Waste generation increases, and its management is one of the global challenges. Improper waste management creates many problems, but on the other hand, effective waste management can save natural resources, minimize GHG emissions, and provide additional workplaces. Sweden has already achieved some successful results in managing household waste, while modern Russia only began to reform the municipal solid waste management system in December 2014. This study makes a legal comparison of the Russian and the Swedish (EU) framework waste legislations, using the functional method of comparative law. The results show that Russia has already introduced many institutions, which are similar to those in the Swedish (EU) waste legislation. Nevertheless, there is still a huge potential to make the municipal solid waste management system in Russia more effective by improving framework waste legislation. Based on the findings from the comparison, there are following recommendations to Russia: to establish a separate waste collection system on the Federal level; make producers responsible for the whole life cycle of waste, including its waste management (from collection till disposal); correct the waste hierarchy; introduce the concepts of “preparing for re-use”, “re-use”, and a waste prevention program; change the norm of waste recovery to the recycling target.

The aim of this final thesis is to analyse and compare the PPP practices of EU member states and to evaluate the current situation of their PPP markets as well as the issues faced at present. The study consists of four chapters. The first chapter deals with the theoretical and legal concept of public-private partnerships: the definition of PPPs, their characteristics, advantages and disadvantages of PPPs and the factors influencing the success of PPP projects. The section thereafter analyses the position and role of the EU, EIB and EBRD in promoting and supporting the implementation of PPP projects. The section is followed by an assessment of the PPP market development trend, high lightening the basic quantitative differences between the EU member states. Chapter four forms the core of this thesis in which, based on specified criteria (legal and institutional PPP conditions, average value of a project, corruption, transparency and the nature of the public sector) the PPP praxis of Great Britain, Italy, Greece, Sweden, Poland and Slovakia are analysed and compared. The states are characterized by national PPP markets of diverse quality as well as significant differences in the national conditions for implementing PPP projects.