Reference metadata describe statistical concepts and methodologies used for the collection and generation of data. They provide information on data quality and, since they are strongly content-oriented, assist users in interpreting the data. Reference metadata, unlike structural metadata, can be decoupled from the data.
The relationships of the parties/sources to the areas of the Regulation on Waste Statistics are displayed in Table 1.
Table 1: Institutions involved and distribution of tasks
Name of institution
Description of key responsibilities
Statistics Netherlands
Environment Statistics
Collect, process and publish waste statistics;
Survey on municipal waste;
Survey on non-hazardous waste generated by enterprises;
Survey on public waste water treatment facilities;
Survey on discarded vehicles;
Statistics on waste from NACE G-Q, 37-39, 4677.
Rijkswaterstaat
Waste Management Department
Monitoring and formulation National Waste Management Plan;
Statistics on hazardous waste;
Statistics on construction and demolition waste;
Statistics on Agricultural waste;
Maintaining the national database of waste statistics.
Rijkswaterstaat
LMA
Host of the database with national waste transports in the Netherlands.
Rijkswaterstaat
EVOA
Writing permits and registration of transports that fall under the Waste Shipment Regulation.
IenW
Dutch Ministry of infrastructure and Water management
Responsible for national waste policy.
The Dutch Waste Statistics are compiled from a number of different sources using a variety of methodologies. The main legislations that form the basis for the waste policies and data sources are listed below:
The administration and monitoring of all waste is formulated in the National waste management plan;
Some companies are statutory required to publish an environmental performance report (e-PRTR);
Reporting entities are statutory required to deliver data to Statistics Netherlands, by means of the general statistical law of Statistics Netherlands;
Transports of hazardous and non-hazardous waste are statutory required to be registered for enterprises that have a provincial waste permit. These registrations are the basis of the "AMICE"-database from NL Agency;
Transboundary waste transports (except green-listed wastes) are statutory required to be registered under the waste shipment regulation 259/93 [5]. These registrations are the basis of the "DaVinci" database from NL Agency.
3.1.1. Description of the parties involved in the data collection
Table : Institutions involved in the collection of data and distribution of tasks
Name of institution
Description of key responsibilities
Stichting afvalfonds verpakkingen
Responsible for the EPR scheme
Inspectorate
Responsible for the checking of the data and reports (within Stichting afvalfonds verpakkingen and individuel companies)
Rijkswaterstaat
Responsible for the checking of the data with their ons waste statistics and reporting to Eurostat
Municipalities
Responsible for providing data collection waste collection households
Waste companies
Responsible for providing data on the collection of waste and their treatment
3.2. Classification system
Not available. New concept added with the migration to SIMS 2.0. Information (content) will be available after the next collection.
Description of classifications used
Name of classification(s) used
Description of the classification(s) (in particular compatibility with WStatR requirements)
Economic activities
SBI ’08 (standard business units)
Kind-of-activity unit (KAU)
Fully compatible with WstatR requirements
Waste types
Eural List of Waste
Fully compatible with WstatR requirements
Recovery and treatment operations
Dutch classification of treatment operations
Fully compatible with WstatR requirements
The data sources use the classification standards listed in Table 3. The economical activities and waste types are fully compatible with Waste Statistics Regulation. However, the recovery and treatment operations are enquired using a Dutch classification. This Dutch classification of treatment operations can be linked to R-D codes. However, it appears that an incorrect classification is used for approximately 50% of the waste. Those are typically “storage and transfer of waste”, “disposal of waste” and “physical and chemical separation”. For each Eural code, the incorrect codes are replaced by taking the average of the “correct” treatment methods for that Eural code.
3.2.1. Classification of treatment operations
The R/D codes in Annexes I and II of Directive 2008/98/EC were used.
3.3. Coverage - sector
Not available. New concept added with the migration to SIMS 2.0. Information (content) will be available after the next collection.
3.4. Statistical concepts and definitions
Not available. New concept added with the migration to SIMS 2.0. Information (content) will be available after the next collection.
3.4.1. Types of reuse system in place for each material type
Obtaining information about reuse streams is still in the start-up phase. With the increasing interest in the transition to a circular economy, the focus on reuse and therefore reporting on it will increase in the coming years.
3.4.2. Other recovery of waste
Other recovery is not a part of our report.
There is 100% of Energy Recovery that is from R1 incinerators, out of all Energy Recovery reported (e.g. that may include cement kilns etc).
3.4.3. Information on temporary storage of packaging waste
It is assumed that temporary storage of packaging waste has no significant contribution in the numbers.
3.5. Statistical unit
Enterprise, household, PRO.
3.6. Statistical population
All packaging waste reporters.
3.7. Reference area
Netherlands.
3.8. Coverage - Time
1 year.
3.9. Base period
Not applicable.
Tonnes.
Calendar year
6.1. Institutional Mandate - legal acts and other agreements
In the Netherlands Rijkswaterstaat is assigned by the ministry to coordinate and report all the waste production and management reports on their behalf. This is formalised in our national waste management plan (LAP, see also A7 Monitoring van het afvalbeleid).
6.2. Institutional Mandate - data sharing
This coordination by Rijkswaterstaat also means that it has to make the data available to third parties to avoid the double collection of the data by different parties.
7.1. Confidentiality - policy
Statistics Netherlands publishes the data from the statistical surveys on municipal waste, industrial wastes, public waste water treatment facilities, end-of-life vehicles at the website called ‘statline’. An abstract of the same data is also published for the Environmental Data Compendium.
European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
7.2. Confidentiality - data treatment
Not requested.
8.1. Release calendar
The data is released within 18 months after the end of a calendar year to Eurostat.
8.2. Release calendar access
Not applicable.
8.3. Release policy - user access
The PRO for packaging waste in the Netherlands informs the press within a few months after reporting to the government (within eight months after the calendar year).
The data is disseminated on a yearly basis.
10.1. Dissemination format - News release
Not requested.
10.2. Dissemination format - Publications
Towards fossil fuel free and circular packaging. Recycling and reuse in the Netherlands, 2023 (available this website in NL).
10.3. Dissemination format - online database
Not requested.
10.4. Dissemination format - microdata access
Not requested.
10.5. Dissemination format - other
Not requested.
10.6. Documentation on methodology
Not requested.
10.7. Quality management - documentation
Not requested.
11.1. Quality assurance
Information (content) will be available after the next collection.
For Details see section 18.4.
11.2. Quality management - assessment
There are many sources that lead to the data delivery to Eurostat. Prior to inserting each data source into the database, the data sources are initially validated by the institutes that have provided the data. After this is done, a final validation on the timeseries of all data combined is performed.
12.1. Relevance - User Needs
We notice that there is a growing demand for waste statistics. In short:
Generation of several types of waste on regional level (NUTS 3);
Food waste;
Circular economy;
Linking material flow accounting to waste statistics;
Relating production, consumption patterns to waste statistics;
More demand on composition of mixed household wastes, and mixed packaging wastes.
We are continiously updating our statistics to meet this demand.
We foresee new user needs on statistics in which recycled wastes (and byproducts) of industries are used. The Netherlands is in the process of adoption a new waste management plan to replaced LAP3. The new management plan, called the Circular Materials Plan (CMP) will be centred around the recycling and reuse of waste materials in line with the development of a circular economy.
12.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction
Not available.
12.3. Completeness
Description of missing data in data set 1 on waste generation
Description of missing data (waste category, economic activity, ..)
Explanation
How to overcome the deficit
Data on sludges from waste water treatment from companies other than NACE BCD is no longer available..
Statistics Netherlands no longer compiles statistics on the waste treatment by companies that are not within the Industry (NACE BCD).
To compile data over 2020 an estimate is made based on data over previous years and production indexes. It concerns relatively small amounts so the impact is limited.
