WR1403-L4-m2-Case-Studies

Transcription

WR1403: Business Waste Prevention
Evidence Review
L4m2 – Case Studies
A report for
Defra
November 2011
This report has been prepared by:
Dan Eatherley (lead author)
Checked as a final copy by:
Katie Deegan
Reviewed by:
David Parker
Date:
20 October 2011
Contact:
david.parker@oakdenehollins.co.uk
File reference number:
WR1403-L4-m2-Case-Studies.docx
Oakdene Hollins provides clients with these services:
● Modelling and impact assessment
● Programme management and evaluation
● Project management
● Ecolabelling advice
● Carbon footprinting
● Critical review of life cycle assessment
● Policy and strategy development
● Lean manufacturing
● Economic analysis
● Market appraisal.
For more information visit www.oakdenehollins.co.uk
Oakdene Hollins is registered to ISO 9001:2008
We print our reports on Ecolabel / recycled paper
The original reports referenced in this
document are permanently and freely
available through our infinifile® service.
Visit www.infinifile.org.uk and use Project
ID 246 and the document id appended to
the bibliographic reference to retrieve.
Conditions apply.
WR1403: Business Waste Prevention Evidence Review
L4m2: Case Studies
Context of Project WR1403
Waste prevention is at the top of the waste hierarchy. A major priority of the coalition government is to
move towards a zero waste economy, and an important element of this will be to encourage and increase
waste prevention. This review aims to map and collate the available evidence on business waste
prevention. It will help inform the preparation of England’s National Waste Prevention Programme as
required under the revised EU Waste Framework Directive (2008).
The focus is on aspects of waste prevention that are influenced directly or indirectly by businesses - it
complements a previous evidence review, WR1204, which focused on household waste prevention. The
definition of the term ‘waste prevention’ used here is that in the revised Waste Framework Directive:
‘Prevention’ means measures taken before a substance, material or product has become waste, that
reduce:
a) the quantity of waste, including through the re-use of products or the extension of the life span
of products;
a) the adverse impacts of the generated waste on the environment and human health; or
b) the content of harmful substances in materials and products.
Recycling activities or their promotion are outside the scope of this review.
Context of this Module
This module is one of a number of Level 4 modules that comprise technical annexes to the Level 2
modules. This module deals specifically with the aspect of Case Studies which illustrate diverse aspects of
waste prevention Approaches and Interventions in various Sectors, including those six chosen for the
core of this review. These Case Studies may appear in identical form in the individual modules dealing
with relevant facets.
A full index to the report modules may be found in L1m2: Report Index, which also provides an overview
of the analysis framework.
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
Contents
Case studies tabulated by intervention
1
1
Toyota and ISO 14001
4
2
Germany’s Blue Angel ecolabel
5
3
Manchester United & Danwood
6
4
The Carrier Bag Commitment
7
5
Business resource efficiency (BRE) campaign
8
6
Japan’s Top Runner programme
9
7
The Dorset Resource Efficiency Club (REC)
10
8
Achmea Parts Service and the RESPECT project
11
9
Plot-lot ordering systems co-ordinated by Wilson James
12
10
Waste reduction by apetito
13
11
Waste prevention at McDonald’s Restaurants
14
12
Oregon packaging waste prevention pilot project: Norm Thompson Outfitters
15
13
Remanufacturing by Caterpillar
16
14
Ernst & Young’s UK waste reduction programme
17
15
Off-site manufacture in supermarket refits
18
16
Surplus food redistribution by FareShare
19
17
London 2012 Olympic Games development
20
18
East Anglian Waste Minimisation in the Food and Drink Industry project
21
19
Standard Life goes paperless
22
20
Envision
23
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
21
The Food & Drink Federation’s Five-fold Ambition
24
22
HazRed
25
23
Quebec’s Enviroclub Initiative
26
24
Waste prevention by Xerox
27
25
Waste prevention by Marks and Spencer
28
26
Bibliography
29
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
Language used in this report
This report has used a framework for evaluating both the actions a business takes to prevent waste (the
Approaches), and the mechanisms that have catalysed the actions (the Interventions). The detailed
description of Approaches and Interventions may be found within the respective modules L2m2:
Approaches and L2m4-0: Interventions Introduction, but a brief reference outline to the Approaches is
given here:
Positioning of approaches in response to business drivers including waste
Process
Incremental CHANGE Radical
“supply side” 
FOCUS
Product Performance
Drivers
 “demand side”
Clean Operations:
More radical restructuring of
processes “new, green, clean”,
often cooperating with others
in the supply chain.
Waste Minimisation:
Traditional in-process
housekeeping, including Lean,
to improve conversion of input
to outputs within current
production system.
Product-Service
Innovation:
Fundamental redesign of the
product and service
combination of a business or its
suppliers to reduce life-cycle
impacts.
Green Products:
Redesign, eco-design, lightweighting of products to reduce
impact in manufacture ,
distribution, use or end-of-life
by businesses or consumers.
Source: Oakdene Hollins/Brook Lyndhurst
Key
In the following tables, a strong, primary association with the indicated Intervention or Sector is denoted
by “XX” and the Case Study will also appear within the indicated Sector module. “X” denotes a weaker or
secondary relevance and the Case Study may also appear in the indicated Sector module dependent on
the weight of other illustrative materials.
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
Case studies tabulated by intervention
L2m4-1 Standards
12
17
22
Japan’s Top Runner
programme
Oregon packaging waste
prevention pilot project:
Norm Thompson Outfitters
London 2012 Olympic Games
Development
HazRed
X
X
X
X
XX
XX
X
X
X
X
X
XX
Green
Products
X
X
X
XX
XX
Clean
Operations
Waste
Minimisation
Office
Automotive
Hospitality
Retail
X
Hazard
Reduction
6
Approaches
Innovation
1
Case Study
Food & Drink
Ref
Construction
& Demolition
Sectors L2m5-1…6
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
L2m4-2 Labelling
X
2
X
X
X
X
X
X
Hazard
Reduction
XX
Hazard
Reduction
X
Innovation
X
Innovation
Office
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Green
Products
Automotive
X
Green
Products
Hospitality
programme
Case Study
Clean
Operations
Retail
6
Ref
Waste
Minimisation
Food & Drink
Approaches
Construction
& Demolition
Sectors L2m5-1…6
X
X
L2m4-3 Procurement
3
12
15
16
Manchester United &
Danwood
Off-site manufacture in
supermarket refits
Surplus food redistribution by
FareShare
17
Development
22
24
HazRed
Waste prevention by Xerox
25
Waste prevention by Marks &
Spencer
For Defra
XX
XX
XX
X
XX
XX
X
X
X
XX
X
X
XX
Clean
Operations
Waste
Minimisation
Office
Approaches
Automotive
Hospitality
Retail
Case Study
Food & Drink
Ref
Construction
& Demolition
Sectors L2m5-1…6
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XX
X
XX
X
X
X
X
1
L4m2: Case Studies
L2m4-4 Intervention – Commitments
20
Envision
21
The Food & Drink
Federation’s Five-fold
Ambition
25
Waste prevention by Marks &
Spencer
X
XX
X
X
XX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Hazard
Reduction
Waste
Minimisation
Office
Automotive
Hospitality
Retail
XX
Innovation
17
Development
XX
Green
Products
10
The Carrier Bag
Commitments
Approaches
Clean
Operations
4
Case Study
Food & Drink
Ref
Construction
& Demolition
Sectors L2m5-1…6
X
X
X
XX
XX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
L2m4-5 Intervention – Communications
5
X
X
XX
XX
X
X
X
X
20
Envision
X
X
X
XX
X
X
23
Quebec’s Enviroclub Initiative
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Hazard
Reduction
Innovation
Waste
Minimisation
Office
Automotive
Hospitality
Retail
XX
Green
Products
The Carrier Bag Commitments
Business resource efficiency
(BRE) campaign
Approaches
Clean
Operations
4
Case Study
Food & Drink
Ref
Construction
& Demolition
Sectors L2m5-1…6
X
L2m4-6 Incentives
2
X
X
X
X
XX
X
Green
Products
Innovation
X
X
X
Hazard
Reduction
Clean
Operations
XX
Waste
Minimisation
Office
6
programme
Approaches
Automotive
The Carrier Bag Commitments
Hospitality
4
Retail
Case Study
Food & Drink
Ref
Construction
& Demolition
Sectors L2m5-1…6
X
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
L2m4-7 Business Support – Waste Minimisation Clubs
18
23
Quebec’s Enviroclub
Initiative
XX
X
Hazard
Reduction
Innovation
XX
Green
Products
XX
Clean
Operations
X
Waste
Minimisation
XX
Office
X
Approaches
Automotive
Hospitality
The Dorset Resource
Efficiency Club (REC) Business Support
East Anglian Waste
Minimisation in the Food and
Drink Industry Project
Retail
7
Case Study
Food & Drink
Ref
Construction
& Demolition
Sectors L2m5-1…6
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
L2m4-8 Business Support – Other
Envision
X
X
Green Products
X
X
X
Clean
Operations
Waste
Minimisation
Automotive
Hospitality
Retail
Office
X
XX
X
Hazard
Reduction
20
XX
Hazard Reduction
12
XX
Innovation
10
Achmea Parts Service and
the RESPECT project
Approaches
Innovation
8
Case Study
Food & Drink
Ref
Construction
& Demolition
Sectors L2m5-1…6
XX
X
X
X
X
None (Voluntary)
X
X
X
XX
13
Remanufacturing by Caterpillar
14
Ernst & Young’s UK waste
reduction programme
XX
19
Standard Life goes paperless
XX
For Defra
Waste
Minimisation
Office
Automotive
Hospitality
Retail
XX
Green Products
11
Plot-lot ordering systems
coordinated by Wilson James
Waste prevention at
McDonald’s Restaurants
Approaches
Clean Operations
9
Case Study
Food & Drink
Ref
Construction &
Demolition
Sectors
XX
X
X
X
3
L4m2: Case Studies
1
The automotive manufacturer Toyota has a strong presence in Europe with nine production facilities in the UK,
France, Poland, Czech Republic, Russia, Turkey and Portugal representing a total investment of around €7bn. In
