|
|
For any question on data and metadata, please contact: Eurostat user support |
|
|||
1.1. Contact organisation | Danish Environmental Protection Agency |
||
1.2. Contact organisation unit | Circular Economy and Waste |
||
1.5. Contact mail address | Tolderlundsvej 5, 5000 Odense C |
|
||||||||||||
2.1. Data description | ||||||||||||
Data on generation and treatment of waste is drawn from the Danish Waste Data System. The system was introduced in April 2010 and all waste collectors, treatment facilities, importers and exporters of waste are obliged to submit their data to the system. Data on number and capacity of treatment disposal and incineration facilities is from a yearly survey done by the Danish Energy Agency. Data on recycling facilities is from the Waste Data System. |
||||||||||||
2.2. Classification system | ||||||||||||
Not available. |
||||||||||||
2.3. Coverage - sector | ||||||||||||
Not available. |
||||||||||||
2.4. Statistical concepts and definitions | ||||||||||||
Not available. |
||||||||||||
2.5. Statistical unit | ||||||||||||
Not available. |
||||||||||||
2.6. Statistical population | ||||||||||||
Not available. |
||||||||||||
2.7. Reference area | ||||||||||||
Not available. |
||||||||||||
2.8. Coverage - Time | ||||||||||||
Not available. |
||||||||||||
2.9. Base period | ||||||||||||
Not available. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.1. Source data | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
General description of Data set 1: Waste generation by waste category (EWC-STAT) and economic activity (NACE)
Data sets 2 and 3: Waste treatment
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.2. Frequency of data collection | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.3. Data collection | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.4. Data validation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Data has been benchmarked with previous years, regionally and with external data. Among others following quality checks are conducted:
The quality checks are done as an on-going process all year, this means they are not only done in relation to the WSTATR. When mistakes or missing has been identified by the EPA the reporter or the waste producer(s) are contacted and the mistake is corrected in cooperation. Corrections are directly incorporated into database for the Danish waste data system. Since the start of the Danish waste data system the reported data to the system has improved significantly. In spite of the improvements and the on-going data quality checks data can still contain mistakes and omissions. Data in the Danish waste data system consists of approx. 100.000 waste producers, 800 reporters and several million records (2020) – each year reporters improve their reporting quality, which makes it possible for the EPA to deal with even further and more complicated reporting mistakes each year. Changes compared with previous yearsAll waste data reported for 2010 is based on an estimation and cannot be directly compared to later years. This is due to the implementation of the current Waste Data System in 2010. Data quality regarding generation and treatment has been updated significant in 2016. This update can result in major changes compared to previous years. Data for 2014 and before will be updated also. There has been a methodological change regarding the reporting of treatment. There are unfortunately major uncertainties related to the reporting of final treatment to Danish waste data system at the moment, which also have been the case previous years. Due to these uncertainties the waste treatment data was based on the reports of generated waste. In the 2014 reporting for treatment there has been made a methodological change, which means treatment of imported waste amounts has been added to treatment of the generated waste amounts in Denmark. Afterwards exported waste amounts are excluded from treated amounts. 2012 has been updated with the same methodology. The amount of soil has increased in 2016, which is related to construction of infrastructure in Denmark. In 2020, the data source regarding the number of incineration and disposal facilities in Denmark and their capacity has been changed to use the yearly BEATE survey done by the Danish Energy Agency. In 2018 we changed the way organic waste was reported to Danish Waste Data System, by splitting the previous Danish waste data code regarding organic waste into two codes. This change was aimed at improving the quality of data regarding food waste, but also affected data regarding manure. During the quality assurence proces for 2018 data organic waste was selected as a focus area for that data year. The low values of manure waste in the time period 2010 - 2016 is partly due to implementation of the new Waste Data System in 2010 and partly due to difficulties getting the correct data from the farming industry. If mineral waste is considered to be too contaminated by different materials to be recycled, but does not contain hazardous material requiring disposal, it is usually used for energy recovery. In 2022 the EPA has discovered issues regarding the reporting of construction and demolition waste, including mineral waste and is looking further into this issues. At this point it is unknown if the issues affect 2020 data and earlier. Glass waste reported as energy reocvery is mainly due to incorrect reporting from the waste collectors. This is a known issue and it is a focus area of our quality assurance process. The data quality has improved significantly since 2012. The variation in waste from G4677 and textile waste from households can't be found in our own data. There is an increase in textile waste 2018, where we introduced a new code in our national waste codes, but before and after it is fairly stable. The improvement in data quality also means, the variation in waste the C19 industry has decreased. The waste generation from this industry was higher in 2016 compared to other years, but has stabilised in recent years. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.5. Data compilation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.6. Adjustment | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|
|||
4.1. Quality assurance | |||
Not available. |
|||
4.2. Quality management - assessment | |||
