Waste and recycling: every county council ranked by spend per resident
21 councils · median £53.49/person · mean £53.83/person. From MHCLG Revenue Outturn 2024-25.
| Rank | Council | Control | Seats | Population | Total spend | Per resident | vs median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | West Sussex | — | — | 915,037 | £83.1m | £90.84 | +70% |
| 2 | Derbyshire | — | — | 822,377 | £61.1m | £74.34 | +39% |
| 3 | Lancashire | — | — | 1,294,914 | £94.3m | £72.86 | +36% |
| 4 | Surrey | — | — | 1,248,649 | £89.0m | £71.30 | +33% |
| 5 | East Sussex | — | — | 560,882 | £39.8m | £70.94 | +33% |
| 6 | Cambridgeshire | — | — | 710,317 | £48.0m | £67.64 | +26% |
| 7 | Kent | — | — | 1,639,029 | £101.5m | £61.90 | +16% |
| 8 | Worcestershire | — | — | 621,360 | £36.7m | £59.12 | +11% |
| 9 | Essex | — | — | 1,563,365 | £91.4m | £58.45 | +9% |
| 10 | Nottinghamshire | — | — | 857,013 | £47.8m | £55.77 | +4% |
| 11 | Norfolk | — | — | 940,359 | £50.3m | £53.49 | 0% |
| 12 | Devon | — | — | 842,313 | £44.7m | £53.11 | -1% |
| 13 | Leicestershire | — | — | 745,573 | £38.2m | £51.25 | -4% |
| 14 | Hertfordshire | — | — | 1,236,191 | £59.4m | £48.03 | -10% |
| 15 | Oxfordshire | — | — | 763,218 | £35.8m | £46.95 | -12% |
| 16 | Hampshire | — | — | 1,447,214 | £61.9m | £42.78 | -20% |
| 17 | Lincolnshire | — | — | 789,502 | £33.2m | £42.10 | -21% |
| 18 | Staffordshire | — | — | 907,153 | £35.9m | £39.54 | -26% |
| 19 | Warwickshire | — | — | 632,207 | £24.9m | £39.43 | -26% |
| 20 | Suffolk | — | — | 786,231 | £16.3m | £20.74 | -61% |
| 21 | Gloucestershire | — | — | 669,380 | £6.6m | £9.79 | -82% |
What this shows. Net revenue expenditure on the waste and recycling bucket from each council’s 2024-25 Revenue Outturn (RO) submission to MHCLG, divided by ONS mid-year population. Higher per-head doesn’t imply waste — it can reflect demographic need (e.g. more older residents), rurality, or policy choice (e.g. retaining in-house services rather than contracting out). Lower per-head doesn’t imply efficiency — some councils have moved costs to fees, grants, or a ringfenced account.
Caveats. Councils under MHCLG suppression for 2024-25 don’t appear here (Birmingham, Slough, Cumberland and others — see their council card for the reason). Comparisons across the tier line don’t make sense, which is why this table is filtered to one council type at a time. Source: MHCLG Local Authority Revenue Expenditure and Financing.