Do we need genius to solve the fly-tipping problem?

Like many of my colleagues in waste management, I’m appalled and frustrated by the rise in fly-tipping. Over a million incidents recorded in 2024 alone. Costs of over £13 million to clean up. Yes, there have been thousands of pounds worth of fines and penalties issued to those that have been caught. Even prison sentences for some, but regardless of this, fly-tipping keeps happening and it’s getting worse.

A number of reasons have been cited:

·         A lack of nearby drop-off depots or recycling facilities.

·         Rejection of items at recycling drop-offs

·         Confusion as to what can be recycled and how to dispose of it.

·         High costs of using landfill or specified hazardous waste sites.

Then there is of course one of the most challenging factors to overcome: simple apathy and disregard for laws, people’s property, or potential risks associated with dumping toxic waste. People who knowingly still dump illegally because they can’t be bothered to go to the effort or don’t want to pay the costs associated with proper disposal.

How do you change the behaviour of people who don’t care? You can’t reason with them. Any attempt to educate them to the harms of what they’re doing will fall on deaf ears, because people only listen to what they care about, and they don’t care. Not one whit. Just look at litter…

What does the world say?

In my curiosity, I tapped into what the world of AI thought. I asked how would the people hailed by many as tech geniuses go about solving one of the biggest problems in waste management – fly-tipping. I’ve summarised the conversation with ChatGPT below. For the full transcript click here. I was very surprised where the conversation too me.

The AI bots cited Musk, Bezos, Nadella and Pichai, heads of Tesla and Starlink, Amazon, Microsoft and Google. If nothing else, it’s one way to start an interesting debate.

1.       The Musk approach is to use data analytics and create efficiencies in waste management by using AI and automation. Let’s separate the AI ideology from reality.

Data can be useful in tracking the source of where illegally dumped items are coming from and where potential gaps in waste facilities and services. By analysing the composition of loads, whether it’s construction materials, DIY waste, general household waste or appliances, it may be possible to trace them back to their source and then address the issue of waste management there.

Alternatively, that information could be fed to local enforcement agencies to track and catch perpetrators. If there are specific routes or areas where illegal dumping commonly occurs, these could be monitored to apprehend culprits.

Using AI to create efficiencies in waste sorting and processing is already happening in many facilities in the UK. Improving recycling processes through automation or innovating ways to process hard to recycle materials, that’s more likely to leverage human intelligence.

2.       The Bezos approach is to optimise logistics and create cost saving efficiencies.

I’m not entirely sure how this could be applied to combat fly-tipping, where items are randomly dumped in small quantities. Perhaps you could use it to consider where there are gaps in local council services. If there are areas that don’t accept items commonly found on illegal dumping sites, then a consideration might be how to formalise collections and processing of these items.

3.       Nadella’s solution is to create a digital tool or platform to help manage waste management, leveraging human experience and expertise coupled with digital capabilities.

It sounds nice, progressive even, and like the Bezos approach it relies on having data including intent data to be able to map, predict and counter human behaviours. An ambitious but unrealistic approach for combatting fly-tipping in the UK.

4.       Pichai’s solution would tap into Google satellite mapping capabilities to monitor illegal dumping and waste infrastructure facilities. Google has also proven influential in terms of user behaviour. Is it possible to use apps to influence the public to re-use or repurpose rather than dumping unwanted goods.

While there is potential to Google’s approach, the downside are privacy concerns and the extent to which behavioural influence is deemed acceptable. Also, positive behaviour reinforcement will need to be backed up by local council facilities and services. If these are lacking, then efforts will be in vain.

Are there more realistic solutions and where can we find them?

When reviewing these four approaches by the supposed geniuses of the tech world, it highlights how technology has an important role to play, and it still can miss many of the nuances that influence human behaviour or that contribute to an issue such as fly-tipping.

Within the UK’s waste and resource sector we have our own wealth of geniuses. People who have had to deal with the challenges of fly-tipping on a regular basis, whether it’s cleaning up the damage, putting penalties and legislation in place, or helping to plan the extent of local council waste services. These are the people that can see where the gaps are, who are best positioned to suggest solutions.

It’s going to take a multi-faceted approach, incorporating technology, services, logistics, psychology, communications expertise, industry know-how and innovation. What’s encouraging is knowing the depth of expertise we have in the resource sector and seeing how the demand for green-skills in all sectors is growing. If we can align skills with specific challenges and outcomes, then perhaps we will be able to start to combat fly-tipping more effectively. What’s also interesting is how using AI can provide insights into potential solutions we might not necessarily consider.