bede júlia - comparison of the waste management policies appleid within the european union and the...

8/3/2019 Bede Jlia - Comparison of the waste management policies appleid within the European Union and the accessing c

1/73

BGF KKFK Elektronikus KnyvtrAz elektronikus knyvtr teljes szveg dokumentumokat tartalmaz biztostva a szabad informci-hozzfrst. A szerzi s egybjogok a dokumentum szerzjt/tulajdonost illeti. Az elektronikus knyvtr dokumentumai szabadon felhasznlhatk vltoztatsok

nlkl a forrsra val megfelel hivatkozssal, de csak sajt clra nem kereskedelmi jelleg alkalmazsokhoz.

3

Budapesti Gazdasgi Fiskola

KLKERESKEDELMI FISKOLAI KAR

KLGAZDASGI SZAK

Nappali tagozat

Eurpai zleti Tanulmnyok szakirny

COMPARISON OF THE WASTE MANAGEMENT

POLICIES APPLIED WITHIN THE EUROPEAN UNION

AND THE ACCESSING CEE COUNTRIES, THROUGH THE

EXAMPLE OF SWEDEN AND HUNGARY

Prepared by: Jlia Bede

Budapest, 2003

rrs: http://www.doksi.hu


2/73



4

Table of Contents

1 Introduction....................................................................................................................5

2 Environmental Protection in the European Union ......................................................7

2.1 The development of the EUs Environmental Policy...................................................... 7

2.2 Legal basis of the European Unions environmental policy and the concerning

legislation....................................................................................................................................... 8

2.2.1 Legal basis: the principles..........................................................................................................82.2.2 The concerning legislation.......................................................................................................10

2.3 The Sixth Environmental Action Programme. Environment 2010: Our future, Our

choice11

2.3.1 A new strategic approach......................................................................................................... 112.3.2 The key priority areas ..............................................................................................................12

3 The European Unions waste management policy .....................................................13

3.1 The most important terms and definitions in the area of waste management ........... 14

3.2 The development of the EUs waste management policy and the main legislation ... 17

3.3 The waste management policy of the Sixth Environmental Action Programme....... 22

3.3.1 The sustainable use of natural resources..................................................................................223.3.2 Waste Prevention and Management.........................................................................................23

4 Waste management policy and practice in Sweden ....................................................27

4.1 Brief history of Swedish waste management................................................................. 27

4.2 Waste legislation in Sweden............................................................................................ 28

4.2.1 The Environmental Quality Objectives Bill 1999 ...................................................................294.2.2 Year 2000.................................................................................................................................29

4.2.3 Year 2001.................................................................................................................................294.2.4 Year 2002 ................................................................................................................................304.2.5 Year 2003.................................................................................................................................30

4.3 Responsibility distribution in Swedish Waste Management........................................ 31

4.4 Collection and transport of waste .................................................................................. 31

4.5 Waste Economy................................................................................................................ 33

4.6 Quantities of waste in 2002 ............................................................................................. 33

4.6.1 Material recycling ....................................................................................................................34

4.6.2 Landfill..................................................................................................................................... 364.6.3 Biological treatment.................................................................................................................38



3/73



5

4.6.4 Waste to energy incineration.................................................................................................384.6.5 Hazardous waste ......................................................................................................................404.6.6 Industrial waste........................................................................................................................ 41

5 Environmental Protection in Hungary .......................................................................42

5.1 Short history of Hungarys environmental policy........................................................ 43

5.2 Environmental legislation in Hungary .......................................................................... 43

- The 1995/LIII Act on the general rules of environmental protection ................................... 44

5.3 The Second National Environmental Protection Programme..................................... 45

(NEPP II).................................................................................................................................. 45

5.3.1 The Programmes principles ....................................................................................................455.3.2 The framework for implementation of the Programme............................................................465.3.3 Waste management in the Programme..................................................................................... 46

6 Hungarys waste management policy..........................................................................48

6.1 Waste Management legislation....................................................................................... 49

6.1.1 Act XLIII. of 2000 on Waste Management..............................................................................49

6.2 The institutional background ......................................................................................... 51

6.3 Division of Responsibility in Waste Management ........................................................ 52

6.4 Waste economy in Hungary............................................................................................ 53

6.5 Waste management in Hungary and the National Waste Management Plan............ 54

6.5.1 Amounts of waste and waste management in 2000 .................................................................556.5.2 Waste treatment in Hungary .................................................................................................... 586.5.3 Special Material and Waste Flow Programme.........................................................................63

6.6 Selective waste collection at Kistarcsa: a good example to be followed in the whole

country......................................................................................................................................... 64

7 Overall Comparison and Conclusion..........................................................................67

7.1 Comparison of waste management legislation in the two countries ........................... 68

7.2 Differences in division of responsibility in waste management ................................... 69

7.3 Waste economy compared .............................................................................................. 69

7.4 Differences in waste treatment methods........................................................................ 70

List of Tables and Graphs...................................................................................................71

Bibliography........................................................................................................................72



4/73



5

1 Introduction

Nowadays, at the beginning of the 21st century, environmental protection has become one

of the most important issues. Its importance lies in its global nature. There is not one single

corner of our planet where the protection of the natural environment is not essential.

Everyone is, in one form or another, affected by the damages caused to the environment,

and everyone is involved in the damages caused.

More and more people are becoming aware of the importance of protecting the natural

environment. The problem is, that most people are not aware of what they could to

diminish the damages caused, and which of their actions has the most harmful effect.

Waste management is one of the areas where the contamination of the environment can be

controlled to a great extent, as everybody generates waste. It is up to the governments and

other decision-making bodies to set up rules and regulations that ensure a reasonable

management of waste.

I have chosen waste management as the topic of my dissertation, because it is an issue that

I am faced with day after day, and my experiences about the, not very encouraging, waste

situation in Hungary have made me want to know more about the possibilities of

improvement. Sweden has become my other choice, because it is a country that can serve

as a very good example with its outstandingly well controlled environmental protection

and well managed waste.

The European Union is making serious efforts in the field of environmental protection. The

countries already members of the Union have the obligation to meet the regulations of the

Community, and the countries accessing in 2004, also have to comply with the rules. Thisis not an easy task for many Member States, and even harder for the often far less

developed accessing countries.

