review of standards for waste and resource …
TRANSCRIPT
1
REVIEW OF STANDARDS FOR WASTE AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH PROJECT
Final Report
October 2009
2
SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................ 4
PROJECT BRIEF ............................................................................................................................. 4
PROJECT METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 4
RESEARCH LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................ 6
KEY FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................ 6
SUGGESTED ACTIONS ................................................................................................................. 7
SECTION 2 – RESULTS FROM DESKTOP RESEARCH .................................................... 8
STANDARDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN USE ....................................................................... 8
INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED CODES/INFORMAL STANDARDS & OTHER
RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ........................................................................................................... 19
SECTION 3 – STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ..................................................................... 34
SECTION 4 – CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTED ACTIONS ............................................... 42
SECTION 5 - APPENDICES ............................................................................................... 54
APPENDIX 1 – FORMAL STANDARDS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED DURING THE
RESEARCH .................................................................................................................................... 54
APPENDIX 2 – TRADE ASSOCIATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
THAT WERE RESEARCHED ...................................................................................................... 56
APPENDIX 3 – INITIAL LIST OF TARGET STAKEHOLDER ORGANIZATIONS ............... 60
APPENDIX 4 - LETTER TO STAKEHOLDERS. ....................................................................... 61
APPENDIX 5 – STAKEHOLDER SURVEY ............................................................................... 62
APPENDIX 6 – SURVEY RESPONDENTS ............................................................................... 67
APPENDIX 7 – STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS FROM SURVEY .......................................... 68
APPENDIX 8 – AGENDA AND INFORMATION SENT TO WORKSHOP DELEGATES
PRIOR TO THE WORKSHOP ..................................................................................................... 77
APPENDIX 9 – LIST OF DELEGATES ATTENDING THE WORKSHOP ............................ 79
APPENDIX 10 – FINDINGS FROM THE STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP ............................ 80
3
Table of Figures Page Figure 1. Stakeholder Awareness of Formal Standards 36 Figure 2. Importance of Formal Standards to Stakeholders 37 Figure 3. Stakeholder Interest in New Standards 38 Figure 4. Stakeholder Awareness of Informal Standards 39 Figure 5. Waste Hierarchy 42 Figure 6. Resource Efficiency Cycle 44 Table of Abbreviations
CEN European Committee For Standardization
BS British Standard
EN European Standard
BS EN European standard adopted at national level
AS/NZ Australia Standard/New Zealand Standard
OENORM Austrian Standards Institute Standard
DIN German Institute For Standardization
ISO International Organization for Standardisation
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
ASTM Formerly American Society for Testing & Materials. Now known as ASTM
PAS Publicly Available Specification
BS EN ISO ISO adopted at European level and therefore adopted automatically at national level
TR Technical Report
VDI The Association of German Engineers
API American Petroleum Institute
BIP Business Information Publication
4
SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT BRIEF
The report ―Supporting Innovation in Services‖ was published jointly by the Departments for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and for Innovation and Skills (BERR and DIUS, now both BIS) in August 2008. The objective behind this project was to generate recommendations to Government on how to stimulate and support innovation in service sectors. This report identified standardization as a key mechanism to support innovation in the UK service sector. It highlighted the positive role which standards frameworks can play in opening market opportunities, in defining and comparing new service offerings and in delineating quality and performance over time. The British Standards Institution (BSI) has been asked by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and by the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) to conduct a strategic review of standards in waste and resource management with the aims of:
1. Identifying existing standards in the areas of waste minimisation and waste prevention (commercial and industrial sectors);
2. Providing suggestions for future strategic standardization priorities; 3. Providing advice on the scope for a standards-based approach to waste
minimisation. The scope of this project is limited to solid waste only. The area of waste handling is not included in this research. It must be recognised however that the disposal of solid waste has a clear impact on carbon and carbon emissions. Carbon is the subject of much BSI standardisation activity and the relevant standards are detailed in this report.
PROJECT METHODOLOGY
The project has been split into three stages.
Stage 1 Conduct desktop research to identify current formal standards In order to identify current formal standards in waste minimisation and prevention we conducted a desktop research exercise using standards databases and online tools available in-house. We used the following keywords or combination of keywords to conduct our search:
waste;
commercial waste;
industrial waste;
waste minimisation (and waste minimization);
waste prevention;
5
waste management;
solid waste;
refuse;
refuse disposal;
resource management;
recycling;
reuse;
facilities management;
procurement. Conduct desktop and telephone research to identify internationally recognised codes (i.e. codes of practice or guideline documents recognised globally and developed by major NGOs) In order to identify internationally recognised codes we:
completed an internet search to identify a list of trade associations and other environmental groups and organizations in the United Kingdom, United States and Germany;
reviewed the websites of trade associations and environmental organizations to search for codes, guidelines or other documents relating to waste and, when appropriate, followed up with telephone calls to these organizations.
Identify key UK stakeholders in the waste industry Using the internet we developed a list of relevant trade associations and environmental organizations in the UK. We telephoned each one of them to identify relevant stakeholders (senior persons directly involved in the waste industry or where waste management plays an important role within their daily function). We also identified key stakeholders from environmental consultancies that are active in the area of waste in the commercial environment. We worked closely with both DEFRA and BIS to ensure that their stakeholder contacts were included in the list. On 1st June 2009 DEFRA emailed the combined DEFRA/BIS/BSI list of 144 stakeholders from 123 different organizations to inform them about the project and to provide details of the stakeholder workshop that took place on July 16th. A list of the organizations that were invited to the workshop can be found in Appendix 3. A copy of the letter that was sent out to stakeholders can be found in Appendix 4. Stage 2 During stage 2 of the project we engaged with stakeholders in order to understand their views on formal and informal standards in waste and specifically how formal standards can assist businesses in waste minimisation and prevention. Stage 2 included:
an online survey;
a bespoke industry workshop.
6
The online survey was sent out to approximately 200 stakeholders. A copy of the online survey can be found in Appendix 5. The results of the survey are included in this report.
Stage 3 This final report was prepared, which includes the findings from stages one and two, as well as suggested actions that will help develop a strategic standardization framework in the future. The potential benefits of the suggested actions and proposed next steps have also been detailed in this report.
RESEARCH LIMITATIONS
There are trade associations and environmental groups in the area of waste all over the world. The research that we conducted was predominantly focused on identifying relevant information that is published in English. Our standards research was also predominantly focused on standards published in English. Although we invited many stakeholders from waste producing organizations to attend the workshop we did not have any representation from this stakeholder group. As with all research projects, this piece of work is somewhat limited by the timeframe in which the project had to be completed.
KEY FINDINGS
We did not identify any cross industry formal standards that have the specific purpose of guiding businesses and other organizations to reduce, prevent or minimise their waste;
There are formal standards that relate to waste in other ways, including waste management, recycling and reuse;
There are formal standards in facilities management that address waste, but these tackle the areas of waste management and waste handling;
We found that trade associations and environmental groups publish guideline documents that businesses can use to help reduce waste. However, we found that these documents generally present high level recommendations only. For example, Earthshare in the United States recommends that businesses should attempt to reduce paper waste. However they do not provide any detail of how businesses could achieve this. Most trade associations and environmental groups propose that a waste audit should be carried out as a first step in identifying ways to reduce waste;
77% of stakeholders who completed the stakeholder survey stated that standards can assist their organization to improve its waste management. In the survey we asked a number of standards based questions in the following areas: waste management, waste reduction, waste prevention, recycling and reuse. There is a low level of awareness, but a high level of importance and a desire for new standards in these areas. Stakeholder opinion was split as to whether new standards in these areas should be generic or sector specific;
In the survey, we asked for stakeholder opinion on informal standards in the same areas. There was a very low level of awareness and their effectiveness in helping to improve waste (management, reduction, prevention, recycling and reuse) within an organization was rated as ‗low‘. However, there was a high level of importance attached to informal standards;
7
In the workshop, stakeholders thought that standards could assist businesses and other organizations in reducing and minimising their waste;
Stakeholders believe that there is potential value in a waste minimisation standard, however there was much stronger stakeholder support for broader standardisation activity to support a wider resource efficiency cycle;
There was strong stakeholder support for a benchmarking standard to help businesses benchmark their waste performance against others;
Stakeholders believe that there is confusion and a lack of awareness relating to the documentation and advice that is available to businesses from environmental organizations and trade associations. As evidenced during the desktop research there is much information available to businesses (for example from Business Link and Solutions For Business that is the new "one stop" Government-sponsored web portal for business support on waste). However, many organisations do not know where to find this information and this was cited as a key barrier that prevents businesses from improving their waste prevention activities;
There is an opportunity for BSI to improve its marketing and communication of existing standards to businesses. 81% of stakeholders who completed the survey answered that they do not believe there is sufficient awareness and uptake of formal standards and that awareness levels across SMEs are particularly low. Following discussions with both DEFRA and BIS, it has been agreed that, where appropriate, BSI will work more closely with relevant Government organizations that can provide assistance in ensuring greater exposure for formal standards in the area of waste and resource efficiency.
SUGGESTED ACTIONS
Section 4 of this report details the suggested actions. The first two have been highlighted as priority actions:
- Engage with waste producing businesses to seek validation for the resource efficiency cycle concept (as detailed in Section 4) and produce a roadmap for future standardization activity around the resource efficiency cycle;
- Confirm the viability of a waste performance benchmarking standard for businesses through further engagement with waste producing organizations;
- Development of a glossary document for waste and resource management;
- Development of a BSI guidance document embracing best practice from existing sources of information to help organizations develop and implement their waste minimisation and resource efficiency policy;
We have provided a table that summarises the suggested actions and details who could take these forward, funding options, timeframes and the expected benefits.
8
SECTION 2 – RESULTS FROM DESKTOP RESEARCH
STANDARDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN USE
Using standards databases and online tools available in-house, we completed a desktop research exercise to identify standards that relate directly to waste in the commercial environment. The results of this search have been categorised into the areas below. A summary list of all the current formal standards identified can be found in Appendix 1.
Waste minimisation or prevention;
Waste management;
Facilities management;
Recycling and reuse;
Packaging;
Procurement;
Standards to create new markets for recycled products;
Standards planned or in development;
Other standards. BACKGROUND In reviewing all of the existing standards that have relevance to the study, it is clear that the majority are national standards. There is very limited documentation emanating from European bodies. This can be ascribed to the fact that standards are created voluntarily and by consensus; i.e. by interested parties who want certain standards to be developed. Both industry and commerce tend to provide input into standards. If there are no standards in a particular area it could be for a number of reasons, for example, the subject area has not been addressed, or there is a lack of interest/need for such a standard. In the case of waste minimisation, no formal proposal has been put forward to CEN and therefore no waste minimisation standards have been developed in the past. The European position is that the driver behind the vast majority of standards is the New Approach Directive which involves the principle of ‗co-regulation‘. The European Commission (EC) creates Directives which must be adopted by national Governments and these are essentially broad and non-technical. Concurrently the EC requests the relevant national standards bodies to develop technical supporting standards and the principle is that if one complies with the standard then one is essentially complying with the requirement of Directives. Over 90% of European standards relate directly or indirectly to European Directives. Since there is no Directive covering waste minimisation there are therefore no standards in this area. Less than 5% of all British Standards are cited in legislation and are therefore mandatory. We are not aware that any of the British Standards described in this report are cited in UK legislation, therefore adoption of the standards is voluntary.
9
Waste Minimisation or Prevention We did not identify any formal standards that specifically address waste minimisation or prevention for businesses or other organizations. There are some standards which touch on this area and these have been included in the results below.
Waste Management BS EN 12940:2004 addresses waste classification and management for companies who are active in the area of manufacturing footwear. This is a good example of a sector specific standard in waste management. BS 5906:2005 is a code of practice to address waste management in buildings. It replaces BS5906:1980. This standard addresses the following areas that relate to the management of solid waste in buildings: waste disposal; waste handling, waste collection, recycling, waste separation, on site disposal of waste and waste disposal processes. BS 8901:2007 is another sector specific example and provides a specification for a sustainable event management system. It provides requirements for planning and managing sustainable events of all sizes and types. Note that BS 8901:2007 does not provide direct guidance on waste reduction but does identify waste reduction and management as an issue to event organisers. A revised version of this standard (BS 8901:2009) will be published later this year. AS/NZS 3831:1998 provides a glossary of terms for waste management. This standard specifies definitions for commonly used waste terms such as those involving collection, sorting, disposal, recycling, waste stream, waste management and waste minimisation. The definitions are aimed at generic waste rather than specific product groups, in order to be suitable to various industries and institutions as well as households. AS/NZS 3816:1998 relates to the management of clinical and related waste and is another good example of a sector specific standard. This standard sets out the requirements for the identification, segregation, handling, storage, transport, treatment and ultimate safe disposal of clinical and related wastes which may be hazardous, in an environmentally responsible manner. Wastes arising from medical, nursing, dental, veterinary, laboratory, pharmaceutical, podiatry, tattooing, body piercing and mortuary practices are dealt with in this standard. Facilities Management OENORM A 7002:2001 is an Austrian standard targeted at Facility Managers. It details a catalogue of requirements that Facility Managers should adhere to and addresses the areas of waste disposal and environment.
10
DIN 32736:2000 is a German standard that addresses: ‗Facility Management - Terminology and scope of services‘. The document specifies definitions and describes the services of building management. Recycling and Reuse ISO 15270:2008 provides guidelines for the recovery and recycling of plastics waste. The objective of this standard is to assist the worldwide market for plastic recovery and recycling. Specifically, this standard has been developed to assist all plastics industry stakeholders in the development of:
a sustainable global infrastructure for plastics recovery and recycling a sustainable market for recovered plastics materials and their derived
manufactured products ISO 11932:1996 Guidance and methods for activity measurements of materials to be released for recycling, re-use or disposal as non-radioactive waste arising from the operation of nuclear facilities. ISO/IEC 24700:2004 specifies product characteristics for use in an original equipment manufacturer's or authorized third party's declaration of conformity to demonstrate that a marketed product that contains reused components performs equivalent to new products, equivalent to new component specifications and performance criteria, and continues to meet all the safety and environmental criteria required by responsibly built products. It is relevant to marketed products whose manufacturing and recovery processes result in the reuse of components. ISO/IEC 24700:2004 specifies product characteristics for use in an original equipment manufacturer's or authorized third party's declaration of conformity to demonstrate that a marketed product that contains reused components performs equivalent to new, meeting equivalent to new component specifications and performance criteria, and continues to meet all the safety and environmental criteria required by responsibly built products. It is relevant to marketed products whose manufacturing and recovery processes result in the reuse of components. In today's procurement processes, technical equipment definitions used by regulators must be addressed and, in that sense, ISO/IEC 24700:2004 is useful in procurement and in the trade facilitation area, to communicate with regulators. This standard specifically addresses office equipment. However, in the future it may provide valuable directions for other industries and industrial sectors.. ASTM D7209 was published in 2006. This is a guide for the development of standards relating to plastics recycling and other means of waste reduction and resource recovery. The guide is directed at consumer, commercial and industrial sources of thermoplastics and thermo set polymeric materials. The closest ISO standard to ASTM D 7209 is ISO 15270:2008. Packaging BS EN 13427:2004 provides requirements for the use of European Standards in the field of packaging and packaging waste. Packaging is required to conform to a significant range of functional and legal demands. This standard addresses
11
compliance with requirements of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive (94/62/EC). BS EN 13428:2004 provides requirements specific to manufacturing, composition and prevention by source reduction. The Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste (94/62/EC) defines requirements for the manufacturing and composition of packaging. This standard amplifies these requirements with respect to reduction of packaging at source and the minimisation of dangerous substances which may arise from waste management operations. This standard also specifies the methodology and procedure for the minimisation of any dangerous substances if they are present in packaging and are released into the environment as a result of waste management operations. BS EN 13429:2004 provides a framework within which this and four other standards (BS EN 13427, BS EN 13430, BS EN 13431, and BS EN 13432) may be used together to support a claim that packaging is in compliance with the Directive‘s essential requirements that allow it to be placed on the market. In order to save resources and minimise waste, the whole system in which packaging takes part should be optimized. This includes prevention, as well as reuse and recovery of packaging waste. The standard presents a framework for assessment to determine whether the requirements of this standard have been met. Its approach is similar to that of systems standards such as the BS EN ISO 9000 and BS EN ISO 14000 series. The standard also specifies the requirements for packaging to be classified as reusable and sets out procedures for assessment of conformity with those requirements, including the associated systems. BS EN 13430:2004 amplifies the material recycling requirements of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive which defines essential requirements for packaging to be considered recoverable. BS EN 13430:2004 amplifies these requirements with respect to material recycling. This standard presents a framework for self-assessment to determine whether the requirements of this standard have been met. Its approach is similar to that of systems standards such as the BS EN ISO 9000 and BS EN ISO 14000 series. This standard also provides practical guidance in assessing recyclability. It specifies the requirements for packaging to be classified as recoverable in the form of material recycling, whilst accommodating the continuing development of both packaging and recovery technologies. This standard also sets out procedures to assess conformity with those requirements. The procedure for applying this standard is contained in BS EN 13427:2000. BS EN 13431:2008 provides requirements for packaging recoverable in the form of energy recovery, including specification of minimum inferior calorific value.