Statistics on waste are needed to provide an evidence base for policy development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. The users of the data include:
central government;
municipalities;
waste industry;
environmental accounting;
sector associations.
The data provided for the Waste Statistics Regulation are derived from sources that are used to meet the national requirements. However, the definitions and coverage level may differ from the national reporting. For example, the secondary wastes are not included in the national waste, as this would be double counting.
The data provided for the Waste Statistics Regulation does not contain missing data on waste generation.
Description of missing data in data sets 2 and 3 on treated waste quantities and capacities
Description of missing data (waste category, treatment category, region, ..)
Explanation
How to overcome the deficit
Use of secondary materials for road filling (R5)
Lack of reliable data
Information not available
Disposal of dredging spoils at sea (D6)
Capacity of the sea cannot be determined
Information not available
The quantity and capacity of the use of recycled waste in industrial plants is not known for, e.g. blast furnaces, and cement kilns.
Lack of reliable data
Information not available
Data on the import and export of waste for 2018 is not yet available. This datas is used to calculate the amount of treated waste (= generation - export + import)
The unit that processes the notification has a major backlog in processing notification forms.
For now an estimate is calculated bases on data from previous years. For some mayor waste streams other reliable data is available. After 2018 data is available we will do a new delivery.
13.1. Accuracy - overall
Generation of wastes is accurate and forms the basis of the data in the Waste Statistics Regulation. Treatment data is less accurate, due to changes in LoW codes during waste management, mixing, imports and exports.
13.1.1. Statistical surveys used regarding packaging waste generation and treatment
The information in this section is to provide an overarching understanding of the accuracy of any statistical surveys used relating to packaging waste. Some of the information may be available in previous questions.
Component of packaging waste
Year
Statistical units
Percentage of population surveyed
Data (tonnes)
Confidence level
Error margin
Details of adjustments from the survey year to the current year
Other details
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
13.1.2. Statistical surveys used regarding reusable packaging
The information in this section is to provide an overarching understanding of the accuracy of any statistical surveys used relating to packaging waste. Some of the information may be available in other concepts.
Packaging material
Year
Statistical units
Percentage of population surveyed
Data (tonnes)
Confidence level
Error margin
Details of adjustments from the survey year to the current year
Other details
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
13.2. Sampling error
Not available.
13.3. Non-sampling error
For the totals per EWC-stat the ratio for T and T-2 is calucated. If the change exceeds a certain factor then the cells are marked.
For the totals per EWC-stat the ratio for Generatuion and Treatment is calucated. If the ratio exceeds a certain factor then the cells are marked.
This validation results in a spreadsheet with timeseries data and cells marked for checking.
14.1. Timeliness
The planning outined below is indicative of the reception, processing and availability of data. The availability of the database from Waste Shipment Regulation is inconsistent and a source of uncertainty for a timely delivery, mainly due to the time it takes to bring the database up to date with current data. With great effort we have been able to deliver the data in time. In earlier years, the final processing of the data (determining treatment) and construction and demolition waste arisings were severely delayed.
T
T+1[year]
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Municipal waste survey
Sending questionnaire
Yes
Collecting questionnaires
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Data processing
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Manual check of the data
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Final data analysis and evaluation
Yes
Data tabulation and publication
Yes
Survey on waste generated by waste incinerators
Publication
Yes
Secondary Waste
Determine sec. wastes in model
Yes
Waste from NACE G-U, 37, 381, 382, 39, 4677
Linking database to business register
Yes
Yes
Extracting primary wastes
Yes
Yes
Determining non-response + data processing
Yes
Yes
Import, export, treatment of green listed wasteYes
Collecting International trade data (microlevel)
Yes
Collecting waste transports to industry using AMICE
Yes
Collecting imp/exp from AMICE register
Yes
Integrating registers (avoiding double counting)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Determining Treatment in the Netherlands
Yes
Yes
Waste Statistics Regulation
Collecting information and evaluation
Yes
Yes
Yes
Publication
Yes
Yes
14.2. Punctuality
Data reported to Eurostat 18 months after the end of each reference year.
15.1. Comparability - geographical
Not applicable.
15.2. Comparability - over time
Changes compared with previous years:
Legal basis of AMICE
The legal basis for reporting to the AMICE database is constantly changing. This implies that for some types of waste reporting or sectors can stop or start after a legal amendment. It is unclear how this affects data quality.
Foreseen changes:
For 2014 and 2015, it was planned to change data gathering for waste from manufacturing from paper questionnaires to an online survey for a pilot group of companies. The enterprises had to fill in exactly the same data as before. However, only submit the data online.
Specific issues concerning the data collection on the current reference year:
Reported waste categories
In the survey on manufacturing waste and waste from services, the introduction of new categories had an influence on the correction for the non-response. In general, the EWC-stat category 10.2 was mostly influenced and increased. In the food manufacturing industry, animal and vegetal wastes were affected. In paper industry, this affected paper and cardboard wastes and chemical wastes. For chemical industry, animal and vegetable wastes were affected, and in the metal industry, this was mainly mineral and chemical wastes. Also, some Eural codes of several companies were changed in the statistical process, to ensure that the waste was allocated to the right EWC-stat category.
Backfilling
For this WstatR we have defined backfilling as deposition of waste in mines. With this definition, there is no back-filling in theNetherlands. There is, however, export of wastes that are back filled elsewhere.
Detailed description and consequences:
Comparability over time
Due to a change of data sources, dredging spoils arisings are not comparable from 2006 to 2008. And from 2008 to 2010.
Due to methodological changes, treatment data from the green listed wastes (EWC 06, 07 and 09) were not comparable from 2008 to 2010. We had hoped to streamline the method retrospectively later in 2012.
Due to methodological changes, the method to estimate secondary wastes has changed in 2010 compared to 2008. This affects all waste arisings in NACE 38 and NACE 4677. This has been retrospectively adjusted for reference years.
When we have finalized all the revisions, we hope to be able to do a delivery in Eural codes, as was asked by Eurostat.
15.3. Coherence - cross domain
The data of the statistical surveys used for the Waste Statistics Regulation and for the national Statistics were the same. However, in some cases the data was processed in a different way. This same data source is used to make the waste accounts. For trade statistics, the imports and exports are not comparable with the imports and exports used in the WstatR. For import and export AMICE, data form Waste Shipment Regulation (orange and red listed wastes) and mainly direct imports to industry have been used.
15.4. Coherence - internal
See 15.4.1.
15.4.1. Explanation for any component with a greater than 10 % variation
Explanation detailing the causes of the tonnage difference (in relation to which waste streams, sectors or estimates have caused the difference, and what the underlying cause is) for any component of packaging waste generated and recycled which shows greater than a 10 % variation from the data submitted for the previous data year.
Material
Variation (%)
Main reason for variation
Wood
24%
The POM is back at its 'normal' level after a lower amount in 2020 due to the COVID pandemic.
Other
74%
No real explanation has been found for the one-off increase in other packaging in 2020. Now it is back at its normal level.
Not applicable.
17.1. Data revision - policy
Not requested.
17.2. Data revision - practice
Not requested.
18.1. Source data
Assessment of the continuity of the data source, e.g. legal basis for the data source:
The Dutch Waste Statistics are compiled from a number of different sources using a variety of methodologies. The main legislations that form the basis for the waste policies and data sources are listed below:
The administration and monitoring of all waste is formulated in the LAP 2017-2023 (National waste management plan) [1].
Some companies are statutory required to publish an environmental performance report (e-PRTR) [2].
Reporting entities are statutory required to deliver data to Statistics Netherlands [3].
Transports of hazardous and non-hazardous waste are statutorily required to be registered for enterprises that have a provincial waste permit [4]. These registrations are the basis of the “AMICE”-database from NL Agency.