The following work aims to compare the waste management practice of the European

Union and the accessing countries. In order to make the comparison clearer, I have chosen

two examples from each side: Sweden, as a Member State, and Hungary as an accessing

country. Through these two examples, it will be easier to highlight the main differences. It

is, however, very important to keep in mind that neither of the two countries shows an



5/73



6

exact picture of the group they are entitled to represent. There are two reasons for this. The

first is, that although the EU has homogeneous regulations, the Member States are at

different levels of implementation of these regulations. Sweden can be considered as one

of the most positive examples for waste management within the EU. It has, in many cases,

already gone beyond EU rules, and adopted stricter legislation. The second reason is

similar, but concerns the accessing countries. In their case, the adoption of the EU

regulations is at an even less developed stage, and they can not be treated as a

homogeneous group, as they are at very different levels of the adoption of the acquis

communitaire.

Despite the two reasons stated above, I am convinced that by analysing the waste

management practices of the two countries chosen, a good picture of the most important

differences between the two groups can be shown.

The first part of the dissertation deals with the European Unions environmental and waste

management policy. These first two chapters show the standards, which the two countries

have to meet. The adoption of EU rules are a must for all Member States and accessing

countries.

The second part of the dissertation discusses the waste management policy of Sweden. Itpresents the national legislation and national waste management practices. The degree of

compliance with EU regulations is also discussed.

The third part presents Hungarys waste management policy and practice. The analysis is

conducted in the same way as in the case of Sweden. This means that the analyses are done

according to the same aspects in both cases. Through this method, the final comparison and

conclusion are easier to complete.

The final part is an overall comparison and conclusion. Here, the most importantdifferences are highlighted and a final conclusion is drawn.



6/73



7

2 Environmental Protection in the European Union

2.1 The development of the EUs Environmental Policy

The European Unions environmental policy has independent features from national

policies: it is based on ethical, economical and welfare principles.

When it was founded in 1957, the European Economic Community had no environmental

policy. It was only in the late 1960s and early 1970s that the Community began to develop

a policy of its own, due to the emerging environmental awareness all around the world.

It was in the year of the UN Stockholm environmental conference, in 1972, that the

Community developed its First Environmental Action Programme, which has been

followed by five other up to the present day. These action programmes give the main

guidelines of the development European environmental policy for various years in advance

.

The first two Action Programmes were mainly aimed at the rehabilitation of the

environment, which shows the recognition by the Community of the importance of

environmental consciousness in the decade of the 1970s.

The Third Action Programme (in 1983) was the first to recognise and introduce

prevention as the most important principle of environmental protection.

The Fourth Programmes (1987-1992) most important goal was the harmonisation of

environmental policy with the Communitys other policies.

The Fifth Programme was launched in 1992 with the title: Towards Sustainability. This

programme took account of economic issues, the need for development and the

unsustainable abuse of natural resources, in order to develop a modern environmental



7/73



8

policy. It set longer term objectives and focused on a more global approach. Two major

principles formed the basis of the programme. The first was the integration of

environmental dimensions into all policy areas and the second the replacement of

command-and-control approaches with shared responsibility between the various actors of

community control (e.g. governments, regional institutions and the community

institutions.)

In order to achieve the goals set by the agreed principles, a series of instruments had to be

introduced and used. These included new environmental legislation, economic instruments

that encouraged the use of environmentally friendly production methods, together with

financial support, information, education and research.

The Sixth Environmental Action Programme is in force at present, since the year 2001. I

will present the programme in detail later in the chapter.

Environmental policy was introduced into the Treaty of Rome by the Single European Act

in 1987, and therefore it can be considered a community policy since that date.

In 1996, the Amsterdam Treaty brought along big changes in environmental questions. Init, they introduced the requirement of sustainable development as a basic community

policy, and also the horizontal integration of environmental issues into other community

policy areas.

Nowadays environmental protection is a priority issue in the European Union and serious

efforts are being made to achieve the total integration of this policy into all areas of action.

2.2 Legal basis of the European Unions environmental policy and the

concerning legislation

2.2.1 Legal basis: the principles

The principles of the European Unions environmental policy are listed in the 130r(2) of

the Treaty on the European Union (the Treaty of Maastricht). They are:1

1 www.kum.hu/eu/magyar/kiadvanyok/korny.pdf



8/73



9

The principle of high level of protection. The treaty states that the main goal is

the high level of environmental protection. The Community has to take into

account the scientific facts, the environmental state of the different regions, the

costs and benefits of the actions taken in this field and the overall economic and

social conditions.

The precautionary principle. Basically, this principle means, that environmental

damage should be avoided by all means.

The principle of preventive action. Preventive action means that environmental

damage should be rectified at source, and this can anticipate the spreading of the

damage through the environment.

The polluter pays principle. Whoever causes the environmental damage should

bear the costs. This may mean the restoring of the caused damage or the costs of

keeping the environmental norms. In practice, however this principle is often

difficult to apply in many cases of pollution, as the given tools (e.g. environmental

taxes) are not effective enough.

The principle of integration. Environmental policy does not have sense if it is

contradictory with other policies, and therefore it has to be integrated into all policy

areas.

The principle of subsidiarity. This principle states that the EU will only act when

it can solve a problem more effectively than the national level could. This means

that the problems are solved on regional, national and community levels with the

most effective division of tasks possible.

Principle of sustainable development. The EU is committed to the application of

the definition of sustainable development in its environmental policy. The

definition was worked out by the Bruntland Committee in 1987: development



9/73



10

that satisfies the needs of present generations in a way that does not keep future

generations from being able to satisfy their own needs.

The partnership principle. This principle aims at developing co-operation

between those, taking part in sustainable development in order to solve

environmental problems.

2.2.2 The concerning legislation

Article 130s identifies the legislative procedures for environmental policy. It states that

qualified majority voting (QMV) has to be used in the council for most areas with co-

operation or co-decision procedure with the European Parliament (EP).

At present, the environmental legislation of the EU is made up of approximately 300

directives, regulations, decisions and recommendations, and the number is growing.

