.jpg?upscale=true&width=1600&name=Headers%20(25).jpg)
.jpg?upscale=true&width=768&name=Headers%20(25).jpg)
Many organizations have now set ambitious goals related to Zero Waste. That’s not surprising. Raw material shortages are on the rise, regulations are becoming stricter, and the pressure to demonstrate more sustainable operations is growing. At the same time, many companies are finding that putting this into practice is more challenging than expected. Despite investments in waste separation, recycling, and awareness campaigns, the desired breakthrough often fails to materialize.
That’s because Zero Waste rarely ends at the waste container. The greatest opportunities—and challenges—lie much earlier in the supply chain: in procurement decisions, packaging choices, internal processes, and collaboration with suppliers. It is precisely there that it is determined how much material is ultimately lost and how much value is retained.
Anyone who wants to achieve their Zero Waste goals must therefore look beyond waste alone. This starts with understanding the challenges that companies most frequently encounter in practice.
Why Zero Waste Ambitions Often Get Stuck at Waste Separation
Ask companies what measures they’re taking toward Zero Waste, and waste separation is almost always the first thing mentioned. That makes sense. It’s visible, relatively easy to organize, and delivers quick, measurable results. New collection methods, clear communication, and higher recycling rates show that progress is being made.
Yet this is often where a misunderstanding arises. After all, separating waste is not the same as preventing waste.
Research by Milgro shows that 68% of organizations primarily fulfill their Zero Waste goals through waste separation and the collection of specific waste streams. Measures that actually prevent waste at the source—such as reducing packaging or promoting reuse—are mentioned significantly less often. In addition, more than one in five organizations reports that no Zero Waste initiatives are currently underway.
This is striking, because waste prevention, in particular, has the greatest impact. After all, packaging that never needs to be produced yields greater environmental benefits than packaging that is only recycled at the end of the supply chain. Rijkswaterstaat also emphasizes that waste prevention is a key way to reduce the use of raw materials and stimulate the circular economy.
Many organizations have now effectively organized their waste management, but still lack insight into the question that really matters: why does this waste stream actually arise?
Zero Waste Starts Before the Trash Can
Anyone who wants to take waste reduction seriously must go back to the source. Much waste is generated long before a product, package, or material ends up in a waste stream. The origin often lies in choices made months or even years earlier.
Consider, for example, packaging that has never been critically evaluated, products that are difficult to repair, disposable materials that are purchased as a matter of course, or supplier choices based solely on price. On their own, these may seem like minor decisions. In practice, however, they determine how much material is lost and how many raw materials retain their value.
The Flemish agency OVAM puts it aptly: zero waste is the best solution for the environment and for your wallet. Only then do sorting, recycling, and processing come into play.
This automatically makes Zero Waste more than just a facilities management issue. It touches on procurement, design, logistics, packaging, production, and supplier management. Organizations that focus exclusively on waste streams often optimize the end of the chain, while the greatest gains lie at the very beginning.
Ultimately, the cheapest kilogram of waste is the one that is never generated in the first place.
The more often organizations view their processes from that perspective, the more opportunities become apparent.
Without ownership and data, Zero Waste remains merely an ambition.
A second challenge is that responsibility for Zero Waste is often scattered throughout the organization. Virtually everyone is involved, but no one feels ownership of the whole.
In many organizations, facilities management handles collection, procurement signs contracts, operations monitors the processes, and sustainability reports on impact. Everyone holds a piece of the puzzle, but precisely because of this, the big picture is sometimes missing.
As a result, improvements are tackled in a piecemeal fashion. A new waste stream is established, an awareness campaign is launched, or a supplier is replaced, while the underlying causes of material loss remain out of sight.
There’s another issue: you can’t improve what you don’t see.
Many organizations know exactly how much residual waste is disposed of, but have limited insight into the underlying causes. Which materials become contaminated? Where do losses occur in processes? Which packaging generates the highest waste costs? And how many valuable raw materials are unnecessarily lost from the supply chain?
