KEY ISSUE PAPER. Sustainable Solid Waste Management & the Green Economy. June, 2013

Transcription

1 KEY ISSUE PAPER Sustainable Solid Waste Management & the Green Economy June, 2013 ISWA the International Solid Waste Association is a global, independent and non-profit making association, working in the public interest to promote and develop sustainable and professional waste management worldwide

2 Prepared for ISWA by the General Secretariat in cooperation with the Scientific Technical Committee Lead Author: Rachael Williams With contributions from Marco Ricci David Newman Helmut Stadler Copyright ISWA 2013 all rights reserved ISWA the International Solid Waste Association is a global, independent and non-profit making association, working in the public interest to promote and develop sustainable and professional waste management worldwide

3 Sustainable Solid Waste Management and the Green Economy Table of Contents Introduction... 2 Contribution of Waste Management to the Green Economy... 3 Social sustainability... 3 Environmental sustainability... 4 Economic sustainability... 5 Benefits of a Green Economy approach to waste management... 8 Improved human health, poverty alleviation and other social impacts... 8 Environmental impacts Economic impacts Moving toward a Green Economy Conclusion

4 Introduction With all due respect, economic growth and urbanisation has brought some positive developments in global welfare; such as important successes toward reaching millennium development goals in education and health. However the rate at which we produce, consume and generate waste with disregard for resources, climate and the environment outweighs any advancement we have managed to make thus far for resource efficient, low carbon and environmentally considerate economic growth. Parallel to growing resource scarcity and environmental degradation is increasing social hardship; the FAO estimate that close to 1 in 7 people in the world are undernourished. More than half of the global population live in substandard urban settlements. In the aftermath of the global economic crisis, now more than ever it is necessary for concerted action to decouple the economic system from resource depletion, CO 2 and waste generation. The term green economy was first coined in a report prepared in 1989 for the United Kingdom Government by a group of renowned environmental economists, entitled Blueprint for a Green Economy. In 2008, the term was brought back to the limelight by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in connection with policy discussions amidst concerns of a global recession. UNEP developed the idea of green stimulus packages and identified specific areas where large scale public investment could kick start a green economy. This turn of events inspired several governments to implement significant green stimulus packages as part of their economic recovery efforts. There is no internationally agreed definition of green economy. Widely used is the UNEP definition an economy that results in improved human well-being and reduced inequalities over the long term, while not exposing future generations to significant environmental risks and ecological scarcities. The green economy is based on the model of sustainable development and the principles of ecological economics. A core principle is to create a low carbon economy and decouple resource depletion and waste generation from economic growth. The green economy gives value to ecological services and natural capital which are externalities in classical economics, being undervalued or not valued at all. The green economy encourages investment in ways that reduce carbon emissions, optimise resource use, and prevent loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. The recognised sectors or economic areas that may contribute to the green economy include: renewable energy, green buildings, clean transportation, water management, waste management and land management. Sustainable waste management complements the Green Economy concept especially when one considers the pivotal role of the waste sector in creating a low carbon, circular economy whereby the generation of waste and harmful substances is minimised, the materials being reutilised, recycled or recovered are maximised, and disposed waste is minimised; whereby all of these processes are managed to avoid damage to the environment and human health. Current waste management practice varies considerably across the globe; much development and therefore funding is needed to raise the lagging practices to an acceptable level. According to the World Bank developing economies spend $46 billion a year on waste management, whereas around double this amount is needed. By 2025 the cost to obtain minimum waste standards is anticipated to increase to around 150 billion. At the same time as much funding across the waste sector is needed 2

5 for adequate infrastructure, equipment and provision of services; policies for stimulating growth in low carbon and sustainable development are gaining strength. The waste sector needs to grasp this opportunity to contribute to a greener economy and sustainable development thereby stimulating in a positive way the current economic downturn. Fig. 1 Waste Management in a circular economy Contribution of Waste Management to the Green Economy In the current economic climate which is strongly reliant on the utilisation of non-renewable fossil fuels and exploitation of natural resources for economic growth, the waste sector can offer net carbon savings and a resource efficient contribution to the economy. The waste sector can also support local economies to become more resource independent which is increasingly important given that raw materials are not distributed evenly across the globe and competition for access to natural resources has already lead to serious conflicts. In order for a sector to contribute to the green economy the 3 pillars of sustainable development: social, environmental and economic sustainability need to first be met. Social sustainability The waste sector needs to ensure as one aspect of its bottom line, that minimum social conditions are met, such as safe working conditions for employees and also the health and safety levels of the greater community. An informal material recovery operation for example where workers dismantle 3