12
BS EN 13432:2000 provides requirements for packaging recoverable through composting and biodegradation, including a test scheme and evaluation criteria for the final acceptance of packaging. Procurement BS 8900:2006 provides guidance for managing sustainable development. This standard is designed to help organizations develop an approach to sustainable development that will continue to evolve and adapt to meet new challenges and demands. It offers clear practical advice with which to make a meaningful contribution to sustainable development. This standard guides organizations towards effectively managing their impact on society and the environment, while enhancing organizational performance and success. Specifically, this standard:
Provides a framework so organizations can take a structured approach to sustainable development by considering the social, environmental and economic impacts of their organization‘s activities;
Is applicable to all organizations, in terms of size, type etc, including civil societies and trade unions;
Makes it easier for organizations to adjust to changing social expectations;
Helps organizations to connect existing technical, social and environmental standards, both formal (e.g. ISO 14000 series of standards) and private standards (e.g. the AA1000 standards for ethical performance);
Offers a pathway for managing sustainable development issues and impacts;
Provides organizations‘ stakeholders with a useful tool to assess and engage in improving organizational performance;
Contributes to international level dialogue on the international standard relating to social responsibility, which is currently under development.
BS 8903, a sustainable procurement standard is currently under development. Further information about this standard is provided later in this section, under the header ‗Standards planned or in development‘. Carbon Management ISO 14064-1:2006 Greenhouse gases -- Part 1: Specification with guidance at the organization level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. ISO 14064-2:2006 Greenhouse gases -- Part 2: Specification with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements. ISO 14064-3:2006 Greenhouse gases -- Part 3: Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions
13
Standards to create new Markets for Recycled Products (Publicly Available Specifications – PAS) We have listed below a number of standards that create new markets for recycled products. Technically these are not formal standards. However, for the purpose of this review, anything that has been developed by a National Standards Body is considered a formal standard. The following standards were developed by BSI in conjunction with Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP). The relevance of these standards to our review is that they are all focussed around identifying different types of waste and reusing these in the manufacture of other non-related products. PAS 100 Specification for composted materials. The BSI PAS 100 builds on the existing Composting Association standard. It will improve confidence in composted materials among end users, specifiers and blenders, and will help differentiate products that are safe, reliable and high performance. PAS 101 Recovered container glass. The specification aims to assist glass collectors in achieving the highest grades of the PAS 101 specification by harmonizing the range of existing specifications for raw container glass collected in the UK and introducing a four tier grading system. PAS 102 Specification for processed glass for selected secondary end markets. Crushed and processed glass can be used as granular media for a number of applications, including: filtration applications such as in the treatment of potable water, municipal wastewater, and industrial wastewater, as a fluxing agent in brick manufacture, in blast abrasive applications where granular or powdered abrasive is fired at a substrate by high-pressure air or water, and in sports turf and related applications. PAS 103 Collected waste plastics packaging. Specification for quality and guidance for good practice in collection and preparation for recycling. The economics of plastic recycling is heavily dependent on the efficiency of waste plastic presentation. Poorly sorted and highly contaminated waste material will impact on the ability of the reprocessor to recycle the material. By preparing, presenting and categorising the waste plastics accurately, the material will be far more attractive to a recycler and therefore more valuable. PAS 104 Wood recycling in the panel board manufacturing industry. PAS 104 was developed to harmonise individual manufacturer specifications and provide post-consumer wood waste processors with a set of nationally recognised quality parameters. These help them to maximise the quality and value of the wood chip they produce and increase its uptake by the panel board manufacturers.
14
PAS 105 Recovered paper sourcing and quality for UK end markets. PAS 105 makes recommendations for, and gives guidance on, good practice for the collection, handling and processing of recovered paper intended for recycling within UK end markets. It is applicable to paper collected by local authorities, local authority contractors, community groups and charities, households and other commercial establishments. PAS 106 Real nappy laundering. Specification for the most appropriate actions to be taken during the process of cleaning nappies. The aim of this standard is to provide a nappy washing specification to organizations in the laundry market that are active in the area of real nappy cleaning. PAS 107 The manufacture and storage of size reduced tyre materials. The use of recycled tyre materials in a wide range of civil engineering and industrial materials and applications is well established and has grown considerably in the last decade. This specification sets out a formal material specification system and defines minimum requirements for the initial storage, production and final storage of size-reduced, tyre derived rubber materials intended for a range of applications in existing and emerging secondary end markets. The overall aim of the PAS is to provide a specification that can be adopted by suppliers for producing grades of size-reduced tyre rubber so that potential customers will be assured that they are procuring a material of consistent and verifiable quality. PAS 108 Specification for the production of tyre bales for use in construction. PAS 108 sets out to provide a specification that can be adopted by suppliers for producing tyre bales such that potential customers will be assured that they are procuring a construction material of consistent and verifiable quality. Thus, the core of this document addresses the production, handling, storage, transport and placement of standardized tyre bales, the dimensions and properties of which are described in this PAS. In addition, guidance is given on engineering properties and typical construction applications. PAS 109 The production of recycled gypsum from waste plasterboard. This PAS sets minimum requirements for the production of recycled gypsum from waste plasterboard, covering:
the selection, receipt and handling of input materials; the specifications of product grades; and the storage, labelling, dispatch and traceability of the products.
It also specifies requirements for a quality management system to ensure the recycled gypsum is consistently fit for its intended uses.
15
This PAS will enable recyclers who adopt it to produce, and users to procure, a quality assured material. This will increase confidence in the use of recycled gypsum, leading to growth in existing markets and the development of new markets. PAS 110 (in development) Specification for whole digestate, separated liquor and separated fibre derived from the anaerobic digestion of source-segregated biodegradable materials. Other PAS PAS 1049:2004-12 Transmission of recycling relevant product information between producers and recyclers - The Recycling Passport. PAS 2020:2009 was produced in response to pressure on the direct marketing (DM) industry to take a more responsible and sustainable approach to marketing activities. This PAS was commissioned by the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) in partnership with Acxiom, The Incorporated Society of British Advertisers (ISBA), Royal Mail and the Telephone Preference Service. PAS 2020 applies to all organizations involved in direct marketing regardless of their size or complexity. These include client companies, advertising agencies, printers and mailing houses. PAS 402:2009 provides a specification for performance reporting that can be adopted by waste resource management organizations. It provides the framework for the demonstration of performance against key areas. Waste resource management is the collection, transport, recovery, treatment and disposal of waste, including the supervision of such operations and aftercare of disposal sites. PAS 402 requires a waste resource management organization to report:
How it conducts specific waste resource management activities
The landfill diversion and material recovery rates it achieves. PAS 402 applies to a waste resource management organization that processes industrial, commercial or household waste at a transfer station, treatment facility or disposal site. It does not apply to a waste resource management organization that operates solely as a waste carrier or waste broker. PAS 2050:2008 provides a specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services. Other Standards BS EN ISO 14803:2006 specifies requirements for methods to identify waste containers and/or determine the quantity of waste. It requires the assignment of a
16
unique identification code to transponders attached to waste containers for the purpose of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). BS EN ISO 14031:2000 gives guidance on the design and use of environmental performance evaluation within an organization. It is applicable to all organizations, regardless of type, size, location and complexity. This standard does not establish environmental performance levels. It is not intended for use as a specification standard for certification or registration purposes, or for the establishment of any other environmental management system conformance requirements. BS EN ISO 14001:2004 specifies requirements for an environmental management system. This system will enable an organization to develop and implement a policy which takes into account legal requirements, and other requirements to which the organization subscribes, as well as information about significant environmental aspects. It applies to those environmental aspects which the organization can control or influence. It does not state specific environmental performance criteria. BS EN ISO 14001:2004 is applicable to any organization that wishes to establish, implement, maintain and improve an environmental management system, to assure itself of conformity with its stated environmental policy, and to demonstrate conformity with BS EN ISO 14001:2004 by:
making a self-determination and self-declaration; or
seeking confirmation of its conformance from parties which have an interest in the organization, such as customers; or
seeking confirmation of its self-declaration by a party external to the organization; or
seeking certification/registration of its environmental management system by an external organization.
All the requirements in ISO 14001:2004 are intended to be incorporated into any environmental management system. The extent of the application will depend on factors such as the environmental policy of the organization, the nature of its activities, products and services and the location where and the conditions in which it functions. BS EN 13965-2:2004 provides guidance on the characterisation of waste and incorporates management related terms and definitions. BS 8555:2003 provides guidance to all organizations on the phased implementation, maintenance and improvement of a formal Environmental Management System (EMS). BS 8555 makes particular reference to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) but is applicable to any organization, regardless of the nature of the business activity undertaken, location or level of maturity.
17
This standard outlines an implementation process that can be undertaken in up to six separate phases and allows for phased acknowledgement of progress towards full EMS implementation. It also includes advice on the integration and use of environmental performance evaluation techniques during the implementation process and the co-ordination of an EMS with other management systems. BS 8555 helps all organizations improve their environmental performance and their supply chain relationships with the following guidance:
Describes a six-phase incremental approach to implementing an EMS using environmental performance evaluation;
Provides information to organizations on environmental performance management and the use of environmental performance indicators;
Helps organizations satisfy the environmental criteria increasingly being set in contract tenders by new and existing major clients;
Can be used by organizations who may wish to self-declare or seek voluntary phased recognition throughout the implementation process.
Beyond this, those using the standard can:
choose to engage in environmental performance management to the level commensurate with the risks they face;
identify and maximize the areas of greatest potential return on investment; demonstrate to interested parties that progress is being made towards the
target level of environmental management. PD ISO/TR 14062:2002 provides guidance on integrating environmental considerations into product design and development. This Technical Report describes concepts and current practices relating to the integration of environmental considerations into product design and development, where ―product‖ is understood to cover both goods and services. The standard is more critical for the front end of the supply chain rather than the retailers, professional services firms and other organizations that this review focuses on. We have included this standard to demonstrate that there are related standards for manufacturers. ASTM E 2365 was published in 2005 and is produced by ASTM International; previously known as the American Society for Testing and Materials. This document is a Standard Guide for Environmental Compliance Performance Assessment. It is an organized collection of information and series of options for industry, regulators, auditors, consultants and the public, intended to measure compliance with environmental performance standards against established benchmarks. It focuses on compliance with air, water, waste prevention, waste management, and toxic reduction standards for facilities in the United States. The guide does not recommend a specific course of action; it establishes a tiered framework of essential components, beginning with those standards where a deviation presents the greatest potential public health, environmental, and business risks. In each identified pathway, at each tier or step of analysis, the guide outlines ways to identify compliance options and reduce pollution in iterative steps. The goal in using the guide is to lower environmental, public health and business risks from
18
Tiers 1 and 2 to Tiers 3 and 4, by evaluating the performance standards described in this guide. ASTM D5681-08 details a standard terminology for waste and waste management. This terminology contains standard definitions of terms used in the general area of waste and waste management. It is intended to promote understanding by providing precise technical definitions of terms used in the standards developed by Committee D34 (ASTM committee on waste management) and its subcommittees. Standards Planned or In Development ISO 14006 is due for release in 2011. This standard will provide guidelines on eco-design for Environmental management systems. ISO 14045 is due for release in 2011. This standard will address the principles and requirements for eco-efficiency assessment. ISO 14051 is due for release in 2011. This standard will provide general principles and a framework for material flow cost accounting. ISO 14067-1 (no expected release date available) will address the quantification of the carbon footprint of products. ISO 26000 is planned for release in 2010. This standard offers guidance on socially responsible behaviour and possible actions; it does not contain requirements and, therefore, in contrast to ISO management system standards, is not certifiable. ISO 26000 will encourage organizations to discuss their social responsibility issues and possible actions with relevant stakeholders. As service providers, certification bodies do not belong to an organization‘s stakeholders. BS EN ISO 14005 is due for release in 2011. It will provide guidelines for the phased implementation of an environmental management system, including the use of environmental performance evaluation. BS 8903 is due for release in late 2010. This standard has been planned to address sustainable procurement as follows:
provide guidance on how to adopt and embed sustainable procurement principles and practices across an organization and its respective supply chains;
provide detailed guidance across all stages of the procurement process; provide practical information to support implementation; provide guidance to help organizations assess the quality of their sustainable
procurement activity and provide a clear route to better performance. BS 8902 is planned for release in late 2009. This standard will provide guidance in responsible sourcing of construction products.
19
PAS 2060 is planned for release in 2010. This PAS will provide requirements for the demonstration of carbon neutrality.
INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED CODES/INFORMAL STANDARDS
AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS
The findings are split into two parts:
1. Relevant guidelines and documents that were identified during the research; 2. Trade associations and environmental groups predominantly from the United
Kingdom and United States and the information that they make available to their members in relation to waste. This information could be in the format of codes of conduct, policy statements or guideline documents.
Part 1 - Relevant guidelines and documents that were identified during the research Waste Minimisation or Prevention AFNOR is the French national organization for standardization. AFNOR published a guide document 3475551 in 2007 that brings together all of the legislation relating to waste. Specifically it addresses the areas of industrial wastes, waste treatment and recycling, as well as information and guidance on the elimination of waste. Waste Management BIP 2102 ‘Environment management report. Focus on Waste Management’ was published by BSI in 2006. It is an environmental management report that focuses on waste management. The primary objective of this report is to demonstrate how effective waste management can benefit businesses. The report provides example case studies of effective waste management and it provides advice on how to identify waste and implement operational procedures in order to reduce and control waste. The Association of German Engineers (VDI) is a financially independent and politically unaffiliated, non-profit organization of 132,000 engineers and natural scientists. As the leading institution for training and technology transfer among experts, it is also a partner at the preliminary stages of the decision-making process in matters of technological policy and for all questions that engineers face in their professional or public lives. VDI has a close working relationship with DIN (German Institute for Standardization). VDI 2160 is a guideline document for waste management in buildings. The target audience includes office and residential buildings, as well as buildings with other uses including restaurants, hotels and supermarkets. The objective of this guideline document is to increase convenience for those responsible for waste management implementation as well as for companies who are involved in the disposal of waste. This guideline document also helps users to reduce the costs involved in waste management and to improve health protection.
20
VDI 4431 and VDI 4432 are guidelines for those in business who are responsible for both planning and developing waste management processes and the disposal of waste. This document also provides guidance on the company specific implementation of the legal regulations of waste management. VDI 4413 was published in 2003. It is a guideline that is intended for use by those persons in waste producing enterprises who are responsible for the company specific implementation of the legal regulations of waste management. Other VDI Guidelines Identified During the Research VDI 2074 Recycling of technical building equipment VDI 2243 Recycling-oriented production development VDI 2343 Recycling of electrical and electronic devices - bases and terms 2001-
05 VDI 2343 Recycling of electrical and electronic devices - external ones and
internal logistics 2000-03 VDI 2343 Recycling of electrical and electronic devices - logistics 2008-07 VDI 2343 Recycling of electrical and electronic devices - disassembly 2009-04 VDI 2343 Recycling of electrical and electronic devices - marketing VDI 3462 Emission reduction, wood processing and processing burning wood
and timber materials with wood preservatives VDI 4432 Disposal management of trade wastes VDI 6009 Facility management - sample applications from the building
management 2002-10 API PUBL 302 was published in 1991 by the American Petroleum Institute (API). This guideline document specifically relates to waste minimisation in the petroleum industry. The content relates to how organizations should source, minimise, treat, recycle and dispose of material used during the petroleum production cycle. This document is a further example of a sector specific document. API PUBL 1638 provides guidance on waste management practices for petroleum marketing facilities. Whilst this is not a formal standard, the options presented in this guidance document are based around compliance requirements from applicable environmental regulations. Facilities Management VDI 6009 was published in 2002. It is entitled ‗Building management in practice‘. The target audience for this guide is people working in facilities management in any type of commercial or residential building. One of the key areas covered by this guide is waste disposal although waste management is also addressed, but to a lesser extent.
