“Our mission is to guarantee effective compliance of the financial sustainability principle by the General Goverment”
Scope: General State Administration, Autonomous communities, Local authorities
Community wellbeing
Environment
4.000 mill. €
Municipal waste management See information aboutMunicipal waste management
The purpose of this study is to provide evidence on the effectiveness and efficiency of a set of instruments available to public administrations to achieve Spain’s municipal waste management objectives. The scope of this study is limited to municipal waste, defined in Law 7/2022 as waste under local jurisdiction, and covers the period 2010-2019, although, where available, it has been extended with the most recent information.
All documentation from the study is available for consultation here.
There is a difference between what Spaniards who separate their waste say and the actual average levels of separate collection. Between 49% and 56% (depending on the fraction) of Spaniards say they separate their waste ‘always (without exception)’, which indicates a positive self-perception. If we compare the subjective assessment of the level of separation in the home with the actual levels of separate collection for Spain, 25% in 2020, it is clear that what is reported is quite far from the usual practice in most households.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
This measure does not apply to MITERD, but rather to local entities. In accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each Administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to regional administrations have taken place.
In accordance with this distribution of powers (Article 12), under the legislation on local government, it is the local authorities that must decide how to organise the management of waste under their jurisdiction in the most efficient way possible, always respecting the obligations established in state legislation on waste. Consequently, and taking into account the provisions of Law 7/2022, the proposal is rejected on the grounds that it is impossible to implement due to a lack of competence.
Finally, it should be noted that, without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer the proposal in a strict sense, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Local authorities should set up physical or virtual service points for waste management, emphasising the importance of publicising these channels.
Setting up physical or virtual service offices would be advisable in order to improve interaction with service users. This could lead to various benefits, such as improved separate collection results, reduced incidents and faster detection and resolution, and greater public awareness of certain aspects of waste management, among others. This tool can be accompanied by the creation of networks of environmental advisors or agents to raise awareness among residents and small businesses about waste management.
A high percentage of the Spanish population lacks information and communication channels regarding waste collection services. According to the survey, 60% of respondents said they did not have access to a citizen service telephone number, the same percentage said they did not have a reference website on waste, 65% did not have a specific social network on waste, and 84% did not have any in-person information points. In addition, only 6% have a mobile app for separate collection. It is also worth mentioning that 37% of citizens are unaware of the existence of any communication channel on waste in their municipality.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
This measure does not apply to MITERD, but rather to local entities. In accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each Administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to regional administrations have taken place.
In accordance with this distribution of powers (Article 12), under the legislation on local government, it is the local authorities that must decide how to organise the management of waste under their jurisdiction in the most efficient way possible, always respecting the obligations established in state legislation on waste. Consequently, and taking into account the provisions of Law 7/2022, the proposal is rejected on the grounds that it is impossible to implement due to a lack of competence.
Finally, it should be noted that, without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer the proposal in a strict sense, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Local authorities should set up physical or virtual service points for waste management, emphasising the importance of publicising these channels.
Setting up physical or virtual service offices would be advisable in order to improve interaction with service users. This could lead to various benefits, such as improved separate collection results, reduced incidents and faster detection and resolution, and greater public awareness of certain aspects of waste management, among others. This tool can be accompanied by the creation of networks of environmental advisors or agents to raise awareness among residents and small businesses about waste management.
En el informe publicado en marzo de 2025 (Informe):
El MITECO indica que esta propuesta está ya se dispone de material gráfico de sensibilización sobre cierto contenido de la ley 7/2022 y RD 1055/2022 que está disponible en la web (https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/temas/economia-circular/sensibilizacionparticipacion.html).
Se está valorando la posibilidad de llevar a cabo una campaña en 2025, si bien por razones de plazos y de presupuesto necesario su implementación no está garantizada.
Design public awareness campaigns with a strategic approach.
Public awareness campaigns should be designed with a more strategic approach in order to influence public behaviour. Innovative designs and methods are needed. Linking these campaigns to economic issues is key to achieving this effect.
Composting is a type of organic waste treatment that consists of an aerobic process which, under controlled ventilation, humidity and temperature conditions, transforms degradable organic waste into a stable and sanitised material called compost, which can be used as an organic fertiliser.
For the implementation of domestic and community composting to be considered good practice, it must:
The study has collected cases in which this experience has been successful, both nationally (e.g., Usurbil) and internationally (e.g., Leicester).
Methodologies: case studies, documentary analysis, individual interviews
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
This measure does not apply to MITERD, but rather to local entities. In accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each Administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to regional administrations have taken place.
In accordance with this distribution of powers (Article 12), local legislation on local government bases stipulates that local authorities must decide how to organise the management of waste under their jurisdiction in the most efficient way possible, while always complying with the obligations established in state legislation on waste. Consequently, and taking into account the provisions of Law 7/2022, the proposal is rejected due to the impossibility of implementation due to jurisdictional issues.
However, it should be noted that in order to improve separate collection, the funds allocated to the autonomous communities in 2021 and 2022 for the implementation of the waste policy (C12.I3) included among the actions to be financed the separate collection of bio-waste, including as eligible costs bins, compostable bags and awareness campaigns (see the rules approved in 2021 (https://www.miteco.gob.es/content/dam/miteco/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/temas/prevencion-y-gestionresiduos/report_certificadoacuerdo3residuoscsma14-4-21_tcm30-525645.pdf)
Facilitate support measures for households for the separate collection of organic waste.
It would be advisable to disseminate information about the use of compostable bags and aerated bins to ensure the proper functioning of organic waste separation in the home. It is also advisable to distribute these materials as part of communication campaigns to implement separate bio-waste collection.
The purchase of these materials by local authorities could be included among the eligible items for subsidies and grants aimed at improving the separation of organic waste at source.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD points out that Article 28 of Law 7/2022 clearly states the quality requirements for compost as a product, referring to EU Regulation 1069/2019. Therefore, it does not consider it necessary to create a state seal, as the law establishes the quality requirements for this material to be marketed as a product.
Create a state seal that certifies compost in terms of quality.
This certification should include parameters such as heavy metal content, stability and maturity, as well as the rate of nutrient release into the soil, and establish the possible uses and applicable quantities based on these parameters.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that this proposal is under evaluation.
Develop a technical guide to advise local authorities on the operation of recycling centres, which will contribute to greater implementation of the most efficient systems and facilitate greater territorial uniformity in their operation.
The ministry responsible for waste management could approve a technical guide to advise local authorities on regulating the operation of their recycling centres.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to local authorities.
Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
In accordance with this distribution of powers (Article 12), under the legislation on local government, it is the local authorities that must decide how to organise the management of waste under their jurisdiction in the most efficient way possible, always respecting the obligations established in state legislation on waste. Consequently, and taking into account the provisions of Law 7/2022, the proposal is rejected on the grounds that it is impossible to implement due to a lack of competence.
However, it should be noted that, in order to improve separate collection, the funds allocated to the autonomous communities in 2021 and 2022 for the implementation of waste policy (C12.I3) included among the actions to be financed fixed and mobile recycling centres (see the rules approved in 2021 (https://www.miteco.gob.es/content/dam/miteco/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/temas/prevencion-y-gestionresiduos/ report_certificadoacuerdo3residuoscsma14-4-21_tcm30-525645.pdf)
Seek to offer fixed or mobile recycling centre services to the entire Spanish population and widely promote their use.
It is proposed that offering recycling centre services be mandatory for all municipalities, either directly or through joint provision with other municipalities via supra-municipal entities, as well as widely promoting their use and providing information on what types of waste can be brought in. The existence of a fixed recycling centre should be ensured in municipalities with a certain number of inhabitants and complemented by mobile recycling centres for smaller municipalities or areas far from population centres.
Methodologies: case studies, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to local authorities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
Insofar as the proposal affects the mandatory services provided by local authorities, it is these authorities that should control these systems.
Without prejudice to the orientation given to the response in order to respond strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as an instrument for improving management.
Implement efficient collection systems and set targets for incorporating recycled materials, with the aim of obtaining high-quality recycled material.
