Alignment of Uk Waste Strategy and the Eu Circular Economy Package

IN THE SEARCH FOR EFFECTIVE WASTE POLICY: ALIGNMENT OF UK WASTE STRATEGY AND THE EU CIRCULAR ECONOMY PACKAGE

C. A. FLETCHER* and R. M. DUNK**

* Waste to Resource Innovation Network, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK ** School of Science and the Environment, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK

SUMMARY: Over-consumption within a linear economy has been recognised internationally as a barrier to sustainability and a major cause of environmental degradation and economic disparity. To address these issues, the transition towards a circular economy has been advocated. A circular economy recycles and reprocesses materials and energy through successive generations and promotes resource efficiency at all stages of a product’s lifecycle. Within the European Union, the Circular Economy Package has been developed to stimulate Europe’s transition toward a circular economy. The Circular Economy Package aims to close the loop of product lifecycles, while bringing economic and environmental benefits. However, it has been criticised for its continued focus on waste management, and particularly the continued use of low priority waste hierarchy strategies such as recovery and disposal. It is an obligation of member states to transpose EU strategy and associated legislation into national policy. This study presents a content analysis of the national waste strategies of the four devolved nations of the United Kingdom - England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – to assess alignment with the ideal circular economy model and its interpretation within the Circular Economy Package. Key differences and similarities in the strategies of the four devolved nations are identified and discussed. The document published by Wales was found to align more to the ideal circular economy model when compared with the remaining three. However, continued utilisation of the waste hierarchy, particularly low priority categories was identified for all four documents, which would indicate greater alignment to the Circular Economy Package. The potential impact of Brexit is then considered, with consideration of how leaving the EU may hamper or enhance opportunities to move towards a circular economy model. In light of this, we conclude that the successful transition of the UK to a circular economy will require improvements from all four devolved nations and an overarching UK wide strategy that provides consistent and collaborative long-term objectives, particularly after Brexit.

Proceedings Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium/ 2 - 6 October 2017

1. INTRODUCTION

Increases in global population and a growing trend towards higher living standards have led to increased depletion of natural resources and environmental degradation due to the linear ‘take-make-dispose’ model on which economic growth has been built (Moreno et al., 2016; Wysokinska, 2016). Overcoming this unsustainable consumption pattern has been acknowledged internationally, most notably by the United Nations who prioritise Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) within their 10-year Framework of Programmes (United Nations Environmental Programme, 2015). A key component of SCP is the transition and implementation of the Circular Economy. This study will present a critical review of the ideal circular economy and its interpretation within the EU Circular Economy Package. From this, a framework will be developed against which national waste strategy (using UK devolved nations as an example) will be compared.

1.1 Ideal Circular Economy

A summary of an ideal circular economy is presented in Figure 1, where the circular economy model can be described as a broad resource efficiency concept (Su et al., 2013) that mimics a natural biological system by recirculating and reprocessing materials and energy through multiple phases (Lieder and Rashid, 2016). It is based on three principles (Ellen Macarthur Foundation [EMF], 2015); (1) Preservation and enhancement of natural capital through the control of finite stocks and the balance of renewable energy flows, (2) Optimisation of resource yields through circulating products, components, and materials, whilst maintaining utility at the highest levels in both technical and biological cycles, and, (3) Enhancing system effectiveness by revealing and designing out negative externalities.

The circular economy model is intended to function as a fully regenerative closed ecological- economic system (Lieder and Rashid, 2016) that reduces the consumption of resources at all stages of design, production, distribution and consumption (Su et al., 2016; Wysokinska, 2016). To maintain the flow of materials and energy, the 3R’s (Reduction, Reuse and Recycle) are embedded into production and consumption models (Su et al., 2013). The 3R’s aim to reduce the consumption of resources to the absolute minimum either through design or behaviour, reuse products and services by extending lifespans, increasing durability and improving repairability and recycle both materials and energy through subsequent lifecycles (Su et al., 2016; Wysokinska, 2016). Product design has been highlighted as crucial in the transition and implementation of the ideal circular economy (Leider and Rashid, 2016). This is achieved by reducing overall resource use as much as possible through application of eco-design principles, whereby resources are designed-out through dematerialisation and virtualisation of goods and services, and regenerative design approaches that ensure resources can be regenerated (Wysokinska, 2016). Other methods of circular product design include standardisation of components, design for easy end-of-life sorting, separation and recycling, and designed-to-last products with the application of potential by-products and wastes considered (EMF, 2015). The production and distribution of products and services should also follow clean- production principles, use renewable resources in a way that ensures regeneration, and increase producer responsibility through implementing reverse cycles within the supply chain Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

(Wysokinska, 2016; EMF, 2015). Clean production principles develop and incorporate low emission and low effluent technologies in existing processes to achieve continued economic growth, develop self-sufficient regional systems and develop virtual sharing markets among regional and international partners (Nemet et al., 2016). Responsible use of renewable resources ensures regeneration for use in subsequent lifecycles without loss of value or negative external effects (Wysokinska, 2016). Implementation of reverse cycles, or reverse supply chain logistics, is the process whereby products and materials are returned to the supplier or producer to be reused or reprocessed. By reclaiming products at end of life, producers can recirculate materials and improve resource efficiency, thereby using fewer materials in the forward system (Sarkis et al., 2010). The way in which products, services and resources are consumed should also be considered either through individual responsibility of consumption level or by utilising performance models (Stahel, 2016). Performance models, or product-service systems, remove ownership of products from the consumer by selling goods and services through rental, share and lease agreements. In doing so, ownership is retained by the producer/manufacturer and so they retain responsibility for the embodied resources (Stahel, 2016). This removes the incentive of business to maximise the number of products sold, and instead by providing a service, businesses are incentivised to maximise resource efficiency and product/service utility (Tukker, 2015). Policy and legislation have a key part to play in motivating different stakeholders to implement the circular economy model. Su et al (2013) identifies three levels of stakeholders, micro-level (individual producers and designers), meso-level (sectors and industrial parks), and macro-level (city/region, co-operative networks of primary, secondary and tertiary sectors), which should be acknowledged in successful circular economy policy. In general, policy and legislation is challenged to enable and develop new markets, and to promote innovation and resource efficiency (Lieder and Rashid, 2016). Nevertheless, the most important role of policies, legislation and overarching strategies are to engage and inspire individuals to consume less, reuse goods, and present high quality recyclate when waste is unavoidable (Price, 2001; EMF, 2015).

Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

OVERARCHING VISION The circular economy aims to preserve and enhance natural capital by decoupling economic growth and resource use through resource efficiency and maintenance of resource value, both in individual product lifecycles and across product supply chains. It requires deep systemic change whereby prevailing economic structures are changed, misconceptions of waste being unavoidable are challenged and economic growth along with social and technical progress are not restricted. To do this a transition away from the linear economic model is advocated along with the move towards closed loop material flows or cradle-to-cradle models that mimic a natural biological system at all stages of production, distribution and consumption.

3R PRINCIPLE STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION MECHANISMS Government creates environment to • Reduction promote the transition to a circular • Technological, Dematerialising utility through the following stakeholders… organisational, social Minimum resource innovation • Industry consumption • New finance/ business Clean production principles Promote waste reduction and models Eco-industrial parks minimisation initiatives • New policy instruments • Designers Reduce impact of legacy • Use of renewable resources Eco-design wastes that ensures regeneration Green products • Reverse supply chain Regenerative design approach • Reuse management Environmental friendly design Use of raw materials and • Process wastes without • Producers energy through multiple negative external effects Optimisation of production systems phases • Consumption of renewable Extensive co-operative networks Foster reuse and extend energy Reverse chain logistics service life • Extended product life • Consumers • Using wastes as raw Influence consumer behaviour • Recycle materials Turn old products/ materials Individual responsibility to reduce any waste generated • Delivering utility virtually into as-new resources • Replace production with Enable strong commodity Consumption patterns that respect the environment sufficiency markets for secondary • Enabling the development materials • Innovation Implementation of responsible research of new markets Promotion of new business models

. Figure 1. Elements of an Ideal circular economy (based on EMF, 2015; Wysokinska, 2016; Lehman, 2010; Lieder and Rashid, 2016; Su et al., 2016).

Although there is strong agreement regarding the urgent need to shift to more sustainable patterns of consumption and production, barriers to transition and limitations of the circular economic model (as described above) have also been identified. Andrews (2015) suggests that the transition towards the circular economy may be limited due to a lack of knowledge and understanding of relevant stakeholders and the presence of current materials and products that are difficult to reuse or recycle i.e. legacy wastes. Jawahir and Bradley (2016) argue that while the socio-political dimensions and opportunities of the circular economy are being pursued and promoted, the technological challenges required to implement the circular economy are often overshadowed. It has been suggested that the 3R’s be expanded to consider multiple, intersecting lifecycles and focus on broader innovation-based methodologies (Jawahir and Bradley, 2016). Other criticisms of the circular economy include unintended consequences Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017 due to transference of impacts and over simplistic goals that are based on reductionist thinking and mathematical models (Murray et al., 2017). Furthermore, Murray et al (2017) argues that rather than promoting biomimicry, the circular economy should aim to “bio-participate” where actions take place within the existing biosphere., Despite these limitations, the circular economy model continues to be the desired destination for many countries including those in the European Union (EU; Wysokinska, 2016). The following section explores how the circular economy model has been interpreted and incorporated within the Circular Economy Package (CEP, European Commission [EC], 2017), the flagship EU strategy to promote resource efficiency.

