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

policy has not been sufficiently responsive to deliver the desired outcome with any
certainty. The best example is the Landfill Directive targets, whilst those in the
National Biodegradable Waste Strategy. It is almost always the case that targets have
been set with the presumption that Regions would embed these within the Regional
Waste Management Plans. However, there is no meaningful monitoring of these
Plans, and even where the Plans show no sign of meeting their own targets, there is
no plan to apply any sanction in this respect. Even if the Regions were to be made
‘responsible’ for delivering on targets, to what extent would it be reasonable to
assume, for example, that they should be sanctioned for failure to meet the required
capture rate for commercial biowaste? The 2010 targets in the National
Biodegradable Waste Strategy look, today, worryingly difficult to achieve, yet no one
will ‘pay’, or face any other sanction, for failure in this regard because no one is
obviously responsible for the targets.
It seems clear that one lesson from this experience is that Ireland needs to change its
‘hands-off’ mentality where target setting is concerned, especially where these are
ones which have to be met as a matter of (European) law. In addition, where it seeks
to ensure that its own objectives are to be met, then where these are considered of
high relevance, these should be supported by policies which drive matters towards
meeting the target, and devolution of targets to relevant addressees as appropriate,
supported by sanctions for non-compliance. If no appropriate addressee exists, then
policy should adjust to meeting targets. In cases where targets seem likely to met with
ease, then consideration should be given to revising these to improve later
performance.
Ireland has to consider which targets to set, in the light of consideration of who
should have (can reasonably take) responsibility for them, and how sanctions will be
applied to ensure compliance. The role of Government should be to ensure that
targets are set and, where appropriate, made the responsibility of those who can be
made responsible for their delivery.
Target setting does need take into account:
871
• data availability, and
• availability of proxy information,
In some cases, it may be appropriate to highlight the desirability of specific targets
without setting them until more data and information is available. This is particularly
important in respect of, for example, targets set relative to an ongoing trend. Until this
trend is established, setting targets can lead to overly, or under-ambitious targets.
59.2 Objectives for Targets
The types of objectives which have been the focus of targets in other countries are:
1. Reducing Reducing waste waste production production (household waste, municipal waste, business
waste, public authority waste, commercial waste, industrial waste, hazardous
waste, construction and demolition waste);
These objectives find expression in terms of:
a. Requirements to reduce growth in a waste stream relative to ‘business
as usual’ trends (Flanders);
International Review of Waste Policy: Annexes