The activities of the European Union reach out to all areas of environmental legislation. In

order to achieve better understanding of the legislation it is divided into some key areas.

These are:2

Horizontal legislation concerning all areas of environmental specialities.

Air cleanness protection

Waste management

Water quality protection

Nature protection

Control of industrial pollution

Chemical substances and genetically modified organisms

Protection against noise pollution

Climate protection, environmental policy, international agreements

Nuclear safety and protection against radiation

Catastrophe prevention and citizen protection

2 Source: www.euro.hu



10/73



11

It is a basic expectation that apart from these specialities, environmental legislation should

also cover certain economic areas, such as agriculture and transport as well as the different

aspects of sustainable development.

2.3 The Sixth Environmental Action Programme. Environment 2010: Our

future, Our choice3

The Sixth Environmental Action Programme of the Community was introduced in January

2001. It followed the Fifth Environmental Action Programme and it was developed so as to

ameliorate it. Therefore, the programme builds to a great extent on the results already

achieved, and the fields where improvement is needed.

The Global Assessment of the 5th Action Programme gave the basis for the new

programme. According to the evaluation of the fifth programme, great progress had been

made in certain areas such as cutting pollution levels, but there were still many problems

remaining that would continue to worsen the state of the environment unless certain

actions were not taken.

The 6th Action Programme was meant to remedy these still existing problems. The method

for achieving this was, on the one hand, to work out a strategic approach to meet the set

objectives, and on the other hand, to identify the priority areas of action.

2.3.1 A new strategic approach

The new approach puts great emphasis on new, innovative ways of working with all

sections of society.

It highlights the importance ofimproving the implementation of existing environmental

legislation, as empirical evidence showed that member states were often lagging behind in

questions of adopting and applying community rules.

The integration of environmental concerns into other policy areas is a key element of

the new approach. This means that all institutions should concentrate on making

3

Executive Summary of the 6th

Environmental Action Programmewww.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/pdf/2001/en_501PC0031.pdf



11/73



12

environmentally conscious decisions in all areas, and no other alternative can be

acceptable. All decisions must be assessed in the light of their impact on the environment.

Working together with the market is also emphasised. The idea is, that if consumer and

business interests are kept in mind, this will contribute to the introduction of more

sustainable production and consumption patterns. It is very important to note, that the new

strategy includes the suggestion that reward for good performance in the case of businesses

should be introduced, besides punishing those who fail to comply with the new rules.

Informing consumers to allow them to choose environmentally friendly products, giving

public subsidies in order to promote environmentally benevolent practices and encouraging

businesses to innovate and develop clean technologies are also important new points in the

strategy.

The Communitys role is also described in the new approach. This is basically to provide

support for Member States by promoting best practice and through the Structural Funds in

questions like land use planning and management decisions. Through this, the

fragmentation of land in rural areas, for example, can be prevented.

2.3.2 The key priority areas

Four priority areas were identified, to which special attention is paid in the action

programme. These four areas have been obviously selected because they are the ones most

affected by the environmental damages. In each of the four areas the objectives of the

programme are made clear and the ways and methods to reach these goals are set forth.

The four areas are: tackling climate change, with the goal of reducing the concentrationof greenhouse gases; protecting nature and bio-diversity and restoring the functioning of

natural systems; protecting environment and health by reducing the levels of

contaminants; and finally, the sustainable use of natural resources and the management

of wastes. The latter area I will discuss in detail in the following chapter.



12/73



13

In connection with the Sixth Environmental Action Programme it has to be noted that it is

this programme, which has to and will give the enlarged European Union the direction and

the tools to create a clean and safe environment.

It fulfils its task as a basis for the environmental policy of the Community, as it provides

the guiding principles and the methods needed, it involves the citizens as well as

businesses and contributes to a great extent to sustainable development.

3 The European Unions waste management policy

For our society, waste means a two fold environmental challenge. The reason for this is,

that all waste has to be either recovered or be disposed of. This means environmental

impacts on the one hand and economic costs on the other. In order to make the

management of waste as efficient as possible on both sides of the problem, it needs to be

decoupled from economic growth.

The European Union is making serious efforts to work out an effective and efficient waste

management policy that will help reach the overall environmental goals but will not hold

up economic development.

This task is not an easy one, due to the great difference in the economic state of the

Member States. The differences in the level of implementation of Community legislation

in the participating countries means a great problem, and the control of waste is also a

problematic area, due to the lack of resources and harmonisation of statistical data,

although improvement has been made recently in this field. Through the planned

introduction of the Waste Statistics Regulation a legal basis will be provided for data



13/73



14

collection and processing, and this way it will hopefully contribute to providing a

comprehensive picture of waste generation and treatment for the whole Community by

2006.

It is important to note here that within the difficult area of environmental protection, waste

management is an accentuated and difficult issue. The necessarily high involvement of

citizens implies a high degree of understanding and acceptance of the issue by the

population. This is not an easy task to solve, as a whole new attitude needs to be

developed.

3.1 The most important terms and definitions in the area of waste

management

In order to give a better understanding of the policy measures taken in the Community to

deal with the enormous amount of waste, it is important to clarify the meaning of the most

important terms used within this area.4

Waste: Materials that are not prime products (that is, products produced for the

market) for which the generator has no further use in terms of his/her own

purposes of production, transformation or consumption, and of which he/she

wants to dispose. Wastes may be generated during the extraction of raw

materials, the processing of raw materials into intermediate and final products,

the consumption of final products, and other human activities. Residuals recycled

or reused at the place of generation are excluded.

Within the European Union the generation of waste reaches approximately 1.3 billion

tonnes per year (excluding agricultural waste). This means an average of 3.5 tonnes per

capita per year, but the exact number varies from country to country.5 Besides the largeamount of waste, the complexity of the generated waste also faces decision makers with a

great challenge.

Waste stream: The total flow of solid waste from homes, businesses,

institutions and manufacturing plants that is recycled, burned, or disposed of in

landfills.