1996, Toyota Manufacturing UK (TMUK) became the first UK based car maker to gain ISO 14001 accreditation for
its management processes, later asking suppliers to gain the certification by 2003. In 2000, TMUK’s sites at
Burnaston and Deeside were earmarked as ‘model sustainable plants’ in which methodologies for achieving
optimal environmental performance would be piloted. TMUK set a goal of zero waste to landfill by 2005, tackling
it in three stages: reducing waste volume, reusing or recycling unavoidable waste, and treating any waste that
could not be re-used or recycled to reduce its environmental impact.
Business Benefits
TMUK has achieved its target of zero waste to landfill and, more recently, zero waste to incineration.
Between 1993 and 2007, TMUK cut waste from UK car production by 60% to around 10kg per car and
2
reduced the release of hazardous volatile organic compounds by 70% to 20g per m of paint surface.
However, whether these savings were directly correlated to the adoption of ISO 14001 is unclear. Greater
efficiencies in water and electricity usage per vehicle have also been documented.
Other benefits from implementing and maintaining an EMS may include marketing advantages by
demonstrating to stakeholders that the company is committed to effective environmental management
and reduced risk of international non-tariff trade barriers.
Drivers
The EMS was implemented as part of Toyota’s commitment to achieve zero waste to landfill. The car
maker is generally regarded as setting benchmark standards in ‘lean’ manufacturing, in other words
production processes in which waste and inefficiency are continuously driven towards minimal levels.
Toyota Motor Europe’s aim is to be ‘green, clean and lean’ and its long-term objective, as stated in its
corporate ‘Earth Charter’ is production of the ‘ultimate eco-car’.
Key Elements for Success
Toyota is famous for its ‘kaizen’ philosophy of continuous improvement where new ideas are welcomed
from anywhere within the global organisation. This approach works in synergy with ISO 14001 for which
continuous environmental improvement is a key objective. New waste saving techniques are first proven
at a local level within a single site and if effective the relevant procedures are then diffused to the rest of
that particular location and then by degrees to the rest of the business.
Through its environmental purchasing guidelines, Toyota used its power in the supply chain to influence
business partners so that they make environmental protection a priority.
Full commitment by top management to environmental protection is fundamental to the successful
implementation of an EMS.
Provision of skills training and awareness building is important. A valuable approach practised at the
Burnaston plant was to take employees on ‘eco tours’ around parts of the factory they would not normally
see such as the waste management facility which improved their understanding of waste.
Sources: (11)
http://www.iema.net/readingroom/casestudies?filter=163%2C189&aid=584;
http://blog.toyota.co.uk/behind-the-scenes-toyota-promotes-environmental-excellence-at-the-home-of-auris-hybrid;
http://www.iso.org/iso/14001_decade_ims3_07.pdf
http://www.mrcmekong.org/envir_training_kit/English/Case%20Studies/PDF/CS19%20-%20Toyota%20Motor%20Vietnam.pdf
4
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
2
Established in 1978, Germany’s Blue Angel (Blaue Engel) was among the world’s first ecolabels. Owned by the
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, it serves as a ‘ecological beacon’
marking out to the consumer those products which demonstrate environmentally superior performance. In 2009,
the Blue Angel was divided into four classes depending on whether a product primarily protects the climate,
health, water or – most relevant to waste prevention - resources. The scheme has several product groups
addressing waste prevention including returnable transit and primary packaging. With the latter, the place of
refilling may also be included enabling consumers to select those products with shorter transportation distances.
Business Benefits
As with other ecolabels, products awarded the Blue Angel label may enjoy a market advantage over nonlabelled competitors among consumers who are interested in purchasing environmentally-friendly
products. A study found that 63% of companies displaying the Blue Angel on their products experienced
some improvement in their market position.
Drivers
A study in Germany found that environmental labelling received a positive response from 91% of
customers. The most frequent reasons given for companies applying for the Blue Angel ecolabel were to
respond to competition and to improve the marketability of the product.
The Blue Angel label may also boost business-to-business sales, as guidelines used by procurement
managers may favour such accreditations.
The Blue Angel ecolabel is guaranteed by, among others, the Environmental Label Jury, the German Federal
Ministry for the Environment and the Federal Environment Agency.
The label’s extremely wide coverage is another success factor. Today 11,500 products and services in 90
categories offered by 1,050 companies display the Blue Angel.
Sources: (2)
http://www.blauer-engel.de/en/index.php
http://www.globalecolabelling.net/pdf/gen7.pdf
http://www.blauer-engel.de/_downloads/publikationen/english/The-Blue-Angel-at-a-Glance.pdf
For Defra
5
L4m2: Case Studies
3
Manchester United & Danwood
In 2005 Manchester United Football Club (MUFC) asked Danwood, its main supplier of office printing equipment
and document management solutions, to help reduce its waste impacts. Danwood conducted a thorough print
audit across the Manchester United campus and discovered that two-thirds of its customer’s 150 printers and
photocopiers could be removed through the deployment of multifunctional products able to scan, email, fax,
photocopy and duplex print. Danwood’s business model was based on a fixed price per print backed up with a
single quarterly invoice. Danwood also provided the club with a used toner cartridge recycling service.
Business Benefits
MUFC saw a 15% year on year cost saving despite an increase in printing activity.
Much of the benefit came in the form of energy efficiency savings, but waste was also prevented through a
significant reduction in the number of appliances which needed to be disposed of.
Drivers
As a high-profile business, MUFC first developed a CSR policy in 1989, and its work with Danwood is just
one of many efforts to mitigate its environmental impacts.
The football club’s philosophy of being “the best, both off and on the field” was applied to its
environmental performance.
MUFC’s membership of Envirowise’s Supply Chain Partnership Forum added impetus to the initiative. The
objective of the Forum, which operated from 2002 to 2007, was to drive down waste in supply chains by
engaging with leading British brands. Other members included Boots, CenterParcs and Halfords.
As part of the Supply Chain Partnership Forum Envirowise provided free consultancy support to Danwood.
The delivery body estimated that as well as streamlining MUFC’s printing operations, Danwood itself could
save more than £9,300 per annum by eliminating or reducing plastic and cardboard packaging.
A close working relationship between MUFC and Danwood is important.
Sources: (30)
http://www.danwood.co.uk/documents/3020%20manchester%20united%20case%20study[1].pdf
6
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
4
The Carrier Bag Commitment
Twenty-one leading retailers committed in 2007 to reduce by 25% the environmental impact of their carrier bags.
WRAP monitored the agreement which was made between businesses and the Government. The target, to be
met by the end of 2008 against a 2006 baseline, was exceeded with a 40% reduction. The number of carrier bags
issued was cut by 26%, their recycled content was increased and their average weight reduced. Seven
supermarket chains entered into a further agreement to halve the number of single-use carrier bags issued by
spring 2009, against a 2006 baseline. The second target was only narrowly missed - a 48% reduction was
achieved. However, the overall weight of single use bags was cut by 56%, while virgin polymer content fell by
65%. Specific actions taken by signatories include charging for single-use bags, removing them from view, selling
‘bags for life’ to customers and offering bagless home deliveries via online shopping.
Business Benefits
Data on the financial benefits from issuing fewer bags are strictly confidential but retailers are likely to have
made significant savings.
The ‘CSR value’ of being seen to help customers help the environmental is a less tangible but important
benefit.
Drivers
The retail sector felt that signing up to the Commitment would avoid the alternative of the UK Government
introducing a ban or taxation as in other countries (e.g. Ireland).
The opportunity to reduce costs through avoided landfill tax was also a motivator.
Support for the Carrier Bag Commitment from two trade bodies, the British Retail Consortium and the
Packaging and Film Association, was important.
While progress towards the global targets was monitored and published by WRAP, individual retailer
performance was kept strictly confidential.
In-store materials, slogans and loyalty schemes devised by signatories engaged customers to reuse carrier
bags.
Signatories trained their staff to discuss the issue of carrier bags with customers.
Sources: (37) (6) (4) (8) (40)
Sources:
For Defra
7
L4m2: Case Studies
5
Business resource efficiency (BRE) campaign
Launched in 2009, BRE was a Defra-led nationwide initiative aimed at effecting long term behaviour change in
businesses with fewer than ten employees (micro SMEs). Other Government departments involved were Business,
Innovation & Skills and the Department of Energy and Climate Change. The BRE campaign consisted of ‘top ten
tips’ on waste, water and energy efficiency, each signposting to further information on the Business Link web
