The long road to deposit return schemes in the Netherlands: the timeline

On Saturday 10 March 2018, State Secretary Stientje van Veldhoven informed the House of Representatives by letter about the introduction of a deposit scheme on plastic bottles and about making the packaging chain circular, with the Packaging Framework Agreement as the focal point. That same Saturday, a major interview with the State Secretary about the introduction of deposits on plastic bottles was published in Trouw.

In the interview, Van Veldhoven is determined that the approach "one way or another, will succeed." In the spring of 2021, there will be a deposit on small plastic bottles containing water and soft drinks, according to the letter to the House of Representatives, unless the business community succeeds in reducing the number of bottles in the environment by 70 to 90% and manages to recycle 90% of small plastic bottles.

This article is an explanation of the State Secretary's decision and the timeline towards the spring of 2021, at which point small plastic bottles must be subject to a deposit if the business community does not meet the targets. The article discusses the context in which the decision was made and the political debate that followed. Where there are still uncertainties regarding the process up to and including the spring of 2021, the article attempts to point these out as carefully as possible.

The petition motion

To interpret the State Secretary's letter, it is useful to first look back at the origin of the so-called 'petition motion' of the Plastic Soup Surfer. In 2016, Merijn Tinga, alias the Plastic Soup Surfer, started a petition to get the subject of deposits on the agenda of the House of Representatives as a citizens' initiative.

On 14 February 2017, Merijn went to the House of Representatives with 55,000 candy hearts and presented the same number of signatures to the politicians. The politicians present, including Agnes Mulder (CDA), Carla Dik-Faber (CU), Liesbeth van Tongeren (GroenLinks), Henk Krol (50PLUS), Stientje van Veldhoven (D66), Erik Ziengs (VVD), Tjeerd van Dekken (PvdA), Eric Smaling (SP) and Esther Ouwehand, were also asked on the spot if they wanted to back the target of achieving 90% fewer plastic bottles in the environment within 3 years. That target was endorsed by all politicians present.

Two days later, on 16 February 2017, the recurring General Consultation on the Circular Economy took place. It was the last 'AO' (General Consultation) before the elections of 15 March 2017. The agenda included the initiative of the Plastic Soup Surfer. In that consultation, Eric Smaling (SP) referred to Merijn's action as being the 'petition motion' and in the same consultation, former State Secretary Sharon Dijksma (PvdA) promised that the government would adopt the target of that 'virtual motion', which probably immediately constituted a first in parliamentary history. Dijksma also promised to come up with a proposal by autumn 2017 regarding a 90% reduction of small plastic bottles in litter within 3 years. Dijksma also stated that the broad support for the target meant that the House of Representatives was asking for additional measures.

In the letter of 23 May 2017, State Secretary Dijksma addresses the implementation of the 'petition motion'. In it, she also indicates that price incentives such as deposits cannot remain unaddressed in order to meet the target. The State Secretary also stated that she would be able to make a well-founded statement on the feasibility of the petition motion by the end of 2017. By then, the ongoing study into the costs and effects of a deposit scheme should also be completed.

The Rutte III cabinet was sworn in on 26 October 2017, with State Secretary Sharon Dijksma being succeeded by Stientje van Veldhoven.

The Deposit Study

On 31 August 2017, Dijksma informed the House of Representatives via a letter about the study "Costs and effects of deposits on small plastic bottles and cans." The study had been promised in the Circular Economy General Consultation of 5 October 2016 and was carried out by CE Delft.

The letter briefly describes some results of the study, which specifically addresses the Dutch situation, considering an expansion of the current system. The researchers conclude that deposits on small bottles and cans lead to a reduction of those products in litter in the range of 70 to 90%. The letter also indicates that the costs of expanding a deposit scheme "can vary from €10 million to €110 million per year depending on the variant chosen."

The letter fails to mention that due to unredeemed bottles and receipts, the deposit system also has income ranging from €31 million to €121 million per year depending on the variant chosen. This income helps to offset the aforementioned costs for the business community.