1.2 EU Circular Economy Package

Already a policy leader in environmental areas such as transport, energy and climate change (Wysokinska, 2016), the publication of the CEP by the EU introduced new priorities that advocated resource efficiency and initiated the transition away from a linear economy and towards a circular model (EC, 2017). While previous strategies such as the ‘Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe’ (2011-2013) and ‘Towards a circular economy: a zero-waste programme for Europe’ (2014-2015) promoted the circular economy, their emphasis remained on the efficient use and management of waste. In contrast, the CEP aims to prioritise the circular economy and address inherent limitations of previous policy initiatives, including a shift in focus away from waste reduction targets and toward full product lifecycle thinking (EC, 2017). Whilst the CEP does encourage industrial symbiosis and the development of secondary materials markets, it continues to place an emphasis on waste management strategies such as revising targets for recycling and landfill diversion and the implementation of the waste hierarchy (EC, 2017; Pomberger et al., 2016). While continued use of legislative targets to increase recycling and recovery and reduce waste disposed of to landfill may be required to drive change, it has been argued that too little emphasis is placed on higher priority (waste hierarchy) strategies. For example, while reducing waste at source is the most effective and efficient way to contribute towards a circular economy, the lack of policy action regarding prevention (i.e. no quantitative targets for reduction or reuse) creates a perceived policy bias towards recycling and disposal (Mazzanti and Zoboli, 2009; Fischer, 2011). However, the CEP is supported by other EU strategies and policies such as the “Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources” (EC, 2005), the “Sustainable Consumption and Production Action Plan” (EC, 2008) and the “Integrated Product Policy”, which includes elements such as eco-design, eco-labelling, and green public procurement (EC, 2016). In combination, these resource and product oriented approaches aim to reduce the environmental impact of resource use while promoting economic growth (EC, 2003) through improving the environmental performance of goods and services across the full lifecycle and creating sustainable business opportunities (EC, 2008, 2016). This provides a framework of strategies and policy objectives that individual member states should adhere to, to aid their transition toward a circular economy.

1.3 Transposition of CEP into member state legislation

The multilevel governance character of the EU sees overarching objectives and suggestions of appropriate instruments published centrally, but decisions with respect to how to go about achieving these objectives and which instruments to use sitting with individual member Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017 states (Nilsson et al., 2012). There are several reported techniques by which EU policy is transposed into national policy including Copy-out (using the exact words and phrasing of the EU directive), Gold-plating (going beyond the minimum stated requirements), and No Gold- plating (consists of only the minimum requirements; Anker et al., 2015). This degree of member state discretion has led to significant differences in national implementation of resource and waste policy, where it has been argued that this creates a barrier to harmonisation, and as such convergence to a single policy regime across Europe is not likely (Garcia Quesada, 2014).

1.4 UK waste policy and the impact of Brexit

With the introduction of the Landfill tax, extension of separate recyclate collections, and the increased export of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) for incineration, the UK, over the two past decades, has transitioned away from high landfill dependency (Pomberger et al., 2016). During this time, EU legislation has provided momentum to improve waste management and lifted it above the national party politics that previously hindered the development and implementation of long-term strategy (United Kingdom Environmental Law Association [UKELA], 2016; BP Collins, 2016). However, due to a plateau in progress potentially caused by the “no gold-plating” approach of transposition (Ankers et al., 2015), the development of new measures that manage resources rather than waste are now required to maintain the momentum of positive change. UK waste policy, along with other UK environmental legislation, has been largely shaped by European Directives; indeed, it is a notable feature of UK waste policy that secondary legislation is used extensively to transpose EU environmental law, particularly the Waste Framework Directive, into domestic law (Scotford and Robinson, 2013). However, following withdrawal from the EU (termed “Brexit”) in the near future, the UK will no longer be obligated to transpose or adhere to EU Directives. While the CEP is expected to come into force before the Brexit negotiation deadline, there is an element of uncertainty regarding this, the UK could repeal or amend domestic implementation of the CEP once it has left the EU (BP Collins, 2016). This leads to the question of how UK waste and resource management will develop in the absence of long-term vision and strategy provided by the EU. Current commentary on the implications of Brexit for waste policy suggests that in the short term the UK would continue to apply existing EU legislation and strategy (Burges Salmon, 2016; BP Collins, 2016). However, in the medium to long term it is difficult to predict whether successive UK governments would maintain compliance with current and successive EU legislation, look to go beyond the CEP and successive EU strategies, or maintain the current status quo, with the risk of being left behind (Burges Salmon, 2016). This is further complicated by the differing positions of the devolved nations within the UK. The devolution of power in the UK allows the four home nations (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) to manage waste and resources within their own boundaries while contributing to overall UK objectives. This has led to the introduction of different strategies by the four nations. Indeed, based on an evaluation of primary and secondary environmental legislation, Scotford and Robinson (2013) argues that Wales and Scotland are providing the most innovative legislation developments when compared across the UK. This study presents an in-depth analysis of the current waste management strategies (introduced prior to publication of the CEP) of the four devolved nations. This study will assess the waste management strategy of the four devolved nations; England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, against the ideal Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017 circular economy and its interpretation in the CEP. It will identify and highlight areas of risk and opportunity, and offer suggestions for future improvement.

2. METHOD

Content analysis has been widely employed as both a qualitative and a quantitative method in policy analysis in a range of policy areas including; health (e.g. Lemiengre et al., 2008), environment (e.g. Maczka et al., 2016), serious crime (e.g. Paoli et al., 2016), procurement (e.g. Testa et al., 2016), and cleaner production (e.g. Peng and Liu, 2016). Content analysis is reported as a simple yet flexible method used to describe and quantify phenomena, analyse written, verbal or visual communication and enhance the understanding of data through the exploration of theoretical ideas (Elo and Kyngäs, 2008). This method also allows the inclusion, comparison and corroboration of large volumes of textual data from different sources (Elo and Kyngäs, 2008). To do this and ensure reliability, analysis should be objective, systematic and quantitative whereby categories of analysis are precisely defined and the inclusion/exclusion of documents is based on consistent rules (Testa et al., 2016). However, the simplicity of this method has created limitations in the application of statistical analyses (Elo and Kyngäs, 2008); instead, it is restricted to descriptive statistical techniques and correlation analysis, which is often criticised by quantitative researchers (Testa et al., 2016; Elo and Kyngäs, 2008). This study will use content analysis of strategy documents and the circular economy framework presented in Section 1.1 (Figure 1) to compare the contents of the documents against the ideal scenario. The three main themes explored in this study are; the overarching vision of the strategy document, promotion of the waste hierarchy, and the inclusion of stakeholders. With the role of the devolved nations in the continued development of UK waste policy acknowledged, this study included the current waste strategies of the four devolved nations; • England: “Waste Management Plan for England” – Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (2013), • Scotland: “Scotland’s zero waste plan” – Natural Scotland, 2010, • Wales: “Towards Zero Waste – One Wales: One Planet” – Welsh Assembly Government, 2010, • Northern Ireland: “Delivering Resource Efficiency” – Department of the Environment, 2013. The overarching vision of each document concerning a circular economy, zero waste, green economy etc. was compared against that of the ideal circular economy (Figure 1) and the EU Circular Economy Package. Using a basic automated keyword search (see Table 1 for search terms), and manual analysis to ensure complete coverage, the number of times terms associated with the circular economy, waste hierarchy categories and stakeholder categories (based on Strauss and Corbin, 2008) were mentioned were counted.

Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Table 1. Keyword search terms CATEGORY SEARCH TERMS Circular Circular; Linear; Life cycle (cradle); SPC /SCP (Consumption/ Production) economy Economy; “Zero waste”; Resource efficient WASTE HEIRARCHY CATEGORIES Reduce Minimis*; Prevent*; Reduc*; Divert*; Substit* Reuse Reus*; Re-us*; Refurb*; Repair; Remanu*, Reprocess* Recycle Recycl* Recovery Recover*; Incinerat*; Energy; Compost*; Digest* Disposal Dispos*; Landfill; Discard*; Deposit STAKEHOLDER CATEGORIES Global*; EU; Export*; International; Europe*; Country/Area Names (E.G. Turkey, International India, China, Scandinavia); Overseas; Member States Devolved Nations (England/Scotland/Wales/Northern Ireland/Gibraltar); Government National (Central); National*; UK/ United Kingdom; Domestic Agency; Regulat*; Names of Depts./Agency (Defra, MMO, Environment Agency, GD/NGPB(i) BIS); Department; Group (Working, Task); Committee Regional Authorit*; Local; Council; Region* Waste sector Operat*; Waste Industry/ Business*; Compan*; Indust*; Sector; Organisations; Commerc*; Producer; Business Enterpris*; Private; Retail*; Manufacturers Consumer; Individual; People; Household*; Municipal; Residents; Schools; Home; Consumer Public (i) Governmental department/ Non-governmental public body

Additionally, the responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the document with respect to policy instruments such as statutory targets, voluntary initiatives, provision of support, and promotion of ideals, along with feedback mechanisms such as the collection and distribution of data and information and changes to behaviour and activity, were also noted. Qualitative data analysis software (NVivo 10) was used for the coding and retrieval of coded text to aid analysis. Documents were assessed by two researchers, with points of ambiguity/disagreement discussed and clarified. It is noted that for this study, only main body text was analysed with other sections such as the title page, contents pages, section headings, figures and tables, etc., excluded.