4

All definitions from: http://glossary.eea.eu.int/EEAGlossary/5 www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/CAC/2003/com2003_0301en01.pdf



14/73



15

The total waste generation within the EU is made up of five major waste streams:

manufacturing waste (26%), mining and quarrying waste (29%), construction and

demolition waste (22%), municipal solid waste (MSW) (14%) and agricultural waste.

Graph no. 1:

Source: Communication from the Commissionwww.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/CAC/2003/com2003_0301en01.pdf

Waste management: The collection, transport, treatment and disposal of waste

(including after-care of disposal sites).

Waste management is one of the most important topics within the environmental policy of

the European Union. It has been developing since the beginnings of the Community. The

approaches to dealing with waste have changed throughout the years, from the relatively

simple method of waste control to a wider, integrated approach. I will discuss the

development of the Unions waste management policy in detail later on in this chapter.

Waste treatment: The physical, thermal, chemical or biological processes,

which change the characteristics of the waste in order to reduce its volume or

hazardous nature, to facilitate its handling or to enhance recovery.

As in the waste hierarchy defined by the Sixth Environmental Action Programme of the

EU, recovery of waste is in the second place, the treatment of waste, which facilitates

recovery is a very important issue, that the EU deals with in depth.

Major Waste Streams in the EU

26%

29%22%

14%

9%

Manufacturing waste

Quarrying w.

Construction anddemolition w.

Municipal Solid w.

Agricultural w.

http://www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/CAC/2003/com2003_0301en01.pdfhttp://www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/CAC/2003/com2003_0301en01.pdf


15/73



16

Recycling: (1) A resource recovery method involving the collection and

treatment of a waste product for use as raw material in the manufacture of the

same or a similar product. (2) The EU waste strategy distinguishes between:

reuse meant as a material reuse without any structural changes in materials;

recycling meant as a material recycling, only, and with a reference to structural

changes in products; and recovery meant as an energy recovery only.

Recycling is practically the best method for treating generated waste. Globally increasing

waste volumes force authorities to improve recycling methods by encouraging further

amelioration of waste collection methods (i.e. separate collection).

Data on the trends in treating waste shows (in the case of MSW), that progress has been

made towards recycling throughout the 1990s. In numbers this means that in the early

1990s about 15% of waste was treated this way, while by theend of the decade this

had increased to approximately 20%.6 This data, of course is an average, as the numbers

vary from Member State to Member State.

Landfill: Deposition of waste on land under controlled conditions.

Although it is not the best way to dispose of waste, this method is still the most widely

used within the Community. At the end of the 1990s, it accounted for 57% of waste

treatment at Community level. This had been a great improvement since the early years of

the same decade, but it is still extremely high. Looking at the differences in numbers

between the Member States can prove this statement. In some states the percentage of

waste (MSW) that goes to landfill is over 80%, while in other countries it is less than 20%.

This variation is due to both economic and social reasons, but it shows that it is possible to

reach such low numbers in landfill.7

Incineration: The process of burning solid waste under controlled conditions toreduce its weight and volume, and often to produce energy.

Incineration is commonly regarded as an extremely pollutant activity. However,

incineration can be a source of energy, and if safely carried out, the damages caused to the

environment can be minimised.

6 Data from: www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/CAC/2003/com2003_0301en01.pdf

7 Data from: www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/CAC/2003/com2003_0301en01.pdf



16/73



17

3.2 The development of the EUs waste management policy and the main

legislation8

The waste management policy of the European Union, as previously mentioned, has

undergone serious changes (improvements) from its creation until present day.

During the 1970s, the European waste management policy was rather concerned with

dealing with the outputs of the economy than with the efficient use of resources. The main

policy areas were the regulation of the final disposal methods of waste and the

development of end-of-pipe solutions. It was soon realised that these two approaches only

give temporal solutions and are not appropriate on the long-term.

The policy approach, since then, has progressively shifted towards a more integrated

approach that puts emphasis on prevention, rather than subsequent action.

I will now shortly present the approaches followed within the different environmental

action programmes developed by the Community, and the main legislation adopted in each

of them. In the case of the Sixth Environmental Action Programme I will discuss the waste

management policy approach in detail in a separate section, later on in this same chapter.

The First Environmental Action Programme (1973-1976) emphasised the need for a

remedial approach at a Community level to problems of waste disposal. During this

programme, in 1975, the Framework Directive on waste 75/442/EEC was adopted. It

was amended by the Council Directive 91/156/EEC, but the main contents have

remained the same. I will discuss the most important contents of the directive in the

context of the fourth Action Programme.

The second (1977-1981) and the third (1982-1986) Environmental Action Programmes

put more emphasis on the Community actions needed to combat waste and a more efficient

use of natural resources. The most important legislation adopted within the framework of

these two programmes was the Hazardous Waste Directive 78/319/EEC, which was

replaced by Directive 91/689/EEC (I will also discuss this directive in detail in the

context of the fourth Action Programme.)

8

http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk/uploadstore/An%20Overview%20of%20European%20Waste%20and%



17/73



18

During the period of the Fourth EAP (1987-1992), the Bruntland report was released,

which defined the concept of sustainable development. This new concept brought along

changes in all areas of environmental policy, and waste management was not an exception.

In 1989 a Community Strategy for Waste Management was introduced, and within it

the principle of waste hierarchy was formally defined. Since then, waste prevention has

been regarded as top priority.

The fourth programme put great emphasis on the need for clean technologies and the use

of instruments other than environmental legislation was first envisaged. These included

economic incentives such as environmental taxes, and also information.

The most important legislation adopted in this period were: the Municipal Waste

Incineration directives 89/369/EEC and 89/429/EEC (amended in 2000), the Amended

Framework Directive on waste 75/442/EEC and the Directive 91/689/EEC replacing

Hazardous Waste Directive 78/319/EEC. I will now discuss the main points of the latter

two.

Amended Framework Directive on waste 75/442/EEC9

The main objective of the directive is to set up a system for the co-ordinated managementof waste within the Community in order to limit waste production.

The most important contents of the directive are the following:

All Member States should prohibit the uncontrolled disposal of waste, and have

to promote prevention, recycling and reuse of wastes.

Co-operation between the Member States is needed in order to set up an adequate

network of waste disposal installations that guarantee a high level of

environmental protection. Member States have to make sure that all waste is handed over to private or

public collection agencies or disposal companies.