21
Packaging ISO/IEC Guide 41:2003 is relevant for retailers. This guide provides general recommendations to be taken into consideration when determining the most suitable type of packaging to protect goods at the point of sale. The objectives are to maximize the direct and indirect benefits to purchasers of goods and services by:
eliminating unnecessary packaging so as to reduce the price of goods and the amount of waste;
ensuring that goods reach consumers in the condition intended by the manufacturer;
protecting consumers from any potentially harmful effects of the packaging or its contents;
enabling consumers to store the goods and their packaging appropriately and to keep, dispose of, or recycle them, in a manner that minimises their environmental impact.
Procurement BIP 2135 ‘A Handbook for Sustainable Development’ was published in 2007. This guide document is a companion to BS 8900 'Guidance for managing sustainable development' (refer to formal standards section on procurement). This handbook is written for organizations that are concerned with managing their impact on society and the environment more effectively. The handbook explores how principle-based standards can work, and it starts by focusing on outcomes. It looks at practical examples of how difficult issues involving values, principles and ethics can be addressed, and changes implemented in organizations and businesses, to help enhance organizational performance and success. This publication also gives an approach to defining a set of criteria or value judgements about what is important, and what practices or activities should be avoided. During this research some of the activities that Canon has been carrying out relating to green procurement became apparent. Their efforts are based on the belief that green procurement is an important task for a corporation trying to fulfill its environmental responsibilities. To promote green procurement, Canon issued the "Global Canon Green Procurement Standards"1 and "Global Canon Green Procurement Guidebook" in 1997. Since this time, they have reviewed and revised their green procurement standards
1 http://www.canon.com/procurement/green.html
22
to reflect trends in society, as well as developments in related regulations. In 2008 they issued "Green Procurement Standards" Version 5.1. When procuring parts and materials, Canon asks each supplier to meet the requirements for "business activities" and "parts and materials" in two areas —construction and operation of an "environmental management system" and "performance" achieved as the result of its operation (legal compliance, no use of prohibited substances, reduction in the use of substances targeted for reduced levels of use, and preventative measures against soil and groundwater pollution in "business activities"; no presence of prohibited substances in ‗parts and materials‘, no presence of use-restricted substances after a specified period in "parts and materials"). On the basis of these requirements, Canon evaluates suppliers and parts/materials and judges qualification for dealings and procurement. Part 2 – Information from trade associations and environmental groups United Kingdom The project team researched 36 trade association and environmental organizations in the United Kingdom. The results of this research are below. Although not all are classified as official industry codes, the content and references are relevant in the context of this research project. The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) IEMA does not issue any guidelines or codes that relate specifically to waste minimisation or prevention. They recommend two formal standards to organizations; ISO 14001:2004 and BS 8555:2005. Summaries of both these standards can be found in the formal standards section of this report. IEMA also suggests the use of the EU Eco Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), as well as their own Acorn Inspection Scheme. Acorn Inspection Scheme The Acorn Inspection Scheme is particularly suited to small and medium sized businesses and enables companies to gain accredited inspection and recognition for their achievements at each stage as they work towards ISO 14001 or EMAS. IEMA also provides information, advice and support on Environmental Management Systems (EMS) via a web portal. EU Eco Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) To receive EMAS registration an organization must comply with the following steps:
1. Conduct an environmental review considering all environmental aspects of the organization‘s activities, products and services, methods to assess these, its legal and regulatory framework and existing environmental management practices and procedures.
2. In the light of the results of the review, establish an effective environmental management system aimed at achieving the organization‘s environmental policy defined by the top management. The management system needs to set
23
responsibilities, objectives, means, operational procedures, training needs, monitoring and communication systems.
3. Carry out an environmental audit assessing in particular the management system in place and conformity with the organization‘s policy and programme, as well as compliance with relevant environmental regulatory requirements.
4. Provide a statement of its environmental performance which lays down the results achieved against the environmental objectives and the future steps to be undertaken in order to continue improving the organization‘s environmental performance.
Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) The Courtauld Commitment is a voluntary agreement that is driven by WRAP in conjunction with major UK grocery organizations. The objectives of the WRAP agreement are to reduce packaging and food waste ending up in household bins. The information below which details the Courtauld Commitment can be found at http://www.wrap.org.uk/retail/courtauld_commitment/index.html). This information is also accessible via the Solutions for Business portal: ―Improving your resource efficiency‖.2 The Courtauld Commitment asks for signatories to support WRAP in achieving its objectives:
• To design out packaging waste growth by 2008 (achieved: zero growth);
• To deliver absolute reductions in packaging waste by 2010; • To help reduce the amount of food the nation's householders throw
away by 155,000 tonnes by 2010, against a 2008 baseline. WRAP, in conjunction with the EA, DEFRA and Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) are currently engaged in a project called The Waste Protocols Project.3 The project seeks to achieve the following outcomes:
to produce a Quality Protocol identifying the point at which waste, having been fully recovered, may be regarded as a non-waste product that can either be reused by business or industry, or used to supply other markets, enabling them to be used without the need for waste management controls; and/or;
to produce a statement that confirms to the business community what waste management controls they must comply with.
The Soil Association The Soil Association publishes a guide called ‗Reduce, re-use, recycle - a guide to minimising the environmental impact of packaging‘4. The objectives of this document
2
http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=ONEOFFPAGE&itemId=1082105198&r.s=e&r.lc=en
&r.i=1081397463&r.t=ONEOFFPAGE
3 http://www.wrap.org.uk/manufacturing/projects/waste_protocols_projects/
24
are to provide guidance on how to minimise the amount of waste being generated, and how to help conserve natural resources and reduce pollution. The Soil Association standards require their licensees to minimise the environmental impacts of their packaging by minimising the amount of materials they use, maximising the amount of material that can be reused or recycled, and by using recycled materials where possible. Environment Agency (EA) The EA states that their work includes helping businesses to use resources more efficiently and that over half of the waste produced by business they regulate is now being put to other uses, including recycling and producing energy. The EA has a service called NetRegs which provides guidance to small and medium businesses through their web portal and telephone support service. Appendix 2 details the advice that is provided by NetRegs for waste minimisation5. Envirowise To encourage waste minimisation within the office, Envirowise has developed a CD toolkit and guide (reference EN 548) to help businesses take a step-by-step approach to office waste reduction6,7. They have also published EN 859 Environmental Strategic Review Guide. This guide is aimed primarily at the retail sector, although Envirowise state that the information on how to conduct an environmental strategic review will be useful to most sectors. The aim of an environmental strategic review is to achieve cost savings and environmental benefits by increasing one‘s ability to streamline and improve a business‘s resource efficiency. EN 922 is aimed at small construction companies and outlines a step-by-step review process which can help businesses identify the main sources of waste around their site and save as much as 40% on waste disposal costs. NI (Northern Ireland) Wasteworks NI Wasteworks provides support to help businesses reduce, reuse, recycle. As a first step they recommend that businesses complete a waste audit and suggest
4
http://92.52.112.178/web/sacert/sacertweb.nsf/e8c12cf77637ec6c80256a6900374463/4d7054234b8da20a8
025740b0012f83f/$FILE/Packaging%20Guide.pdf
5 http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/netregs/businesses/87979.aspx
6 http://www.envirowise.gov.uk/)
7
http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=ONEOFFPAGE&itemId=1082105198&r.s=e&r.lc=en
&r.i=1081397463&r.t=ONEOFFPAGE
25
engagement with Envirowise in order to facilitate this. NI Wasteworks provides guidance to businesses in the areas below8.
Business benefits of waste reduction Conduct a waste management audit Create a waste management plan Cut waste in production processes Reduce packaging waste Environmental awards and recognition for waste reduction Waste minimisation tools
Friends of the Earth Friends of the Earth offers very high level recommendations on how businesses can address the subject of waste. They provide a few basic ideas to ‗green one‘s workplace‘ including, for example, recommendations on suppliers of environmentally friendly products. For more detailed guidance on waste reduction in the workplace they recommend engagement with Envirowise. Green Alliance Green Alliance states that the UK has been concerned mostly with what to do about waste once it has been generated, rather than how to eliminate it in the first place. They are working to challenge and change this approach and are now going to the next level, and creating a movement to design out waste and accelerate the transition from a linear resource economy (extract-process-consume-discard) to one that treats resources in a more cyclical way. With a group of major companies including Asda, Boots and Royal Mail, they are exploring what a resource recovery economy should look like, and how to achieve this. They are starting by looking at products and their manufacture and then, with their partners, they are analysing the policies that affect products and production processes, highlighting conflicts and gaps and helping to make waste and resource policy more effective and coherent. The Chartered Institution of Wastes Management (CIWM) CIWM do not have their own code or guidelines for members. When their members ask for advice relating to waste reduction, they would typically refer them to Envirowise or WRAP. The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) CIWEM publishes a code of ethics that its members must comply with, but this does not specifically address waste. This code is detailed in Appendix 2. CIWEM publishes a Policy Position Statement in waste management9. This is summarised as follows:
8
http://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/bdotg/action/layer?r.l1=1079068363&topicId=5000321430&r.lc=en&site=19
1&r.l2=5000200348&r.s=tl
9 http://www.ciwem.org/policy/policies/pps.asp
26
CIWEM endorses the development of waste strategies that do not harm the
environment; CIWEM encourages the development of waste options that improve recycling
rates in a manner that is economically viable, meets legislation and reduces resource use;
CIWEM stresses the importance of waste strategies that are integrated at a national and local level to resolve conflicts in order to enable greater recycling to take place.
CIWEM‘s aims and objectives relating to waste management are to:
Ensure that waste management plans and contracts are sustainable in terms of financial viability, protection of the environment and resources consumed;
Ensure that protection of the environment and public health is undertaken at every stage of design, development and operation of waste management facilities;
Ensure that the Government develops coherent and integrated strategies for waste management at local, national and European levels;
Promote the equal implementation of European Directives throughout both the UK and Europe, in order to afford due consideration to the interests of the UK waste industry.
Waste Watch Waste Watch is a UK environmental charity. They advise, educate and support people to make behavioural changes that will reduce their environmental impact. They provide support to businesses, as well as to schools and local communities.10 They work with businesses to help them establish an environmental management system or to help them improve organizational practices. They state that their auditors will look at a business‘s current use of resources, including energy, waste and water, and evaluate possible ways to minimise the impact of operations. United States The project team researched 49 trade association or environmental organizations in the United States. Some of these organizations run programmes with businesses to help them reduce their environmental impact. In some instances, they do address waste reduction directly but not via an official code or standards. For example, The World Wildlife Fund has a corporate partnership programme11 where they claim to have a successful track-record in helping companies reduce their environmental footprint and understand the issues in today's marketplace. The examples they provide are reviewing a company's environmental impact and helping identify innovative, new technological solutions.
10
http://www.wastewatch.org.uk/document/201
11 http://www.worldwildlife.org/what/partners/corporate/index.html
27
Although the results of the research below may not all be classified as official industry codes, the content and references may prove useful and relevant for the latter stages of this review project. Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) The NRDC has approximately 1.2 million members. They work with businesses and other organizations to help reduce the environmental impacts of their operations and events. They work with a wide range of different organizations, including major corporations and professional sports teams. Through their experience of working with their member organizations they have developed the NRDC Greening Advisor. This is a guide that can help any commercial business or organization to reduce its environmental impacts. Through their Greening Advisor they claim that their members can produce less waste, consume less paper and energy, and use resources more efficiently. They hope to ecologically improve an institution‘s supply chain and day-to-day operations. The information below has been taken from the NRDC website12 and features ‗business reasons to green your company or office‘. Also included is information from some organizations in the United States who have benefitted from working with the NRDC. The NRDC guidelines for waste management in businesses are broken down into the following categories:
Waste audits
Recycling
Proper disposal of batteries, electronics and hazardous waste
Composting
Donating leftover food Waste Audits The NRDC recommends that the following steps are considered for a waste audit. They do not carry out the audits themselves, although they do provide links on their website to organizations that are qualified to complete audits.
1. Ensure proper safety measures. - Provide thick gloves to sorters, and make sure everyone has had a
tetanus shot. Involve the company‘s occupational health and safety director.
2. Ensure proper confidentiality measures. - The waste stream may contain personal and private information that
should be kept confidential. Ensure that no documents are being read during the audit and that nothing leaves the auditing area. Consider making participants sign confidentiality agreements.
12
http://www.nrdc.org/enterprise/greeningadvisor/wbg-business.asp
28
3. Enlist building managers, custodial staff, and waste haulers. - The help of building managers, custodial staff, and waste haulers is
invaluable to a successful waste audit. These personnel can assist in gathering your business‘s waste and can also provide logistical insights into your recycling and waste management system.
4. Do not disclose the timing of the audit. - By keeping the timing of a waste audit secret, you ensure that the
waste analyzed is a truly representative sample of the waste generated by your business at a particular time of year. If people are informed in advance of the date of a waste audit, they may increase their recycling efforts or otherwise alter their behaviour.
5. Collect waste. - Work with waste haulers, custodial staff, and concessions managers to
collect the waste. Make sure that everything collected is clearly labelled by date and location.
6. Sort waste. - Sort the collected waste by type, noting paper; cardboard; recyclable
and non recyclable plastics; glass; metals; food waste; batteries; and so on. Make sure to note recyclable materials that have not been diverted for recycling.
7. Analyze results and make recommendations. - What is the composition of your business‘s waste stream? By how
much could your company increase its recycling? By what methods could your company increase its recycling? How could waste be collected more efficiently? What are the opportunities to reduce waste generation? How could your business save money by altering its waste management systems?
Recycling The NRDC provides a link to a recycling calculator from the website of Northeast Recycling Council13. They also provide general advice on where businesses should go for guidance on how to implement a recycling programme, or improve upon an existing one. Proper disposal of batteries, electronics and hazardous waste The NRDC provides advice for companies on who they should consult to ensure that hazardous wastes are disposed off correctly. They state that many local Governments should be able to assist companies in this area. They also mention that companies should look at their purchasing requirements in order to see how they can avoid purchasing products of a hazardous nature. Composting The NRDC explains what composting is and provides various links to organizations who can work with businesses to help them save money by reducing waste stream and reducing the need to purchase fertiliser.