page. The first phase of the intervention was part of an existing cross-Government campaign called ‘Real Help’
aimed at all businesses. The second phase, an element of Defra’s ‘Act On CO2’activity, focused on the retail,
manufacturing & hospitality sectors.
Communications Channels
A one-page website www.businesslink.gov.uk/savingmoney integrated with the ‘Real Help’ campaign –
redesigned to be more sector-specific for the second phase.
A combination of national and trade press advertising.
A 30-second radio ad played on regional stations for a 2-week period.
Various PR activity using a spokesperson to generate editorial coverage and radio interviews.
A short email sent to about 40,000 SMEs with snippets of case studies and a link to the campaign page.
Online – display and search advertising.
Outcomes
Resource efficiency “is a noisy market place” so the direct impact of the BRE campaign was hard to
quantify. It seems that the second phase resulted in little behaviour change although it may have
bolstered the resource efficiency message amongst businesses, reminding them of good practice.
The involvement of ‘eco-design expert’ Rob Holdway as a spokesperson to generate editorial coverage and
radio interviews was a successful element of the BRE campaign.
Targeting trade press was more successful than online advertising in terms of spend versus recognition. A
more in-depth advertorial approach might have been more suitable than straight-forward tip-based
adverts.
Sources: (36)
*NB. ‘BRE’ in this context should not be confused with Buildings Research Establishment – formerly a government agency but
now an independent organisation rebranded as ‘bre’.
8
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
6
Japan’s Top Runner programme
Introduced in 1999 and administered by Japan’s Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, the Top Runner
programme aims to reduce energy consumption in the civil and transportation sectors by stimulating the
continuous improvement in energy efficiency of products. Currently, 23 product classes are covered ranging from
passenger vehicles and air conditioners to vending machines and even electric toilet seats! Rather than targeting
retailers or end-users, Top Runner focuses on the supply-side, with manufacturers and importers required to meet
minimum environmental standards. Appliances are tested, with the best performing model serving as a baseline
for other manufacturers to meet or exceed. The next time officials set standards, the best available models will
thus be even more efficient. In this way, standards are ratcheted up and energy conservation advances through
the replacement of machinery and equipment by consumers. The European Union has adopted a similar
mechanism to phase out non-energy efficient light bulbs. Although focused on energy efficiency, the Top Runner
scheme might equally well be applied to waste prevention.
Business Benefits
The Top Runner scheme has improved many appliances and products. For instance, between 2001 and
2007, the energy efficiency of computers increased by 80.8% and magnetic disk units by 85.7%, surpassing
expectations. These improvements will give Japanese manufacturers a competitive edge in the
international marketplace.
Drivers
Japan’s scheme works because although businesses realise they will one day have to comply with new
more stringent and legally-binding standard (the hidden ‘stick’), innovation is driven primarily by the
‘carrot’ of competitive advantage. It should be noted, however, that the scheme has been criticised for
rewarding incremental rather than transformative change.
As part of a voluntary ‘e-Mark’ programme, certain products within the Top Runner scheme which meet
the latest minimum requirements can display a label communicating this to retailers and consumers.
The Top Runner scheme is a non-confrontational approach to environmental protection. Although
minimum standards once established become compulsory, the voluntary nature of progress towards
better environmental performance harnesses businesses’ own in-house expertise.
Primary stakeholders are themselves involved in setting targets so awareness and commitment levels are
high, while targets are not overly ambitious. Moreover, Japan has a culture of close cooperation between
business and regulators.
The scheme’s iterative and flexible nature allows failures to be addressed and remedied.
The ‘free-rider effect’ is an advantage because businesses already performing well at the start of a cycle
become free-riders in needing to invest less additional effort during the subsequent compliance period.
Name-and-shame sanctions are effective deterrents in Japan.
Sources: (19)
http://www.asiaeec-col.eccj.or.jp/top_runner/index.html ;
http://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/policy/saveenergy/toprunner2010.03en.pdf
http://www.aid-ee.org/documents/018TopRunner-Japan.PDF
For Defra
9
L4m2: Case Studies
7
The Dorset Resource Efficiency Club (REC)
The Dorset REC ran for 12 months from September 2006, one of 70 such clubs operating across the UK between
2005 and 2008. The initiative targeted waste prevention through reduced production and office waste,
packaging and usage of raw materials. Dorset Business, the county’s chamber of commerce, was appointed as
the Dorset REC’s Project Manager after demonstrating the necessary skills and knowledge. The South West of
England Regional Development Agency promoted the REC locally while the South West Waste Minimisation
Group acted as Delivery Partner. Participation by member companies was free, but as a condition they had to
produce regular reports and provide resources in kind. Members represented several sectors such as
manufacturing (e.g. Pilkington floor tiles), retail (e.g. New Look), entertainment (e.g. Bowlplex) and office
supplies (e.g. Osmond Group). Benchmarking visits reviewed processes, resource use and wastes with 2-3 days’
worth of consultancy advice and follow up monitoring. Green networking groups provided mentoring and an
opportunity to exchange ideas and share best practice.
Business Benefits
Dorset was perhaps the most successful REC in the country. It aimed to generate savings of £200,000,
equivalent to five times the funding. Actual savings amounted to £261,000 for the implementation year,
and the savings to grant ratio eventually exceeded 50. The South West region in general achieved the
highest savings overall, although mostly as a result of improved energy efficiency.
Drivers
The main drivers for businesses were to promote competitiveness by developing resource efficient
solutions and driving down costs in the supply chain.
Dorset Business promoted the REC by claiming that members could save 3% of turnover which would “go
straight to the bottom line”; benefits that could come “in months not years”, saving the equivalent of
“£1,000 per employee”.
Another benefit for members was access to advice on complying with environmental legislation, often a
worry for smaller businesses.
Close working relationships and frequent communication between Dorset Business and member
companies was vital, as was sharing best practice and networking between members.
Site visits, detailed case studies, web-based discussions, breakfast or lunch events and award ceremonies
contributed to the success.
The cross-sectoral nature of the Dorset REC might also have been important as different perspectives to
resource efficiency could be shared between industries.
Sources: (21)
http://www.dorsetforyou.com/media.jsp?mediaid=124745&filetype=pdf ;
http://www.swwmg.co.uk/downloads/Liam_Baker_SWWMG_presentation_Sept_2007.ppt
10
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
8
Achmea Parts Service and the RESPECT project
Damaged and end-of-life vehicles generate significant quantities of waste metal, plastic, rubber and glass of
which a large proportion is hazardous shredder material sent to landfill. Through its LIFE Programme, the
European Union in 2000 supported an innovative approach in the Netherlands to reusing automotive parts. At
the time, all hire vehicles in the country were repaired with new parts with no system for managing the flow of
used parts. Achmea Parts Service created a network of car dismantlers, body shops, car fleet managers and
insurance companies. It promoted large scale re-use of used car parts through a new “green insurance scheme”
with lower premiums than regular policies: essentially, clients with the green policy have their car repaired with
used parts. Achmea demonstrated that the system would be economically, ecologically and technically viable
and that 80% of all car damage could be repaired with used parts without compromising quality standards.
Business Benefits
Achmea successfully realised the large-scale re-use of second hand car components leading to a win-win
situation, with significant environmental and economic benefits. By early 2002, some 75,000 green
policies had been sold with 6,000 repairs performed with used parts. Emissions from painting were halved
as used parts require fewer or no additional paint layers while some 60 tonnes of material were saved in
2001 alone.
However, the scheme suffers from the fact that parts suitable for newer vehicles – which represent the
bulk of the lease market – are rarer. Therefore the green policy tends to be offered to customers with cars
older than 3 years.
Drivers
The cost and regulations associated with disposal of end-of-life vehicles in Europe was a key driver for
some elements of the supply chain, while other parties benefited from reduced vehicle repair bills or
insurance premiums.
Funding from the EU LIFE Programme was important at the outset.
All parties involved in the project put much effort into the project’s implementation. They demonstrated
the viability of the concept of green repairing, created the required procedures and quality assurances, and
worked hard at improving the professionalism of the dismantling industry. They also undertook wide scale
dissemination activities.
The information technology system developed for the project makes for effective and efficient
communication between all parties in the scheme.
