This presentation was given at IEEP's capacity building for environmental tax reform conference on 5 October 2017 in Brussels, Belgium.
Speaker: Sarah Ettlinger
1. www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
Thematic session: Waste,
resources and circular economy
Sarah Ettlinger (Eunomia Research & Consulting)
5 October 2017, Committee of the Regions,
Rue Belliard 99/101, Brussels
Final conference: Capacity building for environmental
tax reform
2. www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
โข Improving resource efficiency and creating a circular economy
โ not just about managing waste
โข And, sustainable use of raw materials
Waste, resources & circular economy:
issues & challenges
6.7bn tonnes
(EU, 2015)
2.5
bn tonnes
(EU, 2012)
Total material
consumption
Total waste
generation
37%
recycled
3. www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
Waste, resources & circular economy:
instruments used
โข Waste taxes:
โ Landfill tax and ban
โ Incineration tax.
โข Pay-as-you-throw (PAYT)
โข Product-specific:
โ Packaging tax
โ Product fee
โ Deposit refund scheme
โ Plastic bag levy
โข Mineral aggregates taxes
โข Natural resource taxes and
charges
4. www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
Waste, resources & circular economy:
instruments used
Case studies:
Instrument type Member State(s)
Packaging tax or charge Belgium, Latvia, Romania, Finland
Landfill tax Austria (incl. ban), Greece, UK
Pay-as-you-throw scheme Benelux
Deposit refund scheme Finland
Plastic bag levy Ireland
Products tax (with PRO) Lithuania
Natural resource extraction tax UK, Estonia, Finland (peat)
5. www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
Waste, resources & circular economy:
revenues, effectiveness & efficiency
โข Revenue use โ environment funds:
โ Mostly for related and specific environmental problem
โ May help to soften public opinion, but rarely the reason a tax becomes
politically acceptable.
โ Examples: UK landfill tax, Romanian packaging charge, Irish plastic
bags levy, Austrian landfill tax
โข Rarely explicit tax shift, though this can help argument for
decision-makers in finance ministries
โ Example: UK landfill tax
6. www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
Waste, resources & circular economy:
revenues, effectiveness & efficiency
0
25
50
75
100
125
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
2000=100
LevyRate(ยฃ/tonnes)
Years
Aggregates Levy and Intensity of Use of Primary Aggregates
Aggregates Levy Rate
Primary aggregates use per unit of Construction Output
Primary aggregates use per unit of GDP
8. www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
Waste, resources & circular economy: the
way forward
โข Key arguments & discussion points for political acceptability:
โ Link to specific environmental goals (national or local); not likely to be
revenue raising
โ Effective instrument
๏ง Fair, with opportunity to develop sustainable alternative behaviour
๏ง Policy mix and package of measures to nudge towards behaviour
๏ง Revenue use โ for public support, leads to desired behaviour
โข Civil society:
โ Seek and create opportunities to contribute:
๏ง Campaign on environmental issue, set up stakeholder discussion groups,
respond to public consultation, evaluate and analyse impacts
โ Engage as early as possible
9. www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
Case study presentations
โข Case study 1: Finnish deposit refund system
โ Pasi Nurminen (PALPA)
โข Case study 2: Belgian pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) schemes
โ John Wante (OVAM)
Editor's Notes
Total material consumption 13 tonnes per person, EU 2015.
In 2012, total waste generation in the EU was over 2.5 billion tonnes , representing almost 37% of material consumption.
Around 213 million tonnes of waste was generated by households .
Revenue use only relevant for taxes and levies. Rarely introduced as revenue raising. Only landfill taxes have significant potential to raise revenue. Natural resource taxes to a lesser extent. Others are very minor only.
Lots of environmental benefits, though often hard to attribute exactly to tax/charge.
UK landfill: 50 mtpa (01/02) to 12 mtpa (15/16)
AT landfill and ban: from 60% to less than 10% landfilling
PALPA: 59 -> 90% rr on cans, 1996-2009.
Irish plastic bag levy: 5% in litter (2001) to 0.13% in 2015.
Others unclear, due to other activities or step changes in impact that donโt reflect rate changes:
BE Packaging and environmental charges, RO packaging charge.
UK Aggs levy and landfill tax โ likely both responsible for the reduction in chart.
Engagement throughout policy cycle. Few highlighted examples of successful engagement that has impacted implementation of instrument or alternative behaviour.
Overall messages on engagement:
Public institutions/NGO support -> information to public -> publicโs support. Key for instruments targeting public behaviour change, e.g. PAYT, DRS, plastic bag levy.
Stakeholder discussions, organised by govt -> business and LA support of instruments -> more likely desired behaviour change for businesses, e.g. AT landfill tax
Direct lobbying โ rarely key to introduction
Early engagement, more likely to lead to involvement throughout rest of policy cycle, e.g. M&E.