Transboundary waste transports (except green-listed wastes) are statutorily required to be registered under the waste shipment regulation 259/93 [5]. These registrations are the basis of the “DaVinci” database from NL Agency.
Due to changes in legislation and practice, the data sources are subject to changes.
Institutions involved and distribution of tasks
Name of institution
Description of key responsibilities
Statistics Netherlands – Environment Statistics
Collect, process and publish waste statistics
Survey on municipal waste
Statistics on waste from NACE G-Q, 37-39, 4677
Rijkswaterstaat – Waste Management Department
Monitoring and formulation of “LAP 2017-2023” (National Waste Management Plan) Maintaining the national database of waste
Rijkswaterstaat – EVOA
Writing permits and registration of transports that fall under the Waste Shipment Regulation.
IenW - Dutch Ministry of infrastructure and Water management
Main responsible for national waste policy
General description of Data set 1: Waste generation by waste category (EWC-STAT) and economic activity (NACE)
General description of methodology:
General description of methodology
The generation of waste is calculated using a variety of methods and sources. Table 2 gives an overview of the sources and methods used to compile the generated waste. In brief this is:
Non-hazardous waste from NACE 01 to 03
Non-hazardous waste arisings from agriculture and fishing industries were determined by using a model, described at page 14, developed by Van Beusekom and Verbrockhaven [6]. Some parameters in the model were updated in 2008 data [7].
Non-hazardous waste from NACE 06 to 36 and 383
Data is collected using data published in the e-PRTR and supplemented with a sample survey. This is described in more detail at page 7.
Non-hazardous waste from NACE F
All waste arisings in NACE F, except dredging spoils, were determined using the registry of national waste transports (see page 13). For dredging spoils, registrations from the Rijkswaterstaat (ministry of infrastructure and environment) have been used.
Non-hazardous waste from NACE G-U (excl. 46.77), 4677, 37, 381, 382 and 39
The amount of generated non-hazardous waste is estimated by using the notifications in the AMICE database. This method is described in more detail at pages 10 to 13.
Non-hazardous waste from NACE 383
Non-hazardous waste arisings (excluding metallic wastes, combustion wastes and common slugde) were determined by a sample survey described at page 7. Common sludge waste arisings were obtained from a survey conducted by Statistics Netherlands. This survey is described at page 8.
Non-hazardous waste from Secondary wastes
Secondary wastes are obtained using treatment data of some waste streams. This is described in more detail at page 14.
Non-hazardous waste from NACE HH
A survey among all municipalities, described at page 7, is used to determine the waste arisings from households. Waste arisings of discarded equipment is obtained from the WEEE-Directive.
Table 2: Description of methods for determining waste generation
Item
1
2
3
4
…
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
NACE
0102
03
06
07
...
D
36,37,39
38
F
G-U
(ex 4677)
4677
HH
Item
description
1
Spent solvents *
Haz. waste from notification registry
Non-hazardous waste from environmental reports or from sample survey
Hazardous waste from notification registry
Non haz waste:
37 and 39 from notification registry
36 similar to items 3 to 14
Haz. Waste from notification registry; 381 and 382 from notification registry; 383 similar to items 3 to 14
Haz and non-haz waste: from notification registry
Haz and non-haz waste: from notification registry
Haz and non-haz waste: from notification registry
Municipal waste survey
2
Acid, alkaline
...
…
9
Chem. dep. and res.
10
Chem. dep. and res. *
11
Ind. Effluent sludges
12
Ind. Effluent sludges *
13
Health care & …
14
Health care & … *
15
Metallic wastes
16
Metallic wastes *
17
Glass wastes
18
Glass wastes *
19
Paper & cardboard
20
Rubber wastes
1
21
Plastic wastes
22
Wood wastes
23
Wood wastes *
24
Textile wastes
25
Waste cont. PCB *
26
Discarded equip.
2
27
Discarded equip. *
28
Discarded vehicles
National Vehicle Registration Authority
29
Discarded vehicles *
30
Batt. Accum. Waste
Non-haz. wastes derived from waste-modelling
Haz. Waste from notification registry
Haz. Waste from notification registry
Secondary wastes using a model
3
31
Batt. Accum. Waste *
32
Animal & Veg. waste (excl. 33)
33
Animal waste of food prep.
34
Anim. faeces, urine & manure
35
Household & similar wastes
36
Mixed and Undiff. Mater.
…
…
39
Sorting residues *
40
Common sludge (excl. 41)
4
41
Dredging spoils
5
42
Min. Wastes (excl. 44-46)
43
Min. wastes (excl. 44-46) *
44
Combustion wastes
45
Combustion wastes *
..
…
47
Sol. Stab. Vitr. Wastes
48
Sol. Stab. Vitr. Wastes *
Determination of waste generation in the economy on the basis of information on waste collection
The waste statistics are not compiled using information on waste collection.
Determination of waste generation in the economy on the basis of administrative sources
Some statistics on the waste generation are determined using administrative sources. Those statistics are described in the following part.
Table 5 shows the number of linked enterprises in comparison to the number of enterprises in the business register for NACE G-U. It appears that the number of enterprises in the non-response was considerable compared to the number of enterprises in the response. However, the response percentage increases if the enterprises become larger in size. Larger companies are generally expected to generate more waste. This will be beneficial for the accuracy of the statistics. This trend was similar for the other NACE categories (not shown).
For each 2 digit NACE, EWC-stat code, and size class, hereafter referred to as the cell, the following parameters were calculated from the response group.
The amount of waste generated
Total number of enterprises producing waste in general in 2digit NACE and size class for NACE G-U. The other NACE categories were divided into 46771, 46772, 46779, 381, 382, 37 and 39
Number of enterprises producing the specific waste of the cell
Median of waste generation
Total number of enterprises in theNetherlands
Table 5 Coverage of the enterprises in the AMICE database to the business register
4677
Primary waste
Stratum
# enterprises in Netherlands
# enterprises linked to the notification register
1 to 8
1197
489
381-382-37-39
Primary waste
1 to 8
564
331
NACE G-U
Primary waste
1
655972
12672
2
39426
3425
3
19616
2467
4
12112
2020
5
4218
1027
6
2379
739
7
1617
622
8
1086
570
These results have to be interpreted with caution, as some cells can contain unrealistic information. An example of unrealistic data is that production waste is accounted to the financial holding, instead to the production facility. Another observation was that some cells were obvious double countings with waste from waste collection from municipalities. In those cases, all enterprises in the cell were transferred to the non-response. Obvious waste collectors in the NACE G-U, where also excluded from the response. These were:
metal waste in NACE 46722 (Wholesale of metals and metal ores) and 46723 (Wholesale of wood, construction materials and sanitary equipment)
Green wastes (EWC 09.13) from NACE 46216 (wholesale in raw vegetable and animal oil and fat and oil-containing raw materials)
Waste in general from NACE 416 (Wholesale on a fee or contract basis).
If the amount of waste exceeded 5000 kgper employee, the data was excluded from the data set for the wholesale of scrap and waste (4677) sector.
If the amount of waste exceeded 10000 kgper employee, the data was excluded from the data set for the Freight transport by road and removal services (NACE 494)
If the amount of waste exceeded 20000 kgper employee for EWC-stat group Metallic wastes (06), the data was excluded from the data set for NACE codes starting with 4.
For larger companies, another typical phenomenon occurs. It has been observed that not all local units of the kind-of-activity unit are linked to the business register. Waste occuring in these cells are notoriously under covered.
