The Circular Economy: Case Studies about the Transition from the Linear Economy (copublishing agreement) 0128152672, 9780128152676

Table of contents :
Cover
THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY: Case Studies about the Transitionfrom the Linear Economy
Copyright
Preface
One . Getting hold of the circular economy concept
1.1 Historical background
1.1.1 Roots of CE
1.1.2 Founding fathers of modern circular economy
1.2 Defining circular economy
1.2.1 How to define circular economy?
1.2.1.1 Definitions from official and nonofficial bodies
1.2.1.2 Definitions from scientists and professionals
1.2.1.3 Evaluating the current definitions
1.2.1.4 Our interpretation?
1.2.2 Defining other related green concepts
1.2.2.1 Bioeconomy
1.2.2.2 Green economy
1.2.2.3 Industrial ecology and industrial symbiosis
1.2.2.4 Other related concepts
1.2.3 Linear economy (LE)
1.3 Circular supply chain: closing the loop, retaining the value
1.3.1 Sustainable supply chain management
1.3.2 Circular supply chain management
1.3.3 Closed-loops and retained value
1.3.3.1 Closed-loop supply chain (CLSC)
1.3.3.2 Reverse logistics
1.4 Conclusions
References
Further Reading
Two . Circular economy: here and now
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Why now?
2.2.1 Environmental issues
2.2.1.1 Soil degradation and water pollution
2.2.1.2 Air pollution
2.2.1.3 Global warming and climate change
2.2.2 Societal and geopolitical issues
2.2.2.1 Issues with the coal sector
2.2.2.2 Issues with the petroleum sector
2.3 Circular economy: here and there
2.3.1 Here, local CE
2.3.1.1 Locally sourced raw materials
2.3.1.2 Short supply chains and integrated reverse logistics
2.3.1.3 Eco-industrial parks: locally implementing CE
2.3.2 There, global CE
2.3.2.1 CE is a global concept
2.3.2.2 Global supply and value loops
2.3.2.3 Global societal and environmental benefits
2.4 Conclusions
References
Three . Accelerating the implementation of circular economy
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Conceptual change: “rethinking the wheel”
3.2.1 From linearity to circularity
3.2.2 From skepticism to conviction
3.2.3 Concept of “zero waste” cities
3.2.4 Circular business models (CBMs)
3.2.5 Economic incentives: catalyzing change
3.3 Materialistic change: “reinventing the wheel”
3.3.1 Raw material shift
3.3.2 Sustainable management of raw materials
3.3.2.1 Nonrenewable resources
3.3.2.2 Renewable resources: “circular bioeconomy”
3.3.3 Sustainable management of wastes
3.3.3.1 Which waste?
3.3.3.2 Circularity in waste management
3.4 Conclusions
References
Four . Circular economy in action: case studies about the transition from the linear economy in the chemical, mining, textile, agr ...
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Overview of circularity in the industrial sector
4.3 Circular economy in the chemical industry
4.3.1 Green chemistry in CE
4.3.2 Chemicals from bioresource, biowaste, and recycled materials
4.3.2.1 Lignocellulosic biomass
4.3.2.2 Food supply chain waste (FSCW)
4.3.2.3 Algal biomass
4.3.2.4 Chemicals from CO2
4.3.2.5 Challenges related to biomass and wastes valorization
4.3.3 The circular concepts of “chemical leasing” and “pay-per-use”
4.3.3.1 Chemical leasing
4.3.3.2 Pay-per-use chemicals
4.3.4 Cases of circular innovations in the chemical industry
4.4 Circular economy in the mining industry
4.4.1 Conventional mining
4.4.1.1 Metals
4.4.1.2 Construction minerals (CMs)
4.4.2 Circularity in the mining sector
4.4.2.1 Urban mining (UM)
4.4.2.2 Landfill mining (LFM)
4.5 Circular economy in the textile industry
4.5.1 Circularity in the textile business
4.5.2 Circularity in the textile dyeing industry
4.6 Circular economy in the agricultural sector
4.6.1 Global food security
4.6.2 Issues in the current food sector
4.6.3 Why do we need circularity in the food sector?
4.6.4 Circular economy for sustainable food production
4.6.4.1 A circular economy for food: where to focus?
4.6.4.2 Easing the transition to circular food systems
4.6.4.2.1 Circularity in food production
4.6.4.2.2 Circularity in food consumption
4.6.4.2.3 Circular food waste management
4.6.5 Urban agriculture (UA)
4.6.6 The “AgroCycle” project
4.7 Circular economy in the water sector: treatment and reclamation
4.7.1 Water reclamation from municipal wastewaters
4.7.1.1 Chemical processes
4.7.1.2 Biological processes
4.7.1.3 Integrated processes
4.7.2 Industrial wastewaters: pollution removal and resources recovery
4.7.2.1 Case of the mining industry
4.7.2.1.1 Decontaminating mining effluents
4.7.2.1.2 Resources recovery from mining effluents
4.7.2.2 Case of the pulp and paper industry
4.7.2.2.1 Treatment of PPI effluents
4.7.2.2.2 Valorizing PPI side streams
4.8 Conclusions and outlook
References
Five . A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Circular economy in Europe
5.2.1 Strategic visions
5.2.2 National strategies
5.2.2.1 Finland
5.2.2.2 Germany
5.2.2.3 Netherlands
5.2.2.4 United Kingdom
5.2.2.5 Italy
5.2.3 CE the European way: selected case studies
5.2.3.1 In Nordic countries
5.2.3.2 In the Netherlands
5.2.3.3 In Italy
5.3 Circular economy in North America
5.3.1 Circular economy in the US
5.3.1.1 Challenges, opportunities and initiatives in the US
5.3.1.2 Circularity in US companies
5.3.2 Circular economy in Canada
5.3.2.1 Challenges and initiatives in Canada
5.3.2.2 Circular opportunities in Canada
5.3.3 Circular economy the North American way: selected case studies
5.4 Circular economy in China
5.4.1 A challenging context
5.4.2 Circular economy policy in China
5.4.3 Implementation modalities and indicators
5.4.3.1 Implementation modalities
5.4.3.2 Indicator system in China
5.4.4 CE the Chinese way: selected case studies
5.5 Conclusions and outlook
References
Six . Circular economy and sustainable development
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Sustainability
6.2.1 Circular economy and sustainability
6.2.2 Supporting the transition to sustainability
6.2.3 Circular economy and sustainable business
6.2.4 Evaluating circular economy’s success and sustainability
6.3 Addressing environmental considerations
6.3.1 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
6.3.2 Soil and land management
6.4 Reflecting on the societal factor
6.4.1 Why circular economy?
6.4.2 Poverty and employment
6.5 Conclusions
References
Seven . Full “circular” ahead
7.1 Introduction
7.2 The future is circular and digital
7.2.1 Digitalizing circular economy
7.2.2 Application of digital tools and technologies to CE
7.2.3 Challenges and research opportunities related to digitalization
7.2.3.1 Challenges to digitalization
7.2.3.2 Research opportunities related to the digitalization of CE
7.3 R&D: “fundamentally innovative”
7.3.1 Innovation is the key
7.3.2 Spending on circular R&D
7.4 Education system: “sustainable and circular thinking”
7.4.1 Educating about sustainability
7.4.2 Educating about circularity
7.5 Concluding remarks
References
Index
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
K
L
M
N
O
P
R
S
T
U
V
W
Y
Z
Back Cover

Citation preview

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Case Studies about the Transition from the Linear Economy €A € MIKA SILLANPA CHAKER NCIBI Department of Green Chemistry LUT University, Finland

Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier 125 London Wall, London EC2Y 5AS, United Kingdom 525 B Street, Suite 1650, San Diego, CA 92101, United States 50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom Copyright Ó 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions. This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein). Notices Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary. Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility. To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-0-12-815267-6 For information on all Academic Press publications visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Candice Janco Acquisition Editor: Scott Bentley Editorial Project Manager: Ruby Smith Production Project Manager: Paul Prasad Chandramohan Cover Designer: Miles Hitchen Typeset by TNQ Technologies

Preface Circular economy (CE) is a holistic concept gradually and steadily positioning itself as a reliable and viable alternative to the unsustainable linear economic model, based on the “take, make and dispose” paradigm. Why this book now? Because it is the right time, and because too much is at stake either to continue business as usual based on the predominantly linear economic model, to postpone the transition to CE, or even to limit the extent of its implementation strategies and modalities. Straightforwardly, this book is promoting CE as the most comprehensive and mature economic model able to reconcile economic growth with sustainability, thus simultaneously ensuring momentous benefits for stakeholders and welfare to societies and the environment. Accomplishing the paradigm shift from linearity to circularity will have planetary repercussions, as most of UN’s sustainable development goals could be achieved, and several plenary boundaries could be preserved and others mitigated. In such a challenging global context, this book analyzed national strategies and position papers, showcased circular business opportunities, assessed various economic, societal, and environmental impacts, discussed latest R&D findings, presented achievements from around the world, and recommended future measures to be taken to speed up the implementation of CE on a global scale. Our main mission was to provide our broad audience with a comprehensive book on CE, answering questions such as what is it? what do we need it for? how can we benefit for it? how can we implement it on the ground? what are the others doing? can we do it together? etc. Our conviction is that CE, and the diverse implications of its implementation (economic, societal, and environmental), can only be presented and discussed in a broad and comprehensive manner. The most efficient format to enable readers getting hold of such holistic concept is in a single authoritative book, and we endeavored to make this volume that book. Thus, the content of the present manuscript was divided into seven chapters. In Chapter 1, the origins of the CE concept and the various definitions established around it were presented and critically analyzed, as well as related contributions from many key actors. Such joint effort is highly important for a wider adoption, promotion, and implementation of CE. Various other green concepts were also presented in this chapter, along with the linear economic model and its numerous limitations.

vii

j

viii

Preface

After making the case for CE by illustrating the heavy legacy of the current unsustainable fossil-based linear economy in the one hand and briefly presenting the opportunities of adopting circular principles on the economy, society, and environment at local and global scale on the other hand, Chapter 2 emphasized the urgent need to embrace circularity “here and now” by local cities and regions and national and international companies. Then, in Chapter 3, we presented, analyzed, and, when relevant, criticized the various strategies developed and applied to accelerate the local and global adoption of CE from both conceptual and materialistic perspectives. The main objective of Chapter 4 was to illustrate the various modalities to apply CE principles in key and strategic economic sectors including various highly profitable production and manufacturing activities in the chemical, mining, and textile industries. Furthermore, introducing circular principles and business models in the vital water and food sectors was also discussed. In Chapter 5, the focus was on showcasing CE visions in various countries around the world, as well as the associated implementation strategies. The studied countries were selected based on their pioneering decision to embrace “circularity” including many European counties. Also, the two largest economies in the world, the United States and China, were studied with respect to their national CE strategies and implementation scenarios and the involvement of their governmental agencies and private sector in such effort. Since the sustainability of CE is still being debated, we stressed in Chapter 6 on environmental and societal factors in terms of designing and implementing a holistic and genuinely sustainable CE. In this regard, the intertwined relationship between the two holistic concepts of CE and sustainable development was analyzed, along with the modalities to monitor and reinforce CE’s sustainability. As well as, the impacts of implementing CE on key sustainable development issues such as greenhouse gas emissions, land and soil management, poverty, and employment were also presented. In the last Chapter 7, in order to incite active and efficient contributions to the expansion of CE and its sustainable strategies and principles in our communities, cities, companies, universities, etc., several enabling tools and initiatives were highlighted including digitalization, innovative R&D, and the highly influential and overreaching education system. Finally, we can confidently say that CE will boost the competitiveness of countries and corporations implementing it, by protecting businesses against scarcity of resources and volatile prices, helping to create innovative business

