 0078], para 1 Back
73
European Commission, Moving towards a circular economy Back
74
Q223 Back
75
Q249 Back
76
Q10 Back
77
European Commission, Questions and answers on the Commission Communication "Towards a Circular Economy" and the Waste Targets Review,
2 July 2014 Back
78
Defra, Statistics on waste managed by local authorities in England in 2012/13,
7 November 2013 Back
| 