13
http://www.nerc.org/documents/environmental_benefits_calculator.html
29
Donating leftover food The NRDC explains the impact of food decomposition in a landfill. They provide a link to an organization called Feeding America14 which has food banks across the nation. Examples of Organizations Who Have Benefitted from working with NRDC New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (NUMMI) This joint venture of General Motors and Toyota incorporated material efficiency, energy conservation, solid waste reduction, and recycling efforts in their environmental programmes, saving the company approximately $4.5 million in 1999. NUMMI now requires their suppliers to use reusable shipping containers for the shipment of parts. This reduced their consumption of cardboard by 60 percent in 1999, accounting for $2.5 million of the company's savings that year, while also avoiding 11,000 tons of waste. Bank of America By reducing the basis weight15 of its ATM receipts from 20 pounds to 15 pounds, Bank of America saved more than just paper; this also gained the bank additional savings in transportation, storage and handling costs, saving $500,000 a year. Ghirardelli Chocolate Company Ghirardelli redesigned their packaging to incorporate reusable plastic totes for chocolate shipments, eliminating the need to purchase and dispose of 580,000 cardboard boxes every year. This move saves the chocolate company $520,000 annually. Warner Music Group Warner has been working with NRDC for several years, initially approaching the organization for advice about improving the environmental profile of its CD inserts. As a result, Warner Music Group worked with its printer, Ivy Hill, to switch to paper containing 30 percent postconsumer recycled content for all standard CD and DVD packaging. The company has also implemented a number of environmental improvements in its day-to-day business operations. These improvements include an ongoing effort to reduce office paper use and increase wastepaper recycling. Changes include making double-sided printing the default setting on printers, centralizing print jobs and reducing the number of printers, and clearly labelling recycling bins. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) The EPA produces a document entitled Business Guide for Reducing Solid Waste.16 This guide tackles many areas including waste prevention, waste reduction and 14
http://feedingamerica.org/default.aspx?show_shov=1/zip_code.jsp
15 The weight, measured in pounds, of 500 sheets (a ream) of paper cut to a standard size is
its basis weight.(source http://desktoppub.about.com/od/glossary/g/basisweight.htm)
16 http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/red2.pdf
30
waste management. A link to this guide can be found in the footnote below. The table of contents for this document is detailed here:
Introduction
The Benefits of Waste Reduction
Waste Prevention
Recycling
Composting
Purchasing
Chapter One: Getting Started
Management Support
The Waste Reduction Team
Setting Preliminary Programme Goals
Notifying Personnel
Chapter Two: Conducting a Waste Assessment
The Purpose of the Waste Assessment
Determining the Approach
Records Examination
Facility Walk-Through
Waste Sort
Documenting the Waste Assessment
Chapter Three: Selecting, Implementing, and Monitoring
Waste Reduction Options
Compiling and Screening the Options
Analyzing and Selecting the Options
Waste Prevention Options
Recycling Options
Composting Options
Purchasing Options
Implementing the Options
Educating and Training Employees
Monitoring and Evaluating the Programme
Waste Reduction in Your Workplace and Beyond
Appendix A: Waste Reduction Ideas
Appendix B: Regional EPA and State Waste Reduction Programme Contacts
Appendix C: Glossary
Appendix D: Volume-to-Weight Conversion Table
Appendix E: Common Recyclable Materials It is also worth mentioning that the EPA has a resource management initiative that compensates waste contractors based on performance in achieving their client organization‘s waste reduction goals, rather than the volume of waste disposed. The objective of this initiative is to align waste contractor incentives with an organization‘s own goals. This should help explore innovative approaches that foster cost-effective resource efficiency through prevention, recycling, and recovery. This initiative is based around the following practices:
31
1. Establish Baseline Cost, Performance, and Service Levels Define scope and service levels Identify existing contract and compensation methods Establish cost and performance benchmarks Establish goals
2. Seek Strategic Input from Contractors
Convene pre-bid meetings with contractors to articulate goals and address questions
Allow or require bidders to submit plans for achieving specified improvements in existing operations
3. Align Waste and Resource Efficiency Services
Coordinate, integrate, and formalize all contracts and services included in the baseline scope identified in Practice 1 (see above).
Ensure that the contractor has access to "internal" stakeholders that influence waste management and generation.
4. Establish Transparent Pricing for Services
Delineate pricing information for specific services such as container maintenance, container rental, hauling, disposal, etc.
Allow variable price savings, such as "avoided hauling and disposal," to flow back to generator and/or be used as a means for financing performance bonuses.
5. Provide Direct Financial Incentives for Resource Efficiency
Establish compensation that allows the contractor to realize financial benefits for service improvements and innovations.
Assess liquidated damages for failing to achieve minimum performance benchmarks or standards.
6. Cap Compensation for Garbage Service
Establish a cap on waste hauling/disposal service compensation that decreases gradually over time.
Decouple contractor profitability from waste generation and/or service levels. Base compensation initially on reasonable estimates of current hauling and
disposal service and costs as per Practice 1. EarthShare EarthShare provides businesses and employees with the opportunity to support hundreds of environmental groups through workplace payroll contribution campaigns. Although they do not publish a formal industry guideline, they do provide direction for easy and cost effective green efforts for businesses. The direction they provide is broken into four categories; recycling, reducing paper waste, water audit and employee engagement. We have summarized the relevant categories below. Recycling The most basic and important aspect of an environmentally-friendly workplace is a recycling programme. It is likely that the focus of a recycle/reuse programme will be
32
paper products, but it‘s also important to recycle printer cartridges, office electronics, food containers, cans, bottles and plastic bags. Reducing paper waste Another high impact initiative is to reduce paper waste. A recent study by Xerox showed that 45% of the paper printed in offices ends up in the trash bin by the end of the day. This less-than-one day lifespan is the fate of a trillion sheets of paper per year, worldwide. The cumulative cost is enormous. A ―paperless office‖ won‘t develop naturally as a result of electronic filing and communications; reducing a workplace‘s impact will take effort. A sound paper policy is built on three basic principles: using less paper, recycling paper and buying environmentally preferable paper. Employee engagement Investing in employees, the most valuable resource of any company, is always beneficial. Environmentally-conscious business practices help attract and retain the best employees by increasing employee satisfaction and pride in the workplace. A 2008 survey indicated that more than half of workers polled think their company should do more to be environmentally friendly Employee benefits and involvement programmes give employers an opportunity to increase morale and retention by providing an opportunity for people to make a difference in their workplace. Forming employee-driven Green Teams is one way to empower workers with the ability to make change and improve their workplace as well as having a positive impact on the environment. Through the workplace payroll contribution campaign EarthShare gives every environmentally-conscious employee the chance to support hundreds of vetted environmental charities through an easy and effective workplace payroll contribution campaign. Global Green USA17 Global Green USA is a non-profit environmental organization. It runs a programme called Coalition for Resource Recovery (CORR). CORR works with businesses to assist in reduction of waste as follows: Wholesale Packaging Achieve 100% recyclable wholesale transfer packaging, at world‘s largest distribution centre18, setting the standard throughout the world. Food Waste Identify onsite food waste reduction technologies with optimal environmental and financial performance to reduce commercial food waste by at least 50%. Food Packaging Design coffee and soda cups, and other fibre-based food packaging so that it can be collected and recycled with old corrugated cardboard and turned into high-value products.
17
http://www.globalgreen.org/
18 Location of world’s largest distribution centre not available from Global Green USA
33
End-of-Life Treatment Develop a conceptual plan and financial, operational, and environmental comparisons of end-of-life technologies that could be located in the city to treat the commercial organics waste stream. Technologies to be evaluated include composting, anaerobic digestion, and plasma gasification. Beverage Containers Increase beverage container recycling for manufacture into new products. Plastic Bags Increase the use of reusable bags and readily recyclable single-use bags when one is needed. The coalition is in fact comprised of a number of businesses as listed below.
Action Carting Environmental Services Chemol International Paper Interstate Container Plasma Waste Recycling Pratt Industries Spectra-Kote Starbucks Coffee Company Tomra Western Michigan University Coating and Recycling Pilot Plant
The table below provides a breakdown of materials that are discarded by the accommodation, food service, and retail sectors in New York City. These are the materials that are being targeted for reduction by CORR programmes.19
Waste Category Discards (Tons/Day) CORR Programmes
Food 1,100 Onsite waste reduction, end-of-life treatment
Fibre 700 Wholesale packaging, food packaging
Plastic 300 Beverage containers, plastic bags
Metal 100 Beverage containers
Glass 700 Beverage containers
The Centre For Environmental Leadership In Business This organization has published A Practical Guide For Good Practice – ‗Managing Environmental and Social Issues In The Accommodations Centre‘20. This is a good
19
Source www.corr.org
20
http://www.celb.org/ImageCache/CELB/content/travel_2dleisure/practical_5fguide_5fgood_5fpractice_2epdf
/v1/practical_5fguide_5fgood_5fpractice.pdf
34
example of a sector specific guide that addresses waste management. Their guide provides readers with advice about the reduce, reuse and recycle actions. The guide also addresses purchasing and provides guidance on what action points a purchasing organization can take in order to assist with their waste reduction efforts. Other Organizations Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) The Global Reporting Initiative's (GRI) vision is that disclosure on economic, environmental, and social performance is as commonplace and comparable as financial reporting, and important to organizational success. Their mission is to create conditions for the transparent and reliable exchange of sustainability information through the development and continuous improvement of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Framework. GRI Sustainability Reporting Guidelines21 address waste as follows:
Total weight of waste by type and disposal method
Weight of transported, imported, exported, or treated waste deemed hazardous under the terms of the Basel Convention Annex I, II, III, and VIII, and percentage of transported waste shipped internationally
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) In 2000, OECD published the OECD Reference Manual on Strategic Waste Prevention22. This Reference Manual sets out to support government efforts toward developing, applying, and evaluating waste prevention policy programmes.
SECTION 3 – STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK
Introduction The purpose of Stage 2 of the project was to engage with key stakeholders to understand their awareness and opinions on the following areas:
Formal standards in waste: - Awareness - Effectiveness - Importance - Level of uptake and barriers to uptake - How they can be better promoted - If they are used widely enough - What new standards should be introduced and whether they should be
generic or sector specific
21
http://www.globalreporting.org/NR/rdonlyres/DDB9A2EA-7715-4E1A-9047-
FD2FA8032762/0/G3_QuickReferenceSheet.pdf
22 http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2000doc.nsf/LinkTo/NT00001066/$FILE/00081387.PDF
35
Informal standards in waste: - Awareness - Effectiveness - Importance
Trends and areas of innovation in the area of waste
Awareness of standards that address procurement in the context of waste In order to meet this objective, we completed two separate stakeholder activities: an online questionnaire and a workshop. We engaged with the following groups during this stage of the project:
Waste producing businesses;
Trade associations;
Environmental organizations.
Online Questionnaire During the first stage of the project we identified stakeholders in the area of waste and resource management. We sent out the questionnaire to approximately 150 individuals and received 48 completed or partially completed responses. The questionnaire was sent out twice to all target participants over a five week period and, when possible, we spoke to the target participants to encourage them to complete the survey. The questionnaire can be found in Appendix 5. Results from the Online Questionnaire This section summarises the results and feedback from stakeholders from the online survey. Further detail and comments from stakeholders can be found in Appendix 6. Formal Standards The questionnaire started by asking stakeholders if they are aware of any formal standards in the areas below:
Waste management
Waste reduction (and minimisation)
Waste prevention
Recycling
Reuse With the exception of waste management, the level of awareness of formal standards in these areas was lower than 50%.
36
Figure 1. Stakeholder Awareness of Formal Standards
Stakeholders were asked to tell us which formal standards they are aware of. Their detailed responses can be found in Appendix 7. The most popular quoted standards were ISO 14001 (specifies requirements for an environmental management system) and PAS 100 (specification for compost materials). Stakeholders rated the overall effectiveness of standards as 3 on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is very low and 5 is very high. Stakeholders were next asked to tell us how important they believe formal standards are in the areas of waste management, waste reduction, waste prevention, recycling and reuse. Waste management was rated as the most important area and waste prevention the least important.
Nu
mb
er o
f
Res
po
nd
ents
37
Figure 2. Importance of Formal Standards to Stakeholders
81% of stakeholders believe that there is not sufficient awareness and uptake of formal standards. There was strong consensus across stakeholders that, with the exception of ISO 14001, awareness of standards in the area of waste is very low and that there is an exceptionally low level of awareness across the SME sector. Stakeholders were asked to tell us about barriers or challenges that limit the uptake of standards. The responses from stakeholders were very consistent and are as follows:
Cost of implementation and ongoing audit;
Complexity and lack of understanding;
Lack of coordination between national standards bodies and Government;
Lack of appreciation of how standards can assist businesses;
Complexity of implementation. Stakeholders were asked how standards could be better promoted. Stakeholders believe that greater pressure should come from customers and end users and that standards should potentially be promoted through advice giving bodies (for example WRAP) and by Government in general. Stakeholders also stated that trade associations could be more influential in promoting standards. 85% of stakeholders believe that formal standards are not used widely enough in the area of waste. The main reasons stated for this is that there is not enough
Leve
l of
imp
ort
ance
of
form
al s
tan
dar
ds
38
awareness, there is no incentive for businesses to use formal standards and the cost can be prohibitive, especially in the current economic climate. Stakeholders are broadly in favour of new formal standards for businesses and organizations in waste. Figure 3. Stakeholder Interest in New Standards
Stakeholders were asked to tell us about specific areas where they would like to see new standards. There was a broad range of answers to this question and these are listed in Appendix 7. The answers included a waste reduction standard that is auditable, a waste prevention standard linked to carbon reduction and some very specific industry focused recommendations. 52% of respondents stated that any new standards should be sector specific and 48% stated that they should be generic. Stakeholders made some interesting comments to close the section on formal standards. Several stakeholders commented that a whole-life view should be considered, rather than just waste. The potential value of a benchmarking standard was again suggested and three stakeholders stated that, if the scope of ISO 14001 is extended to incorporate good waste management, then there should be no need for new standards. Finally, stakeholders stated that regardless of the output of this project, any new standards need to be clear, easy to understand and affordable.
Nu
mb
er o
f R
esp
on
den
ts
39
Informal Standards There was generally a low level of awareness of informal standards in all categories amongst stakeholders, as shown in the chart below. There were very few responses when we asked stakeholders which informal standards they are aware of. These responses were Envirowise documents, WRAP guidance (including the Courtauld Commitment) and CIWM professional standards. Figure 4. Stakeholder Awareness of Informal Standards
Stakeholders consider the effectiveness of informal standards to be very low, at a score of 1.96 where a scale of 1 (very low) to 5 (very high) was used. Despite the low level of effectiveness, stakeholders told us that informal standards are important. On the same rating scale of 1 to 5, the average rate of importance of informal standards was 3.5. Stakeholders provided limited comments on the role of informal standards in the area of waste and these are listed in Appendix 6. General Questions 77% of stakeholders believe that standards can assist their organization to manage their waste more effectively. Stakeholders told us that standards help them to create focus and a formal framework to address waste.
40
Stakeholders were asked to cite specific results where a business has benefitted from formal or informal standards in waste management, reduction or prevention. Several stakeholders said that they have seen businesses benefit from ISO 14001, for example by helping with waste management and waste reduction. Stakeholders were asked if they are aware of any trends, areas of innovation or other factors that they believe are important for businesses in the areas of waste management, reduction and prevention. Answers included the waste protocols from the EA and WRAP, new technology and the Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) for the construction industry. Only 12.5% of stakeholders are aware of standards that address procurement in the context of waste reduction and prevention. However, when stakeholders were asked what standards they are aware of, the only answer given was ISO 14001.
Finally, stakeholders were asked if they have any general comments relating to standards (formal or informal) for businesses and other organizations in waste management, reduction and prevention. These responses are listed in Appendix 6. Stakeholder Workshop For the final stage of this research, stakeholders were invited to participate in a workshop which took place at BSI headquarters in Chiswick, London on 16th July 2009. 18 industry stakeholders participated in the event together with representation from both DEFRA and BIS. A list of delegates and organizations can be found in Appendix 9. The objective of the workshop was to build on the results and findings from the earlier stages of the project and further examine the role that standards can play in waste and resource management. The full agenda for the workshop can be found in Appendix 8. Prior to posing a number of questions to the delegates, a short presentation was given that covered the following areas:
Overview of BSI British Standards, as the UK‘s National Standards Body and a brief overview of standards;
Objectives for the workshop;
Project methodology;
Summary of the project results to date. The following questions were asked:
Please spend 5 minutes listing common wastes that are produced by your business/organization or businesses/organizations that you work with.
What are the key drivers and enablers that allow businesses and other organizations to improve the management and minimisation of their waste?
What are the key blockers that prevent businesses and other organizations from improving their waste management and minimisation activities?
41
Please spend 5 minutes listing the steps that your organization (or organizations that you work with) is/are taking to manage and minimise waste.
How can (new) standards assist businesses and organizations in managing, reducing, preventing or minimising their waste?
What is your understanding of waste minimisation? Please discuss for 5 minutes and come up with a maximum of 3 bullet points to report back to the group.
How do you see a voluntary standard in waste management and minimisation working in practise? What impact might this have in measuring organizational performance in resource and waste management?
What areas should a voluntary standard on waste minimisation potentially cover?
How would a benchmarking tool for waste management and minimisation benefit your organization?