6 electrical equipment without appropriate protective clothing or environmental measures in place is a health, safety and environmental risk. However in addition to meeting occupational health and safety levels, employment in the green economy needs also to be concerned with other social factors such as the aspects of child labour, social protection and freedom of association. Environmental sustainability The contribution the waste sector can make to the environmental aspect of the green economy needs to be considered from a sectoral approach as well as at the operational /industry level. The waste sector as a whole needs to have an overarching aim of resource efficiency and observe the waste hierarchy (applied within the framework of Life Cycle Analysis) to contribute to a green economy. The waste sector needs to work in synergy with the production & manufacturing sectors to promote the production of goods and materials with minimal hazardous contents, resulting in the least amount of waste ultimately generated i.e. maximising the use, reuse and recycling potential of products. The waste sector also has a responsibility to promote sustainable consumption, by addressing the consumer side, such as through the implementation of waste prevention strategies. At the operation or industry level the technologies and practices applied need to ensure that there is no or minimised adverse impact on the environment for example putting in place effective measures to protect against pollution to land, waterways or air and capture of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. Operations such as reuse and recycling, including composting of biowaste to obtain organic matter and essential plant nutrients, appear to clearly contribute to the green economy and provide green jobs (provided certain environmental and social standards are met). However the performance of individual operations must also be considered. Recycling covers a wide scope of operations and results in varying qualities of materials and substances, for example the process might result in producing an inferior quality of material i.e. downcycling which is less ideal than producing material at the same level of quality. The combustion of waste through Thermal Treatment means that materials are lost from the circular economy, but if energy is efficiently harnessed in parallel and used for fuel, heating or electricity, thereby replacing the need for fossil fuels, there is generally a net contribution to a low carbon economy. Materials of sufficient quality need to be recovered during waste to energy processes where possible such as land applicable Digestate from Anaerobic Digestion. In the context of sustainable development and the green economy it is important that waste treatment operations don t compete with material reutilisation and recycling, so that materials are not unnecessarily lost from the system. There still remains the need within the waste system (and the wider production and consumption system) for the safe disposal of materials and substances that can no longer be reused, recycled or recovered. Therefore disposal operations so long as they don t compete with material recycling and recovery operations may also fit within the green economy framework. The waste sector should aim to reach waste disposal rates that are as low as possible. 4

7 Economic sustainability The waste sector as a whole needs to fulfil its responsibility to cost effectively provide an increasingly extensive range of secondary materials of a high quality, thereby supporting the decoupling of resource consumption from economic growth and waste generation. The waste sector needs to further contribute to economic sustainability through the establishment of new enterprises and subsequently more jobs, affordable access to carbon neutral energy, the gain of economic value from materials otherwise considered waste, and cost savings for waste disposal through minimising the amount of residual waste. Treatment operations for reuse, recycling and recovery need to be cost effective, so that materials are increasingly recycled and recovered above being disposed. Furthermore so that secondary materials and substances can be competitively priced relative to raw materials. For the waste sector to contribute positively to the economy, funds and investment need to be channelled to the development of appropriate practices, infrastructure, equipment and services. Economic investments in the waste sector need to result in infrastructure and services that are affordable to operate and maintain for the mid and long term, that meanwhile account for environmental and social impacts. Economic investments should where possible encourage the financing of local technologies and enterprises; due to procurement law in some regions like the EU, the policy of financing local technologies and enterprises is not always legally possible. The development of infrastructure needs to be considered from an integrated perspective, i.e. so that there is not an undesired result, such as the diversion of potentially recyclable materials to maintain waste treatment operations, like landfilling or thermal treatment. The economic investment needed for waste management may seem huge, particularly when considering the $40 billion gap in developing economies. Comprehensive waste services however can be and are in many developed economies provided at comparably very low per capita costs (more or less equivalent to the cost of a cup of coffee per day). The costs to provide waste management services typically amounts to around 3-15% of a city s budget or 0.1 to 0.7% of per capita GDP. 5

