More from Less

• Philosophy

• How the Material Resources Strategy was developed?
  
      - Workshop Index
        - MRS Documents
  

• Background and context

• Overview of the problem

• Visions and aims

• Increasing resource efficiency and reducing wastage

• Maximising reuse, recycling and composting

• Dealing with unavoidable waste

• Meeting the need for minerals

• Need for new infrastructure and sites

• Moving forward

• Glossary

• FAQ

• Contacts / Get Involved

• Links

What are your views on the proposed MRS Vision and Aims?

The discussions at Workshop 2 focused firstly on the proposed Visions and Aims of the MRS approach. Comments from each discussion group were recorded and have been transcribed below. The proposed MRS Vision and Aims were:

Initial Views

• Why highlight ‘to better protect the environment’, i.e. Why not social and economic protection also? Should keep it but change it slightly.

• Definition of ‘community’: needs support of wider community for strategy to work. ‘Community’ might be misunderstood, too narrow.

• Need to include household waste in ‘promote re-use and recovery…by commercial and industrial practices’.

• Need step-change in commercial world.

• Support the link to transport in the aims.

• ‘Acceptable alternative way’ useful phrase.

Rewording

• What does word ‘efficiency’ relate to? Assume it is to cover a range of bases – useful as a general statement.
• ‘Wishes to use’ is not positive enough. ‘Shall use’ helps to be clear from outset. This was strongly supported by the group
• ‘Material resources’: doesn’t mean enough to most people.
• Vision statement should stand alone, so words in Aim need to be clearly understood.

Initial Views

Additional Aims required:

1. Restoration of minerals extraction sites
2. Pollution and emissions
3. Local amenities to reduce transport, where possible
4. All other resources (energy, soil, water, biodiversity).

• Definition of ‘material resource’ required especially linking to other resources such as energy: (1) production and use as energy, (2) soil, water, biodiversity should also be include in relation to MRS.

Rewording

• ‘Wishes to use’ is a bit weak – shouldn’t this be ‘we will use’.
• Maybe needs to be time-bound ‘Hampshire Community is committed to do this by…’. However as it is a process setting a time can be difficult, may need to add time boundaries elsewhere.
• Maximum efficiency and minimum wastage – needs to be defined and parameters stated.
• ‘To better’ protect the environment for future generation – too woolly. Why is this here?
• Transport aim – assumes transport (whereas we should assume no transport first). There is a need to link this to an additional aim on local amenity sites.
• ‘To recover value’ – does not make sense – other words required.

Initial Views

• ‘An expression of where we want to be’ – consult with other County Councils to pool information for direction of future strategies.
• Set target: targets will keep focus during consultation and provide confidence for investment.
• Incentives can be as beneficial as targets.
• Helpful if targets are uniform throughout the County and relate to realistic timescales.
• Look to long term aims and objectives to raise aspirations to a higher horizon.
• Introduce phased targets for all waste streams. Need to identify maximum potential.
• The vision needs to be aspirational/inspirational to ensure co-operation/motivation into the strategy.
• We need incentives through tax breaks for achievement of sustainability.
• Targets do not have to be included in the Vision.

Rewording

• Include reducing packaging and include producer responsibility.
• Introduce sustainable design in packaging.
• ‘Wastage/Waste’ – should be taken out of the vision.
• No mention of protecting natural resources for the future through reduced consumption – protection/minimise use/conservation of resources.
• Meet society use through most sustainable means.
• Aims not in an order of hierarchy, can they be re-ordered?
• Use process to change national policy.
• Need to allow for advances in technology.

Different Vision

• Potential for ‘Utopian’ vision of zero waste in the future as stated in vision 1 but look at designing out waste in the process.

Initial Views

• The vision is:
  • Simple;
  • Communicable;
  • Everyone understands it; but
  • It must mean something.
• The vision will put incineration out of business
• Needs to be equality in locating sites.
• Need to change attitudes to waste business.
• Need to define ‘material resource’.
• Needs to reduce manufacture of useless items e.g. disposable nappies.