Preface

ix

opportunities and more efficient ways of producing and consuming. It will create local jobs at all skills levels and opportunities for social integration and cohesion. At the same time, it will save energy and help avoid the irreversible damages to climate, biodiversity, air, soil, and water caused by the unsustainable exploitation of resources. Yes, CE can make all this is happen, but we need to promote it, educate it, coordinate it, incentivize it, regulate it, protect it, and above all believe in it. Mika Sillanp€a€a Chaker Ncibi

CHAPTER ONE

Getting hold of the circular economy concept 1.1 Historical background 1.1.1 Roots of CE In the last couple of decades, Circular Economy (CE) emerged as a reliable alternative economic concept able to cope with the imminent global sustainability issues, created by the current unidirectional economic model, Linear Economy (LE). The former is often referred to as the “take, make, and dispose” triptych by many scientists and authors discussing or promoting the concept of CE [1e4]. Suh designation, although summarizing the main features of the current production/consumption schemes, is missing key elements in the whole process, which are equally important in generating unsustainable activities such as transportation of resources or goods and the distribution of the end products. We will develop and discuss this matter in Chapter 3 (the “conceptual change” section). Historically, although the term circular economy is relatively new, the concept itself is well known to humanity for centuries, if not millennia, and it was instinctively and naturally implemented during times when humans and human societies lived in full synergy with nature. Back then, we considered ourselves as part of nature, and we used our curiosity and genius to live better, with the rest. Then, with the sedentary way of life, the fabric and state of mind of human societies profoundly changed, especially with respect to nature. Indeed, we started thinking of domesticating those beasts around us, then why not taming nature altogether. Thus, we started developing new tools and processes for that end, and the more we tamed nature, the more civilized we thought of ourselves. From that point, we became the masters and nature our subject, and since the second half of the 18th century onwards, humanity reached a new level of “virtual” mastership over nature through successive industrial, agricultural, and technological revolutions. The emergence of new political and economic philosophies, along with new societal aspirations (slowly being adopted as global standards of living), further deteriorated, not only our affiliation with nature but also the The Circular Economy ISBN: 978-0-12-815267-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815267-6.00001-3

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1

j

2

The Circular Economy

relationship between humans. Indeed, with the “almost holy” pursuit of happiness for oneself, the tribe, the country, etc., serious animosities started to emerge around the world as groups of humans thought that they have the right to control the resources of other groups (not without pretexts and brutal force if necessary). Thus, in recent times, the pursuit of one’s happiness, notwithstanding the inflicted misery on others, humans and the environment alike seems to be the best recipe for economic development. Such a brief historical account might sound a bit dark and biased (more on the negative side of the story, often mediatized as a success story), but if we analyze the course of human history and its relation with nature (mining, intensive agricultural practices, various pollution incidents, landfills, overfishing, and overexploitation of resources in general) and between humans themselves (slavery, colonialism, armed conflicts, etc.), we can agree that the damaging impacts of such economic development schemes, on the environment and societies alike, are too obvious to be ignored and will seriously compromise the survival of future generations on earth if we continue implementing the current economic model, especially in the energetic, industrial, and agricultural sections. We frequently and purposely have used the personal pronoun “we” throughout this section and if one still wonders who we are? We are humanity as a whole. In response to this alarming global sustainability issue, sporadic wake-up calls tried to alert decisions makers, industrialists, and the general public about the dark side of the story and the urgent need to tackle the serious and, back then, the emerging, economic, and environmental issues related to the various industrial and agricultural activities conducted in their times (mainly, related resources availability, and soil, air, and water contamination by anthropological activities). Such wake-up calls include: • Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (1962), in which the American scientist and writer concluded that DDT and other pesticides had irrevocably harmed animals and had contaminated the world’s food supply, and accused the chemical industry of spreading disinformation and public officials of acting indifferently, despite the seriousness of the matter [5]. • The Limits to Growth, published in 1972 by MIT’s Donella H. Meadows, Dennis L. Meadows, Jørgen Randers, and William W. Behrens III [6]. In this book, the authors tried to build a model to investigate the consequences of five major trends of global concern including accelerating industrialization, rapid population growth, widespread malnutrition, depletion of nonrenewable resources, and a deteriorating environment.

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

3

• In 1983, former Norwegian Prime Minister and Director-General of the World Health Organization, Gro Harlem Brundtland headed a commission with the main objective of exploring long-term strategies to achieve sustainable development by the year 2000 and beyond. The official mission of the Brundtland Commission ended officially in December 1987 after publishing its report “Our Common Future” (released in October 1987) [7]. After many decades of these, and much more, wake up calls, many scientists are still far from being satisfied with the global movement toward sustainability. Some of them even believe that the already precarious situation back then was further aggravated by insisting on relying on unsustainable mass production and consumption schemes. The reasons for such “odd behavior” are often related to side effects of global phenomena such as the globalization of markets, the emergence of highly populated nations, which is causing an increasing pressure on resources, the deregulation in the financial sector, the development of new and highly efficient extraction and processing technologies, the increasing trend of offshoring to reduce production costs (and sometimes to escape environmental regulations which, although being enforced to promote sustainability, are often perceived as impediments to competitiveness), etc. [8e11]. Overall, the abovementioned pioneering effort was conducted in times when economic growth, national pride, and most of all greed, seemed to have blinded humanity for a while (a century and a half or so), which was enough to cause serious global environmental and societal repercussions (externalities in the economic terminology). Even the main objective, for which such “sacrifice” was made, was not achieved, as global and recurrent economic crises still occur. The same is the observation for armed conflicts fueled by animosities and rivalries (mainly over monopolizing their extraction and/or trading of resources).

1.1.2 Founding fathers of modern circular economy Many scientists from various backgrounds, environmental activists, architects, politicians are proclaimed to be the instigators of the modern circular economy concept. Why modern? Because, stating that someone developed or originated the concept of CE is simply not possible, considering the short historical account developed earlier. Thus, it is more correct and fair to say that these respected scientists or other professionals developed the “term” of CE or the “modern” concept.

4

The Circular Economy

The science of Environmental Economics is the real incubator of the CE concept. Indeed, since the early 1960s, this subdiscipline of economics combines conventional studies in the field of welfare economics and the theory of economic growth with more prominent input from the philosophy of sustainable development [12]. In practice, the scientific research effort in Environmental Economics deals with issues such as the various ways to dispose wastes, the quality of air, water and soil resulting from industrial and agricultural activities, the conservation of natural capital and biodiversity, and the promotion of sustainability. Other fields such as industrial ecology, chemistry, architecture, forestry, and agriculture captured the concept in its infancy and contributed to its development and emergence. Based on the related publications and activities, several personalities from various backgrounds could be considered as the founding fathers of modem circular economy. The far from extensive list includes: • The English-born American economist Kenneth E. Boulding, who published in 1966 his famous article entitled “The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth” [13], in which planet earth became a single spaceship with only limited resources, to be continuously reproduced or recycled. • The Swedish economist Karl-G€ oran M€aler, who focused his scientific work on the economics of nonlinear, nonconvex dynamics of ecosystems, within the general field of Ecological Economics. In 1974, he published a book entitled “Environmental Economics: A Theoretical Inquiry” [14], in which he discussed the relationships between economic growth, the quality of the environment, consumption, and welfare. • Timothy O’Riordan, the prominent British geographer, writer, and thinker actively contributed to the environmental governance and policy analysis, and the development of sustainability science. In his book “Environmentalism” published in 1981 [15], he developed the green ideology of environmentalism, thus providing policy and decision makers with a valuable reference on environmental planning, resources management, and pollution control. • Tom Tietenberg, an American Professor of Economics, who made a sustainable contribution in the field of environmental economics with his book entitled “Environmental and Natural Resource Economics” [16]. The first edition was published in 1984, and the book was reedited many times since. In these volumes, the author correlated economics to environmental issues by addressing basic theoretical economics and their application to global challenges such as the increasing population,

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

•

•

•

•

5

depletable and nonrecyclable resources (mainly energy and mineral resources), waste disposal, and water and air pollution. The Swiss architect Walter R. Stahel had raised fundamental questions about the unsustainability of the current linear economic model under growing waste volumes and limitations in resources’ availability in his piece entitled “Product life as a variable: the notion of utilization” published in 1986 [17]. He advocated the need to develop new “spiral-loops that minimizes matter and energy flow, and environmental deterioration without restricting economic growth or social and technical progress” such as the servicelife extension of goods, and reuse, repair, and remanufacture. Stahel’s work on the notion of “cradle to cradle” and the concept of “performance economy” (to be detailed later in Section 1.2.), made a substantial contribution in the emerging field of circular economy. The American scientists Robert A. Frosch and Nicholas E. Gallopoulos, then working at the General Motors (GM) Research Department, with their article entitled “Strategies for Manufacturing” published in the Scientific American in 1989 [18]. In their paper, the authors advocated the urgent necessity to develop and implement an alternative integrated manufacturing system, termed as the industrial ecosystem. In such model “the consumption of energy and materials is optimized, waste generation is minimized and the effluents of one process . serve as the raw material for another process.” Robert Frosch, fifth administrator of NASA and later the vice president for research at GM, is often referred to as the father of industrial ecology [19], especially after the publication of his 1992 article “Industrial ecology: a philosophical introduction” [20]. The British scientists David W. Pearce and R. Kerry Turner with their book “Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment” [21], in which they gave a detailed description of the interactions between economics and the environment, including the need to account for environmental services, and the economics of pollution and depleting natural resources. The second chapter of this book published in 1990 was explicitly entitled “circular economy.” In 1992, American economist and ecologist Herman E. Daly published his paper “Allocation, distribution and scale: toward an economics that is efficient, just, and sustainable” to express his worries about inefficient, unjust and unsustainable economics [22], using the metaphor of a boat which would sink if it is overloaded, no matter how well the cargo is balanced.

