Professional Documents
Culture Documents
WR1401 8670 FRP
WR1401 8670 FRP
WR1401 8670 FRP
RESEARCH PROJECT
Final Report
October 2009
1
SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................ 4
SUGGESTED ACTIONS................................................................................................................. 7
2
Table of Figures Page
Table of Abbreviations
3
SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT BRIEF
The British Standards Institution (BSI) has been asked by the Department for
Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and by the Department for Environment Food
and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) to conduct a strategic review of standards in waste and
resource management with the aims of:
The scope of this project is limited to solid waste only. The area of waste handling is
not included in this research. It must be recognised however that the disposal of
solid waste has a clear impact on carbon and carbon emissions. Carbon is the
subject of much BSI standardisation activity and the relevant standards are detailed
in this report.
PROJECT METHODOLOGY
The project has been split into three stages.
Stage 1
Conduct desktop research to identify current formal standards
In order to identify current formal standards in waste minimisation and prevention we
conducted a desktop research exercise using standards databases and online tools
available in-house. We used the following keywords or combination of keywords to
conduct our search:
waste;
commercial waste;
industrial waste;
waste minimisation (and waste minimization);
waste prevention;
4
waste management;
solid waste;
refuse;
refuse disposal;
resource management;
recycling;
reuse;
facilities management;
procurement.
We worked closely with both DEFRA and BIS to ensure that their stakeholder
contacts were included in the list. On 1st June 2009 DEFRA emailed the combined
DEFRA/BIS/BSI list of 144 stakeholders from 123 different organizations to inform
them about the project and to provide details of the stakeholder workshop that took
place on July 16th. A list of the organizations that were invited to the workshop can
be found in Appendix 3.
A copy of the letter that was sent out to stakeholders can be found in Appendix 4.
Stage 2
During stage 2 of the project we engaged with stakeholders in order to understand
their views on formal and informal standards in waste and specifically how formal
standards can assist businesses in waste minimisation and prevention.
Stage 2 included:
an online survey;
a bespoke industry workshop.
5
The online survey was sent out to approximately 200 stakeholders. A copy of the
online survey can be found in Appendix 5. The results of the survey are included in
this report.
Stage 3
This final report was prepared, which includes the findings from stages one and two,
as well as suggested actions that will help develop a strategic standardization
framework in the future. The potential benefits of the suggested actions and
proposed next steps have also been detailed in this report.
RESEARCH LIMITATIONS
There are trade associations and environmental groups in the area of waste all over
the world. The research that we conducted was predominantly focused on identifying
relevant information that is published in English. Our standards research was also
predominantly focused on standards published in English.
As with all research projects, this piece of work is somewhat limited by the timeframe
in which the project had to be completed.
KEY FINDINGS
We did not identify any cross industry formal standards that have the specific
purpose of guiding businesses and other organizations to reduce, prevent or
minimise their waste;
There are formal standards that relate to waste in other ways, including waste
management, recycling and reuse;
There are formal standards in facilities management that address waste, but
these tackle the areas of waste management and waste handling;
We found that trade associations and environmental groups publish guideline
documents that businesses can use to help reduce waste. However, we found
that these documents generally present high level recommendations only. For
example, Earthshare in the United States recommends that businesses
should attempt to reduce paper waste. However they do not provide any detail
of how businesses could achieve this. Most trade associations and
environmental groups propose that a waste audit should be carried out as a
first step in identifying ways to reduce waste;
77% of stakeholders who completed the stakeholder survey stated that
standards can assist their organization to improve its waste management. In
the survey we asked a number of standards based questions in the following
areas: waste management, waste reduction, waste prevention, recycling and
reuse. There is a low level of awareness, but a high level of importance and a
desire for new standards in these areas. Stakeholder opinion was split as to
whether new standards in these areas should be generic or sector specific;
In the survey, we asked for stakeholder opinion on informal standards in the
same areas. There was a very low level of awareness and their effectiveness
in helping to improve waste (management, reduction, prevention, recycling
and reuse) within an organization was rated as ‗low‘. However, there was a
high level of importance attached to informal standards;
6
In the workshop, stakeholders thought that standards could assist businesses
and other organizations in reducing and minimising their waste;
Stakeholders believe that there is potential value in a waste minimisation
standard, however there was much stronger stakeholder support for broader
standardisation activity to support a wider resource efficiency cycle;
There was strong stakeholder support for a benchmarking standard to help
businesses benchmark their waste performance against others;
Stakeholders believe that there is confusion and a lack of awareness relating
to the documentation and advice that is available to businesses from
environmental organizations and trade associations. As evidenced during the
desktop research there is much information available to businesses (for
example from Business Link and Solutions For Business that is the new "one
stop" Government-sponsored web portal for business support on waste).
However, many organisations do not know where to find this information and
this was cited as a key barrier that prevents businesses from improving their
waste prevention activities;
There is an opportunity for BSI to improve its marketing and communication of
existing standards to businesses. 81% of stakeholders who completed the
survey answered that they do not believe there is sufficient awareness and
uptake of formal standards and that awareness levels across SMEs are
particularly low. Following discussions with both DEFRA and BIS, it has been
agreed that, where appropriate, BSI will work more closely with relevant
Government organizations that can provide assistance in ensuring greater
exposure for formal standards in the area of waste and resource efficiency.
SUGGESTED ACTIONS
Section 4 of this report details the suggested actions. The first two have been
highlighted as priority actions:
- Engage with waste producing businesses to seek validation for the
resource efficiency cycle concept (as detailed in Section 4) and
produce a roadmap for future standardization activity around the
resource efficiency cycle;
- Confirm the viability of a waste performance benchmarking standard
for businesses through further engagement with waste producing
organizations;
- Development of a glossary document for waste and resource
management;
- Development of a BSI guidance document embracing best practice
from existing sources of information to help organizations develop and
implement their waste minimisation and resource efficiency policy;
We have provided a table that summarises the suggested actions and details
who could take these forward, funding options, timeframes and the expected
benefits.
7
SECTION 2 – RESULTS FROM DESKTOP RESEARCH
STANDARDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN USE
Using standards databases and online tools available in-house, we completed a
desktop research exercise to identify standards that relate directly to waste in the
commercial environment. The results of this search have been categorised into the
areas below. A summary list of all the current formal standards identified can be
found in Appendix 1.
BACKGROUND
In reviewing all of the existing standards that have relevance to the study, it is clear
that the majority are national standards. There is very limited documentation
emanating from European bodies.
This can be ascribed to the fact that standards are created voluntarily and by
consensus; i.e. by interested parties who want certain standards to be developed.
Both industry and commerce tend to provide input into standards. If there are no
standards in a particular area it could be for a number of reasons, for example, the
subject area has not been addressed, or there is a lack of interest/need for such a
standard. In the case of waste minimisation, no formal proposal has been put
forward to CEN and therefore no waste minimisation standards have been
developed in the past.
The European position is that the driver behind the vast majority of standards is the
New Approach Directive which involves the principle of ‗co-regulation‘. The
European Commission (EC) creates Directives which must be adopted by national
Governments and these are essentially broad and non-technical. Concurrently the
EC requests the relevant national standards bodies to develop technical supporting
standards and the principle is that if one complies with the standard then one is
essentially complying with the requirement of Directives. Over 90% of European
standards relate directly or indirectly to European Directives. Since there is no
Directive covering waste minimisation there are therefore no standards in this area.
Less than 5% of all British Standards are cited in legislation and are therefore
mandatory. We are not aware that any of the British Standards described in this
report are cited in UK legislation, therefore adoption of the standards is voluntary.
8
Waste Minimisation or Prevention
We did not identify any formal standards that specifically address waste minimisation
or prevention for businesses or other organizations. There are some standards
which touch on this area and these have been included in the results below.
Waste Management
Note that BS 8901:2007 does not provide direct guidance on waste reduction but
does identify waste reduction and management as an issue to event organisers.
A revised version of this standard (BS 8901:2009) will be published later this year.
AS/NZS 3816:1998 relates to the management of clinical and related waste and is
another good example of a sector specific standard. This standard sets out the
requirements for the identification, segregation, handling, storage, transport,
treatment and ultimate safe disposal of clinical and related wastes which may be
hazardous, in an environmentally responsible manner. Wastes arising from medical,
nursing, dental, veterinary, laboratory, pharmaceutical, podiatry, tattooing, body
piercing and mortuary practices are dealt with in this standard.
Facilities Management
9
DIN 32736:2000 is a German standard that addresses: ‗Facility Management -
Terminology and scope of services‘. The document specifies definitions and
describes the services of building management.
ISO 15270:2008 provides guidelines for the recovery and recycling of plastics waste.
The objective of this standard is to assist the worldwide market for plastic recovery
and recycling. Specifically, this standard has been developed to assist all plastics
industry stakeholders in the development of:
a sustainable global infrastructure for plastics recovery and recycling
a sustainable market for recovered plastics materials and their derived
manufactured products
ASTM D7209 was published in 2006. This is a guide for the development of
standards relating to plastics recycling and other means of waste reduction and
resource recovery. The guide is directed at consumer, commercial and industrial
sources of thermoplastics and thermo set polymeric materials. The closest ISO
standard to ASTM D 7209 is ISO 15270:2008.
Packaging
10
compliance with requirements of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive
(94/62/EC).
This standard also specifies the methodology and procedure for the minimisation of
any dangerous substances if they are present in packaging and are released into the
environment as a result of waste management operations.
BS EN 13429:2004 provides a framework within which this and four other standards
(BS EN 13427, BS EN 13430, BS EN 13431, and BS EN 13432) may be used
together to support a claim that packaging is in compliance with the Directive‘s
essential requirements that allow it to be placed on the market. In order to save
resources and minimise waste, the whole system in which packaging takes part
should be optimized. This includes prevention, as well as reuse and recovery of
packaging waste.
11
BS EN 13432:2000 provides requirements for packaging recoverable through
composting and biodegradation, including a test scheme and evaluation criteria for
the final acceptance of packaging.
Procurement
Carbon Management
ISO 14064-3:2006 Greenhouse gases -- Part 3: Specification with guidance for the
validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions
12
Standards to create new Markets for Recycled Products (Publicly Available
Specifications – PAS)
We have listed below a number of standards that create new markets for recycled
products. Technically these are not formal standards. However, for the purpose of
this review, anything that has been developed by a National Standards Body is
considered a formal standard.