Improvements must be made to collection and treatment systems, in line with other proposals in this study, and targets must be set for incorporating recycled materials into the production of new products and reducing the levels of unsuitable materials in the different collection fractions.
AIReF has carried out a counterfactual assessment of the adoption of the PaP system in municipalities in Catalonia to try to identify a causal relationship between the establishment of this technical collection system and various performance indicators (per capita generation, separate collection and level of improper waste).
The results obtained include the following highlights:
Methodologies: difference in differences, descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to local authorities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
Insofar as the proposal affects the mandatory services provided by local authorities, it is these authorities that should control these systems.
Without prejudice to the orientation given to the response in order to respond strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as an instrument for improving management.
Implement efficient collection systems and set targets for incorporating recycled materials, with the aim of obtaining high-quality recycled material.
Improvements must be made to collection and treatment systems, in line with other proposals in this study, and targets must be set for incorporating recycled materials into the production of new products and reducing the levels of unsuitable materials in the different collection fractions.
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicated in its 2024 response that this measure could be taken into account in the next distribution of PRTR funds to the autonomous communities to improve waste management.
However, the funds distributed in the 2024 Sectoral Conference Agreement did not exclusively promote this model, and it can be considered that it has been considered an eligible activity in the territorialisations that took place in 2021, 2022 and 2024, although the final decision on its implementation has been left to the local authority.
Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, Spanish legislation establishes a clear distribution of powers between public administrations and in no case should these powers conflict. The competence of local authorities in the matter covered by the AIReF proposal is regulated in accordance with the provisions of Article 12 of Law 7/2022 of 8 April on waste and contaminated soil for a circular economy. The proposal is therefore rejected on the grounds that it is impossible for the central administration to implement it due to a lack of competence.
Notwithstanding the guidance provided in the response, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the Sectoral Conference on the Environment agreements for the distribution and transfer of future credits to the Autonomous Communities or Local Authorities in the field of waste, with the aim of promoting this type of proposal as an instrument for improving public management.
Actively promote the door-to-door (D2D) collection model.
The promotion of this collection model could be linked to various instruments:
This system has so far been little implemented in Spanish municipalities with high urban density, although it has been implemented in other European countries (Brussels, Vienna, Berlin, Paris, Maastricht, Milan and Lisbon are examples of cities that have implemented PaP collection in all or part of the city). Despite this, it is a system that can potentially be implemented in any type of municipality, as there are various tools available to adapt it to the urban characteristics of the municipality: open community containers (e.g. for paper) or closed community bins (e.g. for organic waste), posts, hangers or closed cabinets to locate individual containers in the case of multi-dwelling buildings, etc.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that with regard to investments in municipal waste management within the PRTR framework, associated with C12. I3, this hierarchy principle has been applied and taken into account in the funds distributed to the Autonomous Communities in 202111, 2022 and 2024, and will continue to be taken into account in those that may be distributed, directing investments towards separate collection, preparation for reuse and recycling.
A link to the website where the aforementioned sectoral conference agreements are published is included: https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacionambiental/temas/prevencion-y-gestion-residuos/acuerdos-conferencia-sectorial.html
In view of the above, MITECO indicates that the measure can be considered implemented.
Direct investment towards compliance with the waste hierarchy, giving greater weight to priority levels (prevention and reuse).
It is necessary to redirect investment towards compliance with the waste hierarchy, as currently the area in which the least resources are invested in municipal waste management is prevention.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MNHAC considers that Law 7/2022 established that local authorities must mandatorily implement a specific, differentiated and non-deficit public non-tax fee or charge (PPPNT) for the provision of urban solid waste collection and treatment services, which would allow for the implementation of pay-as-you-throw systems. This fee or PPPNT must include all service costs, and consideration may be given to the inclusion of systems to encourage separate collection in holiday rental properties, differentiation or reduction in cases of composting or separation, the use of recycling centres, and the status of families at risk of social exclusion. The Law gave local authorities a period of three years (until April 2025) to implement it.
For its part, MITERD indicates that this measure is applicable to local authorities.
Therefore, and in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, Spanish legislation establishes a clear division of powers between public administrations and in no case should these powers conflict.
Without prejudice to the orientation given to the response in order to respond strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as an instrument for management improvements.
Promote the rollout of pay-as-you-throw (PxG) waste collection systems alongside incentives for improved separate collection behaviour.
The deployment of taxes or, where appropriate, non-tax public benefits associated with waste management at the local level should be promoted to ensure that the legally required costs are covered. It is recommended to promote pay-as-you-throw waste systems. In addition, it would be possible to offer bonuses for the use of recycling centres, home composting or waste reuse services, among others.
Although Law 7/2022 provides for the possibility of local authorities establishing both PxG systems and rebates and reductions on waste charges, this is only a guideline. The deployment of these instruments in Spain is very limited compared to other countries with good performance indicators, and the evidence provided in this evaluation demonstrates the effectiveness of these instruments.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MNHAC considers that Law 7/2022 established that local authorities must mandatorily implement a specific, differentiated and non-deficit public non-tax fee or charge (PPPNT) for the provision of urban solid waste collection and treatment services, which would allow for the implementation of pay-as-you-throw systems. This fee or PPPNT must include all service costs, and consideration may be given to the inclusion of systems to encourage separate collection in holiday rental properties, differentiation or reduction in cases of composting or separation, the use of recycling centres, and the status of families at risk of social exclusion. The Law gave local authorities a period of three years (until April 2025) to implement it.
For its part, MITERD indicates that this measure is applicable to local authorities.
Therefore, and in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, Spanish legislation establishes a clear division of powers between public administrations and in no case should these powers conflict.
Without prejudice to the orientation given to the response in order to respond strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as an instrument for management improvements.
Promote the rollout of pay-as-you-throw (PxG) waste collection systems alongside incentives for improved separate collection behaviour.
The deployment of taxes or, where appropriate, non-tax public benefits associated with waste management at the local level should be promoted to ensure that the legally required costs are covered. It is recommended to promote pay-as-you-throw waste systems. In addition, it would be possible to offer bonuses for the use of recycling centres, home composting or waste reuse services, among others.
Although Law 7/2022 provides for the possibility of local authorities establishing both PxG systems and rebates and reductions on waste charges, this is only a guideline. The deployment of these instruments in Spain is very limited compared to other countries with good performance indicators, and the evidence provided in this evaluation demonstrates the effectiveness of these instruments.
The content of the technical-economic reports that justify the forecast of domestic waste management costs and the subsequent calculation of the fee is not defined in any legal text. In this context, both the description of the costs and the formula for calculating the fee tend to be insufficient and have been the subject of multiple legal challenges.
Thus, over the years, and even today, both the criteria used to determine the fee (e.g. the volume of water consumed) and the justification of the cost of the service have been controversial from the point of view of their jurisprudential interpretation (see, for example, judgment 382/2016 of the High Court of Justice of the Balearic Islands, judgment 2609/2022 of the High Court of Justice of Catalonia (appeal 1404/2020) or Appeal 2865/2022 before the Supreme Court).
Methodologies: regulatory analysis
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MINHAC indicates that in order to facilitate the implementation and application of the tax by local authorities, or its alternative, the non-taxable public service, for the collection, transport and treatment of solid urban waste, the mandatory establishment of which before 10 April 2025 is provided for in Article 11.3 of Law 7/2022 of 8 April on waste and contaminated soil for a circular economy, was set up on 8 March 2024, at the request of the FEMP, the Working Group on Waste Tax, made up of representatives from MINHAC (General Secretariat for Regional and Local Financing and the Directorate-General for Taxation), MITECO (Directorate-General for Quality and Environmental Assessment) and the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FEMP).
Following the session held on that date, four further meetings were held, the last of which took place on 7 May 2024.
As a result of the work carried out by the group, a document entitled ‘Relevant issues in relation to the establishment and management of the local solid urban waste tax’ has been agreed upon. This document is intended to be a guide to facilitate the regulation, management and application of the tax or non-tax public patrimonial service (hereinafter Fee/PPPNT) for waste collection, transport and treatment services.
