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

codes. For example, Korea introduced ‘The Act on the Promotion of Construction
Waste Recycling’ in 2005 which mandated use of recycled aggregate for construction
work contracted by a public agency. 838 Similarly, in Australia, state projects often
mandate the use of recycled materials for pavements, earthworks and drainage. 839
C&D recycling is also strongly incentivised by policy measures which discourage
disposal such as landfill tax, landfill bans and, specific to C&D, aggregates tax (see
Section 46.0). Without these policies providing such strong economic drivers for
construction and demolition companies to recycle it is unlikely that such high
recycling rates would be achieved within the sector. It is notable that in the US, where
disposal costs have tended to remain low, the targets being set are less ambitious
than those in Europe and Asia, possibly reflecting a concern that the measures might
imply additional costs to developers, rather than implying savings, as might be more
common in EU countries (where higher disposal costs apply).
The continuing problem in analysing the policies is how to attribute cause and effect
directly to one policy when they are working in parallel towards the same goal. The US
cases are of particular interest in this respect since there are fewer complementary
policies.
48.10 Effect of the Policy on Pricing of Resources / Services
The cost of demolition is likely to increase due to greater care that has to be taken
when source separating the demolished materials. However, savings are likely to be
made due to decreased disposal costs, especially in those countries where a landfill
tax is in place. In the case of Austria, one study compares the cost of treatment and
disposal of mixed/non separated waste with separated waste. The results show an
overall reduction of €11.5/m 3 in the cost of treatment and disposal of separated
waste, compared to mixed waste. 840
48.11 Evasion and Enforcement
For the deposit schemes in California fines can range from $100/day to $1,500/day
relative to the size of the development. Enforcement in these cases is undertaken by
the relevant city authority and no evidence was identified which indicated how
effective the enforcement of the system is.
838 Ministry of Environment Republic of Korea (2007) Act on the Promotion of Construction Waste
Recycling, Accessed 16 th January 2009,
http://eng.me.go.kr/docs/laws/laws.html?topmenu=D&cat=400
839 AEA Technology (2007) International Approaches to Waste Prevention and Minimisation, Final
Report for Defra (BREW), Accessed 15 th October 2008,
http://www.crwplatform.co.uk/conwaste/assets/Publications/2006-7-Reports/International-
Approaches-to-Waste-Prevention-and-Minimisation.pdf
840 C. Pladerer (2006) ‘Towards Sustainable Plastic Construction and Demolition Waste Management
in Europe’ Initiatives for a Sustainable Plastic C&D Waste Management in Europe; The Case of Austria,
Presentation by the Okologie Institut for the European Workshop, Brussels, 24 th April 2006.
687
International Review of Waste Policy: Annexes