We split delegates into four groups and changed these groups throughout the day. At the end of the morning and afternoon sessions table hosts presented the results from the group discussions to the entire group of attendees. The detailed results from the workshop can be found in Appendix 10. The key themes to come out of the workshop are as follows:
Both new and existing standards can assist businesses and organizations in managing, reducing, preventing or minimising their waste by helping to create a common language, creating a level playing field and providing detail to guide practical actions;
New standards should be focused around a resource efficiency cycle and not just waste prevention, reduction and minimisation;
A benchmarking standard could be a valuable tool to help businesses compare their waste management to other businesses;
The lack of awareness and confusion surrounding information that is available to businesses should be addressed;
There is limited consistency across local authorities in how they deal with the collection and separation of waste for both businesses and households and perhaps third party organizations. Businesses are not aware of the support and guidance that is available to them from environmental organizations such as WRAP and Solutions For Business;
Several workshop participants provided details of some of the steps that their organizations have taken to manage and minimise their waste. It was clear that the steps being taken differ vastly from one organization to another. It was not clear if these organizations are following a formal published policy.
42
SECTION 4 – CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTED ACTIONS
SUMMARY
Stakeholders from more than sixty organization were consulted during the course of
this research. These included stakeholders from trade associations, environmental
organizations and waste producing businesses. The results from the desktop
research and the analysis of the stakeholder feedback (received through the survey
and workshop) present a strong argument that actions are needed to help
businesses and organizations reduce their waste. This is also an opportunity to use
a standards based approach to augment current Government sponsored support to
business in this area.
Perhaps the key strategic outcome of the project is the concept of a resource
efficiency cycle. This concept was introduced by stakeholders at the workshop.
Established thinking embraces a waste management hierarchy i.e. the 3R concept -
reduce, reuse, recycle. This can be illustrated conceptually by the pyramid below:
Figure 5. Waste hierarchy
Whilst this concept is valid and valuable, it lacks several important elements. It is not
dynamic and it fails to deal effectively with resource utilization and allocation. Thus,
whilst it encompasses prevention in general terms, it fails to cover specific aspects of
prevention such as product/service design, process engineering, material selection,
purchasing and resourcing, etc. Equally, the hierarchy is static, whereas the real
world is dynamic and indeed cyclical. The resource efficiency cycle, detailed below,
attempts to be holistic and dynamic and thus more appropriate to the real world. In
this way, it offers a strategic template and could create a roadmap for future
standardisation.
The second key outcome of the project is the demand for a benchmarking standard
to assist businesses in minimising and managing their waste. This standard could
provide a basis for businesses to compare their waste and resource performance
against others in their own industries and across all industries. This would better
43
inform them and allow identification of best practice in resource efficiency and waste
minimization.
Based on the results from the desktop research and stakeholder feedback, four suggested actions are being proposed. Two of these should be treated as priority actions:
Broad engagement with stakeholders to validate the concept of a resource efficiency cycle and then determine what role standards can play in this cycle;
A standard for businesses to help them benchmark their waste performance against other businesses.
The remaining two suggestions are establishing a glossary of terms and a standard to help organizations develop and implement a waste minimization policy. Each of the suggested actions is explained below. A table is also provided that summarises these actions and:
suggests who should be responsible for moving these forward;
proposes the immediate next steps;
suggests funding options;
outlines timeframes;
summarises the expected benefits.
Suggested Action 1. Broad engagement with stakeholders to validate the concept of a resource efficiency cycle and then determine what role standards can play in this cycle Stakeholders commented that any new standards should have a much broader focus than just waste, and the concept of a resource efficiency cycle was introduced and very well supported during the workshop. The principle behind this concept is that waste is just one part of a holistic cycle and its management should not be dealt with as an isolated output or process. At the stakeholder workshop, various standardisation suggestions were illustrated graphically. However, at this stage these are considered too vague and unsubstantiated. This illustration is therefore limited to the core model below.
1. The cycle starts with the input of virgin or raw material 2. A primary manufacturer or a service provider would use the virgin or raw
material to make a product or service and the secondary output at this stage is redundant resource (waste)
3. Redundant resource (waste) can go to the 2nd stage of the cycle - one man‘s waste is another man‘s resource - where the output is secondary products and services. The other output is potentially recyclable materials and/or end of life waste.
4. Recyclable materials would potentially go to re-processors or recyclers (for example glass, paper and plastic). They produce secondary materials that can be used to help manufacture products and services (for example methane gas and compost material) as well as end of life waste, which is for disposal.
44
Figure 6. Resource Efficiency Cycle
Conceptually and strategically the concept of the resource efficiency cycle could be positioned as an evolutionary development from the waste hierarchy that could be very valuable for businesses. However, at this stage we believe that this concept requires much broader discussion and investigation before it can be accepted and used as a template to identify the need for future standards in this area. Although not explored in detail, consideration has been given to how this might work in the context of standards. There is the potential for a single generic standard for resource management with a series of other standards that are underpinned by the parent resource management standard. For example, these could include waste minimisation, waste management, reuse and some sector specific standards. Product design and the effective use of materials during the product design and development period are important factors to be considered in the context of the resource efficiency cycle. Outside the context of this project, BSI is currently conducting an internal review of existing product design standards. The BS 7000 series of standards addresses the issues surrounding design management from initial outset of the design of a product through to the end of its lifecycle, when it becomes obsolescent. In addition, BS 8888:2006 provides a definitive set of requirements for technical product specifications. There is also a proposal that has recently been submitted by BSI to the Design Council for the
45
development of a PAS for sustainable product design. This proposal will subsequently be sent to BIS for review. If the resource efficiency cycle is accepted, there needs to be engagement and coordination between the BSI team that is responsible for the review of current product design standards and the project team that is responsible for the resource efficiency cycle implementation work. This will ensure that any new design standards, or modification to existing design standards, can be integrated into the suite of standards that would sit under the generic resource efficiency cycle. As an initial step, BSI would like to present a proposal to DEFRA and BIS for a pre-standardisation engagement exercise which will allow us to seek validation from stakeholders for this concept. The stakeholder workshop was characterised by a preponderance of public sector executives, consultants and specialist environmental organizations. There was a marked lack of representatives from waste producing organizations. This creates the opportunity to consult them regarding the key strategic outcome of the workshop, i.e. the resource efficiency cycle. This consultation exercise would focus on engaging between six and ten waste producing businesses from different industries, in order to understand their views on the resource efficiency concept and the potential role that standards can play. Engagement should be via in-depth interviews using a broad topic list to guide, but not lead, discussions. Specifically, we would like to explore the following with stakeholders:
Their agreement and acceptance that the focus of waste should be broadened to encompass the resource efficiency cycle;
Do they currently measure waste and resource efficiency. If yes, how?
Do they have a formal policy in place for waste and/or resource management?
What, if any, performance indicators do they use in relation to this?
Would they reference the cycle within their own businesses and how, i.e. in practise, what internal requirements are necessary for implementation?
If they accept the resource efficiency cycle, do they accept that standards are necessary or helpful in minimising waste and maximising resource efficiency?
Do they already have experience or exposure to this or a similar concept?
Assuming that resource and efficiency management are on their corporate agenda, where in this organization does the management of this reside (production, procurement, quality, facilities and so forth)?
What percentage of their surplus materials do they pass on to recyclers?
How do they currently dispose of end of life waste?
Use of existing standards in resource efficiency and their applicability in the resource efficiency concept;
Their interest in joining a technical committee;
Measurement of inputs resources and redundant materials (e.g. by weight).
There is also an opportunity for engagement with the relevant BSI committees and the organizations that are represented on these committees for additional feedback, using the same questions as above.
46
Upon completion of this exercise, a DEFRA, BIS and BSI workshop would be required in order to define and agree upon a roadmap based around the results of the feedback from this project and the subsequent and more detailed input from the waste producing stakeholders. This workshop would tackle the following questions:
Is the concept of the resource efficiency cycle of value to businesses and other organizations?
What standards (if any) should be introduced?
What is the rationale behind the recommended standards?
How would these standards work?
What is the suggested timeframe?
What are the expected benefits? With the answers in place to these questions, BSI would be in a position to develop a plan for standardisation activity around the resource efficiency cycle and, at that time, funding and other critical areas to move this forward would be addressed. The answers to these questions will also help to finalise a strategic standardization framework. Should the concept of the resource efficiency cycle be accepted, it has the potential to create a new geography for the area of waste minimisation and resource efficiency for businesses. It would be helpful to establish a strategic advisory committee. This committee would be under the auspices of, and driven by, BSI and would be composed of a small number of knowledgeable and experienced personnel drawn from industry, Government and BSI. Their task would be as follows:
To develop the findings of the research recommended for the resource efficiency cycle;
To map existing standards that relate to this cycle;
To identify sector specific standards that spin off from the cycle and are to be developed in the future;
To determine the priorities that should be applied to these standards that are to be developed.
A coalition of interested groups is needed to take forward the resource efficiency cycle concept. This coalition should include appropriate Government Departments, environmental organizations, stakeholders and BSI, in its role as the National Standards Body for the UK. Also, experience within ISO, who established a committee to evaluate environmental standardisation in 1992 (Strategic Advisory Group on the Environment - SAGE), shows that this holistic approach which, inter alia, led to the creation of the ISO 14000 series, is a valid and worthwhile starting position for approaching any new area of standardisation.
47
Suggested Action 2 – A standard for businesses to help them benchmark their waste performance against other businesses There was strong consensus amongst the stakeholders who completed the survey that a standard to assist them in benchmarking their waste performance would be of great value. This principle was further validated during the workshop, where a significant number of delegates identified this as a valuable tool. The benchmarking standard should allow an organisation to compare its performance in the area of waste both with its own prior performance, as well as a range of organizations. This will allow the organisation to identify areas for further and continuous improvement. As well as identifying the benefits of benchmarking and the process to be conducted, the proposed standard will identify and detail those aspects of waste minimisation and resource efficiency that should be assessed, measured and reported. These aspects could cover, for example, production, design, storage and transportation in the context of material utilisation and waste management. The proposed standard should reference PAS 402 and other relevant standards in the waste management area. For the standard to be used effectively, a central online database must be developed. It is envisaged that this was would incorporate a software based tool that is utilised by organisations to develop and record their performance. The online database should detail the results from participating organizations and allow them to compare themselves against their industry peers and, more generally, across all industries. The Solutions for Business portal could be considered as the host for this database. This would also encourage strong performing organizations to leverage their performance as a way of self promotion. In order to ensure maximum up-take of the benchmarking standard, particularly given the likelihood that small businesses may not have the resources to conduct this exercise, it should be made available to all businesses with no charge. BIS and DEFRA have the opportunity to leverage internal marketing expertise and develop an awareness programme for the benchmarking standard. The standard could be promoted by different parties including WRAP, Envirowise, BIS, DEFRA as well as BSI. Further, DEFRA and BIS may wish to consider motivating businesses by providing annual awards to the best performing businesses and/or the most improved businesses in waste performance. It is felt that it would be worthwhile to review current benchmarking practices in waste and resource management. Therefore, engagement could take place with micro, small, medium and large businesses in order to provide valuable input for the proposed benchmarking standard. Ideally, all of the following sectors should be included in this research; manufacturing, extraction (e.g. oil, quarrying), construction and services (private and/or public). The research should probe the following:
48
Current benchmarking practice (if any);
Potential conflict with current practice;
Would a standard help to formalize current benchmarking activities?
What current indicators (if any) do they use to measure performance?
Participants awareness of benchmarking activity in other countries;
Other areas of benchmarking that take place in business;
Resource requirements (capital and human);
Attractiveness and willingness for a benchmarking standard;
Perceived benefits of benchmarking;
What are the key factors that participants would like to measure/compare?
Through in-depth interviews with the relevant representatives from each business, BSI would be in a stronger position to shape a future benchmarking standard, establish which sectors and what size of businesses have an interest in benchmarking and confirm what elements should be included in a benchmarking standard. The target would be to achieve approximately thirty in-depth interviews. BSI is ideally positioned to carry out the proposed research and to subsequently analyze the results and, where appropriate, use the findings from the research to assist with the development of the future benchmarking standard and tool. Funding and marketing support will need to be procured from Government to complete this important exercise, to develop the benchmarking standard and tool and to promote its uptake across a broad range of businesses. The results of this research would be a very valuable first step in the development of the proposed standard. Suggestion Action 3. Develop a comprehensive Glossary Standard for Resource and Waste Management. Minimising and dealing with waste effectively is becoming increasingly important and clear terminology and definitions are essential for the future development of standards for this area. The findings of the research indicate that different trade organizations, environmental groups and other parties have varying terms and definitions for resource management and waste. It is suggested, therefore, that an up-to-date glossary standard be developed for the UK market, drawing upon published global standards and current terms in use. This standard would be a valuable source and reference document for any further standards that are developed in the waste and resource efficiency area. The objectives of developing such a standard can be summarised as follows:
To update existing glossaries to include new terms and new technology;
To bring together all relevant published terms from the global marketplace;
49
To be an important building block to any future standards in this area .
There are three clear published sources of input to such a standard. However, it should be noted that terminology from overseas standards may differ to UK terminology. The proposed standard would thus need to identify the equivalent term used in other countries. The three sources are:
1. In CEN, TC292 has produced sixteen relevant standards in the last seven years relating to the characteristics of waste, two of which directly cover terminology:
BS EN 13965-1 2004 – Characterization of waste-material related terms and definitions
BS EN 13965-2 2004 – Characterization of waste-management related terms and conditions
2. The Australian and New Zealand Standards bodies have co-operated to produce a glossary:
AS/NZS 3831: 1998 – Glossary of terms for waste management
3. The American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) produced in 2008:
ASTM D5681-08 – Standard terminology for waste and waste management
In the development of the suggested standard it is critical that inputs from WRAP, Envirowise and other important organisations are included. Suggested Action 4 – A standard to help organizations to develop and implement a resource efficiency and waste minimization policy and appropriate procedures In the marketplace there are numerous documents and guides to help organizations develop a waste minimization policy, including those from WRAP and Envirowise. However, based on the feedback from both the stakeholder workshop (in response to a specific question) and also from the survey, it is clear that different organizations are taking uncoordinated and unrelated steps in order to minimize their waste (see Appendix 10). It appears clear that most organizations do not have a formal or cohesive policy, which results in sporadic and sub-optimal performance in waste minimization and control. Some organizations did cite a range of disparate, incomplete instructions covering reuse and recycling of a minor nature, e.g. reusing plastic coffee cups, whilst others offer very broad instructions with no details regarding procedures to be adopted.
50
A lack of policy in this, as in all areas of management, can clearly result in inefficiency and an inability to measure, monitor, audit and improve performance. The environmental management standard BS EN ISO 14000 was mentioned both by respondents in the survey, as well as during the workshop. This standard, the second most popular standard in the world, is, however, designed to ensure management of a policy by stipulating management, monitoring, control and auditing procedures. It sets out to ensure that a policy or specification is consistently adhered to. It is not a substitute for a policy and is of limited value without such a policy. Within the limitations of the workshop, it was not possible to identify the reasons behind the lack of policy. There also appeared to be a lack of awareness of the available guidance documentation. It is felt that organizations would benefit from assistance in the development and implementation of a comprehensive policy in this area. A formal standard developed by all interested stakeholders results in a transparent document underpinned by national consensus. Such a standard can be a powerful tool, and since it has been created voluntarily by technical experts, and its adoption is voluntary, it is frequently widely used. It typically embodies best practice, state of the art, fitness for purpose and ensures compliance with legislative requirements. It thus achieves an authoritative status, especially when prepared under the auspices of the National Standards Body. Therefore, it is proposed that consolidating existing guidance in a formal standard would be a worthwhile exercise, This will, of course, include, inter alia, the contributions of WRAP, Envirowise and other important organizations. The proposed standard could incorporate the following areas:
Introduction
Policy statement
Objectives of policy - Prevention - Minimization - Reuse - Recycling - Energy recovery - Disposal
Application
Organization and management - Facilities - Quality Assurance - Resourcing - Design - Production - Storage - Staff training - Communication
51
Legislation
Auditing and Reporting
Government‘s role in the distribution of this standard through existing delivery mechanisms, such as Business Link, could be very valuable. This document should also leverage Government‘s technical expertise in resource and waste management. It is believed that the widespread adoption of a formal standard guiding policy development by organizations within the UK would have a major impact on waste minimization and resource efficiency.
52
Summary of Suggested Actions Suggested actions highlighted in green are the recommended high priority actions.