6

The Circular Economy

• the American environmental scientist Braden R. Allenby contributed to the development of the concept of industrial ecology through the publication of his two articles “Achieving sustainable development through industrial ecology” [23] and “Industrial ecology: The materials scientist in an environmentally constrained world” [24], both published in 1992. Two years later, he coedited a book with fellow Yale professor Deanna J. Richards entitled “The Greening of Industrial Ecosystems” [25]. • John T. Lyle, an American professor of landscape architecture who developed the concept of regenerative design with the publication, in 1994, of his book “Regenerative design for sustainable development” [26], in which he advocates the recourse to proven regenerative theories, practices, and strategies for the utilization of water, land, and energy resources, and waste valorization. The faculty, staff, and students of the Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies in California State Polytechnic University’s Pomona campus are following the footsteps of the Late Dr. Lyle toward “a future in which all people live with dignity in safe, healthy, and sustainable environments” [27]. • More recently, the coordinated work of the American architect William A. McDonough and The German chemist Michael Braungart gave a real momentum to the CE movement with the publication, in 2002, of their first book on the subject entitled “Cradle to Cradle:Remaking the Way We Make Things” [28]. In this book, they developed several circular principles and came about with the catchy notion of “waste equals food” referring to the need to design and manufacture products so that they would remain valuable after their primary useful life by providing either “biological nutrients” which could be safely reincorporated by nature, or as “technical nutrients” able to be recirculated within closedloop industrial cycles without being “downcycled” into low-grade utilization schemes. McDonough and Braungart also formed the McDonough Braungart Design Chemistry, a company closely working with businesses and governments to “design products which eliminate the concept of waste, use clean energy, value clean water and celebrate diversity” [29]. It has to be noted that the cradle to cradle designation is believed to be first coined by Walter Stahel during the 1970s [30,31]. The genuine effort made by Ellen Macarthur, the former English sailor, has to be also mentioned in this section. Indeed, although she is not among the modern founders of CE, the initiatives and joint actions conducted by her Foundation, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) [32], to

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

7

promote, popularize and accelerate the transition to CE are globally appreciated as expressed by many participants of the World Economic Forum session entitled “Toward the circular economy: Accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains,” held in Switzerland in 2014 [33]. Many reports where published by the foundation starting with the first volume published in 2012 and entitled “Toward the Circular Economy Vol. 1: an economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition” [34], followed by volume 2 “opportunities for the consumer goods sector” in 2013 [35] and volume 3 “Accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains” in 2014 [36]. The foundation also published several books such as Ken Webster’s “The Circular Economy: A Wealth of Flows” (first edition in 2015 [37] and second edition in 2017 [38]) and the book “A New Dynamic: Effective Business in a Circular Economy” [39], which is a compilation of contributions made by prominent authors such as Amory Lovins, Michael Braungart and Walter Stahel. A new edition of this book was published in 2016, entitled “A New Dynamic 2: Effective systems in a Circular Economy” [40]. All the reports published by EMF are downloadable for free [41]. One of the most utilized presentation to illustrate the CE concept is the EMF’s butterfly diagram depicting the continuous flow of technical and biological materials through the “value circle”’ [42].

1.2 Defining circular economy Before presenting, analyzing, and discussing the concept of CE and its implementation in many case studies, the notion itself should be defined. The importance of this first and fundamental step is mainly related to the fact that this emerging concept will be globally applied to deal with urgent and very challenging issues such as worldwide population growth, depleting fossil raw materials, climate change, and many environmental problems. In the related literature, many perceptions and viewpoints about CE were formulated into various definitions, since originating from various scientists, professionals, governmental bodies and international institutions, echoing their specific aspirations from such concept, which could be grouped into the economic, environmental, and social dimensions. The critical aspect of defining CE is the fact that legislations, development strategies, and policies will be developed and later implemented based on those definitions. The challenge at this point is that CE is a holistic and multidimensional concept, and its definition basically depends on who’s defining it.

8

The Circular Economy

Economists, industrialists, chemists, farmers, strategists, ecologists will have distinct definitions of CE. Imagine government officials enforcing specific legislations and adopting action plans for years ahead based on the “official” definition of CE, but industrialists, on the other hand, will develop another vision of the whole concept. The implementation, in this case, will be very difficult, especially within an international network involving players from various nations, scientific or professional backgrounds and, more importantly, with various objectives (sometimes conflicting ones). In the following section, several definitions of CE will be presented and evaluated, along with the ones on related concepts such as bioeconomy, green economy, industrial ecology etc. The linear economic model will also be defined since the notion is always used on CE lexicon as the antonym of CE.

1.2.1 How to define circular economy? In this key segment, we will present and evaluate the various proposed definition of CE from selected official bodies, nongovernmental organisms, as well as scientists and professionals focusing their research studies and business activities on the CE concept. We will also discuss some missing aspects in those definitions (especially the social factor) and the need to reach a consensus on a globally accepted definition of CE. 1.2.1.1 Definitions from official and nonofficial bodies The selected definitions were taken from authoritative sources on CE from both official (governments, parliaments or independent public) institutions and nonofficial (nongovernmental, nonprofit, etc.) organizations and associations. - On 2 December 2015, the European Commission put forward a package to support the EU’s transition to a circular economy entitled “closing the loop - An EU action plan for the Circular Economy” [43]. As a document of legislative proposals for action plans on matters such as raw materials and wastes, no clear definition of CE was proposed in this report. Most of the discourse was on the benefits generated from the transition to CE, including economic gains, energy savings, environmental benefits, local jobs, and opportunities for social integration. In other EU official documents, some “practical” definitions of CE were provided including the one used in the EU parliament publications stating that CE is “a production and consumption model which involves reusing, repairing, refurbishing and recycling existing materials and products to keep materials within the economy

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

-

-

-

-

9

wherever possible . waste will itself become a resource, consequently minimising the actual amount of waste. It is generally opposed to a traditional, linear economic model, which is based on a ‘take-make-consume-throw away’ pattern” [44,45]. Since 2015, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation is focusing its Sustainability Forum on the concept of CE to explore “the powerful impact of the circular economy . how to make the circular economy work for businesses, examine how innovative business models can accelerate cost savings, and explore new advances in cradle-to-cradle design.” In the 2015 forum entitled The Circular Economy: Unleashing New Business Value,” CE was defined as “a model that focuses on careful management of material flows through product design, reverse logistics, business model innovation, and cross-sector collaboration” [46]. Since 2017, the organizers changed the title of their annual event from Sustainability Forum to Sustainability and Circular Economy Summit [47], which echoes the growing interest in CE in the United States. In the report “Toward the Circular Economy - Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition,” the Ellen MacArthur Foundation proposed the following definition of the concept of CE: “an industrial system that is restorative or regenerative by intention and design. It replaces the endof-life concept with restoration, shifts toward the use of renewable energy, eliminates the use of toxic chemicals, which impair reuse, and aims for the elimination of waste through the superior design of materials, products, systems and business models” [34]. In a report published in 2014, the World Economic Forum used this definition developed by EMF [33]. Circular Economy European Summit is an annual gathering of scientists, industry experts, and professionals from different backgrounds to debate the global challenges related to sustainability and the role of CE to address those global challenges. The first congress was held in Barcelona in 2016. The organizers of this summit are defining CE as a “conceptual framework of sustainable development. Its goal is the production of goods and services while at the same time reducing the consumption and wastage of raw materials, water and energy sources” [48]. The Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra is an independent public foundation aiming at promoting sustainability in Finland and around the world. One of its pioneering effort related to CE is the organization of the first-ever World Circular Economy Forum in Helsinki on June 2017. In one of its publications, Sitra stated that CE “is based on the sustainable use of resources. This means monitoring, minimising and eliminating waste flows by circulating, rather than just consuming, materials. In practice, this could mean not adding substances to raw materials that could

10

The Circular Economy

prevent recycling at the end of the product life cycle, or product design that facilitates the efficient end-of-life sorting of constituent materials. The circular economy seeks to base itself on renewable energy. It goes further than the production and consumption of goods or services” [49]. - WRAP (Waste and Resources Action Program) was set up in the United Kingdom in 2000, to promote sustainable waste management in the United Kingdom, and to accelerate the move to a sustainable, resourceefficient economy. For WRAP, CE “is an alternative to a traditional linear economy (make, use, dispose) in which we keep resources in use for as long as possible, extract the maximum value from them whilst in use, then recover and regenerate products and materials at the end of each service life” [50]. 1.2.1.2 Definitions from scientists and professionals The increasing interest in CE from the academic and professional spheres generated several proposals to define this emerging and highly anticipated economic model, including: - A team of Finnish researchers, in their article “Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations” [51], proposed the following definition: “Circular economy is an economy constructed from societal productionconsumption systems that maximizes the service produced from the linear nature-society-nature material and energy throughput flow. This is done by using cyclical materials flows, renewable energy sources and cascading1-type energy flows. Successful circular economy contributes to all the three dimensions of sustainable development. Circular economy limits the throughput flow to a level that nature tolerates and utilises ecosystem cycles in economic cycles by respecting their natural reproduction rates.” - According to the Dutch Council for the Environment and Infrastructure, an independent strategic advisory board for the government and parliament on sustainable development issues, CE “stresses the following focal points: reducing the consumption of raw materials, designing products in such a manner that they can easily be taken apart and reused after use (eco-design), prolonging the lifespan of products through maintenance and repair, and the use of recyclables in products and recovering raw materials from waste flows. A circular economy aims for the creation of economic value (the economic value of materials or products increases), the creation of social value (minimization of social value destruction throughout the entire system, such as the prevention of unhealthy working conditions in the extraction of raw materials and reuse) as well as value creation in terms of the environment (resilience of natural resources) ” [52].