Sources: (42)
For Defra
11
L4m2: Case Studies
9
Plot-lot ordering systems co-ordinated by Wilson
James
Founded in 1991, Wilson James provides construction and aviation logistics and consultancy services in the UK,
boasting such clients as BAA, Bovis Lend Lease, GSK, and Mace. The company employs some 2,000 people and has
an annual turnover of £77m. Wilson James has pioneered the ‘consolidation centre’ approach to construction
logistics. Rather than builders ordering materials on a bulk ad hoc basis, Wilson James provides a distribution
centre to intercept, consolidate and carefully coordinate deliveries. A ‘just-in-time’ schedule eases the flow of
materials from suppliers to sites avoiding the wastage which often results from over-ordering. A similar approach
is widespread in the automotive manufacturing industry.
Business Benefits
The opportunity to save significantly on materials costs explains why so many big names are working with
Wilson James. For instance, Bovis Lend Lease saved £200,000 by preventing the over-ordering of
plasterboard. As much as 25% of an order of plasterboard can be wasted on a conventionally-run site, Bovis
and Wilson James got this down to 4.6%, with the remnants being 100% re‐used or recycled.
Drivers
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a motivating factor. Wilson James’s approach was used by Skanska
during the redevelopment of two London hospitals; a primary aim was to reduce vehicle movements and
hence carbon emissions during work in a restricted site in central London.
The Wilson James approach has proved effective because it promotes greater visibility, discipline and
efficiency of materials management. This enables greater site productivity and improved sustainability
impacts.
The greater visibility exposes vested interests among a few suppliers, who may previously have been
profiting from the inadequacies of the conventional approach. Some oppose changes to normal practice;
Wilson James tackled this cultural resistance by threatening to reject non‐compliant deliveries.
Sources: (32) (34) (23)
12
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
10 Waste reduction by apetito
Based in Wiltshire, apetito provides frozen food and catering solutions to care homes, local authorities and
hospitals, and offers a frozen meal delivery service to the public via its Wiltshire Farm Foods franchise and a
private hot meal delivery service through local authorities via apetito Services. In 2009, the company invested
£630,000 in a new reusable plastic transit crate system to replace the single-trip corrugated cardboard boxes
previously used to supply hospital and care home clients with multi-portion and twin-portion meals. The new
crates work well with apetito’s existing processes and are easy to fill up, handle, transport, store and wash. They
also proved surprisingly robust, better protecting apetito’s products and expected to last for up to five years.
Following advice from WRAP, apetito also eliminated “low-sales-volume products” from its inventory to further
reduce waste and started directing 3,000 tonnes of food waste to an anaerobic digestion plant in Devon.
Business Benefits
Switching to the new crates enabled apetito to avoid the costs associated with procuring and disposing of
around 1,200,000 cartons a year, saving some 112 tonnes of carton board and 230 tonnes of greenhouse
gas emissions. Although apetito has not published the financial savings realised from this measure, the
company “is confident that the investment will pay back financially in the longer-term”.
With the new plastic crates, customers are left with less waste to deal with and can more quickly access
the contents than was the case with the cardboard boxes.
Each crate can contain several meals with different recipes, whereas in the previous carton system, each
case would contain identical meals. Individual products can now be ordered and are packed on the day of
delivery offering flexibility to customers who need to serve varied or special menus.
Drivers
Although apetito was keen to reduce the transit packaging waste, some pressure also came from its
customers.
apetito was motivated in part by its being a signatory to the Courtauld Commitment, a voluntary
agreement hosted by WRAP aimed at reducing food waste and associated packaging.
One-to-one assistance in the form of a waste prevention review undertaken by WRAP helped apetito
achieve its goals. The review was one a series of visits to members of the Food and Drink Federation in
support of the trade association’s ‘Five-Fold Environmental Ambition’ and the Courtauld Commitment.
Registration to ISO 14001 in 2009 helps apetito in achieving its environmental objectives.
Sources: (3) (45)
http://www.apetito.co.uk
http://www.caterersearch.com/Articles/2010/10/14/335489/apetito-takes-the-holistic-approach.htm
http://www.apetito.co.uk/Documents/apetito-Sustainability-Report-2010.pdf
http://www.apetito.co.uk/Documents/Care%20Homes%20-%20Why%20Choose%20apetito.pdf
For Defra
13
L4m2: Case Studies
11 Waste prevention at McDonald’s Restaurants
McDonald’s operates more than 30,000 restaurants in over 119 countries. The target of much public criticism
over the years, the world’s largest fast-food chain now claims that environmental sustainability is a core
objective. A host of measures have been adopted in the area of waste management, many centring on landfill
diversion or increased use of recycled or biodegradable materials. Some examples of waste prevention are
though evidenced. For instance, McDonald’s Europe re-designed the McFlurry spoons to save on material and, in
2007, BigMac carton and Hash Brown bags were resized. In the UK and elsewhere, McDonald’s uses a stock
control and forecasting system called ‘Manugistics’ to balance customer demand with waste minimisation – an
increasing challenge as the range of products offered grows. The system evaluates how historic store-specific
data, local and national events, holidays, promotions, weather and other factors affect demand. An indication of
the progress McDonald’s has made is the fact that – along with Coca-Cola and Cadbury – the corporation has
been invited by organisers of the London 2012 Olympic Games to advise on sustainable catering delivery.
Business Benefits
Material savings of 286 tons per annum have been achieved with the shorter McFlurry spoons, while the
new BigMac cartons and smaller Hash Brown bags reduce materials' consumption by 423 tons and 12 tons,
respectively. The measures on this page contributed to reducing the consumption of materials from nonrenewable sources by 2,302 tons. The total consumption of materials used dropped by 496 tons.
The Manugistics system significantly reduces food waste and the costs associated with unsold food and
enables the company to pass on savings to customers. It also prevents restaurants from running out of
stock and having to rely on expensive emergency deliveries. By taking the “hard work” out of stock
management, Restaurant Managers can spend more time focusing on delivering a high standard of quality,
service and cleanliness.
Drivers
The large amount of negative media coverage which McDonald’s received in the past has likely motivated
the organisation to demonstrate a better environmental performance. The perennial and visible problem
of fast-food chain litter motivated McDonald’s UK to sign up to the Government’s voluntary code on
reducing litter, which includes a commitment to reduce packaging.
Good internal communications mean that lessons learnt in one section of the business can be passed to
the rest of it.
Sources: (13)
http://www.bestofgreenmcdonaldseurope.com
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/4223106/McDonalds-waste-makes-up-largest-proportion-of-fast-food-litter-onstreets.html
http://www.thetimes100.co.uk/case-study--managing-stock-to-meet-customer-needs--28-273-1.php
14
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
12 Oregon packaging waste prevention pilot project:
Headquartered in Oregon, USA, Norm Thompson Outfitters is a catalogue and web retailer of clothing, outdoor
products and other goods. Annual revenues were approximately $200 million in 2004. Norm Thompson was a
key partner in a 2002-5 pilot project operated by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to
reduce the use and waste of packaging materials by businesses in the State. The project was funded by the
regional government of the Portland metropolitan area and the US Environmental Protection Agency. Norm
Thompson committed to cut by 25% both packaging waste generation and the use of virgin packaging material
as against 2001 levels and through the better packaging efficiency and increased use of recycled content
material, reduce the amount of virgin packaging material used by 25% from 2001 levels. Key measures taken by
Norm Thompson included switching in 2003 to reusable plastic shipping bags for soft goods order fulfilment. The
change required the company to relax an internal standard that had previously prohibited the use of plastic bags
rather than corrugated cartons for shipping higher cost products. Norm Thompson also asked vendors to reduce
excessive packaging associated with ‘Save Your Back’ bags, a day bag designed to reduce muscle strain and
fatigue. Prior to the change up to 60 bin bags full of wadded-up paper might need to be disposed of in a single
day at one distribution centre.
Business Benefits
The increased use of shipping bags at distribution centres alone prevented some 370 tonnes of packaging
waste per annum, equivalent to annual savings of $680,000. The reduced packing in the ‘Save Your Back’
bags cut costs by a further $2,900 a year.
A total of $77,400 was invested in the Oregon project yielding savings of more than 493 tonnes, or some
$994,000, per annum.
Intangible benefits included the value of educating both Norm Thompson employees and also DEQ and
contractor staff on packaging evaluation and environmental considerations.
Drivers
Norm Thompson’s commitment to environmental improvement and sustainability was identified as a