Suggested Action Who Next Steps Funding Timing Expected Benefits
1. Engage widely with the business community to validate and elaborate a new strategic framework for how standards can support and reflect the concept of the resource efficiency cycle across the economy
BIS, Defra, BSI should work with business support delivery organizations (WRAP, NISP, Envirowise and engaging the RDAs) to lead a stakeholder engagement project
BIS, Defra, BSI to develop this coalition and complete the stakeholder engagement project. This could include a joint BSI/DEFRA/BIS workshop to determine future roadmap. BSI to engage with relevant BSI committees and representatives
Resourcing for the initial stakeholder engagement project to come from Government
Stakeholder engagement project to be completed by early 2010
Validation and elaboration of the concept and a roadmap for determining the role that standards can play in the resource efficiency cycle and the overall strategic framework
2. A waste performance benchmarking standard for businesses
BIS, Defra, BSI to work with expert business support bodies ( Wrap, NISP, Envirowise) and arrange engagement with stakeholders for detailed input and BSI to develop standard
BIS, Defra, BSI to work with expert business support bodies ( Wrap, NISP, Envirowise) and arrange engagement with stakeholders
BSI suggests that standard is made available to businesses at no charge. Funding for further engagement with stakeholders and standard development to be discussed with Government
Engagement with stakeholders to be completed by early 2010. Subsequently between 9 months and 3 years will be needed depending on whether a PAS or a British Standard is developed. This timeframe would allow for benchmarking tool and other development work
Businesses better able to compare their waste performance against others; inform business management decisions, expectations and enable calibration of innovative business services. Businesses should be better informed and able to identify benefits of resource efficiency and waste minimisation
3. Develop a glossary standard for waste and resource management
BSI to develop a standard that complies with relevant legislation, and is consonant with existing
BSI to present a proposal to Government for development of standard
Funding from Government
Secondary project timeframe to be agreed
Standard terminology that can be used by waste producing businesses, recyclers, re-processors and others
53
standards.
4. A standard to guide organizations in the development of a resource efficiency and waste minimization policy
BSI to develop the standard
Project timeframe to be determined by Government in consultation with BSI
Funding of standard from DEFRA
Project timeframe to be determined by DEFRA in consultation with BSI
More organizations will have a formal policy in place. Greater consistency of policy across organizations
54
SECTION 5 - APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 – FORMAL STANDARDS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED DURING
THE RESEARCH BS 5906:2005 Waste Management Waste management in buildings
BS EN 12940:2004 Waste Management Classification and management for companies
who are active in the manufacture of footwear
AS/NZS 3831:1998 Waste Management Glossary of terms for waste management
AS/NZS 3816:1998 Waste Management Management of clinical and related waste
BS 8901:2007 Waste Management Specification for a sustainable event
management system
OENORM A
7002:2001
Facilities Management Catalogue of requirements that Facility
Managers should adhere to
DIN 32736:2000 Facilities Management Facility Management – Terminology and scope
of services
ISO 15270:2008 Recycling and Reuse Recovery and recycling of plastics waste
ISO 11932:1996 Recycling and Reuse Guidance and methods for activity
measurements of materials to be released for
recycling, reuse or disposal as non-radioactive
waste arising from the operation of nuclear
facilities
ISO/IEC 24700:2004 Recycling and Reuse Quality and performance of office equipment
that contains reused components
ASTM D7209 Recycling and Reuse Guide for the development of standards relating
to plastics recycling and other means of waste
reduction and resource recovery.
BS EN 13427:2004 Packaging Packaging. Requirements for the use of
European Standards in the field of packaging
and packaging waste
BS EN 13428:2004 Packaging Packaging. Requirements specific to
manufacturing and composition. Prevention by
source reduction
BS EN 13429:2004 Packaging Packaging and reuse. BS EN 13429:2004
presents a framework for assessment to
determine whether the requirements of this
standard have been met
BS EN 13430:2004 Packaging Requirements for packaging recoverable by
material recycling
55
BS EN 13431:2008 Packaging Requirements for packaging recoverable in the
form of energy recovery, including specification
of minimum inferior calorific value
BS EN 13432:2000 Packaging Requirements for packaging recoverable
through composting and biodegradation. Test
scheme and evaluation criteria for the final
acceptance of packaging
BS 8900:2006 Procurement Guidance for managing sustainable
development
BS EN 13965-2:2004 Other Relevant Standards Characterisation of waste
BS EN ISO
14031:2000
Other Relevant Standards Guidance on the design and use of
environmental performance evaluation
BS EN ISO
14001:2004
Other Relevant Standards Specifies requirements for an environmental
management system
BS 8555:2003 Other Relevant Standards Guidance to all organizations on the phased
implementation, maintenance and improvement
of a formal Environmental Management System
BS EN ISO
14803:2006
Other Relevant Standards Specifies requirements for methods of
identification containers
PD ISO/TR
14062:2002
Other Relevant Standards Guidance on integrating environmental aspects
into product design and development
ASTM E 2365 Other Relevant Standards Standard Guide for Environmental Compliance
Performance Assessment
ASTM D5681-08 Other Relevant Standards Standard terminology for waste and waste
management
56
APPENDIX 2 – TRADE ASSOCIATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS THAT WERE RESEARCHED
United Kingdom
Association for Environment Conscious Building (AECB)
Carbon Trust
Carbonlite Programme
Centre for Alternative Technology (CAT)
Chartered Institution of Wastes Management
Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management
Confederation of European Environmental Engineering Societies
Cumbria Green Business Forum (http://www.cgbf.co.uk/)
Eco Hive
ENFORAC (Environmental Forum for Action)
Envirobusiness
Envirolink
Environmental Agency
Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA)
Environmental Protection UK
Environmental Services Association
Envirowise
Federation of Environmental Trade Associations
Friends of the Earth England Wales and Northern Ireland
Green Alliance Groundwork UK
Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA)
John Muir Trust
NI (Northern Ireland) Wasteworks
Pathway to Zero Waste
Plane Stupid
Society for the Environment (SocEnv)
Soil Association
The Civil Engineering Environmental Quality Assessment And Award Scheme
The Corner House
The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA)
The Institution of Environmental Sciences
Town and Country Planning Association
UK Environmental Law Association (UKELA)
Waste Watch
WRAP United States of America
Air and Waste Management Association
Alliance to Save Energy
America the Beautiful Fund
57
American Land Conservancy
Association of Environmental and Resource Economists (AERE)
Association of Environmental Professionals
ATWA (Association on Third World Affairs)
Citizens Campaign for the Environment
Conservation International
Earth First!
Earth Island Institute
Earth Liberation Front (ELF)
Earth Share
Earth Trust
EarthLab
Earthwatch
Ecologyfund
Envirolink
Environmental Defense Fund
Environmental Law Institute
Environmental Life Force (ELF)
Environmental Working Group
Environmentalists Everyday
Friends of the Earth
Friends of the Environment
Global Green USA
GREENGUARD Environmental Institute
Greenpeace
Honor the Earth
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER)
Izaak Walton League of America
Leave No Trace
National Solid Wastes Management Association
Natural Resources Defense Council
Nature Conservancy
Our Earth
Our Earth
Republicans for Environmental Protection
Sierra Club
Solid Waste Association of North America
Stop Climate Chaos
The Resource Foundation
Waste Equipment Technology Association
Wilderness Society
World Resources Institute
Worldchanging
WWF Others International Solid Waste Association
58
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)
Waste Reduction Advice from NETREGS
If you reduce the amount of waste your business produces you can save money and reduce your environmental impact. Some common ways to reduce the amount of waste you produce include:
repairing equipment before you replace it; reusing items instead of discarding them
Office paper Many offices waste large quantities of paper. You can take a number of steps to reduce your paper use. You should only print and photocopy documents when absolutely necessary. You should make sure that your staff only print and photocopy using the double-sided setting on all equipment. You should re-use paper whenever possible. For example, print and photocopy drafts and internal documents on paper that has already been used on one side. To stop printers or photocopiers jamming, you should store paper that you intend to re-use near the machine under a heavy weight so that all the paper is flat and at a similar humidity and temperature. You can re-use envelopes for internal mail, or use labels to re-use them for external post. You can make notepads out of scrap paper. Make it easy for your staff to recycle paper. For example, put extra recycling bins in key areas such as your copier and print rooms. To stop receiving junk mail and faxes you should register with the fax and mail preference services. Supplies Carry out regular stationery ‗amnesties‘, where everyone empties their desk of unwanted office supplies, which will be put back in the stationery cupboard. Use re-writeable CDs and DVDs instead of write only discs. Assess the environmental criteria of new office supplies and wherever possible, buy more environmentally friendly products. NetRegs also provides guidance for reduction of waste, reuse and recycling as follows:23 Your business will produce waste. The legislation in the UK now obliges you to consider what you do with your waste. You should consider whether you can reduce
23
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/netregs/63071.aspx
59
or reuse your waste before you think about recycling it. Recycling uses energy and will cost more than reducing and reusing. Reduce your waste
Buy in bulk. It will reduce your packaging. Buy only what you need. You should control stock and look to streamline
processes across departments. Ask your staff to 'think before they throw'. Someone else may want to use it. Where possible set your printers to print double sided by default. When buying equipment consider the product‘s durability or lifespan.
Replacing equipment less often will reduce the waste you create. Reuse your waste
Refill toner and ink-jet cartridges. Use waste paper as notepaper. Use durable cups, mugs, glasses and cutlery rather than disposable
alternatives. Reuse envelopes.
The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM)
CIWEM publishes a code of ethics that its members must comply with, but this does not address waste specifically. This code is detailed in Appendix 2. Ensure that the uses of natural resources are fair, equitable and sustainable
and take account of the needs of a diverse environment. Never knowingly or deliberately over-exploit natural resources. Never knowingly or deliberately cause the environment to be damaged or
nuisance to be created by the discharge of unacceptable quantities of any substance or energy in any form.
Recognize that in contributing to the provision of environmental services they provide an important contribution to human well-being.
Ensure that the uses of the environment do not harm it or the native wild-life within it and, wherever possible, enhance it.
Embrace the needs of the community. Promote the concepts of integrating the management of the wider
environment. Use their wisdom in serving the community and constantly strive to learn
more. Serve as an example to others for responsible environmental behaviour. Never engage in corrupt practice and maintain a high standard of professional
behaviour which will serve as an example to others.
60
APPENDIX 3 – INITIAL LIST OF TARGET STAKEHOLDER
ORGANIZATIONS
360 Environmental Cranfield University Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment
Advisory Committee on Packaging Davis Recycling Ltd KPMG
AEA Technology Defra Assistant Economist Lamp Recycling Services Ltd
Agyplas - AGP Dept.Communities and Local Government LARAC
ALP Ambrose DMW (via his PA) LGA
Aluminium Packaging Recucling Organisation DWCL Group LLP LGA & NAWDO
AMEC Earth & Environmental (UK) Ltd Ecosys Environmental Management and Education London Remade Solutions
ARUP Eeda London Waste and Recycling Board
Association for Organics Reclying EEF Magpie Recycling Co-op Ltd
Atos Consulting EIC Mayer Environmental Ltd
Avalon Environmental Ltd EIC The Environmental Industries Commission Mitie Waste and Environmental
Axion Consulting Ltd Energy Saving Trust NAWDO
AXR Engineering Employers Federation NISP
BERR Entec Oakdene Hollins
Bob Lisney Consulting Entec UK Ltdf Oaktree Environmental Ltd
Bradford University and UKCEED Enventure Consultancy PA Consulting
BRE EnviroBusiness PERA
BRE Environment Agency Pera
British Cleaning and Support Services Association Environment Centre (The) Planning Officers Society
British Glass Manufacturers Confederation Environmental Industries Commission and Enviros PPS
British Metals Recycling Association Environmental Packaging Solutions PriceWaterhouseCoopers
British Plastics Federation Environmental Resources Management Public Private Partnership Forum
British Retail Consortium Environmental Services Association Recycling Concepts Ltd
Brunel University and NESTA Fellow Environmental Sustainability Knowledge Transfer Network Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnerships (RIEPs)
Building Research Establishment Enviros Consulting Searles Associates Ltd
Bureau of International Recycling Envirowise Seeda
Bywaters ERM (Environmental Resources Management) SITA
Centre for Environment and Economic Development Federation of Small Businesses SLR Consulting Ltd
Centre for Environment and Safety Management for Business Food and Drink Federation Textile Recycling Association
Centre for Process Innovation Friends of the Earth The Green Organisation
Centre for Sustainable Design at Surrey University Furniture Re-use Network Urban Mines
Centre for Sustainable Engineering GOEM Viridor
Ceres Logistics Ltd Golder Associates (UK) Ltd WamCal Ltd
Chartered Institute of Waste Management Green Alliance Waste Audit Company Ltd-
Chemical Industries Association Green Business Network Waste Information Services Limited
Community Composting Network/Community Recycling
Network/Furniture Recycling Network Greener World Ltd Waste Watch
Community Recycling Network UK Greenstar Women‘s Institute
Confederation of British Industry Home Builders Federation WRAP
Confederation of Paper Industries Hyder Consulting WRRAG
Construction Products Association IBM WSP Environmental
Consumer Federation Independent Waste Paper Processors Association
County Surveyors Society Industry Council for Electronic Equipment Recycling
61
APPENDIX 4 – LETTER TO STAKEHOLDERS
1
st June 2009
Dear
We are contacting you because the Department for Business (BERR) and the Department for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) are working with the British Standards Institution (BSI) to assess the role of standards in waste and resource management. We would like to invite you to contribute to this assessment. The Government is exploring whether standards could provide further help and support to individual businesses and others in decisions on how to make the most efficient use of material resources in their activities and on how to minimise and manage their waste – to benefit both them and the environment. We would very much welcome your input to support our work. We want to ask for your help in two ways, in particular:
1. We would like to invite you, or a colleague within your organization, to attend a workshop to discuss and validate our emerging project findings. This event is likely to be held in London on July 16
th, between mid-morning and mid-afternoon; and
2. We would also be grateful if, in advance of this, you would answer some short questions on
the issues, which we would like to email to you later this month. Further details will be sent to you in due course, but at this stage can you please put this date in your diary and indicate your likely availability or that of a named substitute by email to Anna Bond at BSI ([email protected]), ideally by June 12
th.
We thank you in advance for your cooperation and look forward to seeing you at the workshop in July. Yours sincerely,
Hugh McNeal Director, Low Carbon Business Opportunities Unit, BERR
Daniel Instone Senior Responsible Officer, Waste Programme, DEFRA
Frank Post
Director, Group Marketing & Communications, BSI
62
APPENDIX 5 – STAKEHOLDER SURVEY
We contacted you recently to tell you about the project that DEFRA and BERR are
working on with the British Standards Institution (BSI) to assess the role that
standards currently play in waste and resource management.
The Government is exploring whether standards could provide further help and
support to individual businesses and others in decisions on how to make the most
efficient use of material resources in their activities and on how to minimise and
manage their waste - to benefit both them and the environment. We would very
much welcome your input to support our work.
We would be very grateful if you could complete this short questionnaire. It should
take a maximum of 20 minutes. The questionnaire is structured in three sections.
Section one has questions relating to formal standards, section two has questions
relating to informal standards and section three is made up of some general
questions relating to standards and waste. All results will be treated
confidentially and only group results will be reported. Please complete the
questionnaire as early as possible, but no later than July 3rd 2009.
This is the link to our questionnaire:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=NykT5qNQwHfl_2b0ZmkF7_2fhw_3
d_3d
Please note that we are not suggesting that standards (whether formal or informal)
would necessarily constitute legal obligations.
This research will culminate in a stakeholder workshop which will take place in
London on July 16th this year. At the end of the questionnaire you will have the
opportunity to register your interest for this free event.