Nor does the letter mention that the expansion of the deposit scheme leads to savings on collection through current systems (e.g. Plastic Heroes) in the range of €5.5 million

On Saturday 10 March 2018, State Secretary Stientje van Veldhoven informed the House of Representatives by letter about the introduction of a deposit scheme on plastic bottles and about making the packaging chain circular, with the Packaging Framework Agreement as the focal point. That same Saturday, a major interview with the State Secretary about the introduction of deposits on plastic bottles was published in Trouw.

In the interview, Van Veldhoven is determined that the approach "one way or another, will succeed." In the spring of 2021, there will be a deposit on small plastic bottles containing water and soft drinks, according to the letter to the House of Representatives, unless the business community succeeds in reducing the number of bottles in the environment by 70 to 90% and manages to recycle 90% of small plastic bottles.

This article is an explanation of the State Secretary's decision and the timeline towards the spring of 2021, at which point small plastic bottles must be subject to a deposit if the business community does not meet the targets. The article discusses the context in which the decision was made and the political debate that followed. Where there are still uncertainties regarding the process up to and including the spring of 2021, the article attempts to point these out as carefully as possible.

The petition motion

To interpret the State Secretary's letter, it is useful to first look back at the origin of the so-called 'petition motion' of the Plastic Soup Surfer. In 2016, Merijn Tinga, alias the Plastic Soup Surfer, started a petition to get the subject of deposits on the agenda of the House of Representatives as a citizens' initiative.

On 14 February 2017, Merijn went to the House of Representatives with 55,000 candy hearts and presented the same number of signatures to the politicians. The politicians present, including Agnes Mulder (CDA), Carla Dik-Faber (CU), Liesbeth van Tongeren (GroenLinks), Henk Krol (50PLUS), Stientje van Veldhoven (D66), Erik Ziengs (VVD), Tjeerd van Dekken (PvdA), Eric Smaling (SP) and Esther Ouwehand, were also asked on the spot if they wanted to back the target of achieving 90% fewer plastic bottles in the environment within 3 years. That target was endorsed by all politicians present.

Two days later, on 16 February 2017, the recurring General Consultation on the Circular Economy took place. It was the last 'AO' (General Consultation) before the elections of 15 March 2017. The agenda included the initiative of the Plastic Soup Surfer. In that consultation, Eric Smaling (SP) referred to Merijn's action as being the 'petition motion' and in the same consultation, former State Secretary Sharon Dijksma (PvdA) promised that the government would adopt the target of that 'virtual motion', which probably immediately constituted a first in parliamentary history. Dijksma also promised to come up with a proposal by autumn 2017 regarding a 90% reduction of small plastic bottles in litter within 3 years. Dijksma also stated that the broad support for the target meant that the House of Representatives was asking for additional measures.

In the letter of 23 May 2017, State Secretary Dijksma addresses the implementation of the 'petition motion'. In it, she also indicates that price incentives such as deposits cannot remain unaddressed in order to meet the target. The State Secretary also stated that she would be able to make a well-founded statement on the feasibility of the petition motion by the end of 2017. By then, the ongoing study into the costs and effects of a deposit scheme should also be completed.

The Rutte III cabinet was sworn in on 26 October 2017, with State Secretary Sharon Dijksma being succeeded by Stientje van Veldhoven.

The Deposit Study

On 31 August 2017, Dijksma informed the House of Representatives via a letter about the study "Costs and effects of deposits on small plastic bottles and cans." The study had been promised in the Circular Economy General Consultation of 5 October 2016 and was carried out by CE Delft.

The letter briefly describes some results of the study, which specifically addresses the Dutch situation, considering an expansion of the current system. The researchers conclude that deposits on small bottles and cans lead to a reduction of those products in litter in the range of 70 to 90%. The letter also indicates that the costs of expanding a deposit scheme "can vary from €10 million to €110 million per year depending on the variant chosen."