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

11

- UK researchers and scientists from different business schools suggested a definition which reads: “The Circular Economy is an economic model wherein planning, resourcing, procurement, production and reprocessing are designed and managed, as both process and output, to maximize ecosystem functioning and human well-being”[8]. - Other scientists from manufacturing and industrial design backgrounds defined CE as “a regenerative system in which resource input and waste, emission, and energy leakage are minimised by slowing, closing, and narrowing material and energy loops. This can be achieved through long-lasting design, maintenance, repair, reuse, remanufacturing, refurbishing, and recycling” [53]. - Researchers from the Swedish KTH Royal Institute of Technology, demonstrated that CE is an essentially contested concept, and defined it as “a sustainable development initiative with the objective of reducing the societal production-consumption systems” linear material and energy throughput flows by applying materials cycles, renewable and cascade-type energy flows to the linear system. CE promotes high value material cycles alongside more traditional recycling and develops systems approaches to the cooperation of producers, consumers and other societal actors in sustainable development work” [54]. The authors objectively and justly stated that “the definition that we give here is only a ‘build-up’ for what comes after, i.e., it is not intended as a universal and absolute definition.” This is only a small account of the numerous proposals to define CE from the academic and professional worlds. Such prolific effort is mainly due to the recent emergence of the concept on the one hand, and the high expectations from its implementation on the other hand (economic growth, sustainability, environmental preservation, social well-being, etc.). Recently, many research and reviews papers focused on analyzing and evaluating the various CE definitions. In the following sections, we will detail this interesting endeavor. 1.2.1.3 Evaluating the current definitions Several articles were published in the last decade to examine how scientists, industrialists, and governmental bodies are perceiving the concept of CE through their proposed or adopted definitions. In their article entitled “Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions” [55], the Utrecht University’s Innovation Studies Group overviewed an extensive number of definitions from published materials including the special issue “Exploring the Circular Economy,” published by the Journal of Industrial Ecology in June 2017 [56]. The authors

12

The Circular Economy

found that 73% of those definitions dated from 2012 onward and important fractions was published in nonpeer-reviewed journals (32%). In another related study, and after an extensive literature review, researchers from the Spanish University of Navarro reached the conclusion that for defining CE, four main components need to be systematically included in order to reach a consensus on CE [57]. The components are: i) The recirculation of resources and energy, the minimization of resources demand, and the recovery of value from waste, ii) A multilevel approach, iii) Its importance as a path to achieve sustainable development, and iv) Its close relationship with the way society innovates. In this paper, the authors also generated an interesting knowledge map of CE, depicted in Fig. 1.1. It is clear from the proposed definitions that we speak about the same thing. However, when we want to describe it, it is another matter. CE is indeed a multidisciplinary concept, which makes its definition a challenging endeavor. The main issue is how to develop a comprehensive definition that covers a holistic concept like CE without generating either a too restrained or too loose a description. Analyzing the various proposed definitions reveals that most of them are compilations of ideas and/or objectives emerging from various scientific and industrial disciplines. Furthermore, as a key enabler of sustainability, CE needs to be defined so that it echoes the tridimensional aspect of sustainable development (economy, environment, and society). The current definitions tend to be more on the economic side (how to generate growth from circularity while

Figure 1.1 Circular economy knowledge map proposed by Prieto-Sandoval et al. Data source Prieto-Sandoval V, Jaca C, Ormazabal M. Towards a consensus on the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;179:605e615.

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

13

preserving the environment). In this case, the proposed definitions are too technical, which overshadow the other dimensions of CE, often promoted as a “conceptual framework of sustainable development” [48]. The social dimension is rarely integrated into these definitions. Although being acknowledged in the rhetoric around CE, the social factor is still perceived as a mere side effect of CE implementation. Recently, many scientists are pushing toward including this pillar of sustainability in the CE definition to fully and earnestly recognize it alongside the economic and environmental sides. For instance, Murray et al. [8] focused on this matter and, in a section on the tensions and limitations within CE, the authors reported other aspects missing from the definitions such as confusion with semantics and the inclusions on potentially unintended consequences and oversimplistic goals. It has to be noted that in their effort to emphasize on the need to include the social factor, the authors proposed a definition (Cf. Section 1.2.1.2) and made the same inaccuracy as in the other definitions by limiting the outcome from CE to “maximize ecosystem functioning and human well-being.” Overall, CE is still an emerging concept, and it will be the best platform to, finally, reunite the economic, environmental and societal pillars of sustainability in the globally applicable and highly anticipated CE concept. Putting aside political inclinations, nationalistic tones, and ideological stances will help in reaching a consensus on CE definition quickly and empower a worldwide momentum toward the achievement of the UN’s sustainable development goals (SDGs) [58]. 1.2.1.4 Our interpretation? In this book, we decided not to propose a definition of CE. Adding another one to the already extensive catalog of definitions is not important. We all know that individual or group initiatives from scientists, industrialists, or any third party involved in CE, will remain valid and useful only within the closed circles of the originating group. Thus, we deem crucial and urgent, for the future of CE, that international bodies with a well-established authoritative status (precisely the United Nations) need to get heavily involved in this effort and invite world-class scientists, leading industrialists, and decision-makers. The objective is to jointly develop and agree upon a clear and comprehensive definition of CE, which could later be adopted on a global scale. Such a significant endeavor will help in harmonizing and synchronizing the efforts of all

14

The Circular Economy

possible contributors for worldwide implementation of this new economic model, thus laying a solid ground for CE to quickly mature and thrive.

1.2.2 Defining other related green concepts As a holistic and multisectoral concept, CE is by nature inclusive, which is why numerous studies investigated its relationship with other green concepts [59], including industrial symbiosis [60], industrial ecology or eco-industry [61,62], and green economy and bioeconomy [63]. The other notions frequently investigated alongside CE are definitely sustainability and sustainable development [53,64,65]. In the following section, these green concepts are briefly presented. 1.2.2.1 Bioeconomy Bioeconomy is also an emerging concept promoted and implemented for its sustainability and numerous economic, environmental, and societal benefits [66]. According to the European Commission, bioeconomy “encompasses the production of renewable biological resources and their conversion into food, feed, biobased products and bioenergy. It includes agriculture, forestry, fisheries, food and pulp and paper production, as well as parts of chemical, biotechnological and energy industries” [67]. As an emerging concept, it was reported that bioeconomy needs to be carefully and thoughtfully implemented and controlled via continuous monitoring of the sustainability of its components via various metrics, as well as the assessment of key environmental and social factors such as greenhouse gas emissions, land-use change, biodiversity, employment, and food security [68]. Further details and discussion on the bioeconomy concept and its global impacts and prospects (industrial, environmental, social, and geopolitical perspectives) are compiled in our previous book entitled “A Sustainable Bioeconomy: The Green Industrial Revolution” [69]. It has to be noted that, based on the latest publications, researchers seem to perceive bioeconomy as a highly interconnected concept with CE, to the point that a new notion is emerging: Circular bioeconomy [70,71]. 1.2.2.2 Green economy The Green Economy Initiative was launched in 2008 by the United Nations Environment Program (UN Environment). According to the leading global environmental authority, green economy is a concept that “results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities,” and 65 countries have already started transforming

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

15

their economies into drivers of sustainability by implementing green economy and related strategies [72]. I has to be highlighted that, although the implementation effort was conducted under the aegis of the UN Environment and was highly publicized, some experts still perceive the concept of green economy as having inner structural constraints, susceptible of withholding the realization of key objectives in greening economies, mainly in the social field [73]. Other serious concerns were reported in the literature concerning the damaging impact of influential geopolitical and industrial players carrying out highly selective implementation schemes of green economy, sectorally and regionally [74]. Circular economy needs to be immunized against this threat too. If we manage to do it, CE will be a real enabler of the SDGs. If we fail, CE will be heavily obstructed during its global implementation, and we will continue heading toward pronounced worldwide disparities, which would fuel new kinds of conflict over the “control” of wastes and renewable resources. Too much is at stake, and we shall further develop this discussion and propose solutions throughout this book, to avoid labeling CC as a “Gramscian passive revolution,” as it was the case for green economy [75]. 1.2.2.3 Industrial ecology and industrial symbiosis The concept of industrial ecology is based on a straightforward analogy with natural ecological systems [76]. In the preface of this book, Robert M. White, former president of the National Academy of Engineering, coined this economic model as “the flows of materials and energy in industrial and consumer activities, of the effects of these flows on the environment, and of the influences of economic, political, regulatory, and social factors on the flow, use, and transformation of resources” [77]. Industrial symbiosis, an emerging subfield of industrial ecology [78], has gained considerable interest among scientists, especially in the fields of production economics [79], mainly due to the urgent necessity for industrial activities to reduce their environmental footprint by limiting their solid, liquid, and gaseous emissions, reducing their water and energy requirements, and limiting their consumption of nonrenewable resources. Yale Professor Marian R. Chertow, an authoritative source on industrial ecology, described this concept as “engaging traditionally separate industries in a collective approach to competitive advantage involving physical exchange of materials, energy, water, and byproducts. The keys to industrial symbiosis are collaboration and the synergistic possibilities offered by geographic proximity” [80].

16

The Circular Economy

1.2.2.4 Other related concepts • Cradle to Cradle (C2C): In their 2002 book, “Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things” [28], William McDonough and Michael Braungart introduced the C2C as a concept integrating design and science to generate benefits to society from the exploitation and utilization of clean and safe materials, water, and energy supplies, within a circular economy paradigm. According to the authors, the C2C design framework is based on three nature-derived principles [81]: (i) the waste of one production system is the “food” for another system, meaning “everything” can be designed, produced, used, and disassembled to be safely returned to the soil as “biological nutrients,” or reintroduced to the production cycles as “technical nutrients,” i.e., feedstock for the design and production of other safe and easily disassembled products. (ii) Capitalizing on the abundant, clean, and renewable energy resources such as clean and renewable energy such as solar, wind, and geothermal energy, thus decoupling humanity’s energetic need from fossil recourses, while promoting human health and preserving the environment. (iii) Be inspired by the thriving diversity in nature through highly yielding and efficient phenomena such as photosynthesis and nutrients cycling, which are well adapted and functioning in their “niches.” • Performance economy: In the 2010 edition of his book “Performance Economy” [82] (first published in 2006 [83]), Swiss architect and industrial analyst Walter Stahel stated that this concept “outlines the strategies needed to face tomorrow’s challenges by using science and knowledge to improve product performance, create jobs, and increase wealth and welfare . e all while reducing the consumption of non-renewable resources and contributing to a low carbon, low toxin society.” Stahel twins CE with performance economy, with the only exception that in the latter, goods or molecules are sold as “services” through various business models such as sharing, renting, and leasing [84]. Thus, within the performance economy, the ownership of any produced item, and its embodied resources is retained by the manufacturer, who in return will be responsible for the costs of the postproduction risks and waste, which entitles a thoughtfully-designed product in the first place. • Natural capitalism: Since their first book on natural capitalism published in 1999 and until the 10th edition entitled Natural capitalism: The next

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

17

industrial revolution, first published in 1999 [85], Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins are promoting a global economic concept, which catalyzes on the world’s stocks of natural assets including soil, air, water, and all living things. Their concept was developed in direct opposition to the “unnatural” model of industrial capitalism [86]. According to the authors, the concept of natural capitalism is based on four main principles: (i) The radical increase in the productivity of natural resources by implementing new and more efficient designs, production practices, and technologies. (ii) Shifting to closed-loop production models, inspired by nature, which entitles the elimination of the notion of wastes and the continuous and safe channeling of outputs, either to nature as a nutrient, or as feedstocks for other manufacturing processes. (iii) Shifting to a “service-and-flow” business model instead of the current “sale-of-goods” model. Such change is believed to be mutually beneficial for the service provider and the customer. (iv) Reinvesting in natural capital by promoting initiatives and aiming activities at restoring and regenerating natural resources, thus laying the growth for genuinely sustainable development. • Regenerative design: This concept is based on process-oriented and selfregenerating systems, designed to enable the valorization of the full potential of resources (i.e., outputs equal inputs), thus eliminating the notion of waste. Although mainly applied in the agricultural and architectural fields [78,87], Compared to green chemistry, perceived as a generic, top-down approach, regenerative design and development is, by contrast, a holistic concept inherently comprising the social and ecological factors [88]. • Biomimicry: is a novel concept generated in a postindustrial revolution era, and is based on mimicking the most efficient producing and recycling entity known to men, Nature. During the last decade, an increasing number of researchers have begun exploring and exploiting “natural” designs and mechanisms to their respective fields in robotics, medical, energetic, building, and textile sectors, to name a few [89e91]. Biomimicry, or “innovation inspired by Nature” [92], thus relies on “studying nature’s most successful developments and then imitating these designs and processes to solve human problems” [93]. Like any emerging (or reemerging) model, its inspirational theory and practices are being questioned, especially to determine if this concept

The Circular Economy

18

is inherently sustainable [94]. In this context, some scientists believe that the “overidolization” of nature could undermine the “human-centered outlook of industrial design’ and that “biomimicry fails to take notice of the complex network of human society” [95]. The counterarguments, which could easily overshadow this simplistic viewpoint, are the facts that the overidolization of humanism led us to serious complications, and that the human-centered outlook of industrial design failed to take notice of the complex network of nature.