We thank you for your time and input into this important study. If you have any
questions or comments with regards to this questionnaire please email:
63
Standards for Resource and Waste Management – A Questionnaire We contacted you recently to tell you about the project that DEFRA and BERR are working on with the British Standards Institution (BSI) to assess the role that standards currently play in waste and resource management. The Government is exploring whether standards could provide further help and support to individual businesses and others in decisions on how to make the most efficient use of material resources in their activities and on how to minimise and manage their waste – to benefit both them and the environment. We would very much welcome your input to support our work. We would be very grateful if you could take a few minutes to complete this short questionnaire. It should take a maximum of 20 minutes. All results will be treated confidentially and only group results will be reported. Please complete the questionnaire as early as possible, but no later than July 3rd 2009. This research will culminate in a stakeholder workshop which will take place in London on July 16th this year. At the end of the questionnaire you will have the opportunity to register your interest for this free event. We thank you for your time and input into this important study. If you have any questions or comments with regards to this questionnaire please email: [email protected]. Please read the following notes before commencing the questionnaire: When we talk about formal standards in the context of this questionnaire we are referring to standards that are published by a National Standards body, e g. British Standards (BS), European Standards (EN) or International Standards (ISO) as well as Publicly Available Specifications (PAS). By informal standards, we mean standards, codes of practise or codes of ethics that are produced by industry trade associations, environmental groups, consortia or internal standards that businesses or organizations are working with in relation to waste management, reduction, prevention, recycling and reuse. When we refer to other organizations these could include for example charities, accountancy firms, hotels, public or private hospitals, educational institutions and so forth. Please note that we are not suggesting that standards (whether formal or informal) would necessarily constitute legal obligations.
64
PLEASE NOTE THAT WHEN QUESTIONS REFER TO WASTE, WE ARE REFERRING TO SOLID WASTE ONLY (INCLUDING FOOD) Section 1. Formal Standards 1. Are you aware of any formal standards that are either being used by your organization or others in the following areas: Waste management Yes/No Waste reduction (and minimisation) Yes/No Waste prevention Yes/No Recycling Yes/No Reuse Yes/No 1a. If you have answered yes to any of the above, please tell us what formal standards you are aware of. 1b. If you have direct exposure to these standards, please list each standard below and tell us on a scale of 1 to 5 (where 1 is very low and 5 is very high) how effective these have been in improving waste (management, reduction, prevention, recycling and reuse) within the organization. . Please use standard 1 to mean the first standard you entered in Q1a, standard 2 to be the second standard you entered and so on. 2. On a scale of 1 to 5 (where 1 is not important at all and 5 is extremely important) how important do you believe that formal standards are in: Waste management Waste reduction Waste prevention Recycling Reuse 3.If there are formal standards that you are aware of, do you believe that there is sufficient awareness and uptake of these? Yes/No 3a. Are there any barriers or challenges which limit the uptake of these standards, for example are they too difficult to meet or too costly to achieve. Please comment. 3b. Do you have any views on how current standards could be better promoted? Please explain. 4. In your opinion, are formal standards used widely enough by businesses and organizations in the area of waste? Yes/No 4a. Please explain briefly the reasons for your answer.
5. Would you like to see the introduction of any new formal standards for businesses and organizations in the following areas?
65
Waste management Yes/No Waste reduction (and minimisation) Yes/No Waste prevention Yes/No Recycling Yes/No Reuse Yes/No 5a. If you have answered yes to any of the above, please explain what new standards you believe would be valuable for businesses and organizations and why. 5b. If you have answered yes to any of the above, do you believe that these standards should be sector specific or generic (cross industry)? 6. Do you have any other comments or recommendations on the role of formal standards in waste management, reduction and prevention?
Section 2. Informal Standards
By informal standards we mean standards, codes of practise or codes of ethics that are produced by industry trade associations, environmental groups, consortia or internal standards that businesses or organizations are working with in relation to waste management, reduction, prevention, recycling and reuse. When we refer to ‗other organizations‘ these could include for example charities, accountancy firms, hotels, public or private hospitals, educational institutions and so forth. 1. Are you aware of any informal standards that are either being used by your organization or others in the following areas? Waste management Yes/No Waste reduction (and minimisation) Yes/No Waste prevention Yes/No Recycling Yes/No Reuse Yes/No 1a. If you have answered yes to any of the above, please tell us what informal standards you are aware of. 1b. If you have direct exposure to these informal standards, please list below each informal standard and tell us on a scale of 1 to 5 (where 1 is very low and 5 is very high) how effective these standards have been in improving waste (management, reduction, prevention, recycling and reuse) within the organization. Please use standard 1 to mean the first standard you entered in Q1a, standard 2 to be the second standard you entered and so on. 2. On a scale of 1 to 5 (where 1 is not important at all and 5 is extremely important) how important do you believe that informal standards are in: Waste management Waste reduction Waste prevention Recycling Reuse
66
3. Do you have any other comments on the role of informal standards in waste management, reduction and prevention?
Section 3. General
1. Do you believe that standards can assist your organization to better manage its waste? Yes/No 1a. Please explain why or why you do not believe that standards can assist your organization to better manage its waste. 2. Can you cite any specific examples or results where a business or organization has benefitted from standards (formal or informal) in waste management, reduction or prevention? 3. Are you aware of any trends, areas of innovation or other factors that you believe are important in the areas of waste management, reduction and prevention for businesses? Please explain. 4. Are you aware of any standards that address procurement in the context of waste management, reduction and prevention? Yes/No 4a. If you have answered yes to question 4, please tell which standards you are aware of and if you believe that they are effective. 5. Are you aware of any standards that are or could be used in the procurement process to stipulate the requirements for a sustainable waste management service? 6. Do you have any general comments that you would like to make in relation to standards (formal or informal) for businesses and other organizations in waste management, reduction and prevention? 7. We will be running a free workshop for stakeholders in London to discuss the role of standards in waste management, reduction and prevention. The indicative date for this event is July 16th. Would you (or a colleague) like to attend this event? Yes/No THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND PARTICIPATION. PLEASE TICK THE BOX BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE US TO SEND YOU A SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
67
APPENDIX 6 – SURVEY RESPONDENTS
48 stakeholders responded to the survey. The survey was positioned as a covert
survey. The organizations who disclosed their identity are as follows:
Shell Diageo Waste Watch Hyder Consulting Johnson Diversey Scientists International Ricoh National Consumers Federation The Environment Centre PA Consulting Gypsum Products Development Association CIWM NQA
68
APPENDIX 7 – STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS FROM SURVEY
The survey started by asking stakeholders if they are aware of any formal standards in the areas below:
Waste management
Waste reduction (and minimisation)
Waste prevention
Recycling
Reuse
Number Of
Responses
ISO 14001 Specifies requirements for an environmental management system
8
PAS 100 specification for compost materials 7
ISO 9000 Good quality management practices 4
BS 8555 Guidance to all organizations on the phased implementation, maintenance and improvement of a formal Environmental Management System
4
PAS 109 Specification for the production of recycled gypsum from waste plasterboard
2
PAS 2050 Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services
1
BS EN 13437:2003 Packaging and material recycling. Criteria for recycling methods. Description of recycling processes and flow chart
1
BS EN 13440 Packaging. Rate of recycling. Definition and method of calculation
1
BS 8887-1 Design for manufacture, assembly, disassembly and end-of-life processing (MADE)
1
PAS 99 integrated management system requirements specification based on the six common requirements of ISO guide 72 (a standard for writing management system standards)
1
CEN TC/343 Standards for solid recovered fuel 1
BS 6187 Code of practice for demolition 1
BS 5906:2005 Waste management in buildings. Code of practice Bottom of Form
1
BS 13427 Packaging. Requirements for the use of European Standards in the field of packaging and packaging waste
1
ASTM D7209 Guide for the development of standards relating to plastics recycling and other means of waste reduction and resource recovery
1
69
We next asked stakeholders to tell us how important they believe that formal standards are in the areas of waste management, waste reduction, waste prevention, recycling and reuse. Waste management was rated as the most important area and waste prevention the least important. The answers from stakeholders are transcribed below.
Not enough formal standards and not widely known outside of industry. Need to be market related and owned by banks and insurance companies too who tend to be disparaging about the use of recovered materials
Awareness of standards by those "producing" materials e.g. composters is probably good. Awareness by "users" that "products" have achieved a reasonable standard (composition, etc) and are therefore acceptable alternatives is less good
SME sector is largely untouched
If environmental and/or quality standards are employed (e.g. ISO14001/ISO9001) then these should encourage activity in relation to waste - avoid, reduce, re-use, recycle etc
The majority of customers in our industry are either working towards or already have 14001 accreditation
BSI needs to get IEC 62402 and groups like COG's Component Obsolescence groups recognised
In our view, it is likely to be difficult for SMEs to be aware of standards referenced in EU legislation which may be applicable to them.
Little awareness or knowledge of any standards in waste reduction, reuse, waste prevention
There is insufficient awareness of these standards throughout the various industries
The main players are aware but not at the grass roots
There is increasing pressure within manufacturing supply chains to have 14001, but the 2004 standard includes "services" so other types of organizations should be taking up 14001 or BS 8550. Awareness of this seems to be low
There is probably good awareness by waste management companies of the standards that they need to meet but poor awareness of waste management standards by other companies, especially SMEs
Businesses know they are not regulated sufficiently therefore they are somewhat ignored
The current EN643 is inadequate and a suggested revision should be tabled with CEN within the next 6 months
Does WEEE count as a standard? If so, it is very hard to find practical guidance on it and harder still to learn whether e-waste recyclers adhere to best practise (i.e. do not simply ship the waste to the developing world)
Most of the industry are only aware of those standards that directly relate to their present activities
Only for 14001
ISO 14001 and BS 8555 could be much better exploited by Government and others to improve attention to the above aspects, particularly through the Acorn initiative
70
They are generic and not seen as applicable to detailed implementation. Standards seem to be more focused on Health and Safety and site and process management systems than on material quality or carbon measures
We asked stakeholders to tell us about specific areas where they would like to see new standards. Their responses are listed below.
A PAS add on to ISO 9001
A standard to standardize the use of different polymers in particular applications such as margarine or yoghurt pots, to make waste collection & sorting much easier
End-of-waste quality protocols for a range of material streams (plastics, etc)
Standards to allow benchmarking versus other organization performance on waste (mentioned by several different stakeholders)
A general waste management standard covering the four categories of waste reduction, prevention, recycling and reuse would be useful
Proper guidance on what to recycle and where, also guidance on reuse
Waste management - standards could be introduced to ensure treatment of waste as required by specific pieces of EU legislation - for example pre-treatment of residual waste could include the removal of X% of recyclables before disposal
Recycling standards could stipulate recycling technologies which produce quality secondary raw materials (rather than 'down-cycled' materials)
Standards could also support data capture as organizations will need to record data to demonstrate compliance with the standard and compare performance compare to other organizations
Quality control for material reuse
Benchmarks for Traded Pollution permit regimes
Standards for all elements of the industry from collection to processing
How to manage chemical waste
ISO standards to assist on global resource management efforts and supply chains
Waste management standards for waste carrying vehicles. All vehicles to be compulsorily marked with the carrier‘s details. Too many unmarked vehicles are being used
Waste reduction standards that would be auditable and would be used to reward waste reduction methodology
Waste prevention standards need to be linked to carbon reduction and have the necessary accreditation
Storage containers are already regulated via BS. Recycling needs to be better defined and this could be done via standards
Although this is covered by ISO 14001: 4.4.6 Operational Control, the requirement to assess the environmental impact against set criteria (Waste mapping / Re-use / Recycling life cycle analysis) at the Design or New Model/ Service introduction stage of an organization's operation
I think standards to promote waste minimisation, recycling and responsible waste management would be valuable for protection of the environment
71
Clear simple instructions and solutions. It is too complicated and inflexible i.e. when is it waste and when is it a resource. Encouragement to make more waste a resource rather than currently it becomes a barrier
Standards as a basis for idea generation and practical implications. Ways to show how this can save the company money rather than increasing costs. Offering ideas by industry sector might aid in the "sale" of the idea to promote up-take
Waste management: I think that the sector-specific guidelines on dealing with material and water waste are probably sufficient
Waste prevention/waste reduction (and minimisation). There is a clear advantage here to reduce the waste send to landfill by demonstrating to organizations that there are alternatives to commonly consumed materials. For example, the cheaper (and less wasteful) alternative to coffee creamer sachets is a 'pump' - but this is not widely known
There is a lot of confusion about what can and cannot be recycled - in particular which items can and cannot be lumped together. This varies between recycling firms, of course. A clear set of standards here would be like a specification between recycling firms and their customers and could significantly increase the percentage of materials in recycling bins which actually end up being recycled
I am not aware of standards in this area but instinct tells me that there are many possibilities for reuse of commonly discarded materials which could end up saving money (Starbucks recently started giving away their old coffee grounds for use as a fertiliser for alkaline soil)"
A standard outlining best practice would be helpful
The use of standards can help organizations address areas of activity that they have traditionally ignored. The use of quality standards (and to a degree management system standards) have not been supported by rigorous enough certification procedures, producing a largely discredited series of certificates
Material specific standards like the PAS series 100+ have been beneficial and could be extended to other materials/wastes streams
A standard that helps to improve a material‘s efficiency, not just increase recycling rates
A standard for waste management that includes reduction, reuse etc and guides the user towards best practice. It should be certifiable so the organization can demonstrate their credentials
If they were to be BSI standards within a 'family' allowing for a range of different levels of enterprise with different volumes of material and an implicit journey of continuous improvement, especially in terms of carbon performance and the skills needed for our new green economy; then I think the standards could realise rapid and increasing value for participating enterprises
Stakeholders provided limited comments on the role of informal standards in the area of waste and these are listed in below.
These depend on the commitment of the individual users, individual companies, trade associations, etc.
72
Informal standards can be fudged and thus third party certification is needed.
Very useful. Allow flexibility. Allow innovative (safe) creation, reuse and recycling
Via the company's standards, pressure is brought to bear on each Diageo site to manage waste - the main KPI relates to amount of mixed waste going into landfill
We already have legislation and guidance notes so have no need for informal standards
Informal standards appear easier to access (and usually free of charge), however, they are usually used by public bodies rather than businesses
Voluntary codes only go so far and depend on strong regulatory push
It‘s all about best practice and anything which promotes this would be good
I believe certain sectors are more tuned to informal standards and guidance rather than compulsory standards
Voluntary commitment by industry is the best route to achieve real waste reduction and re-use
Informal standards are like verbal contracts - not worth the paper they are written on
They are informal but often considered by operators and regulators as more than just good practice, although not statutory. They are also more likely to be directly related to specific issues in specific sectors and not necessarily generic
Need strong support from trade bodies
A formal standard which is certifiable so the business can promote their use of best practice is more relevant in today‘s climate
We asked stakeholders to tell us why they believe, or why they do not believe, that standards can assist their organization to better manage their waste. Their responses are listed below Why?
Unless you have standards the level achieved (or not achieved) is not measurable and is totally arbitrary
We would not adopt such a standard unless it had a clear business benefit for us
Standards provide goals and objectives, a means of comparing like with like (i.e. something meets or does not meet the standard) and a measure of acceptability (or not) of a material or service
Standards like ISO14000 or 18000 create a formal management and response framework that raises standards across the industry
If you do not measure it, you cannot manage it. Standards will assist in both of these
We will have to comply with the standard and this will make senior management take waste more seriously
The standard results in greater control of legislation and training of employees
By providing a management framework
Benchmark non-financial efficiencies
Standards create a level playing field of quality and services
73
We can base our Standard Operating Procedures on widely accepted standards
Standards create an annual focus that is linked with KPIs (key performance indicators. Those KPIs can be linked to national waste strategies and therefore enhance the public efforts to deliver a waste strategy
Standards ensure quality and safe carriage and storage of waste
Everyone can clearly understand what is expected of them and their team. They know everyone is playing their part creating a greater impact. It shows there is a greater importance than just a manager's aim - it has the whole company's commitment
Standards are a key tool in managing waste along a supply chain or within a complex structure. They constitute a contractual interface between the different entities in question. As also mentioned earlier, the key to successful contracting in this instance is transparency between the different actors and the capability for end-to-end governance of the 'waste process'
Standards help to set the benchmark to guide improved performance. Standards also help to classify materials which may assist recycling or recovery options
Can bring consistency - but can also mean only lowest common denominator is achieved
Formalised approaches can be effective, and standards provide this Why Not?
