International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

the market such as waste sluices (each household has a signature key to open the
sluice and is charged accordingly). 200
9.8 Social and Distributional Consequences
In terms of distributional effects, one-person-households (who may be
disproportionately penalised by the charging structures) can legally reduce their
waste disposal costs in Germany by sharing services with a neighbour. In this
instance, only one household receives the fee-invoice for the shared wheeled bin.
In Schweinfurt, those who suffer from incontinence problems are given a reduction in
the fixed fee (the fixed component is as for 120l but they are given a 240l bin). The
weight-based and emptying fees are the same. Since the typical breakdown in the fee
is that fixed fees account for 60% of system costs, the reduction is significant (30% or
so of the usual fee).
9.9 Complementary Policies
“Pay as you throw” policies need a framework of suitable collection and recycling
services for an overall integrated and successful waste management system. This
may be specified in national or local governance as minimum service standards.
Policies that ensure residual waste is high in cost will help to encourage diversion of
material up the waste hierarchy.
9.10 Effect of the Policy on Pricing of Resources / Services
“Pay as you throw” systems are economically efficient and link the costs of waste
disposal with the progress in waste reduction and resource efficiency. Where
treatment and disposal of residual waste is high in cost, charges provide the stimulus
to reduce residual waste, leading to cost (and environmental) savings.
Due to the transparency of charging for the individual households, systems are
considered to be fair for the citizens as well as good for the environment. It is quite
typical for responsible politicians of engaged communities to discuss success stories
in the local media, thereby re-engaging citizens to actively participate in the system.
Flat rate per-person charging system means there are no incentives to avoid waste,
because charges are calculated based on the number of residents rather than the
quantity of disposed waste. With the introduction of the pay-per-volume system, waste
avoidance and separation are directly stimulated by financial incentives. The decision
to introduce the pay-per-volume model (‘waste producer pays’) thus follows both, the
cost recovery principle and the goal of waste prevention.
200 There may be lessons to be learned for Ireland in implementing such schemes. The message is that
pay-by-use does not need to be confined to detached and semi-detached houses, but can be deployed
at blocks of flats. However, it is very difficult to see why any private collection company would invest in
such systems if the investment might subsequently be used by an alternative contractor (owing to the
nature of competition in the market).
171
International Review of Waste Policy: Annexes