3. RESULTS

Table 2 presents summary results for all devolved nations with respect to the frequency of keywords associated with the circular economy, waste hierarchy categories, and stakeholder groups. This is accompanied by Table 3, which summarises the overarching vision of each document concerning the circular economy (and cognate themes). Results for each nation are briefly presented in following sections.

3.1 England

Thirty-eight pages of relevant main body text (including 194 paragraphs and with a word count of 10,963) were analysed from the 42-page “Waste Management Plan for England” document. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

3.1.1 Overarching vision

As shown in Table 2, terms associated with the concept of the circular economy were mentioned twenty times. This document deals primarily with minimising the environmental and human health impact of waste generation and management. This is achieved by supporting local authorities (and waste management companies) to prioritise recycling and recovery of waste materials. It highlights the role of zero waste initiatives in the transition towards a sustainable economy, and advocates lifecycle thinking, closed loop approaches and a zero- waste economy. However, it provides little more that rhetoric regarding these ideas. For example, although it does imply that resources should be used efficiently, it places the responsibility of creating more goods/services with fewer resources, with businesses and industry rather than through central/governmental drivers.

Table 2. Frequency of keywords mentioned within the devolved nations’ Waste Management Strategy documents associated with the Circular Economy, Waste Hierarchy categories and Stakeholder groups. Proportion of each document analysed and rank with respect to most number of mentions per paragraph also shown.

DETAIL ENGLAND SCOTLAND WALES N. IRELAND Total pages 42 59 92 68 Pages analysed 38 46 59 51 Paragraph analysed 194 288 357 374 Word count analysed 10,963 13746 13768 19604 CIRCULAR ECONOMY Circular Economy (total) 20 28 108 25 (per paragraph) 0.10 0.10 0.30 0.07 (rank) 2 2 1 4 WASTE HIERARCHY Reduce (total) 37 63 117 90 (per paragraph) 0.19 0.22 0.33 0.24 (rank) 4 3 1 2 Reuse (total) 31 70 68 84 (per paragraph) 0.16 0.24 0.19 0.22 (rank) 4 1 2 3 Recycle (total) 89 143 143 150 (per paragraph) 0.46 0.50 0.40 0.40 (rank) 2 1 3 3 Recover (total) 74 84 58 82 (per paragraph) 0.38 0.29 0.16 0.22 (rank) 1 2 4 3 Disposal (total) 56 74 72 116 (per paragraph) 0.29 0.26 0.20 0.31 (rank) 2 3 4 1 STAKEHOLDER GROUPS International (total) 75 34 41 115 (per paragraph) 0.39 0.12 0.11 0.31 (rank) 1 4 3 2 National (total) 191 239 294 197 Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

(per paragraph) 0.98 0.83 0.82 0.53 (rank) 2 2 1 4 GD/NGPB (total) 53 48 19 144 (per paragraph) 0.27 0.17 0.05 0.39 (rank) 2 3 4 1 Regional (total) 42 40 24 50 (per paragraph) 0.22 0.14 0.07 0.13 (rank) 1 2 4 3 Waste sector (total) 24 35 29 68 (per paragraph) 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.18 (rank) 3 2 4 1 Industry/business (total) 68 77 77 86 (per paragraph) 0.35 0.27 0.22 0.23 (rank) 1 2 2 4 Consumer (total) 39 84 69 86 (per paragraph) 0.20 0.29 0.19 0.23 (rank) 4 1 2 3

Table 2. Circular economy characteristics identified in the waste management strategies of the four devolved nations; England, Scotland (Scot), Wales and Northern Ireland (NI).

CHARACTERISTIC ENGLAND SCOT WALES NI IDEAL CIRCULAR ECONOMY Preserve/enhance natural capita • • • • Decoupling economic growth Resource efficiency • • • • Maintain resource value • • • Lifecycle thinking • • • Supply chain management • Systemic change • • Change economic structures • • • • Avoid waste • • • Economic growth • • • • Social progress/ justice • • Technical/Technological progress • • Closed loop/ cradle-to-cradle • • • Mimic biological/ natural systems • sustainable consumption and production • • Design for longevity, reuse and recycle • • • 3R principle – Reduction • • • 3R principle – Reuse • 3R principle – Recycle • • Stakeholder participation – Industry • • Stakeholder participation – Designers • • • Stakeholder participation – Producers • • Stakeholder participation – Consumers • • • Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Stakeholder participation – Research/ business • Mechanisms – policy instruments • • • • Mechanisms – business models • • • Mechanisms – market development • • Mechanisms – virtualisation/ dematerialisation • • Mechanisms – innovation • • MISCELLANEOUS Waste hierarchy • • • • Secondary materials markets • • • • Minimise impact of waste/ resource use • • • • Resource management • • Waste management sector involvement • • • • Zero waste economy/ society, green economy • • • Protect human health • • Legacy waste • • Green jobs • • • Avoid down-cycling • Move away from linear economy model • Sector specific programmes/ schemes/ plans • Identify key waste streams • Long term policy/ plans • • Sustainable/ green procurement • • • Responsibility of consumers • • Resource management • • Resource security/ future availability • • • Use of fair share/ within environmental limits • • Consumer consideration/ selective purchasing • Recycling society • Reduce climate change impacts • • Reduce carbon footprint/ ecological footprint • Sustain cultural legacy • Use secondary/ recycled/ alternative materials • • • Sustainable development • Avoid lock in • Eliminate associated emissions and discharges • •

3.1.2 Promotion of waste hierarchy

As shown in Table 2, terms associated with the category ‘Recycle’ were mentioned most frequently with 89 mentions; while ‘Recovery’ terms were mentioned 74 times, ‘Disposal’ terms were mentioned 56 times, ‘Reduce’ terms were mentioned 37 times and ‘Reuse’ terms were mentioned 31 times.

3.1.3 Inclusion of stakeholders Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

As shown in Table 2, ‘national’ stakeholders were referred to the most frequently with 191 mentions; while ‘international’ stakeholders were mentioned 75 times, ‘industries excluding waste’ were mentioned 68 times, ‘governmental department and other public bodies’ were mentioned 53 times, ‘regional’ stakeholders were mentioned 42 times, ‘consumers’ 39 times, and the ‘waste sector’ 24 times. Table 3 records responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the document with respect to policy instruments and feedback mechanisms, which are further summarised below. • ‘International’ stakeholders set overarching legislation and objectives. In addition, they introduce broad programmes to assist with the completion of these objectives and require the collection of information and data to assess progress. • ‘National’ stakeholders transpose legislation into national objectives, set national targets, provide support and guidance to other stakeholders in achieving these objectives, and encourage sustainable thinking within resource/waste management. Contribution to feedback mechanisms sees ‘national’ stakeholders monitoring and reviewing progress, providing information and data sources to other stakeholders, producing quality standards for recycled materials, identifying suitable locations for future facilities and driving behaviour change. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Table 3. Responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the Waste Management for England document.