We do not need a standard to tell us how to manage our waste. Only other incentives would improve our waste management. These standards are not publicly accessible and the public even have to pay to acquire them. All public standards should be free and publicly available, like legislation
Standards in general are good to provide direction and guidance to companies. But a waste specific standard is unnecessary
Our waste streams are very varied - civil engineering. We need a flexible and creative waste use/reuse/recycling approach. Rigid systems impose barriers and prevent good and safe use of waste and hurt the environment more
EA Guidance notes should help compliance with legal duties. Carbon Trust and Envirowise provide support services
Cost
Standards tend to be viewed as inflexible and often irrelevant. They have a place, but a guided approach rather than a pass/fail view against a fixed set of criteria would offer a better introduction
Voluntary commitments are a better way - you can have too many standards
We produce very little waste and our accredited certification to ISO 14001 is more than sufficient
We asked stakeholders to cite any specific results where a business has benefitted from formal or informal standards in waste management, reduction or prevention. The answers are listed below.
74
All of the Furniture Reuse Network Enterprises (FRNE) subscribers have benefited from the external audits to the FRNE standard. In many case it was found that, through ignorance, they were breaking the law
Purchase of recovered aggregates, plastics, and collection of paper and card to meet market needs
Look at individual company results - e.g. in retail and construction sectors. Improvements are at least partly attributable to ISO14001 and/or internal policy / procedures / standards
BS5906, where architects have been able to persuade clients of the need for adequate space for bins, allowing for new buildings to operate efficiently
Year-on-year improvement in environmental compliance and H&S record
Some tenders (specifically Ministry of Defence) require ISO 14001 accreditation
Only through employment of ISO14001
Guidance from WRAP in several areas of waste has saved millions of m3 from going to landfill and saved natural resources
ISO 14001 helps with waste management, of course
Diageo's internal risk management standards certainly provide a framework for waste management and for establishing waste targets etc. Each site is audited against these standards by head office
The WEEE regulations addressed a widely ignored problem
Most supermarkets stopped giving out plastic bags simply to meet their own corporate social responsibilities objectives
PAS 100 for compost has provided assurance and benefit to commercial operations
Companies that have brought in standards have seen greater team inclusion, pride and savings
The site standard on segregation of waste has contributed significantly to our reduction targets
Gypsum waste recyclers
Many of our members have used our guidance, or that from WRAP, rather than write their own, saving them valuable resources
DMA PAS 2020
Many organizations using ISO 14001 have seen benefits in waste reduction etc
FRN enterprise quality mark enables companies to access goods supplied through nationally brokered deals
PAS100 product has opened revenue streams for sales of compost We asked stakeholders if they are aware of any trends, areas of innovation or other factors that they believe are important in the areas of waste management, reduction and prevention for businesses. The relevant responses are listed below.
South East region Pathway To Zero Waste is looking with WRAP and EA at the development of more standards, the potential for a commodities market that will require a formal set of widespread standards owned by industry, and creating demand by using the planning and procurement routes to embed standards in delivery. They are also beginning to engage with insurance companies and banks about their negative perception of recovered materials
75
Waste Framework Directive, Landfill Directive targets
A move from companies to higher value options such as business model innovation and a broader view of resource effectiveness rather than purely waste. There is confusion in the use of the word ‗waste‘. For manufacturers, waste is associated with process inefficiency and for consumers/users waste is related to loss of material at the end of life (for example packaging)
New technology for dealing with solid waste to prevent/reduce landfill
DEFRA proposals on waste management license exemptions will cause millions of tonnes of good useable material going to landfill
Corporate social responsibility
Zero waste to landfill is the big goal (essentially no mixed waste should be produced). The use of a 'primary waste contractor' has become popular (one key waste contractor who manages the sub-contractors)
Informal social networks such as transition towns could be use effectively by local businesses who wish to attract these organized social groups that aim to achieve practical sustainable management solutions in their areas. Businesses could offer incentives to such informal social networks and then link with them on mutual efforts on waste reduction and resource management. Such protocols have been developed in Hackney
New technologies including gasification and autoclaving all need to have more research and support in preference to mass-burn incineration. These are the future - any technology which captures the energy within a resource or reuses/recycles that resource must be considered
The issue of who is enforcing standards must be sorted i.e. Environment Agency or local authorities. SMEs do not understand waste transfer notes. The large construction companies have adapted the Site Waste Management Plan(SWMP) to more effectively run their operations
Supermarkets looking to reduce cereal packaging is a good start
The trend for CSR and the inclusion of 'corporate citizenship' reports in the annual accounts means that all areas of ecological or social impact are coming under scrutiny in many large firms
CSR programmes are often launched as cost-cutting exercises. A centralised repository of standards and guidelines can help to build the case for possible savings from better waste management
Increase in landfill tax is a spur to waste reduction
The link to sustainability and eco design
The waste protocols prepared by EA/WRAP have provided a valuable route for many materials previously deemed waste
Finally, stakeholders were asked if they have any general comments in relation to standards (formal or informal) for businesses and other organizations in waste management, reduction and prevention. Their responses are listed below:
They are needed to create a level market playing field
Waste Quality Protocols should be included. PAS 2050 may also be relevant but I have not mentioned it as I am not sure how directly relevant to solid waste it is for your purposes
76
BSI should be aware that waste companies are already asked a full range of questions (by both public and private sector procurers) relating to environmental and safety management, as well as the company's management of waste. These questions affect our chances of prequalifying for tenders
I don't feel that waste specific standards are necessary
Standards may be applicable to other industry sectors - processors and operators of transfer stations and landfill. In most industries they are a hindrance. Need to change the culture in organizations not regulate/standardise more
There needs to be continuous improvement in waste segregation and in sending waste back directly to the manufacturer of the waste component. Why generate more standards when the EA guidance notes are sufficient?
In our experience, standards do not necessarily guarantee a high level of environmental management ambition, as the standard requires compliance with the general framework rather than specific target (as in the case of ISO 14001). However, they provide an important management framework and a tool for companies to differentiate themselves from others, as well as external scrutiny of environmental practices
A full impact assessment must be made and agreed with industry
Standards need to be developed and promoted in all areas to promote best practice
These should be a requirement for all organizations, as all organizations make waste in one form or another
They need easy to follow standards, cost benefits shown and easy routes to practical support
You can have too many standards. Don't create them just for the sake of it.
Many larger businesses in particular already have established operational, input and output standards; they do not require a further generic standard for procedure.
77
APPENDIX 8 – AGENDA AND INFORMATION SENT TO WORKSHOP
DELEGATES PRIOR TO THE WORKSHOP Agenda
Meeting name Review of Standards for
Waste and Resource
Management
Location BSI, Chiswick
Meeting date Thursday 16th July Time 09:00 – 16.00
1 Arrival & registration 09.00 – 09.15
2 Welcome and introductions 09.15 – 09.25
3 Introduction to BSI and project overview 09.25 – 09.40
4 Summary of project results to date 09.40 – 09.55
5 MORNING BREAK 09.55 – 10.00
6 Group discussions – Questions 1 – 3 10.00 – 11.30
7 Group summary presentations and discussion 11.30 – 12.00
8 LUNCH 12.00 – 12.45
9 Group discussions – Questions 4 – 7 12.45 – 14.00
10 AFTERNOON BREAK 14.00 – 14.10
11 Group discussions – Questions 8 – 9 14.10 – 15.00
12 Group summary presentations and discussion 15.00 – 15.50
13 Conclusions and next steps 15.50 – 16.00
14 CLOSE 16.00
78
Questions for discussion
Please spend 5 minutes listing out common wastes that are produced by your business/organization or businesses/organizations that you work with.
What are the key drivers and enablers that allow businesses and other organizations to improve the management and minimisation of their waste?
What are the key blockers that are preventing businesses and other organizations from improving their waste management and minimisation activities?
Please spend 5 minutes listing out the steps that your organization (or organizations that you work with) is taking to manage and minimise waste.
How can (new) standards assist businesses and organizations in managing, reducing, preventing or minimising their waste?
What is your understanding of waste minimisation? Please discuss for 5 minutes and come up with a maximum of 3 bullet points to report back to the group.
What are the potential impacts and consequences of a voluntary standard in waste minimisation?
What areas should a voluntary standard on waste minimisation potentially cover?
How would a benchmarking tool for waste management and minimisation benefit your organization?
79
APPENDIX 9 – LIST OF DELEGATES ATTENDING THE WORKSHOP
Euston Ling AEA Technology
Barry Saunders Avalon Environmental Ltd
Alan Mayo BIS - Department for Business, Innovation & Skills
Pritum Shah BIS - Department for Business, Innovation & Skills
Kerry Vitalis BIS - Department for Business, Innovation & Skills
Chris Murphy Chartered Institute of Waste Management
Robin Green CIWEM
Peter Jones Consultant
Nick Blakey Defra
Daniel Instone Defra
Demetra Orthodoxou Defra
Peter Hewitt EIC
Henry Emblem Environmental Packaging Solutions
Jacob Hayler Environmental Services Association
Arnold Black Environmental Sustainability Knowledge Transfer Network
Chris Carter Enviros Consulting
Simon Drury Envirowise
Fred Dobb Furniture Recycling Network
Martin Hockaday NQA
Ben Walsh Oakdene Hollins
Mark Burstall Recycling Concepts Ltd
Ioannis Alexiou Scientists International
Chris Searles Searles Associates Ltd
Mike Webster Waste Watch
Sarah Clayton WRAP
Anna Bond BSI
Peter Bonner BSI
Quincy Lissaur BSI
Darren Rickless BSI
Maria Varbeva-Daley BSI
80
APPENDIX 10 – FINDINGS FROM THE STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP
Question 1. Please spend 5 minutes listing out common wastes that are produced by your business/organization or businesses/organizations that you work with.
Food & Drink Paper & Card Textiles
Organic Food Packaging Construction Materials
Energy & Water Junk Mail Pallets
Wood Offal Confidential Items
Clinical Waste Pharmaceutical Waste Synthetic Fibre
Chemicals Oil & Lubes Cartons
Radioactive Paints & Coatings Furniture
Toner Cartridges Plastic Glass
Metal (ferrous and non ferrous)
Batteries Electrical Bits
Bulk packaging Electronic Equipment Agricultural Waste
Demolition waste Asbestos Excavation waste
Question 2. What are the key drivers and enablers that allow businesses and other organizations to improve the management and minimisation of their waste? Drivers
Standards
Proving that waste is no longer a waste but is actually a resource
Landfill tax (and the financial implications for a business)
No clear driver for
Lack of strong policy and targets
Reducing cost/saving money
Customer demand
Statute/legislation
ISO 14001
EMAS
Staff
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
Security of supply
Audits
Carbon accounting
Incentives for providing corporate marketing messages (example was given that B&Q source material from sustainable forests)
Pay to throw issues
Local authority and corporate targets
Regulations and avoiding financial penalties
Health and Safety requirements
Cost of disposal
Company policy
Quality assurance
81
Political influence
Producer responsibility
Community pressure
Media
Incentives Enablers
Standards
Simplification
Technology
Information - resource recovery messages - awareness of hidden costs - best practice - key monitoring of business activities
Funding
Legislation
Staff/employees
Supply Chain
Lack of policing Question 3. What are the key blockers that are preventing businesses and other organizations from improving their waste management and minimisation activities?
Whilst standards can be an enabler they can also be an inhibitor
Most SMEs generate small quantities of waste
Lack of commitment to separation and sorting waste
Lack of management systems
Cost
Perceived lack of infrastructure
Lack of information on where to go for help and how to organise
Ignorance and animosity towards change
Local authority targets are driven by MSW management and do not take into account commercial and industrial waste
Incentives in the system as a blocker
Cost of C&I waste service provision
Cost of disposal is not reflected in product
Lack of case study experience to inform best practice
Operational constraints including lack of manpower and lack of necessary space and infrastructure
Supply chain management and the difficulty in influencing as a consumer
Lack of knowledge
Lack of communication and awareness
Lack of strategic focus
Lack of market appropriate language
Rigid organizational structures
Confusing advice/lack of joined up thinking
82
Lack of time
Lack of enablers
Conflicting priorities within an organization
Misinformation and misunderstanding
Not enough data sharing and benchmarking information
Lack of effort from local authorities - Lack of designated collection facilities
Disappearance of WEE during collections (i.e. cherry picking – no policing)
Lack of control
Lack of local re-processors - Leads to down-cycling
Lack of policy to create consistent market conditions
Complexity of packaging
Product design
Virgin resource subsidies
Cost of recycling and finding the cheapest way 'to get rid of it‘
Corporate inertia
Global production
EU fatigue Question 4. Please spend 5 minutes listing out the steps that your organization (or organizations that you work with) is taking to manage and minimise waste.
Installation of recycling facilities
Battery recycling
Bin less office
Food waste collection
Coffee grounds to compost
Food waste compost
Transport policy
Cartridge remanufacture
Using 3rd party waste management company for recycling
Ban on bottled water
Loyalty scheme for reuse of coffee cups
Only buy vegetarian lunch buffet
Reduction in lighting
Obtain buy in from Senior Management
Action plan
Bottom up/top down feedback
Implementation of management systems in small organizations
Auditing
Initiation of culture change
Awareness training - Sending out information to staff by email
Demonstrate that this is a process and not an event to maintain buy in
Double sided printing
Informed procurement
Material resource flows
83
Social and corporate responsibility measures
Service contract for managing office materials
Audits of material/energy/water usage trends and reporting back and influencing staff behaviour and management
Question 5. How can (new) standards assist businesses and organizations in
managing, reducing, preventing or minimising their waste?
Creation of a common language
Can help to facilitate a common agenda
Can help to create common expectations
Help to ensure that expectations are met
Create a level playing field
Provide information and detail to guide practical actions
Can facilitate incremental improvement backed up by adequate enforcement
Can create a minimum barrier to entry for rogue traders
But need to have a ‗stick‘ to ensure compliance
Can help to find the right baseline - Generic rather than specific - Low enough to be inclusive
Can help to avoid duplication of what already exists
Provide a clear specification (rather than a guideline) but it cannot be too challenging that businesses want to avoid it
Can help to clarify roles and responsibilities
Help to capture data
Can assist with benchmarking
Can help to define, measure and improve
External verification
Improve focus on inputs
Business reorientation
Provides customers with information Question 6. What is your understanding of waste minimisation? Please
discuss for 5 minutes and come up with a maximum of 3 bullet points to report
back to the group.
Group 1
Reduce material use or change material choice and inputs
Just in time (lean manufacturing)
Clean design Group 2
Optimal use of minimum resources consistent with fitness for purpose
Continually making more with less
Maximum added value with minimum resources and wastage
84
Group 3
Prevention (strict avoidance/prohibition)
Reuse
Recycling Group 4
Measurement collection
End of waste
Minimise post-use recycled content
Question 7a. How do you see a voluntary standard in waste management and
minimisation working in practise?
Voluntary standard would not work very well because there are too many ‗cowboys‘ in the industry
However, could be the first step to encourage behavioural change
Standard needs to be compulsory with adequate policing
Should be focused on collection
Should be material specific
Needs to have industry buy in and supply chain involvement
Would need to cover process control
Objective must be to improve bottom line
Needs to be recognised and credible
Addresses procurement and whole life costing
Gives best practice guidance
Quick win checklist (application specific)
Supply chain integration
Need to be able to self certify with optional external audit
Used as a data sharing mechanism
Allows comparison of data versus others
Would include a material cost of waste indicator
We should be looking at a standard that can be tagged to ISO 14001. It should cover energy, carbon impact and mass balance/reduction with 3 focuses:
- Primary manufacturing and services - Material retrieval and conditioning - Secondary production and products
Question 7b. What impact might this have in measuring organizational
performance in resource and waste management?
Would be slow progress if standard is voluntary
Eventually there would be improvement over time and might help to meet long term targets
Resource efficiency should end up reducing business costs
Greatest impact would be seen if there is a cash advantage
Being able to benchmark performance against competition may deliver impact
85
May provide resource efficiency indicators
Question 8. What areas should a voluntary standard on waste minimisation
potentially cover?
Standard should cover resource management and not just waste
Top down approach to waste hierarchy
Modification of existing standards to incorporate greater resource efficiency
Evidence/precautionary approach to resource efficiency
Compulsion to comply
Cradle to cradle approach Question 9. How would a benchmarking tool for waste management and minimisation benefit your organization?
Would allow companies to benchmark performance against others but would need to be sector specific
Would provide some how to examples and case studies
Would need to be based on indices or rations and not figures
Would provide companies with measurable targets
Opportunity for league tables
Would provide an SME benchmarking tool for internal use An EA comparative database and a construction industry benchmarking tool named BRE Smart Waste were provided as examples.