8 Fig. 2 The Waste Hierarchy according to EU Waste Framework Directive To summarise, the waste sector as a whole and its individual operations have the potential to contribute in numerous ways to a green economy, however to do so minimum social, environmental and economic standards and practices need to be met and upheld. The waste hierarchy (provided life cycle analysis is applied) indicates the relative contribution of different waste practices to the green economy, those higher up in the hierarchy are a stronger shade of green and therefore more strongly contribute than those at the bottom. In the absence of sustainable waste management practices, the waste sector has rather the opposite impact on the economy leading to environmental destruction, unnecessary running down of natural capital stocks, avoidable GHG emissions, and negative health and social impacts ultimately resulting in a net cost to the economic system. 6

9 Fig. 3 Waste Management and the Green Economy sustainable waste management 7

10 Benefits of a Green Economy approach to waste management Improved human health, poverty alleviation and other social impacts i. Health and Safety It is widely recognised that poorly managed waste can adversely impact human health and safety of both waste workers and the wider public in many ways. This could be from coming into direct contact depending on the type of waste and what it is composed of (such as hazardous and healthcare waste), associated with the operation or treatment process or from the release of harmful substances into the environment (air, water and land). In Mexico it is reported that the average life expectancy of a waste worker is 39 years while the normal life expectancy is 69. Source: Solid Waste Management in the World Cities, UNHABITAT 2010 In places where collection is lacking and there is no or little formal sorting or recycling, waste pickers make a livelihood from gathering re-saleable materials, working and sometimes living in conditions that are not only detrimental to their own health and safety, but also to the health of the wider public who come into contact with them. Poor waste management is associated with increased public health and private medical costs and loss of productivity due to injury or sick days from work. The implementation of even basic waste management practices such as collecting waste and containing it in an area away from the public can bring health and safety benefits, for example the establishment of sanitary landfills is associated with a decrease in rats and mosquitos which are vectors of diseases such as leptospirosis, malaria, dengue fever respectively. Addressing the health and safety aspect of waste management leads therefore to improvements to public health, safety and minimisation of the associated cost burden. This involves confronting the upstream effects, such as reducing the hazardous substances in products; minimising the health and safety risks involved with waste management and treatment operations; and the long term impact and cumulative effects on the environment as a final sink of pollutants. ii. Poverty alleviation, job creation and improved employment conditions Some of the poorest of society are reliant on waste picking for their livelihood; this work is often associated with poor conditions such as child labour, risky health and safety conditions, and discrimination by waste traders etc. The establishment of a reuse and recycling industry is a recognised pathway leading toward substantial job creation and employment opportunities. The establishment of a formal reuse or recycling industry needs to integrate the waste pickers (informal sector) so that their livelihood is not lost meanwhile improving their social conditions such as safer working conditions, social security, ceasing child labour etc. 8

11 Job Creation through improved Waste Management Waste-Management District: Priula Consortium Northern Italy, population of inhabitants The Priula WMD is one of Italy's most advanced cases in MSW management, reaching high levels of source separation by means of intensive source-separation with curb side collection and applying PAYT charges. When switching from traditional commingled collection of MSW towards intensive source-separation schemes (at the doorstep) the Consortium created an increase in work places of close to 81% in 3 years, while reducing at the same time the amounts of residual waste from 39% of total MSW to 9,2% of total MSW. Hence the total MSW management cost (i.e. collection, transport and disposal/recycling of waste) remained almost unchanged. Source: M. Galli, Presentation of the Priula Consortium, M. Ricci, Comparison of PAYT charges in 2 Italian cases, Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza, Employment gains through Recycling 12 million people are currently employed in recycling in the 3 major economies of- Brazil, China and the United States. Sorting and processing recyclables alone sustain ten times more jobs than land filling or incineration on a per tonne basis. Source: UNEP, 2011, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication According to a report by the European Environment Agency the overall employment related to the recycling of materials in European countries has increased steadily from 422 per million inhabitants in 2000 to 611 in This represents an increase of 45 % between 2000 and Persons per million inhabitants employed in recycling across EU, Norway and Switzerland Source: EEA (2011), Earnings, jobs and innovation: the role of recycling in a green economy 9