For those reasons, it is evident that statistics have to be made very carefully. Therefore, a suitable method had to be found to determine outliers, but not to delete real deviating data. This was done by calculating the average waste arising in the NACE G-U sector for a EWC-stat code and size class. A robust method appeared to determine the median of the waste arising per employee for each size class, EWC-stat combination. The calculated medians per employee were averaged for each EWC-stat code with excluding obvious outliers. Finally, the median per employee is used to calculate the median in the size class (Mcalc) by multiplying it with the average number of employees in the size-class. This Mcalc represents the average waste arising for a size class for a EWC-stat code per enterprise, and was used to correct for non-response if the waste factors in the cell were unrealistic.
Then, an assumption is made how often the waste is expected to arise in the 2d NACE. This information is applied to determine the number of enterprises in the non-response group. Three waste patterns were distinguished. For common wastes, like household waste and paper waste, it has been assumed that the waste occurs in all enterprises. Thus, the business register has been taken as the population. Non-response was subsequently determined by subtracting the number of enterprises in the response (Nresponse) from the number of enterprises in the Netherlands (Nenterprises in NL). The non-reponse was multiplied by the median, as seen in equation 1. The median of the cell (Mcell), however, could display unrealistic data, as mentioned before. To prevent unrealistic extrapolations, the value of the Mcell has been compared to the median of the whole sector (Mcalc). If Mcell deviated more than 2 times smaller/larger than Mcalc, the Mcell is rejected and Mcalc is used to estimate for non-response.
Wnon-resp = Median * (Nenterprises in NL – Nenterprises in response) (1)
For less common wastes, but still typical for the sector, we assumed that only a fraction of the companies produce the waste. This could be, for instance, rubber waste in wholesale and retail trade and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles (NACE 45). The fraction that produces the waste has been chosen by a guess of ourselves of 10, 20, 30 or 50% of the enterprises. The other steps in the procedure were similar as described for equation 1. This leads to equation 2.
Wnon-resp = (Nenterprises in NL – Nenterprises in response) * Fraction * Median (2)
The non-response was set to zero for incidental waste streams, such as metal waste in telecommunication (equation 3). Extrapolation for those wastes is expected to be unrealistic.
Wnon-resp = 0 (3)
Then the total waste arisings are calculated with equation 4.
W = Wnon-resp + Wresp (4)
Data sets 2 and 3: Waste treatment
General description of methodology:
For paper recycling, recycling figures of the sector association were used. For ferrous metal recycling, data were obtained from the two largest ferrous metal manufacturers. For all other wastes, statistics on the treatment of waste in theNetherlandshas been determined via waste generation, since we do not have questionnaires on all recycling facilities. Imports of waste have been added up to this and exports are subtracted (see equation 5).
Several data sources were used to determine import and export amounts.
For the orange and red-listed wastes, import and export were taken from the Waste Shipment Regulation [5].
For green listed wastes imports and exports were obtained using the AMICE database and international trade. For a complete description how this has been done, see section on the import and export on green listed waste on pages 18 and 19.
Then, an average treatment of waste has been made for each Eural code. This has been done via empirical data of waste notifications and assumptions. This average treatment of waste was in line with the generated secondary wastes.
In practice three scenarios were calculated:
In case the waste is directly subjected to final treatment, the amount that is generated is simply added to the imports and exports are subtracted to determine the treatment of that waste (according to equation 5). The secondary wastes that arise during final treatment are added to the generation. Those secondary wastes are also accounted in the treatment table.
If wastes are subjected to pre-treatment, such as glass wastes, the secondary wastes that arise during sorting are added to the secondary wastes (metals, plastics, paper, and so on). The cleaned waste material (glass in the example) is not double counted. The secondary wastes are also accounted in the treatment table. The remaining glass that is final treated, is assumed to be recycled. Only, the impurities that were separated during pre-treatment are subtracted from the treatment (see equation 6).
Treatment of glass = Generation of glass waste – secondary wastes + imports – exports (6).
For some wastes, the waste is treated via various treatment channels. For instance, in some regions in the Netherlands, the household waste is directly incinerated (scenario 1). However, for other regions it is sorted (pre-treated) prior to final treatment (scenario 2). This is divided according to the previous scenarios.
The total amount of treated waste is researched independently by enquiring the disposal, incineration, and composting facilities in the Netherlands [10]. The outcomes of equation 6 are consistent with the value in that publication.
Identification of relevant treatment facilities:
Treatment facilities have been identified using:
Companies within category NACE 383 in the business register.
Memberships of sector associations.
Report from the study group waste treatment registration.
Additional researches (e.g. internet).
Data collection on treated quantities:
The sources and methods used to compile the statistics on waste treatment are listed below.
Registry of waste treatment
Source Waste Management Department
Treatment All treatment methods
This registry contains data how each type of waste is treated on average. That is to say, waste item “a” is treated as: x % R1, y % R2, etc. For each waste item, the data is updated every 3 to 5 years. The information is gathered from several sources. Industry reports, transport notifications and assumptions.
Determination of treated waste quantities
Description of data sources and methods by treatment category
Item 1 Incineration (R1)
Treatment quantities of generated waste are determined by linking the registry of waste treatment to the generated waste from Annex I (see equation 5)
The numbers are corrected for the import and export to obtain the treated waste quantities in the nation (see equation 6).
For metal, glass, paper and household waste, data on treated waste is obtained form sector associations or other sources.
The total amount of composted, incinerated, disposed waste is taken from a report [10].
Item 2 Incineration (D10)
Item 3a Recycling (R2 – R11)
Item 3b Backfilling
Item 4 Landfilling (D1, D5, D12)
Item 5 Other disposal (D2,D3,D4, D6,D7)
Data collection on capacity of treatment facilities:
Capacities of the treatment facilities are obtained from the report by the study group waste treatment registration [10]. These involve landfills, incineration facilities, and composting facilities. For some disposal methods, however, the capacities are less straightforward to determine, such as the use of secondary materials for road filling (R5), and disposal of dredging spoils at sea (D6). These capacities have not been determined for that reason.
18.1.1. Waste samples from waste analysis
The waste samples for waste analysis are taken from:
Approach
Details about the flows of waste covered
Directly from the bin
Not applicable
From the waste trucks
Not applicable
Other approaches
Not applicable
18.1.2. Source of waste flow data for estimation
Sources
Materials covered
Waste collectors
Not applicable
Not applicable
Waste treatment operators
Not applicable
Not applicable
Municipalities
Not applicable
Not applicable
Others
Not applicable
Not applicable
18.2. Frequency of data collection
The datasets that are used for national monitoring are compiled each year. This comprises all datasets for the WstatR, with the exception of secondary wastes, dredging spoils, import-export of green listed waste. Those exceptions are only compiled in the even years. In the uneven years, datasets for waste in manufacturing are estimated to reduce the costs.
18.3. Data collection
See below.
18.3.1. Description of the methodology and verification of data on packaging waste generated in case waste analysis is used
In the Netherlands clear definitons are used to make a distiction betwee packaging and non-packaging waste. With this distinction sorting analyses are done on a yearly basis of residual municipal waste and separate collected waste streams.
18.3.2. Description of the methodology to report on composite packaging
Composite packaging waste is reported within the different materials available. This is expecially the case for beverage cartons.
18.3.3. Description of methods for determining packaging waste treatment
Packaging waste material
Total
Plastic
Wood
Ferrous metals
Aluminium
Glass
Paper and Cardboard
Other
Data collection methods
Administrative reporting
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Surveys
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Electronic registry
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Waste analysis
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Data from waste operators
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Data from municipalities
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Data from extended producer responsibility schemes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Other
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Additional information about the methodology, including the combination of methods used:
All these methods are more and less in place to cover the whole "picture' of collection the packaging wasts from different sources (households, companiers etc). They complement each other and on specific items it is possible to double-check specific amouts. The basis is electronic/administrative reporting by municiipalities and waste management companies. In order to verify the quality of the collected or sorted packaging waste, waste composition analysis is done (e.g. % of plastics that are not packaging, humidity, impurities in paper and cardboard waste, impurities in glass waste, the share of packaging in the paper waste stream. For the losses that occur at recycler's plants before the calculation point, analysis by Wagening University was used.
