As the UK pursues its net zero goals by 2050, the transition toward a circular economy shapes practices of how resources are consumed – and how waste and resources are perceived. In this article, Pawan Srikanth and Dr Daniel Welch explore how legacy landfill sites across the UK offer pathways for the UK’s net zero and circular economy goals.

• Landfill mining (LFM) – the excavation and processing of valuable materials (such as metals and plastics) from historical landfill sites – has the potential to create economic and social opportunities.
• Landfill mining is being advanced and embedded internationally but currently is not supported in UK policy frameworks.
• Opportunities exist to position landfill mining as part of a broader circular economy approach.

Landfill, waste and the current UK policy position

Landfill sites in the UK (both authorised and illegal) have become persistent symbols of unsustainable waste practices, signalling environmental hazards and economic and social burdens. Landfills and dumpsites – such as Walleys Quarry in Staffordshire, Withyhedge Landfill and Mobuoy illegal dump in Northern Ireland – are increasingly associated with fires, odour complaints, and waste crimes. Their continued existence weakens land value, deters tourism, and in many cases, amplifies environmental problems. As well as recovering otherwise wasted resources, LFM has the potential to remediate legacy landfill sites.

Currently, no UK policy explicitly supports landfill mining. UK policy has focused largely on reducing new waste flows into landfill – through recycling targets, waste prevention measures and extended producer responsibility.

The 2023 Environment Improvement Plan reconfirms goals to eliminate avoidable waste and to ‘near eliminate’ biodegradable municipal waste to landfill by 2028. UK waste statistics reflect this shift: by 2022 the UK sent only 6.3 million tonnes of biodegradable waste to landfill and just 7% of household waste was landfilled (1.8 Mt in 2022/2023). But this strategy lacks a cohesive framework for dealing with the existing stock of legacy waste.

Without addressing the millions of tonnes of buried waste, the country’s circular economy ambitions will remain structurally incomplete. This is where landfill mining comes in, with the potential to close a crucial gap in UK circular economy policy

A global issue

Internationally, several countries have already recognised and acted on this opportunity.

Our research examines how across the Global South, countries such as Sri Lanka, India and Thailand are advancing LFM to recover Refuse Derived Fuel, which is then used in cement kilns to replace coal.

Within Europe, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Sweden have embedded LFM within their national circular economy frameworks, with positive results for both resource recovery and land reclamation.

Opportunities and benefits of landfill mining

Landfill mining recovers resources and reduces long-term liabilities. Excavation and material separation allows recovery of recyclables and fuels (such as plastics and wood for ‘Refuse Derived Fuels).

LFM can also support urban redevelopment, reclaiming land near cities/coastal areas. Removing waste cuts future aftercare costs and can mitigate ongoing pollution: legacy landfills can leach toxins and emit methane.

These projects also create jobs in waste recovery and remediation and contribute secondary metals and materials to the economy. In a resource-strained world, recovering buried material has appeal and can offset virgin material extraction and production.

Risks and challenges

Significant technical, environmental and regulatory challenges exist. Excavating waste can create nuisance impacts (dust, odours, noise) and risk exposing landfill mining workers and the environment to hazardous substances.

Moreover, UK regulators would require strict controls on groundwater, odour, and waste classification, increasing project complexity and cost. Achieving material purity is difficult: metals may remain mixed with soils, and plastics can be degraded or contaminated.

Market demand creation for recovered materials is uncertain but not impossible. In practice, most trials worldwide have faced economic and logistical hurdles; only projects with well-defined end-markets or in combination with site remediation have proven viable. These areas require further investigation.

Frameworks, framing and recommendations

The prevailing framework in the UK prioritises waste prevention, recycling, and secure closure of landfills.

The Resources and Waste Strategy (2018) and Environmental Act aims to reduce residual waste and increase material reuse, without provisions for digging up old sites.

In this context, promoting landfill mining may conflict with the waste hierarchy and existing legal duties: waste owners are obliged to contain and cap sites, and disturbed waste is typically re-classified as waste requiring treatment.

Any policy support for landfill mining would likely need to reclassify it (for example, treating it as remediation or as mining of secondary resources). Stakeholders should be aware that, as Sweden’s experience shows, policy incentives (such as subsidies or tax relief) for conventional mining or recycling do not automatically apply to landfill waste. Overcoming these gaps would require coordinated policy changes across environmental regulation, planning and waste management.

We make the following recommendations:

• Clarify legal frameworks: DEFRA and the devolved administrations should clarify how landfill mining is regulated – for example, whether excavated materials count as “recovered resources” or must be treated as new waste. Guidance should address permitting processes, operator responsibilities, and requirements for material off-take and reuse.

• Pilot projects with clear goals: Any trials should couple resource recovery with remediation. For example, local authorities or landowners could pilot low-risk projects where recovered materials have secure uses (for example inert cover soil) and environmental monitoring is stringent. Lessons learned should be shared with regulators and industry.

• Policy incentives: Government should consider targeted incentives (grants or tax credits) to offset high upfront costs, but only where environmental benefits (pollution removal, avoided new landfill) could be demonstrated. Revising the landfill tax regime to account for material recovery (as distinct from disposal) may be needed.

• Integration with wider circular economy plans: Landfill mining should be positioned as part of a broader circular economy approach. Any government strategy should acknowledge legacy waste recovery as a niche contributor to resource security, complementing upstream recycling and reuse efforts.

Landfill mining offers potential environmental and resource advantages, but faces substantial technical, economic and policy hurdles in the UK context. Alignment with national targets will require careful framing: projects should be presented as contamination remediation or land-reuse initiatives (rather than just recycling schemes) to fit existing regulations. Rigorous feasibility studies and stakeholder engagement (including local communities and regulators) are essential before scaling up.

With the right safeguards and clarity, selective landfill excavation could help unlock secondary materials and reclaim valuable land – but it must be pursued carefully to ensure it truly aligns with the UK’s circular economy and environmental objectives.