Industry/ ENGLAND Gov. Dept/ Regulators/ Regional/ Local Consumer/ International National Waste sector business/ other NGPB authorities Individuals sectors Fulfil requirements of WFD. Devolved waste management Waste Framework plans. Bring all associated Directive (WFD), Regulate waste management Consider national policies under one umbrella Adhere to regulation Obligates member activities. Policy enforcement, planning policy. Adhere to plan. Develop re-use and repair and legislation. states to transpose prosecution. Lead on the Legal obligation regulations, Policy/ policies. Provide planning Sector specific EU waste Packaging (Essential under the legislation and Legislation/ strategies, planning targets. Obligation regulation, set Requirements) Regulations Environmental permit conditions. Statutory frameworks, Waste under Producer recycling and 2003 and Producer Protection Act 1990 Notify regulator Management regulations and Responsibility targets landfill targets, Responsibility Obligations to provide waste of facility proportional/ targeted Regulations (esp. Publishes (Packaging Waste) Regulations collections to closures. legislation. Set sector specific WEEE). mandatory 2007. households. targets and suitability criteria for requirements. facilities. Regulation to create secondary material markets. Voluntary Reward and recognise schemes agreements to tackle Weekly Collection Support Provide waste Campaigns/ EU LIFE+ to increase frequency and food waste. Private Scheme. Provides funds for collection Meet the Voluntary programme, quality of waste collections. finance initiatives schemes. Voluntary producer agreements to necessary quality initiatives/ Courtauld Produce quality standards for (provide financial responsibility agreements with smaller shops and standards commitment recycled materials. Offer help for additional Programmes specific sectors. trading estates. alternative business models. infrastructure and capacity). Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Work with national Produce guidance on the government to application of the waste increase frequency Provide technical support, Recognise and act hierarchy. Provide advice to and quality of suitability criteria, guidance and upon potential local authorities to improve waste collected. access to skills. Facilitate savings through waste management. Sets out Help local Provision of infrastructure provision. Advise better resource the principles of how local businesses meet support/ on options available. Help efficiency and authorities can help local their waste recognise and act upon preventing waste, to guidance businesses meet their waste management potential savings through realise opportunities management responsibilities responsibilities and efficacies. Stimulate investment for growth. Capitalise and recycle more Improve recycle more. (green investment bank). on opportunities clarity of application forms and Facilitate the guidance provision of waste infrastructure. Contribute to a more sustainable economy Encourage separate collection by building waste of bio-waste, sustainable food reduction into design. Encouragement waste management, Demonstrate the benefits of Polluter pays sustainable design, greater use food waste collections to principle, share cost / Endorsement/ of recycled content in packaging business. Encourage weekly of management Promotion and a culture of valuing collections of residual waste waste at end of resources Promote high quality products life cycle. recycling. Encouraged to use of greater recycled content in packaging. Provide evidence on current Provide evidence Developed Edoc activities. Respond to on current waste system. Requires Monitor and review progress consultations. Report illegal management member states to regarding WFD targets and Provide evidence waste exports. Publish policy activities. Respond analyse current waste arisings. on current waste Provide statements and forecasts to consultations. WMS, characterise Evaluate/analyse current management Provide evidence on evidence on regarding waste arisings. Report illegal waste Information and waste generated, policies and practices. Reform activities. current waste current waste Produce guides on EfW and exports. Record data collection/ assess new/current reporting procedures. Involve Respond to management management local waste management plans. data. Assess the distribution collection and local communities in early consultations. activities. Respond to activities. Extract good quality data from need for any disposal schemes. planning stages. Provide info Contribute to consultations Respond to EDOC system. Initiate changes to Evaluate adverse regarding how to reduce/ repair/ waste strategy consultations consultations. Collaboration collection effects of marine enable reuse of waste. Share and action plan. with industry. Compile regional arrangements that based waste evidence. reports, produce statistics. best fit local activities Assess performance of local circumstances. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

authorities.

Responsibility for Responsibility for minimising risk of minimising risk of Change illegal waste Aims to increase the recycling illegal waste export. behaviour to export. Change Behaviour Drive behaviour change. of waste streams that arise Change contribute to behaviour to away from the home. behaviour/actions to national contribute to contribute to national objectives national objectives objectives Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

• ‘Governmental departments and other public bodies’ are obliged to implement legislation and policy from both international and national levels by providing funding for schemes and organising voluntary sector agreements. In addition, they provide advice and guidance to other stakeholders on the implementation of waste hierarchy strategies and support inter- stakeholder collaboration. They provide evidence and data regarding current (and future) waste management activities, initiate/respond to consultations and distribute environmental permits to facilities that are routinely inspected. • ‘Regional’ stakeholders are obligated to implement national legislation, provide waste collection services, and support business to meet responsibilities. They work in partnership with the waste sector to ensure full and efficient waste services in their area, record and report local waste generation/management data, provide evidence to consultations, and report illegal activity. • The ‘Waste sector’ must adhere to national and international legislation and relevant environmental permit conditions. Where appropriate, actions are developed to meet quality standards and behaviours changed to contribute to national objectives. They are obligated to provide waste collection services that are regular, efficient and affordable, working in partnership with local authorities and other regional stakeholders. Further, they contribute to future waste strategy by providing evidence for current activities and responding to consultations. • ‘Other Industries excluding waste’ adhere to national and international legislation and are subjected to sector specific targets, they also participate in voluntary agreements and provide private financial initiatives. They are supported in recognising and capitalising on opportunities made by resource efficiency savings, and encouraged to incorporate sustainable thinking into product/service design. Further, they contribute to future waste strategy by providing evidence for current activities and responding to consultations. • ‘Consumers’ within this document are not responsible or held to account by any policy mechanism. It is acknowledged that they are the main contributors to waste generation and that a change in behaviour would contribute to national objectives. These stakeholders also provide evidence on current waste management activities and can respond to consultations.

3.2 Scotland

Forty-six pages of relevant main body text (including 288 paragraphs, with a word count of 13,768) were analysed from the 59-page “Scotland’s zero waste plan” document.

3.2.1 Overarching vision

As shown in Table 2, terms associated with the circular economy concept were mentioned 28 times. This document frames waste management strategy within the context of economic growth whereby resources are managed efficiently, economic opportunities are sought and capitalised upon, and waste materials are given a value. To do this, it advocates a transition away from a linear economy, long-term policy stability, and effective resource use. It also acknowledges the role of consumer behaviour, asking individuals and businesses to recognise and take responsibility for their actions. However, it does recognise the need for continued waste management strategies for the foreseeable future and so promotes the reuse, recycling and recovery of resources from waste in line with the waste hierarchy. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

3.2.2 Promotion of waste hierarchy

As shown in Table 1, terms associated with the category ‘Recycle’ were mentioned most frequently with 143 mentions; while ‘Recovery’ terms were mentioned 84 times, ‘Disposal’ terms were mentioned 74 times, ‘Reuse’ terms were mentioned 63 times and ‘Reduce’ terms were mentioned 70 times.

3.2.3 Inclusion of stakeholders

As shown in Table 2, ‘national’ level stakeholders were mentioned the most frequently with 239 mentions; while ‘consumers’ were mentioned 84 times, ‘industries excluding waste’ were mentioned 77 times, ‘governmental department and other public bodies’ were mentioned 48 times, ‘regional’ stakeholders were mentioned 40 times, the ‘waste sector’ 35 times, and ‘international’ stakeholders 34 times. Table 4 records responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the document with respect to policy instruments and feedback mechanisms, which are further summarised below. • ‘International’ stakeholders set overarching legislation/objectives, promote the waste hierarchy, and promote high quality recycling. In addition, they introduce broad programmes to assist with the completion of these objectives and require the collection of information and data to assess progress. ‘National’ stakeholders address the requirements of international legislation through the introduction of national policies, targets and strategies. They introduce policy drivers, develop national programmes and provides tools. Guidance and support is provided to support good practice, develop secondary materials markets and introduce measures that value resources. They encourage the use of the waste hierarchy and the use of best available techniques/ technology, and promote long-term stability, eco-design and investment. They stimulate behaviour change by strengthening market confidence, developing measures to influence behaviour and providing reliable information. Information is collected and reviewed to measure progress with respect to domestic and international targets, and to measure the success of implemented measures and initiatives..

Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Table 4. Responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the Scotland’s zero waste plan.

SCOTLAND Gov. Dept/ Regional/ Local Industry/ business/ Consumer/ International National Waste sector Regulators/ NGPB authorities other sectors Individuals Enforce regulatory Major policy and Adhere to Adhere to EU legislation, frameworks and other investment decisions regulatory Major policy and and international regimes. Consolidate about capacity and frameworks, other investment decisions obligations. Introduce Scottish Planning Policy. infrastructure. Carry out regimes and about the treatment European policies, mandatory Regulatory functions to their functions in the mandatory capacity and legislation, set segregation/pre-sort control activities that most sustainable way Policy/ requirements infrastructure. recycling targets, steps, progressive landfill influence the environment. that supports delivery of Legislation/ including steps to Implement the provide scope bans and policy levers to Regulation of reuse climate change targets. Statutory segregate/ pre-sort forthcoming Low for member drive transition. Sets activities through light Adhere to regulatory waste. Major policy Carbon Economic targets states to adopt future goals and touch exemptions. frameworks, other and investment Strategy. Adhere to national target. domestic targets. Licensing and permitting regimes and mandatory decisions about regulatory frameworks, Develop low carbon applications. Implement requirements. Implement the treatment and mandatory strategies and propose the forthcoming Low the forthcoming Low capacity and requirements. long-term targets Carbon Economic Carbon Economic infrastructure. Strategy. Strategy. Sector-specific Procurement toolkit. Develop and implement programmes. Use tools Develop awareness consistent, targeted, Develop and implement and toolkits. Develop Campaigns/ campaigns, and sector coordinated and phased programmes and tools. Develop/ sign up to Environmental and Participate in Voluntary Courtauld specific programmes. education and Provide services to enable good practice Clean Technologies. strategies/ initiatives/ commitment Deliver targeted awareness programme. value for money in commitments. Participate in good programmes. education programmes. Develop shared strategic Programmes procurement. practice commitments. Support zero waste waste infrastructure with Awareness objectives in curriculum. neighbours. campaigns. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Ensure valuable Provide leadership in their materials are not areas of influence. Support disposed. Provide Providing leadership in delivery of zero waste plan, guidance and clarity. their areas of Provision of utilisation of renewable Support utilisation of Provide leadership in influence. Access support/ energy generated from facilities, and their areas of influence. support needed to resource management guidance development of maximise resource facilities, zero waste reprocessing capacity. efficiency. policies. Produce Develop good practice guidance. commitments.

