After just over a decade of unremitting success, in which recycling has become an accepted norm, the pulse of change is not beating as regularly. Most industry leaders now warn that, as things currently stand, the UK will miss its EU 2020 targets. Looking at the most recent data for 2014/15 (in Scotland’s case 2014), this diagnosis seems reasonable. Overall, there has been a mild improvement in performance since last year, but not enough to suggest the recycling industry is in the rude health of previous years. What’s more, the national press is now waking up to this flatlining, and, unsurprisingly, the stories are unduly negative and potentially counterproductive. In the main, the public has adopted the changes we have asked of them and developed expectations about these services. Consequently, the waste-to-resources industry needs to collectively address this negative coverage; otherwise, it will become even harder to get the public on board with future improvements. Based on each country’s own figures for household waste management, we find that for the UK as a whole, recycling increased to a total of 44.1 per cent. Working with the Office of National Statistics (ONS) population estimates, we find that residual waste arisings per capita – the amount each person on average threw away last year – also fell to 239.5 kilogrammes (kg). This data point remains our favoured measure of progress, illustrating how close we are to the ideal goal of zero waste. As with our previous tables, we again also have published figures for the total waste arisings per capita, as this is a useful reflection of the intensity of our resource use. It is important to recognise that the ONS population figures for 2014/15 vary noticeably from the mid-year population data for 2013/14 in WasteDataFlow. This inevitably has an impact on the per capita findings. Looking at the national table (right), recycling rates increased in all countries, though in the case of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland, by less than one per cent. Although Scotland and Northern Ireland still recycle less than England, we estimate that changes in waste policy and infrastructure currently underway in each will result in them overtaking England’s recycling rate long before 2020. However, once again it’s Wales that continues to paint a picture of health, sprinting ahead of the field. By our calculations, the household recycling rate was 54.6 per cent, less than its headline municipal recycling rate of 56.2 per cent, but an increase of 3.1 per cent all the same.  In line with this, residual per capita fell to less than 200 kilos per person. It demonstrates the value of ambitious targets backed by sincere political support – the contrast with England could hardly be starker. Based on current trends and the prevailing attitude of Ministers and senior civil servants, we like many others believe DEFRA has to shoulder most responsible for missing the 2020 target required by the EU. Now it may be the case that officials in Noble House probably think that they can pull a rabbit out of the hat b counting more than just metals from incinerator bottom ash (IBA) (after all, the headline Welsh figures does), but before banking this, it might be prudent to consider the possible impact of the reporting requirements for the Materials Facilities (MF) Regulations. These already provide a clear indication that contamination and reject rates for material passing through material recovery facilities (MRFs) has been substantially underestimated. Furthermore, this opinion is based on the reporting by the better-managed half of MRFs that are subject to the regulations. Based on this evidence, it’s not unrealistic to think the UK’s recycling rate might be one or two per cent lower than currently stated.  It’s an issue that Defra and the devolved administrations need to carefully square up to: the public will lose some confidence in recycling if the optics of this aren’t managed correctly, but we do need to get at the real figures. After all, we care about what is actually recycled, rather than what’s claimed, don’t we? Here, the Environment Agency and its devolved administration counterparts have a job to do, reconciling MRF contamination and reject reporting for the MF Regulations and the submissions to WasteDataFlow that these agencies also audit (and that current recycling figures are based on). Arguably, the savvy move will be to start counting what appears to be the real level of contamination and rejects from MRFs at the same time as allowing all material used from IBA to count towards recycling figures – that way we can ensure rates don’t go backwards, avoiding the inevitable dent in public confidence and negative press for the Government. Based on findings compared to last year, residual per capita fell in Wales and Northern Ireland, while England and Scotland have both seen a marginal increase. The same trend can be seen for total waste arising per capita, falling in Wales and Northern Ireland, rising in England and Scotland. For Scotland this can in part be explained by the weather, which received substantially more rainfall in 2014 than the previous year, which will have contributed to an increase in green waste arisings. Generally speaking, the vital signs in this year’s figures are better than they were a year ago, but the stories at the individual council level are variable. Local authorities Overall in the UK, excluding Scotland, 55 per cent of waste disposal authorities (WDAs) and unitary authorities (UAs) improved their recycling rates, while 43 per cent went backwards. It is encouraging that this is an improvement on the previous year, given the ongoing squeeze that council budgets have been experiencing, but illustrates how improvement can no longer be taken for granted. Topping this year’s poll is Carmarthenshire (last year’s runner up), where the amount of rubbish produced has fallen to less than 145kg per person – due to an established policy of restricting households to no more than four black bags of waste a fortnight. In fact, the approach of restricting residual