The letter fails to mention that due to unredeemed bottles and receipts, the deposit system also has income ranging from €31 million to €121 million per year depending on the variant chosen. This income helps to offset the aforementioned costs for the business community.

Nor does the letter mention that the expansion of the deposit scheme leads to savings on collection through current systems (e.g. Plastic Heroes) in the range of €5.5 million to €8.0 million per year depending on the variant chosen.

The study also calculates that the expansion of deposits yields CO2 savings in the range of €3.5 million to €27.0 million per year depending on the variant chosen and depending on the cost assigned to CO2. A further saving of €3 million to €10 million is estimated because municipalities will need to empty public waste bins less frequently.

And finally, the study indicates that municipalities can save up to a maximum of €80 million annually on the clean-up of litter. This saving is achieved if municipalities continue to strive for the same level of cleanliness as before the introduction of deposits. Cleaning up would then occur less frequently. The maximum saving is therefore dependent on the choices municipalities make, but the amount does indicate which costs no longer need to be incurred for the clean-up of small plastic bottles and cans.

None of the above-mentioned revenues and cost savings are mentioned in Dijksma's letter, which therefore gave an incomplete and distorted picture of the actual benefits and costs of introducing deposits.

The CE Delft analysis that deposits lead to 70% to 90% fewer bottles and cans in litter is important. The range is based on measurements from the United States and Denmark. The CE Delft study did not attempt to explain why the effectiveness of deposits differs in the various US states and Denmark, but that could, for example, depend on the level of the deposit amount and the ease with which the bottles and cans can be returned.

Through the study by CE Delft, deposits are the only means established that can achieve the target from the 'petition motion' of 90% fewer bottles in litter in 3 years' time, potentially with additional accompanying policies if the effectiveness falls below 90%.

Reward Clean (Schoon Belonen)

The letter of 23 May 2017 also speaks about another type of price incentive besides deposits. Under the banner of 'Schoon Belonen' (Reward Clean), the Natuur & Milieu Foundation, the VNG (Association of Netherlands Municipalities) and the packaging industry have taken the initiative to test reward systems for bottles and cans in practice. In doing so, schools and associations received a collective reward or a quid pro quo for the bottles and cans they collected. 102 municipalities registered for the pilot, and eventually 77 municipalities effectively participated, according to the initiators.

In the letter of 18 June 2015 to the House of Representatives, State Secretary Wilma Mansveld (PvdA) speaks for the first time about a nationwide approach to litter. Part of that approach is the development of a return premium system for small PET bottles and cans. In the letter, Mansveld says that "all parties [have been] asked to think about a creative approach for small PET bottles and cans." In an annex to the letter ("Packaging Coalition Proposal", date: 16 June 2015), the Afvalfonds (Waste Fund), VNG, NVRD and Natuur & Milieu Foundation propose to present an action plan before 1 October 2015, in which the parties involved "carry out various extensive experiments in neighborhoods, districts and villages for the collection of small PET bottles, beverage cans and possibly other packaging materials." Based on this pilot, a nationwide plan should be introduced as of 1 January 2018, according to the letter from the 'packaging coalition'.

In the letter of 14 October 2015 to the House of Representatives, Mansveld presents the action plan of the packaging coalition. Schoon Belonen would start on 1 January 2016 and the pilot would be evaluated at the end of 2017. During the VAO (Report of a General Consultation) on Raw Materials and Waste on 1 September 2015, a motion by MPs Yasmin Çegerek and Stientje Van Veldhoven was submitted and ultimately adopted. The motion asks to "ensure a solid set-up of the research by, among other things, providing a scientifically sound determination of the research framework, a good baseline measurement and adequate monitoring, with a declaration of approval of the setup, measurement data and conclusions by an independent organization." State Secretary Mansveld subsequently asked Rijkswaterstaat as an independent party to work out the baseline measurement and further monitoring to determine the effect of the Schoon Belonen Pilot.