Developing and Encourage use of best Enable efficient resource marketing the available techniques. use and recovery. technologies. Promote Eco-design. Encourage and support Promote the Encourage business Encouragement Promote long-term policy investment in innovative waste hierarchy investment in resource / Endorsement/ stability. Encourage resource management and high quality management. Promotion reuse or recycling of technologies. Raise recycling. Encourage use of best materials. Encourage awareness. Comment on available techniques to investment. Encourage layout and design of non- prevent waste waste prevention. waste applications. production. Respond to consultations. Audits. Scope out Publish data, trends and Review domestic target improvements that information. Produce performance. Monitor Respond to could be secured methodologies to measure and report on progress of consultations. Review using voluntary compliance and revised Respond to WFD targets. Initiate the success of measures means. Collect Waste Data Strategies. consultations. Improve Information and Requires reports consultations. Improve to influence waste and report Improve quality of data. their understanding Respond to data collection/ on progress on data collection. Review behaviours. Collect and information on the Collect and publish and use of resources. consultations WFD targets success of measures report data/ information. composition of distribution information on individual Contribute/ improve and initiatives. Provide Audits. Undertake waste. Provide waste streams. Produce, data on resource use. reliable data and analysis to meet local information on the publish and maintain waste information regarding information needs. wastes that they infrastructure maps. waste materials. generate, hold or Undertake macro level manage. studies. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Enthusiasm. Improve skill Taking action. levels, health, and Acting to prevent or Increase safety. Role is reduce waste, and use understanding Be increasingly resources more responsible for Stimulate behaviour shifting away from efficiently. Appreciate waste generation. change. Develop disposal of waste, environmental, social Involvement in Behaviour measure to influence and towards and economic value of planning behaviours. Strengthen recovery of resources. Take processes. market confidence. resources. responsibility for Appreciate Improve early minimising waste and environmental, public engagement using resources social and with waste effectively. economic value of planning activities. resources

Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

• ‘Governmental departments and other public bodies’ enforce regulatory frameworks and provide other regulatory functions to control relevant activities, develop programmes and tools, and provide guidance for the delivery of zero waste plans and policies. They enable efficient resource use, encourage investment in innovative technologies, and input on the design of non-waste facilities/activities. In addition to consultation responses, data/information is collected, reviewed and published on local authority progress, individual waste streams, current and future infrastructure needs and contribution to international obligations. They also undertake macro level studies. • ‘Regional’ stakeholders adhere to regulatory frameworks and take decisions regarding investment in capacity and infrastructure considering national policy. Additionally, they develop programmes and strategic waste infrastructure plans with neighbouring regions. They are called upon to provide leadership in areas of influence and to achieve value for money with respect to procurement. They respond to consultations, adhere to audits, report data on local information and are involved in relevant planning applications. • The ‘waste sector’ adhere to regulatory frameworks, are partly responsible for compliance, and take decisions regarding investment in capacity and infrastructure considering national policy. They help develop and sign up to good practice commitments, are subject to audits and report information concerning compositional data, services provided and improvements that could be achieved voluntarily. With their role shifting away from waste management and towards resource recovery, the waste sector looks to improve skills and health and safety levels within the workplace and to engage with the public. • ‘Other Industries excluding waste’ adhere to regulatory frameworks and take decisions regarding investment in capacity and infrastructure considering national policy. Subject to sector-specific programmes, they should adhere to good practice commitments, and develop innovative technologies whilst participating in awareness campaigns. They are encouraged to recognise and capitalise on opportunities made by resource efficiency savings to incorporate sustainable thinking into product/service design. As well as contributing to consultation, industries should make the effort to improve their understanding and usage of resources and take responsibility for reduce waste generated under their control. • ‘Consumers’ should actively participate in programmes and initiatives and contribute to consultations. They are implored to take action, be enthusiastic and increase their own understanding of consumption and waste generation. Furthermore, they should recognise and take responsibility for the waste they generate and be involved in planning processes with respect to waste infrastructure.

3.3 Wales

Fifty-nine pages of relevant main body text (including 357 paragraphs, with a word count of 13,768) were analysed from the 92-page “Towards Zero Waste – One Wales: One Planet” document.

3.3.1 Overarching vision

As shown in Table 2, terms associated with the concept of the circular economy (or equivalent) were mentioned 108 times. This document frames waste management strategy in the broader context of social justice, cultural legacy, climate change and limited resources. The aim of the strategy is to create a pathway to where resource use is within environmental limits, Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017 society and culture prosper, and human well-being is maximised. To do this, this document advocates sustainable consumption and production, optimisation of material utilisation, and reduced dependence on primary resources. It promotes a long-term framework that requires the engagement of citizens, business and industry. Citizens are asked to rethink and reconsider consumption patterns, and to become a recycling society, whilst business and industry are asked to use alternative materials, employ integrated product policy and reduce associated emissions. It acknowledges the continued production of some waste and so advocates enhanced action on waste prevention, maximised recycling and near zero waste to landfill. It also notes the requirement to manage legacy wastes.

3.3.2 Promotion of waste hierarchy

As shown in Table 2, terms associated with the category ‘Recycle’ were mentioned most frequently with 143 mentions; while ‘Reduce’ terms were mentioned 117 times, ‘Recovery’ terms were mentioned 74 times, ‘Reuse’ terms were mentioned 68 times, and ‘Disposal’ terms were mentioned 56 times.

3.3.3 Inclusion of stakeholders

As shown in Table 2, ‘national’ level stakeholders were mentioned the most frequently with 294 mentions; while ‘industries excluding waste’ were mentioned 77 times, ‘consumers’ were mentioned 69 times, ‘international’ stakeholders were mentioned 41 times, the ‘waste sector’ was mentioned 29 times, ‘regional’ stakeholders 24 times, and ‘governmental department and other public bodies’ 19 times. Table 5 records responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the document with respect to policy instruments and feedback mechanisms, which are further summarised below • ‘International’ stakeholders set overarching legislation and objectives, and in addition, introduce broad programmes to assist with the completion of these objectives. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Table 5. Responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the Towards Zero Waste – One Wales: One Planet document

Gov. Dept/ Regional/ Industry/ business/ WALES International National Regulators/ Local Waste sector Consumer/ Individuals other sectors NGPB authorities Provides statutory Obligated to EU legislation. Adhere to sector- duty to produce a Enforce and Develop and implement UK specific plans and waste management ensure law. Provide long-term and relevant targets. plan, restrictions and compliance with domestic policy and power to Requirement that all bans. EU directives. waste and waste regulators. Consider packaging placed on Obligates MS to apply related Policy/ appropriate levers and Implement waste the market complies waste hierarchy, have legislation to Legislation/ instruments. Set penalties for strategy. Adhere to with the ‘essential adequate protect human Statutory compliance failure. Set relevant policy and requirements’. infrastructure and and animal sector specific objectives. legislation. Implement waste targets installations available. health and the Apply waste hierarchy as a strategy. Set targets to Laws defining environment. priority. Set equal recycling reduce growth in waste minimum recycled Adhere to targets for recycling, reuse streams in line with content and condition of and composting of msw business as usual secondary material grants across local authorities. trends. utilisation. Explore initiatives such as Waste Provision of compulsory take back minimisation Adhere to polluter Voluntary Polluter pays waste schemes. Develop non- campaigns. pays principle. arrangements. Polluter Campaigns/ principle. Extended collection Develop local exchange statutory sector targets, and Develop more Provision of waste pays principle. Voluntary producer services from schemes. Participate in education campaigns. Detail efﬁcient and collection services Extended producer initiatives/ responsibility. households. education and engagement delivery actions in sector effective from households. responsibility. Integrated product Engagement schemes. Programmes plans. Apply precautionary services. Increase number Integrated Product policy. of citizens and principle. Link markets to Demonstrate of green jobs. Policy. communities. collection systems. value for money. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Develop infrastructure, Support capacity and mechanisms to qualifications Develop recyclate meet objectives. Establish and skill Support the Influence procurement Provision of markets. Support Workers should recognise other related targets. Create development. most beneﬁcial activity. Use support/ specific their influence over strong markets for recyclates Produce detailed alternatives to purchasing power to qualification and procurement activities. guidance and AD digestate. Support policies with landﬁlls. influence suppliers. skill development. integrated product policy. respect to Provide advice and support. planning

Encourage Promote zero waste systems that Encouragement of the strategies, behaviour change treat waste as use of recycled and Sustainable a resource. packaging materials, Encouragement/ Development. Encourage Recommend use Ensure greater Promote closed eco-design and the Endorsement/ use of recycled packaging of AD consistency in loop recycling generation of waste

Promotion materials and sustainable technology. the types and facilities in Wales. during the production. construction practices. range of Ensure products do not Empower citizens to shape recyclable become future legacy communities. materials wastes. collected. Publish data. Use ecological footprinting to measure Provide progress. Identify skills gaps information on Obtain and and end destination of technical report data. recyclates. Initiative requirements. Evaluating the consultations. Evaluate local Assess the skills role in waste Assess the skills Information and authorities. Undertake further Record and submit gap in the prevention. gap. Assess the data collection/ research on indicators to data through surveys. resource Discuss issues infrastructure measure prevention. Assess the skills gap distribution efﬁciency and concerning requirements. Measure community waste value for satisfaction through surveys management money and and access to knowledge. industry. Consult best practice. Monitor and support progress on legislation. and outcomes of eco-design activities. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Reduce waste as far as possible. Improve local environment. Contribute to Adopt waste prevention, a sustainable resource efficient economy Share responsibility for Represent national interests. waste and to the well-being of waste and recycling. Commitment to only using a management wales. Leave clean Behaviour ‘Future proof’ against fair share of earth’s practices. Drive separated recyclates for increasing competition resources. change, by collection. Donate for resources. greening supply unwanted items to charity chains. shops. Improve skill set. Rethink consumption. Act to reduce waste. Changes to lifestyle and behaviour.

Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

• ‘National’ stakeholders ensure the full transposition of international legislation and objectives. They provide a long-term policy vision, set domestic targets, and enact associated penalties for non-compliance. They also give power to regulators for enforcement and set sector- specific objectives. They explore and develop schemes, sector plans (including non-statutory sector targets) and campaigns to link markets, raise awareness and apply the precautionary principle. They provide advice and support regarding secondary materials markets, integrated product policy and infrastructure, and promote broader themes such as zero waste strategies, sustainable development and citizen empowerment. The publication of data and information are used to measures indicators such as programme progress, employment, and community satisfaction, along with the identification of skills gaps and the final destination of recyclates. They also contribute to consultations and the evaluation of local authorities and progression of eco-design activities. This is to represent national interest and commit to using only a fair share of total global resources. • ‘Governmental departments and other public bodies’ enforce and ensure compliance with relevant legislation and conditional grants. In addition, they develop and implement campaigns and other services, and support skill development and local capacity/infrastructure plans. They provide information on technical requirements, assess skills gaps, consult on legislation and are encouraged to adopt sustainable waste management practises and drive change through procurement. • ‘Regional’ stakeholder provide waste collection services and implement engagement campaigns. They support alternatives to landfill and encourage systems that treat waste as a resource to ensure greater consistency in recycled materials. In addition, they collect and report data to evaluate waste prevention goals, best practice and value for money. The ‘waste sector’ implements waste strategy, adheres to relevant legislation and implements programmes/initiatives that implement the polluter pays principal, increases the number of green jobs and provides waste collection services. They promote closed loop recycling, establish integrated networks of waste facilities, and assess skills gaps and infrastructure requirements. • ‘Other Industries excluding waste’ adhere to sector specific plans, achieve sector-specific targets and implement waste strategy. They develop and implement voluntary arrangements that consider the polluter pays principle, extended producer responsibility and Integrated product policy. They can influence procurement activity through purchasing power and are encouraged to use recycled/alternative materials in packaging and products. Design of products to reduce environmental impacts and avoid the creation of legacy wastes should be encouraged. They contribute to feedback mechanism by recording and submitting data and assessing skills gaps within their own sector. They should also share responsibility for waste generated and future proof their business against future resource competition. • ‘Consumers’ are encouraged to develop local exchange schemes and participate in national educational and engagement schemes. Furthermore, workers are encouraged to recognise and rethink their influence within the workplace and at home regarding procurement and consumption, contribute to the well-being of Wales, resource efficiency and waste reduction.

3.4 Northern Ireland

Fifty-one pages of relevant main body text (including 374 paragraphs, with a word count of 19,604) were analysed from the 68-page “Delivering Resource Efficiency” document. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

3.4.1 Overarching vision

As shown in Table 2, terms associated with the concept of the circular economy (or equivalent) were mentioned 25 times. This document place waste management strategy within the context of economic growth, whereby sustainable waste management can promote green jobs, maximise opportunities and contribute to a low carbon economy. It identifies both socially responsible economic growth and global economic transformation to combat finite natural resources and climate change. To do this, it advocates the implementation of the waste hierarchy, recognition of waste as a resource, use of environmentally friendly technology and behaviours, and increased integrated support across sectors and between stakeholders.

3.4.2 Promotion of waste hierarchy

As shown in Table 2, terms associated with the category ‘Recycle’ were mentioned most frequently with 150 mentions; while ‘Disposal’ terms were mentioned 116 times, ‘Reduce’ terms were mentioned 90 times, ‘Reuse’ terms were mentioned 84 times and ‘Recovery’ terms were mentioned 82 times.

3.4.3 Inclusion of stakeholders

As shown in Table 2, ‘national’ level stakeholders were mentioned the most frequently with 197 mentions; while ‘governmental department and other public bodies’ were mentioned 144 times, ‘international’ stakeholders were mentioned 115 times, ‘consumers’ were mentioned 86 times, ‘industries excluding waste’ were mentioned 86 times, the ‘waste sector’ 68 times, and ‘regional’ stakeholders 50 times. Table 6 records responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the document with respect to policy instruments and feedback mechanisms, which are further summarised below. • ‘International’ stakeholders set overarching legislation and objectives, and in addition, introduce broad programmes to assist with the completion of these objectives. In addition, they provide access to officials to support the implementation of programmes and objectives and help identify financial and non-financial opportunities. • ‘National’ stakeholders ensure compliance with international policy, develop compatible and complementary policy using an all-island approach and propose sector-specific targets. Whilst participating in UK and international initiatives, they also develop domestic re-use and voluntary quality assurance schemes. They aim to reduce burden on business and support resource efficiency. The collection and publication of data and information covers waste flows, commodity prices and legislative proposals. • ‘Governmental departments and other public bodies’ develop, monitor and enforce the waste management strategy and accompanying policies/regulations. They use a suite of penalties and sanctions to ensure compliance. They grant funds for schemes and initiatives, and develop their own programmes and educational campaigns. Exploration and exploitation of all-island economies of scales, support market development, promote collaboration and add information. They are instrumental in consulting on new strategies, new legislation and spatial aspects. • ‘Regional’ stakeholders adhere to all national and international legislation. They have powers to improve the quality of the environmental and are responsible for planning aspects of waste management strategies. Use partnerships with regulators, other regional stakeholders and Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

the third sector to tackle poor compliance, to develop schemes and initiatives, and to provide advice. They collect and report data, contribute to consultations and participate in studies, campaigns and inspections. • The ‘waste sector’ adheres to national and international legislation, abide by conditions from permits/ licences and delivers on domestic targets and actions. They develop and utilise programmes and investment schemes to introduce innovate waste collection schemes, integrate facilities on an all-island basis and implement codes of practice. They support local authorities and communities to adhere to the waste hierarchy, contribute to consultations and collect/report data regarding specific waste streams. • ‘Other Industries excluding waste’ adhere to both national and international legislation in addition to sector specific domestic targets. They develop and participate in voluntary initiatives, build market confidence and consider best available techniques. • ‘Consumers’ participate in campaigns and promote social enterprise along with green jobs. Improvements can be instigated through public concern, social acceptance and public understanding and engagement. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Table 6. Responsibilities of each stakeholder group as described in the Delivering Resource Efficiency document.