Companies treating, storing or dumping waste for another party must obtain

authorisation from the competent authorities.

Companies disposing of their own waste should also get authorisation.

20Resource%20Management%20Policy.pdf9 www.europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l21197.htm



18/73



19

In accordance with the polluter pays principle, the producer who generated the

waste must pay for the cost of disposal.

The competent authorities appointed by the Member States are in charge of

working out at least one waste management plan.

Directive 91/689/EEC on Hazardous Waste10

This directive is a complement for the waste framework directive for hazardous waste. The

objective of the directive is the management, recovery and correct disposal of hazardous

waste. The main elements of the directive are:

The properties that make any waste type hazardous are listed in the annexes of

the directive. By these lists, any waste can be identified as either hazardous or

not.

Member States have to ensure that hazardous waste is not mixed with other

hazardous or non-hazardous wastes, and that all hazardous waste is recorded and

identified.

Any establishment dealing with hazardous waste must obtain a permit. They

must be subject to regular inspections and have to keep a record of their

activities. Competent authorities have to make plans for the management of hazardous

waste and the Commission has the task to evaluate these.

Member States can derogate from the directive when there is a case of great

danger or emergency, but the Commission has to be informed of any such

derogation.

The annexes of the directive can be changed in order to be in accordance with

scientific and technological progress.

The Fifth Environmental Action Programme (1993-2000) was underpinned by the

concept of sustainable development. It introduced a new approach, which differed from the

previous ones in that it supported a proactive approach against the previously used

corrective ones. A good example for this new approach is the launch of the Priority Waste

10 www.europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l21199.htm



19/73



20

Stream Programme, which was aimed at dealing with important waste streams like tyres,

vehicle and other, in an integrated way.

Similar to the Fourth Programme, this one too, put emphasis on the introduction of new

control and influence methods, other than legislation. Public participation, education as

well as the already mentioned economic instruments were more and more widely used.

This underlined again, that the objective was no longer to handle the waste and resources

issue through previously set legislation, but instead to create an environment where the

sustainable resources management would be feasible.

The most important legislation adopted in the context of this programme were: the

Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive 94/62/EC, the Integrated Pollution

Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive 96/61/EC, the Landfill of Waste Directive

1999/31/EC and the Waste Incineration Directive 2000/76/EC. I will now present the

most important points of these directives.

Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive 94/62/EC11

The objective of the directive is to harmonise the national ways of packaging and

packaging waste management.

The most important points of the directive are: It covers all packaging and all packaging waste placed on the market regardless

of the material it is made of.

Member States must take measures in order to prevent the formation of

packaging waste, and they must introduce systems for recovery and recycling of

used packaging.

The requirements concerning the composition of packaging are also laid down in

the directive. In order to monitor the implementation of the objectives of the directive, Member

States must ensure that harmonised databases on packaging and packaging waste

are established. Member States must report regularly to the Commission on the

implementation of the directive.

Landfill of Waste Directive 1999/31/EC12

11

http://www.europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l21207.htm12 http://www.europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l21208.htm



20/73



21

The main objective of the directive is to minimise the negative environmental effects of

landfill by introducing strict technical requirements for landfills. The most important

features of the directive are:

It identifies the most important categories of waste to which it applies and those

to which it does not and classifies the landfills according to the categories above.

For example: landfills for hazardous, non-hazardous and inert waste.

The directive lays down the criteria for accepting waste in landfills in order to

avoid any risks. It also lists those types of waste that are strictly prohibited to

accept for landfill.

A system for operation permits is also set up for landfill sites.

Waste Incineration Directive 2000/76/EC13

The objective of the directive is to reduce the damage caused by the incineration of waste

to the environment as well as human health. In brief, the directive states:

The scope of the directive spreads to the incineration of non-toxic wastes and it

intends to fill the gaps left by previous legislation (i.e. Municipal Waste

Incineration directives 89/369/EEC and 89/429/EEC).

It applies to co-incineration plants, which are intended to produce energy andmaterial products using waste as a regular or additional fuel.

The heat produced by incineration has to be put to good use as far as possible.

It states the limit numbers for emissions in both incineration and co-incineration

plants and also provides measures for the process of incineration.

Concerning the waste management legislation it is very important to note that in order to

make it more understandable, it can be divided into three categories. Horizontallegislation (which includes for example the Framework Directive on waste) gives an

overall framework for the legislation, the main definitions and the most important

principles. Legislation on waste treatment operations including disposal includes such

directives as the directive on landfill and on incineration. These, set out the requirements

for the final handling of waste, they clarify the permit conditions for establishments, and

the environmental standards they have to keep to.

13 http://www.europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l28072.htm



21/73



22

The third category is the legislation on specific waste streams. Among these the

Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste can be mentioned, but there are many

directives in this category. The growing amount, and complexity of some waste streams,

and the need of control over them in terms of hazardousness has motivated this legislation.

3.3 The waste management policy of the Sixth Environmental Action

Programme14

As described in the previous chapter, the Sixth Environmental Action Programme (2001-

2010) of the Community was developed in order to further ameliorate the achievements of

the previous programme and also to introduce a more integrated approach into

environmental policy.

In this new programme, decision-makers have chosen four priority areas within the context

of environmental policy. Among these four areas is the issue of waste management,

together with the sustainable use of natural resources. With the reasonable use of natural

resources, a lower volume can be reached in waste generation. The two areas are therefore

very closely related to each other.

In the following I will describe the objectives set out by the programme for both areas and

the policy approach used to reach these.

3.3.1 The sustainable use of natural resources

Our planets resources, and in particular the environmental and renewable resources (air,

soil, wateretc) are under serious pressure from the growing population, the development

of the economy and the ever increasing demand for them. This serious growth in

consumption of these resources is reaching the edge of the carrying capacity of the planet.Lack of fresh water and desertification are no longer rare phenomena in many parts of the

world.

In the case of non-renewable resources, such as metals and minerals, the use of these and

the generated waste from them cause serious damage to the environment and human

health.