1.2.3 Linear economy (LE) The designation linear economy is being used as the antonym of circular economy. That is why, in most related publications, LE and CE are presented together to comparatively define each economic model while illustrating the difference between these competing concepts as highly effective and unsustainable LE, and highly efficient and sustainable CE. In Fig. 1.2, the general perception of LE and CE is illustrated. The former is based on the “take, make, and dispose” linear approach, and the latter on closed loops schemes (both symbolized by bold arrows). Thus, LE is a straightforward “production-consumption-disposal” structure, where resources are extracted, manufactured into products, which are

Figure 1.2 From a linear to a circular economy. Data source PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague. Circular economy: measuring innovation in the product chain. 2016. http://www.pbl.nl/en/infographic/from-a-linear-to-a-circulareconomy.

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

19

used and then incinerated or landfilled. Thus, it limited the initiatives to minimize production and consumption wastes or valorize them. On the other hand, CE is based on a dynamic, resilient, and more efficient “production-consumption-recycling/recovering” structure, where resources are recirculating with the same process of a network of processes, so that the output of one is the input of another, thus retaining the value of the products or their parts [97e99]. For a more illustrative description of those two economic models, two interesting analogies were proposed: cowboy versus spaceman and lake versus river (respectively LE vs. CE). The first analogy was coined by Kenneth Boulding in his book chapter “The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth” [13]. Regarding the open economy (Boulding’s LE), he symbolically used the analogy with a cowboy to emphasis on the “reckless, exploitative, romantic, and violent behavior” of societies adopting this concept. On the other hand, he called the closed economy (Boulding’s CE) the spaceman economy, comparing planet earth to a spacecraft in which all resources are limited, and where the only viable solutions is to live in a “cyclical ecological system.” The other analogy is the one proposed by Walter Stahel in his 2016 article in Nature [100], where LE is compared to a river and CE to a lake. For the linear model, resources are flowing like a river, from feedstocks to end products which are sold to a consumer who becomes the owner and user of that item. Ultimately, the consumer will have the final decision to recycle a used item or dump it. Since this linear economic model is fundamentally based on mass production at one end, and mass consumption on the other end. Thus, under this linear scheme, ending in a landfill or an incinerating facility is the “ultimate” fate of products in LE. Circular economy, on the other hand, was assimilated to a lake where goods and materials are continuously reprocessed in a closed environment, which saves valuable resources (water, energy, nutrients, etc.), reduces consumption and wastes, preserves the environment, while creating new jobs and exploring new markets.

1.3 Circular supply chain: closing the loop, retaining the value In order to ensure a highly competitive CE model, the flow of resources (materials, money, and information) has to be effectively managed, as well as the entire value-adding processes occurring from the acquisition of

20

The Circular Economy

the raw materials (or data) to the storage, marketing, and use of end products (or service). Thus, as defined by Robert Handfield and Ernest Nichols in their 1999 book entitled Introduction to Supply Chain Management [101], the supply chain “encompasses all activities associated with the flow and transformation of goods from raw materials stage (extraction), through to the end-user, as well as the associated information flows. Material and information both flow up and down the supply chain. Supply chain management (SCM) is the integration of these activities through improved supply chain relationships, to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage.” In this context, circular economy is expected to lay the ground for sustainable economic growth by new implementing business models, developing new job opportunities, preserving valuable resources (both finite and renewable ones), while preserving the environment and promoting social welfare. According to many experts, the key endeavor to achieve such highly anticipated objectives is to secure a sustainable supply chain of raw materials, products, energy, water, finances, information, etc. [102].

1.3.1 Sustainable supply chain management Supply chain management is a set of designs and strategies developed for the efficient management of flows of products, information, and financial resources throughout complex production systems [103]. Indeed, improving the security of the entire supply chain (often a complex one) through sustainable management schemes is of paramount importance in CE, as it is believed to lead to valuable outcomes such as: - Maximizing the use of resources [104]. - Saving material cost and dampening price volatility [105]. - Minimizing energy consumption and waste generation through various supply chain configurations [106,107]. - Enabling new business models and engaging both manufacturers and consumers in the supply-chain issues to develop more effective solutions [108]. - Preventing the generation of waste along the life-cycle stages of production and consumption can help avoid the loss of resources and the environmental impacts associated with waste management [109]. - Incorporating more digital information in the supply chain [110]. For many decades, concerns over an increasing number of environmental issues related to key sectors (such as fossil fuels, mining, agriculture, and various industries) remain unaddressed, until new legislations and other

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

21

regulatory pressures (taxation solutions such as the polluter-pays principle [111]) started to be enforced nationally and internationally (less so in developing countries) [112]. Besides, as consumers started to be more aware of the environmental impact of resources’ extraction, and unsustainable production processes, and to a lesser extent of the related social implications, companies and corporations started to effectively work on this sustainability issue in order to promote their competitive advantage and to develop an ecofriendly image, proven to be a very effective marketing tool. One of the key elements to build or reinforce a competitive advantage is through a well-planned, and implemented, management strategy of the company’s supply chain. Such revolution in the management and business fields is referred to as green or sustainable SCM [113]. So, what is the role and impact of such SCM in the transition toward a circular economy?

1.3.2 Circular supply chain management As stated earlier, the central goals of implementing sustainable SCM practices include environmental preservation by responsible management of resources and the substantial reduction of emissions and wastes during both production and consumption stages. Thus, ensuring the company’s business success, while “internalizing” environmental externalities [114,115], is the main “mission” of sustainable SCM. Likewise, CE is profoundly prompting environmental sustainability through its various circular production practices and business models. It goes further by developing efficient symbiotic relationships with the ecological systems in order to generate economic growth, while benefiting nature. The “waste equals food” notion of the cradle-to-cradle concept clearly highlights the fact that, unlike the so-called green or sustainable SCM, circular economy is not just concerned with the reduction of wastes throughout the entire supply chain, but rather with the development and implementation of self-sustaining and adaptive production systems in which resources are used over and over again [116,117]. As well, CE does not consider nature as a sink for wastes and emissions (often leading to further environmental and health issues) [118]. Thus, in order to incorporate green or sustainable SCM in the CE “toolbox,” scientists, researchers, industrialists, and other involved parties, need to introduce more circularity to these important management practices [119]. Indeed, greening the SCM, while still considering the product from the processing of raw materials to delivery to the customer, is not a circular

22

The Circular Economy

way of thinking. Rather, a circular and sustainable SCM must integrate flows and related issues extending beyond this green, yet still linear, supply chain management scheme. Circular business models and practices such as product design, manufacturing by-products, by-products produced during product use, product life extension, product end-of-life, and recovery processes at end-of-life were reported [120], along with other aspects such as reverse logistics, and more engaged and responsible behaviors from producers and consumers [121,122]. In order to upgrade green or sustainable supply chain management, and include it in the CE concept, scientists are emphasizing the need to evaluate the performance of green SCM based of the “Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle” (3Rs) rules of CE [123]. In an interesting paper overviewing the latest academic literature on SCM approaches in a circular economy, researchers from the Finnish Technical Research Center (VTT) have determined major challenges facing SCM in CE. The information in Table 1.1 summarizes those challenges.

Table 1.1 Major challenges facing the supply chain management in circular economy and insights from literature streams [124]. Challenges Literature stream

Maintaining current SCM schemes because building new ones is a challenging task Lack of motivation and cautious behavior from the different value chain partners during the implementation of novel business models Lack of commitment to a full-scale partnership between the supply chain players, especially in cross-industry cooperation Issues with the logistics during warehousing, collection and handling Distribution on reverse side. The main issue in this regard is the degree of involvement of end users, still regarded as not adequately prepared for such proactive role [125]. Balancing the forward and reverse loops and ensuring uniform material quality

Social aspects of SCM Value network Social aspects of SCM, value network, governance models SCM, value network

Sustainable SCM/ closed-loop SCM/ reverse supply chain Sustainable SCM/ closed-loop SCM/ reverse supply chain Sustainable SCM/ closed-loop SCM/ reverse supply chain

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

23

1.3.3 Closed-loops and retained value 1.3.3.1 Closed-loop supply chain (CLSC) To fully adopt the circular economy concept, corporations imperatively need to integrate sustainable goals in their planning and be genuinely prepared for cooperation with an evolving network of peers and other third parties. One of the key sustainable objectives to prevent or mitigate the impacts of our intensive activities and practices (industries, agriculture, mining, etc.) on the environment by implementing closed-process chains. Such an integrated management approach must, therefore, consider the whole product supply chain, with a special emphasis on products recovery, reutilization, and remanufacturing [126e128]. Thus, green and circular SCM strategy based on closed-loops is able, if properly implemented, to ensure gainful outcomes for entrepreneurs (increased economic benefits and enhanced competitiveness), the environment (less pollution and reduced pressure on raw resources) and society (new jobs, clean water, healthy food). Guide and Van Wassenhove defined CLSC as “the design, control and operation of a system to maximize value creation over the entire life-cycle of a product with dynamic recovery of value from different types and volumes of returns over time” [129]. In practice, CLSC relies on a set of innovative practices, technologies, and services enabling the recycling, remanufacturing, and refurbishing/ reconditioning of products, carried out by the manufacturer itself, or through partnerships within an extended supply chain network. This network could include trading partners, sponsored startups, firms involved in other activities (networks in eco-industrial parks), an also partnership with consumers [130e132]. In the CE literature, some scientists are trying to make a distinction between the so-called open-loops and closed-loops in the SCM [133e136]. In the former, marketed products are not recovered by the manufacturing firm, but by third parties with other kinds of infrastructure, technology, and expertise enabling a profitable recovery, reuse or remanufacture of these products. The term “closed-loops,” on the other hand, is reserved for the supply chains where the manufacturer is reclaiming its products from customers to revalorize them (as a whole or as parts) via new circular business models. In this book, either way, the supply chain is circular, and as far as the product itself, the loop is closed anyhow. That is why we will only consider and use the term “closed-loop,” which is more entangled with the

24

The Circular Economy

philosophy of CE, unlike the term “open.” semantically more linked to the linear economy concept. Overall, CLSC is clearly one of the driving forces in the CE concept. Nonetheless, several constraints were reported in the literature in order to highlight the weak point of such sustainable and profitable management systems. The objective of such an effort is to focalize the R&D effort on tackling those issues and optimizing the entire flow of raw, manufactured, used, and recovered resources in the supply chains. Fig. 1.3 depicts the main processes and limitations in CLSC. Two other major challenges are expected to face CLSC during its implementation, that is: (i) Building partnerships with competitors. Such a delicate endeavor is necessary to overcome tough obstacles to the full-scale implementation of CE. Finding common grounds to gradually build trust between current competitors is possible. But the real issue is to include environmental and social targets, with the obvious economic ones. This is indeed challenging because in the recent past, and within the linear system, numerous partnerships between “supposed”

Figure 1.3 Key processes and constraints in closed-loop supply chain. Data source Kumar S, Malegeant P. Strategic alliance in a closed-loop supply chain, a case of manufacturer and eco-non-profit organization. Technovation, 2006;26(10):1127e1135.