Industry/ NORTHERN Gov. Dept/ Regional/ Local business/ Consumer/ International National Waste sector IRELAND Regulators/ NGPB authorities other Individuals sectors Adopt an all-island approach. Promotes life cycle Ensure compliance and thinking. EU directives. Adhere to relevant develop strategy wrt EU Adopt risk-based Set statutory recycling waste legislation and directives. Compatible and approach to concentrate Deliver on the Sector- targets. Define long and targets. Subject to complementary policy between on serious crime. challenging targets speciﬁc medium term objectives. Strategic Northern and Rep. of Ireland. Oversee and monitor and actions. Adhere recycling Obliges MS to use Environmental Policy / Develop national legislation. implementation of to legislation, targets. appropriate methods and Assessments. Legislation / Propose sector-specific national strategy. regulation and Adhere to facilities. Sets out EoW Prepare waste Statutory targets. Produce new primary Development, licencing/permit national and criteria and fines for non- management plans. legislation for proposed new implementation and conditions. Obligated international targets compliances with New responsibilities statutory targets. Introduce enforcement of waste to meet requirements legislation statutory targets. Banned and a broader range interim recycling targets. policy and legislation. of regulations. and certain disposal activities of powers, including Introduce legislation for Use suite of penalties Subject to landfill tax. regulation. Restricts materials use in planning. Obligated organised crime. Develop and sanctions. design. Adopt an all- to regulations. policy on separate collections island approach. and landfill restrictions. Adhere to polluter Secure funding to Producer pays principle. sustain waste prevention Responsibilit Partnership with Receive funding and and recycling y schemes. regulators to tackle grant funds for Participation in the UK quality communications. Voluntary serious crime, poor programmes. protocol programme for end of Development and responsibility compliance and Introduce novel and Campaigns / waste criteria. Voluntary quality implementation of deals. Participate in Introduced extended illegal activity. innovative waste Voluntary assurance schemes. programmes. Grant Participate in campaigns. producer responsibility. Receive funding and collection systems. initiatives / Sponsorship of awards that funds to community, programmes Registration of Polluter pays principle. grant funds for Implement code of highlight good practice. voluntary and private and Eco-schools. Programmes programmes. practice. Utilise Development of scheme that sector groups. Develop schemes. Participate in financial investment promote reuse. further quality protocols, Voluntary schemes and schemes. programmes, compliance initiatives. Programme to educational campaigns, with quality integrate facility and code of practice. protocols. network. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Support EU objectives, reuse Supported to and repair networks, and end deliver Facilitated to take an of waste decisions. Exploit Support the development Facilitate local resource active role in re-use economies of scale with all- of markets. Provide clear communities to take efficiency and recycling island approaches. Provide and concise guidance, an active role in re- (including activities leading to a Provision of leadership, clear guidance and and support to use and recycling through Provides access to greater sense of support / funding for landfill diversion. organisations seeking activities Support financial officials. community and Reduce burden on business. elective EU funding. local authorities to incentives). guidance social cohesion. Support resource efficiency Support efficient energy capture more Receive Given technical including financial incentives. recovery from residual materials streams. clear and support and advice Enable financial investment of waste. Utilise guidance. sector to improve services. reprocessing sector through specific financial mechanisms. guidance. Encourage Encourage partnerships Promote market Encouraged to partnerships. between local authorities and development and develop appropriate Consider Encouragement Promoting recycling, Promote social Encourages reuse and private sector and development sustainable collection systems best / Endorsement / re-use and in enterprise and recycling of EEE. appropriate collection systems. development. Explore where recycling available diverting green jobs. Promotion Obligated to promote better all-island opportunities performance is techniques. biodegradable regulation. Encourage partnerships currently often poor. LACMW from landfill. Provide information Collect and report regarding type and Carry out scoping data Review and Consult on legislation amount of waste exercise to review new revise waste proposals. Use waste data flow handled. Contribute strategies. Initiate management plans. Collection and non-mandatory surveys to to consultations. Information and Identify financial and Consultations. Review Carry out and collect data, monitor and report Monitoring of data collection/ non-financial planning policy. Inform environmental reporting of on commercial waste. Provide progress of opportunities. and support crosscutting inspections and data/ distribution current market data on programme sustainable development investigations. information commodity prices and achievements. issues. Develop all- Participation in economic indicators. Assess different island knowledge. studies. Contribute to waste management consultations. options. Commitment and Take an active role engagement. Improve public perception. in re-use and Utilise public Development of investor Contribute to the Achieving such a cultural recycling activities concern and social Behaviour confidence. Raise consumer green economy by shift leading to a greater acceptance. confidence in waste-derived creating jobs sense of community Understanding with products. and social cohesion. respect to resource efficacy Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

4. DISCUSSION

This section compares the four documents against the themes of the ideal circular economy as shown in Figure 1, and its interpretation in the CEP. Discussion will be based on the following themes; over-arching circular economy vision, promotion of the waste hierarchy, and inclusion of stakeholders. While similarities were found between the four waste strategies when considering the scope and breadth of ideal circular economy and CEP elements that were acknowledged, there were also substantial differences. Addressing similarities first, all four documents promoted resource efficiency and changes to current economic structures, along with the use of secondary material markets and policy instruments to preserve and protect the environment, maintain economic growth, and minimise the impact of waste generation and resource use. They also all included implementation of the waste hierarchy and the contribution of the waste management sector in decision-making. Differences between the four documents particularly related to the range of mechanisms employed, stakeholder participation, and consideration (or not) of social/cultural justice. For example; Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all included maintenance of resource value, waste avoidance, participation of designers and consumers, use of business models, promotion of green jobs, sustainable procurement to ensure future security of resource availability. These elements were notably absent in the English document. To achieve a zero waste or green economic model, three of the waste strategies (England, Scotland and Northern Ireland) promoted life-cycle thinking and closed loop recycling. In comparison, the Welsh document cited the circular economy and sustainable development as its ambition and promoted supply chain management, consumer consideration, avoidance of lock-in scenarios and reduction of the national ecological footprint as mechanisms to achieve these goals. Wales and Northern Ireland advocate societal progress, mimicry of natural biological cycles, and the dematerialisation of products and services. They also aimed to reduce the impact of climate change, stay within environmental limits and eliminate other associated discharges. Additionally, they were joined by England in the promotion of design for reuse and sustainable consumption and production, where these elements were absent from the Scottish document, which instead advocated avoidance of down-cycling, identification of key waste streams, and sector specific schemes. The occurrence of waste hierarchy categories differed between the four documents on an absolute basis, although frequency counts were more comparable on a per paragraph basis (Table 2). Across the four nations, Wales was found to advocate Reduce strategies most strongly, Scotland promoted both Reuse and Recycle strategies most strongly, England promoted Recovery and Northern Ireland promoted Disposal. The largest differences between the documents was the prominence of Reduce and Recover strategies. With respect to Recover strategies, this discrepancy may be attributed to the differing stances of England, where Recovery is encouraged, compared to Wales and Scotland who aim to implement Recover strategies only as a last resort. When compared against the ideal circular economy model, only the 3R’s (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) should be considered, thus the documents published by Wales and Scotland appear to align more closely. However, the inclusion of Recover and Disposal and the implementation of the full waste hierarchy across all four nations reflects EU waste policy and the interim need for recovery and disposal options in the transition to a fully circular economy. Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Substantive differences were found between the four documents with respect to the engagement of different stakeholder groups. The only exception to this was the involvement of national stakeholders, who were referred to most often in all four documents. This is to be expected given the nature of the documents, having been published by the devolved governments and being primarily concerned with domestic strategy. While the prominence of governmental departments and non-governmental public bodies differed between the four documents, the responsibilities did not, reflecting their role as regulators to ensure compliance and issue sanction where necessary. Likewise, the role of international stakeholders was similar, being the provision of overarching objectives and targets. In terms of engagement, England and Northern Ireland were most likely to engage with international stakeholders due to existing waste export routes from England and the presence of a land border with the Republic of Ireland (Eire) together with ambitions of an all-island waste strategy in Northern Ireland. Perhaps the starkest difference between the four documents was the inclusion of consumers, or lack thereof, where they held no responsibilities within the English document other than to receive waste management services and potentially participate in initiatives and information collection schemes. This contrasts with the Welsh and Scottish documents that, to varying degrees, hold the consumer responsible for their level of consumption and waste generation, ask them to actively engage and participate in waste reduction programmes, and promote consumer led initiatives. With respect to industry and business groups, again the Scottish and Welsh documents encouraged greater engagement with circular economy ideals when compared to England and Northern Ireland. Within the former, industry and business were asked to be innovative, and were encouraged to develop and take opportunities that would incorporate circular economic thinking into their business models. In contrast, in England and Northern Ireland engagement with industry and business was limited to providing policy, regulation and voluntary agreements (these were also present in the Scottish and Welsh documents) to which business and industry should adhere. Overall, the waste management strategy from Wales was found to be the most closely aligned to the ideal circular economy, followed by Scotland, Northern Ireland and then England (Table 2). However, all of the strategies were found to have limitations with consistent criticisms including the continued focus on waste management rather than resource utilisation and the reliance on EU targets and objectives to set national priorities. This issue may become more pertinent once the UK leaves the EU and is no longer obliged to follow EU strategy. Here, it would appear that Wales and Scotland do have the long-term policy objectives to replace the overarching strategy provided by the EU. Furthermore, these two nations have started the process of incorporating waste management strategy into the broader context of resource management and sustainable development. This agrees with previous arguments that these two nations are producing innovative and progressive strategies, when compared against the rest of the UK. One element that is not included in any of the four documents is the decoupling of economic growth from resource use. As a prerequisite for the ideal circular economy, any future waste (and resource) management strategy should aim to address this.

