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

ecycling to meet its targets (such as in the UK) then the cheapest sources will be
addressed first. As recycling targets are increased then the cheaper – commercial
and industrial sectors – will have to be supplemented by household recycling, and the
higher cost of collection will increase the overall cost (which will then be passed onto
the consumer).
One report that examined the cost effectiveness of packaging recycling concluded
that amongst France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, Germany accrued the
greatest environmental benefits and recycling rates but at a higher cost per unit. 264
This is likely to be inevitable as the recycling performance improves as this
necessarily implies having to collect packaging from higher cost sources. It does not
necessarily imply that such collections should not be undertaken.
Indeed, the above analysis suggests that, not only in terms of principles, but also,
potentially in respect of performance, schemes which require producers to fund 100%
of the costs of collection of household packaging, and which require services to be
provided to all householders, are likely to deliver highest performance. Without strong
coverage of households, rate of recycling far in excess of 60% or so are likely to be
more difficult to achieve. The top 3 performing countries – Austria, Germany and
Belgium – also all make widespread use of PBU schemes at the household level.
Another message is that recycling of packaging does, where logistics are efficient,
deliver environmental benefits. These have been well documented in respect of GHG
emissions, though our analysis suggests they apply equally in terms of non-GHG air
pollutants (see Annex 63.0).
Key recommendations from the Packflow 2008 report for the UK were as follows: 265
i) Non Non-compliance Non compliance penalties penalties. penalties
The packaging regulations should be amended at the
earliest opportunity to introduce a mechanism for dealing with non-compliance by
imposing non-criminal tonnage-related financial penalty charges on compliance
schemes and producers that fail to meet their obligations. The revenue from these
charges should be used to enhance UK packaging recycling and recovery.
ii) Targets Targets. Targets . Business Targets for the years 2006 to 2008 should be calculated from
the estimates in the likely growth of obligated tonnage. In addition the Government
should adopt a process, ideally not requiring continual amendment of regulations, to
set 5-year rolling targets extending beyond 2008 and allowing targets to be managed
through regular annual review.
iii) Packaging Packaging obligation obligation and and recovery recovery data data. data There is a need for more accurate and
timely data and it is essential if sound target setting and review is to be
accomplished.
264 Taylor Nelson Sofres, 2000 Cost-Efficiency Of Packaging Recovery Systems- the Case Of France,
Germany, The Netherlands And The United Kingdom, Report for the European Commission, Feb 2000.
265 Adapted from the Packflow 2008 report,
http://www.valpak.co.uk/docs/packaging/packflow_2008_summary_report_recommendations.pdf
250
29/09/09