The following standards were developed by BSI in conjunction with Waste and
Resources Action Programme (WRAP). The relevance of these standards to our
review is that they are all focussed around identifying different types of waste and
reusing these in the manufacture of other non-related products.
PAS 100
Specification for composted materials. The BSI PAS 100 builds on the existing
Composting Association standard. It will improve confidence in composted materials
among end users, specifiers and blenders, and will help differentiate products that
are safe, reliable and high performance.
PAS 101
Recovered container glass. The specification aims to assist glass collectors in
achieving the highest grades of the PAS 101 specification by harmonizing the range
of existing specifications for raw container glass collected in the UK and introducing
a four tier grading system.
PAS 102
Specification for processed glass for selected secondary end markets. Crushed and
processed glass can be used as granular media for a number of applications,
including: filtration applications such as in the treatment of potable water, municipal
wastewater, and industrial wastewater, as a fluxing agent in brick manufacture, in
blast abrasive applications where granular or powdered abrasive is fired at a
substrate by high-pressure air or water, and in sports turf and related applications.
PAS 103
Collected waste plastics packaging. Specification for quality and guidance for good
practice in collection and preparation for recycling. The economics of plastic
recycling is heavily dependent on the efficiency of waste plastic presentation. Poorly
sorted and highly contaminated waste material will impact on the ability of the
reprocessor to recycle the material.
By preparing, presenting and categorising the waste plastics accurately, the material
will be far more attractive to a recycler and therefore more valuable.
PAS 104
Wood recycling in the panel board manufacturing industry. PAS 104 was developed
to harmonise individual manufacturer specifications and provide post-consumer
wood waste processors with a set of nationally recognised quality parameters. These
help them to maximise the quality and value of the wood chip they produce and
increase its uptake by the panel board manufacturers.
13
PAS 105
Recovered paper sourcing and quality for UK end markets. PAS 105 makes
recommendations for, and gives guidance on, good practice for the collection,
handling and processing of recovered paper intended for recycling within UK end
markets. It is applicable to paper collected by local authorities, local authority
contractors, community groups and charities, households and other commercial
establishments.
PAS 106
Real nappy laundering. Specification for the most appropriate actions to be taken
during the process of cleaning nappies. The aim of this standard is to provide a
nappy washing specification to organizations in the laundry market that are active in
the area of real nappy cleaning.
PAS 107
The manufacture and storage of size reduced tyre materials. The use of recycled
tyre materials in a wide range of civil engineering and industrial materials and
applications is well established and has grown considerably in the last decade. This
specification sets out a formal material specification system and defines minimum
requirements for the initial storage, production and final storage of size-reduced, tyre
derived rubber materials intended for a range of applications in existing and
emerging secondary end markets.
The overall aim of the PAS is to provide a specification that can be adopted by
suppliers for producing grades of size-reduced tyre rubber so that potential
customers will be assured that they are procuring a material of consistent and
verifiable quality.
PAS 108
Specification for the production of tyre bales for use in construction. PAS 108 sets
out to provide a specification that can be adopted by suppliers for producing tyre
bales such that potential customers will be assured that they are procuring a
construction material of consistent and verifiable quality. Thus, the core of this
document addresses the production, handling, storage, transport and placement of
standardized tyre bales, the dimensions and properties of which are described in this
PAS. In addition, guidance is given on engineering properties and typical
construction applications.
PAS 109
The production of recycled gypsum from waste plasterboard. This PAS sets
minimum requirements for the production of recycled gypsum from waste
plasterboard, covering:
the selection, receipt and handling of input materials;
the specifications of product grades; and
the storage, labelling, dispatch and traceability of the products.
14
This PAS will enable recyclers who adopt it to produce, and users to procure, a
quality assured material. This will increase confidence in the use of recycled
gypsum, leading to growth in existing markets and the development of new markets.
Other PAS
PAS 1049:2004-12
Transmission of recycling relevant product information between producers and
recyclers - The Recycling Passport.
PAS 2020:2009 was produced in response to pressure on the direct marketing (DM)
industry to take a more responsible and sustainable approach to marketing activities.
PAS 2020 applies to all organizations involved in direct marketing regardless of their
size or complexity. These include client companies, advertising agencies, printers
and mailing houses.
PAS 2050:2008 provides a specification for the assessment of the life cycle
greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services.
Other Standards
15
unique identification code to transponders attached to waste containers for the
purpose of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID).
This standard does not establish environmental performance levels. It is not intended
for use as a specification standard for certification or registration purposes, or for the
establishment of any other environmental management system conformance
requirements.
All the requirements in ISO 14001:2004 are intended to be incorporated into any
environmental management system. The extent of the application will depend on
factors such as the environmental policy of the organization, the nature of its
activities, products and services and the location where and the conditions in which it
functions.
BS 8555 makes particular reference to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs)
but is applicable to any organization, regardless of the nature of the business activity
undertaken, location or level of maturity.
16
This standard outlines an implementation process that can be undertaken in up to six
separate phases and allows for phased acknowledgement of progress towards full
EMS implementation.
BS 8555 helps all organizations improve their environmental performance and their
supply chain relationships with the following guidance:
Describes a six-phase incremental approach to implementing an EMS using
environmental performance evaluation;
Provides information to organizations on environmental performance
management and the use of environmental performance indicators;
Helps organizations satisfy the environmental criteria increasingly being set in
contract tenders by new and existing major clients;
Can be used by organizations who may wish to self-declare or seek voluntary
phased recognition throughout the implementation process.
The guide does not recommend a specific course of action; it establishes a tiered
framework of essential components, beginning with those standards where a
deviation presents the greatest potential public health, environmental, and business
risks. In each identified pathway, at each tier or step of analysis, the guide outlines
ways to identify compliance options and reduce pollution in iterative steps. The goal
in using the guide is to lower environmental, public health and business risks from
17
Tiers 1 and 2 to Tiers 3 and 4, by evaluating the performance standards described in
this guide.
ASTM D5681-08 details a standard terminology for waste and waste management.
This terminology contains standard definitions of terms used in the general area of
waste and waste management. It is intended to promote understanding by providing
precise technical definitions of terms used in the standards developed by Committee
D34 (ASTM committee on waste management) and its subcommittees.
ISO 14006 is due for release in 2011. This standard will provide guidelines on eco-
design for Environmental management systems.
ISO 14045 is due for release in 2011. This standard will address the principles and
requirements for eco-efficiency assessment.
ISO 14051 is due for release in 2011. This standard will provide general principles
and a framework for material flow cost accounting.
ISO 14067-1 (no expected release date available) will address the quantification of
the carbon footprint of products.
ISO 26000 is planned for release in 2010. This standard offers guidance on socially
responsible behaviour and possible actions; it does not contain requirements and,
therefore, in contrast to ISO management system standards, is not certifiable.
ISO 26000 will encourage organizations to discuss their social responsibility issues
and possible actions with relevant stakeholders. As service providers, certification
bodies do not belong to an organization‘s stakeholders.
BS EN ISO 14005 is due for release in 2011. It will provide guidelines for the phased
implementation of an environmental management system, including the use of
environmental performance evaluation.
BS 8903 is due for release in late 2010. This standard has been planned to address
sustainable procurement as follows:
BS 8902 is planned for release in late 2009. This standard will provide guidance in
responsible sourcing of construction products.
18
PAS 2060 is planned for release in 2010. This PAS will provide requirements for the
demonstration of carbon neutrality.
1. Relevant guidelines and documents that were identified during the research;
2. Trade associations and environmental groups predominantly from the United
Kingdom and United States and the information that they make available to
their members in relation to waste. This information could be in the format of
codes of conduct, policy statements or guideline documents.
Part 1 - Relevant guidelines and documents that were identified during the
research
Waste Management
VDI 2160 is a guideline document for waste management in buildings. The target
audience includes office and residential buildings, as well as buildings with other
uses including restaurants, hotels and supermarkets. The objective of this guideline
document is to increase convenience for those responsible for waste management
implementation as well as for companies who are involved in the disposal of waste.
This guideline document also helps users to reduce the costs involved in waste
management and to improve health protection.
19
VDI 4431 and VDI 4432 are guidelines for those in business who are responsible for
both planning and developing waste management processes and the disposal of
waste. This document also provides guidance on the company specific
implementation of the legal regulations of waste management.
VDI 4413 was published in 2003. It is a guideline that is intended for use by those
persons in waste producing enterprises who are responsible for the company
specific implementation of the legal regulations of waste management.
API PUBL 302 was published in 1991 by the American Petroleum Institute (API).
This guideline document specifically relates to waste minimisation in the petroleum
industry. The content relates to how organizations should source, minimise, treat,
recycle and dispose of material used during the petroleum production cycle. This
document is a further example of a sector specific document.
API PUBL 1638 provides guidance on waste management practices for petroleum
marketing facilities. Whilst this is not a formal standard, the options presented in this
guidance document are based around compliance requirements from applicable
environmental regulations.
Facilities Management
VDI 6009 was published in 2002. It is entitled ‗Building management in practice‘. The
target audience for this guide is people working in facilities management in any type
of commercial or residential building. One of the key areas covered by this guide is
waste disposal although waste management is also addressed, but to a lesser
extent.
20
Packaging
ISO/IEC Guide 41:2003 is relevant for retailers. This guide provides general
recommendations to be taken into consideration when determining the most suitable
type of packaging to protect goods at the point of sale.
The objectives are to maximize the direct and indirect benefits to purchasers of
goods and services by:
eliminating unnecessary packaging so as to reduce the price of goods
and the amount of waste;
ensuring that goods reach consumers in the condition intended by the
manufacturer;
protecting consumers from any potentially harmful effects of the
packaging or its contents;
enabling consumers to store the goods and their packaging
appropriately and to keep, dispose of, or recycle them, in a manner that
minimises their environmental impact.
Procurement
BIP 2135 ‘A Handbook for Sustainable Development’ was published in 2007. This
guide document is a companion to BS 8900 'Guidance for managing sustainable
development' (refer to formal standards section on procurement).
This handbook is written for organizations that are concerned with managing their
impact on society and the environment more effectively.