5. CONCLUSION

The circular economy model has been advocated internationally as a solution to current unsustainable consumption patterns. An alternative to the linear economy model, which has supported global economic growth by exploiting natural resources, the circular economy aims to Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017 reduce consumption, reprocess and recirculate products and materials, and prevent environment degradation. To do this, the circular economy model promotes implementation of the 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle), encourages the participation of various stakeholder groups, and supports the use of several delivery mechanisms. These mechanisms include novel policy instruments and business models, implementation of clean production and regenerative design principles, and development of markets and reverse supply chain participation, amongst others. The EU has responded to the international prioritisation of sustainable consumption and production and the circular economy with the publication of the Circular Economy Package (CEP). The CEP provides objectives and targets, including the reiteration of the waste hierarchy (and associated waste targets), promotion of industrial symbiosis and elevation of resource efficiency, that are required to be transposed into national strategy by member states. Although, the CEP does provide the correct direction for member states to initiate a transition toward a circular economy, it has also been criticised for its continued focus on waste management and too little emphasis on high priority waste hierarchy categories such as reduce and reuse. This study has assessed the current waste management strategies of the four devolved UK nations (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) against the ideal circular economy model and its interpretation within the CEP. It has identified differences in interpretation and implementation of the same overarching EU objectives across the devolved nations. Overall, Wales and Scotland have been shown to align more closely with the ideal circular economy model when compared with England and Northern Ireland. As previously argued, this may be due to more innovative and progressive strategies. However, with all four national documents being based on overarching European strategy, it can be suggested that the focus remains on waste management and the lower priorities within the waste hierarchy, which are characteristics of the CEP. Looking to the future of waste management strategy in the UK, we highlight the risks associated with Brexit, particularly the potential impact of eliminating or diluting the influence of EU strategy and law. To address this, it is imperative that strong cross-party support is gained for long-term circular economy objectives both within each devolved parliament and across the UK as a whole. This would prevent the return of waste strategy politicisation that was successfully overcome on joining the EU due to the primacy of European law. Again, Wales and Scotland would appear to be ahead of the curve with respect to long-term objectives and targets. The way in which the UK and the individual devolved nations choose to proceed after the Brexit negotiations could lead to several outcomes. By choosing to continue with existing strategies, they would risk falling behind in environmental standards and becoming competitively disadvantaged. This would particularly affect England and Northern Ireland who, to some extent, rely on waste exports and cross-border participation to achieve their objectives. Another option would be to mirror EU strategy. However, through leaving the EU, the UK and its devolved nations lose influence on how this strategy may evolve and may therefore be disadvantaged. Of course, they may also flourish. Finally, they could grasp the opportunity provided to engage fully with the circular economy model and therefore overcome the current limitations of EU strategy. However, to do this, economic growth would need to be decoupled from resource use, the 3R principles of the circular economy would be prioritised over the waste hierarchy of the CEP, and all stakeholders would be incorporated and involved in the production of broad holistic objectives that combine different policy areas other than waste management.

Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study was completed as part of a PhD programme, funded by a studentship from Manchester Metropolitan University and Viridor Waste.

REFERENCES

Andrews, D. (2015) The circular economy, design thinking and education for sustainability. Local economy, vol. 30, no. 3, 305-315. Anker, H. T., de Graaf K. J., Purdy, R., and Squintani, L. (2015) Coping with EU environmental legislation: Transposition principles and practices. J ENVIRON LAW, vol. 27, no. 1, 17 BP Collins (2016). Brexit: Implications for Waste and Resources Legislation. http://www.eic- uk.co.uk/Documents/Files/Waste_Legislation_Eng_Wales_landscape%20(2).pdf (accessed 26.05.2017) Burges Salmon (2016). Effects of a Brexit on Environmental laws - Habitats, Waste, Chemicals and Air. https://www.burges-salmon.com/-/media/files/publications/open- access/effects_of_a_brexit_on_ environmental_laws.pdf (accessed 26.05.2017). Corbin, J. and Staruss, A. (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.): Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. doi: 10.4135/9781452230153 Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs. (2013) Waste Management Plan for England. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/ 265810/pb14100-waste-management-plan-20131213.pdf (accessed 22.02.2017) Department of the Environment. (2013) Delivering Resource Efficiency. https://www.daera- ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/doe/waste-policy-delivering-resource-efficiency- northern-ireland-waste-management-strategy-2013.pdf (accessed 22.02.2017) European Commission [EC]. (2017) Implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/index_en.htm (accessed 15.05.2017) European Commission [EC]. (2016) Integrated Product Policy (IPP). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/index_en.htm (accessed 15.05.2017) European Commission [EC]. (2008) Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52008DC0397&from=EN (accessed 15.05.2017) European Commission [EC]. (2005) Thematic Strategy on the sustainable use of natural resources. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52005DC0670&from=EN (accessed 15.05.2017) Ellen Macarthur Foundation. (2015) What is the circular economy? https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy (accessed 15.05.2017). Elo, S. and Kyngäs, H. (2008) The qualitative content analysis process. J ADV NURS, vol. 62, 107-115. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x Fischer, C. J. (2011) The development and achievements of EU waste policy. Materials Cycles and Waste Management, vol. 13, no. 1, 2-9. doi:10.1007/s10163-010-0311-z García Quesada, M. (2014) The EU as an “enforcement patchwork”: the impact of national enforcement for compliance with EU water law in Spain and Britain. Journal of Public Policy, vol. 34, no. 2, 331–353 Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Jawahir, I. S. and Bradley, R. (2016) Technological Elements of Circular Economy and the Principles of 6R-Based Closed-loop Material Flow in Sustainable Manufacturing. Procedia CIRP, vol. 40, 103-108. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2016.01.067 Lehmann, S. (2010) Resource recovery and material flow in the city: Zero waste and sustainable consumption as paradigms in urban development. Sustainable Development, Legislation and Policy, vol. 28, 2010-2011. Lemiengre, J., de Casterle, B. D., Denier, Y., and Schotsmans, P. (2008) How do hospitals deal with euthanasia requests in Flanders (Belgium)? A content analysis of policy documents. PATIENT EDUC COUNS, vol. 71, 293-301. Lieder, M. and Rashid, A. (2016) Towards circular economy implementation: a comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. Journal of cleaner production, vol. 115, 36- Maczka, K., Matczak, P., Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, A., and Rechciński, M. (2016) Application of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy-A systematic empirical analysis of national level policy documents in Poland. ECOL ECON, vol. 128, 169-176 Mazzanti, M. and Zoboli, R. (2009) Municipal Waste Kuznets Curves: Evidence on Socio- Economic Drivers and Policy Effectiveness from the EU. ENVIRON RESOUR ECON, vol. 44, 203. doi:10.1007/s10640-009-9280-x Moreno, M., De los Rios, C., Rowe, Z., Charnley, F. (2016) A Conceptual Framework for Circular Design. Sustainability, vol. 8, 937-951. DOI: 10.3390/su8090937 Murray, A., Skene, K., and Haynes, K. (2017) The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context. J BUS ETHICS, vol. 140, 369- 380. Natural Scotland (2010) A Zero waste Plan for Scotland, The Scottish Government (Ed.), Edinburgh. http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/314168/0099749.pdf (accessed 22.02.2017) Nemet, A., Varbanov, P. S. and Klemes, J. J. (2016) Cleaner production, Process Integration and intensification. Clean Technology and Environmental policy, vol. 18, 2029-2035. Nilsson, M., Zamparutti, T., Petersen, J. E., Nykvist, B., Rudberg, P., and McGuinn, J. (2012) Understanding Policy Coherence: Analytical Framework and Examples of Sector–Environment Policy Interactions in the EU. Environmental Policy and Governance, vol. 22, no. 6, 395-423. Paoli, L., Adriaenssen, A., Greenfield, V. A., and Conickx, M. (2016) Exploring Definitions of Serious Crime in EU Policy Documents and Academic Publications: A Content Analysis and Policy Implications. European journal on criminal policy and research, 1-17 Peng, H. T. and Liu, Y. (2016) A comprehensive analysis of cleaner production policies in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 135, 1138 Pomberger, R, Sarc. R, and Lorber, K. E. (2016) Dynamic visualisation of municipal waste management performance in the EU using Ternary Diagram method. WASTE MANAGE, vol. 61,558-571. Price, J.L. (2001) The landfill directive and the challenge ahead: demands and pressures on the UK householder. RESOUR CONSERV RECY, vol. 32, 333-348. DOI: 10.1016/S0921- 3449(01)00070-2 Sarkis, J., Helmns, M. M., and Hervani, A. A. (2010) Reverse logistics and Social Sustainability. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, vol. 17, 337–354 Scotford, E. and Robinson, J. (2013) UK Environmental Legislation and Its Administration in 2013-Achievements, Challenges and Prospects. J ENVIRON LAW, vol. 25, no. 3, 383-409. Stahel. W, R. (2016) Circular economy. NATURE, vol. 531, no.7595, 435 (comment) Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Su. B, Heshmati. A, Geng. Y, and Yu. X. (2013) A review of the circular economy in China. Journal of cleaner production, vol. 42, 215 Testa, F., Grappio, P., Gusmerotti, N.M., Iraldo, F. and Frey, M. (2016) Examining green public procurement using content analysis: existing difficulties for procurers and useful recommendations. Environment, Development and Sustainability, vol. 18, no. 1, 197-219. Tukker, A. (2015) Product services for a resource-efficient and circular eocnomy – A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 97, 76-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.049 United Nations Environment Programme, (2015) THE 10-YEAR FRAMEWORK OF PROGRAMMES ON SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION. http://www.unep.org/10yfp/Portals/50150/10YFP%20Brochure%20English.pdf (accessed 14.10.2016) United Kingdom Environmental Law Association [UKELA]. (2016) Brexit - Implications of the UK leaving the European Union: Waste Management. https://www.ukela.org/content/page/5640/Brexit%20Waste%20Management%20WP.pdf (accessed 26.05.2017). Welsh Assembly Government. (2010) Towards Zero Waste - One Wales: One Planet. http://gov.wales/docs/desh/publications/100621wastetowardszeroen.pdf (accessed 22.02.2017) Wysokińska, Z. (2016) The "New" Environmental Policy of the European Union: A Path to Development of a Circular Economy and Mitigation of the Negative Effects of Climate Change. Comparative economic research: Central and Eastern Europe, vol. 19, no. 2, 57.