Presentation of the OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Latvia 2019 chapter on waste, materials management and circular economy given on 17 October 2019 in Riga, Latvia

1. Myriam Linster
Environmental Performance and Information Division
OECD Environment Directorate
Riga,17 October 2019
Waste,
materials management
and circular economy

2. • Reconstruction of waste management systems in the
2000s
• Fairly complete policy and legal frameworks
• Important progress with recovery and recycling
… but many challenges remain
• Waste is not yet managed cost-effectively
• Public action on waste prevention and circular
economy approaches is fairly recent
2
Main features of waste and materials
management

3. 3
Material use is driven by socio-economic
developments
OECD
USD 2400 per
tonne of
materials
consumed
Latvia
USD 1100 per
tonne of
materials
consumed
Source: OECD (2018), "Material resources", OECD Environment Statistics (database); Eurostat (2018),
Material flow accounts (database).
15.7 tonnes
of materials
consumed per
person
20 tonnes
of materials
consumed per
person
• The natural asset base mainly
consists of biological resources and
construction materials
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2005=100Million tonnes
GDP (right axis)
Domestic material
consumption
• Material productivity is improving,
but remains low
• Latvia generates less than half the
economic value per tonne of material
consumed than the OECD average

4. 4
Growing amounts of waste
Significant increase in recovery
• Waste generation grew faster than
the economy and material use:
it more than doubled
since 2004
• Recovery rates grew significantly
• Separate collection
• Extended Producer Responsibility
• Natural resource tax
• Investments in recycling
infrastructure
• Latvia is well placed for recycling
of polymers (Baltic Sea leader),
of paper & cardboard
• One fifth of all waste is still landfilled
Source: OECD (2018), "Material resources", OECD Environment Statistics (database); Eurostat (2018), Material flow accounts (database).
0
50
100
150
200
500
1 000
1 500
2 000
Energy recovery Material recovery
Disposal Generation index (right axis)
GDP index (right axis)
2004=1001 000
tonnes
Total waste

5. 5
Significant increase in recovery
Insufficient change in landfilling
• Among the highest
growth rates in EU
• From basically zero in
2000 to about 30% in
2016
• But level still lower
than in many other
countries
• Biogas recovery is
encouraged
• EU recovery target by
2020: 50%
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1 000
Recovery (material, energy) Biogas recovery
Disposal (landfill) Generation index per capita (right axis)
GDP index per capita (right axis)
Thousand tonnes 2005=100
Municipal waste

6. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% Landfill % Incineration without energy recovery % Other disposal % Incineration with energy recovery % Recycling % Composting % Other recovery
6
Landfilling of municipal waste remains
common
Notes: Data refer to the indicated year or to the latest available year. They may include provisional figures and estimates. Household and similar
waste collected by or for municipalities, originating mainly from households and small businesses. Includes bulky waste and separate collection.
For the specific country notes see the source database.
Source: OECD (2019), "Municipal waste", OECD Environment Statistics (database).
Municipal waste management and disposal, 2017

7. 7
Landfilling is encouraged through low
landfill taxes
Landfill tax rate too low to promote other options
• Hampers efforts to promote recycling and the use of secondary raw materials
• Increased landfill taxes since 2017; further increases planned by 2020
Municipal waste fees too low to ensure cost-recovery and spur waste reduction
Little use of volume-based pricing (Pay-as-you-throw)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% landfill (latest year) Tax rate (right axis)
Tax rate USD/tonne
Note: Subnational data (local taxes) are used for: Mexico (Mexico City), Spain (Catalonia), United States (1) (North Carolina) and (2) (California), Australia (Western Australia) and Belgium (Flanders). Caution
must be exercised in interpreting these data due to (a) the lag between application of a tax rate and its effects on the landfill rate, and (b) the relationship between local tax rates and nationwide landfill rates.
Source: OECD (2019), "Environmental policy: Environmental policy instruments", OECD Environment Statistics (database); CEWEP (2017), Landfill Taxes and Bans Overview.
% of landfilled waste