12 Employment gains related to Bio-waste treatment Italy According to CIC (the Italian Composting and Biogas Consortium) the Italian composting and AD sector has a turnover of 640M /yr, including the cost for collecting Bio-waste and the management of composting and ADplants. CIC estimates that about 3000 working places have been created between the late '90s and today for managing composting plants in Italy Source: 20 years of CIC, anniversary publication, 2012, Rome The decentralised composting sector in Austria (composting in cooperation with Farmers) has created 1 new job for every tonnes of Bio-waste separately collected and composted. This applies to the situation of Lower Austria Source: F. Amlinger iii. Improved Public Amenity When waste is not collected from households or is poorly managed in disposal sites, in addition to health implications, this is often associated with odours, visual impact and general rundown of public spaces and landscapes. Disamenity leads to loss of land value from an economic perspective, in addition and more difficult to quantify, it is also recognised that access to green spaces is linked to quality of life factors such as physical and mental well-being. iv. Public Engagement and Participation Public engagement and participation is an important aspect of sustainable waste management and creates a positive feedback loop. On the one side a recycling system relies on the support of households to separate or make available recyclable materials. This in turn offers the authorities responsible for managing the waste, free access to material for recycling. Surveys reveal that in general people feel good about contributing to the recycling process. 10

13 Environmental impacts i. Resource Efficiency When materials and products are disposed as waste they result in a net loss of natural resources that can no longer be utilised (i.e. depletion of natural capital). Not only does this result in the loss of raw materials, but also depending on the processing required often leads to associated increased losses of water and fossil fuels. The energy savings made from recycling different materials can be up to the following amounts: aluminium (95%), copper (85%), plastics (90%), steel (74%), lead (65%), and paper (40%). Producing steel from recycled scrap can lead to an 86% reduction in air pollution. Producing paper from recycled stock instead of virgin pulp reduces water pollution by 35 % and air pollution by 74 %. Recycling of textiles also contribute to considerable energy savings and international trade. Source: UNEP, 2011, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. Below is a chart showing the growth in global resource extraction of a number of different materials since Over the same time GDP has been increasing and so too has the population. The growth in GDP has been steeper than resource extraction, indicating some decoupling however in absolute terms the bottom line is that resource extraction is continuing to grow. Resource scarcity particularly of rare earth metals is a major issue and is reflected in growing prices for raw materials. 11

14 Fig. 4 Global Resource extraction between 1980 and 2008 Source: Sustainable Europe Research Institute (SERI), 2011 One of the fastest growing waste streams observed in Europe (and most of the world) is for Waste Electrical & Electronic Equipment (WEEE), which typically contains rare earth metals such as gold, silver, and palladium (usually found in printed circuit boards) as well as special metals, such as indium and tantalum. Although the composition in each product is small, due to the huge volumes of WEEE being discarded (around 10 million tonnes annually in Europe) the total amounts of these metals that could potentially be recovered is significant. Viewing waste as a resource and avoiding the final disposal of as many materials and substances as possible, thereby contributing to resource efficiency and a cycle economy is one of the most valuable benefits that the waste sector can contribute to the economy. 30% of the worldwide demand for resources in 2030 could be met through available resource improvements and the estimated global economic benefit of resource efficiency improvements could eventually be as high as $3.7 trillion each year. Source: McKinsey & Company (2011). Resource Revolution: Meeting the world's energy, materials, food and water needs. Due to the fact that considerable stocks of raw materials are contained for extended periods of time in built infrastructure, such as buildings and roads means that despite significant advances in recycling it is still unlikely that enough resources to meet production demands can be made available through recycling alone. This further emphasises the importance of maximising the reuse and recycling potential of materials. 12

