Trends explored by the Global Waste Index 2025 include the ongoing move away from landfill (in most places), the growth in waste-to-energy incineration in some places, and the impact on waste figures of adopting Deposit Return Schemes. The index, compiled by waste management technology firm Sensoneo, and last published in 2022, offers a snapshot of the leaders and laggards in the sector across 38 OECD member countries, and what they are doing with their waste.
The 2022 edition was marked particularly by the impact of COVID-19 measures, such as systems struggling to cope and mountains of new waste like masks and test kits. Widely reported recycling figures – particularly for plastics – were shown to be misleading.
The 2025 update profiles a world moulded to a greater degree by inflation and conflict, and the associated uncertainty. Data included in the index focus on waste generation, recycling, incineration, and landfilling (all measured as mass in kg per inhabitant per year).
The biggest polluters
Israel has emerged as the country with the highest per capita waste generation, producing up to 650 kg of municipal waste per person annually. Of this amount, 524 kg is landfilled, 80% of the country’s total waste – the highest landfill share among all analyzed nations. Chile and the US continue to rank among the world’s most significant waste polluters, just as they did from 2019 to 2022.
The top performers, on the other hand – those dealing with waste in the most responsible and successful way – included two Asian countries. Japan jumped to first place from seventh in 2022, seemingly thanks to low rates of waste generation and landfilling. South Korea arrived in second place with the highest recycling rate among all nations – 54%. Estonia made a surprise entry to the top three, in Sensoneo’s analysis, with almost no waste sent to landfill. Positive rankings were also achieved by Scandinavian countries such as Sweden and Finland, as well as by DACH region countries, Germany and Austria.
As in 2022, the country generating the most municipal solid waste is the US, which has actually hiked its output from 811 kg to 951 kg per capita. Both Canada and the US rank at the bottom in terms of waste management, with alarming rates of landfill disposal.
The US sends 447 kg of its 951 kg of waste per capita to landfill, while in Canada the proportion is even higher: 486 kg out of 684 kg of all generated waste ends up in landfills.
How it’s changed since 2022
The Index identifies a number of shifts: Belgium and Austria recorded the largest increases in per capita waste generation, both rising by more than 200 kg over the observed period. Austria, despite this noticeable growth, achieved the highest increase in recycling – reaching a total of 334 kg per capita, which represents 42% of its generated waste, even before the introduction of a national deposit return scheme.
New Zealand achieved a remarkable reduction in landfilling over the past few years, decreasing the amount of waste sent to landfill by 423 kg per capita per year. This progress reflects a clear shift away from landfill. At the same time, Belgium and Lithuania has increased their use of waste-to-energy incineration by over 100 kg per person within a few years. Hungary, the US, and Israel recorded a notable rise in landfilling rates.
DRS has a positive impact
Well-designed and efficiently functioning Deposit Return Schemes (DRS) could significantly improve recycling rates of secondary raw materials from the non-alcoholic beverage sector. When looking at the GWI ranking, it becomes clear that countries with established DRS rank among the highest in overall waste management performance. Nations such as Estonia, Germany, Finland, Sweden, and Norway consistently achieve top scores. On the other end of the spectrum are countries like Turkey, Chile, Greece, and Mexico, where no DRS is currently in place.
The trend of implementing such a circular economy system is on the rise. Since the 2022 edition of GWI, new countries from the ranking have introduced Deposit Refund Systems: Romania in 2023, Ireland and Hungary in 2024, and Austria in 2025. All of these countries are using an IT system for DRS powered by Sensoneo. In this way, we can assume that countries with active Deposit Refund Systems also adopt a more sustainable and environmentally friendly stance toward other waste management practices, such as incineration or landfilling. More interesting insights and data on the impact of DRS on collection rates of PET bottles and overall waste management practices are explored in the full article on our website.
Incineration vs landfill
Incineration has emerged as a viable and efficient waste management method, particularly for materials that cannot be easily recycled. This process involves the controlled burning of waste at high temperatures, significantly reducing waste volume by up to 90% minimizing the need for landfills. One of the key benefits of this method is energy recovery: modern waste-to-energy plants convert the heat generated during incineration into electricity or district heating, providing a renewable energy source for thousands of homes and businesses. Many of today’s incineration technologies are equipped with advanced filtration systems that limit harmful emissions, making the process cleaner and safer than in the past.
Nineteen of the 38 countries in the report incinerate more than they landfill. On the other end of the waste management approach are countries where more than 50% of waste ends up in landfills, which is particularly alarming. These include Israel, Canada, Greece, Chile, Turkey, Costa Rica, Colombia, Hungary, Portugal, Mexico, and Australia.
In this year’s Index, Sensoneo has added some caveats when it comes to interpreting the figures, stating that “the Global Waste Index serves as an indicator of the world’s largest waste producers”. The statement continues: “A good score in the index does not necessarily mean that a country’s waste management practices are optimal or do not require improvement. The overarching goal must be to generate as little waste as possible. That is why, in this year’s index, we have adjusted the weighting of the factors and placing greater importance on smaller waste generation and higher recycling rates.”
