Den 1 Orl 1 <| sep |> Well , I am not sure this is the case . First , there is a market for waste and a price is paid . If both parties agree and there is a transaction , then it the outcome is weakly better for both parties involved . This also means thar Swedish plants are more efficient economically , maybe also thermally and the resource , i . e . waste , allocates were it is more convenient for it to go . Second , trading parties are , at least to an extent , profit maximizers . Therefore they do not fully internalize the externalities related to waste management in their decisions . These externalities are basically in the form of local pollution from aftrrburn smoke or through spills in the soil etc . . In a sense Sweden , i . e . the Swedish community , is carrying the burden on these externalities , although some of the waste is produced , say , in Italy . Since pollution is not traded upon well , it is to an extent , e . g . inside the EU ETS , the argument above does not apply .