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

The intention to implement a landfill tax was announced in 1994 and this is
seemingly the beginning in a sharp rise in market share of recycled aggregate, before
the introduction in 1996. The impact of the tax on aggregate is less noticeable, but a
slightly sharper increase in recycled aggregate market share can be noticed in line
with the introduction of the tax. Broadly speaking, the impacts that the two taxes have
had on production of recycled aggregate are relative to the level at which the tax has
been set therefore reinforcing the argument that the landfill tax is the driving force
behind increased recycling rates for aggregate.
Figure 46-1: Effects of Landfill Tax and Aggregate Levy Introduction in the UK
£/tonne
659
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Introduction of
landfill tax
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Year
International Review of Waste Policy: Annexes
Introduction of
tax on aggregate
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
%
Landfill Tax (£/tonne)
Aggregate Tax (£/tonne)
Recycled Aggregates as a % of
the Total Aggregates (%)
Implementation of a tax on aggregate policy as part of a package which includes a
disposal tax is very important, despite the difficulties involved with attributing any
positive outcome to a specific measure. There appear to be no examples where
aggregates tax have been shown, in the literature, to single-handedly impact upon the
recycling rate of C&D waste in a significant manner. This is likely to be a reflection of:
� The low levels at which the tax is set, as a percentage of the product price; and
� Low elasticities where implemented.
In light of this it is possible to see a situation where aggregate tax could be influential,
without an underpinning disposal tax. However, raising the level of aggregate tax
could result in the level of tax being equal to or greater then the value of the product
which policy makers are likely to be tentative about.
Secondly, at the margin, to the extent that primary aggregate consumption is reduced,
the extent of quarrying operations may also be reduced. This implies that the
associated environmental costs are tackled, for example, the effect on local
biodiversity and communities though noise, dust and visual intrusion.