It also seeks to respond to the various questions that have arisen in relation to the regulation and application of this Tax/PPPNT, in terms of the subjective scope of application, the obligation to gradually set its amount taking into account pay-as-you-go systems; that this amount should, as far as possible, cover the costs of the service; the possibility of establishing certain tax benefits and the elements that must be taken into account in its regulation; the determination of the net costs of the service that must be included in setting the amount of the Tax/PPPNT; the possibility of using the enforcement procedure in the case of a non-taxable public financial contribution (hereinafter, PPPNT); the accrual and enforceability of the Fee/PPPNT; the fee notification system; and the possibility of its establishment by local entities that are supra-municipal in nature and provide all or some of the phases of the service.
Link to the FEMP press release and access to the document: https://www.femp.es/comunicacion/noticias/la-femp-hacienda-y-el-MITECOresponden-las-dudas-que-plantea-la-aplicacion-de
Develop a methodological guide for preparing economic reports for the establishment of fees.
The ministries responsible for waste management and public finance should draft a methodological guide for the preparation of economic reports on which agreements to establish fees to finance waste management services should be based, in accordance with the revised text of the Law Regulating Local Finances and Law 7/2022 on waste. This guide would make it easier for local authorities to determine the costs associated with waste management in a technically validated manner.
Methodologies: international benchmarking, comparative analysis, descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MINHAC points out that Law 7/2022, in Articles 84 to 97, regulates the tax on the deposit of waste in landfills, incineration and co-incineration of waste, which is configured as an ‘indirect tax levied on the delivery of waste to landfills, incineration or co-incineration facilities for disposal or energy recovery’.
The purpose of the tax is to promote prevention, preparation for reuse and recycling of waste, with organic waste as the preferred fraction, and environmental education, in order to discourage the disposal of waste in landfills, incineration and co-incineration.
This tax is configured as a state tax applicable throughout Spanish territory, with the revenue from it being transferred to the autonomous communities, which can then manage it and set higher tax rates than those provided for in state regulations.
Therefore, the establishment of a calendar setting out the long-term tax rates must be agreed with each of the autonomous communities, which makes it impossible to anticipate.
Furthermore, anticipating changes in tax rates could lead to tax planning that results in undesirable practices from the point of view of waste treatment.
Por tanto, el establecimiento de un calendario donde se recoja la previsión de los tipos impositivos del Impuesto a largo plazo debe ser consensuado con cada una de las CCAA, lo que no hace viable su anticipación.
Por otra parte, una anticipación en la modificación de tipos impositivos podría conducir a una planificación fiscal que conlleve prácticas indeseadas desde el punto de vista del tratamiento de residuos.
Anticipate the path of tax rates on municipal waste disposal, giving as much advance notice as possible to those responsible for waste management.
Knowing the expected tax increase years in advance helps those responsible for waste management to plan ahead, taking this evolution into account and thus increasing the effectiveness of the tax, as evidenced by the international data collected in this study.
Methodologies: international benchmarking, descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that Law 7/2022 already establishes the conditions under which an SDDR can be established. The development of pilot projects in which an SDDR could be implemented is contemplated for packaging in Article 34.5 of Royal Decree 1055/2022, of 27 December, on packaging and packaging waste. This article establishes that it is the local authorities or autonomous communities that are responsible for promoting it. For this reason, and in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, Spanish legislation establishes a clear division of powers between public administrations and in no case should these powers conflict.
Without prejudice to the orientation given to the response in order to respond strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as an instrument for management improvements.
Launch pilot programmes for deposit, return and refund systems (SDDR).
The ministry responsible for waste or the inter-administrative coordination body for waste should carry out a pilot programme to advance the possible implementation of an SDDR in Spain for certain products.
The MITERD study (Tragsatec, 2021) highlighted the feasibility of implementing an SDDR in Spain, so a pilot programme would be the natural next step.
Law 7/2022 incorporates its implementation in the event of failure to meet waste management targets, so this programme would provide evidence and detect difficulties at an early stage, facilitating and optimising its possible future implementation at national level.
The relationship between SCRAP and SDDR can be complex, but both can coexist with the right public policy (Laubinger, Brown, Dubois and Börkey, 2022), so the pilot programme should pay attention (as far as possible) to the SCRAP-SDDR interrelationship.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, individual interviews
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that Article 37 of Law 7/2022 provides that extended producer responsibility may be applied by Royal Decree. This instrument already applies to some waste streams, but they must be adapted to the new regulatory framework of Title IV. Currently, packaging waste has been adapted by Royal Decree 1055/2022, and a new Royal Decree on end-of-life tyres is being processed (https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/participacion-publica/ppresiduos2023-prd -neumaticos-fuera-uso-y-gestion-ambiental-residuos.html) a new Royal Decree on end-of-life tyres.
Likewise, Article 60 and Final Provision 7 of Law 7/2022 provide for its application in a novel way to other waste (textiles, furniture, tobacco, etc.). In this regard, it should be noted that in October 2024, Royal Decree 1093/2024 of 22 October was approved, regulating the management of waste from tobacco products with filters and filters marketed for use with tobacco products containing plastic and which are single-use, and the preliminary consultation phases have begun (Waste section within Quality and Environmental Assessment: https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/participacion-publica.html) for the development of this instrument in other products: wet wipes containing plastic and balloons, textile waste and fishing gear.
Expand the waste streams subject to extended producer responsibility (EPR), especially those streams whose management has a high economic cost and which are also difficult to recycle. In addition, it is advisable to define minimum criteria to be met in terms of eco-modulation.
Currently, the EPR obligation is limited only to those waste streams established by European regulations (electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), batteries and accumulators, end-of-life vehicles, packaging and packaging waste, end-of-life tyres and used industrial oils). Given the high cost of managing certain types of waste and the current low recyclability of some materials, it is considered necessary to extend the EPR obligation to other waste streams, such as textiles, sanitary textiles, furniture and mattresses, among others. Law 7/2022 already incorporates the obligation to develop regulations for EPR for textiles, furniture and household goods within a period of three years from its entry into force.
It is advisable to define minimum criteria to be met in terms of eco-modulation for the different existing or newly implemented EPR schemes. In this regard, Law 7/2022 defines that the financial contribution paid by the producer must be modulated for each product or group of similar products, especially taking into account their durability, whether they can be repaired, reused and recycled, and the presence of hazardous substances, adopting a life-cycle approach.
Methodologies: individual interviews, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that, in accordance with the provisions of Article 54 of Law 7/2022, all administrations are working in coordination within the working groups of the Coordination Commission to monitor compliance with the obligations of the RAP systems.
Improve the supervision and control by the Administration of SCRAP activities to ensure that they comply with all their regulatory obligations.
Law 7/2022 has already incorporated improvements with the aim of strengthening and ensuring the control of SCRAPs, but it is necessary to ensure that both regional and state administrations carry out their defined obligations to perform this control.
Methodologies: individual interviews, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that all administrations are working in coordination within the working groups of the Coordination Commission to negotiate an agreement that can be applied by the Autonomous Communities and Local Authorities. This was done in the case of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) at the beginning of 2023, and this approach is being used in the working group on packaging and packaging waste, where a first draft agreement was submitted in March 2024, another version on 22 November 2024 and the latest on 4 March 2025.
It should be noted that it is in the working groups of the Coordination Committee that the most important issues at any given time are addressed in order to work as coordinately as possible between all administrations. Among the aforementioned work and work in progress (https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/temas/prevencion-y-gestionresiduos.html) that is currently being implemented, it is worth highlighting the agreements reached that are published on the website (https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/temas/prevencion-y-gestionresiduos/comision-coordinacion.html).
Increase the technical capacity and availability of information of the competent authorities to negotiate agreements with SCRAPs on equal terms.
In order to have better information available, the actual costs of managing the different flows of materials subject to RAP should be analysed and this information should be made available to local authorities. For example, a working group could be set up within the Coordination Committee to promote the exchange of knowledge in this area between the different autonomous communities and local authorities.