14

Source: 6th

Environmental Action Programme, full text:http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/pdf/2001/en_501PC0031.pdf



22/73



23

The objective of the programme in this area is to ensure that the consumption of these

resources does not exceed the carrying capacity of the planet, to decouple resource

consumption from economic growth and to lower the amount of waste generated through

their consumption.

As a first step, the policy described in the Programme states the need for a Thematic

Strategy on the sustainable use of natural resources, especially non-renewable resources.

The basic approach for setting this strategy is to:

Establish a framework to identify criteria for setting priorities and undertake the

necessary data collection and analysis to identify the resources that are of most

concern.

Identify and implement specific policy measures that reduce the consumption of

these resources for example by changing demand, improving the efficiency with

which they are used, preventing the wastage of these resources and by improving

the extent to which they are recycled back into the economy after use.

Some specific measures that are to be taken are also listed in the programme. These are

aimed at helping the implementation of the described policy approach. These measures are:

Promote research and development into less resource-intensive products andproduction.

Use of taxes and other economic instruments in a way that encourages the use of

more resource-efficient technologies, products and services.

Removal of subsidies that encourage the over use of resources.

The implementation of the strategy requires actions at different levels of government and

in the different sectors of the economy. These actions will, however, be rewarding, as by

improving resource efficiency, economic efficiency will increase and this will enhancecompetitiveness and innovation.

3.3.2 Waste Prevention and Management

As our society gets wealthier, the demand for products increases. This, together with

decreasing product life cycles generates increasing quantities of waste. At the same time,

products are becoming more and more complex, using a large variety of substances, and

therefore will become hazardous waste after use.



23/73



24

Amounts of waste generated in the Community are projected to increase, unless some

serious action is taken to prevent this. The enormous amounts of waste, apart from

requiring large portions of valuable land, contaminate the environment and are extremely

harmful to human health.

The Sixth Environmental Action Programme sets out various objectives and targets in the

field of waste management.

The main objective of the Programme is to decouple waste generation from economic

growth and achieve an overall reduction in waste volumes by introducing improved waste

prevention initiatives, better resource efficiency and a shift towards more sustainable

consumption. The main objective, therefore, is to prevent waste from actually arising.

For wastes that are still generated, the aim is to achieve a situation, where:

The wastes are non-hazardous, or at least present a very low risk for the

environment and human health.

The majority of waste is reintroduced into the economic cycle by recycling, or is

returned into the environment in a harmless form.

The quantity of the waste that still needs to go to final disposal has to be reduced

to an absolute minimum.Waste should be treated as closely as possible to where it is generated.

Specific targets are also set in the Programme:

The quantity of waste going to final disposal has to be reduced by 20% until 2010

compared to 2000, and by 50% until 2050.

The quantity of hazardous waste generated should be reduced by 20% until 2010

compared to 2000, and by 50% until 2020.

The policy approach of the programme is based on the principle of waste hierarchy. Thisprinciple gives preference first to waste prevention, then to waste recovery and finally

waste disposal. The policy is based on Community legislation (described earlier in the

chapter). In connection with the legislation, the Programme states, that specific attention

will be given to the implementation of the existing measures by the Member States.

For achieving the holistic use of the waste hierarchy, the Community has worked out

policy approaches for its levels separately.



24/73



25

In the case of waste prevention (the most favoured area), the aim is to decrease volumes

and also hazardousness. This means that waste prevention applies to both quantitative and

qualitative matters. In order to achieve this aim, waste generation needs to be decoupled

from economic growth.

As waste prevention is closely linked with resource efficiency, the preventive action must

be taken at source, at the production stage itself and along with this, changes in

consumption patterns should be backed.

In terms of specific actions this means, on the one hand, making producers responsible for

the treatment of waste generated by their products and the substitution of hazardous

substances with less hazardous ones, and on the other hand, encouraging the use of

economic instruments to reduce the use of resource- and waste-intensive processes and

products.

According to the waste hierarchy, waste recovery has to be used in the case of wastes that

can not be prevented, with particular emphasis on recycling.

In previous programmes, recycling was mainly aimed at specific waste streams, such as

packaging waste, but now focus is on a more general approach. Recycling is now promoted

in all areas, but it is important to note that only to the extent where it still makes sense andthere is a net environmental benefit.

Actions to be taken towards a Thematic Strategy on waste recycling are described in the

Programme.

These are:

To identify which wastes should be recycled as a priority.

Formulate policies and measures that ensure the collection and recycling of the

priority waste streams. These include recycling targets and monitoring systems. Identify policies that could encourage the creation of markets for the recycled

products.

The Sixth Environmental Action Programme, as it can be seen, gives very specific tasks

for the Community in terms of waste management.

The most important goal set by the programme is to decouple waste generation from

economic growth, to enhance the efficient and sustainable use of natural resources, to



25/73



26

improve producer responsibility and to change consumption patterns in favour of more

environmentally friendly products. These four main goals are targeted through a series of

action plans. These do not only apply at the Community level, but also need to be followed

by all levels of national governments.

In order to be able to assess the waste management plan of the Sixth Environmental Action

Programme, we should wait until 2010 at least, but probably even longer. The reason for

this is, that although the measures described in the programme are very good, it is difficult

to forecast how they will be implemented and used, how producers and consumers will

react to them. Although, in my opinion, it is probable that the reception of the new

measures will be positive, as people are getting more and more conscious about their own

role in the protection of the environment.

In the following chapter I will give a specific example of how a Member State deals with

waste management within its own borders.



26/73



27

4 Waste management policy and practice in Sweden

In the previous chapter, I described the waste management policy of the European Union.

In this chapter I will give a specific example on how the EUs policy is applied in a

Member State, and for this purpose I have chosen Sweden. The reason for my choice is

that Sweden is in a very good state of applying Community rules in this area and has waste

management practices that can serve as an example not only for the accessing countries,but other Member States as well. I would like to underline that it is not only the countrys

decision making bodies who give special attention to this issue, but also the population as

well, meaning not only individuals, but producers and all those who produce waste. I

find this very important to mention, because without them, effective and efficient waste

management would be unimaginable. It is a society that has understood the importance of

the issue, and also, that it is only with the participation of everybody, that the common goal

of a sustainable environment can be achieved.