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

25

competitors were established for market control and enhanced revenues, but at the expense of the environmental and/or social factor. One challenging mission of the holistic concept of CE is to deal with such delicate problems, and we shall get back to this important matter in the following chapters. (ii) The other is the challenge of how to handle the inherent uncertainty in the business environment (volatile resources prices, customer demands, and transportation costs) and solve the related SC design problem. The scientific effort in this context is focusing on the development of multiobjective, fuzzy, stochastic programming, and optimization models [138e140]. 1.3.3.2 Reverse logistics In the related literature, the notion of reverse logistics was intensively debated, and many definitions were proposed [141,142]. Conceptually, reverse logistics is part of the closed-loop supply chain management, consisting of both forward and reverse SCM schemes. Circular supply chains involving forward and reverse logistics could be adopted via a simple three-leveled model (including manufacturer, distributor, and consumer), or relatively more complex configurations. Graphical illustrations of both networks are illustrated in Fig. 1.4. The basic idea of reverse logistics is to enable and facilitate the flow of used products back to the original point of manufacturing or to other outlets able to reincorporate those products into related or completely different production systems. Key factors tend to affect the strategic network design of reverse logistics and the configuration of its value-added structure, including collection platforms, recovery methods, available infrastructure,

Figure 1.4 Forwardereverse logistics network: (A) three-leveled [143] and (B) multileveled configurations [144].

The Circular Economy

26

the proper time and state to recover the product at the end of its “useful life,” and for what new “life” this product (or parts of it) is being upgraded or transformed? [145,146]. In an interesting article published in 2015, by the European Journal of Operational Research, Govindan and coauthors reviewed around 380 scientific papers related to the themes of reverse logistics and CLSC and provided interesting insights on the current limitations and future R&D perspectives [147]. The main gaps reported in this study are in reverse logistics and CLSC sectors such as network designing and planning, production planning, and inventory management, and decision making and performance evaluation.

1.4 Conclusions After relying on the fossil-based, waste-generating, and unsustainable linear economy model for many decades, a growing number of scientists, environmentalists, economists, politicians, and experts from different fields are, all unequivocally calling for an urgent shift to an alternative economic model to be able to deal with the pressing economic, environmental, and societal issues, on a global scale. In this context, many green and sustainable concepts were proposed including bioeconomy, green economy, industrial ecology, etc. Nonetheless, the implementation of these concepts on the ground revealed some inherent constraints affecting their sustainability, i.e., were they able to structurally integrate the socio-environmental factors along with the obvious objective of “sustainable economic growth”? [74,148]. The concept of circular economy has emerged, on the one hand, from the heated debates between scientists, researchers, industrialists, and other involved parties, and on the other, from the valuable feedbacks generated by the first implementation scenarios of “theoretically sustainable” business models and industrial systems. As shown in this chapter, CE emerged as a holistic, restorative, and resilient economic model, based on innovative designs for re-use of products and resources, efficient materials recovery strategies through closed-loop supply chains and reverse logistics. The main CE advantage is that it integrates sustainable economic growth (through circular and profitable economic and production systems, and low-carbon development strategies) with the sustainable development goals targeting environmental preservation and societal well-being, in an inherent, structural, and global manner [1,149,150].

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

27

Nonetheless, CE is still in its infancy, in comparison with the current linear model. Thus, potential constraints need to be anticipated and targeted by researchers from around the world, first to be highlighted, and second to contribute in finding solutions to those limitations. Related R&D investigations and assessment studies are already being carried out [51,151], and it is crucial to promote such research effort in order to: (i) keep the valuable momentum behind CE thriving, (ii) Enable a smooth and quick transition from linear economy, (iii) Facilitate the development and expansion of CE networks, (iv) Ensure the execution of the circular principles on solid grounds via well-planned, efficiently designed and effectively implemented practices, and (v) Catalyze the progression toward a mature, fully efficiency, and globally adopted CE concept. Among the issues anticipated to constrain the progress and development of CE is still the unclear conceptual relationship between CE and sustainability. Such confusion could generate adverse outcomes on the global dissemination of the CE concept, and the performances of related supply chains, business models, and innovation systems [53]. It was also reported that, as an emerging concept, the CE concept needs to provide more evidence of its systemic capacities to enable the transition from unsustainable linear practices, along with additional information on the possible interactions and trade-offs between technological and socioinstitutional systems [152,153]. Both driving and limiting factors within CE and its various implementation schemes will be thoroughly discussed in the following two chapters, from both conceptual and practical perspectives.

References [1] Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S. A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;114:11e32. [2] Kalmykova Y, Sadagopan M, Rosado L. Circular economyefrom review of theories and practices to development of implementation tools. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2018;135:190e201. [3] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Circular economy overview. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/overview/concept. [4] Gallaud D, Laperche B. Circular economy, industrial ecology and short supply chain: towards sustainable territories. John Wiley & Sons; 2016. [5] Carson R. Silent spring. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett Publications; 1962. [6] Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J, Behrens WW. The limits to growth. New York: Universe Books; 1972.

28

The Circular Economy

[7] Brundtland G, Khalid M, Agnelli S, Al-Athel S, Chidzero B, Fadika L, Hauff V, Lang I, Shijun M, de Botero MM, Singh M. Our common future. The report of the world commission on environment and development. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press; 1987. [8] Murray A, Skene K, Haynes K. The circular economy: an interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics 2017;140(3):369e80. [9] Weber O, Feltmate B. Sustainable banking: managing the social and environmental impact of financial institutions. University of Toronto Press; 2016. [10] Greenstone M, List JA, Syverson C. The effects of environmental regulation on the competitiveness of US manufacturing (No. w18392). National Bureau of Economic Research; 2012. Available online at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18392.pdf. [11] Li X, Zhou YM. Offshoring pollution while offshoring production? Strategic Management Journal 2017;38(11):2310e29. [12] Pearce D. An intellectual history of environmental economics. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 2002;27(1):57e81. [13] Boulding KE. The economics of the coming spaceship earth. In: Jarrett H, editor. Environmental quality in a growing economy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 1966. p. 3e14. [14] M€aler KG. Environmental economics: a theoretical inquiry. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1974. 267 pages. [15] O’Riordan T. Environmentalism. London: Pion; 1981. 409 pages. [16] Tietenberg T. Environmental and natural resource economics. Illinois, Scott: Foresman & Company; 1984. 482 pages. [17] Stahel WR. Product life as a variable: the notion of utilization. Science and Public Policy 1986;13(4):185e93. [18] Frosch RA, Gallopoulos NE. Strategies for manufacturing. Scientific American 1989; 261(3):144e52. [19] Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Frosch R. Father of industrial ecology. Press Release. In: Receives prestigious society prize from international society for industrial ecology; June 19, 2005. Available online at: https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/robert-frosch-father-industrial-ecol ogy-receives-prestigious-society-prize. [20] Frosch RA. Industrial ecology: a philosophical introduction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 1992;89(3):800e3. [21] Pearce DW, Turner KT. Economics of natural resources and the environment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1990. 378 pages. [22] Daly HE. Allocation, distribution and scale: towards an economics that is efficient, just, and sustainable. Ecological Economics 1992;6:185e93. [23] Allenby BR. Achieving sustainable development through industrial ecology. International Environmental Affairs 1992;4(1):56e68. [24] Allenby BR. Industrial ecology: the materials scientist in an environmentally constrained world. MRS Bulletin 1992;17(3):46e51. [25] Allenby BR, Richards DJ, editors. The greening of industrial ecosystems. Washington D.C.: National Academies; 1994. 259 pages. [26] Lyle JT. Regenerative design for sustainable development. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1994. 339 pages. [27] Lyle center for regenerative studies at cal poly Pomona, California, USA. http://env. cpp.edu/rs/rs. [28] McDonough W, Braungart M. Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things. New York: North Point press; 2002. 193 pages. [29] About MBDC. https://mbdc.com/about-mbdc/.

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

29

[30] Visser W. CSR 2.0: transforming corporate sustainability and responsibility. New York: Springer; 2014. 89 pages. [31] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Circular economy schools of thought. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/schools-of-thou ght/performance-economy. [32] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/. [33] World Economic Forum. Towards the circular economy: accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains. 2014. Available online at: http://www3.weforum.org/ docs/WEF_ENV_TowardsCircularEconomy_Report_2014.pdf. [34] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy e economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2013. 98 pages. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthur foundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation-Towardsthe-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf. [35] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy e opportunities for the consumer goods sector. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2013. 112 pages. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/ downloads/publications/TCE_Report-2013.pdf. [36] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy e accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2014. 41 pages. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation. org/assets/downloads/publications/Towards-the-circular-economy-volume-3.pdf. [37] Webster K. The circular economy: a wealth of flows. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2015. 208 pages. [38] Webster K. The circular economy: a wealth of flows. 2nd ed. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2017. 201 pages. [39] Lovins A, Braungart M, Stahel WR, et al. A new dynamic: effective business in a circular economy. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2014. 172 pages. [40] Franconi E, Bridgeland B, Graichen P, et al. A new dynamic 2: effective business in a circular economy. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2016. 212 pages. [41] Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publications. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation. org/publications. [42] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Circular economy system diagram. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/interactive-diagram. [43] EU Commission. Closing the loop-An EU action plan for the circular economy. Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions COM, 614 final. 2015. Available online at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource. html?uri¼cellar:8a8ef5e8-99a0-11e5-b3b7-01aa75ed71a1.0012.02/DOC_1&format¼ PDF. [44] EU parliamentary research service. Circular economy. Available online at: http:// www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/infographics/circulareconomy/public/index. html. [45] EU parliament. Legislative train schedule: New boost for jobs, growth and investment. Circular economy package. Available online at: http://www.europarl. europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-new-boost-for-jobs-growth-and-investment/ package-circular-economy-package. [46] U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation. Sustainability forum. 2015. Available online at: https://www.uschamberfoundation.org/event/2015-sustainability-forum.