The handbook explores how principle-based standards can work, and it starts by
focusing on outcomes. It looks at practical examples of how difficult issues involving
values, principles and ethics can be addressed, and changes implemented in
organizations and businesses, to help enhance organizational performance and
success.
During this research some of the activities that Canon has been carrying out relating
to green procurement became apparent. Their efforts are based on the belief that
green procurement is an important task for a corporation trying to fulfill its
environmental responsibilities. To promote green procurement, Canon issued the
"Global Canon Green Procurement Standards"1 and "Global Canon Green
Procurement Guidebook" in 1997.
Since this time, they have reviewed and revised their green procurement standards
1
http://www.canon.com/procurement/green.html
21
to reflect trends in society, as well as developments in related regulations. In 2008
they issued "Green Procurement Standards" Version 5.1.
When procuring parts and materials, Canon asks each supplier to meet the
requirements for "business activities" and "parts and materials" in two areas —
construction and operation of an "environmental management system" and
"performance" achieved as the result of its operation (legal compliance, no use of
prohibited substances, reduction in the use of substances targeted for reduced levels
of use, and preventative measures against soil and groundwater pollution in
"business activities"; no presence of prohibited substances in ‗parts and materials‘,
no presence of use-restricted substances after a specified period in "parts and
materials"). On the basis of these requirements, Canon evaluates suppliers and
parts/materials and judges qualification for dealings and procurement.
United Kingdom
The project team researched 36 trade association and environmental organizations
in the United Kingdom. The results of this research are below. Although not all are
classified as official industry codes, the content and references are relevant in the
context of this research project.
22
responsibilities, objectives, means, operational procedures, training needs,
monitoring and communication systems.
3. Carry out an environmental audit assessing in particular the management
system in place and conformity with the organization‘s policy and programme,
as well as compliance with relevant environmental regulatory requirements.
4. Provide a statement of its environmental performance which lays down the
results achieved against the environmental objectives and the future steps to
be undertaken in order to continue improving the organization‘s environmental
performance.
The information below which details the Courtauld Commitment can be found at
http://www.wrap.org.uk/retail/courtauld_commitment/index.html). This information is
also accessible via the Solutions for Business portal: ―Improving your resource
efficiency‖.2
The Courtauld Commitment asks for signatories to support WRAP in achieving its
objectives:
• To design out packaging waste growth by 2008 (achieved: zero
growth);
• To deliver absolute reductions in packaging waste by 2010;
• To help reduce the amount of food the nation's householders throw
away by 155,000 tonnes by 2010, against a 2008 baseline.
WRAP, in conjunction with the EA, DEFRA and Welsh Assembly Government
(WAG) are currently engaged in a project called The Waste Protocols Project.3
http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=ONEOFFPAGE&itemId=1082105198&r.s=e&r.lc=en
&r.i=1081397463&r.t=ONEOFFPAGE
3
http://www.wrap.org.uk/manufacturing/projects/waste_protocols_projects/
23
are to provide guidance on how to minimise the amount of waste being generated,
and how to help conserve natural resources and reduce pollution.
The Soil Association standards require their licensees to minimise the environmental
impacts of their packaging by minimising the amount of materials they use,
maximising the amount of material that can be reused or recycled, and by using
recycled materials where possible.
Envirowise
To encourage waste minimisation within the office, Envirowise has developed a CD
toolkit and guide (reference EN 548) to help businesses take a step-by-step
approach to office waste reduction6,7.
They have also published EN 859 Environmental Strategic Review Guide. This guide
is aimed primarily at the retail sector, although Envirowise state that the information
on how to conduct an environmental strategic review will be useful to most sectors.
The aim of an environmental strategic review is to achieve cost savings and
environmental benefits by increasing one‘s ability to streamline and improve a
business‘s resource efficiency.
http://92.52.112.178/web/sacert/sacertweb.nsf/e8c12cf77637ec6c80256a6900374463/4d7054234b8da20a8
025740b0012f83f/$FILE/Packaging%20Guide.pdf
5
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/netregs/businesses/87979.aspx
6
http://www.envirowise.gov.uk/)
7
http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=ONEOFFPAGE&itemId=1082105198&r.s=e&r.lc=en
&r.i=1081397463&r.t=ONEOFFPAGE
24
engagement with Envirowise in order to facilitate this. NI Wasteworks provides
guidance to businesses in the areas below8.
Green Alliance
Green Alliance states that the UK has been concerned mostly with what to do about
waste once it has been generated, rather than how to eliminate it in the first place.
They are working to challenge and change this approach and are now going to the
next level, and creating a movement to design out waste and accelerate the
transition from a linear resource economy (extract-process-consume-discard) to one
that treats resources in a more cyclical way.
With a group of major companies including Asda, Boots and Royal Mail, they are
exploring what a resource recovery economy should look like, and how to achieve
this. They are starting by looking at products and their manufacture and then, with
their partners, they are analysing the policies that affect products and production
processes, highlighting conflicts and gaps and helping to make waste and resource
policy more effective and coherent.
http://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/bdotg/action/layer?r.l1=1079068363&topicId=5000321430&r.lc=en&site=19
1&r.l2=5000200348&r.s=tl
9
http://www.ciwem.org/policy/policies/pps.asp
25
CIWEM endorses the development of waste strategies that do not harm the
environment;
CIWEM encourages the development of waste options that improve recycling
rates in a manner that is economically viable, meets legislation and reduces
resource use;
CIWEM stresses the importance of waste strategies that are integrated at a
national and local level to resolve conflicts in order to enable greater recycling
to take place.
Ensure that waste management plans and contracts are sustainable in terms
of financial viability, protection of the environment and resources consumed;
Ensure that protection of the environment and public health is undertaken at
every stage of design, development and operation of waste management
facilities;
Ensure that the Government develops coherent and integrated strategies for
waste management at local, national and European levels;
Promote the equal implementation of European Directives throughout both the
UK and Europe, in order to afford due consideration to the interests of the UK
waste industry.
Waste Watch
Waste Watch is a UK environmental charity. They advise, educate and support
people to make behavioural changes that will reduce their environmental impact.
They provide support to businesses, as well as to schools and local communities.10
United States
10
http://www.wastewatch.org.uk/document/201
11
http://www.worldwildlife.org/what/partners/corporate/index.html
26
Although the results of the research below may not all be classified as official
industry codes, the content and references may prove useful and relevant for the
latter stages of this review project.
Through their experience of working with their member organizations they have
developed the NRDC Greening Advisor. This is a guide that can help any
commercial business or organization to reduce its environmental impacts. Through
their Greening Advisor they claim that their members can produce less waste,
consume less paper and energy, and use resources more efficiently. They hope to
ecologically improve an institution‘s supply chain and day-to-day operations.
The information below has been taken from the NRDC website 12 and features
‗business reasons to green your company or office‘. Also included is information from
some organizations in the United States who have benefitted from working with the
NRDC.
The NRDC guidelines for waste management in businesses are broken down into
the following categories:
Waste audits
Recycling
Proper disposal of batteries, electronics and hazardous waste
Composting
Donating leftover food
Waste Audits
The NRDC recommends that the following steps are considered for a waste audit.
They do not carry out the audits themselves, although they do provide links on their
website to organizations that are qualified to complete audits.
12
http://www.nrdc.org/enterprise/greeningadvisor/wbg-business.asp
27
3. Enlist building managers, custodial staff, and waste haulers.
- The help of building managers, custodial staff, and waste haulers is
invaluable to a successful waste audit. These personnel can assist in
gathering your business‘s waste and can also provide logistical insights
into your recycling and waste management system.
4. Do not disclose the timing of the audit.
- By keeping the timing of a waste audit secret, you ensure that the
waste analyzed is a truly representative sample of the waste generated
by your business at a particular time of year. If people are informed in
advance of the date of a waste audit, they may increase their recycling
efforts or otherwise alter their behaviour.
5. Collect waste.
- Work with waste haulers, custodial staff, and concessions managers to
collect the waste. Make sure that everything collected is clearly labelled
by date and location.
6. Sort waste.
- Sort the collected waste by type, noting paper; cardboard; recyclable
and non recyclable plastics; glass; metals; food waste; batteries; and
so on. Make sure to note recyclable materials that have not been
diverted for recycling.
7. Analyze results and make recommendations.
- What is the composition of your business‘s waste stream? By how
much could your company increase its recycling? By what methods
could your company increase its recycling? How could waste be
collected more efficiently? What are the opportunities to reduce waste
generation? How could your business save money by altering its waste
management systems?
Recycling
The NRDC provides a link to a recycling calculator from the website of Northeast
Recycling Council13. They also provide general advice on where businesses should
go for guidance on how to implement a recycling programme, or improve upon an
existing one.
Composting
The NRDC explains what composting is and provides various links to organizations
who can work with businesses to help them save money by reducing waste stream
and reducing the need to purchase fertiliser.
13
http://www.nerc.org/documents/environmental_benefits_calculator.html
28
Donating leftover food
The NRDC explains the impact of food decomposition in a landfill. They provide a
link to an organization called Feeding America14 which has food banks across the
nation.
Bank of America
By reducing the basis weight15 of its ATM receipts from 20 pounds to 15 pounds,
Bank of America saved more than just paper; this also gained the bank additional
savings in transportation, storage and handling costs, saving $500,000 a year.