In this chapter I will first outline in brief the history of waste management in Sweden.

Then I will give a review of the concerning Swedish legislation, the division of

responsibilities in waste management, I will write in brief about collection and

transportation issues, waste economy and I will also give specific data about waste issues

in Sweden in 2002 (the latest year available).

4.1 Brief history of Swedish waste management15

The first, so called, Public Cleansing Authorities in Sweden were set up in the second half

of the 19th century. The reasons for this were the spreading diseases and the growing

amount of waste. It was becoming clear for the Central Government that the Municipalities

themselves should be entitled to provide this service. As for every service provided, in this

case too, there was a fee to be charged, but in the beginning this did not include the cost of

treatment and disposal, only collection. By the 1960s, the service expanded to cover all

15 www.riet.org/conference/conference-files/B%Paulsson%2001.doc



27/73



28

urban citizens, but due to the increasing amount of waste, pressure was also on for

technical development of treatment and disposal methods.

The 1970s brought along the first real challenges for Municipalities. Many discovered that

they were running out of available land for landfills and that this method was not going to

be affordable for individual Municipalities. Multi-municipal co-operations became the

solution for this problem, and these associations later became the centres of competence in

management skills and development of new methods. Together with the growing amount

of waste, new treatment and disposal methods were also developed.

Nowadays waste management has become much more than merely a sanitary problem.

Efficient waste management is a must for every society. In Sweden this has been

recognised at all levels. Apart from the economic instruments such as taxes and fees,

information campaigns are also used to reach the set goals for waste management.

All the efforts together have led to the extremely prominent situation, where Sweden is

about 30-50 years ahead of other countries in terms of managing waste.

4.2 Waste legislation in Sweden

Waste legislation in Sweden can not be separated from Community legislation. As a result

of this, the past few years have brought quite a few changes to Swedish waste policy.

These, however, have not only been the result of Community decisions, but of national

ambitions as well. The waste hierarchy described in the Sixth Environmental Action

Programme of the Community is also adopted in Sweden, and the concerning legislation is

developed in accordance with this principle.

Chapter 15 of the Environmental Code, SFS 1998:808 gives the definitions and the general

framework for waste management. In addition, there are a number of other provisionsconcerning the topic. In the following I will give a review of these, but it is very important

to note that the concerning Community legislation described in the previous chapter also

applies in Sweden, although I will not describe them in this chapter again.



28/73



29

4.2.1 The Environmental Quality Objectives Bill 1999 16

The Bill describes 15 environmental goals, with corresponding subsidiary targets. The 15

goals describe the environmental conditions that the country should reach within one

generation. The concerning targets are measurable and time-bound, in order to ensure the

achievement of the goals and through them a more sustainable development.

From among the 15 overall goals, there are two, which affect waste management. First, the

goal of groundwater of good quality, with the subsidiary goal of higher and more uniform

environmental requirements for landfills and second, a good living environment, with the

subsidiary goal of reduced quantities of waste going to landfill.

There are some specific targets for waste management as well:

Reduce the quantity of waste

Reduction of the quantity of waste going to landfill with 50% by 2005 (compared

to 1994)

Reduction of the hazardous content of waste

Now I will give a review on the main legislation in order of the year they were introduced.

4.2.2 Year 2000In the year 2000 tax on waste going to landfill was introduced.17 The law constituted the

biggest change for Swedish waste management in economic terms. The main aim of the

legislation was to increase costs and steer away flows of waste from landfill by making

other treatments economically more attractive.

4.2.3 Year 2001.18

A new ordinance on landfill was passed. This incorporated the Communitys landfilldirective into Swedish legislation. According to it, all landfills must be conform with the

strict environmental rules by 2008.

The other rule introduced this year was the rule on handling electric and electronic

waste. Completely new conditions for separating and handling emerged, as a result of the

new requirements for pre-treatment and producer responsibility.

16 www.regeringen.se/galactica/service=irnews/action=obj_show?c_obj_id=4155717

www.rvf.se/startsidan.html18 www.rvf.se/startsidan.html Swedish Waste Management 2002



29/73



30

4.2.4 Year 2002 .

On 1st of January of this year a totally new waste ordinance came into force. This new

legislation comprises two previous ones (Waste Collection and Disposal Ordinance and

Ordinance on Hazardous Waste), which have ceased to apply. The new Waste Ordinance

incorporates the new EU Waste List into Swedish legislation and also simplifies permit

procedures.

During this same year a requirement for separating and a ban on landfilling

combustible waste were introduced. The tax on landfilled waste was also raised and a ban

on landfilling organic waste from 2005 was also decided about.

4.2.5 Year 200319

In 2003, the EU issued a new directive on waste from electric and electronic equipment,

but for Sweden this does not mean significant changes, as the national legislation

introduced in 2001 within the same area, is very similar.

The Community Directive on Incineration on Waste (described in the previous chapter)

was introduced into Swedish Legislation under the name of Ordinance on Waste

Incineration.

In May 2003 the government presented its bill A Society with a Non-toxic and

Resource Saving Ecocycle. The bill deals with questions of producer responsibility, tax

on incinerated waste, biological recycling and the role of local authorities in waste

management.

On January 2003 the tax on landfilled waste was raised once again, and has therefore

risen by 50% since its introduction in 2000.

It can be seen that in questions of waste management, Swedish legislation goes beyond

Community rules. They set national goals and back them with strict national legislation.

They do not only go further than Community rules in strictness, but also in time. Often

only minor changes have to made to Swedish legislation in order to comply with the EU

rules (e.g. in the case of electric and electronic equipment or the case of landfills)

19 www.rvf.se/startsidan.html Swedish Waste Management 2003



30/73



31

4.3 Responsibility distribution in Swedish Waste Management

The distribution of responsibility in questions of waste is stated in the Swedish

Environmental Code.

The responsibility is divided between three actors: the local council, producers and

those who give rise to other waste.

The local authorities are responsible for transporting household waste within the

Municipality to a treatment station. This, on the other hand, implies an obligation for those

who give rise to household waste to hand it over to the local authorities. It is important to

note that it is not possible to hand over the task of managing household waste to anyone

but the local council.