30

The Circular Economy

[47] U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation. Sustainability and circular economy summit. 2017. Available online at: https://www.uschamberfoundation.org/event/2017sustainability-and-circular-economy-summit. [48] Circular Economy European Summit. What is the circular economy? Available online at: http://www.circulareconomysummit.com/en/about. [49] Sitra. The opportunities of a circular economy for Finland. October 2015. Available online at: https://media.sitra.fi/2017/02/28142449/Selvityksia100.pdf. [50] WRAP. What is a circular economy?. Available online at: http://www.wrap.org.uk/ about-us/about/wrap-and-circular-economy. [51] Korhonen J, Honkasalo A, Sepp€al€a J. Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecological Economics 2018;143:37e46. [52] van Buren N, Demmers M, van der Heijden R, Witlox F. Towards a circular economy: the role of Dutch logistics industries and governments. Sustainability 2016;8(7):647. [53] Geissdoerfer M, Savaget P, Bocken NM, Hultink EJ. The circular economyea new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;143:757e68. [54] Korhonen J, Nuur C, Feldmann A, Birkie SE. Circular economy as an essentially contested concept. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;175:544e52. [55] Kirchherr J, Reike D, Hekkert M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: an analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2017;127:221e32. [56] Bocken NM, Olivetti EA, Cullen JM, Potting J, Lifset R. Taking the circularity to the next level: a special issue on the circular economy. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21:476e82. [57] Prieto-Sandoval V, Jaca C, Ormazabal M. Towards a consensus on the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;179:605e15. [58] United Nations. Sustainable development goals e 17 goals to transform our world. Available online at: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-develop ment-goals/. [59] Merli R, Preziosi M, Acampora A. How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;178:703e22. [60] Wen Z, Meng X. Quantitative assessment of industrial symbiosis for the promotion of circular economy: a case study of the printed circuit boards industry in China’s Suzhou New District. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015;90:211e9. [61] Zhang L, Yuan Z, Bi J, Zhang B, Liu B. Eco-industrial parks: national pilot practices in China. Journal of Cleaner Production 2010;18(5):504e9. [62] Wenbo L. Comprehensive evaluation research on circular economic performance of eco-industrial parks. Energy Procedia 2011;5:1682e8. [63] D’Amato D, Droste N, Allen B, Kettunen M, L€ahtinen K, Korhonen J, Leskinen P, Matthies BD, Toppinen A. Green, circular, bio economy: a comparative analysis of sustainability avenues. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;168:716e34. [64] Andrews D. The circular economy, design thinking and education for sustainability. Local Economy 2015;30(3):305e15. [65] Sauvé S, Bernard S, Sloan P. Environmental sciences, sustainable development and circular economy: alternative concepts for trans-disciplinary research. Environmental Development 2016;17:48e56. [66] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Bioeconomy: the path to sustainability. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 29e53. [67] European Commission e Press release data base. Commission adopts its strategy for a sustainable bioeconomy to ensure smart green growth in Europe. February 2012. MEMO/12/97. Available online at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO12-97_en.htm?locale¼en.

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

31

[68] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Bioeconomy: multidimensional impacts and challenges. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 317e43. [69] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. A sustainable bioeconomy: the green industrial revolution. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. 343 pages. [70] Mohan SV, Nikhil GN, Chiranjeevi P, Reddy CN, Rohit MV, Kumar AN, Sarkar O. Waste biorefinery models towards sustainable circular bioeconomy: critical review and future perspectives. Bioresource Technology 2016;215:2e12. [71] Sheridan K. Making the bioeconomy circular: the biobased industries’ next goal? Industrial Biotechnology 2016;12(6):339e40. [72] UN Environment. Green Economy Initiative (GEI). Available online at: http://web. unep.org/greeneconomy/what-inclusive-green-economy. [73] R€ ohr U. Sustainable economy and green growth: who cares?. In: International workshop linking care. Livelihood and Sustainable Economy; 2011. Available online at: http://www.genanet.de/fileadmin/user_upload/dokumente/Care_Gender_Green_ Economy/Int_WS_Sustainable_Economy_Green_Growth_who_cares_EN.pdf. [74] Brand U. Green economyethe next oxymoron? no lessons learned from failures of implementing sustainable development. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 2012;21(1):28e32. [75] Wanner T. The new ‘Passive Revolution’ of the green economy and growth discourse: maintaining the ‘sustainable development’ of neoliberal capitalism. New Political Economy 2015;20(1):21e41. [76] Allenby BR, Richards DJ, editors. The greening of industrial ecosystems. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1994. 259 pages. [77] White RM. B.R. Preface. In: Richards DJ, editor. The greening of industrial ecosystems Allenby Washington, D.C: National Academy Press; 1994. [78] Chertow MR. “Uncovering” industrial symbiosis. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2007;11(1):11e30. [79] Yazan DM, Romano VA, Albino V. The design of industrial symbiosis: an inpute output approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;129:537e47. [80] Chertow MR. Industrial symbiosis: literature and taxonomy. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 2000;25(1):313e37. [81] W. McDonough. Cradle to Cradle. Available online at: http://www.mcdonough. com/cradle-to-cradle/. [82] Stahel WR. The performance economy. 1st ed. UK: Palgrave Macmillan; 2006. 248 pages. [83] Stahel WR. The performance economy. 2nd ed. UK: Palgrave Macmillan; 2010. 349 pages. [84] Stahel WR. The performance economy: business models for the functional service economy. In: Misra KB, editor. Handbook of performability engineering. London: Springer; 2008. [85] Hawken P, Lovins AB, Lovins LH. Natural capitalism: the next industrial revolution. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge; 2013. 415 pages. [86] Lovins LH, Lovins A. Natural capitalism: path to sustainability? Corporate Environmental Strategy 2001;8(2):99e108. [87] Du Plessis C. Towards a regenerative paradigm for the built environment. Building Research and Information 2012;40(1):7e22. [88] Cole RJ. Regenerative design and development: current theory and practice. Building Research and Information 2012;40(1):1e6. [89] Habib MK. Biomimetics: innovations and robotics. International Journal of Mechatronics and Manufacturing Systems 2011;4(2):113e34. [90] Green DW, Lee JM, Jung HS. Marine structural biomaterials in medical biomimicry. Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews 2015;21(5):438e50.

32

The Circular Economy

[91] Das S, Bhowmick M, Chattopadhyay SK, Basak S. Application of biomimicry in textiles. Current Science 2015;109:893e901. [92] Benyus J. Biomimicry: innovation inspired by nature. New York City: Harper Perennial; 2002. 308 pages. [93] Kennedy S. Biomimicry/biomimetics: general principles and practical examples. The Science Creative Quarterly 2007. Available online at: http://www.scq.ubc.ca/ biomimicrybimimetics-general-principles-and-practical-examples/. [94] Marshall A, Lozeva S. Questioning the theory and practice of biomimicry. International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics 2009;4(1):1e10. [95] Kaplinsky J. Biomimicry versus humanism. Architectural Design 2006;76(19):66e71. [96] PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague. Circular economy: measuring innovation in the product chain. 2016. Available online at: http:// www.pbl.nl/en/infographic/from-a-linear-to-a-circular-economy. [97] Kiyoka A, Koichi F. Transition from a linear economy toward a circular economy in the Ramsey model. 2017. Available online at: https://lagv2017.sciencesconf.org/ file/281655. [98] Potting J, Hekkert MP, Worrell E, Hanemaaijer A. Circular economy: measuring innovation in the product chain. PBL; 2017. Available online at: http://www.pbl. nl/en/publications/circular-economy-measuring-innovation-in-product-chains. [99] Sariatli F. Linear economy versus circular economy: a comparative and analyzer study for optimization of economy for sustainability. Visegrad Journal on Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development 2017;6(1):31e4. [100] Stahel WR. The circular economy. Nature 2016;531(7595):435e8. [101] Handfield RB, Nichols EL. Introduction to supply chain management. 1st ed. London, IK: Pearson; 1999. 192 pages. [102] Huang GQ, Zhang XY, Liang L. Towards integrated optimal configuration of platform products, manufacturing processes, and supply chains. Journal of Operations Management 2005;23(3e4):267e90. [103] Sanders NR. Supply chain management: a global perspective. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2011. 448 pages. [104] Homrich AS, Galv~ao G, Abadia LG, Carvalho MM. The circular economy umbrella: trends and gaps on integrating pathways. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;175: 525e43. [105] Kalmykova Y, Sadagopan M, Rosado L. Circular economyefrom review of theories and practices to development of implementation tools. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2017;135:190e201. [106] Wei F, Liu S, Yin L, Li W, Yu Z. Research on performance evaluation system for green supply chain management based on the context of recycled economy-taking Guangxi’s manufacturing industry as example. Journal of Grey System 2014;26: 177e87. [107] Zhu Q, Geng Y. Drivers and barriers of extended supply chain practices for energy saving and emission reduction among Chinese manufacturers. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013;40:6e12. [108] Bocken NM, Short SW, Rana P, Evans S. A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production 2014;65: 42e56. [109] Rizos V, Rizos V, Tuokko K, Tuokko K, Behrens A, Behrens A. The Circular Economy: a review of definitions, processes and impacts. 2017. CEPS Research Report No 2017/8, April 2017. Available online at: http://aei.pitt.edu/85892/1/ RR2017%2D08_CircularEconomy_0.pdf.