16
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/red2.pdf
29
waste management. A link to this guide can be found in the footnote below. The
table of contents for this document is detailed here:
Introduction
The Benefits of Waste Reduction
Waste Prevention
Recycling
Composting
Purchasing
Chapter One: Getting Started
Management Support
The Waste Reduction Team
Setting Preliminary Programme Goals
Notifying Personnel
Chapter Two: Conducting a Waste Assessment
The Purpose of the Waste Assessment
Determining the Approach
Records Examination
Facility Walk-Through
Waste Sort
Documenting the Waste Assessment
Chapter Three: Selecting, Implementing, and Monitoring
Waste Reduction Options
Compiling and Screening the Options
Analyzing and Selecting the Options
Waste Prevention Options
Recycling Options
Composting Options
Purchasing Options
Implementing the Options
Educating and Training Employees
Monitoring and Evaluating the Programme
Waste Reduction in Your Workplace and Beyond
Appendix A: Waste Reduction Ideas
Appendix B: Regional EPA and State Waste Reduction Programme Contacts
Appendix C: Glossary
Appendix D: Volume-to-Weight Conversion Table
Appendix E: Common Recyclable Materials
It is also worth mentioning that the EPA has a resource management initiative that
compensates waste contractors based on performance in achieving their client
organization‘s waste reduction goals, rather than the volume of waste disposed. The
objective of this initiative is to align waste contractor incentives with an organization‘s
own goals. This should help explore innovative approaches that foster cost-effective
resource efficiency through prevention, recycling, and recovery. This initiative is
based around the following practices:
30
1. Establish Baseline Cost, Performance, and Service Levels
Define scope and service levels
Identify existing contract and compensation methods
Establish cost and performance benchmarks
Establish goals
EarthShare
EarthShare provides businesses and employees with the opportunity to support
hundreds of environmental groups through workplace payroll contribution
campaigns. Although they do not publish a formal industry guideline, they do provide
direction for easy and cost effective green efforts for businesses. The direction they
provide is broken into four categories; recycling, reducing paper waste, water audit
and employee engagement. We have summarized the relevant categories below.
Recycling
The most basic and important aspect of an environmentally-friendly workplace is a
recycling programme. It is likely that the focus of a recycle/reuse programme will be
31
paper products, but it‘s also important to recycle printer cartridges, office electronics,
food containers, cans, bottles and plastic bags.
Employee engagement
Investing in employees, the most valuable resource of any company, is always
beneficial. Environmentally-conscious business practices help attract and retain the
best employees by increasing employee satisfaction and pride in the workplace. A
2008 survey indicated that more than half of workers polled think their company
should do more to be environmentally friendly
Wholesale Packaging
Achieve 100% recyclable wholesale transfer packaging, at world‘s largest distribution
centre18, setting the standard throughout the world.
Food Waste
Identify onsite food waste reduction technologies with optimal environmental and
financial performance to reduce commercial food waste by at least 50%.
Food Packaging
Design coffee and soda cups, and other fibre-based food packaging so that it can be
collected and recycled with old corrugated cardboard and turned into high-value
products.
17
http://www.globalgreen.org/
18
Location of world’s largest distribution centre not available from Global Green USA
32
End-of-Life Treatment
Develop a conceptual plan and financial, operational, and environmental
comparisons of end-of-life technologies that could be located in the city to treat the
commercial organics waste stream. Technologies to be evaluated include
composting, anaerobic digestion, and plasma gasification.
Beverage Containers
Increase beverage container recycling for manufacture into new products.
Plastic Bags
Increase the use of reusable bags and readily recyclable single-use bags when one
is needed.
The table below provides a breakdown of materials that are discarded by the
accommodation, food service, and retail sectors in New York City. These are the
materials that are being targeted for reduction by CORR programmes.19
19
Source www.corr.org
20
http://www.celb.org/ImageCache/CELB/content/travel_2dleisure/practical_5fguide_5fgood_5fpractice_2epdf
/v1/practical_5fguide_5fgood_5fpractice.pdf
33
example of a sector specific guide that addresses waste management. Their guide
provides readers with advice about the reduce, reuse and recycle actions. The guide
also addresses purchasing and provides guidance on what action points a
purchasing organization can take in order to assist with their waste reduction efforts.
Other Organizations
Introduction
The purpose of Stage 2 of the project was to engage with key stakeholders to
understand their awareness and opinions on the following areas:
21
http://www.globalreporting.org/NR/rdonlyres/DDB9A2EA-7715-4E1A-9047-
FD2FA8032762/0/G3_QuickReferenceSheet.pdf
22
http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2000doc.nsf/LinkTo/NT00001066/$FILE/00081387.PDF
34
Informal standards in waste:
- Awareness
- Effectiveness
- Importance
Online Questionnaire
During the first stage of the project we identified stakeholders in the area of waste
and resource management. We sent out the questionnaire to approximately 150
individuals and received 48 completed or partially completed responses. The
questionnaire was sent out twice to all target participants over a five week period
and, when possible, we spoke to the target participants to encourage them to
complete the survey. The questionnaire can be found in Appendix 5.
Formal Standards
The questionnaire started by asking stakeholders if they are aware of any formal
standards in the areas below:
Waste management
Waste reduction (and minimisation)
Waste prevention
Recycling
Reuse
35
Figure 1. Stakeholder Awareness of Formal Standards
Respondents
Number of
Stakeholders were asked to tell us which formal standards they are aware of.
Their detailed responses can be found in Appendix 7. The most popular quoted
standards were ISO 14001 (specifies requirements for an environmental
management system) and PAS 100 (specification for compost materials).
Stakeholders rated the overall effectiveness of standards as 3 on a scale of 1 to 5,
where 1 is very low and 5 is very high.
Stakeholders were next asked to tell us how important they believe formal
standards are in the areas of waste management, waste reduction, waste
prevention, recycling and reuse. Waste management was rated as the most
important area and waste prevention the least important.
36
Figure 2. Importance of Formal Standards to Stakeholders
Level of importance of formal standards
81% of stakeholders believe that there is not sufficient awareness and uptake of
formal standards. There was strong consensus across stakeholders that, with the
exception of ISO 14001, awareness of standards in the area of waste is very low and
that there is an exceptionally low level of awareness across the SME sector.
Stakeholders were asked to tell us about barriers or challenges that limit the
uptake of standards. The responses from stakeholders were very consistent and
are as follows:
85% of stakeholders believe that formal standards are not used widely enough in
the area of waste. The main reasons stated for this is that there is not enough
37
awareness, there is no incentive for businesses to use formal standards and the cost
can be prohibitive, especially in the current economic climate.
Stakeholders are broadly in favour of new formal standards for businesses and
organizations in waste.
Stakeholders were asked to tell us about specific areas where they would like to see
new standards. There was a broad range of answers to this question and these are
listed in Appendix 7. The answers included a waste reduction standard that is
auditable, a waste prevention standard linked to carbon reduction and some very
specific industry focused recommendations.
52% of respondents stated that any new standards should be sector specific and
48% stated that they should be generic.
38
Informal Standards
There was generally a low level of awareness of informal standards in all
categories amongst stakeholders, as shown in the chart below. There were very few
responses when we asked stakeholders which informal standards they are aware of.
These responses were Envirowise documents, WRAP guidance (including the
Courtauld Commitment) and CIWM professional standards.
General Questions
77% of stakeholders believe that standards can assist their organization to
manage their waste more effectively. Stakeholders told us that standards help
them to create focus and a formal framework to address waste.
39
Stakeholders were asked to cite specific results where a business has benefitted
from formal or informal standards in waste management, reduction or prevention.
Several stakeholders said that they have seen businesses benefit from ISO 14001,
for example by helping with waste management and waste reduction.
Stakeholders were asked if they are aware of any trends, areas of innovation or
other factors that they believe are important for businesses in the areas of waste
management, reduction and prevention. Answers included the waste protocols from
the EA and WRAP, new technology and the Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP)
for the construction industry.
Finally, stakeholders were asked if they have any general comments relating to
standards (formal or informal) for businesses and other organizations in waste
management, reduction and prevention. These responses are listed in Appendix 6.
Stakeholder Workshop
For the final stage of this research, stakeholders were invited to participate in a
workshop which took place at BSI headquarters in Chiswick, London on 16 th July
2009. 18 industry stakeholders participated in the event together with representation
from both DEFRA and BIS. A list of delegates and organizations can be found in
Appendix 9.
The objective of the workshop was to build on the results and findings from the
earlier stages of the project and further examine the role that standards can play in
waste and resource management. The full agenda for the workshop can be found in
Appendix 8.
Overview of BSI British Standards, as the UK‘s National Standards Body and
a brief overview of standards;
Objectives for the workshop;
Project methodology;
Summary of the project results to date.
Please spend 5 minutes listing common wastes that are produced by your
business/organization or businesses/organizations that you work with.
What are the key drivers and enablers that allow businesses and other
organizations to improve the management and minimisation of their waste?
What are the key blockers that prevent businesses and other organizations
from improving their waste management and minimisation activities?
40
Please spend 5 minutes listing the steps that your organization (or
organizations that you work with) is/are taking to manage and minimise waste.
How can (new) standards assist businesses and organizations in managing,
reducing, preventing or minimising their waste?
What is your understanding of waste minimisation? Please discuss for 5
minutes and come up with a maximum of 3 bullet points to report back to the
group.
How do you see a voluntary standard in waste management and minimisation
working in practise? What impact might this have in measuring organizational
performance in resource and waste management?
What areas should a voluntary standard on waste minimisation potentially
cover?
How would a benchmarking tool for waste management and minimisation
benefit your organization?
We split delegates into four groups and changed these groups throughout the day.
At the end of the morning and afternoon sessions table hosts presented the results
from the group discussions to the entire group of attendees.
The detailed results from the workshop can be found in Appendix 10. The key
themes to come out of the workshop are as follows:
Both new and existing standards can assist businesses and organizations in
managing, reducing, preventing or minimising their waste by helping to create
a common language, creating a level playing field and providing detail to
guide practical actions;
New standards should be focused around a resource efficiency cycle and not
just waste prevention, reduction and minimisation;
A benchmarking standard could be a valuable tool to help businesses
compare their waste management to other businesses;
The lack of awareness and confusion surrounding information that is available
to businesses should be addressed;
There is limited consistency across local authorities in how they deal with the
collection and separation of waste for both businesses and households and
perhaps third party organizations. Businesses are not aware of the support
and guidance that is available to them from environmental organizations such
as WRAP and Solutions For Business;
Several workshop participants provided details of some of the steps that their
organizations have taken to manage and minimise their waste. It was clear that the
steps being taken differ vastly from one organization to another. It was not clear if
these organizations are following a formal published policy.
41
SECTION 4 – CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTED ACTIONS
SUMMARY
Stakeholders from more than sixty organization were consulted during the course of
this research. These included stakeholders from trade associations, environmental
organizations and waste producing businesses. The results from the desktop
research and the analysis of the stakeholder feedback (received through the survey
and workshop) present a strong argument that actions are needed to help
businesses and organizations reduce their waste. This is also an opportunity to use
a standards based approach to augment current Government sponsored support to
business in this area.