Methodologies: individual interviews, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that, in accordance with the provisions of Article 54 of Law 7/2022, all administrations are working in coordination within the working groups of the Coordination Commission to monitor compliance with the obligations of the RAP systems.
Improve the supervision and control by the Administration of SCRAP activities to ensure that they comply with all their regulatory obligations.
Law 7/2022 has already incorporated improvements with the aim of strengthening and ensuring the control of SCRAPs, but it is necessary to ensure that both regional and state administrations carry out their defined obligations to perform this control.
Long tender processes, difficulties in obtaining sufficiently high-quality specifications, vulnerabilities observed in the award process (high number of appeals), and insufficient resource allocation limit the actions of public administrations.
Methodologies: individual interviews, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to local authorities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
Insofar as the proposal affects the mandatory services provided by local authorities, it should be those authorities that encourage the training of their municipal technicians.
Without prejudice to the orientation given to the response in order to respond strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as an instrument for management improvements.
Reallocate resources in local entities to provide staff with greater specialisation in procurement matters in the field of waste management.
The current long deadlines in tendering processes, the difficulty in obtaining sufficiently high-quality specifications, the vulnerability observed in the award process (high number of appeals), and insufficient dedication to monitoring and controlling services make it advisable to allocate more resources to the waste area of local authorities.
During the study period, the various public administrations did not make sufficient use of public procurement to promote waste reduction. When contracting a service or work, purchasing a product or awarding a contract, public administrations have the possibility of incorporating clauses that promote environmental or social sustainability. The evidence observed leads to the conclusion that the inclusion of these clauses to reduce waste generation or encourage better management in line with the waste hierarchy was limited.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, individual interviews
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
This measure does not apply to MITERD, but rather to local entities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
Insofar as the proposal affects the mandatory services provided by local authorities, it should be those authorities that encourage the training of their municipal technicians responsible for drawing up the specifications for the contracting of municipal waste collection and treatment services.
Without prejudice to the orientation given to the response in order to respond strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as an instrument for improving management.
Improve the technical quality of tender specifications for waste collection services.
Waste collection specifications must be technically sound in order to prevent future costs and problems. The specifications must be evolutionary, allowing for the incorporation of improvements.
Promoting preparation for reuse by special employment centres and integration companies through reserved contracts is not sufficient on its own. During the period analysed, the introduction of reserved contracts for social entities engaged in preparation for reuse operations has not led to an increase in public procurement from social entities. According to the information obtained in the interviews conducted, reserved contracts are an instrument whose limited scope does not yet allow for evaluation by the main actors. The promotion of PxR through social integration entities requires robust formulas in the commercial and social spheres to ensure that these types of organisations remain in the market. In the specific case of textile waste, Law 7/2022 (nineteenth additional provision) requires that at least 50% of the amount awarded in public administration contracts for textile waste management be through reserved procurement from integration companies and special employment centres of social initiative, authorised for waste treatment. However, representatives of the sector associate the increase in contracts with the increase in waste management policies rather than with the use of this figure.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, individual interviews
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to local authorities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to regional administrations have taken place.
Insofar as the proposal affects the mandatory services provided by local authorities, it should be the contracting services of the authorities that ensure compliance with these clauses.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the coordination or collaboration mechanisms between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Ensure compliance with the existing reserved contract for promoting preparation for reuse by special employment centres and integration companies through monitoring and reporting mechanisms.
Monitoring and control mechanisms should be introduced to ensure compliance with the percentages of reserved contracts through periodic audits that verify compliance with the requirements, as well as monitoring the quantity of products reused or prepared for reuse. It would also be useful to provide local councils with information on the functioning of this type of contract, as well as reserved contract templates.
Methodologies: individual interviews, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to local authorities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
Insofar as the proposal affects the mandatory services provided by local authorities, it is these authorities that should control these systems.
Without prejudice to the orientation given to the response in order to respond strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as an instrument for improving management.
Implement efficient collection systems and set targets for incorporating recycled materials, with the aim of obtaining high-quality recycled material.
Improvements must be made to collection and treatment systems, in line with other proposals in this study, and targets must be set for incorporating recycled materials into the production of new products and reducing the levels of unsuitable materials in the different collection fractions.
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
These types of measures are studied and assessed jointly by MINHAC and MITECO.
Both ministries indicate that, in the case of plastic, the measure is considered to be implemented (see description below). For other materials, a similar approach is not being considered at this time.
Law 7/2022, of 8 April, on waste and contaminated soil for a circular economy, in Articles 67 to 83, regulates the special tax on non-reusable plastic packaging, defining it as “an indirect tax levied on the use, within the territory of application of the tax, of non-reusable packaging containing plastic, whether empty or containing, protecting, handling, distributing and presenting goods”.
For its part, the tax base is configured exclusively by the non-recycled plastic incorporated in the packaging. Specifically, Article 77.1 of Law 7/2022 establishes that: ‘1. The tax base shall consist of the amount of non-recycled plastic, expressed in kilograms, contained in the products that fall within the scope of the tax.’
Therefore, the special tax on non-reusable plastic packaging promotes the use of recycled plastic.
Establish taxes on virgin materials or other economic instruments to promote more competitive prices for recycled materials.
It would be effective to implement economic instruments such as taxes on virgin materials to help promote more competitive prices for recycled materials in relation to virgin raw materials, which would enable the consolidation of recycled material markets. Other economic instruments could also be considered, such as financial support or the inclusion of sustainable criteria in public procurement.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to local authorities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
Insofar as the proposal affects the mandatory services provided by local authorities, it should be those authorities that control the content of inappropriate material.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the coordination or collaboration mechanisms between the State and local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Improve collection systems and the sorting capacity of sorting plants, with the aim of reducing inappropriate items in municipal waste and increasing the quality of materials that reach recyclers.
With regard to collection systems, Law 7/2022 already recognises the need to prioritise more efficient collection models, although it does not establish any obligations. In this regard, local authorities could be required to implement an efficient selective collection system or be required to achieve a separate collection ratio as a condition for receiving government funds for municipal waste management.
At the sorting plant level, technologies should be improved to increase the percentage of material recovery and the quality of the recovered material by investing in advanced technology that incorporates artificial intelligence systems and real-time monitoring and tracking systems to control plant performance.
There is a negative correlation between market concentration and recycling rates. Countries with higher market concentration, as measured by the Herfindahl-Hischmann index, have lower rates of preparation for reuse and recycling, although some countries with low market concentration also score poorly on this waste performance indicator.
Spain has one of the most concentrated waste markets in Europe, especially in the waste collection subsector, which may be a limiting factor in achieving regulatory objectives.
Methodologies: exploratory data analysis, international benchmarking, distributive analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that Law 7/2022, together with another sectoral waste regulation, contains the minimum criteria for the authorisation of waste managers.
Public procurement by administrations is governed by the Public Sector Contracts Act.
In the case of possible contracts with certain private economic operators, such as SIGs, Royal Decree 1055/2022 (Art. 22.1 c) has already included criteria such as those indicated in the recommendation.
Ensure competition and facilitate the creation and incorporation of companies in the waste market in order to diversify the range of players and prevent market concentration in a few companies.
The implementation of measures to ensure competition and facilitate the creation and incorporation of companies in the waste sector is proposed. For example, a well-defined and uniform legal framework for the creation and authorisation of companies in the sector throughout the territory, clear, precise and transparent tendering procedures, incentives for innovation that promote the transition to a circular economy that prioritises the reuse, recycling and recovery of waste, as well as material auction processes with transparent award criteria.
The insufficient allocation of resources to waste management at different administrative levels, as well as the lack of greater specialisation among the personnel assigned to this task, poses a challenge to achieving the objectives set.
As has been confirmed in various interviews with administrations at the state, regional and local levels, in all cases there has been a lack of human and financial resources allocated to waste management to comply with the recently approved regulatory framework and to achieve the objectives derived from it. It is worth noting the differences in the allocation of human resources, both between autonomous communities and between municipalities. In the case of local councils, as the bodies responsible for providing the service, it will be difficult for them to comply with the obligations established by the regulations with the level of resources available for waste management and the degree of technical specialisation of the staff assigned (Fundación CONAMA, 2021). Local authorities must have qualified personnel to implement and maintain an efficient waste management system and, in turn, have the authority and capacity to supervise performance and ensure compliance at all levels (The World Bank, 2021).
