Waste: A Game of Snakes and Ladders?
A benchmarking report on waste and business strategy
Foreword
A year ago, we published a report which examined boardroom apathy towards environmental legislation and the advantages of effective waste management.
That report 'Waste: somebody else's problem?' was well received within industry, since it spelled out in clear terms the options for senior management when it comes to dealing with waste - a product that everybody produces, but very few take into account.
What our first report did not do was to measure the impact of increased responsibilities for those key industrial sectors that produce significant amounts or types of waste. As a result, we felt that what industry really needed was an analysis of individual sectors that would allow companies to 'benchmark' their own practices against those prevalent in their sectors and within industry in general.
We set out, with the help of some of the country's leading academics, to do exactly this in a way that would help shape policies within individual companies, whether they be large or small. To help in this task we formed the British Waste Management Forum which aims to combine academic expertise and experience with our own. With their help, we have been able to produce this report- 'Waste: a game of snakes and ladders?'
Our title reflects the fact that for a large number of companies, waste management really is like a game of snakes and ladders. When making a praiseworthy change to a process or product and therefore climbing a ladder, many companies find they hit a proverbial snake by creating a costly waste problem in the process that needs to be dealt with. This is exemplified in the problems that industry has experienced in the past with substances such as CFCs, PCBs and asbestos. With effective waste management and advice from waste experts these potential problems can often be avoided before they happen.
This is particularly important since our findings show that, overall, UK industry has at best a mixed approach to waste and has yet to appreciate the potential for financial gain through effective waste management. The fact that over two in five companies do not measure their waste is a dreadful indictment of bad practice and business inefficiency. It is also a sign that many companies do not recognise that landfill costs - the UK's most available disposal method are set to rise significantly as legislation and continued public pressure force up contractors' costs.
The thrust of legislation is likely to impose financial instruments to force industry to take waste management seriously. It is now an integral part of government thinking. Recent examples of this are the joint DTI/DoE initiative directed at examining producer levies and high level appointments to the group overseeing the future of levies for packaging. The principles established there could easily be transferred elsewhere to include automotive components, hazardous household materials, batteries and electrical equipment.
Quite simply, in the not-so-distant future if you make anything, you may be liable for it, even when it has reached the end of its useful life. That is the trend in the United States and the rest of Europe, so can the UK be far behind?
The message is now clear. UK plc will continue to lose competitive advantage if it tries to ignore the major changes in waste practice that are about to occur. This must not happen and we all have a role to play to ensure we react to opportunities rather than problems.
I hope you find our report interesting reading.
Martin Bettington
Managing Director