Perhaps the key strategic outcome of the project is the concept of a resource
efficiency cycle. This concept was introduced by stakeholders at the workshop.
Established thinking embraces a waste management hierarchy i.e. the 3R concept -
reduce, reuse, recycle. This can be illustrated conceptually by the pyramid below:
Whilst this concept is valid and valuable, it lacks several important elements. It is not
dynamic and it fails to deal effectively with resource utilization and allocation. Thus,
whilst it encompasses prevention in general terms, it fails to cover specific aspects of
prevention such as product/service design, process engineering, material selection,
purchasing and resourcing, etc. Equally, the hierarchy is static, whereas the real
world is dynamic and indeed cyclical. The resource efficiency cycle, detailed below,
attempts to be holistic and dynamic and thus more appropriate to the real world. In
this way, it offers a strategic template and could create a roadmap for future
standardisation.
The second key outcome of the project is the demand for a benchmarking standard
to assist businesses in minimising and managing their waste. This standard could
provide a basis for businesses to compare their waste and resource performance
against others in their own industries and across all industries. This would better
42
inform them and allow identification of best practice in resource efficiency and waste
minimization.
Based on the results from the desktop research and stakeholder feedback, four
suggested actions are being proposed. Two of these should be treated as priority
actions:
The remaining two suggestions are establishing a glossary of terms and a standard
to help organizations develop and implement a waste minimization policy.
Each of the suggested actions is explained below. A table is also provided that
summarises these actions and:
Stakeholders commented that any new standards should have a much broader focus
than just waste, and the concept of a resource efficiency cycle was introduced and
very well supported during the workshop.
The principle behind this concept is that waste is just one part of a holistic cycle and
its management should not be dealt with as an isolated output or process. At the
stakeholder workshop, various standardisation suggestions were illustrated
graphically. However, at this stage these are considered too vague and
unsubstantiated. This illustration is therefore limited to the core model below.
43
Figure 6. Resource Efficiency Cycle
Conceptually and strategically the concept of the resource efficiency cycle could be
positioned as an evolutionary development from the waste hierarchy that could be
very valuable for businesses. However, at this stage we believe that this concept
requires much broader discussion and investigation before it can be accepted and
used as a template to identify the need for future standards in this area.
Although not explored in detail, consideration has been given to how this might work
in the context of standards. There is the potential for a single generic standard for
resource management with a series of other standards that are underpinned by the
parent resource management standard. For example, these could include waste
minimisation, waste management, reuse and some sector specific standards.
Product design and the effective use of materials during the product design and
development period are important factors to be considered in the context of the
resource efficiency cycle. Outside the context of this project, BSI is currently
conducting an internal review of existing product design standards.
44
development of a PAS for sustainable product design. This proposal will
subsequently be sent to BIS for review.
As an initial step, BSI would like to present a proposal to DEFRA and BIS for a pre-
standardisation engagement exercise which will allow us to seek validation from
stakeholders for this concept.
There is also an opportunity for engagement with the relevant BSI committees and
the organizations that are represented on these committees for additional feedback,
using the same questions as above.
45
Upon completion of this exercise, a DEFRA, BIS and BSI workshop would be
required in order to define and agree upon a roadmap based around the results of
the feedback from this project and the subsequent and more detailed input from the
waste producing stakeholders. This workshop would tackle the following questions:
With the answers in place to these questions, BSI would be in a position to develop a
plan for standardisation activity around the resource efficiency cycle and, at that
time, funding and other critical areas to move this forward would be addressed. The
answers to these questions will also help to finalise a strategic standardization
framework.
Should the concept of the resource efficiency cycle be accepted, it has the potential
to create a new geography for the area of waste minimisation and resource
efficiency for businesses.
46
Suggested Action 2 – A standard for businesses to help them benchmark their
waste performance against other businesses
There was strong consensus amongst the stakeholders who completed the survey
that a standard to assist them in benchmarking their waste performance would be of
great value. This principle was further validated during the workshop, where a
significant number of delegates identified this as a valuable tool.
The proposed standard should reference PAS 402 and other relevant standards in
the waste management area.
The online database should detail the results from participating organizations and
allow them to compare themselves against their industry peers and, more generally,
across all industries. The Solutions for Business portal could be considered as the
host for this database. This would also encourage strong performing organizations to
leverage their performance as a way of self promotion.
47
Current benchmarking practice (if any);
Potential conflict with current practice;
Would a standard help to formalize current benchmarking activities?
What current indicators (if any) do they use to measure performance?
Participants awareness of benchmarking activity in other countries;
Other areas of benchmarking that take place in business;
Resource requirements (capital and human);
Attractiveness and willingness for a benchmarking standard;
Perceived benefits of benchmarking;
What are the key factors that participants would like to measure/compare?
Through in-depth interviews with the relevant representatives from each business,
BSI would be in a stronger position to shape a future benchmarking standard,
establish which sectors and what size of businesses have an interest in
benchmarking and confirm what elements should be included in a benchmarking
standard. The target would be to achieve approximately thirty in-depth interviews.
BSI is ideally positioned to carry out the proposed research and to subsequently
analyze the results and, where appropriate, use the findings from the research to
assist with the development of the future benchmarking standard and tool. Funding
and marketing support will need to be procured from Government to complete this
important exercise, to develop the benchmarking standard and tool and to promote
its uptake across a broad range of businesses.
The results of this research would be a very valuable first step in the development of
the proposed standard.
Minimising and dealing with waste effectively is becoming increasingly important and
clear terminology and definitions are essential for the future development of
standards for this area.
The findings of the research indicate that different trade organizations, environmental
groups and other parties have varying terms and definitions for resource
management and waste.
48
To be an important building block to any future standards in this
area .
There are three clear published sources of input to such a standard. However, it
should be noted that terminology from overseas standards may differ to UK
terminology. The proposed standard would thus need to identify the equivalent term
used in other countries.
1. In CEN, TC292 has produced sixteen relevant standards in the last seven
years relating to the characteristics of waste, two of which directly cover
terminology:
In the development of the suggested standard it is critical that inputs from WRAP,
Envirowise and other important organisations are included.
In the marketplace there are numerous documents and guides to help organizations
develop a waste minimization policy, including those from WRAP and Envirowise.
However, based on the feedback from both the stakeholder workshop (in response
to a specific question) and also from the survey, it is clear that different organizations
are taking uncoordinated and unrelated steps in order to minimize their waste (see
Appendix 10).
It appears clear that most organizations do not have a formal or cohesive policy,
which results in sporadic and sub-optimal performance in waste minimization and
control. Some organizations did cite a range of disparate, incomplete instructions
covering reuse and recycling of a minor nature, e.g. reusing plastic coffee cups,
whilst others offer very broad instructions with no details regarding procedures to be
adopted.
49
A lack of policy in this, as in all areas of management, can clearly result in
inefficiency and an inability to measure, monitor, audit and improve performance.
Within the limitations of the workshop, it was not possible to identify the reasons
behind the lack of policy. There also appeared to be a lack of awareness of the
available guidance documentation. It is felt that organizations would benefit from
assistance in the development and implementation of a comprehensive policy in this
area.
It typically embodies best practice, state of the art, fitness for purpose and ensures
compliance with legislative requirements. It thus achieves an authoritative status,
especially when prepared under the auspices of the National Standards Body.
Introduction
Policy statement
Objectives of policy
- Prevention
- Minimization
- Reuse
- Recycling
- Energy recovery
- Disposal
Application
Organization and management
- Facilities
- Quality Assurance
- Resourcing
- Design
- Production
- Storage
- Staff training
- Communication
50
Legislation
Auditing and Reporting
51
Summary of Suggested Actions
Suggested actions highlighted in green are the recommended high priority actions.
3. Develop a glossary BSI to develop a BSI to present a Funding from Secondary project timeframe to Standard terminology that can
standard for waste and standard that proposal to Government be agreed be used by waste producing
resource management complies with Government for businesses, recyclers, re-
relevant legislation, development of processors and others
and is consonant standard
with existing
52
standards.
4. A standard to guide BSI to develop the Project timeframe to Funding of standard Project timeframe to be More organizations will have a
organizations in the standard be determined by from DEFRA determined by DEFRA in formal policy in place. Greater
development of a Government in consultation with BSI consistency of policy across
resource efficiency and consultation with BSI organizations
waste minimization
policy
53
SECTION 5 - APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 – FORMAL STANDARDS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED DURING
THE RESEARCH
BS 5906:2005 Waste Management Waste management in buildings
ISO 15270:2008 Recycling and Reuse Recovery and recycling of plastics waste
ISO 11932:1996 Recycling and Reuse Guidance and methods for activity
measurements of materials to be released for
recycling, reuse or disposal as non-radioactive
waste arising from the operation of nuclear
facilities
ISO/IEC 24700:2004 Recycling and Reuse Quality and performance of office equipment
that contains reused components
ASTM D7209 Recycling and Reuse Guide for the development of standards relating
to plastics recycling and other means of waste
reduction and resource recovery.
54
BS EN 13431:2008 Packaging Requirements for packaging recoverable in the
form of energy recovery, including specification
of minimum inferior calorific value
ASTM E 2365 Other Relevant Standards Standard Guide for Environmental Compliance
Performance Assessment
ASTM D5681-08 Other Relevant Standards Standard terminology for waste and waste
management
55
APPENDIX 2 – TRADE ASSOCIATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS THAT WERE RESEARCHED
United Kingdom
Association for Environment Conscious Building (AECB)
Carbon Trust
Carbonlite Programme
Centre for Alternative Technology (CAT)
Chartered Institution of Wastes Management
Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management
Confederation of European Environmental Engineering Societies
Cumbria Green Business Forum (http://www.cgbf.co.uk/)
Eco Hive
ENFORAC (Environmental Forum for Action)
Envirobusiness
Envirolink
Environmental Agency
Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA)
Environmental Protection UK
Environmental Services Association
Envirowise
Federation of Environmental Trade Associations
Friends of the Earth England Wales and Northern Ireland
Green Alliance
Groundwork UK
56
American Land Conservancy
Association of Environmental and Resource Economists (AERE)
Association of Environmental Professionals
ATWA (Association on Third World Affairs)
Citizens Campaign for the Environment
Conservation International
Earth First!