Methodologies: individual interviews
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to local authorities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
In this regard, and in accordance with Article 12.5 of Law 7/2022, local authorities would be responsible for complying with this recommendation.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to strictly answer the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the State’s coordination or collaboration mechanisms with local authorities in which this initiative can be promoted, with the aim of encouraging this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Allocate human and financial resources within the local administration to ensure proper waste management and guarantee the training and education of the personnel assigned to this service.
It is necessary to reallocate human and financial resources within the local administration to waste management services in order to facilitate the achievement of regulatory objectives. It is also necessary to ensure the specialisation of the technical personnel assigned, and to this end, the selection and transfer processes for civil servants assigned to waste management functions must ensure that the person has the necessary training and specialisation to perform their tasks effectively.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis, regulatory analysis, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure applies to the autonomous communities. Therefore, in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to regional administrations have taken place.
In this regard, and taking into account the provisions of Article 15, the autonomous communities would be responsible for establishing mechanisms to monitor compliance with the obligations of their local authorities.
Establish monitoring mechanisms to ensure the commitment and participation of local councils in cases where waste management is provided by a supra-municipal entity.
To encourage the involvement of local councils in the management of services provided in partnership, autonomous communities could establish mechanisms such as the obligation to report information on separate collection at municipal level.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD points out that the Waste Coordination Commission (https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/temas/prevencion-y-gestion-residuos/comisioncoordinacion. html) is carrying out the functions of communication and information exchange between the different public administrations involved in waste management, especially municipal administrations. Within this framework and as indicated in the answer to question 1, at the plenary meeting of the Waste Coordination Commission on 31 January 2024, a specific working group was set up to monitor compliance with waste regulations, in accordance with the provisions of the PRTR Addendum (milestone 440), whose first meeting will be convened in the second quarter of the year.
Establish mechanisms to ensure coordination between the different administrations with the aim of guaranteeing efficient and effective management and avoiding duplication in the exercise of powers, while also ensuring greater communication between them and standardising, as far as possible, the different procedures defined.
It is necessary to establish stable channels of communication and information exchange between the different public administrations involved in municipal waste management.
The Coordination Commission, whose main function is cooperation and collaboration between administrations, could respond to these needs.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis, individual interviews, exploratory data analysis, difference in differences
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that this measure is applicable to the Autonomous Communities in accordance with the provisions of Final Provision 8 of Law 7/2022, of 8 April, on waste and contaminated soil for a circular economy.
In accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide.
In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
In accordance with this distribution of powers (Article 12 and Final Provision Eight), local legislation on local government bases stipulates that local authorities must decide how to organise the management of waste under their jurisdiction in the most efficient way possible, always respecting the obligations established in state legislation on waste. Consequently, and taking into account the provisions of the eighth final provision of Law 7/2022, the proposal is rejected on the grounds that it is impossible to implement due to a lack of competence.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly whether or not the recommendation has been implemented, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the Waste Coordination Commission with the aim of promoting this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Adopt, where they do not exist, or update, where they are not recent, the regulations governing waste management services.
When drafting or updating the regulations governing waste management services, the following aspects, among others, should be considered:
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that it does not consider it appropriate to create a new public body, such as an agency or similar, at the state level, dedicated specifically to the field of waste.
Promote a coordination and support mechanism or a specialised body for municipal waste management, involving central and regional governments, as well as local authorities, to promote excellence in management and support local authorities in implementing their municipal waste management responsibilities.
Municipal management, whether led by individual councils or by supra-municipal entities, has a very significant impact on municipal waste management. The existence of a coordination mechanism with specialised technical capabilities would enable support to be provided to local authorities in the development of their powers, promote excellence in the implementation of instruments and address the weaknesses identified in this study in the area of municipal management.
The support provided by this mechanism could be in the form of:
Germany and France, for example, have state-level public bodies that share the function (with different nuances) of advising public management from a centralised specialisation in a public body. Germany has a state environmental agency (Umweltbundesamt – UBA) which, among other functions, uses its expert knowledge to advise the administration on the exercise of public management. In France, the Agency for Ecological Transition (Agence de la transition écologique – ADEME) supports public environmental management and includes a territorial approach. One of its functions is precisely to support local communities in the transition to a circular economy.
In Spain, there is no state-level body focused on waste prevention and management with characteristics and powers similar to those proposed for a possible new coordination and support mechanism. However, in Catalonia, a specialised public law entity, the Agència de Residus de Catalunya, attached to the department of the Generalitat responsible for the environment, which in 2023 has around 200 employees, centralises the autonomous community’s functions in the field of waste and includes in its service charter advice to local authorities on waste prevention and generation. This agency is not owned by other administrations, although its Board of Directors is made up of various departments of the Generalitat, the two associations representing local authorities and various business, trade union and environmental organisations, among others.
In the strategic sphere, only 10% of local authorities made use of the provisions of Law 22/2011 for local authorities to programme waste prevention and plan its management. In 2019, only 5% of municipalities had a unique (non-joint) municipal waste prevention programme and 3% had management plans, according to data obtained from the questionnaire sent to municipalities.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that this proposal is under evaluation.
Coordinate regional or national initiatives to support local authorities in facilitating and promoting the drafting of waste prevention and management programmes and plans.
The low level of planning could be due, at least in some cases, to local authorities lacking experience in developing these instruments. Technical support from another administration with greater capacity could accelerate their development, approval and implementation.
Between 2010 and 2019, the autonomous communities made limited use of the penalty system.
Methodologies: exploratory data analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that, in accordance with Article 12.3 of the Waste Law, the MITERD only has executive powers (authorisation, monitoring, inspection and sanctioning) in relation to shipments between Spain and third countries and in relation to the Register of Product Producers. These powers are already being exercised. Similarly, the Autonomous Communities and Local Authorities are the competent authorities for control, inspection and sanctioning within the scope of their powers in accordance with Articles 12.4 and 12.5 of Law 7/2022, respectively. Therefore, and in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly whether or not the recommendation has been implemented, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals to improve the application of these powers within the framework of the Waste Coordination Commission.
Effectively apply existing regulatory control and inspection mechanisms and, where appropriate, apply the corresponding penalty system.
The State, autonomous communities and local authorities should effectively apply control, inspection and penalty instruments at the different stages of municipal waste management, as this study has found that these instruments are used to a limited extent.
Methodologies: documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that, in accordance with Article 12.3 of the Waste Law, the MITERD only has executive powers (authorisation, monitoring, inspection and sanctioning) in relation to shipments between Spain and third countries and in relation to the Register of Product Producers. These powers are already being exercised. Similarly, the Autonomous Communities and Local Authorities are the competent authorities for control, inspection and sanctioning within the scope of their powers in accordance with Articles 12.4 and 12.5 of Law 7/2022, respectively. Therefore, and in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly whether or not the recommendation has been implemented, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals to improve the application of these powers within the framework of the Waste Coordination Commission.
Effectively apply existing regulatory control and inspection mechanisms and, where appropriate, apply the corresponding penalty system.
The State, autonomous communities and local authorities should effectively apply control, inspection and penalty instruments at the different stages of municipal waste management, as this study has found that these instruments are used to a limited extent.
The maximum percentages of unsuitable materials in separately collected biowaste established in Law 7/2022 are not sufficient to meet the minimum quality standards for compost production established by MITERD in 2013 and ensure high-quality compost with sufficient market outlets.
Methodologies: documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD points out that Article 28 of Law 7/2022 clearly states the quality requirements for compost as a product, referring to EU Regulation 1069/2019. Therefore, it does not consider it necessary to create a state seal, as the law establishes the quality requirements for this material to be marketed as a product.
Create a state seal that certifies compost in terms of quality.