18.3.4. Explanation of the scope and validity of surveys to collect data on the generation and treatment of packaging waste
The PRO is responsible for the collection for all the data and make sure that the data is valid.
18.3.5. Explanation of the scope and validity of surveys to collect data on reusable packaging
Measuring reusable packaging is not done to a large extent. Measuring reusable packaging is not possible in the case that consumers use packaging at home (pallets, jars, etc.) or when reusable packaging (IBC's, pallets, crates, etc.) are transported and used abroad. The only reusable packaging that can be measured is that within a domestic, closed pool (e.g. reusable glass bottles).
18.3.6. Detailed description of the method to collect data in order to calculate the amount of metals separated from incineration bottom ash
Calculation of recycling of metals from incinerator bottom ash : Detailed description of the method to collect data in order to calculate the amount of metals separated from incineration bottom ash in accordance with the Commission Implementing Act adopted in accordance with Article 37(7) of Directive 2008/98/EC.
Data
Description of the measurement method to obtain the data
Total amount of metal concentrate extracted from incinerator bottom ash
Based on the average composition of the waste to be incinerated (by type of metals) and the associated recovery yields per incineration plant, the quantities of metals that end up in the ashes have been determined. Subsequently, a reduction of 18% was made, especially for aluminum, as a result of the oxidation losses that occurred and the resulting reduced recyclability
Average level of metallic content in the total amount of metal concentrate, including the reliability of any surveys undertaken
See above
Proportion of waste entering incineration plants that is packaging waste, including the reliability of any surveys undertaken
See above
18.4. Data validation
Statistics Netherlands uses a tool (database) to store versions of the data set. The tool also compiles tables (spreadsheets) for analyses. The tool also can compare two versions of the dataset and validate the dataset.
the validation that are performed are:
For the totals per NACE or Treatment the ratio Non-Haz/ Haz is calculated and compared for T and T-2. If the change exceeds a certain factor then the cells are marked.
For the totals per EWC-stat the ratio for T and T-2 is calucated. If the change exceeds a certain factor then the cells are marked.
For the totals per EWC-stat the ratio for Generatuion and Treatment is calucated. If the ratio exceeds a certain factor then the cells are marked.
For both Generation and Treatment the 20 largest increased or decreased amounts between T-2 and T are identified.
This validation results in a spreadsheet with timeseries data and cells marked for checking. The problem is that the amounts of waste will often differ strongly over the years. so in many cases there is no real explanation to be found. It just is what it is.
18.4.1. Detailed description of the system for quality control and traceability for packaging waste pursuant to Article 6a(3) and (8) of Directive 94/62/EC
One of the tasks of the inspectorate is to check and control the quality control and traceability of the treatment of packaging waste. This is done in the Netherlands and in facilities abroad treating waste from the Netherlands. This is done to ensure that the treatment is equivalent to the requirements of EU environmental law.
18.4.2. Traceability of waste treated outside the member State and ensuring its treatment in conditions broadly equivalent to the requirements of EU environmental law
Packaging waste material
Subject to final treatment in the Member State (yes/no)
Shipped to another EU Member State (yes/no)
Exported outside the EU (yes/no)
Description of specific measures for quality control and traceability of packaging waste, in particularly as regards monitoring and validation of data
Plastic
Yes
Yes
Yes
See 18.4.1
Wood
Yes
Yes
No
No available
Ferrous metals
Yes
Yes
Yes
See 18.4.1
Aluminium
Yes
Yes
Yes
See 18.4.1
Glass
Yes
Yes
No
Not available
Paper and cardboard
Yes
Yes
Yes
See 18.4.1
Others
Yes
Yes
No
Not available
18.4.3. Description of measures to ensure broadly equivalent waste treatment
To get an approval to ship waste outside the EU information is provided on the treatment abroad. Based on this information it is clear if it is equivalent to the EU.
18.4.4. Verification of data on packaging waste generated
The columns in the table relate to information on verification procedures used within the national statistical reporting system to validate the accuracy of the data.
Packaging waste material
Cross-check (yes/no)
Time-series check (yes/no)
Audit (yes/no)
Verification process
Plastic
Yes
Yes
Yes
The EPR system performs cross-checks in waste management, year to year checks , and does audits ( at least 80 companies belonging to the top 250 of the country),
The inspectorate is responsible for the audits and RWS does checks on general waste statistics and reports (for instance from housholds)
Wood
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above
Ferrous metals
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above
Aluminium
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above
Glass
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above
Paper and cardboard
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above
Others
No
No
No
No available
18.4.5. Verification of data on packaging waste recycling
The columns in the table relate to information on verification procedures used within the national statistical reporting system to validate the accuracy of the data.
Packaging waste material
Cross-check (yes/no)
Time-series check (yes/no)
Audit (yes/no)
Verification process
Plastic
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above 18.4.4
Wood
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above 18.4.4
Ferrous metals
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above 18.4.4
Aluminium
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above 18.4.4
Mixed waste
Yes
Yes
Yes
See above 18.4.4
Others
No
No
No
No
18.5. Data compilation
See details below.
18.5.1. Methods for determining packaging waste generation
Approach
% of waste generated based on this approach
Approach 1 Put on the Market (POM) based on EPR data, complemented with estimates to ensure full coverage of the EPR data
100%
Approach 2 POM based on sources other than EPR (e.g. based on production and import statistics and factors to estimate the amount of packaging associated to these product flows)
Not applicable
Approach 3 Waste analysis
Not applicable
Other approaches
Not applicable
18.5.1.1. Approach 1 - Put on the Market (POM) based on EPR
Primary sources and their shares in the total
Sources for calculation of PoM
% of packaging total covered
Threshold of this source(*)
Total
Plastic
Wood
Ferrous metals
Aluminium
Glass
Paper and Cardboard
Other
EPR scheme data
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
50000 kg packaging per company per year
Administrative reporting different from EPR
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Surveys
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Electronic registry
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Other
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
(*) Necessity of a certain minimum amount of waste, turnover etc. to be registered
18.5.1.2. Approach 2 - Put on the market (POM) calculated from production and reign trade statistics and using coefficients of packaging for the sold goods in question
Primary sources and their shares in the total
Sources for calculation of PoM
% of packaging total covered
Threshold of this source(*)
Total
Plastic
Wood
Ferrous metals
Aluminium
Glass
Paper and Cardboard
Other
Production statistics
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Foreign trade statistics
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Specific surveys
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Electronic registry
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Other
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
(*) Necessity of a certain minimum amount of waste, turnover etc. to be registered.
18.5.1.3. Approach 3 - Waste analysis
Packaging waste generated estimated by waste analysis
Type of waste
Number of samples taken
Total volume or weight of samples taken
What proportion does the sample represent of the total waste generated (in %)
Frequency of sample
Volume in cubic metres
Weight in tonnes
Mixed household and similar waste
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Separately collected municipal waste
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Separately collected business waste
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Others
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
18.5.2. Information on estimates for packaging placed on the market
Producers have a threshold to report POM to stichting afvalfonds verpakkingen of at least 50.000 kg per year. For the producers under this threshold a survey has been done (by the EPR) to get a clear idea of the missing gaps. The data comes from statistical representative research. Further, the weight of certain transport packaging ("logistieke hulpmiddelen" is estimated by the EPR scheme and materials organisations, by questioning pool owners and producers of transport packaging. Here, it's the clearest that the results are estimates.
