Workshop 4

This July, at two half-day sessions in Winchester and Southampton, the fourth Material Resources Strategy (MRS) stakeholder process took place. The purpose of the MRS is to redefine Hampshire’s waste as a resource, and to devise a plan for maximising the re-use, recycling and recovery of value from it.

With a commitment to developing a draft core strategy by the end of 2004, much has already been achieved: previous meetings have defined the vision, principles and strategic objectives of MRS; how to use materials more efficiently and minimise waste at all stages, and how to maximise recovery and re-use.

The aim of the fourth stakeholder meeting was to review the findings of the individual specialist groups which had been formed at the end of the previous meeting to engage with the process chain and focus on individual resource streams, and to discuss a proposed methodology for identifying a preferred solution for the recycling and recovery of individual resource streams in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton. It also provided an opportunity for stakeholders to consider current ‘officer thinking’ on how the core strategy for the MRS will develop over the ensuing five months, and to give feedback accordingly.

Alison Millward, lead independent facilitator for MRS and head of Alison Millward Associates, set the scene for the meeting by summarising what had been achieved so far, outlining the day’s agenda and looking ahead to the three remaining meetings to the end of the year. She then handed over the Campbell Williams, development manager within Hampshire County Council’s Environment department, for feedback on engaging the process chain – how will MRS ‘change minds and practices to use resources efficiently, minimising wastage at all stages’?

Engaging the process chain

The five specialist groups had covered design, business practices, retail, procurement and consumption. Each had included experts, stakeholders and a representative from the environmental and engineering consultancy Entec UK, which is managing the stakeholder process on behalf of Hampshire County Council. As part of their work, the groups had held discussions with various organisations, including the British Retail Consortium, high street retailer Boots, the Surrey Institute of Art and Design, Waste Watch, and the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply. Following this two-month process, they had identified a need to achieve a ‘factor four improvement’ – i.e. to double production but produce half as much waste. Although this is easy to say but difficult to do, some real opportunities for change had been identified in Hampshire.

A number of themes emerged that are key to moving things forward: increase awareness, ensure that the MRS vision is intrinsic to formal education and training, develop markets, and influence key sectors such as Government, the public and business. Let’s take design as an example. 75% of a product’s environmental impact will be determined during its design. Hampshire has very little manufacturing industry, but a lot of R&D and design facilities, so there is a big opportunity for influence here. The group looked at ways in which MRS could act as an overall driver for environmentally-aware design, including the production of green product guides for designers, increasing awareness of new products, organising design competitions to encourage innovation, and making sustainability an integrated part of design courses. Other suggestions included inviting delegations from countries whose examples we would like to learn from, lobbying Government on issues identified as barriers to progress, and targeting the main consumers of the material.

The next steps for the process chain groups would be to develop the themes they had identified, come up with some radical delivery ideas and link these to the individual resource streams. Before the next meeting, they would appraise the options available, and develop action and delivery plans.

Fourteen specialist groups had been focusing on the individual resource streams, and Julian Lucraft, managing director of Lucraft Engineering, reported on the activities of the End of Life Vehicle resource group. Their first task, he said, had been to form a research strategy and identify key contacts in the industry.

Julian highlighted the group’s finding that the effective co-ordination with other resource groups is necessary to deal with an end of life vehicle (e.g. WEEE, textiles, glass, etc). The suggestion is that a resource map, or sustainability map, is drawn up to identify where waste streams are built and used, where synergies occur and how economies of scale can be achieved.

The next presentation, from Jim Kersey, a director of Entec, outlined the process by which the solutions being considered by the process chain groups and the resource groups could be appraised in a way that fully embraces the overarching principles of the developing Material Resources Strategy. The key steps to such an appraisal methodology were:

• Establish the draft appraisal objectives – a task to be completed during the group sessions at Workshop 4.
• Establish the recycling/recovery solutions to be appraised – to be achieved soon after Workshop 4.
• Appraisal of the potential solutions against the objectives – to be completed soon after Workshop 4.
• Aggregation of the resource stream and process chain work covered in the above steps.

This presentation led naturally to the first group work of the meeting, where stakeholders debated suggested objectives against which each solution can be evaluated. They were also asked to prioritise the relative importance of each objective.

The draft objectives had been developed with regard to the agreed aims and objectives of the MRS, prevailing planning and waste management policy, and other relevant sustainable development documents and strategies. They comprised environmental objectives, waste management objectives, socio-economic objectives and operational objectives.

Various issues were debated during the group discussions. Concern was expressed about the lack of ‘market-led’ criteria, as creation of markets creates pull-through for products and makes the task of selling them much easier. Conversely, it is no good manufacturing something that your clients don’t want. Lee Robinson of SCA Recycling gave as an example the lesson learnt by his company when recycling green glass. There was no market for it in the UK, so much of it ended up being sent to South America. However, once they started crushing it to make sand, they found an eager market in this country. So, the need to create new markets, exploit existing markets and find alternatives must be emphasised in the appraisal methodology. Also, delegates felt that ‘maximising public acceptability of the proposed methods of resource management’ was too weak an objective in terms of the socio-economic impact of MRS. We need to change people’s behaviour and lifestyles, and nothing less.

Overall, it was felt that the qualitative appraisal methodology was correct, although some detailed information on each of the resources was needed so that stakeholders can evaluate the best way to deal with unavoidable waste. It was also felt that some objectives were needed that relate to deriving benefits for the people of Hampshire, and the methodology should be mindful of cost factors. It was difficult, however, to prioritise the appraisal objectives, because priorities are all high at this stage.

Richard Read, head of Minerals and Waste Planning for Hampshire County Council, then gave a presentation on moving the MRS programme forward. MRS would form part of a Minerals and Waste Development Scheme (MWDS) document that Government requires Hampshire County Council and Portsmouth and Southampton Councils to prepare, setting out details of what planning documents will be produced and when. The documents within the MWDS will effectively be the different elements of the MRS, and will form the partner authorities’ Minerals and Waste Development Framework.

The next task for stakeholders would be to debate at Workshop 5, on 23 September, how unavoidable wastes (or residual material – that which cannot be recycled or re-used) should be dealt with in Hampshire over the coming years. It was crucial that informed decisions be taken at Workshop 5, and this required that information be provided to stakeholders on the available options and technologies prior to the event. Delegates were asked to think about the nature and level of information they required.

In addition, also at Workshop 5, it would be necessary to debate on Hampshire’s mineral needs. Specific information would be provided on minerals resources in the county, the environmental constraints and the ‘apportionment’ imposed by the Regional Minerals Strategy. Stakeholders would be advised of the outcome of previous workshops in 2002/3 on minerals and would be given an opportunity to debate options.

Before Workshop 5, then, it would be necessary to appraise best practice, mid-range, and stretching best practice solutions for each resource stream. It would also be necessary to aggregate the resource stream work and appraisals, to arrive at an overall preferred solution for recycling and recovery in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton.

At Workshop 5, officers would report back on the preferred solution and delegates would discuss draft action plans for unavoidable wastes and minerals.

Following this workshop, it would be necessary to define and appraise unavoidable waste solutions and the need for minerals, so that at Workshop 6 on 11 November, a report could be made on the preferred overall solution for managing recycling in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton’s resource streams (i.e. recycling/recovery preferred option and unavoidable waste preferred option, including minerals). A debate on spatial planning issues – where recycling facilities would be located, where minerals would be extracted – would also take place.

Before workshop 7, the draft MRS would be prepared, to include core strategy and spatial options. And at Workshop 7 on 2 December, officers would report on these and invite stakeholders to sign up to future involvement.