motivating factor. Its mission statement is: “[We] will be a leader in developing business practices that
sustain, restore and move in harmony with the natural environment.”
DEQ established the Oregon pilot in response to waste prevention goals adopted by the Oregon Legislature
in 2001 couple with the fact that packaging comprised 20–25% of the State’s waste arisings.
DEQ provided crucial support in helping Norm Thompson to identify waste prevention in its own
operations and to evaluate environmental marketing claims made by suppliers of packaging materials.
The fact that certain suppliers were using excessive packing only came to light because of Norm
Thompson’s culture of open communication among employees, something fostered by the Oregon pilot.
The suppliers were then asked to reduce this packaging.
Norm Thompson is a large company so could achieve significant change by influencing suppliers
DEQ, Norm Thompson and other project partners developed a life cycle inventory analysis which helped
businesses trade off probable environmental impacts of different packaging options. This tool improved
decision-making.
Although Norm Thompson had already implemented several packaging efficiency measures prior to 2002,
the partnership approach embodied in the Oregon pilot created a forum for discussion of this topic.
Sources: (35)
For Defra
15
L4m2: Case Studies
13 Remanufacturing by Caterpillar
Remanufacturing is defined as a series of manufacturing steps acting on an end-of-life part or product to return it
to like-new or better performance, with warranty to match. Caterpillar (CAT), the world’s largest maker of offroad vehicles, construction and mining equipment, is a high profile pioneer of remanufacturing. The company not
only makes new products but also takes back old components, cleans and remanufactures them, and sells them
again. By adopting this Product-Service Innovation approach CAT has reinvented its business.
Business Benefits
In 2005, CAT’s global remanufacturing operation reused 43 million tonnes of core materials. Not only does
this translate as a vast financial saving, but the emission of some 52 million tonnes of greenhouse gas was
prevented. Wastes associated with raw material extraction were also substantially reduced.
The demand for remanufactured products is huge; CAT sells them to large haulage fleet operators, the
Ministry of Defence, train operators, mining and quarrying firms, farmers, construction companies and
marine users.
Not only does CAT remanufacture its own products but from its regional hubs – such as one in Shrewsbury,
UK – the company also provides a remanufacturing service to other OEMs (original equipment
manufacturers).
Drivers
Customer pressure was a key driver. CAT first explored remanufacturing back in 1972 after US truck fleets
operators demanded high quality, low cost replacement engines.
CAT is aware of the stigma attached to ‘second hand’ goods, so every remanufactured product or
component goes through the same stringent quality test procedure as a new products and is given a
warranty. In many cases, the products will be remanufactured on the same production lines as their new
counterparts and often leave the plant in ‘better than new’ condition as every part is modified to include
the latest design features.
CAT maximises the flexibility in the type of components it can remanufacture by using patented processes,
procedures and tools to dismantle, modify, and reassemble the products.
Sources: (33)
16
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
14 Ernst & Young’s UK waste reduction programme
Ernst & Young is one of the world’s largest professional services firms. In 2004, the UK division, which has 430
partners and 8,600 staff based in 22 cities, established a corporate responsibility (CR) team. Following a
benchmarking exercise and consultation with internal and external stakeholders, the team reviewed and
reinforced the existing environment management strategy. The CR team championed both waste recycling and
prevention. The team increased the efficiency of paper use by switching machines to default double-side printing
and kept staff informed of the company’s monthly paper use and the equivalent in trees. In addition, the easy
availability of stationery items was reduced while bins were removed from under employee desks.
Business Benefits
Between 2004 and 2006 Ernst & Young reduced its paper consumption by 18% through the introduction of
default duplex printing. The financial savings which resulted are unknown but likely to be substantial.
The waste reduction programme created a high level of interest among employees, challenging their
attitudes to the environment and changing behaviour both in the office and at home. This in turn might
demonstrate to stakeholders that staff share Ernst & Young’s environmental values.
Drivers
Corporate responsibility was the main driver. Although Ernst & Young’s environmental impacts are small
relative to those of businesses in other sectors, the company realised that employees, clients, communities
and other stakeholders expected to see action. This meant going beyond mere compliance with regulations
and stimulated the 2004 establishment of the CR team.
The CR team played a vital role in raising awareness, conveying the need for change and for establishing
new behavioural norms.
Senior management commitment and endorsement was key to waste prevention activity by Ernst & Young.
Waste prevention efforts were boosted through the frequent, clear and tailored messages delivered at the
right place and time: some audiences responded better to environmental messages while for others the
potential to save costs was the main ‘hook’. A variety of communications were used including intranet and
plasma screen messaging.
Sources: (44)
For Defra
17
L4m2: Case Studies
15 Off-site manufacture in supermarket refits
Off-site manufacture (OSM) is a technique increasingly seen in the construction sector where materials are
supplied to the site as pre-assembled modules. OSM can lower transport intensity and material stockholding on
site compared with the traditional method whereby each material category is ordered separately. Having fewer
orders and less material stored on site also reduces wastes arising from building materials being damaged in
transit or storage. Pre-fabrication within a controlled manufacturing environment rather than on a building site
also delivers efficiencies in labour, time and materials. Working with suppliers RG Group and Fit Out (UK) Ltd, the
retailer Sainsbury’s recently combined OSM and a Consolidation Centre approach for the refitting of some of its
stores. Backwalls are partition panels with mounted images and graphics and are an important marketing
element in refits. Materials for these are now consolidated at off-site workshops where the backwalls are
fabricated before being delivered to, and fitted at, the stores. The small amount of waste and packaging that
does arise is 100% reused or recycled.
Business Benefits
Construction waste was directly reduced by up to 40% which meant substantial cost savings.
The OSM approach limited the duration of departmental closures which minimised disruption to trading
during store refits.
The consolidation approach optimises the efficiency of distribution vehicles and avoids the problems of
congestion in the supermarket car parks.
Drivers
Clearly, the shop refitters were driven by their powerful customer to adopt OSM techniques. Sainsbury’s
itself was motivated by the opportunity to cut costs and reduce disruption to trading.
Substantial savings could be achieved by adopting principles of standardisation in design or by engaging
with the supply chain to ensure that standard manufactured components can be adjusted to suit a specific
design.
Sainsbury’s achieves even greater efficiencies by combining OSM with a consolidation centre approach see
Wilson James case study, wherein materials and modules are stored and delivered on a just-in-time basis.
In addition to the 40% reduction in construction waste, a further 16.25% in material savings are realised
through improved design, material procurement, storage and manufacturing.
Sources: (19 p. 32) (23) (20)
18
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
16 Surplus food redistribution by FareShare
FareShare is a national charity redistributing surplus arisings from the UK’s food industry to homeless hostels,
breakfast clubs, women’s refuges and other good causes. The charity works with many big names including
Sainsbury’s, Nestlé, Sodexo and Brakes and operates 15 depots including two in London. The most recent was
opened in Llandudno, North Wales. In 2009-10, FareShare estimates that around 3,000 tonnes of surplus - the
equivalent of 6.7 million meals - was redistributed. 29,000 people a day benefited from FareShare food. This is
food that would otherwise have been disposed of, often to landfill. Food and drink manufacturers accounted for
61% of the food redistributed in 2009-10, while 31% came from retailers and 8% from the hospitality sector.
Business Benefits
Assuming it can be done efficiently and safely, redistributing surpluses to charity not only helps vulnerable
people but saves food businesses significant disposal costs; however, not producing the waste in the first
place would, theoretically, save companies far more money.
The PR value of giving food to charity rather than dumping it is likely to be considerable.
Preventing food waste also reduces greenhouse gas emissions.
Drivers
The CSR agenda is an important motivator; many participating businesses publicise their involvement with
FareShare in their CSR reports.
For some businesses, procurement pressure may have driven participation. According to FareShare, many
food and drink manufacturers got involved after being encouraged to do so by their retailer customers.
The manufacturers’ own trade body, the Food & Drink Federation, is also a strong supporter of the
scheme, with 17 members now collaborating with FareShare.
Timing is key. The surplus food often has a short shelf-life so partnerships are most successful when