15 ii. Environmental protection Inappropriate waste management can result in environmental costs associated with pollution of the air, land and water bodies. Leading to the destruction of ecosystems and causing damage to flora and fauna resulting in a loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Uncollected litter can additionally amplify or cause flooding (bringing associated costs) from blocked drains. As with the social costs burdened on society, the environmental costs can be costly and are also often unaccounted for. Many countries are however quite aware of the environmental costs involved with the remediation of land from past poorly disposed of waste. The remediation of poorly constructed landfills or dumpsites has and continues to cost governments significant sums of money globally. In Austria for the 13 year period between 1989 until 2002, about 700 Million from landfill taxes were collected and subsequently spent to cover the costs of more than 140 land remediation projects. This gives a result of approximately 5 Million per project. Source: European Environmental Agency, 2011 The waste management sector has the opportunity to minimise the costs to society associated with waste related environmental damage, therefore maintaining biodiversity and valuable ecosystem services. A United Nations study carried out in 2008 calculated that human use of environmental goods and services (ecosystem services) equated to around $ 6.6 trillion USD in environmental costs, equal to 11% of the global economy. Source: UN-backed Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) and UNEP Finance Initiative, study 2008 iii. Climate The waste sector despite making a reasonably low contribution to global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (estimated at around 5%) has the opportunity to make significant net reductions. For example, since 1990, the EU has reduced its emissions by 31 %, mainly via reduced methane emissions from landfills (EEA, 2011). In most developing countries the potential for net reductions is believed to be even larger. The waste sector can contribute to reducing GHG emissions across the whole waste sector, such as from closing of open dumpsites, capturing methane emissions from landfills, composting of biological waste, and implementing efficient logistics and transport for waste collection. Furthermore the recycling of materials results in a lower energy use compared to extraction and production from raw materials. The recycling of nutrients and carbon from biowaste leads to net carbon sequestration due to the reason above and also improving the capture rate of carbon in the soil. Waste to Energy replaces the need for fossil fuels thereby creating carbon neutral heating, fuel and electricity. 13

16 Economic impacts i. Waste Management Costs Costs most commonly associated with waste management are the capital costs of infrastructure and equipment and the labour costs of those employed within the system. The costs can be considerably high especially for a city or region that has to establish new infrastructure. The costs relate to the type and performance of the system; local factors; and the amount of waste that is generated and therefore ideally the amounts collected and treated. Financing of waste management is an on-going challenge for many developing economies. In many developing economies, municipalities have insufficient budgets and access to finance or funding to carry out basic solid waste management operations such as collection and safe disposal. The current policy trend is moving toward investment in projects and infrastructure that promote the green economy concept, particularly for low carbon growth. Below is an overview of the stimulus funds established by different countries in response to the economic crisis in The green fund relative to the total stimulus fund, ranges significantly from country to country. Table 1. International green stimulus packages COUNTRY South Korea TOTAL STIMULUS FUND USDBN $ TOTAL STIMULUS FUND AS A % OF GDP FUND PERIOD YEARS GREEN STIMULUS FUND USDBN $ GREEN FUND AS A % OF TOTAL STIMULUS FUND % % 2.8% Australia % % 1.2% China % % 1.1% France % % 0.13% Japan % 2009 onwards United Kingdom % 0.36% % % 0.24% Germany % % 0.21% United States % 10 years % 0.24% GREEN STIMULUS FUND AS A % OF GDP Source: HSBC Bank plc, Taking Stock of the Green Stimulus, November 2009 In addition to governmentally driven green stimulus packages, there are a number of international and regional funds aimed at green growth. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) the largest public funder of projects to improve the global environment funded around $75 million toward waste related projects in 2012 from a total of $1.5 billion. The EU eco-innovation initiative (EU, 2011) is making nearly 200 million euro available to finance projects in the period and recycling is one of the main areas receiving funding. Compared to the total amount of donor funds awarded to green projects, these amounts are shamefully and unreasonably low. However with a raising awareness of the significant contribution that the waste sector can make to the economy this potential could and should be increased. 14