This certification should include parameters such as heavy metal content, stability and maturity, as well as the rate of nutrient release into the soil, and establish the possible uses and applicable quantities based on these parameters.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that, given that the implementation of separate bio-waste collection is just beginning, the percentage of inappropriate waste must be monitored, and therefore, for the time being, it is not considered appropriate to further reduce the percentage included in the law.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly whether or not the recommendation has been implemented, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its regulatory or coordination or promotion powers, from carrying out the relevant studies in the future to assess whether it is appropriate to review this percentage or establish it for other fractions.
Progressive reduction of the maximum percentage of inappropriate items in separately collected biowaste.
Making use of the possibility provided for in Article 25.4 of the LRSC, the maximum percentage of unsuitable waste allowed should be reduced from 20% in 2022 and 15% in 2027 to the percentages recommended by the Ministry for Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge (2022) of less than 5% and preferably less than 1-2% by weight.
Only three of the nine autonomous communities that reported having some form of regional regulation of waste managers in 2019 regulated traceability (the Balearic Islands, Galicia and the Basque Country), which is a key element in understanding waste transformation and trade processes. More stringent regulation of traceability during the different phases of waste management would mean greater control over infringements in transport, illegal waste collection or the sale or transfer of waste under irregular conditions, which between 2010 and 2019 accounted for only 2.6% of the disciplinary proceedings carried out and 0.9% of the amount of penalties declared by the autonomous communities It could also mean greater control over infringements such as the abandonment, dumping, storage or uncontrolled disposal of waste.
Methodologies: documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that the proposal is implemented within the scope of the State’s powers: With the approval of Royal Decree 553/2020, of 2 June, regulating the transfer of waste within the territory of the State, together with the Waste Law3, the Autonomous Communities are provided with instruments to improve traceability. Furthermore, it is the autonomous communities, as the competent authorities in accordance with Article 12.4 of Law 7/2022, that are responsible for monitoring the proper management of waste.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly whether or not the recommendation has been implemented, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from continuing to make proposals within the Waste Coordination Commission, with the aim of promoting this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Establish mechanisms to improve the monitoring (traceability) of the recycling process for certain materials and, in general, of all phases of municipal waste management.
The autonomous communities should establish regulations for waste managers and technical mechanisms to ensure the traceability of waste in the various municipal waste management processes, which would allow greater control over infringements such as the illegal transport or collection of waste or the sale or transfer of waste under irregular conditions, in addition to others linked to the abandonment, dumping, storage or uncontrolled disposal of waste.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that in transfers to the Autonomous Communities within the framework of the PRTR (C12. I3), made in 2021 and 2022, include the possibility of financing treatment plants for separately collected bio-waste, as well as improving the efficiency of mechanical-biological treatment (MBT) plants, together with other actions such as the implementation of new separate collection systems, including recycling centres and improvements to sorting plants, among others. These transfers are being executed by the autonomous communities and local authorities.
At the end of July 2024, €300 million from the PRTR was transferred to the autonomous communities for actions related to improving separate collection and treatment, not including on this occasion the possibility of actions on MBT plants.
Consequently, MITECO, within the scope of its powers, has carried out the actions within its power to comply with this proposal. It now remains to analyse the effects of the subsidies and to adopt measures by the autonomous communities and local authorities to comply with the obligations in accordance with the distribution of powers set out in Article 12 of Law 7/2022, without prejudice to the coordination and cooperation tasks of MITECO.
Accompany the establishment of pre-treatment obligations for waste destined for landfill with other measures that ensure sufficient capacity at treatment facilities.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that with regard to investments in municipal waste management within the PRTR framework, associated with C12. I3, this hierarchy principle has been applied and taken into account in the funds distributed to the Autonomous Communities in 202111, 2022 and 2024, and will continue to be taken into account in those that may be distributed, directing investments towards separate collection, preparation for reuse and recycling.
A link to the website where the aforementioned sectoral conference agreements are published is included: https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacionambiental/temas/prevencion-y-gestion-residuos/acuerdos-conferencia-sectorial.html
In view of the above, MITECO indicates that the measure can be considered implemented.
Direct investment towards compliance with the waste hierarchy, giving greater weight to priority levels (prevention and reuse).
It is necessary to redirect investment towards compliance with the waste hierarchy, as currently the area in which the least resources are invested in municipal waste management is prevention.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that in 2021, information was requested from the autonomous communities on the implementation of separate collection of bio-waste for the purpose of reporting the information established in the Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2008/98/EC).
Within the framework of the studies indicated in the response to proposal 1, an update of this information is envisaged.
Information is expected to be available following the questionnaire launched in January 2025.
Enforce the obligation to separate organic waste collection.
The obligation to separate organic waste collection introduced in Law 7/2022 is key to improving overall results, but it must be accompanied by regulatory and economic instruments (e.g. positive economic returns based on separate collection, as established in Catalonia with the ‘landfill tax’, subsidies and grants), together with information and awareness-raising instruments, to ensure its proper implementation.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, regulatory analysis, individual interviews
There is no proposal associated with this finding.
The difficulty in making progress towards achieving waste management objectives has not been due to a lack of clear guidelines in regulations and strategies, which offer precise quantitative targets with appropriate timelines.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, regulatory analysis
There is no proposal associated with this finding.
Methodologies: documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide. In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to regional administrations have taken place.
In this regard, Articles 12 and 15 and Annex VII of Law 7/2022 establish the powers for drawing up waste management plans and their content, stating that it is the autonomous community plans that must include an assessment of the need for infrastructure, as well as the investments and financial resources to meet their needs. Therefore
However, the State Waste Management Framework Plan (PEMAR), currently being drawn up, may provide for part of the MITERD’s budget to be allocated to promoting certain waste-related actions, always within the framework of its powers.
The proposal is therefore rejected on the grounds that it is impossible for the central government to implement it due to a lack of powers.
Include quantification of the public expenditure and revenue necessary to achieve the forecasts in the plans or programmes.
Law 7/2022 on waste, when ordering the preparation, evaluation or content of prevention programmes or management plans and programmes by the competent authorities, only includes a reference to the means of financing in the case of planning the closure or opening of waste facilities.
In line with the principles of good regulation set out in Law 39/2015 on the Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations, plans and programmes, insofar as they affect present or future public expenditure or revenue, should be quantified in order to assess their impact and effects. Combining waste prevention and management planning with associated cost calculations and budget forecasts could increase their degree of implementation.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, regulatory analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
This measure does not apply to MITERD but rather to the autonomous regions, as provided for in Final Provision 8 of Law 7/2022 of 8 April on waste and contaminated soil for a circular economy. Therefore, and in accordance with the methodology for categorising the follow-up of recommendations, the proposal is classified as ‘rejected’.
The distribution of responsibilities depends on the current system of distribution of powers established in the Constitution, laws, statutes of the autonomous communities and local legislation and, therefore, these are powers specific to each administration that should not overlap or coincide. In this area, waste, Law 7/2022 and other state regulations on waste establish a clear distribution of powers between public administrations, and in no case should these powers conflict, especially once transfers to territorial administrations have taken place.
In accordance with this distribution of powers (Article 12 and Final Provision Eight), local legislation on local government means that it is the local authorities that must decide how to organise the management of waste under their jurisdiction in the most efficient way possible, always respecting the obligations established in state legislation on waste. Consequently, and taking into account the provisions of the eighth final provision of Law 7/2022, the proposal is rejected on the grounds that it is impossible for the central government to implement it due to a lack of powers.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly whether or not the recommendation has been implemented, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the Waste Coordination Commission with a view to promoting this type of proposal as an instrument for improvement.
Complete the eighth final provision of Law 7/2022 so that there is no room for interpretation as to which regulation should apply in the event that a municipality located in an autonomous community without its own waste law lacks an ordinance.
Methodologies: documentary analysis, regulatory analysis
There is no proposal associated with this finding.
There is a confusing and misleading cost report by local authorities, as the subdivision of programmes to which the expenditure should be attributed does not comply with the definitions in the sectoral waste legislation.
