Land application of sewage sludge has long been subject to concern. Among the reasons for these concerns are, for example, the occurrence of odours and the risk of spreading heavy metals and pathogens, but also a negative perception regarding the use of sludge. In this paper, we focus the actors' perceptions of sewage sludge use and investigate, through a series of interviews with key actors and stakeholders in the sewage sludge management chain, how technology, the regulatory framework or public perception may function as barriers for valuing sewage sludge as a resource. The uncertainty following outdated legislation and constantly changing policies are frequently mentioned as the main barriers to investment in new technologies, which, in the respondents' opinion, creates a deadlock within the sector with no clear path forward. Although all respondents act and argue with a focus on environment and circularity, their overall sludge management strategies, as well as the issues they focus on, differ. Our study indicate that Swedish sludge management is, to a large extent, siloed and there is a clear a need for a more holistic approach that can help actors to target common issues.

This project has targeted utilisation of infrastructure for organic waste treatment in Sweden, in particular sewage sludge, to achieve increased production of high-value materials and energy carriers, reduced use of primary resources, and improved economic performance. We have investigated the sewage sludge management system as a socio-technical system facing a change, with integral connections to the energy and waste systems.

In conclusion, there is no silver bullet for the future of sewage sludge management. Indeed, it would have to be a full clip of silver bullets, as we found that a mishmash of different barriers –technical, economic, legal, and related to public perception – creates uncertainty that hinders progress regarding both sustainable long-term strategies and technological advancement. The Swedish sewage sludge management is largely fragmented, highlighting the need to shift directionto a more holistic approach. This can help actors address common issues rather than focussing solely on activity-specific problems. Introducing new legislation could be a key step, as the current specific legislation on sewage sludge has a seemingly insignificant role for today’s sludge management, compared to other legislation and the voluntary certification.

We have formulated six overall research highlights, to outline both published results and meta-conclusions based on combined insights. Each highlight is described separately in this report.

Generation of waste is unavoidable. While human use of natural resources, at least initially, is often about refining resources, it typically also involves a reduction in value in the form of, for example, losses of energy or gradual deterioration of physical objects. The use of resources thus contributes to the production of waste. Waste is considered a nuisance and has historically been dealt with in the cheapest, or easiest way possible. Current resource use and consumption rates are, however, often considered unstainable, and according to some estimations humanity is currently consuming about three plantes worth of resources. Circular economy, where generation of waste is minimized, and reutilization of waste is increased, has therefore been proposed as an economic model for the future. One, frequently mentioned, barrier towards circular economy is the legal system. When it comes to new and innovative practices, legal systems often adapt at slow pace. This is also the case for European waste law. Waste is within the European Union (EU) regulated through the 2008 Waste Framework Directive, which is a minimum directive. Waste law is an area where the EU exercises great influence over Member State (MS) policy and MS may not implement laws that provide for a lower level of protection than what EU law mandates. As is often the case in studies related to environmental law, the legal system in focus for this study is EU environmental law, as a large part of the national regulations are either influenced by or derived from EU law as a large share of national provisions are either affected by, or stem from EU law (or both).

The aim of this dissertation is to examine the role of law in relation to both environmental protection in the immediate sense, and reutilization of waste. Previous research has established that waste law can be said to have developed around how waste is defined legally, and that the definition of waste is a cornerstone of the entire corpus of waste law as it determines what can and cannot be controlled by the substantive rules the framework provides. To this end, the dissertation examines the relationship between key terms for the applicability of the WFD, the concepts of waste, by-product and end-of-waste through legal analysis. It builds on previous research by assessing the coherency between these terms. Special attention is paid to under what circumstances a substance or object may transform into a waste and vice versa. The dissertation shows that transformation from non-waste to waste, and waste to non-waste differ. the law sets higher requirements for something to be classified as non-waste than for the object to be classified as waste, as a result of the mandatory, cumulative, conditions that must be fulfilled for end-of-waste and by-products. This means that substances or objects are included in and excluded from the protective governance of waste law on different terms. In this regard, the dissertation suggests that this incoherency can be alleviated by the alignment of the concepts of waste, by-product and end-of-waste.

