The last National Waste Report in December 2022 shows there has been an increase in recovery of about one million tonnes over the past two reporting years, whereas Australia needs over 10 million additional tonnes to be recovered to hit our 80 per cent target by 2030.
The next National Waste Report is due out by early next year. I guess it remains to be seen if there will be any material change in recovery rates, given the pace of policy implementation, facility development and real market development for our essential industry nationally.
Let’s hope though, that we do see a shift up from the current resource recovery rate of 63 per cent, given in 2024 we still need to recover more than 1.5 million tonnes a year – a jump we have not seen previously.
We all know what needs to be done to get to this goal – we need to use less for longer. The reality is that it is not hard, but possibly it is brave to try and shift both the consumption and production behaviours of the lucky country.
In 2024, we desperately need co-ordinated government action that drives regulation, investment (with certain planning support), genuine market settings that values recycled materials and local green jobs, and genuine green public procurement. Seriously, when will we get beyond viewing the use of recycled materials and repaired products as unique behaviours to realising they are mandatory habits – necessary not just for our industry but the planet. As Kamala Harris said (yep girl crush here)… “it’s (both) an environmental imperative and economic good”.
I understand it is always a fine line for governments between showing leadership on an issue and riding roughshod over public opinion. Increasingly after two years it is looking like this Federal government is frozen by inaction either because change is seen as being too scary, too big, too risky, too expensive, too fast or a combination of all the above.
I fear this is where we are now with the Federal Government’s recent announcement of a Productivity Commission inquiry into the circular economy. It’s a topic that could arguably fall into all of the above categories (except fast), but I would argue it also falls into another – too late.
Read more: Sloan comes out firing over Victorian CE bill
It was with some sadness that I noted the inquiry into the circular economy. Not because of any misgivings about the PC (in fact, it will be headed by Joanne Chong, who appears eminently qualified), but because I fear the inquiry will be able to now be used as yet another excuse for government inaction.
There is a real risk that both sides of politics will argue they cannot do anything substantial on circular economy (or waste and resource recovery policy) until the Commission reports back, which is on the other side of the Federal election. The inquiry could be the fig leaf of cover the major parties will hold onto like a life buoy. Tick, tick, tick, as we head to 2030…. Not to mention that the PC report on Right to Repair, which was released on 1 December 2021, has still not been responded to by government.
Maybe there are positives to the PC inquiry. Hopefully it will, for example, expand circular economy thinking beyond just environment departments given it must be a paradigm shift that applies to whole of government – treasury, infrastructure, finance and industry just to name a few. This inquiry could provide that impetus. But the fact is we cannot tread water for another 12 months. The world is leaving us behind.
We can only kid ourselves for so long before the (plastic) straw breaks the camel’s back – whether it is battery fires, packaging or PFAS. Issues keep piling up and go largely unaddressed.
There are, however, plenty of actions governments could take to use less for longer that won’t fall foul of the PC report. Most of you have probably heard of the nudge theory of behavioural economics, which attempts to persuade rather than compel people to make specific decisions. And it strikes me that we could do with a little of that in the WARR space.
Given the apparent reluctance of government to take bold action to make the transition to a circular economy a reality, perhaps we need to harness other methods to elicit change?
I attended a Mood of the Nation research report presentation from SEC Newgate Australia, and it gave me some thoughts and a few key takeouts, beyond the obvious like cost-of-living issues, are top of mind for Australians.
Broadly the research found that while people do not want government to tell them how to live their lives, they are open to government showing them how to do things differently. It struck me as something we could use in WARR to highlight the importance of consuming less, making materials last longer, only getting what we truly need and shifting to circularity.
In part, this is why WMRR has been calling for years for a well-funded nationwide education campaign to drive behaviour change about consumption. We are not talking about a ‘what goes in which bin’ campaign, but one which makes people aware of the consequences of their choices on the environment – whether it relates to so-called switching from goods to services, making better use of existing products or tackling food waste, as used in the WRAP UK: Net Zero Why Resource Efficiency Holds Answers campaign.
One that transitions from linear to circular. And with Australia’s currently circularity rate calculated by CSIRO at 3.7 per cent compared with global average of 8.6 per cent, we really need to get moving. Australian’s value their natural environment and overwhelmingly want to leave it a better place for future generations.
The SEC Newgate report also showed strong support for the concept of the Federal Government’s Future Made in Australia plans (67 per cent) with only 11 per cent of people opposed. Our industry is key to this, as we are able to provide the input materials to ‘making in Australia’. There really is a great opportunity to embed both WARR and circularity at the heart of the plan.
We haven’t seen much to date on that, but it is not too late. Not only does it reduce the drain on the planet’s resources and help address the climate challenge, it derisks the Australian economy by making us more independent, free from overseas shocks and grows domestic green jobs. Back to Kamala – ‘when we invest in climate, we create jobs, we lower costs and we invest in families’, seriously what is not to love?
So why aren’t we seeing much more action much faster in Australia (it’s not like there is a Planet B!)? Let’s hope the government grasps this opportunity with both hands.
On the bright side, Newgate’s research highlighted that recycling is now seen as ‘hygiene’ – simply something we must do (well done all – that message has got through), but it really is time we moved the dial so that circularity becomes hygiene too, and not just a buzz word in yet another framework.
Gayle Sloan, Chief Executive Officer, WMRR