Prevention and Reuse: Waste Hierarchy Steps Before Waste Collection

  • Ana Pires
  • Graça Martinho
  • Susana Rodrigues
  • Maria Isabel Gomes


The way how policy instruments and actions can impose measures before products became waste depends on policies based on the waste prevention, reduction, and reuse. A brief review on the concepts in the light of the waste hierarchy principle is discussed, considering the view of European countries and when possible from other countries in the world.


WHP Waste Framework Directive Products reuse Minimization Design 


  1. Bârsan L, Bârsan A (2014) Ecodesign education – a necessity towards sustainable products. In: Visa I (ed) Sustainable energy in the built environment – steps towards nZEB proceedings of the conference for sustainable energy (CSE) 2014. Springer, Cham, pp 495–502Google Scholar
  2. Bindel A, Rosamond E, Conway P, West A (2012) Product life cycle information management in the electronics supply chain. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B 226:1388–1400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bio Intelligence Service (2011) Assessment of impacts of options to reduce the use of single-use plastic carrier bags. Final report prepared for the European Commission – DG EnvironmentGoogle Scholar
  4. Bortoleto AP, Kurisu KH, Hanaki K (2012) Model development for household waste prevention behavior. Waste Manag 32:2195–2207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) (2015) Plastic bag use down 71% since 5p charge was introduced. Accessed 9 Dec 2016
  6. Cecere G, Mancinelli S, Mazzanti M (2014) Waste prevention and social preferences: the role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Ecol Econ 107:163–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chung S (2011) Import and export of waste in Korea: regulation and actual practice. In: Kojima M, Michida E (eds) Integration and recycling in Asia: an interim report. Institute of Developing Economies, Chosakenkyu-Hokokushu, pp 45–64Google Scholar
  8. Convery F, McDonnell S, Ferreira S (2007) The most popular tax in Europe? Lessons from the Irish plastic bags levy. Environ Resour Econ 38:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Department of Agriculture and Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA) (2016) Northern Ireland carrier bag levy statistics. Accessed 7 Dec 2016
  10. Environmental Protection Agency at South Australia (EPASA) (2018) Regulation waste management. Accessed 15 Mar 2018
  11. Espinoza PT, Arce EM, Daza D, Faure MS, Terraza H (2010) Regional evaluation on urban solid waste management in Latin America and the Caribbean – 2010 report. Pan American Health Organization, Inter-American Association of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. European Commission (1977) 2nd environmental action programme 1977–1981. Off J C 139:1–46Google Scholar
  13. European Commission (1989) A community strategy for waste management, SEC/89/934 (final). BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  14. European Council (1975) Council directive of 15 July 1975 on waste 75/442/EEC. Off J L 194:39–41Google Scholar
  15. European Parliament, Council (2008) Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain directive. Off J L312:3–30Google Scholar
  16. Gharfalkar M, Court R, Campbell C, Ali Z, Hillier G (2015) Analysis of waste hierarchy in the European waste directive 2008/98/EC. Waste Manag 39:305–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Giarini O, Stahel WR (1993) The limits to certainty, 2nd edn. Springer Science+Business Media, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goedkoop MJ, van Halen CJG, te Riele HRM, Rommens PJM (1999) Product service systems, ecological and economic basis. Report commissioned by Dutch ministries of environment and economic affairs, Pricewaterhouse Coopers NV/Pi!MC, Storrm CS, pre consultantsGoogle Scholar
  19. Greyson J (2007) An economic instrument for zero waste, economic growth and sustainability. J Clean Prod 15:1382–1390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hermann B, Carus M, Pael M, Blok K (2011) Current policies affecting the market penetration of biomaterials. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 5:708–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Howell D (2016) The 5p plastic bag charge: all you need to know. Accessed 10 Aug 2016
  22. Hultman J, Corvellec H (2012) The European waste hierarchy: from the sociomateriality of waste to a politics of consumption. Environ Plan-Part A 44:2413–2427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hutner P, Thorenz A, Tuma A (2017) Waste prevention in communities: a comprehensive survey analyzing status quo, potentials, barriers and measures. J Clean Prod 141:837–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kling M, Seyring N, Tzanova P (2016) Assessment of economic instruments for countries with low municipal waste management performance: an approach based on the analytic hierarchy process. Waste Manag Res 34:912–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Knauf M (2015) Waste hierarchy revisited—an evaluation of waste wood recycling in the context of EU energy policy and the European market. For Policy Econ 54:58–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Martinho G, Balaia N, Pires A (2017a) The Portuguese plastic carrier bag tax: the effects on consumers’ behavior. Waste Manag 61:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Martinho G, Magalhães D, Pires A (2017b) Consumer behavior with respect to the consumption and recycling of smartphones and tablets: an exploratory study in Portugal. J Clean Prod 156:147–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Martinho G, Gomes A, Ramos M, Santos P, Gonçalves G, Fonseca M, Pires A (2018) Solid waste prevention and management at green festivals: a case study of the Andanças festival, Portugal. Waste Manag 71:10–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Maslennikova I, Foley D (2000) Xerox’s approach to sustainability. Interfaces 30:226–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mont OK (2002) Clarifying the concept of product–service system. J Clean Prod 10:237–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2001) Environmentally related taxes in OECD countries: issues and strategies. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  32. Papargyropoulou E, Lozano R, Steinberger J, Wright N, bin Ujang Z (2014) The food waste hierarchy as a framework for the management of food surplus and food waste. J Clean Prod 76:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Poortinga W, Whitmarsh L, Suffolk C (2013) The introduction of a single-use carrier bag charge in Wales: attitude change and behavior spillover effect. J Environ Psychol 36:240–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pre-waste (2011) Eco-tax on plastic bags in Romania (Pre-waste factsheet 94). Accessed 9 Dec 2016
  35. Reike D, Vermeulen WJV, Witjes S (2018) The circular economy: new or refurbished as CE 30? – exploring controversies in the conceptualization of the circular economy through a focus on history and resource value retention options. Resour Conserv Recycl. 135:246–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Richa K, Babbitt CW, Gaustad G (2017) Eco-efficiency analysis of a lithium-ion battery waste hierarchy inspired by circular economy. J Ind Ecol 21:715–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Roy R (2000) Sustainable product-service systems. Futures 32:289–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Silva AR (2015) Industry reduces personal and cannot compensate for losses caused by environmental tax (in Portuguese: Indústria reduz pessoal e não consegue compensar as perdas provocadas pela taxa ambiental). Accessed 10 Aug 2016
  39. The Danish Ecological Council (2015) Fact sheet: Tax on plastic bags. Accessed 9 Dec 2016
  40. The Guardian (2015) Scotland’s plastic bag usage down 80% since 5p charge introduced. Accessed 9 Dec 2016
  41. The Guardian (2016) England's plastic bag usage drops 85% since 5p charge introduced. Accessed 9 Dec 2016
  42. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2017) Criteria for the definition of solid waste and solid and hazardous waste exclusions. Accessed 1 Mar 2018
  43. Valorlux (2014) PPP-initiative “eco-bag.” Accessed 9 Dec 2016
  44. Wimmer W, Züst R (2003) Ecodesign pilot: product investigation, learning and optimization tool for sustainable product development. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  45. Women in Informal Employment: Globalization and Organizing (WIEGO) (2018) National solid waste policy. Accessed 1 Mar 2018

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ana Pires
    • 1
  • Graça Martinho
    • 1
  • Susana Rodrigues
    • 1
  • Maria Isabel Gomes
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Sciences and TechnologyUniversidade NOVA de Lisboa (FCT NOVA)CaparicaPortugal

Personalised recommendations