Earth Island Institute
Earth Liberation Front (ELF)
Earth Share
Earth Trust
EarthLab
Earthwatch
Ecologyfund
Envirolink
Environmental Defense Fund
Environmental Law Institute
Environmental Life Force (ELF)
Environmental Working Group
Environmentalists Everyday
Friends of the Earth
Friends of the Environment
Global Green USA
GREENGUARD Environmental Institute
Greenpeace
Honor the Earth
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER)
Izaak Walton League of America
Leave No Trace
National Solid Wastes Management Association
Natural Resources Defense Council
Nature Conservancy
Our Earth
Our Earth
Republicans for Environmental Protection
Sierra Club
Solid Waste Association of North America
Stop Climate Chaos
The Resource Foundation
Waste Equipment Technology Association
Wilderness Society
World Resources Institute
Worldchanging
WWF
Others
International Solid Waste Association
57
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)
If you reduce the amount of waste your business produces you can save money and
reduce your environmental impact.
Some common ways to reduce the amount of waste you produce include:
repairing equipment before you replace it;
reusing items instead of discarding them
Office paper
Many offices waste large quantities of paper. You can take a number of steps to
reduce your paper use.
You should only print and photocopy documents when absolutely necessary. You
should make sure that your staff only print and photocopy using the double-sided
setting on all equipment.
You should re-use paper whenever possible. For example, print and photocopy
drafts and internal documents on paper that has already been used on one side. To
stop printers or photocopiers jamming, you should store paper that you intend to re-
use near the machine under a heavy weight so that all the paper is flat and at a
similar humidity and temperature.
You can re-use envelopes for internal mail, or use labels to re-use them for external
post. You can make notepads out of scrap paper.
Make it easy for your staff to recycle paper. For example, put extra recycling bins in
key areas such as your copier and print rooms.
To stop receiving junk mail and faxes you should register with the fax and mail
preference services.
Supplies
Carry out regular stationery ‗amnesties‘, where everyone empties their desk of
unwanted office supplies, which will be put back in the stationery cupboard.
Assess the environmental criteria of new office supplies and wherever possible, buy
more environmentally friendly products.
NetRegs also provides guidance for reduction of waste, reuse and recycling as
follows:23
Your business will produce waste. The legislation in the UK now obliges you to
consider what you do with your waste. You should consider whether you can reduce
23
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/netregs/63071.aspx
58
or reuse your waste before you think about recycling it. Recycling uses energy and
will cost more than reducing and reusing.
59
APPENDIX 3 – INITIAL LIST OF TARGET STAKEHOLDER
ORGANIZATIONS
360 Environmental Cranfield University Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment
Advisory Committee on Packaging Davis Recycling Ltd KPMG
AEA Technology Defra Assistant Economist Lamp Recycling Services Ltd
Agyplas - AGP Dept.Communities and Local Government LARAC
ALP Ambrose DMW (via his PA) LGA
Aluminium Packaging Recucling Organisation DWCL Group LLP LGA & NAWDO
AMEC Earth & Environmental (UK) Ltd Ecosys Environmental Management and Education London Remade Solutions
ARUP Eeda London Waste and Recycling Board
Association for Organics Reclying EEF Magpie Recycling Co-op Ltd
Atos Consulting EIC Mayer Environmental Ltd
Avalon Environmental Ltd EIC The Environmental Industries Commission Mitie Waste and Environmental
Axion Consulting Ltd Energy Saving Trust NAWDO
AXR Engineering Employers Federation NISP
BERR Entec Oakdene Hollins
Bob Lisney Consulting Entec UK Ltdf Oaktree Environmental Ltd
Bradford University and UKCEED Enventure Consultancy PA Consulting
BRE EnviroBusiness PERA
BRE Environment Agency Pera
British Cleaning and Support Services Association Environment Centre (The) Planning Officers Society
British Glass Manufacturers Confederation Environmental Industries Commission and Enviros PPS
British Metals Recycling Association Environmental Packaging Solutions PriceWaterhouseCoopers
British Plastics Federation Environmental Resources Management Public Private Partnership Forum
British Retail Consortium Environmental Services Association Recycling Concepts Ltd
Brunel University and NESTA Fellow Environmental Sustainability Knowledge Transfer Network Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnerships (RIEPs)
Building Research Establishment Enviros Consulting Searles Associates Ltd
Bureau of International Recycling Envirowise Seeda
60
APPENDIX 4 – LETTER TO STAKEHOLDERS
st
1 June 2009
Dear
We are contacting you because the Department for Business (BERR) and the Department for the
Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) are working with the British Standards Institution (BSI)
to assess the role of standards in waste and resource management. We would like to invite you to
contribute to this assessment.
The Government is exploring whether standards could provide further help and support to individual
businesses and others in decisions on how to make the most efficient use of material resources in
their activities and on how to minimise and manage their waste – to benefit both them and the
environment. We would very much welcome your input to support our work.
1. We would like to invite you, or a colleague within your organization, to attend a workshop to
discuss and validate our emerging project findings. This event is likely to be held in London
th,
on July 16 between mid-morning and mid-afternoon; and
2. We would also be grateful if, in advance of this, you would answer some short questions on
the issues, which we would like to email to you later this month.
Further details will be sent to you in due course, but at this stage can you please put this date in your
diary and indicate your likely availability or that of a named substitute by email to Anna Bond at BSI
th
(Anna.Bond@bsigroup.com), ideally by June 12 .
We thank you in advance for your cooperation and look forward to seeing you at the workshop in July.
Yours sincerely,
Hugh McNeal
Director, Low Carbon Business Opportunities Unit, BERR
Daniel Instone
Senior Responsible Officer, Waste Programme, DEFRA
Frank Post
61
APPENDIX 5 – STAKEHOLDER SURVEY
We contacted you recently to tell you about the project that DEFRA and BERR are
working on with the British Standards Institution (BSI) to assess the role that
standards currently play in waste and resource management.
The Government is exploring whether standards could provide further help and
support to individual businesses and others in decisions on how to make the most
efficient use of material resources in their activities and on how to minimise and
manage their waste - to benefit both them and the environment. We would very
much welcome your input to support our work.
We would be very grateful if you could complete this short questionnaire. It should
take a maximum of 20 minutes. The questionnaire is structured in three sections.
Section one has questions relating to formal standards, section two has questions
relating to informal standards and section three is made up of some general
questions relating to standards and waste. All results will be treated
confidentially and only group results will be reported. Please complete the
questionnaire as early as possible, but no later than July 3rd 2009.
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=NykT5qNQwHfl_2b0ZmkF7_2fhw_3
d_3d
Please note that we are not suggesting that standards (whether formal or informal)
would necessarily constitute legal obligations.
This research will culminate in a stakeholder workshop which will take place in
London on July 16th this year. At the end of the questionnaire you will have the
opportunity to register your interest for this free event.
We thank you for your time and input into this important study. If you have any
questions or comments with regards to this questionnaire please email:
darren.rickless@bsigroup.com
62
Standards for Resource and Waste Management – A Questionnaire
We contacted you recently to tell you about the project that DEFRA and BERR are
working on with the British Standards Institution (BSI) to assess the role that
standards currently play in waste and resource management.
The Government is exploring whether standards could provide further help and
support to individual businesses and others in decisions on how to make the most
efficient use of material resources in their activities and on how to minimise and
manage their waste – to benefit both them and the environment. We would very
much welcome your input to support our work.
We would be very grateful if you could take a few minutes to complete this short
questionnaire. It should take a maximum of 20 minutes. All results will be treated
confidentially and only group results will be reported. Please complete the
questionnaire as early as possible, but no later than July 3 rd 2009.
This research will culminate in a stakeholder workshop which will take place in
London on July 16th this year. At the end of the questionnaire you will have the
opportunity to register your interest for this free event.
We thank you for your time and input into this important study. If you have any
questions or comments with regards to this questionnaire please email:
darren.rickless@bsigroup.com.
When we refer to other organizations these could include for example charities,
accountancy firms, hotels, public or private hospitals, educational institutions and so
forth.
Please note that we are not suggesting that standards (whether formal or
informal) would necessarily constitute legal obligations.
63
PLEASE NOTE THAT WHEN QUESTIONS REFER TO WASTE, WE ARE REFERRING
TO SOLID WASTE ONLY (INCLUDING FOOD)
1. Are you aware of any formal standards that are either being used by your
organization or others in the following areas:
1a. If you have answered yes to any of the above, please tell us what formal standards
you are aware of.
1b. If you have direct exposure to these standards, please list each standard below
and tell us on a scale of 1 to 5 (where 1 is very low and 5 is very high) how effective
these have been in improving waste (management, reduction, prevention, recycling
and reuse) within the organization. . Please use standard 1 to mean the first standard
you entered in Q1a, standard 2 to be the second standard you entered and so on.
Waste management
Waste reduction
Waste prevention
Recycling
Reuse
3.If there are formal standards that you are aware of, do you believe that there is
sufficient awareness and uptake of these?
Yes/No
3a. Are there any barriers or challenges which limit the uptake of these standards, for
example are they too difficult to meet or too costly to achieve. Please comment.
3b. Do you have any views on how current standards could be better promoted?
Please explain.
4. In your opinion, are formal standards used widely enough by businesses and
organizations in the area of waste?
Yes/No
5. Would you like to see the introduction of any new formal standards for businesses
and organizations in the following areas?
64
Waste management Yes/No
Waste reduction (and minimisation) Yes/No
Waste prevention Yes/No
Recycling Yes/No
Reuse Yes/No
5a. If you have answered yes to any of the above, please explain what new standards
you believe would be valuable for businesses and organizations and why.
5b. If you have answered yes to any of the above, do you believe that these standards
should be sector specific or generic (cross industry)?
By informal standards we mean standards, codes of practise or codes of ethics that are
produced by industry trade associations, environmental groups, consortia or internal
standards that businesses or organizations are working with in relation to waste
management, reduction, prevention, recycling and reuse.
When we refer to ‗other organizations‘ these could include for example charities,
accountancy firms, hotels, public or private hospitals, educational institutions and so forth.
1. Are you aware of any informal standards that are either being used by your
organization or others in the following areas?
1a. If you have answered yes to any of the above, please tell us what informal
standards you are aware of.
