At the beginning of January, the Food Food Selection Committee presented its recommendations on what Norway must do to halve food waste by 2030. Among the proposals was to order shops to reduce the price of goods that are about to expire, and to donate food that has expired on date. But the Consumer Council wants more than the shops to receive sanctions. Norwegian households account for half of the food waste in Norway. But it is not possible to create a tax that gives each individual household an incentive to reduce food waste, according to Gunstein Instefjord, head of consumer policy at the Consumer Council. Gunnstein Instefjord, head of consumer policy at the Consumer Council, believes it is a good solution to place more responsibility on the municipalities to reduce food waste in households. Photo: John Trygve Tollefsen / Forbrukerrådet – There are far too many households for that and it is too complex to measure the food waste for a specific household. Therefore, he believes that the responsibility should lie with the municipalities. – They have a great opportunity to influence food waste in the household, says Instefjord. So what will they do? They will set up a fee that follows the municipal boundaries. This tax must follow the same pattern as for food waste. The more household waste in a municipality, the higher the fee. – If there is very little food waste in an area from the household, you can imagine removing the waste, says Instefjord. The Consumer Council was part of the food waste election, but they were in the minority. Therefore, their proposal was not included in the food waste report that was submitted on 3 January. Photo: Erik Waage / news The Norwegian Consumer Council, SIFO and Framtiden i våre hände propose placing the tax on the municipality. This gives the municipality an incentive to work against food waste in its area. – We need to locally adapt measures against food waste, says Instefjord, and points out that also in the EU it has been seen that municipal and local level is important for communicating and initiating measures against consumer waste. The idea is therefore not for the municipality to charge the waste disposal fee to the residents, but to pay an additional fee for the food that is thrown away. Instefjord also says that the proposal must be explained more closely. Mayor: – Could be a carrot The mayor of Rødøy, Inger Monsen, says this could be a good proposal. – People are environmentally conscious and most want to throw away less food. I think the residents of Rødøy would have been involved, says Monsen Inger Monsen, mayor of Rødøy municipality Photo: Private photo – With the goal of dropping such a tax, most municipalities would probably try to reduce food waste. But at the same time, it is not the individual consumer who knows about this tax that the municipality must pay. She believes that competition between municipalities can make a positive contribution. – Perhaps it can be a carrot for the residents that the tax can be used for something positive in the municipality if consumers reduce food waste. Inger Monsen believes that attitude campaigns and information measures can get people to throw less, for example in Rødøy where she is mayor. Photo: Synnøve Sundby Fallmyr / news But holding campaigns for the municipalities require extra resources. And Monsen is unsure whether the measure would have been decisive in reducing food waste. The arrangement will also require closer cooperation between the municipality and their waste disposal company, the mayor believes. – Difficult to implement Geir Benden is responsible for communications at Helgeland Avfallsforedling IKS (HAF), which handles the rubbish for Rødøy and five other municipalities. He says that they notice that there is a lot of food waste. Nevertheless, HAF believes that this proposal will be difficult to implement. – As we see it, you must then carry out picking analyzes of each individual load, says Benden. Rødøy and the other municipalities HAF works for recently started having food waste in their own bins in their areas. Therefore, the increase in food waste can also be about people being better at sorting. Photo: Geir Benden / HAF The reason is that there is also real food waste such as peels. To know how much is waste, they must then open the food waste bags to find out what is what. Another option is to set a limit on how much food waste each municipality can have. But then the municipalities are at risk of having to pay more for actual food waste that weighs more. – It is difficult to make a decision until you get some more information about how it will be done, says Benden. If it is to be done consistently, it will also require a lot of people and resources. – People can be motivated Head of development and sustainability in Iris, Tor Gausemel Kristensen, is unsure whether people will take ownership of their own food waste if the municipality gets the bill. – As the proposal is, the municipalities will receive the bill directly from the waste company instead of the waste company sending the invoice directly to the customers. Tor Gausemel Kristensen, head of development and sustainability at Iris Salten, believes there are other solutions that will work better than the one outlined by the Consumer Council. Photo: Iris Salten He highlights “Pay as you throw” as a better solution: – The amount of waste you generate will be reflected in the size of the invoice for those who generate the rubbish. In that way, those who throw away a lot of rubbish can be made responsible, says Kristensen and adds: The head of development and sustainability at Iris believes it is a better idea to let consumers themselves pay for their food waste, as the amount of waste reflects the size of the invoice. Photo: Vilde Bratland Erikstad / news – It seems that people are motivated by that. The model is already being tested in the EU, but also in Bergen. According to Waste Norway, the model has reduced the amount of residual waste from households by between 30 and 55 per cent. Voted down the proposal The proposal for a municipal levy on food waste was a minority proposal made up of the Consumer Council, SIFO and Fremtiden i være hande. They want things to get better and better. But it was not included in the report for 2023. Managing director of NHO Mat og Drikke, Petter Haas Brubakk, led the Food Food Selection. Brubakk says that the proposal was voted down, among other things, because it was too complicated. – Many municipalities are already collaborating across municipal borders on waste, says Managing Director of NHO Food and Drink, Petter Haas Brubakk. Photo: Hans Fredrik Asbjørnsen / NHO – The proposal for a fee and financial incentive for not throwing away food seems to us to be too complicated and poorly founded for now. Brubakk does not rule out that the measure may be applicable at a later date. Førebels thinks the measure could lead to more people throwing away their food waste elsewhere. – We were going to propose measures that will work before 2030. It may well be that this is a long-term measure, but I did not feel justified in going in for it now. – We are concerned that the waste disposal fee is self-cost-based. It must be the real costs of collecting and handling the waste, says Johanne Solheim, adviser at Samfunnsbedriftene. Photo: Samfunnsbedriftene Today, all residents pay a waste disposal fee. It is in accordance with the Pollution Act. The Consumer Council does not think that anything should be done about it. Johanne Solheim, adviser at Samfunnsbedriftine, believes that if food waste is priced higher than other rubbish, it can mean that more food ends up in residual waste. – We do not think it is a good solution. It is better to introduce measures earlier in the value chain. When the food has already been thrown away, it is too late, says Solheim.
ttn-69
The Consumer Council will give the municipalities the bill for ordinary people’s rubbish – news Nordland
