Europaudvalget 2018
KOM (2018) 0656
Offentligt
1942236_0001.png
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 24.9.2018
SWD(2018) 422 final
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT
The early warning report for Portugal
Accompanying the document
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE
COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS
on the implementation of EU waste legislation, including the early warning report for
Member States at risk of missing the 2020 preparation for re-use/recycling target on
municipal waste
{COM(2018) 656 final} - {SWD(2018) 413 final} - {SWD(2018) 414 final} -
{SWD(2018) 415 final} - {SWD(2018) 416 final} - {SWD(2018) 417 final} -
{SWD(2018) 418 final} - {SWD(2018) 419 final} - {SWD(2018) 420 final} -
{SWD(2018) 421 final} - {SWD(2018) 423 final} - {SWD(2018) 424 final} -
{SWD(2018) 425 final} - {SWD(2018) 426 final}
EN
EN
 kom (2018) 0656 - Ingen titel
1942236_0002.png
1. Introduction
This early warning report is part of the Commission's overall implementation report and aims
to assist Member States at risk of failing to meet the 2020 target of 50 % preparation for re-
use/recycling of municipal waste set out in Article 11(2)(a) of Directive 2008/98/EC. It builds
on previous support provided by the Commission to help Member States comply
1
with EU
law in the area of municipal waste management. This resulted in country-specific roadmaps
2
being drawn up for the relevant Member States.
The assessment underpinning the early warning report is based on a collaborative and
transparent process involving the Member States concerned and an in-depth analysis of their
most recent policy developments. This also involved extensive consultation with the
authorities in charge of waste management.
The possible actions identified during this process are based on the existing best practices and
aim to help Member States in meeting the 2020 municipal waste preparation for re-
use/recycling target; they therefore focus on policy measures that can be taken forward in the
short term. These actions should be seen as complementary to those recommended in the
roadmaps that were drawn up as part of the preceding compliance promotion activities and to
the recommendations made in the Environmental Implementation Review
3
.
2. Key findings
In 2016, Portugal’s municipal waste recycling rate (including composting)
reported to
Eurostat was 31 %, while its landfilling rate was 45 %. Based on an analysis of existing and
firmly planned policies in the area of waste management, Portugal is considered at risk of
missing the 2020 target of 50 % preparation for re-use/recycling of municipal waste.
The assessment
4
that underpins the early warning report concludes that the separate collection
of recyclables, including bio-waste, is not yet effective and Portugal relies heavily on
treatment of mixed municipal waste. In addition, the economic incentives to support
recycling are insufficient and the extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes in Portugal
do not fully cover the costs of separate collection.
The table below lists possible actions to support Portugal’s efforts
to improve its waste
management.
1
2
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/framework/support_implementation.htm
Roadmap for Portugal:
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/framework/pdf/facsheets%20and%20roadmaps/Roadmap_Portugal.
pdf
3
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eir/country-reports/index2_en.htm
4
Eunomia Research & Consulting
et al.
(
8) Stud to ide tif Me er States at risk of o
-compliance with
the 2020 target of the Waste Framework Directive and to follow-up phase 1 and 2 of the compliance
pro otio e er ise. The earl war i g report: Portugal.
1
 kom (2018) 0656 - Ingen titel
1942236_0003.png
O
VERVIEW OF POSSIBLE ACTIONS TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE
Contribution of Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facilities to recycling
1)
Review of the calculations that are currently being used to determine the contribution to
the target that is assumed to come from increased recycling in MBT facilities.
2)
Assessment whether the current projected MBT performance is realistic and, if
necessary, review of the efficiency of policies that encourage separate collection to
consider whether they will be sufficient to make up for the shortfall.
Separate collection
3)
Assessment of the current fee levels (to be paid by the waste management systems that
do not meet recycling targets) to consider if these are high enough to serve as an
incentive to introduce the effective separate collection systems. Depending on the
results a review of fees may need to be considered urgently.
4)
Review of waste collection scheme funding by Agencia Portuguesa do Ambiente (APA)
and Entidade Reguladora dos Serviços de Águas e Resíduos (ERSAR) to ensure that
there is enough funding to roll out door-to-door collection schemes.
If funding is deemed insufficient, consideration of additional funding sources, taking
into account:
a.
the changes in funding that will occur following the review of the household waste
fee, which will come into effect in 2019; and
b.
the scope for increasing the fees paid by packaging producers.
5)
Consideration of introducing legislation to ensure that the producer responsibility
schemes (PROs) develop deposit refund systems.
Technical support to municipalities
6)
Development of a system at national level that provides technical support for local
councils, specifically in the following areas:
a.
choosing collection services;
b.
service procurement;
c.
service management;
d.
communication campaigns;
coupled with active sharing of good ideas and practices that can improve efficiency in terms
of cost reduction and improvement in performance.
Communication and awareness-raising
7)
Development of a set of national communications materials addressed to the public for
use at local level, with clear and consistent messages, and with particular focus on bio-
waste. These materials should be used as part of awareness-raising campaigns, in
leaflets and at civic amenity sites.
2
 kom (2018) 0656 - Ingen titel
1942236_0004.png
8)
Optimum use of the communication budget by APA via:
a.
taking a more active role in identifying areas where funding is most needed,
ensuring campaigns are carried out alongside collection service updates;
b.
ensuring that funding can be accessed by municipalities, especially by the better-
performing, larger municipalities; and
c.
putting in place methods by which municipalities can learn from each other.
3