FareShare is integrated into a company’s business processes, all levels of the company are aware, and
surplus food is identified as early on as possible.
FareShare focuses its efforts on handling food from further up the supply chain as surpluses available at
store level are small compared to those available at warehouse or manufacturer level. However, the
charity does collect from a limited number of stores, for example, when stores are conveniently located on
the way back from a delivery to a Community Member.
FareShare has enjoyed the support of the UK Government. For example, a past Secretary of State wrote to
retailers encouraging them to work with the charity. FareShare has also been referenced in the former
Labour administration’s food strategy ‘food2030’ and is promoted by WRAP.
Sources: (10) (24) (25); FareShare’s Marketing Manager
For Defra
19
L4m2: Case Studies
17 London 2012 Olympic Games development
Waste prevention has been evident in the preparations for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
While landfill diversion is a priority - LOCOG, the organising committee, has the objective of sending ‘zero waste
to landfill’ – several measures have been taken to reduce the waste arising in the first place. For instance, LOCOG
favours the leasing of temporary venues and other elements to limit the volume of material needing to be
disposed of after the Games. These include seating, tented and modular buildings, flooring, fencing, furniture,
signage, tensile fabrics, cabling and pipework. Where new permanent developments are needed, off-site
manufacturing has been adopted with construction materials and products for bridges and structural frames
procured in pre-assembled form. Particular construction and fixing methods are also prescribed by LOCOG to
facilitate disassembly and maximise the options for reuse or recycling. Finally, LOCOG’s Sustainable Sourcing
Code required that, where practicable, all packaging and products could be reused, recycled or recovered and
certain hazardous materials (e.g. PVC with heavy metal additives) avoided. Suppliers and licensees were also
expected to calculate the carbon impact of their products and services.
Business Benefits
Quantitative evidence is not yet available on the amount of waste that LOCOG has avoided through these
initiatives and the financial costs saved, but the figures are likely to be impressive.
Drivers
Although LOCOG had already pledged to divert 90% of construction refuse from landfill, its ambition was
further boosted by WRAP’s Halving Waste to Landfill commitment which it signed up to in 2009. LOCOG
wanted to demonstrate its part in a bigger government initiative and to show leadership.
LOCOG clearly set out its intentions in ‘Towards a one planet 2012’, the sustainability plan it published in
2009.
Given the scale of the Olympic development, the organisers were in a strong position to put pressure on a
range of suppliers to prevent waste in their activities. LOCOG saw its Sustainable Sourcing Code and
Materials Policy as an opportunity to inspire change and catalyse industry innovation.
LOCOG helped develop a new standard: BS 8901 Sustainability Management Systems for Events – which in
turn guides preparations for the Games.
Sources: (13) (12) (5) (14)
20
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
18 East Anglian Waste Minimisation in the Food and
Drink Industry project
Running between 1997 and 1999, the East Anglian Waste Minimisation in the Food and Drink Industry Project
was a partnership between ten public and private sector organisations. The aim was to help 13 independent food
and drink manufacturers to prevent waste in their operations by support in the form of a prescribed training
programme with distinct learning outcomes. Topics ranged from mass balance and material loss calculations
through project management skills. Members contributed to the programme design and were supported in
workshops and training on specific technologies.
Business Benefits
Solid waste production was reduced by 1,370 tonnes per year.
The East Anglian Project achieved net annual savings from waste, water and energy efficiencies of £1.1m
from a total capital investment of £726,000. These savings represented an average of 0.4% of company
turnover.
Drivers
Food and drink companies were motivated to participate in the East Anglian Project by potential to save
money.
The opportunity to receive collaboratively funded training and consultancy support was another driver.
Regulations apparently did little to stimulate producers, suppliers and consumers to act on their collective
supply chain responsibilities.
Reduction in the use of raw materials use through simple procedural changes such as input changes,
product modification, and good housekeeping were very important, representing £350,000 of total annual
savings, with an average payback of less than one month. However, these measures required intensive
staff and management time to change current practice.
While investment in new technology yielded the greatest financial savings, such measures were among the
most costly. However, payback on these investments was typically less than 8 months.
Participants found that the progress-sharing/workshop approach was especially valuable.
The East Anglian Project engaged and fostered a champion in each company; the same person who
attended training events was then responsible for training colleagues.
Sources: (9) (1) (16) (15)
For Defra
21
L4m2: Case Studies
19 Standard Life goes paperless
In order to achieve its target of halving paper consumption by 2012, the financial services company Standard Life
introduced its ‘Go Paperless’ campaign in 2006. Similar strategies have been adopted in recent years by many
other businesses in financial, utility and related sectors. Standard Life’s Go Paperless facility is now available to all
of the company’s 30,000 life and pension customers who can choose to receive statements by e-communications
rather than as ‘hard copies’ in the post.
Business Benefits
How much waste paper has been saved by Standard Life’s campaign is unknown but the company claims a
23% reduction in the carbon footprint associated with paper consumption between 2006 and 2008.
The company saved £32,000 by using less paper, despite rising paper costs.
Employee satisfaction on Standard Life’s approach to environment has increased.
Drivers
Standard Life took their decision voluntarily hoping both to reduce operating costs and to improve its brand
reputation among stakeholders – employees, shareholders, suppliers and customers - who felt the company
was over-consuming paper.
Excellent nationwide internet coverage and widespread access to IT equipment among its customers was
essential to the success of Standard Life’s initiative.
Standard Life introduced a new document centre on a secure website ensuring a safe channel to customers.
Standard Life’s paper strategy focuses on communications and engagement, technology and efficiency
changes, and sustainable sourcing.
Sources: (38)
22
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
20 Envision
The Envision project, a £3.82m project financed by European Union structural funds, the South West Regional
Development Agency and Devon County Council ran between 2005 and 2009. The aim was to improve resource
efficiency, increase productivity and competitiveness and reduce CO2 emissions from small and medium-sized
enterprises in South West England. Information, guidance and up to two hours of free advice was offered to
2,206 businesses, of which 766 received more intensive support. The latter consisted of 3 to 10 days of on-site
consultancy support.
Business Benefits
Estimates range from £18m to £24m for the total savings to date through resource efficiencies (water,
energy and waste) achieved by businesses as part of Envision. Ultimately, businesses are expected to
benefit by between £65m and £105m.
78% of businesses receiving intensive support agreed that Envision helped them achieve savings, new
market opportunities or staff cultural change. The most popular actions taken were reducing energy use
and reducing the volume of waste going to landfill.
Drivers
SMEs with a strong customer focus such as hotels and restaurants especially welcomed advice on how to
implement environmental management systems as these were thought to attract customers and reduce
the costs of resources.
Envision focused on energy, greenhouse gas reduction and landfill diversion; waste prevention did not
seem to be important to the organisers.
The use of mentors to engage businesses worked well at local level, but a lack of a region-wide marketing
strategy limited Envision’s overall effectiveness.
The use of case studies was beneficial although critics were concerned that they might have been used
more effectively to demonstrate the business case for resource efficiency.
Businesses made a financial contribution towards the support which may have meant they were more likely
to value the intervention.
Sources: (39)
For Defra
23
L4m2: Case Studies
21 The Food & Drink Federation’s Five-fold Ambition
In, 2007 FDF (the Food & Drink Federation), the leading trade association for the UK’s food manufacturing
industry, launched its Five Fold Ambition covering key environmental themes including greenhouse gas emissions,
waste and transport. Three years later the body updated its targets, making some more challenging:
Raising its 2020 CO2 reduction target from 30% to 35%.
Accelerating progress to its 2015 zero waste to landfill target and contributing for the first time to a supply
chain waste prevention target: namely to reduce waste in the supply chain by 5% by the end of 2012
against a 2009 baseline.
Adopting WRAP’s Courtauld 2 Commitment as the basis of a packaging target with a new aim to engage
with consumers.
Building on the Federation House Commitment on water efficiency to develop guidance on water use and
management in the supply chain.
Continuing to embed environmental standards through its ‘fewer and friendlier’ transport commitment
and contributing for the first time to IGD’s Sustainable Distribution initiative.