8. • The overall material recovery rate is high
• Low-value recovery is common for some waste streams
• Recycled feed-stocks are often exported for reprocessing;
generate little value-added domestically
• Many recycling targets achieved, some EU targets
missed or difficult to reach
• e.g. WEEE collection rate, landfilling of biodegradable waste,
recovery of municipal waste
• Unexploited potential of waste as a source of
secondary raw materials
• Biodegradable waste, C&D waste, e-waste, plastics, …
8
Significant increase in recycling, but
unexploited raw material potential

9. • Separate collection is not yet cost-efficient
• Two systems co-exist: municipalities, EPR companies
• Quality of sorted materials not always good enough
• Extended Producer Responsibility systems are not
yet cost-efficient and lack transparency
• Well functioning in particular for packaging
• Less efficient for products such as WEEE
• Markets for recycled & recyclable materials are weak
• Depend on: external demand, quality of recycled goods, price
difference between primary and secondary raw materials
• Synergies with eco-innovation and green public purchasing
to be exploited
• Trading/information system to be considered
9
Significant increase in recovery, but recycling
markets remain weak

10. • Economic instruments are well established
• Most instruments target extraction & post-consumption phases
• Less attention given to consumer behaviour, product design
• Successful in supporting extended producer
responsibility programmes (recycling)
• Less successful in encouraging waste reduction and
prevention, and in reducing the cost gap between
primary and secondary raw materials
Economic incentives not yet strong enough to
move towards a circular economy

11. • Improving the cost-effectiveness and governance of
waste management, including separate collection
and extended producer responsibility systems
• Paying greater attention to waste prevention and
materials and product management over full life
cycle (circular business models, recycling markets,
consumer behaviour, product design)
• Further improving the information base on waste and
materials to cover all management steps and
treatment routes, monitor economic performance,
and link waste and material flow data
Laying the groundwork for circular economy
approaches

12. • Encouraging developments
• Waste management plan and waste prevention programme
• Circular economy strategy
• Eco-innovation and new technology programmes: Smart
specialisation strategy; Bio-economy strategy
• Green and circular public procurement
• A few elements are key
• Use of synergies between waste prevention, circular
economy, eco-innovation measures, public procurement
• Effective institutional coordination (national, local)
• Use of synergies in the Baltic Region: recycling markets,
deposit-refund systems, …
• Provision of strong economic incentives
12
Performance outlook: good potential for
progress

13. • Review waste-related taxation in line with the waste hierarchy: further
increase the natural resource tax for landfilling beyond 2020; encourage
municipalities to increase waste fees to ensure full cost recovery…; apply
PAYT systems in major cities …; implement measures to change consumer
behaviour and product design.
• Merge the separate collection schemes operated through extended
producer responsibility systems and those operated by or for municipalities...
• Specify the requirements for extended producer responsibility systems
(calculation of fees, eco-design, recycling objectives, arrangements for service
provision and cost-sharing with local authorities, reporting obligations,
including on financial aspects) to improve their cost-effectiveness,
transparency and co-ordination...
• Ensure that national waste policies and targets are cascaded at local level,
… through systematic establishment of regional and local waste management
plans and regular reporting on results, including on financial aspects.
13
Selected recommendations (1)
Improving the effectiveness and governance of
waste management

14. • Improve the material productivity and efficiency of the economy and
encourage waste prevention in industry and upstream in the value
chain (design phase); fully integrate the objectives of closing material loops
and preventing waste generation into innovation policies; exploit
synergies between measures on cleaner production, eco-innovation, waste
prevention, bioenergy and smart specialisation by establishing effective
mechanisms for co-ordinating and monitoring the actions of all
ministries involved.
• Strengthen markets for secondary raw materials and recycled goods
through public procurement and increased co-operation with neighbouring
countries; encourage investment in high-value domestic recycling.
• Broaden institutional co-operation to steer the transition to a circular
economy and related investment choices, and deepen co-operation between
the MEPRD and the Ministry of Economy.
14
Selected recommendations (2)
Promoting waste prevention and circular
business models

15. THANK YOU
PALDIES