The cost of municipal waste management is paid by the households through a fee, and it is

obligatory for everyone to follow the rules concerning waste management in their

municipality. The rules are decided by the local council.

Producers are responsible for waste covered by statutory producer responsibility. There

are five categories of this type of waste today: packaging waste of various materials, waste

paper, tyres, cars and electric and electronic products. Producers are obliged to look afterthe collection and recycling of these wastes.

There has been an agreement between the local authorities and the producers in the case of

electric waste. The local authorities collect the electric household waste, while the

producers are responsible for recycling it.

The third party responsible is anyone who gives rise to waste other than household

waste or waste covered by producer responsibility. Anyone within this category is

obliged to ensure that the generated waste is handled and disposed of in anenvironmentally correct way. The costs are paid directly by the producer of the waste.

4.4 Collection and transport of waste

More and more municipalities are introducing systems were the households sort their

waste before collection. Separation of organic and combustible fractions is now an

established custom in about 50 of the 289 municipalities in Sweden.20 There are

20 www.riet.org/conference/conference-files/B%20Paulsson%2001.doc



31/73



32

differences in the frequency of collection of the different types of waste. Organic fractions

are usually collected once a fortnight while other fractions are often only collected every

fourth week. Different types of waste are usually collected in bags of different colours.

This way, only one container per household has to be collected, and there is no need for

multi-compartment vehicles either. The different coloured bags are optically sorted before

final treatment. This makes the handling of waste much easier.

In the case ofbulky waste, house owners are encouraged to take their waste to municipal

recycling centres, but there is a service of collecting bulky waste from the households, if

the owners wish. Waste from electric and electronic equipment and hazardous waste is also

directed to the sorting plants. At the recycling centres waste is sorted according to

properties. The sorting of waste has created a whole new profession, where a high

knowledge of materials is needed. Apart from sorting waste, recycling centres also give

information to the public about waste management issues. These sorting plants have been

operating in Sweden since the 1970s. There, recyclable waste was separated from mixed

waste, but this is an extremely difficult, if not an impossible task. This is why nowadays

the waste that goes to the sorting plants is already separated to a certain degree.

Changes have occurred in the collection of industrial waste. Producer responsibility andother legislation, together with economic reasons and growing environmental awareness

have forced producers to separate their waste before collection and use different containers

to make collection easier. Collection is still mostly done with traditional rear loading

vehicles.

For packaging waste there are over 7000 recycling stations in Sweden. Here there are

separate containers for glass, metal, plastic and paper.

Private contractors collect about 60 percent of waste in bins and sacks on behalf ofmunicipalities. The municipalities themselves collect the remaining 40 percent.

The main way of collecting the waste is with the traditional back-loaded vehicles, but the

collection with side-loaded vehicles still has a ten percent market share.

Some municipalities are introducing identification systems, which note and report data on

the individual bins. Weighing systems are also introduced. Through them, information can

be given to the house-owners, about the amount of waste they generate and the system can

also be used to set fees.



32/73



33

4.5 Waste Economy

Under the subtitle of waste economy I will discuss the financial build-up of waste

management in Sweden.

The responsibility of managing household waste rests with municipalities, and in the case

of materials covered by statutory producer responsibility, with producers. This way, the

costs of waste management are covered on the one hand by waste management fees

charged by municipalities (waste taxes are very rare), and on the other hand

environmental levies on products, charged by the producers.

The waste management fees are set by the local council. Individual households can only

be granted total exemption from the waste management fee, if they are totally unoccupied.

A basic fee, however, always has to be paid to cover communal costs. Waste management

fees are often used as economic incentives to make households manage their waste in an

environmentally compliant way.

Nowadays municipalities often divide the set fees into a fixed and a variable part. This

way, the house-owner itself can influence the amount to be paid. The reason for this is the

wide range of activities that the fee needs to cover, but that often depend on the quantity

and the quality of the waste generated.

The environmental levies on products are set by the producers in order to cover their costs

in the managing of waste. The levies are included in the price of the products, so they are

not charged separately.

The total cost per person per year for waste management in an average household is

about SEK 500.21 This includes the costs for collection, treatment and transport.

4.6 Quantities of waste in 200222

In the following I will analyse the actual situation in Sweden concerning waste

management. I will analyse the most recent data available at the moment, which is data

concerning the year 2002.

21

www.rvf.se/startsidan.html Swedish Waste Management 200322 All specific data in this sub-chapter from: www.rvf.se/startsidan.html Swedish Waste Management 2003



33/73



34

In general it can be said that there was more waste in 2002 than in the previous years, but it

was better managed. The total amount of household waste was 4,172,200 tons (that is 476

kg per inhabitant), which is an increase of 6.2 per cent compared to the previous year.

The management of the generated waste has developed in a favourable direction. The

increase in material recycling and the decrease in the amount of waste going to landfill

both show that the management of waste is going in the right direction.

Graph no. 2: Source: www.rvf.se Swedish Waste Management 2003

The above diagram shows the degree of use of different treatment methods for householdwaste in 2002. In the following I will analyse each of the treatment methods, in turn. I will

concentrate on the numbers concerning household waste, but I will also write about the

situation with industrial waste. The reason for this separation of the types of waste is that

in the case of industrial waste there is less available data at the national level. Industrial

waste is waste produced by the industries throughout the production processes, or other

activities. Household and comparable waste comprises waste in bins and bags, bulky

waste, including green waste, hazardous waste and shop and office waste.

4.6.1 Material recycling

The amount of household waste being recycled is rising significantly. This increase

concerns all types material. In numbers, this means that the amount of household waste

recycled has risen from 28.9% to 31% compared to the previous year.

Distribution of Treatment Methods for Household

Waste 2002

1%

31%

9%39%

20% HazardousWaste

MaterialRecycling

BiologicalTreatment

Incineration

Landfill

http://www.rvf.se/http://www.rvf.se/


34/73


nlkl a forrsra val megfelel hivatkozssal, de csak sajt clra nem kereskedel

bede júlia - comparison of the waste management policies appleid within the european union and the...

Documents