Rewording

• Must make everyone aware of environmental aspects. Must include environmental considerations.
• Reference to sustainability (Social and Economic and Environment).
• Wishes - too weak - need something stronger (e.g. commits to/will intend to).
• Does the ‘Hampshire community’ own the resource?
• Must make sense - common sense.
• ‘Minimum wastage’ should come before maximum efficiency - base it on the waste hierarchy and change order of bullet points to reflect this.
• ‘Promote’ - needs to be worded more strongly (aim 4).
• Household waste is not mentioned in the list and add ‘maximise benefit’ or ‘value’ in.
• Make reference to quality of life.

Initial Views

Aims:

• Transport will cause problems, reliance on HGV’s, change sustainable to ‘most socially acceptable.
• Emphasis on waste which is inappropriate - use materials instead
• Delete ‘better’ from last bullet point - also ‘all generations’.
• Why not include sustainability - because of issue of definition?
• Minimum wastage potentially superfluous - general benefit of community.
• Concern about understanding of the term materials but realise we must attitudes.
• Material resources do also include importation - is this covered? Appears to be.
• Concern about cost - environmental and economic.
• Aims need to recognise.

Rewording

• Not use minimum wastage - perhaps general benefit of society.
• Include wording around ‘sensible’ or ‘reasonable’ cost both economic and environmental.
• ‘Environmentally and economically sustainable way’ instead of with maximum effect and minimum wastage.

Initial Views

• Time based - could just refer to ‘the future’ presuming a date will be allocated to the strategy.
• Mention environmental protection, but care taken to ‘improve enhance where appropriate’.
• All agreed the vision needs to be one simple sentence.

Rewording

• ‘Efficiency’ - may be misinterpreted - replace with ‘effective’.
• Is ‘use’ appropriate? - add ‘re-use’.
• ‘The Hampshire community wish’ – questioning this as opening line of vision.

Initial Views

• Time based - when, is needed to be included.
• Aspirational - but has to look at what is done now and to build from that
• An expression of where we want to be - embrace new technology.
• Engaging public - can we change culture from bin outside door - incentives need to be ‘sold’.
• Vision and aims - aspirational - need to level the ground to start across districts/counties etc. Spread best practice, essential to include business.
• Need to include education as an aim.

Rewording

• ‘Community’ - implied that this does not include hospitals, schools, and business. Assumes that it is ‘community groups’
• ‘Sustainable’ - is this economic or environmental - provide definition being used for this project.
• All sections of the Hampshire community will work - stronger commitment to the vision
• Intend - need to show more buy-in.

Initial Views

• Use of the word ‘waste’, might have to come up with new words e.g. discarded or unwanted materials.
• Problem with the definition of ‘waste’.
• Time is critical, landfill already running out.
• Problem of siting facilities for recycling

Rewording

• Include protection of the environment.
• Need longer-term permission for facilities.
• Learn from experience elsewhere in Europe. Can recycle 90% construction waste.
• Need segregation.
• Confidence in companies to deliver and help them invest economic savings to using resources more efficiently.

Initial Views

• Pt. Of the MRS aspirational because we have to work with what we’ve got - would do things very differently if we started from a clean sheet.
• Issue of new incinerators diverting material from recycling. Packaging a key issue.

Rewording

• Focus on the end product.
• What does ‘The Hampshire community’ mean?
• All Waste Collection Authorities do their own thing. But they can join together. Need to recognise that they are all different.
• Vision too wide? Quite fluffy!
• No timing on the vision - need tying down in this regard

Different Vision

• Vision should be seeking to reduce waste. Council does have the ability to do this! - Education/culture change.