18.5.3. Presence and calculation of estimates and indication of added volume in % of the total
Packaging waste material
Total
Plastic
Wood
Ferrous metals
Aluminium
Glass
Paper and Cardboard
Other
Validation
Corrections for underreporting of units covered by the above sources
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Estimates for units below the threshold (de minimis)
7%
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
Estimates for other units legally exempt from reporting
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Estimates for freeriders
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Private imports /exports by private parcels
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Private imports /exports (from journeys)
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Internet imports and exports i.e. on-line sales
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Other corrections
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
18.5.4. Measurement points for recycling applied
Packaging waste material
Description of measurement points used (at calculation point or at the output of sorting operation with subtraction of non-target materials as appropriate, end-of-waste criteria, etc.), including variation at regional and local level
Plastic
Output of sorting using ALR
Wood
Output of sorting using ALR
Ferrous metals
Output of sorting using ALR
Aluminium
Output of sorting using ALR
Glass
Output of sorting using ALR
Paper and cardboard
Output of sorting using ALR
Others
Not available
18.5.4.1. Detailed description of the methodology to calculate the amount of non-target materials removed between the measurement and the calculation points, where applicable
Based on a mass balance per treatment operation the amount of non-target materials is indicated for removing them.
18.5.4.2. Detailed description of how compostable packaging recovered at biowaste treatment plants has been identified and recorded in the data
Not applicable.
18.5.5. Methodology to determine recycled amounts from composite packaging or packaging composed of multiple materials
As indicated in 3.1.5 this is especially the case for beverage cartons. Based on the composition of this cartons placed on the market it is clear how the different materials are divided over the different materials. The weight of recycling of beverage cartons is only that of the paper part of this packaging, as the plastic and aluminium were not yet recycled.
18.5.6. Use of Average Loss rates (ALRS)
Description of the sorted packaging waste to which ALRs are applied, types of sorting plants to which different ALRs apply, the methodological approach to calculating ALRs at such point(s), including the statistical accuracy of any surveys used, or the nature of any technical specifications.
Sorted waste material and sorting plant type
ALR applied (in %)
Description
Glass
14%
Average in the range found: 11-17%
Plastics
26%
Average in the range found: 22-30%
Metals
8%
Average in the range found: 6-10%
18.6. Adjustment
Not requested.
18.6.1. Adjustment for impurities and humidity
Factors
Total
Plastic
Wood
Ferrous metals
Aluminium
Glass
Paper and Cardboard
Other
Correction factors for impurities and humidity in % of waste
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
How the correction factors are derived
Not applicable
If no correction of impurities and humidity is applied, how they are accounted
Not applicable
18.6.2. Attribution of waste to packaging and non-packaging types and correction for humidity
Description, where applicable, of the methodology to exclude non-packaging waste from the reported amount of recycled packaging waste and of the methodology to correct the amount of packaging waste at the measurement point in order to reflect the natural humidity rate of packaging (including by using relevant European standards). Aggregated data across facilities of a similar type is acceptable.
Packaging waste material
Facility type
Share of packaging waste (%)
Description of the methodologies applied to obtain the percentage
Plastics
Recyclers
6%
Samples taken from the recyclers, material cleaned and dried. Corrected for weight difference.
Paper
Recyclers
3%
Samples taken from the recyclers and dried. Corrected for weight difference.
18.6.3. Attribution of waste
Description of the methodology to exclude waste originating from other countries, where applicable. Aggregated data across facilities of a similar type is acceptable.
Packaging waste material
Facility type
Share of waste from the Member State (%)
Description of the methodologies applied to obtain the percentage
All
Recyclers
Not available
The quantities of processed packaging reported to the PRO only include Dutch packaging waste. This is tested through protocols and audits.
The data collection and processing has not changed since the previous delivery.
The relationships of the parties/sources to the areas of the Regulation on Waste Statistics are displayed in Table 1.
Table 1: Institutions involved and distribution of tasks
Name of institution
Description of key responsibilities
Statistics Netherlands
Environment Statistics
Collect, process and publish waste statistics;
Survey on municipal waste;
Survey on non-hazardous waste generated by enterprises;
Survey on public waste water treatment facilities;
Survey on discarded vehicles;
Statistics on waste from NACE G-Q, 37-39, 4677.
Rijkswaterstaat
Waste Management Department
Monitoring and formulation National Waste Management Plan;
Statistics on hazardous waste;
Statistics on construction and demolition waste;
Statistics on Agricultural waste;
Maintaining the national database of waste statistics.
Rijkswaterstaat
LMA
Host of the database with national waste transports in the Netherlands.
Rijkswaterstaat
EVOA
Writing permits and registration of transports that fall under the Waste Shipment Regulation.
IenW
Dutch Ministry of infrastructure and Water management
Responsible for national waste policy.
The Dutch Waste Statistics are compiled from a number of different sources using a variety of methodologies. The main legislations that form the basis for the waste policies and data sources are listed below:
The administration and monitoring of all waste is formulated in the National waste management plan;
Some companies are statutory required to publish an environmental performance report (e-PRTR);
Reporting entities are statutory required to deliver data to Statistics Netherlands, by means of the general statistical law of Statistics Netherlands;
Transports of hazardous and non-hazardous waste are statutory required to be registered for enterprises that have a provincial waste permit. These registrations are the basis of the "AMICE"-database from NL Agency;
Transboundary waste transports (except green-listed wastes) are statutory required to be registered under the waste shipment regulation 259/93 [5]. These registrations are the basis of the "DaVinci" database from NL Agency.
27 June 2025
Not available. New concept added with the migration to SIMS 2.0. Information (content) will be available after the next collection.
Enterprise, household, PRO.
All packaging waste reporters.
Netherlands.
Calendar year
Generation of wastes is accurate and forms the basis of the data in the Waste Statistics Regulation. Treatment data is less accurate, due to changes in LoW codes during waste management, mixing, imports and exports.
Tonnes.
See details below.
Assessment of the continuity of the data source, e.g. legal basis for the data source:
The Dutch Waste Statistics are compiled from a number of different sources using a variety of methodologies. The main legislations that form the basis for the waste policies and data sources are listed below:
The administration and monitoring of all waste is formulated in the LAP 2017-2023 (National waste management plan) [1].
Some companies are statutory required to publish an environmental performance report (e-PRTR) [2].
Reporting entities are statutory required to deliver data to Statistics Netherlands [3].
Transports of hazardous and non-hazardous waste are statutorily required to be registered for enterprises that have a provincial waste permit [4]. These registrations are the basis of the “AMICE”-database from NL Agency.
Transboundary waste transports (except green-listed wastes) are statutorily required to be registered under the waste shipment regulation 259/93 [5]. These registrations are the basis of the “DaVinci” database from NL Agency.
Due to changes in legislation and practice, the data sources are subject to changes.
Institutions involved and distribution of tasks
Name of institution
Description of key responsibilities
Statistics Netherlands – Environment Statistics
Collect, process and publish waste statistics
Survey on municipal waste
Statistics on waste from NACE G-Q, 37-39, 4677
Rijkswaterstaat – Waste Management Department
Monitoring and formulation of “LAP 2017-2023” (National Waste Management Plan) Maintaining the national database of waste
Rijkswaterstaat – EVOA
Writing permits and registration of transports that fall under the Waste Shipment Regulation.
IenW - Dutch Ministry of infrastructure and Water management
Main responsible for national waste policy
General description of Data set 1: Waste generation by waste category (EWC-STAT) and economic activity (NACE)
General description of methodology:
General description of methodology
The generation of waste is calculated using a variety of methods and sources. Table 2 gives an overview of the sources and methods used to compile the generated waste. In brief this is:
Non-hazardous waste from NACE 01 to 03
Non-hazardous waste arisings from agriculture and fishing industries were determined by using a model, described at page 14, developed by Van Beusekom and Verbrockhaven [6]. Some parameters in the model were updated in 2008 data [7].