1b. If you have direct exposure to these informal standards, please list below each
informal standard and tell us on a scale of 1 to 5 (where 1 is very low and 5 is very
high) how effective these standards have been in improving waste (management,
reduction, prevention, recycling and reuse) within the organization. Please use
standard 1 to mean the first standard you entered in Q1a, standard 2 to be the second
standard you entered and so on.
Waste management
Waste reduction
Waste prevention
Recycling
Reuse
65
3. Do you have any other comments on the role of informal standards in waste
management, reduction and prevention?
Section 3. General
1. Do you believe that standards can assist your organization to better manage its
waste?
Yes/No
1a. Please explain why or why you do not believe that standards can assist your
organization to better manage its waste.
2. Can you cite any specific examples or results where a business or organization has
benefitted from standards (formal or informal) in waste management, reduction or
prevention?
3. Are you aware of any trends, areas of innovation or other factors that you believe
are important in the areas of waste management, reduction and prevention for
businesses? Please explain.
4. Are you aware of any standards that address procurement in the context of waste
management, reduction and prevention?
Yes/No
4a. If you have answered yes to question 4, please tell which standards you are aware
of and if you believe that they are effective.
5. Are you aware of any standards that are or could be used in the procurement
process to stipulate the requirements for a sustainable waste management service?
6. Do you have any general comments that you would like to make in relation to
standards (formal or informal) for businesses and other organizations in waste
management, reduction and prevention?
7. We will be running a free workshop for stakeholders in London to discuss the role
of standards in waste management, reduction and prevention. The indicative date for
this event is July 16th. Would you (or a colleague) like to attend this event?
Yes/No
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND PARTICIPATION. PLEASE TICK THE BOX BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE
US TO SEND YOU A SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
66
APPENDIX 6 – SURVEY RESPONDENTS
Shell
Diageo
Waste Watch
Hyder Consulting
Johnson Diversey
Scientists International
Ricoh
National Consumers Federation
The Environment Centre
PA Consulting
Gypsum Products Development Association
CIWM
NQA
67
APPENDIX 7 – STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS FROM SURVEY
The survey started by asking stakeholders if they are aware of any formal
standards in the areas below:
Waste management
Waste reduction (and minimisation)
Waste prevention
Recycling
Reuse
Number Of
Responses
ISO 14001 Specifies requirements for an environmental 8
management system
PAS 100 specification for compost materials 7
ISO 9000 Good quality management practices 4
BS 8555 Guidance to all organizations on the phased 4
implementation, maintenance and improvement of a
formal Environmental Management System
PAS 109 Specification for the production of recycled gypsum 2
from waste plasterboard
PAS 2050 Specification for the assessment of the life cycle 1
greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services
BS EN 13437:2003 Packaging and material recycling. Criteria for recycling 1
methods. Description of recycling processes and flow
chart
BS EN 13440 Packaging. Rate of recycling. Definition and method of 1
calculation
BS 8887-1 Design for manufacture, assembly, disassembly and 1
end-of-life processing (MADE)
PAS 99 integrated management system requirements 1
specification based on the six common requirements of
ISO guide 72 (a standard for writing management
system standards)
68
We next asked stakeholders to tell us how important they believe that formal
standards are in the areas of waste management, waste reduction, waste
prevention, recycling and reuse. Waste management was rated as the most
important area and waste prevention the least important. The answers from
stakeholders are transcribed below.
Not enough formal standards and not widely known outside of industry. Need
to be market related and owned by banks and insurance companies too who
tend to be disparaging about the use of recovered materials
Awareness of standards by those "producing" materials e.g. composters is
probably good. Awareness by "users" that "products" have achieved a
reasonable standard (composition, etc) and are therefore acceptable
alternatives is less good
SME sector is largely untouched
If environmental and/or quality standards are employed (e.g.
ISO14001/ISO9001) then these should encourage activity in relation to waste
- avoid, reduce, re-use, recycle etc
The majority of customers in our industry are either working towards or
already have 14001 accreditation
BSI needs to get IEC 62402 and groups like COG's Component
Obsolescence groups recognised
In our view, it is likely to be difficult for SMEs to be aware of standards
referenced in EU legislation which may be applicable to them.
Little awareness or knowledge of any standards in waste reduction, reuse,
waste prevention
There is insufficient awareness of these standards throughout the various
industries
The main players are aware but not at the grass roots
There is increasing pressure within manufacturing supply chains to have
14001, but the 2004 standard includes "services" so other types of
organizations should be taking up 14001 or BS 8550. Awareness of this
seems to be low
There is probably good awareness by waste management companies of the
standards that they need to meet but poor awareness of waste management
standards by other companies, especially SMEs
Businesses know they are not regulated sufficiently therefore they are
somewhat ignored
The current EN643 is inadequate and a suggested revision should be tabled
with CEN within the next 6 months
Does WEEE count as a standard? If so, it is very hard to find practical
guidance on it and harder still to learn whether e-waste recyclers adhere to
best practise (i.e. do not simply ship the waste to the developing world)
Most of the industry are only aware of those standards that directly relate to
their present activities
Only for 14001
ISO 14001 and BS 8555 could be much better exploited by Government and
others to improve attention to the above aspects, particularly through the
Acorn initiative
69
They are generic and not seen as applicable to detailed implementation.
Standards seem to be more focused on Health and Safety and site and
process management systems than on material quality or carbon measures
We asked stakeholders to tell us about specific areas where they would like to see
new standards. Their responses are listed below.
70
Clear simple instructions and solutions. It is too complicated and inflexible i.e.
when is it waste and when is it a resource. Encouragement to make more
waste a resource rather than currently it becomes a barrier
Standards as a basis for idea generation and practical implications. Ways to
show how this can save the company money rather than increasing costs.
Offering ideas by industry sector might aid in the "sale" of the idea to promote
up-take
Waste management: I think that the sector-specific guidelines on dealing with
material and water waste are probably sufficient
Waste prevention/waste reduction (and minimisation). There is a clear
advantage here to reduce the waste send to landfill by demonstrating to
organizations that there are alternatives to commonly consumed materials.
For example, the cheaper (and less wasteful) alternative to coffee creamer
sachets is a 'pump' - but this is not widely known
There is a lot of confusion about what can and cannot be recycled - in
particular which items can and cannot be lumped together. This varies
between recycling firms, of course. A clear set of standards here would be like
a specification between recycling firms and their customers and could
significantly increase the percentage of materials in recycling bins which
actually end up being recycled
I am not aware of standards in this area but instinct tells me that there are
many possibilities for reuse of commonly discarded materials which could end
up saving money (Starbucks recently started giving away their old coffee
grounds for use as a fertiliser for alkaline soil)"
A standard outlining best practice would be helpful
The use of standards can help organizations address areas of activity that
they have traditionally ignored. The use of quality standards (and to a degree
management system standards) have not been supported by rigorous enough
certification procedures, producing a largely discredited series of certificates
Material specific standards like the PAS series 100+ have been beneficial and
could be extended to other materials/wastes streams
A standard that helps to improve a material‘s efficiency, not just increase
recycling rates
A standard for waste management that includes reduction, reuse etc and
guides the user towards best practice. It should be certifiable so the
organization can demonstrate their credentials
If they were to be BSI standards within a 'family' allowing for a range of
different levels of enterprise with different volumes of material and an implicit
journey of continuous improvement, especially in terms of carbon
performance and the skills needed for our new green economy; then I think
the standards could realise rapid and increasing value for participating
enterprises
71
Informal standards can be fudged and thus third party certification is needed.
Very useful. Allow flexibility. Allow innovative (safe) creation, reuse and
recycling
Via the company's standards, pressure is brought to bear on each Diageo site
to manage waste - the main KPI relates to amount of mixed waste going into
landfill
We already have legislation and guidance notes so have no need for informal
standards
Informal standards appear easier to access (and usually free of charge),
however, they are usually used by public bodies rather than businesses
Voluntary codes only go so far and depend on strong regulatory push
It‘s all about best practice and anything which promotes this would be good
I believe certain sectors are more tuned to informal standards and guidance
rather than compulsory standards
Voluntary commitment by industry is the best route to achieve real waste
reduction and re-use
Informal standards are like verbal contracts - not worth the paper they are
written on
They are informal but often considered by operators and regulators as more
than just good practice, although not statutory. They are also more likely to be
directly related to specific issues in specific sectors and not necessarily
generic
Need strong support from trade bodies
A formal standard which is certifiable so the business can promote their use of
best practice is more relevant in today‘s climate
We asked stakeholders to tell us why they believe, or why they do not believe, that
standards can assist their organization to better manage their waste. Their
responses are listed below
Why?
Unless you have standards the level achieved (or not achieved) is not
measurable and is totally arbitrary
We would not adopt such a standard unless it had a clear business benefit for
us
Standards provide goals and objectives, a means of comparing like with like
(i.e. something meets or does not meet the standard) and a measure of
acceptability (or not) of a material or service
Standards like ISO14000 or 18000 create a formal management and
response framework that raises standards across the industry
If you do not measure it, you cannot manage it. Standards will assist in both of
these
We will have to comply with the standard and this will make senior
management take waste more seriously
The standard results in greater control of legislation and training of employees
By providing a management framework
Benchmark non-financial efficiencies
Standards create a level playing field of quality and services
72
We can base our Standard Operating Procedures on widely accepted
standards
Standards create an annual focus that is linked with KPIs (key performance
indicators. Those KPIs can be linked to national waste strategies and
therefore enhance the public efforts to deliver a waste strategy
Standards ensure quality and safe carriage and storage of waste
Everyone can clearly understand what is expected of them and their team.
They know everyone is playing their part creating a greater impact. It shows
there is a greater importance than just a manager's aim - it has the whole
company's commitment
Standards are a key tool in managing waste along a supply chain or within a
complex structure. They constitute a contractual interface between the
different entities in question. As also mentioned earlier, the key to successful
contracting in this instance is transparency between the different actors and
the capability for end-to-end governance of the 'waste process'
Standards help to set the benchmark to guide improved performance.
Standards also help to classify materials which may assist recycling or
recovery options
Can bring consistency - but can also mean only lowest common denominator
is achieved
Formalised approaches can be effective, and standards provide this
Why Not?