During a recent Milgro webinar on raw material scarcity and legislation, it was emphasized that insight into material flows, ownership, and supply chain data is becoming increasingly important. Not only to implement improvements, but also to comply with reporting obligations such as the CSRD.
Without data, Zero Waste remains an ambition, but with data, it becomes a management tool.
.jpg?width=780&height=390&name=Uitgelichte%20afbeelding%20(84).jpg)
Zero Waste delivers more Than Many Organizations Realize
When people think of Zero Waste, environmental benefits are often the first thing that comes to mind. There’s no doubt those benefits exist. Less waste means less incineration, less use of raw materials, and lower CO₂ emissions. Yet another benefit is frequently underestimated: the financial impact.
Waste often consists of materials that were once paid for, stored, processed, and transported, but ultimately no longer provide any value. Every full container therefore tells the same story: raw materials have been lost here.
Those who prevent waste usually also benefit from lower waste disposal costs, reduced material procurement, fewer transport trips, and a more efficient use of raw materials. Moreover, dependence on primary raw materials decreases—something that is becoming increasingly relevant in a world where availability is less and less a given.
Many organizations are now experiencing that supply chains are under pressure, prices can fluctuate sharply, and geopolitical developments have direct consequences for the availability of materials. As a result, circularity is increasingly seen as a way to reduce dependencies and limit risks.
The sheer scale of the issue also highlights just how many opportunities still exist. According to the Dutch Waste Management Association, nearly 60 million metric tons of waste are generated in the Netherlands each year. Approximately 80% of that is recycled. While this is positive, it also shows how many materials become waste before they are reused.
The greatest economic benefit, therefore, lies not at the end of the chain, but at the beginning.
Zero Waste Requires Collaboration
The organizations that have made the most progress with Zero Waste often have one thing in common: they don’t treat it as a waste issue, but as an organizational issue.
After all, waste rarely results from a single wrong decision. It is usually the result of dozens of choices spread across departments, suppliers, and supply chain partners. As a result, no single department can solve the problem on its own.
Successful organizations therefore bring together different disciplines. Facilities management knows which materials end up in the waste streams. Procurement influences what comes in. Operations identifies where losses occur. Sustainability monitors goals and reporting. Suppliers help determine which materials, packaging, and return options are available.
OVAM therefore explicitly links waste prevention, circular procurement, reuse, and sustainable design to integrated materials management. Waste management is not separate from the rest of the organization but forms part of a broader strategy for raw materials and circularity
This is precisely where the shift from waste management to raw materials management occurs. The focus is no longer on the waste stream, but on how materials can retain their value for as long as possible.
Conclusion
Many organizations now have clear Zero Waste ambitions. Yet in practice, the reality often proves more complicated than expected. This is not because of a lack of ambition, but because the focus still frequently lies on waste separation rather than waste prevention.
Organizations that are truly making progress look beyond the trash can. They investigate where waste is generated, which materials are lost, and how processes can be designed more intelligently. Ownership, reliable data, and collaboration play a crucial role in this.
Ultimately, the greatest benefit lies not in better waste management, but in preventing waste in the first place. Those who keep valuable raw materials in the supply chain longer lower costs, reduce COâ‚‚ emissions, minimize dependencies, and take concrete steps toward circular business practices.
Zero Waste is therefore not a final destination, but a different way of looking at materials, processes, and value.
Together to a world free of waste- will you join us?
Zero Waste starts with reducing waste. Less waste means materials stay in use longer and fewer new raw materials are needed. This is in line with our vision: waste is a raw material that has lost its way.
Stay informed
Follow us on LinkedIn. Here we share the latest news on regulations, circular topics and developments in the industry. You can also subscribe to our newsletter. Curious what Milgro can mean for your operations and waste processes? Feel free to get in touch.
.jpg)