As agreed, the evaluation of the Schoon Belonen pilot was delivered by Rijkswaterstaat at the end of 2017. Together with the letter of 28 November 2017, State Secretary Stientje van Veldhoven sent the report in question, "Monitoring Report Pilot Schoon Belonen", to the House of Representatives.

The core of the evaluation concerns the question of whether the Schoon Belonen Pilot has led to fewer bottles and cans in litter in the participating municipalities. For this purpose, baseline measurements were carried out in May 2016 (measurement 1) and September 2016 (measurement 2) regarding the numbers of bottles and cans in litter. In May 2017 (measurement 1) and September 2017 (measurement 2), the number of bottles and cans in litter was measured again in the municipalities participating in the pilot. By comparing the 2017 results with 2016, the effect of the pilot would be evaluated.

For measurement 1, a slight increase in bottles and cans was observed in 2017. For measurement 2, there was a decrease of 19% in PET bottles and 36% in cans in litter. Based on measurement 1, there seems to be no positive effect, but based on measurement 2, the pilot does seem to yield a significant positive effect. Rijkswaterstaat then compared the results with the broader national monitoring, so also with the areas where the pilot was not carried out. This showed that in the period of measurement 1, 2 to 3% more bottles and cans were found across the country. In the period of measurement 2, a decrease of 36% was observed for both bottles and cans. By comparing the results of the pilot with the national results, it appeared that no broad significant positive effect of the pilot was observed. Only in the immediate vicinity of participating schools and associations (a very limited share of the municipal area) could a positive effect be seen.

Although the results of the Schoon Belonen Pilot barely show a positive effect on litter, the initiators state in the letter of 17 November 2018 addressed to the State Secretary that the results of the pilot provide starting points

to make elements of Schoon Belonen part of the broad national approach to litter. Indeed, Schoon Belonen is said to have a positive effect on social engagement.

State Secretary Dijksma already indicated in 2017 that price incentives cannot remain unaddressed in order to meet the target of 90% fewer plastic bottles in the environment within 3 years. CE Delft's study on the costs and effects of deposits showed that deposits can help achieve the target. The evaluation of Schoon Belonen shows that this 'alternative to deposits' has a minimal effect on litter.

Demand for the introduction of deposits grows

In 2012, former State Secretary Joop Atsma (CDA) made an agreement with the business community that deposits on large bottles could be abolished, provided seven conditions were met. Those conditions are laid down in the Packaging Framework Agreement. In 2015, his successor Wilma Mansveld concluded that the business community had failed to meet the condition of removing PVC packaging from supermarkets, which meant deposits were definitively not released.

Since then, support for the expansion of deposits has grown. The 55,000 signatures collected by the Plastic Soup Surfer are a sign of this. Surveys conducted among the Dutch population also show that public support is very large and growing.

At the end of 2016, Radar conducted a survey among 1,500 of its own panel members, which showed that 74% supported the expansion of deposits to small plastic bottles and cans.

In early 2018, Radar asked 40,000 test panel members again what they thought of expanding the deposit scheme. This time, 80% responded positively.

In early 2018, the Consumentenbond (Consumers' Association) also asked 2,000 members what they thought of the expansion of deposits. 84% of respondents reacted positively to the expansion for small bottles and 75% support the expansion of deposits to cans.

Finally, in early 2018, both Recycling Netwerk (GfK, 24,979 respondents) and EenVandaag (33,270 respondents on the EenVandaag opinion panel) asked about support for deposits among the voters of political parties. The results of these polls support each other. Respectively, 79% (GfK) and 78% (EenVandaag) of those surveyed support the expansion of deposits. Support is also high among voters of the government parties. In the CDA, according to both polls, 83% are in favour of expansion, and in the VVD, that is 79% (GfK) and 72% (EenVandaag). In D66 (85% GfK; 89% EenVandaag) and ChristenUnie (85% for both GfK and EenVandaag), support for the expansion of deposits is very high.