17 In a system where waste is managed as a resource, the costs of waste management can be offset by economic benefits, these are outlined below. The global waste market, from collection to recycling, is estimated at US$ 410 billion a year, not including the considerable informal segment in developing countries. Source: UNEP, 2011, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. Waste management and recycling industries in the EU had a turnover of 145 billion in 2008, representing around 2 million jobs. Full compliance with EU waste policy could create an additional extra jobs within the EU and an extra annual turnover of 42 billion Source: Europa Press release (2012) Getting gold from garbage. IP/12/369 ii. Waste Prevention Through the implementation of waste prevention and waste minimisation practices economic savings can be made across the entire production and manufacturing sector. This can be from directly avoiding unnecessary waste, weight or volume reductions, substituting raw materials with recycled materials and finding innovative ways to use material that would otherwise end up as waste. Table 2. Potential Savings if best in class weights are adopted, UK example Product (sold through traditional grocery retailers) Packaging weight (tonnes) Reduction if all moved to the Best in Class weight (tonnes) Potential cost reduction to business ( ) Potential carbon savings (tonnes of CO2 equivalent) Wine (bottles) 310, ,024 3,150,000 75,000 Champagne & Sparkling Wine 48,573 19, ,000 13,000 Cereals (boxed) 40,686 11, ,000 17,000 Carbonated (cans) 47,725 10,816 3,710,000 50,000 Beer (cans) 29,276 10,798 3,700,000 50,000 Fruit juice (cartons) 51,144 10, ,000 23,000 Coffee (jars) 36,119 9, ,000 6,000 Ketchup table sauce 21,222 7,720 N/A 23,000 Whisky (bottles) 28,347 6, ,000 4,000 Eggs (tray & boxed) 12,854 6, ,000 10,000 Source: DEFRA (2009) Making the most of Packaging A study conducted by DEFRA estimates that on average, 50% of the cost of certain packaging can be saved by incorporated recycled materials, whether arising from site or from offsite sources. Source: DEFRA (2009) Making the most of Packaging 15

18 iii. Recycling and Recovery Waste itself is an economic concept given that it implies that resources are not being used efficiently. When resources are produced and used in ways that lead to their disposal as waste, the loss of those resources is an economic loss. When resources can be saved, reused, recovered or used more efficiently, there is a net economic gain. The materials recovery industry makes a significant contribution to the economy. The figure below shows the materials recovery industry turnover for the UK and the significant development in recent years. Fig. 5 Industry turnover from Materials Recovery, UK Source: Office for National Statistics, UK Plastic Europe reports that the European Plastic Recycling industry is currently comprised of: 1,000 companies 30,000 employees 3 million tonnes of produced plastics 2 billion turnover Source: Facts and Figures Recycling and recovery of materials also supports a countries resource security. Many valuable resources (particularly rare metals) are asymmetrically distributed across the globe and are predominately concentrated in a few areas. Conversely the flow of goods (and therefore materials) is global, meaning that access to secondary materials can replace some of the need to import raw 16

19 materials. Gold for example is only mined in significant quantities in around 20 countries; however gold can be obtained through the recycling of WEEE. In the same way that value is gained from materials embedded in waste, transforming waste efficiently into energy in the form of heat, fuel or electricity also results in an economic benefit. In 2008 the Waste to Energy market was estimated at US$ 19.9billion and according to forecasts, the market is anticipated to grow by 30 per cent by Source: Argus Research Company, Independent International Investment Research and Pipal Research Group The market for waste incineration plants continues to grow steadily. Between 2007 and 2011, the worldwide installed annual capacity increased by about 12 per cent. This growth is anticipated to accelerate in the next five years to an installed annual capacity increase by 21 per cent by By then, operational capacities will amount to about 300 million annual tons. Source: Ecoprog (2012).The World Market for Waste Incineration Plants 2012/2013 iv. Residual Waste When residual waste is minimised, through waste prevention measures, recycling and recovery operations this results in less costs for residual waste management, from collection through to disposal. This is significant because disposal of waste results in a net economic cost, whereas when waste is considered a resource (material or energy) value can be obtained from it, offsetting the management costs. v. Other There are also other indirect economic benefits: for example land may be put to more productive purposes if not used for disposal; and land values will be higher where it is possible to control or avoid significant odour and unsightliness associated with poorly managed wastes. Absence of litter and pollution can also lead to economic opportunities such as for other markets to develop like tourism. A study by the New Zealand Ministry of the Environment in 2001 calculated that a degraded environment could result in a loss of $938 Million NZD from the tourism sector. Source: MfE (2001) Valuing New Zealand s Clean Green Image 17