Initial Views

• Start at beginning - minimisation of waste then the rest will follow.
• Is broader than waste - look at the overall.
• Minimise the use of the resource, and recovering value from it.
• Less raw material = less waste.
• New concepts - all material has potential - whether used previously or not.
• Use all materials, with least use of transport - energy decrease.
• How to influence/control manufacturing. Design - needs to be taken into consideration.
• Lot is driven by legislation - lot of factors coming together.
• Economies - making things disposable helps the economy but results in lots of waste.
• Need to influence legislation - to influence manufacture/design - new sites will be needed for manufacturers to deal with their products and recycling.
• Economic point - influence businesses, in their design and how the public sector can help firms in dealing with their end of the life product.
• Vision problem - is restricted to Hampshire - we have no influence beyond Hampshire.
• We need to influence - protocols in this country - to ultimately influence countries beyond UK.
• Public sector and providing facilities for dealing with waste.
• Industrial land is all going to housing and leisure.
• Commercial operatives will not want to join with household waste.
• What about agricultural wastes? Where will it go, if farmers are not allowed to dispose of materials on their land?

Rewording

• Need to include reference to business/industry
• ‘Hampshire business and residential community’?
• Businesses - will want to see how authorities will respond to new legislation.

Rewording

Vision:

• Should read ‘Hampshire community uses its material resources’ (delete ‘wishes’ and replace with ‘uses’)
• Needs a timescale e.g. 10-15 years for 2020 – strong targets needed
• Needs a definition of ‘material resources’.
• Needs to be aspirational
• Work in partnership with other appropriate bodies (not only focused on Hampshire)

Aims:

• mention that they are in no order of priority
• ‘To better protect the environment’ should be changed to ‘protect and enhance’.
• Should refer to current generations
• Should be ‘To extract primary materials only where it can be shown that…’
• Question use of the word waste

Initial Views

• The vision needs to be aspirational and an expression of where we want to be
• The vision does not need to be Time based, Targeted, Specific or Measurable
• Not appropriate to include timescale or target
• Mixed messages – unclear as to the structure of waste processes

Rewording

Vision

• Remove word ‘its’ – who/what are we referring to? Or replace ‘its’ before ‘use’?
• Unclear as to what is meant by ‘material resources’.
• Should the vision be slightly longer (i.e. more words)? Is it too succinct as drafted?
• Should the vision include reference to ‘sustainable/sustainability’?
• Delete ‘The Hampshire community wishes’

Aims

• Treat waste as a potential resource?
• Practicality/feasibility – should it be implicit (as drafted) or more explicit?
• Need to minimise extraction of primary materials – is this adequately reflected in the aims (fifth aim)?

Different Vision

• Perhaps the vision should allude to the process of material resource through production transportation use waste/disposal i.e. that a material is a resource throughout the process until ‘disposal’ when it is classified as waste. Is done already but should be reminded more often to help focus objectives

Initial Views

• Don’t agree with the definition of a vision outlined in the briefing note
• Vision should be short
• Differing views on whether a vision should have a target and a timescale.

Rewording

• Add the word ‘conserve’ into vision before ‘use’
• Take out ‘its’
• Add ‘to better protect the environment for future generations’
• Remove ‘wishes’ and replace with ’intends’
• Aims could be time specific
• Replace the fifth aim with ‘use recycled material wherever possible’

Note: the New UK Directive outlining restrictions on use of crushed concrete for road building.

Initial Views

• Timescales are important but might come lower down, i.e. in strategic objectives – vision should be directional
• Short and sweet!
• Material resources – does this cover everything we want it to - Economic benefit and Environmental sustainability?

Different Vision

Aims:

• To focus on business opportunities that could arise
• Green waste and composting
• Education
• Partnerships
• Ability to influence the planning process
• If people are going to buy into MRS you need to tell them there will need to be more infrastructure built

  Top of page 

MRS
Homepage

Table 1 (afternoon)

Table 1 (evening)

Table 2 (afternoon)

Table 2 (evening)

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

Table 9

Table 10

Table 11

Table 12