Non-hazardous waste from NACE 06 to 36 and 383
Data is collected using data published in the e-PRTR and supplemented with a sample survey. This is described in more detail at page 7.
Non-hazardous waste from NACE F
All waste arisings in NACE F, except dredging spoils, were determined using the registry of national waste transports (see page 13). For dredging spoils, registrations from the Rijkswaterstaat (ministry of infrastructure and environment) have been used.
Non-hazardous waste from NACE G-U (excl. 46.77), 4677, 37, 381, 382 and 39
The amount of generated non-hazardous waste is estimated by using the notifications in the AMICE database. This method is described in more detail at pages 10 to 13.
Non-hazardous waste from NACE 383
Non-hazardous waste arisings (excluding metallic wastes, combustion wastes and common slugde) were determined by a sample survey described at page 7. Common sludge waste arisings were obtained from a survey conducted by Statistics Netherlands. This survey is described at page 8.
Non-hazardous waste from Secondary wastes
Secondary wastes are obtained using treatment data of some waste streams. This is described in more detail at page 14.
Non-hazardous waste from NACE HH
A survey among all municipalities, described at page 7, is used to determine the waste arisings from households. Waste arisings of discarded equipment is obtained from the WEEE-Directive.
Table 2: Description of methods for determining waste generation
Item
1
2
3
4
…
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
NACE
0102
03
06
07
...
D
36,37,39
38
F
G-U
(ex 4677)
4677
HH
Item
description
1
Spent solvents *
Haz. waste from notification registry
Non-hazardous waste from environmental reports or from sample survey
Hazardous waste from notification registry
Non haz waste:
37 and 39 from notification registry
36 similar to items 3 to 14
Haz. Waste from notification registry; 381 and 382 from notification registry; 383 similar to items 3 to 14
Haz and non-haz waste: from notification registry
Haz and non-haz waste: from notification registry
Haz and non-haz waste: from notification registry
Municipal waste survey
2
Acid, alkaline
...
…
9
Chem. dep. and res.
10
Chem. dep. and res. *
11
Ind. Effluent sludges
12
Ind. Effluent sludges *
13
Health care & …
14
Health care & … *
15
Metallic wastes
16
Metallic wastes *
17
Glass wastes
18
Glass wastes *
19
Paper & cardboard
20
Rubber wastes
1
21
Plastic wastes
22
Wood wastes
23
Wood wastes *
24
Textile wastes
25
Waste cont. PCB *
26
Discarded equip.
2
27
Discarded equip. *
28
Discarded vehicles
National Vehicle Registration Authority
29
Discarded vehicles *
30
Batt. Accum. Waste
Non-haz. wastes derived from waste-modelling
Haz. Waste from notification registry
Haz. Waste from notification registry
Secondary wastes using a model
3
31
Batt. Accum. Waste *
32
Animal & Veg. waste (excl. 33)
33
Animal waste of food prep.
34
Anim. faeces, urine & manure
35
Household & similar wastes
36
Mixed and Undiff. Mater.
…
…
39
Sorting residues *
40
Common sludge (excl. 41)
4
41
Dredging spoils
5
42
Min. Wastes (excl. 44-46)
43
Min. wastes (excl. 44-46) *
44
Combustion wastes
45
Combustion wastes *
..
…
47
Sol. Stab. Vitr. Wastes
48
Sol. Stab. Vitr. Wastes *
Determination of waste generation in the economy on the basis of information on waste collection
The waste statistics are not compiled using information on waste collection.
Determination of waste generation in the economy on the basis of administrative sources
Some statistics on the waste generation are determined using administrative sources. Those statistics are described in the following part.
Table 5 shows the number of linked enterprises in comparison to the number of enterprises in the business register for NACE G-U. It appears that the number of enterprises in the non-response was considerable compared to the number of enterprises in the response. However, the response percentage increases if the enterprises become larger in size. Larger companies are generally expected to generate more waste. This will be beneficial for the accuracy of the statistics. This trend was similar for the other NACE categories (not shown).
For each 2 digit NACE, EWC-stat code, and size class, hereafter referred to as the cell, the following parameters were calculated from the response group.
The amount of waste generated
Total number of enterprises producing waste in general in 2digit NACE and size class for NACE G-U. The other NACE categories were divided into 46771, 46772, 46779, 381, 382, 37 and 39
Number of enterprises producing the specific waste of the cell
Median of waste generation
Total number of enterprises in theNetherlands
Table 5 Coverage of the enterprises in the AMICE database to the business register
4677
Primary waste
Stratum
# enterprises in Netherlands
# enterprises linked to the notification register
1 to 8
1197
489
381-382-37-39
Primary waste
1 to 8
564
331
NACE G-U
Primary waste
1
655972
12672
2
39426
3425
3
19616
2467
4
12112
2020
5
4218
1027
6
2379
739
7
1617
622
8
1086
570
These results have to be interpreted with caution, as some cells can contain unrealistic information. An example of unrealistic data is that production waste is accounted to the financial holding, instead to the production facility. Another observation was that some cells were obvious double countings with waste from waste collection from municipalities. In those cases, all enterprises in the cell were transferred to the non-response. Obvious waste collectors in the NACE G-U, where also excluded from the response. These were:
metal waste in NACE 46722 (Wholesale of metals and metal ores) and 46723 (Wholesale of wood, construction materials and sanitary equipment)
Green wastes (EWC 09.13) from NACE 46216 (wholesale in raw vegetable and animal oil and fat and oil-containing raw materials)
Waste in general from NACE 416 (Wholesale on a fee or contract basis).
If the amount of waste exceeded 5000 kgper employee, the data was excluded from the data set for the wholesale of scrap and waste (4677) sector.
If the amount of waste exceeded 10000 kgper employee, the data was excluded from the data set for the Freight transport by road and removal services (NACE 494)
If the amount of waste exceeded 20000 kgper employee for EWC-stat group Metallic wastes (06), the data was excluded from the data set for NACE codes starting with 4.
For larger companies, another typical phenomenon occurs. It has been observed that not all local units of the kind-of-activity unit are linked to the business register. Waste occuring in these cells are notoriously under covered.
For those reasons, it is evident that statistics have to be made very carefully. Therefore, a suitable method had to be found to determine outliers, but not to delete real deviating data. This was done by calculating the average waste arising in the NACE G-U sector for a EWC-stat code and size class. A robust method appeared to determine the median of the waste arising per employee for each size class, EWC-stat combination. The calculated medians per employee were averaged for each EWC-stat code with excluding obvious outliers. Finally, the median per employee is used to calculate the median in the size class (Mcalc) by multiplying it with the average number of employees in the size-class. This Mcalc represents the average waste arising for a size class for a EWC-stat code per enterprise, and was used to correct for non-response if the waste factors in the cell were unrealistic.
Then, an assumption is made how often the waste is expected to arise in the 2d NACE. This information is applied to determine the number of enterprises in the non-response group. Three waste patterns were distinguished. For common wastes, like household waste and paper waste, it has been assumed that the waste occurs in all enterprises. Thus, the business register has been taken as the population. Non-response was subsequently determined by subtracting the number of enterprises in the response (Nresponse) from the number of enterprises in the Netherlands (Nenterprises in NL). The non-reponse was multiplied by the median, as seen in equation 1. The median of the cell (Mcell), however, could display unrealistic data, as mentioned before. To prevent unrealistic extrapolations, the value of the Mcell has been compared to the median of the whole sector (Mcalc). If Mcell deviated more than 2 times smaller/larger than Mcalc, the Mcell is rejected and Mcalc is used to estimate for non-response.