The ministerial order establishing the structure of local authority budgets sets out a subdivision of programmes to which waste management expenditure should be attributed that does not comply with the definitions in sectoral legislation. Specifically, it includes, within Expenditure Area 1 (Basic public services) and Expenditure Policy 16, programme number 162, which corresponds to ‘Waste collection, management and treatment’. In turn, within this, it classifies three programmes:
In this context, there is confusion when it comes to differentiating between the costs of ‘collection’, “management” and ‘treatment’ in municipal budgets. According to reports received from municipalities and data available from CESEL and CONPREL, the distinction between management and treatment is unclear to municipalities.
Local authorities do not have clear criteria for allocating expenditure to the appropriate programme, depending on whether it relates to waste collection, management or treatment. This confusion is a logical consequence of the fact that the various sectoral waste regulations refer to different concepts for the same action and, in some cases, lack definition.
The recording of transfers made by municipalities to supra-municipal entities to pay for waste management and treatment services is inconsistent, which often prevents the correct traceability of costs. Evidence has been found in the sample data from local entities and in CONPREL that reporting is frequently done within programme 94, where transfers to other public administrations are grouped together in aggregate form and where it is not possible to trace the amounts relating to waste management. According to the interview conducted with the Ministry of Finance, this practice may stem from the fact that municipalities agree on a single joint payment for various services that would be recorded in a single transfer to the same supra-municipal entity (e.g. waste, social services, water, etc.).
There is confusion when it comes to differentiating between revenue from ‘collection’ and ‘treatment’ fees in municipal budgets. It is common for municipalities to charge a single fee for collection and treatment, so it is common for municipalities to record all revenue in one of the two categories of collection (301) or treatment (302), even though the taxable event includes both. This prevents the traceability of revenue and the accurate calculation of the cost coverage of these services.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis, documentary analysis, regulatory analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MINHAC considers that this work should in all cases be carried out by the auditing body of each local authority, which is responsible for the administrative functions of internal control and auditing of economic, financial and budgetary management and accounting in the local authority, including the submission of economic and financial information to the Ministry of Finance, the Court of Auditors and external control bodies, as well as other bodies in accordance with the provisions of current regulations.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly in accordance with the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the mechanisms for coordination or collaboration between the State and local authorities in which progress can be made on this initiative, with a view to promoting this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Correctly allocate the amounts collected by financing instruments (fees, public prices or non-taxable public property benefits) for collection and treatment services to their corresponding separate collection and treatment accounts.
Waste tax regulations clearly and unambiguously establish the taxable event for the fee, which may cover collection, treatment or both services. When there is only one concept in the taxable event, the allocation of the income to the corresponding account code for budgetary purposes (302 for collection, 303 for treatment) is direct. In the very common case where the taxable event covers both concepts, the way in which the income is allocated to each of the concepts should be specified in the economic reports accompanying the tax regulations. As Law 7/2022 provides in Article 11 that municipalities must implement non-tax public fees or charges that must also cover management costs, specific monitoring by the ministry responsible for tax matters would be advisable to ensure consistency between the financial reports and the budget report.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MINHAC points out that Order EHA/3565/2008 already establishes the obligation to allocate transfers made to supra-municipal entities for waste collection, management and treatment to chapter 4 of the economic classification of the expenditure budget and to the existing programmes for this purpose in the classification by programmes of the expenditure statements (1621, 1622 and 1623). Therefore, it is the responsibility of local authorities to correctly apply the Order, avoiding grouping expenses of different economic or programmatic nature under a single item.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer the proposal strictly, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the State’s coordination or collaboration mechanisms with local authorities in which progress can be made on this initiative, with the aim of promoting this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Establish the obligation to code transfers made to supra-municipal entities with specific waste programme codes.
Transfers made from municipalities to supra-municipal entities for waste collection and/or treatment should be recorded separately from other transfers in Chapter IV of programme codes 1621, 1622 and 1623, as appropriate. To ensure the correct traceability of amounts relating to waste management, these costs should not be added to programme 94 by grouping waste costs with transfers to other public administrations.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MINHAC indicates that Order EHA/3565/2008 does not define the concepts of ‘collection’ and ‘treatment’, so there is no discrepancy between the Order and the applicable sectoral law (currently Law 7/2022), whose definitions apply to local authorities. Although the concept of waste ‘management’ is broad and would cover, according to the definition in Law 7/2022, the operations of collection and treatment (recovery and disposal), waste management would also include other operations not covered by the aforementioned concepts, such as sorting and other preliminary operations, monitoring of operations and post-closure maintenance of landfills, among others. Therefore, although the concept of management includes collection and treatment, and there are two specific programmes for allocating these operations, local authorities must use these and not the management programme.
Order EHA/3565/2008 allows local authorities to create the programmes and sub-programmes they deem necessary when they do not appear in the structure established by the Order. Therefore, local authorities could create sub-programmes within the waste collection, management and treatment programmes to cover the costs associated with waste prevention or preparation for reuse.
Without prejudice to the guidance given in the response to answer strictly to the proposal, the above does not prevent the State, within the scope of its coordination or promotion powers, from making proposals within the framework of the coordination or collaboration mechanisms between the State and local authorities in which progress can be made on this initiative, with the aim of promoting this type of proposal as a means of improving management.
Link budgetary concepts and programmes relating to municipal waste management with the definition of these terms in specific waste regulations.
It is necessary to revise Order EHA/3565/2008, of 3 December, which approves the structure of local authority budgets, so that expenditure programmes relating to municipal waste management are associated with concepts that correspond to the definitions contained in State Law 7/2022 on waste.
Specifically, for the purposes of the classification used in local authority budgets, the concepts of ‘collection’ and “treatment” should coincide with those of Law 7/2022 on waste, and the concept of ‘management’ should disappear, as it covers all other phases.
The order should also be adapted to the waste management model outlined in European guidelines and provide for municipal spending programmes to differentiate between items associated with waste prevention and those associated with preparation for reuse.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that the TSI project has been implemented: ‘Implementation and Monitoring of the Spanish Recovery and Resilience Plan for the Green Transition REFORM/SC2021/109 under Framework Contract SRSS/2018/01/FWC/002’, which ends on 30 November and includes municipal waste management. As part of this project, 17 training sessions have been held for civil servants from local and regional administrations, according to the level of municipal waste management (basic, intermediate and advanced). Information on this project will be posted on the website in the coming weeks for wider dissemination.
Strengthen professional training and specialisation for workers involved in municipal waste management at regional and local level.
Aspects related to regulations and objectives, management, information gathering and reporting, service costs and financing, and models and instruments should be reinforced.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that ESIR and its tools are under continuous development to comply with waste reporting obligations. It is noted that the information to be used is environmental information and not economic information or information on management or governance models, which is therefore not considered appropriate to include.
Creating an integrated information system on waste management in Spain with a clear and common methodology for all public administrations is a key tool for properly monitoring performance, evaluating the different instruments applied, and designing public policy measures.
This system should be centralised and collect information using a clear methodology that is common to all public administrations. The minimum information it should include is:
According to consultations with MITERD, the E-Sir database is being designed to enable the extraction of this data from the information reported by waste managers, which could cover part of the information proposed for this observatory.
Performance monitoring for all targets is available online. However, the methodologies and underlying data for the calculations are not available, or only partially so.
There are limitations to the transparency of Spain’s performance in relation to the target for preparation for reuse and recycling. Although the data used to make the calculations are publicly available in detail, this document has limitations from the point of view of transparency:
The report on the autonomous communities for calculating Spain’s performance against the municipal biodegradable waste disposal target is not very transparent. The publication by MITERD does not present a breakdown by autonomous community or methodological instructions on how to calculate the indicator.
Methodologies: documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that the Ministerial Order on the information to be made public from the waste production and management register is currently being processed.
On the other hand, regarding the public availability of information relating to the placing on the market of products provided by producers to the sections included in the Product Producers Register, the provisions of the specific regulation on extended producer responsibility (sectoral Royal Decrees) must be taken into account, so that aggregated information will be published but not individualised by producer, as this could violate information that affects competition between companies.
