Waste: A Game of Snakes and Ladders? : Public Services and Utilities
Researched by the University of Southampton
Given the historical link between public services and central government, it is not surprising that this sector feels the need to embody government environmental policy, and certainly our survey shows that this pressure influences practice. However, with the privatisation of services and the push for competition, it is also a sector in transition. So how far-sighted is the sector in its waste management policies? Will current practice meet the new demands created by change or are organisations looking to develop their existing waste strategies?
The public sector has well-established and well-publicised waste management policies including both waste minimisation and recycling. Over six in ten (63 per cent) currently operate a waste minimisation policy and, of the rest, three-quarters (74 per cent) are planning to implement such a scheme. This reflects both the statutory obligations of many organisations in the sector and also the historical duty to meet central government aims.
Energy savings score highly (96 per cent) as part of minimisation plans, perhaps an area for obvious concern in a sector where few produce goods. Conserving energy within buildings is therefore an obvious target in the control of waste.
However, more than any other sector surveyed, public service organisations recognise the importance of recycling. The sector leads the way in the recycling of paper and card and is a close second (to the brewing industry) in recycling glass - the two main components of their waste stream. Unlike the rest of UK plc, finance (29 per cent) is not the motivating force behind the recycling policy. Staff pressure plays a larger part here (19 per cent) than elsewhere, but, as public bodies, the main driver is the need to be seen to lead by example.
Many district authorities have been waging campaigns to promote domestic recycling in order to achieve government targets to recycle 50 per cent of recyclable material from the household waste stream by the year 2000. The onus is therefore on the authorities to implement the waste practices they are encouraging the public to carry out.
Environmental programmes certainly win over quality systems. Over half (51 per cent) of those organisations surveyed had a formal environmental management system in place, with 63 per cent of the rest planning such a programme. This compares with far fewer who have (32 per cent) or are planning (51 per cent) BS5750 accreditation. This suggests that the sector thinks it is more likely to be judged on environmental matters than the quality of service it provides.
But the government is also flexing its muscles to improve quality standards in the service sector through various means: privatisation, pitching public organisations in open competition against private companies or increasing accountability with the Citizen's and Patient's Charters. At their best, environmental systems can help achieve high quality standards, certainly by reducing waste costs.
The concern regarding public scrutiny is not enough on its own to guide waste management policies; they also need to be developed with cost-effectiveness in mind. The majority of organisations interviewed (48 per cent) are confident that waste minimisation schemes will reduce waste output. However, they are less confident that these schemes will actually save money. Most (42 per cent) believe that waste management costs will rise over the next five years. In part this is a realistic understanding of EC and UK waste regulations. However, it is also evidence that waste management in these sectors is not actually planned with a view to cutting costs.
Currently, fewer than half (47 per cent) actually measure how much they spend on waste, and waste costs are certainly not in any way seen as a major factor in terms of gaining competitive edge.
But if the sector had a clearer idea of waste spend, it would also be better able to manage its waste costs. With a lack of capital, the public sector can no longer afford to look at expensive technology to reduce waste spend in the long term. Indeed, its waste stream is not particularly complex; rather, the sector faces a logistical problem. Often geographically scattered, it requires a logical and consistent approach to achieve economies of scale by co-ordinated regional strategies.
The Government has encouraged the public sector to look at competitive tendering, and contracting out to work with a waste management company is a means of reducing waste costs and improving efficiency. Take Back Liability does not actually apply to this sector. However, Take Back is set to relieve some of the burden from local authorities, as it will transfer costs for waste disposal from district councils back to producers.
The public sector is undergoing dramatic changes as it begins to face the challenges of the commercial world. Organisations are being empowered with their own budget and are no longer tied to historical decisions. Cost effective waste management is therefore an obvious way of maximising financial resources and can provide the opportunity to achieve central government targets with fewer resources.
This sector covered a broad and varied group of service and regulatory organisations. These included a number of government departments, borough and county councils, HM Prisons, universities and colleges, utilities including gas, water and electricity companies, research establishments, airports and fire brigades.
MAIN FINDINGS
- Over six in ten (63 per cent) currently have a waste minimisation programme in operation
- Half (51 per cent) have a formal environmental management system in place
- Only 32 per cent have BS 5750
- 43 per cent spend over £100,000 per year on waste - second only to the chemical industry' s spend in this upper bracket
INDUSTRY FACTS
The public services industry . . .
- In 1993 average capital expenditure on recycling was £52,000 per local authority
- 39 per cent of local authorities have a policy of purchasing recycled products
Legislation
- 1990 Environmental Protection Act
- This Common Inheritance
- EC Fifth Action Programme
- Proposed Packaging Directive
- Draft Incineration of Hazardous Waste Directive
- Unitary authorities and local government reorganisation.
- Local authority air pollution control (LAAPC)
Process Change
- Waste increasingly diverted from landfill
- Systems for issue of recycling credits
- PRG recommendations
- Segregated waste collection systems and their evaluation
- Integrated waste management systems with industry commerce
- Involvement in 'round-table' facilities with environment groups and private sector
Environmental Effects
- Waste to energy assessment
- County or regionally based waste strategies