To meet their commitments, members have trialled and adopted a range of waste prevention measures such as
investment in new technology to improve the efficiency of food preparation, returnable and bulk transit
packaging for raw ingredients, and the lightweighting of primary packaging.
Business Benefits
While the FDF’s waste target focuses on landfill diversion, data from 2009 data suggests a modest decoupling of waste generation from production with arisings per tonne of product dropping slightly at some
FDF member sites. This could signify less wasteful processes and that true waste prevention is happening.
Drivers
The UK’s landfill tax escalator is likely to have been a driver for the Zero Waste to Landfill commitment.
While cost-saving is a motivating factor, the PR value of improving the environmental reputation of its
members is also a consideration for FDF which in 2010 published Building on Success, a glossy report
detailing progress towards the five goals.
The opportunity to contribute to society - as well as to save on disposal costs - may have encouraged 17
FDF members to work with the FareShare to redistribute surplus, fit-for-purpose food and drink products
to disadvantaged people. See FareShare Case Study.
WRAP’s Courtauld Commitments have provided extra impetus for FDF ambitions on waste and packaging
reduction.
FDF members are now working to optimise goods in packaging, known as ‘production-ready packaging’
and are aiming for a 1,000 tonne reduction in goods-in packaging waste by May 2011.
Unilever, a high prominent FDF member, trialled new technology at a plant in Essex aimed at tackling the
waste generated when a process line switches. ‘Sensory analysis’ equipment identifies ingredients left over
in the production of one low-fat spread brand for re-inclusion in a different brand.
Sources: (24) (25) (43) (26)
24
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
22 HazRed
Launched in 2004, the three-year HazRed project aimed to check the rise in hazardous waste generation across
Europe. Funded through the EU Life Programme, the project sought to address hazardous arisings from small and
medium-sized enterprises. In the UK, HazRed was co-sponsored by the Environment Agency, Scottish Environment
Protection Agency, Envirowise, Waste Recycling Group and others. They tracked and targeted areas of highest
hazardous waste arisings and impact across focus sectors including pharmaceuticals, printing, automotive and
construction. Training workshops were run and specialist advisors sent to specific businesses. Measures taken
included removal of such substances as chromium, cyanide and volatile organic compounds from protective
finishes, paints, strippers, inks and cleaning fluids.
Business Benefits
Some 1,200 tonnes of hazardous waste were diverted from landfill and savings to business totalled more
than £440,000.
Drivers
Businesses saw their involvement in HazRed as a way not only to save costs but also to ensure compliance
with ever more stringent hazardous waste regulation.
One company wanted to participate because taking action to limit environmental impact was ‘a central
part’ of its strategy. Another pointed out that customers working towards their own sustainability targets,
including the standard ISO 14001, expected suppliers to demonstrate a similar commitment.
The backing of the Environment Agency has been crucial to the success of HazRed. The Agency maintains
an interest with schemes such as the European Pathway to Zero Waste targeting construction and other
high-impact sectors.
Recognising that larger companies are better placed to benefit from the environmental guidance and
exploit advances in clean technology, the HazRed project deliberately targeted SMEs.
Various communications tools were used to recruit companies and influence behaviour including sector
champions, workshops, member communications within trade associations, regional and national press,
Project Partner events, websites and newsletters.
Sources: (22) (18)
For Defra
25
L4m2: Case Studies
23 Quebec’s Enviroclub Initiative
The Enviroclub Initiative involved seven waste minimisation clubs developed in 2000 to assist SMEs in Canada’s
Quebec region. Each club consisted of 10 to 15 businesses who committed themselves, by contract, to conduct one
profitable on-site project and attend four workshops within six months. Interventions included material
substitution and changes in operational practice. For instance, one SME started using glass rather than steel shot
as a polishing agent not only lowering hazardous arisings by 132 tonnes per annum but also producing less dust.
Business Benefits
3
Total resource savings realised by Enviroclub included 11,300m of wood, 708 tonnes of hazardous waste
and 53 tonnes of toxic substances. Across the seven clubs, annual savings of CAD$5.1m (£3.2m at
November 2010 exchange rates) were achieved, although the longer term and wider community impacts of
the club are unknown.
Drivers
The opportunities for companies to save costs and increase competitiveness were thought to be important
drivers, and language used in marketing material during recruitment to Enviroclub reflected this. ‘Win-win’
was a common phrase.
As with other waste minimisation clubs, interactive workshops, knowledge exchange and support for handson experience was key to engaging SMEs in the Enviroclub initiative, as were strategic marketing tools and
clear messaging.
The Enviroclub engaged and fostered a ‘champion’ who attended training events and workshops and
returned to oversee the training of colleagues. The club also made the most of personal contacts with
expertise in the relevant industries to reach those companies in most need of support.
By contracting members to attend at least one workshop, Enviroclub ensured continued engagement.
Sources: (27)
26
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
24 Waste prevention by Xerox
Founded in 1906 and today employing 130,000 people in 160 countries with a $22 billion turnover, Xerox is one of
the world’s largest suppliers of business technology. The company is tackling waste prevention on several fronts.
Green Products approaches include the development of a new toner requiring less toner mass per page which
results in reduced toner waste. For certain printers, Xerox has also invented ‘ColorQube’ a solid ink colour
technology eliminating the need for cartridges or other consumable items. In addition, Xerox is a pioneer of
Product-Service Innovations such as leasing equipment and consumables enabling its reuse or remanufacture
rather than disposal at end-of-life. The company operates numerous ‘take back’ schemes.
Business Benefits
Xerox’s new solid ink cartridges generate 90% less toner waste than conventional counterparts.
In the US, Xerox’s cartridge return programme for mid- and high-volume machines enabled 65% of eligible
cartridges to be returned for remanufacturing. In 2009 more than 2.2 million cartridges and toner
containers were returned. Reuse of leftover toner in cartridges saves Xerox several million dollars in raw
material costs each year.
Using its considerable procurement power, Xerox can effect significant change in the supply chain. For
example, when Xerox (USA) asked suppliers to switch to returnable transit packaging this led to annual
savings of $1.5m.
Drivers
Although many of Xerox’s initiatives appear voluntary, new regulations in territories where it does business
serve as additional motivators. For example, it is working to comply with the EU’s Waste Electrical and
Electronic Equipment Directive and participates in countries’ individual collection and recycling programs.
In parts of the world where Xerox exercises direct control over the end-of-life management of equipment,
return rates are high. For instance, 95% of equipment sold through direct channels in the US is returned to
Xerox.
Xerox maximizes the end-of-life potential of products and components by considering reuse in the design
process. Machines are designed for easy disassembly and contain fewer and durable parts. Up to 70-90%
of machine components can be reused in remanufactured equipment.
Xerox works hard to challenge negative consumer perceptions of the quality of equipment made with
reused or recycled components.
Sources: (2) (19) (17) (28)
http://www.xerox.com/corporate-citizenship-2010/sustainability/waste-prevention.html
For Defra
27
L4m2: Case Studies
25 Waste prevention by Marks and Spencer
‘To reduce non-glass product packaging by 25% by 2012’, and ‘to send zero waste to landfill by the start of 2012’
are just two of the aims in Plan A, Marks & Spencer’s high profile sustainability strategy launched in January
2007. The Plan sets out 100 commitments on climate change, waste reduction, raw materials, ethical trading
and customers’ health to be achieved by 2012. A further 80 commitments to be fulfilled by 2015 were recently
added. M&S wants to be known as ‘the world’s most sustainable major retailer.’ Examples of specific waste
prevention include asking suppliers to switch to returnable and bulk transit packaging, using lighter and reduced
primary packaging, and the phasing out of PVC from packaging and products. Food waste has also been
challenged, particularly by improving stock planning through more accurate demand forecasting systems; in
addition M&S has donated 1,200 tonnes of usable surplus food to charity.
Business Benefits
A 78% reduction in packaging waste was achieved by the switching to returnable and bulk transit
packaging solutions. For instance, M&S worked with its supplier Tibbett & Britten Group to use transit
packaging for groups of products rather than to individually pack them.
As well as helping the environment, Plan A has helped M&S’s bottom line. In 2010, the retailer reported
that Plan A had generated £50m of additional profit by acting as a ‘unique selling point’, enabling it to
differentiate itself from its competitors.
Drivers
M&S’s CSR agenda is clearly a motivating factor, and seems itself to driven by changing consumer
attitudes; the company states that ‘we understand that our customers still want to buy beautiful looking