In addition, the dissertation also examines the regulatory framework for two specific waste streams: legacy waste and sewage sludge. Sewage sludge is, through the Sewage Sludge Directive (SSD), regulated lex specialis. Here, the perceived appropriateness of the regulatory framework is examined through interviews with sector stakeholders. A key finding is that the regulatory framework is perceived to be obsolete by the stakeholders, an opinion that is mirrored in literature, but also that it is possible to enforce stricter requirements than what is called for by the SSD. This highlights a gap between ‘law in books and law in action’. Regarding the recovery of legacy waste, the dissertation shows that, chiefly, the regulatory framework is not designed for recovery of such waste. This result mirrors previous literature showing that the current regulatory framework is not designed for the objectives of circular economy, such as recovery of legacy waste. For instance, specific provisions are missing for both the recovery of mining waste and landfill mining. The regulatory framework can thus, in this regard, be considered as underdeveloped, which means uncertainty for the actors involved.

The generation of waste is certain and unavoidable. Waste will always exist in some form. It is, however, possible to minimize waste generation and thereby improve virgin resource utilization. Within the European Union, the concept of End of Waste is a legal instrument adopted to facilitate the transition from waste to product, thus by extension facilitate the conditions for a circular economy. In this paper, the implications of the legal definition transforming waste to product, End of Waste, is discussed against the backdrop of waste as a potential resource. Through legal analysis, three primary issues regarding the current formulation of article 6(1) of the Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) are highlighted: (1) the cumulative conditions stated in article 6(1) creating (unnecessary) bottlenecks; (2) the fact that the conditions for End of Waste originally were intended to be operationalized through legislative acts, such as the regulation for iron scrap or glass cullet; and (3) the fact that there is no clear indication of what level of proof the conditions stated in article 6(1) requires and the ambiguity of its application this implies in general. The fact that there must be a specified use as well as a market for a 'waste' to transform into something else implies that the underlying idea of the incorporation of End of Waste loses some of its meaning.

In Sweden, landfills are excavated on a relatively modest scale (mainly for the purpose of decontamination, to increase landfill capacity or to free up land for other uses). Lately however, aspirations for excavations aimed at recovering energy and materials have increased and an important goal according to the Mineral Strategy of Sweden is to increase the recycling rate of metals and minerals and reduce the amount of waste. The incidence of certain (critical) metals and minerals, including REE and phosphorus, is moreover assumed to be relatively large in Swedish landfills, and the interest in excavating landfills is therefore expected to increase. The legal situation as regards excavation of landfills in general and of mining waste in particular, is however unclear, not least regarding permit requirement according to the Swedish Environmental Code. Even though landfill recycling may entail numerous negative environmental effects, e.g., acidic and metallic leachate, release of gases, and destabilization of land the regulation of the activity is not clear. The aim of this paper is to describe and problematize the legal situation as regards landfill excavation in Sweden against the backdrop of, on the one hand, a potential increase in the demand for recycled metals and minerals, and on the other hand comprehensive requirements for a non-toxic and healthy environment.

Drawing a line between what constitutes a potentially hazardous waste and what is instead a possible resource is complicated. A case in point is the use of sewage sludge, whose use not least in agriculture, has long been subject of debate. In Sweden, the issue has been investigated for possible legislative changes four times in the past decades. The latest of these investigations propose to introduce either a total or a partial ban on agricultural use of sewage sludge. In this paper, the legality of these proposals is analyzed with particular focus on their compatibility with the precautionary principle and the EU principle of free movement of goods and services, using a traditional legal method. The analysis indicates that a partial ban may well be considered proportionate to the risks that the use entails for human health and the environment, whilst a total ban would likely be found in breach of EU law, despite the scope for Member States to take stricter measures than prescribed by secondary legislation.