We do not need a standard to tell us how to manage our waste. Only other
incentives would improve our waste management. These standards are not
publicly accessible and the public even have to pay to acquire them. All public
standards should be free and publicly available, like legislation
Standards in general are good to provide direction and guidance to
companies. But a waste specific standard is unnecessary
Our waste streams are very varied - civil engineering. We need a flexible and
creative waste use/reuse/recycling approach. Rigid systems impose barriers
and prevent good and safe use of waste and hurt the environment more
EA Guidance notes should help compliance with legal duties. Carbon Trust
and Envirowise provide support services
Cost
Standards tend to be viewed as inflexible and often irrelevant. They have a
place, but a guided approach rather than a pass/fail view against a fixed set of
criteria would offer a better introduction
Voluntary commitments are a better way - you can have too many standards
We produce very little waste and our accredited certification to ISO 14001 is
more than sufficient
We asked stakeholders to cite any specific results where a business has benefitted
from formal or informal standards in waste management, reduction or prevention.
The answers are listed below.
73
All of the Furniture Reuse Network Enterprises (FRNE) subscribers have
benefited from the external audits to the FRNE standard. In many case it was
found that, through ignorance, they were breaking the law
Purchase of recovered aggregates, plastics, and collection of paper and card
to meet market needs
Look at individual company results - e.g. in retail and construction sectors.
Improvements are at least partly attributable to ISO14001 and/or internal
policy / procedures / standards
BS5906, where architects have been able to persuade clients of the need for
adequate space for bins, allowing for new buildings to operate efficiently
Year-on-year improvement in environmental compliance and H&S record
Some tenders (specifically Ministry of Defence) require ISO 14001
accreditation
Only through employment of ISO14001
Guidance from WRAP in several areas of waste has saved millions of m3 from
going to landfill and saved natural resources
ISO 14001 helps with waste management, of course
Diageo's internal risk management standards certainly provide a framework
for waste management and for establishing waste targets etc. Each site is
audited against these standards by head office
The WEEE regulations addressed a widely ignored problem
Most supermarkets stopped giving out plastic bags simply to meet their own
corporate social responsibilities objectives
PAS 100 for compost has provided assurance and benefit to commercial
operations
Companies that have brought in standards have seen greater team inclusion,
pride and savings
The site standard on segregation of waste has contributed significantly to our
reduction targets
Gypsum waste recyclers
Many of our members have used our guidance, or that from WRAP, rather
than write their own, saving them valuable resources
DMA PAS 2020
Many organizations using ISO 14001 have seen benefits in waste reduction
etc
FRN enterprise quality mark enables companies to access goods supplied
through nationally brokered deals
PAS100 product has opened revenue streams for sales of compost
South East region Pathway To Zero Waste is looking with WRAP and EA at
the development of more standards, the potential for a commodities market
that will require a formal set of widespread standards owned by industry, and
creating demand by using the planning and procurement routes to embed
standards in delivery. They are also beginning to engage with insurance
companies and banks about their negative perception of recovered materials
74
Waste Framework Directive, Landfill Directive targets
A move from companies to higher value options such as business model
innovation and a broader view of resource effectiveness rather than purely
waste. There is confusion in the use of the word ‗waste‘. For manufacturers,
waste is associated with process inefficiency and for consumers/users waste
is related to loss of material at the end of life (for example packaging)
New technology for dealing with solid waste to prevent/reduce landfill
DEFRA proposals on waste management license exemptions will cause
millions of tonnes of good useable material going to landfill
Corporate social responsibility
Zero waste to landfill is the big goal (essentially no mixed waste should be
produced). The use of a 'primary waste contractor' has become popular (one
key waste contractor who manages the sub-contractors)
Informal social networks such as transition towns could be use effectively by
local businesses who wish to attract these organized social groups that aim to
achieve practical sustainable management solutions in their areas.
Businesses could offer incentives to such informal social networks and then
link with them on mutual efforts on waste reduction and resource
management. Such protocols have been developed in Hackney
New technologies including gasification and autoclaving all need to have more
research and support in preference to mass-burn incineration. These are the
future - any technology which captures the energy within a resource or
reuses/recycles that resource must be considered
The issue of who is enforcing standards must be sorted i.e. Environment
Agency or local authorities. SMEs do not understand waste transfer notes.
The large construction companies have adapted the Site Waste Management
Plan(SWMP) to more effectively run their operations
Supermarkets looking to reduce cereal packaging is a good start
The trend for CSR and the inclusion of 'corporate citizenship' reports in the
annual accounts means that all areas of ecological or social impact are
coming under scrutiny in many large firms
CSR programmes are often launched as cost-cutting exercises. A centralised
repository of standards and guidelines can help to build the case for possible
savings from better waste management
Increase in landfill tax is a spur to waste reduction
The link to sustainability and eco design
The waste protocols prepared by EA/WRAP have provided a valuable route
for many materials previously deemed waste
Finally, stakeholders were asked if they have any general comments in relation to
standards (formal or informal) for businesses and other organizations in waste
management, reduction and prevention. Their responses are listed below:
75
BSI should be aware that waste companies are already asked a full range of
questions (by both public and private sector procurers) relating to
environmental and safety management, as well as the company's
management of waste. These questions affect our chances of prequalifying
for tenders
I don't feel that waste specific standards are necessary
Standards may be applicable to other industry sectors - processors and
operators of transfer stations and landfill. In most industries they are a
hindrance. Need to change the culture in organizations not
regulate/standardise more
There needs to be continuous improvement in waste segregation and in
sending waste back directly to the manufacturer of the waste component.
Why generate more standards when the EA guidance notes are sufficient?
In our experience, standards do not necessarily guarantee a high level of
environmental management ambition, as the standard requires compliance
with the general framework rather than specific target (as in the case of ISO
14001). However, they provide an important management framework and a
tool for companies to differentiate themselves from others, as well as external
scrutiny of environmental practices
A full impact assessment must be made and agreed with industry
Standards need to be developed and promoted in all areas to promote best
practice
These should be a requirement for all organizations, as all organizations
make waste in one form or another
They need easy to follow standards, cost benefits shown and easy routes to
practical support
You can have too many standards. Don't create them just for the sake of it.
Many larger businesses in particular already have established operational,
input and output standards; they do not require a further generic standard for
procedure.
76
APPENDIX 8 – AGENDA AND INFORMATION SENT TO WORKSHOP
DELEGATES PRIOR TO THE WORKSHOP
Agenda
77
Questions for discussion
Please spend 5 minutes listing out common wastes that are produced by your
business/organization or businesses/organizations that you work with.
What are the key drivers and enablers that allow businesses and other
organizations to improve the management and minimisation of their waste?
What are the key blockers that are preventing businesses and other
organizations from improving their waste management and minimisation
activities?
Please spend 5 minutes listing out the steps that your organization (or
organizations that you work with) is taking to manage and minimise waste.
78
APPENDIX 9 – LIST OF DELEGATES ATTENDING THE WORKSHOP
Euston Ling AEA Technology
79
APPENDIX 10 – FINDINGS FROM THE STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP
Question 1. Please spend 5 minutes listing out common wastes that are
produced by your business/organization or businesses/organizations that you
work with.
Question 2. What are the key drivers and enablers that allow businesses and
other organizations to improve the management and minimisation of their
waste?
Drivers
Standards
Proving that waste is no longer a waste but is actually a resource
Landfill tax (and the financial implications for a business)
No clear driver for
Lack of strong policy and targets
Reducing cost/saving money
Customer demand
Statute/legislation
ISO 14001
EMAS
Staff
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
Security of supply
Audits
Carbon accounting
Incentives for providing corporate marketing messages (example was given
that B&Q source material from sustainable forests)
Pay to throw issues
Local authority and corporate targets
Regulations and avoiding financial penalties
Health and Safety requirements
Cost of disposal
Company policy
Quality assurance
80
Political influence
Producer responsibility
Community pressure
Media
Incentives
Enablers
Standards
Simplification
Technology
Information
- resource recovery messages
- awareness of hidden costs
- best practice
- key monitoring of business activities
Funding
Legislation
Staff/employees
Supply Chain
Lack of policing
Question 3. What are the key blockers that are preventing businesses and
other organizations from improving their waste management and minimisation
activities?
81
Lack of time
Lack of enablers
Conflicting priorities within an organization
Misinformation and misunderstanding
Not enough data sharing and benchmarking information
Lack of effort from local authorities
- Lack of designated collection facilities
Disappearance of WEE during collections (i.e. cherry picking – no policing)
Lack of control
Lack of local re-processors
- Leads to down-cycling
Lack of policy to create consistent market conditions
Complexity of packaging
Product design
Virgin resource subsidies
Cost of recycling and finding the cheapest way 'to get rid of it‘
Corporate inertia
Global production
EU fatigue
Question 4. Please spend 5 minutes listing out the steps that your organization
(or organizations that you work with) is taking to manage and minimise waste.
82
Social and corporate responsibility measures
Service contract for managing office materials
Audits of material/energy/water usage trends and reporting back and
influencing staff behaviour and management
Group 1
Reduce material use or change material choice and inputs
Just in time (lean manufacturing)
Clean design
Group 2
Optimal use of minimum resources consistent with fitness for purpose
Continually making more with less
Maximum added value with minimum resources and wastage
83
Group 3
Prevention (strict avoidance/prohibition)
Reuse
Recycling
Group 4
Measurement collection
End of waste
Minimise post-use recycled content
Question 7a. How do you see a voluntary standard in waste management and
minimisation working in practise?
Voluntary standard would not work very well because there are too many
‗cowboys‘ in the industry
However, could be the first step to encourage behavioural change
Standard needs to be compulsory with adequate policing
Should be focused on collection
Should be material specific
Needs to have industry buy in and supply chain involvement
Would need to cover process control
Objective must be to improve bottom line
Needs to be recognised and credible
Addresses procurement and whole life costing
Gives best practice guidance
Quick win checklist (application specific)
Supply chain integration
Need to be able to self certify with optional external audit
Used as a data sharing mechanism
Allows comparison of data versus others
Would include a material cost of waste indicator
We should be looking at a standard that can be tagged to ISO 14001. It
should cover energy, carbon impact and mass balance/reduction with 3
focuses:
- Primary manufacturing and services
- Material retrieval and conditioning
- Secondary production and products
84
May provide resource efficiency indicators
85