waste capacity while conducting separate food waste collections has been key to Wales’s progress. This year, it’s the principal explanation why seven out of the top 10 in our UK league table are Welsh authorities. The country also provides the biggest improvement on our table compared with last year in Merthyr Tydfil, which nearly halvedthe size of wheelie bins from 240 litres (l) to 140l for its fortnightly collection, contributing to almost 100kg less per person, though the principal reason residual waste per capita fell was due to a jump in both population and the quantity of material recycled. Once again, Calderdale (last year’s best performer) is the top English authority, with residual waste per person falling by 1.5kg to just over 150kg per person. This demonstrates the impact mechanical biological treatment (MBT) of black bin waste has on recycling rates, though it still remains a point of debate how to classify compost-like output (CLO). The ongoing issue is whether CLO meets the required composting standard – the criteria for inclusion in the recycling rates – and on this, there seems to be a lot of variation between local authorities as to whether CLO qualifies. At the other end of the UK table, residual arisings per capita on the Isles of Scilly are almost exactly twice the amount (653.9kg) as the next authority on our list, North East Lincolnshire Council (326.8kg). This is largely due to the comparatively large number of tourists that descend on the island, which are not counted as part of the official population. However, both total and residual waste arisings did fall in 2014/15, though this can be largely attributed to introduction of charging for use of the Moorwell tip, following the EA’s announcement that the site will need to close. Turning to the recycling tables, Merthyr also features at the top of the list for 2014/15 diverting two thirds of its waste from disposal; closely followed in the lsit by three other Welsh councils: Conwy, Caerphilly and Carmarthenshire. However, all four counties only head Oxfordshire (England’s best performer with 60.5 per cent) by virtue of counting incinerator bottom ash into their figures. Furthermore, examining the detail of wastedataflow submissions, we have concerns about contamination data for the councils at the top of the list that ran a co-mingled recycling service, as well as the reported recycling recovery from the residual waste stream. Recovery of material from the residual waste stream is of course to be welcomed, but it is the feeling of this magazine that this area in particular is difficult to verify; there is an obligation of local authorities and environment agencies to seek evidence from reprocessors. Our concern is that the pressure to achieve targets stacks the cards in the opposite direction. Looking at the poor recycling performers, it’s striking how London waste authorities dominate the bottom of the table. It’s recognised that some councils in the UK capital face additional hurdles, including more complex demographics and housing structures. But if the England is to achieve those 2020 targets, and London is to remain one of the world’s forward thinking capitals, then this has to change starting with real innovation in high-rise recycling and food waste collection. In Scotland, only 13 out of 32 local authorities saw a fall in the amount of residual waste their householders produced, but 2014 was a much wetter year and inevitably green waste arisings will have increased. This view is borne out by the fact that well over half of councils improved their recycling rate, with Inverclyde holding on to top spot with a recycling rate 56.8 per cent, thanks in part to rolling out a new separate collection service for glass. Turning to this year’s Waste Collection Authority (WCA) table, residual waste arisings per capita fell in 56 per cent of councils and rose in 43 per cent; while recycling improved in 59 per cent and fell in 35 per cent – a marked rise from the previous year, when over half of WCAs recorded a fall in recycling rates. Once again, Vale of White Horse tops the table with a residual waste arising of just 114.8 kg per person. It’s neighbour, South Oxfordshire comes a close second (119.4kg), but once again tops the recycling league table, diverting 67.3 per cent. However, it is disappointing that MRF sampling data for these two councils has not been made accessible through the MRF reporting portal, especially given that Biffa has been willing to report figures for many of its other customers and these two are so regularly cited by the company in its public relations. The biggest improvement in this year’s WCA table is South Bucks District Council, which rolled out a new service in early 2014, notably with the introduction of weekly separate collection of food waste, along with alternate weekly collection of residual waste and dry recyclables. The result has been a jump of over 17 per cent in the recycling rate to just over 15 per cent, and a 48 kilo drop in the amount of black bin waste for each resident. At the other end of the table, three of the bottom four councils with the largest residual waste per capita fall under the auspices of East London Waste Authority. As has already been said, parts of London have particularly challenging demographics and housing stock, but there are other parts of London and elsewhere that are comparable that do not struggle with recycling rates of around 20 per cent. In particular, LWARB, with its additional resources, now needs to show it can make a difference in helping these councils. Taking everything into account, while the current trend in recycling and waste reduction performance is not as healthy as it used to be, there are a few signs that things could rally. To do this, it’s clear that all stakeholders need to be active – the concern is that right now in England, DEFRA, as well as many local authorities and waste companies give the impression that they think the onus for driving the required change lies elsewhere.  Click through to access the England WCA, Scotland, or United Countries league tables for 2014/15.