20 Fig. 6 The 3 Pillars of the Green Economy and their associated benefits 18

21 Moving toward a Green Economy Moving towards a green economy necessitates understanding the value of waste as a resource, the value in protecting human health and the environment and the value in improving the working conditions of employees. This is essential for all economies. Developed economies need to find ways to curb unsustainable consumption, develop new efficiencies in resource and energy use and the recyclability of materials. Developed economies also need to take responsibility for the resource demands they place on developing and transitional economies, so that these economies can develop without depleting their natural capital, harming their environment and exploiting their people. This means promoting on a global scale sustainable consumption and production patterns, implementing low-carbon and resource efficient solutions, improved employment conditions and use of technologies that protect the environment. Market forces alone will not drive sustainable waste management or a green economy; typically market forces encourage the favouring of the cheapest option which may involve no management at all or open dumping of waste. The waste sector needs to not only think about production/manufacture and consumption patterns but also in terms of trade and distribution. The development and implementation of national and local waste management strategies, policies, legislation and financial incentives that focus on a life cycle (cradle to cradle) approach; decoupling of waste generation from economic development; low carbon development; resource efficiency; and environmentally sound waste management can support the transition to a greener economy. However it can be a long and costly step to make this transition. The availability of significant funds and investment in infrastructure and services that supports green economy principles is needed. Currently only a small amount of international donor funds goes toward establishing waste management infrastructure and services where they are most needed. Investment may be boosted by donor funds and private public partnerships, bearing in mind the need to consider the local situation and the ability to maintain and operate new technology. Therefore investment in the most suitable and appropriate technology, not necessarily the most advanced is essential. Research and development to find more and innovative ways to produce goods that result in less waste creation, are ultimately more recyclable and require less scarce materials and hazardous materials is also needed. WEEE for example is the fastest growing waste stream in Europe (and effectively worldwide); not so long ago it was largely landfilled because it was not cost effective to recycle. The WEEE Directive 2012/19/EU sets collection targets from 2019 onwards at 85% of WEEE generated, meaning more development in recycling will be needed. Recycling operations need to ensure sufficient quality standards are reached (that encourage the recycling of material to the same quality rather than the down-cycling to a less valuable material) and that the recycling efficiency and actual recycling rates (the output from recycling operations relative to what enters the facility) are accurately quantified. 19

22 Fair market conditions where social and environmental externalities are accounted for need to exist, such as through the accurate pricing of raw materials. The implementation of standards for work safety, employment, quality and environmental such as those set by the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO); and encouraging transparent sustainability reporting by the industry can also support this transition. New job creation with social conditions (labour policies)such as formalising and regularising employment for waste pickers, protecting them from exploitation by middlemen, protecting the rights of children, improving the conditions of access and of operation, and ensuring that waste pickers receive a fair return on their labour are much needed. International organisations like ISWA can and do support the transition to a Green Economy by promoting sustainable waste management worldwide, through influencing policy and providing information on best available technologies, transfer of expertise, necessary skills and know-how. Conclusion Globally there are considerable differences in waste management practices. In some regions, formal services for the collection of waste are absent (or limited) and when waste is collected the prevailing practice is uncontrolled open dumping causing social, health and environmental risks. To quantify the situation, around half of the world s population has no access to waste services and around a ¼ of the world s waste is wantonly dumped. At the other end of the scale highly sophisticated integrated and sustainable waste management practices exist where waste is considered and used as a resource and only very small quantities of waste remains and is safely disposed. Sound investment in waste management infrastructure, equipment and services that support the local economy, utilise local expertise and minimise environmental and social costs can be costly, but their absence can be equally as costly. A poorly managed waste system imposes social and environmental costs and economic losses, whereas a properly functioning resource management/waste system brings benefit across all of these elements. Many of the best strategies for waste reduction, recycling and composting produce benefits for a quadruple bottom line they require less capital investment, create more jobs and sustain more livelihoods, protect public health, provide secondary material to production processes and minimise CO 2 emissions. For the waste sector to support the progression toward a Green Economy not only do we need to maximise resource efficiency giving consideration to the whole lifecycle of products (cradle to cradle approach) but also the way we value enterprises where factors such as the creation of sustainable employment and protection of the environment are valued alongside economic growth and profit. 20

23 Related ISWA Publications Waste Prevention, Waste Minimization and Resource Management - ISWA Key Issue Paper ISWA/UNEP Joint thematic paper on waste and climate change 21