Allow public access to source data and clear disclosure of the methodologies applied.
Monitoring, tracking and transparency tools are not effective because there are significant gaps in the information on municipal waste management. These gaps have been found in most of the areas addressed in this study: calculation of targets, collection of basic data on waste collection, costs and revenues, management models, among others. Municipal waste management accounts for a significant percentage of local authority budgets (around 7%), hence the importance of having sufficiently spatially disaggregated information.
Methodologies: exploratory data analysis, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that ESIR and its tools are under continuous development to comply with waste reporting obligations. It is noted that the information to be used is environmental information and not economic information or information on management or governance models, which is therefore not considered appropriate to include.
Creating an integrated information system on waste management in Spain with a clear and common methodology for all public administrations is a key tool for properly monitoring performance, evaluating the different instruments applied, and designing public policy measures.
This system should be centralised and collect information using a clear methodology that is common to all public administrations. The minimum information it should include is:
According to consultations with MITERD, the E-Sir database is being designed to enable the extraction of this data from the information reported by waste managers, which could cover part of the information proposed for this observatory.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
The MITERD indicates that the Ministerial Order on the information to be made public from the waste production and management register is currently being processed.
On the other hand, regarding the public availability of information relating to the placing on the market of products provided by producers to the sections included in the Product Producers Register, the provisions of the specific regulation on extended producer responsibility (sectoral Royal Decrees) must be taken into account, so that aggregated information will be published but not individualised by producer, as this could violate information that affects competition between companies.
Allow public access to source data and clear disclosure of the methodologies applied.
In the report published in March 2025 (Report):
MITECO indicates that Management Assignment 23ECES0016 provides for the implementation of an urban waste characterisation plan and has a duration of 12 months. Due to problems with subcontracting within the framework of the assignment, work began with the implementation of the pilot plan in 2025, with characterisations being carried out during the current calendar year, and it is therefore expected to be completed in December 2025.
Perform frequent characterisations of the composition of the different fractions, particularly the residual fraction.
The characterisations must be based on an official source and use a methodology that ensures the statistical representativeness of the estimates according to different stratifications (e.g. by autonomous community), as well as any corrections that need to be applied consistently (e.g. calculation of the dry weight of packaging subject to extended producer responsibility). Given that the data on placing on the market based on the Register and SCRAP data, which must be verified, is only obtained at the national level, this action should be framed within the remit of the ministry responsible for waste, without prejudice to the appropriate coordination mechanisms with the autonomous communities.
Spain is one of the Member States at risk of not meeting its municipal waste management targets, as warned by the European Commission in its early warning in June 2023, although some autonomous communities are closer to compliance.
In addition, European regulations include methodological changes in the calculation of the reuse and recycling rate, which increase the gap between Spain and the targets required from 2020 onwards.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis, documentary analysis, comparative analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that, for the time being, there are no plans to implement this measure.
Create, maintain and disseminate an observatory of good practices, which also allows technicians and decision-makers to connect, both in the field of collection and treatment, similar to the PowerBi tool that accompanies this assessment hosted on the AIReF website and which includes examples of experiences and good practices in municipal waste management.
The ministry responsible for waste or the inter-administrative coordination body for waste should create and subsequently maintain an observatory, preferably in web format and/or as a mobile application, which would collect, among other things, good practices and success stories from:
This observatory should also facilitate communication between technicians and decision-makers, so that those who have implemented good practices can advise and share their experience and knowledge.
There are several examples at the international level (for example, Interreg compiles regional experiences in Europe on its policy learning platform and connects technicians and policy-makers). As a result of this study, AIReF has also made an observatory of this kind available on its website.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that at the plenary meeting of the Waste Coordination Commission on 31 January 2024, a specific working group was set up to monitor compliance with waste regulations, in accordance with the provisions of the PRTR Addendum (milestone 440), whose first meeting will be convened in the second quarter of the year. In addition, MITECO has launched specific studies on the situation of the autonomous communities in terms of compliance with some of the obligations of Law 7/2022, in particular the separate collection obligations of Article 25.
Therefore, this recommendation is considered to have already been implemented.
Create a flexible mechanism, at least once a year, to monitor performance against regulatory targets and identify risks of deviations well in advance so that corrective measures can be proposed, similar to the European Commission’s early warning system with Member States. This mechanism should:
This mechanism could be created within the context of the Waste Coordination Committee or another coordination tool.
Methodologies: comparative analysis, descriptive statistical analysis, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that, for the time being, there are no plans to implement this measure.
Create, maintain and disseminate an observatory of good practices, which also allows technicians and decision-makers to connect, both in the field of collection and treatment, similar to the PowerBi tool that accompanies this assessment hosted on the AIReF website and which includes examples of experiences and good practices in municipal waste management.
The ministry responsible for waste or the inter-administrative coordination body for waste should create and subsequently maintain an observatory, preferably in web format and/or as a mobile application, which would collect, among other things, good practices and success stories from:
This observatory should also facilitate communication between technicians and decision-makers, so that those who have implemented good practices can advise and share their experience and knowledge.
There are several examples at the international level (for example, Interreg compiles regional experiences in Europe on its policy learning platform and connects technicians and policy-makers). As a result of this study, AIReF has also made an observatory of this kind available on its website.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that at the plenary meeting of the Waste Coordination Commission on 31 January 2024, a specific working group was set up to monitor compliance with waste regulations, in accordance with the provisions of the PRTR Addendum (milestone 440), whose first meeting will be convened in the second quarter of the year. In addition, MITECO has launched specific studies on the situation of the autonomous communities in terms of compliance with some of the obligations of Law 7/2022, in particular the separate collection obligations of Article 25.
Therefore, this recommendation is considered to have already been implemented.
Create a flexible mechanism, at least once a year, to monitor performance against regulatory targets and identify risks of deviations well in advance so that corrective measures can be proposed, similar to the European Commission’s early warning system with Member States. This mechanism should:
This mechanism could be created within the context of the Waste Coordination Committee or another coordination tool.
Methodologies: descriptive statistical analysis, documentary analysis
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that, for the time being, there are no plans to implement this measure.
Create, maintain and disseminate an observatory of good practices, which also allows technicians and decision-makers to connect, both in the field of collection and treatment, similar to the PowerBi tool that accompanies this assessment hosted on the AIReF website and which includes examples of experiences and good practices in municipal waste management.
The ministry responsible for waste or the inter-administrative coordination body for waste should create and subsequently maintain an observatory, preferably in web format and/or as a mobile application, which would collect, among other things, good practices and success stories from:
This observatory should also facilitate communication between technicians and decision-makers, so that those who have implemented good practices can advise and share their experience and knowledge.
There are several examples at the international level (for example, Interreg compiles regional experiences in Europe on its policy learning platform and connects technicians and policy-makers). As a result of this study, AIReF has also made an observatory of this kind available on its website.
In the report published in March 2024 (Report):
MITERD indicates that at the plenary meeting of the Waste Coordination Commission on 31 January 2024, a specific working group was set up to monitor compliance with waste regulations, in accordance with the provisions of the PRTR Addendum (milestone 440), whose first meeting will be convened in the second quarter of the year. In addition, MITECO has launched specific studies on the situation of the autonomous communities in terms of compliance with some of the obligations of Law 7/2022, in particular the separate collection obligations of Article 25.
Therefore, this recommendation is considered to have already been implemented.
Create a flexible mechanism, at least once a year, to monitor performance against regulatory targets and identify risks of deviations well in advance so that corrective measures can be proposed, similar to the European Commission’s early warning system with Member States. This mechanism should:
This mechanism could be created within the context of the Waste Coordination Committee or another coordination tool.
Note: Status and justification of the proposal communicated by the organization to which it is addressed
Autoridad Independiente de Responsabilidad Fiscal (AIReF), AAI – José Abascal nº 2, 2ª planta 28003 Madrid / +34 91 010 08 95
© Autoridad Independiente de Responsabilidad Fiscal (AIReF), AAI. Todos los derechos reservados.
