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

For each indicator decoupling was calculated by comparing the regression of the
pressure indicator (in this case waste production) with the economic indicator (in this
case GDP) over the same period. Confidence intervals have been added to see if the
indicator really is statistically sound above zero, which was the case until 2001. From
2002 onwards, positive decoupling cannot with statistical certainty be proved for the
Flemish region.
Figure 1-1: Decoupling Indicator for Industrial Waste in Flanders
In principle, the above formulation might be a little simplistic and a more general form
might be:
r =
10
( ∂m
) ∂t
( ∂a
)
29/09/09
∂t
This effectively compares the rate at which the pressure variable is changing over
time relative to the rate of change in the economic variable.
The somewhat hackneyed view that waste prevention ‘cannot be measured’ can be
seen to be little more than an excuse not to act, or not to evaluate policies which,
after all, are the ones which ought to be given the highest priority, both because of
their potential to reduce the waste of ‘other factors of production’ (solid wastes are
often a symptom of other forms of waste), and because of their likely positive impact
in terms of the environment and sustainable development. Finally, waste prevention
measures frequently give rise to cost savings to businesses and consumers,
suggesting that policy is failing to move these actors to a situation where waste is
considered to be a variable cost in the production process.