[not requested] |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5.1. Relevance - User Needs | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5.3. Completeness | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5.3.1. Data completeness - rate | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.1. Accuracy - overall | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.2. Sampling error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.2.1. Sampling error - indicators | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3. Non-sampling error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.1. Coverage error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1)Please mark with an X whether the listed materials are completely covered, partially covered or generally excluded from waste statistics. Denmarkdoes not contain any mining facilities and only a few very small quarries. We do, however, not collect data from these facilities at current.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.1.1. Over-coverage - rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.1.2. Common units - proportion | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.2. Measurement error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The waste handlers must report their data in tonnes to the Waste Data System. However, many reported in kilos instead of tonnes in 2010. We have checked all waste handlers that reported more than 100.000 tonnes in 2010 and corrected any kilo/tonnes mistakes. In total data from 67 waste handlers was checked for correct reporting of amounts. Starting with 2011-data, correct reporting of waste types, treatment, final treatment and source will be a part of our quality assurance. A check on waste handlers that have not reported to the system will also be done for the purpose of getting them to submit their data. The waste system was operational from April 2010. The waste handlers were therefore instructed to only deliver data from April 2010 and onwards (9 months). Many waste handlers have submitted data for the whole year. From the data of the 67 waste handlers we checked, about half submitted data for 12 months and the other half for 9 months. We have therefore assumed that all waste handlers that reported to Waste Data System in average covered 10½ months of 2010. We have therefore multiplied all data with a factor 12/10.5 = 1.14. This is a problem for 2010-data only as waste handlers must report for the whole year from 2011 and onwards. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.3. Non response error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We know that not all waste handlers that are obliged to submit data has done so. We will use data from 2011 as a supplement to 2010-data and revise our 2010-data later this year. We estimate that around 200-300 collectors and treatment facilities did not submit data for 2010. This has a significant impact on the 2010-amounts reported and actual waste generation and treatment is estimated to be considerably higher. As we finish the quality assurance of 2011 we will have a better idea of the impact of the missing waste handlers on waste amounts. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.3.1. Unit non-response - rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.3.2. Item non-response - rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.4. Processing error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Waste handlers must submit their data from the previous year. They can either enter the data manually, by a csv-file import or a system-to-system solution, which continuously submits data to the Waste Data System through the year. A check is carried out automatically by the Waste Data System to detect any errors in data structure in csv and system-to-system reports. The list of reporters to the Waste Data System is cross checked with lists of waste handlers that should have reported and reminders are sent out to the waste handlers missing. For 2010 not all waste handlers have submitted their data, which results in underestimation of the amounts of waste. The received data is validated by the EPA. For 2010, waste handlers that submitted data of more than 100,000 tonnes were checked to discover any kilo/tonnes mistakes. Waste types and treatment type were not subject to quality assurance in 2010, but will be for 2011 and onwards. Therefore waste types and treatment of waste have a high degree of uncertainty. The NACE category is given by the production-number of the producer of the waste, which the waste handlers must report. However in 2010 quite a few waste handlers reported themselves to be producers of the waste either by mistake or because they did not record the production-number of the waste producers. The waste without production-number/NACE-code has been distributed on the NACE-codes via the LoW-codes of the reported waste. Waste handlers must mark household waste with a Danish set of codes. For 2010 we have not assessed how much household waste actually originates from businesses. However, the quality assurance of 2011 will include assessment of the correct use of the Danish household codes. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.4.1. Imputation - rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.3.5. Model assumption error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
When calculating the primary amounts of waste, primary waste produced by waste handlers is not included. However, we estimate that this is a small amount with less significance for the datasets. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.4. Seasonal adjustment | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.5. Data revision - policy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] [not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.6. Data revision - practice | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6.6.1. Data revision - average size | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|
|||
7.1. Timeliness | |||
Data is reported yearly to the Danish Waste Data System. |
|||
7.1.1. Time lag - first result | |||
[not requested] |
|||
7.1.2. Time lag - final result | |||
[not requested] |
|||
7.2. Punctuality | |||
|
|||
7.2.1. Punctuality - delivery and publication | |||
[not requested] |
|
|||||||||||||||
8.1. Comparability - geographical | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
8.1.1. Asymmetry for mirror flow statistics - coefficient | |||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||
8.2. Comparability - over time | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
8.2.1. Length of comparable time series | |||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||
8.3. Coherence - cross domain | |||||||||||||||
Apart from assigning waste according to the LoW, the waste handlers must also assign the waste according to a Danish set of waste type codes, divided into waste fractions from businesses or households. The Danish waste type codes will form the basis for our national statistics. [not requested] |
|||||||||||||||
8.4. Coherence - sub annual and annual statistics | |||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||
8.5. Coherence - National Accounts | |||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|||||||||||||||
8.6. Coherence - internal | |||||||||||||||
[not requested] |
|
|||
9.1. Dissemination format - News release | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.2. Dissemination format - Publications | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.3. Dissemination format - online database | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.3.1. Data tables - consultations | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.4. Dissemination format - microdata access | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.5. Dissemination format - other | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.6. Documentation on methodology | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.7. Quality management - documentation | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.7.1. Metadata completeness - rate | |||
[not requested] |
|||
9.7.2. Metadata - consultations | |||
[not requested] |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
11.1. Confidentiality - policy | |||
|
|||
11.2. Confidentiality - data treatment | |||
[not requested] |
|
|||
- |
|
|||
|
|||