gifts, just with less packaging and we are making it easy for them to do this.’
Although Plan A is a voluntary initiative, M&S had previously been engaged with Envirowise’s Supply Chain
Partnerships scheme which encouraged retailers to work with supply chains to improve environmental
performance and maximise profit margins. Some of the Plan A actions are also compatible with WRAP’s
Courtauld Commitment Phases 1 and 2, to which M&S is a signatory.
Marks & Spencer’s has used its considerable power in the supply chain to help it achieve its goals on waste
prevention. Rather than simply accepting suppliers’ ‘green claims’ at face value, M&S’s buyers choose
suppliers, and provide clear requirements to them, based on their contribution to Plan A.
Flexibility has been important. For instance, in 2008-9 M&S relaxed its food pricing rules in UK stores to
lower the cost of items approaching sell-by dates; this led to a 20% reduction in food waste.
Sources: (10) (31) (29) (7) (41)
http:// http://corporate.marksandspencer.com/documents/publications/2010/how_we_do_business_report_2010
28
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
26 Bibliography
1. Poonprasit, M., et al. The Application of Waste Minimisation to Business Management to Improve
Environmental Performance in the Food and Drink Industry. 2005. id 65.
2. WRAP. Lightweight wine bottles: less is more (Case Study). Banbury : WRAP. id 110.
3. —. apetito: waste prevention boosts business efficiency. Banbury : WRAP. id 287.
4. —. Carrier Bag Case Studies. Banbury : WRAP. id 241.
5. —. Ashdown Agreement Annual Report to 31 March 2010. Banbury : WRAP, 2010. id 897.
6. —. Voluntary Carrier Bag Agreement-Review of Supermarket Carrier Bag Use 2010. Banbury :
WRAP, 2010. id 709.
7. —. Courtauld Commitment 1 (2005-2010). Banbury : WRAP, 2010. id 630.
8. —. Reducing Carrier Bag Use. Banbury : WRAP, 2009. id 288.
9. The value of resource efficiency in the food industry: a waste minimisation project in East Anglia,
UK. Henningsson, S., et al. 2004, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 12, pp. 505–512. id 410.
10. Lee, P. and Willis, P. Waste arisings in the supply of food and drink to households in the UK.
Banbury : WRAP, 2010. id 819.
11. Farish, M. plants that are green. s.l. : Engineering & technology, 2009. id 826.
12. London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG). LOCOG
Sustainable Sourcing Code-Second Edition. London : LOCOG, 2009. id 852.
13. —. London 2012 Sustainability Plan-Towards a one planet 2012. London : LOCOG, 2009. id 849.
14. Puckett, K. Time for a new Age-Halving waste to landfill: seize the opportunity. s.l. : WRAP, 2009.
id 495.
15. Minimising waste in the food and drink sector: using the business club approach to facilitate
training and organisational development. Hyde, K., et al. 2003, Journal of Environmental
Management, Vol. 67, pp. 327–338. id 417.
16. The challenge of waste minimisation in the food and drink 28 industry: a demonstration project in
East Anglia, UK. Hyde, K., et al. 2001, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 9, pp. 57–64. id 596.
17. Kara, H. Carbon Impact of Remanufactured Products. s.l. : Centre for Remanufacturing & Reuse,
2008. id 78.
18. Foreman, J. Hazred Sector Prioritisation Workshop Background Paper. s.l. : Environment Agency,
2005. id 915.
19. House of Lords. Waste Reduction- Volume I: Report. London : House of Lords, 2008. id 397.
For Defra
29
L4m2: Case Studies
20. Mason, H. Reducing Waste in Sainsbury’s Supermarket Refits through off site fabrication.
Banbury : WRAP, 2008. id 24.
21. Envirowise. Unpublished internal evaluation of the Envirowise Resource Efficiency Clubs
Programme April 2005 – March 2008, provided by WRAP. id 808.
22. HAZRED. HAZRED-Working with small Businesses to reduce hazardous Waste. s.l. : HAZRED. id
569.
23. Lundesjo, G. Material Logistics Planning - Barts Hospital, London. Banbury : WRAP, 2010. id 703.
24. Food and Drink Federation (FDF). Five-fold Environmental Ambition: Progress Report 2010 Building on Success. London : FDF, 2010. id 896.
25. —. Waste: promoting resource efficiency. London : FDF, 2009. id 330.
26. —. Reducing and Managing Waste in the Food Industry. s.l. : FDF, 2007. id 560.
27. Fostering pollution prevention in small businesses: the Enviroclub initiative. Huppe, F., et al.
2006, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14, pp. 563-571. id 324.
28. Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme. Choosing and Managing Re-usable Transit
Packaging. s.l. : Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme, 1998. id 700.
29. Envirowise. Packaging Design for the Environment: Reducing Costs and Quantities. Didcot :
Envirowise, 2008. id 817.
30. —. SHARING SUCCESS-Profiting from supply chain partnerships. Didcot : Envirowise, 2008. id 717.
31. —. Profiting from waste reduction in retail stores. Didcot : Envirowise, 2002. id 711.
32. Earthshine Solutions. Global Research Project: “In Search of Sustainable Business” Wilson James.
2010 : Earthshine Solutions. id 377.
33. Parker, D. and Butler, P. An Introduction to Remanufacturing. Aylesbury : Centre for
Remanufacturing and Reuse, 2007. id 657.
34. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Practical Resource Efficiency Savings - Case
Studies. s.l. : BIS, 2009. id 333.
35. State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Business Packaging Waste Prevention
Project (2002 – 2005) Project Evaluation Report. Portland, Oregon : State of Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality, 2006. id 463.
36. Defra. Business Resource Efficiency (BRE) Campaign Evaluation of 2009 communications activity.
London : Defra, 2009. id 861.
37. WRAP. Carrier Bags. Banbury : WRAP, 2009. id 631.
30
For Defra
L4m2: Case Studies
38. Business in the Community (BITC). Standard Life: Reducing embedded carbon in paper. BITC.
[Online] [Cited: 19 November 2010.]
http://www.bitc.org.uk/resources/case_studies/stand_life_cs.html. id 839.
39. Buckman, E. An Economic, Environmental and Strategic Impact Evaluation of Envision. Emma
Buckman : Ekosgen, 2010. id 109.
40. Brook Lyndhurst. Improving Communications with SMEs. A review of Six Sectors (Forthcoming
report for Defra. A draft report was used for the purposes of this evidence review.). London : Defra,
2010. id 561.
41. —. Mainstreaming Waste Minimisation - A scoping study (Unpublished internal reference
document provided by WRAP.). 2006. id 271.
42. Janssen, B. The RESPECT project: RE-use of Second-hand car comPonEnts iin Company car fleeTs.
s.l. : LIFE. id 688.
43. Bartlett, C. Mapping Waste in the Food and Drink Industry. s.l. : Defra and The Food and Drink
Federation, 2010. id 846.
44. Article 13 and CBI. CSR Case Studies - Ernst and Young. s.l. : Article 13, 2006. id 634.
45. Apetito. Sustainability update autumn 2009. s.l. : Apetito, 2009. id 114.
Note: The id numbers at the end of the bibliographic references refer to the source file id
number stored at www.infinifile.org.uk. You can access these sources for free, using project id
246 in conjunction with the file id when prompted. Requires registration. The adjacent QR
code will take you to the site if you have the smart-phone QR reader app (many are free).
For Defra
31
L4m2: Case Studies
(Empty page)
32
For Defra
Disclaimer:
Oakdene Hollins Ltd and Brook Lyndhurst Ltd believe the content of this report to be correct as at the date of writing. The opinions
contained in this report, except where specifically attributed, are those of Oakdene Hollins Ltd and Brook Lyndhurst Ltd. They are based
upon the information that was available to us at the time of writing. We are always pleased to receive updated information and opposing
opinions about any of the contents.
The listing or featuring of a particular product or company does not constitute an endorsement by Oakdene Hollins or Brook Lyndhurst,
and we cannot guarantee the performance of individual products or materials. This report must not be used to endorse, or suggest
Oakdene Hollins’ or Brook Lyndhurst’s endorsement of, a commercial product or service.
All statements in this report (other than statements of historical facts) that address future market developments, government actions and
events, may be deemed "forward-looking statements". Although Oakdene Hollins and Brook Lyndhurst believe the outcomes expressed in
such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of future performance: actual
results or developments may differ materially. Factors that could cause such material differences include emergence of new technologies
and applications, changes to regulations, and unforeseen general economic, market or business conditions.
We have prepared this report with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the contract with the client. Although we
have made every reasonable effort to ensure the accuracy of information presented in this report, neither Oakdene Hollins nor Brook
Lyndhurst can expressly guarantee the accuracy and reliability of the estimates, forecasts and conclusions herein. Factors such as prices
and regulatory requirements are subject to change, and users of the report should check the current situation. In addition, care should be
taken in using any of the cost information provided as it is based upon specific assumptions (such as scale, location, context, etc.). Clients
should satisfy themselves beforehand as to the adequacy of the information in this report before making any decisions based on it.
Oakdene Hollins Ltd
Pembroke Court
22-28 Cambridge Street
Aylesbury
Buckinghamshire
HP20 1RS
T: +44(0)1296 423915
E: admin@oakdenehollins.co.uk
www.oakdenehollins.co.uk
www.remanufacturing.org.uk
Registered in England No. 2937129

WR1403-L4-m2-Case-Studies

Transcription

Similar documents

- Ranpak Protective Packaging Systems

PadPak Jr.

ANNEX A Packaging Guidelines “How to Pack”

Bong Packaging Systems

Full News Article

Custom Packaging

GLOBAL PACKAGING

Dave Moccia`s Resume

Excitement - Model Group

CELESTIAL SEASONINGS: STIRRING UP INTEREST

Framework response plan