Wnon-resp = Median * (Nenterprises in NL – Nenterprises in response) (1)
For less common wastes, but still typical for the sector, we assumed that only a fraction of the companies produce the waste. This could be, for instance, rubber waste in wholesale and retail trade and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles (NACE 45). The fraction that produces the waste has been chosen by a guess of ourselves of 10, 20, 30 or 50% of the enterprises. The other steps in the procedure were similar as described for equation 1. This leads to equation 2.
Wnon-resp = (Nenterprises in NL – Nenterprises in response) * Fraction * Median (2)
The non-response was set to zero for incidental waste streams, such as metal waste in telecommunication (equation 3). Extrapolation for those wastes is expected to be unrealistic.
Wnon-resp = 0 (3)
Then the total waste arisings are calculated with equation 4.
W = Wnon-resp + Wresp (4)
Data sets 2 and 3: Waste treatment
General description of methodology:
For paper recycling, recycling figures of the sector association were used. For ferrous metal recycling, data were obtained from the two largest ferrous metal manufacturers. For all other wastes, statistics on the treatment of waste in theNetherlandshas been determined via waste generation, since we do not have questionnaires on all recycling facilities. Imports of waste have been added up to this and exports are subtracted (see equation 5).
Several data sources were used to determine import and export amounts.
For the orange and red-listed wastes, import and export were taken from the Waste Shipment Regulation [5].
For green listed wastes imports and exports were obtained using the AMICE database and international trade. For a complete description how this has been done, see section on the import and export on green listed waste on pages 18 and 19.
Then, an average treatment of waste has been made for each Eural code. This has been done via empirical data of waste notifications and assumptions. This average treatment of waste was in line with the generated secondary wastes.
In practice three scenarios were calculated:
In case the waste is directly subjected to final treatment, the amount that is generated is simply added to the imports and exports are subtracted to determine the treatment of that waste (according to equation 5). The secondary wastes that arise during final treatment are added to the generation. Those secondary wastes are also accounted in the treatment table.
If wastes are subjected to pre-treatment, such as glass wastes, the secondary wastes that arise during sorting are added to the secondary wastes (metals, plastics, paper, and so on). The cleaned waste material (glass in the example) is not double counted. The secondary wastes are also accounted in the treatment table. The remaining glass that is final treated, is assumed to be recycled. Only, the impurities that were separated during pre-treatment are subtracted from the treatment (see equation 6).
Treatment of glass = Generation of glass waste – secondary wastes + imports – exports (6).
For some wastes, the waste is treated via various treatment channels. For instance, in some regions in the Netherlands, the household waste is directly incinerated (scenario 1). However, for other regions it is sorted (pre-treated) prior to final treatment (scenario 2). This is divided according to the previous scenarios.
The total amount of treated waste is researched independently by enquiring the disposal, incineration, and composting facilities in the Netherlands [10]. The outcomes of equation 6 are consistent with the value in that publication.
Identification of relevant treatment facilities:
Treatment facilities have been identified using:
Companies within category NACE 383 in the business register.
Memberships of sector associations.
Report from the study group waste treatment registration.
Additional researches (e.g. internet).
Data collection on treated quantities:
The sources and methods used to compile the statistics on waste treatment are listed below.
Registry of waste treatment
Source Waste Management Department
Treatment All treatment methods
This registry contains data how each type of waste is treated on average. That is to say, waste item “a” is treated as: x % R1, y % R2, etc. For each waste item, the data is updated every 3 to 5 years. The information is gathered from several sources. Industry reports, transport notifications and assumptions.
Determination of treated waste quantities
Description of data sources and methods by treatment category
Item 1 Incineration (R1)
Treatment quantities of generated waste are determined by linking the registry of waste treatment to the generated waste from Annex I (see equation 5)
The numbers are corrected for the import and export to obtain the treated waste quantities in the nation (see equation 6).
For metal, glass, paper and household waste, data on treated waste is obtained form sector associations or other sources.
The total amount of composted, incinerated, disposed waste is taken from a report [10].
Item 2 Incineration (D10)
Item 3a Recycling (R2 – R11)
Item 3b Backfilling
Item 4 Landfilling (D1, D5, D12)
Item 5 Other disposal (D2,D3,D4, D6,D7)
Data collection on capacity of treatment facilities:
Capacities of the treatment facilities are obtained from the report by the study group waste treatment registration [10]. These involve landfills, incineration facilities, and composting facilities. For some disposal methods, however, the capacities are less straightforward to determine, such as the use of secondary materials for road filling (R5), and disposal of dredging spoils at sea (D6). These capacities have not been determined for that reason.
The data is disseminated on a yearly basis.
The planning outined below is indicative of the reception, processing and availability of data. The availability of the database from Waste Shipment Regulation is inconsistent and a source of uncertainty for a timely delivery, mainly due to the time it takes to bring the database up to date with current data. With great effort we have been able to deliver the data in time. In earlier years, the final processing of the data (determining treatment) and construction and demolition waste arisings were severely delayed.
T
T+1[year]
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Municipal waste survey
Sending questionnaire
Yes
Collecting questionnaires
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Data processing
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Manual check of the data
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Final data analysis and evaluation
Yes
Data tabulation and publication
Yes
Survey on waste generated by waste incinerators
Publication
Yes
Secondary Waste
Determine sec. wastes in model
Yes
Waste from NACE G-U, 37, 381, 382, 39, 4677
Linking database to business register
Yes
Yes
Extracting primary wastes
Yes
Yes
Determining non-response + data processing
Yes
Yes
Import, export, treatment of green listed wasteYes
Collecting International trade data (microlevel)
Yes
Collecting waste transports to industry using AMICE
Yes
Collecting imp/exp from AMICE register
Yes
Integrating registers (avoiding double counting)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Determining Treatment in the Netherlands
Yes
Yes
Waste Statistics Regulation
Collecting information and evaluation
Yes
Yes
Yes
Publication
Yes
Yes
Not applicable.
Changes compared with previous years:
Legal basis of AMICE
The legal basis for reporting to the AMICE database is constantly changing. This implies that for some types of waste reporting or sectors can stop or start after a legal amendment. It is unclear how this affects data quality.
Foreseen changes:
For 2014 and 2015, it was planned to change data gathering for waste from manufacturing from paper questionnaires to an online survey for a pilot group of companies. The enterprises had to fill in exactly the same data as before. However, only submit the data online.
Specific issues concerning the data collection on the current reference year:
Reported waste categories
In the survey on manufacturing waste and waste from services, the introduction of new categories had an influence on the correction for the non-response. In general, the EWC-stat category 10.2 was mostly influenced and increased. In the food manufacturing industry, animal and vegetal wastes were affected. In paper industry, this affected paper and cardboard wastes and chemical wastes. For chemical industry, animal and vegetable wastes were affected, and in the metal industry, this was mainly mineral and chemical wastes. Also, some Eural codes of several companies were changed in the statistical process, to ensure that the waste was allocated to the right EWC-stat category.
Backfilling
For this WstatR we have defined backfilling as deposition of waste in mines. With this definition, there is no back-filling in theNetherlands. There is, however, export of wastes that are back filled elsewhere.
Detailed description and consequences:
Comparability over time
Due to a change of data sources, dredging spoils arisings are not comparable from 2006 to 2008. And from 2008 to 2010.
Due to methodological changes, treatment data from the green listed wastes (EWC 06, 07 and 09) were not comparable from 2008 to 2010. We had hoped to streamline the method retrospectively later in 2012.
Due to methodological changes, the method to estimate secondary wastes has changed in 2010 compared to 2008. This affects all waste arisings in NACE 38 and NACE 4677. This has been retrospectively adjusted for reference years.
When we have finalized all the revisions, we hope to be able to do a delivery in Eural codes, as was asked by Eurostat.
