Executive Summaries Archive

Fact Sheets & Summaries > Waste Prevention > [Rethinking Resources: New Ideas for Community Waste Prevention]

Rethinking Resources

A growing and diverse array of environmental challenges have captured the world's attention over the last two decades. Oil shortages. Water scarcity. Deforestation. Garbage. Air pollution. Contaminated lands. What do these global concerns have in common? And what can local communities do to address them?

One common thread running through all of these concerns is the inefficient and destructive - and ultimately unsustainable - use of natural resources. In looking at the second question, one overarching theme emerges: communities can establish policies and programs that encourage businesses, schools and other institutions, and individual citizens to use resources in the most efficient, prudent manner possible. The concept of waste prevention - a reduction in the amount or toxicity of waste generated - is one crucial element of this endeavor.

In practice, waste prevention (also known as source reduction) entails paying attention to what we make into products, what we buy, how we use products, and how we reuse these products when we no longer need them - with the ultimate goal of achieving a more efficient, more cost-effective use of natural resources. Besides reducing the amount of waste that must be managed, waste prevention yields a variety of environmental, economic, and social benefits - ranging from using less energy in manufacturing to reduced purchasing costs for businesses. Seen this way, waste prevention is a vital part of the essential movement toward globally sustainable ways of living and doing business.

In the United States, governments at every level are involved in promoting waste prevention. At the national level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has long supported waste prevention as the priority approach to managing waste and has promoted its implementation in public and private sectors through educational materials, through technical assistance, and through research and educational programs.

At the same time, state governments have gotten involved in waste prevention, establishing policies, developing educational materials, conducting workshops, and funding local programs. Many states have established waste reduction goals and turned over the responsibility for meeting those goals to local solid waste agencies. Virtually all of the nation's government-sponsored waste prevention programs are run by local or regional solid waste management agencies.

In many cases, local waste prevention activities are closely tied to recycling efforts, and there is a great deal of overlap among staff responsible for these two related activities. Many communities have found that combining waste prevention and recycling education programs increases their efficiency.

These waste prevention efforts appear to be having an effect: the rate of municipal solid waste generation dropped from 4.4 to 4.3 pounds per person per day from 1994 to 1995; recycling covered 27 percent of this waste, up from 25 percent the year before. However, the amount of garbage Americans generate per person is still one of the highest rates of any industrialized nation in the world - almost one ton per person every year.

This report explores some of the key limiting factors to greater implementation of government waste prevention programs and describes a broad array of public and private sector initiatives that have overcome these limitations.

 

Overcoming the Limits to Municipal Waste Prevention

In preparing this report, INFORM conducted interviews with solid waste staff in five of the leading state agencies administering waste prevention policies and with dozens of local officials charged with implementing waste prevention programs. INFORM's research identified three important reasons why waste prevention programs are not more widespread:

1. Responsibility for government-sponsored waste prevention programs is typically entrusted to local or regional solid waste agencies, which have limited financial and personnel resources and lack the institutional priority for achieving the range of waste prevention benefits beyond reducing the waste they must manage.

2. The absence of comprehensive data on the tons or volume of waste reduced makes it difficult for communities to justify continued investment in waste prevention programs. In addition, the failure to recognize the other broader benefits of waste prevention keeps municipalities from gaining support from the outside groups that stand to gain from those benefits.

3. There is a lack of leadership that could provide direction for waste prevention programs and incorporate waste prevention goals into public policies.

 

INFORM found a number of innovative approaches that state and local governments have taken to overcome these obstacles:

1. Forming partnerships with groups outside solid waste agencies to leverage resources, bring in additional skills, and build broader constituencies. These alliances might include local businesses, schools and institutions, nonprofit organizations, and other city or regional agencies.

2. Re-evaluating the measurement of progress to consider indicators besides quantities of waste reduced. These indicators might include the savings achieved for businesses and institutions, increased sales of products and services that are less wasteful, and the scope of educational programs that create community awareness. In addition to helping communities justify expenditures on waste prevention, documenting these broader benefits has helped them recruit outside partners.

3. Elevating waste prevention to the level of state policy and promoting it through goal-setting, funding, technical assistance, and the coordination of partnerships.

 

Staff running the municipal and state programs identified in this report are "rethinking resources" - human, financial, and natural. By broadening the concept of waste prevention to consider benefits in addition to reducing disposal needs, these programs are involving diverse groups, attracting new sources of funding, re-evaluating the meaning of progress, and placing the responsibility for preventing waste (that is, conserving resources) where it belongs - with every member of society.

 

Steps to Progress

To help local and state government readers translate the successes of the programs profiled in Rethinking Resources into action in their own communities, INFORM has compiled a list of the steps they have taken. For readers wishing to know more, contact information for the key staff involved is included at the end of the report.

 

Forming partnerships

• Identify the groups with a vested interest in waste prevention, show them how they can benefit, and use this information to attract support for - and participation in - waste prevention programs.
• Collaborate with business and trade organizations to reach other businesses and institutions.
• Link up with manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of products and services to educate consumers.
• Join other agencies at other levels or in other locales to share materials and to boost effectiveness through collaboration.
• Reach out to community groups and other nonprofit organizations to work with community residents, schools, and other institutions and businesses.

 

Measuring impact

• Evaluate the success of specific business and institutional waste prevention initiatives to obtain case-study data.
• Document the results of consumer-directed campaigns through such means as sales data, surveys, and tracking the degree of media coverage.
• Measure the impact of residential waste prevention programs by targeting a particular neighbourhood or by evaluating residents' knowledge about, participation in, or requests for technical assistance with waste prevention activities.
• Assess the value of reuse and exchange programs according to the tons of waste diverted from disposal and resulting cost savings, the value of materials donated to exchange programs, the range of organizations or individuals benefiting from the exchange, and the jobs created through reuse and repair operations.

 

Promoting waste prevention at the state level

• Establish policies and issue mandates, directives, laws, and bans that promote waste prevention or deter activities leading to the generation of waste.
• Provide funds in the form of grants or other types of financial assistance for staff and programs dedicated to waste prevention.
• Provide technical assistance to municipalities, businesses, and institutions through workshops, conferences, and the development of guides, manuals, and other educational materials.
• Create model programs that demonstrate and/or promote the viability of a particular waste prevention method and distribute the findings to local agencies.
• Bring together local governments, businesses, or other state agencies to share expertise and resources on waste prevention projects.