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

33

[110] Meyerson B. Emerging Tech 2015: Distributed manufacturing. World Econ. Forum; 2015. Available online at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/03/emergingtech-2015-distributed-manufacturing/. [111] Ambec S, Ehlers L. Regulation via the polluter-pays principle. The Economic Journal 2016;126(593):884e906. [112] Luppi B, Parisi F, Rajagopalan S. The rise and fall of the polluter-pays principle in developing countries. International Review of Law and Economics 2012;32(1): 135e44. [113] Sarkis J, Zhu Q, Lai KH. An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain management literature. International Journal of Production Economics 2011; 130(1):1e15. [114] Corbett CJ, Van Wassenhove LN. The green fee: internalizing and operationalizing environmental issues. California Management Review 1993;36(1):116e35. [115] Ding H, Zhao Q, An Z, Xu J, Liu Q. Pricing strategy of environmental sustainable supply chain with internalizing externalities. International Journal of Production Economics 2015;170:563e75. [116] Genovese A, Acquaye AA, Figueroa A, Koh SL. Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: evidence and some applications. Omega 2017;66:344e57. [117] Carter CR, Meschnig G, Kaufmann L. Moving to the next level: why our discipline needs more multilevel theorization. Journal of Supply Chain Management 2015; 51(4):94e102. [118] Xue B, Chen XP, Geng Y, Guo XJ, Lu CP, Zhang ZL, Lu CY. Survey of officials’ awareness on circular economy development in China: based on municipal and county level. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2010;54(12):1296e302. [119] Koh SL, Gunasekaran A, Morris J, Obayi R, Ebrahimi SM. Conceptualizing a circular framework of supply chain resource sustainability. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 2017;37(10):1520e40. [120] Linton JD, Klassen R, Jayaraman V. Sustainable supply chains: an introduction. Journal of Operations Management 2007;25(6):1075e82. [121] Zheng L, Zhang J. Research on green logistics system based on circular economy. Asian Social Science 2010;6(11):116. [122] Wieland A, Handfield RB. The socially responsible supply chain: an imperative for global corporations. Supply Chain Management Review 2010;14(6):22e9. [123] Ying J, Li-jun Z. Study on green supply chain management based on circular economy. Physics Procedia 2012;25:1682e8. [124] Aminoff A, Kettunen O. Sustainable supply chain management in a circular economydtowards supply circles. In: Setchi R, Howlett R, Liu Y, Theobald P, editors. Sustainable design and manufacturing 2016. Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 61e72. [125] Gonzalez EM, Felix R, Carrete L, Centeno E, Casta~ no R. Green shades: a segmentation approach based on ecological consumer behavior in an emerging economy. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 2015;23(3):287e302. [126] Tsoulfas GT, Pappis CP. Environmental principles applicable to supply chains design and operation. Journal of Cleaner Production 2006;14(18):1593e602. [127] Ferguson ME, Souza GC, editors. Closed-loop supply chains: new developments to improve the sustainability of business practices. Boca Ratom, FL: CRC Press; 2016. 240 pages. [128] Gu X, Ieromonachou P, Zhou L, Tseng ML. Optimising quantity of manufacturing and remanufacturing in an electric vehicle battery closed-loop supply chain. Industrial Management and Data Systems 2018;118(1):283e302. [129] Guide Jr VDR, Van Wassenhove LN. OR FORUMdthe evolution of closed-loop supply chain research. Operations Research 2009;57(1):10e8.

34

The Circular Economy

[130] Hammond D, Beullens P. Closed-loop supply chain network equilibrium under legislation. European Journal of Operational Research 2007;183(2):895e908. [131] Yang GF, Wang ZP, Li XQ. The optimization of the closed-loop supply chain network. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 2009;45(1):16e28. [132] Haskins C. A systems engineering framework for ecoeindustrial park formation. Systems Engineering 2007;10(1):83e97. [133] French ML, LaForge RL. Closed-loop supply chains in process industries: an empirical study of producer re-use issues. Journal of Operations Management 2006;24(3): 271e86. [134] Gou Q, Liang L, Huang Z, Xu C. A joint inventory model for an open-loop reverse supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics 2008;116(1):28e42. [135] Ferguson M. Strategic and tactical aspects of closed-loop supply chains. Foundations and TrendsÒ in Technology Information and Operations Management 2010;3(2): 101e200. € urk N. Open loop reverse supply chain network design. Procedia-Social [136] Ene S, Ozt€ and Behavioral Sciences 2014;109:1110e5. [137] Kumar S, Malegeant P. Strategic alliance in a closed-loop supply chain, a case of manufacturer and eco-non-profit organization. Technovation 2006;26(10): 1127e35. [138] Pishvaee MS, Rabbani M, Torabi SA. A robust optimization approach to closed-loop supply chain network design under uncertainty. Applied Mathematical Modelling 2011;35(2):637e49. € [139] Ozkır V, Bas¸lıgil H. Multi-objective optimization of closed-loop supply chains in uncertain environment. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013;41:114e25. [140] Soleimani H, Govindan K, Saghafi H, Jafari H. Fuzzy multi-objective sustainable and green closed-loop supply chain network design. Computers and Industrial Engineering 2017;109:191e203. [141] Tibben-Lembke RS, Rogers DS. Differences between forward and reverse logistics in a retail environment. Supply Chain Management: International Journal 2002; 7(5):271e82. [142] Amin SH, Zhang G. A multi-objective facility location model for closed-loop supply chain network under uncertain demand and return. Applied Mathematical Modelling 2013;37(6):4165e76. [143] Fard AMF, Hajaghaei-Keshteli M. A tri-level location-allocation model for forward/ reverse supply chain. Applied Soft Computing 2018;62:328e46. [144] El-Sayed M, Afia N, El-Kharbotly A. A stochastic model for forwardereverse logistics network design under risk. Computers and Industrial Engineering 2010;58(3): 423e31. [145] Wells P, Seitz M. Business models and closed-loop supply chains: a typology. Supply Chain Management: International Journal 2005;10(4):249e51. [146] Mutha A, Pokharel S. Strategic network design for reverse logistics and remanufacturing using new and old product modules. Computers & Industrial Engineering 2009;56(1):334e46. [147] Govindan K, Soleimani H, Kannan D. Reverse logistics and closed-loop supply chain: a comprehensive review to explore the future. European Journal of Operational Research 2015;240(3):603e26. [148] Hertel T, Steinbuks J, Baldos U. Competition for land in the global bioeconomy. Agricultural Economics 2013;44(s1):129e38. [149] Liu Z, Adams M, Cote RP, Geng Y, Li Y. Comparative study on the pathways of industrial parks towards sustainable development between China and Canada. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2018;128:417e25.

Getting hold of the circular economy concept

35

[150] Haas W, Krausmann F, Wiedenhofer D, Heinz M. How circular is the global economy?: an assessment of material flows, waste production, and recycling in the European union and the world in 2005. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2015;19(5):765e77. [151] Govindan K, Hasanagic M. A systematic review on drivers, barriers, and practices towards circular economy: a supply chain perspective. International Journal of Production Research 2018:1e34. [152] Stirling A. Pluralising progress: from integrative transitions to transformative diversity. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 2011;1(1):82e8. [153] De Jesus A, Mendonça S. Lost in transition? drivers and barriers in the eco-innovation road to the circular economy. Ecological Economics 2018;145:75e89.

Further Reading [1] Rhodes CJ. Feeding and healing the world: through regenerative agriculture and permaculture. Science Progress 2012;95(4):345e446.

CHAPTER TWO

Circular economy: here and now 2.1 Introduction The current fossil-based linear economic (LE) model is largely based on mass production and consumption patterns, briefly and justly summarized by “take-make-use-dispose” label. After many decades of application on a global scale, LE revealed its serious conceptual and structural limitations, and thus was evidenced by economists, ecologists and other scientists to be an unsustainable paradigm that needs to be quickly and attentively replaced [1e3]. The main challenge in this transition phase is the necessity for the alternative CE model to design and execute sustainable productionconsumption systems, equally effective as the linear systems, while gradually remediating the heavy legacy of the LE, especially in the environmental and societal sectors. Such a goal is indeed very challenging, but it is believed to be the only foreseeable scenario to ensure the global implementation of a genuinely sustainable economic model. Experts from around the world have been raising their voices to alert decision makers, industrialists, and the general public about the obvious issues with LE, related to the wasteful management of valuable resources (mostly fossil) and the continuous pressure on those raw materials from highly effective industrial complexes and an increasing world population. Such pressures are further accentuated by polluting activities during the extraction/cultivation of raw materials and/or the industrial processing, utilization, and disposal of products [4e6]. In short, LE is governed by the destructive principle of producing more products from cheaply available resources, and with short lifespans (to produce even more). This was (or still, to be accurate) a highly effective approach to produce and use/consume commodities, where the fate of products after their “useful life” is neglected, to say the least, as most items are either landfilled or incinerated [7]. Even, modern waste management schemes aiming at producing heat and electricity from incineration, and biogas and compost in landfills [8], are conceptually linked to the linear model as they tend to “encourage” the generation of wastes and not to The Circular Economy ISBN: 978-0-12-815267-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815267-6.00002-5

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

37

j

The Circular Economy

38

reduce it in the first place. Besides, such tentative valorizations, although reducing the amount of wastes to be disposed, are also reducing the embedded value of many wastes (“wasted” resources to be correct) [9], which is in direct opposition with the CE principle of increasing value and reducing waste [10,11]. Thus, despite numerous scientific and technological breakthroughs in the linear economy model, enabling the production of more food, more clothes, and more cars, the price paid (and to be paid by future generations) is already too high. This includes the loss of valuable and scarce resources, release of harmful emissions, and the generation of amounts of waste through the entire supply and value chains [12e14]. Considering the urgency and seriousness of this matter, to explain why CE is needed now, the environmental, societal, and geopolitical legacy of the linear economic model is briefly described in the following section.

2.2 Why now? The linear economy concept, and throughout decades of unsustainable mass production/mass consumption schemes and reckless resources/ wastes management strategies (with some expectations of course), helped in producing more food and goods (although not equally distributed) and did generate economic growth. But, it also led to the formation and accentuation of various environmental, societal, and geopolitical issues.

2.2.1 Environmental issues One of the main traits of LE is the reliance on fossil resources as feedstock and/or energy input for many key industrial sectors worldwide. This includes the extensive use of fossil fuels to produce transportation fuels, electricity, chemicals, materials, and many other commodities [15], and the reliance on mined resources such as phosphate rocks to produce fertilizers for the agricultural sector [16]. The involved extraction and refining processes, involving both fossil resources, was proved by scientists to have a long-term harmful impact on the environment, and in some cases leading to the irreversible deterioration of exposed ecosystems [17,18]. The global environmental situation became so alarming that scientists from around the world, led by Johan Rockstr€ om from the Stockholm Resilience Center, deemed it timely and necessary to exploring the safe operating space for Humanity by proposing the concept of “Planetary Boundaries” [19].

Circular economy: here and now

39

Considering the wide range of products and industrial activities conducted according to the LE concept, we will focus on the two key sectors of coal mining and petroleum industry, along with the related refining, utilization, and waste disposal patterns, to illustrate their negative impacts on the environment, exclusively based on published scientific results, and data for international authoritative sources. 2.2.1.1 Soil degradation and water pollution ➢ Coal mining activities around the world did make a substantial contribution to the national economic growth of many countries, most notably China, where coal is the principal primary energy source [20]. Nonetheless, many studies reported the damaging impact of coal mining on the environment, especially the contamination of surface and ground waters during the extraction stage or through the surface disposal of waste rock, due to solubilization and release of inorganic contaminants, including toxic heavy metals [21]. Acid mine drainage, radically altering the properties of exposed surface and ground waters was also closely monitored [22]. The environmental situation in and around coal mines was more pronounced because of the expensive costs related to the implementation of reclamation, mitigation, and monitoring activities of improperly controlled and abandoned mining sites [23]. The issue with coal mining continues even after the exploitation of this fossil resource. Indeed, after the coal is mined, the mining companies are required to “restore” the ecological functions to the post-mining landscape [24]. The widely applied soil reconstruction scheme involve reallocating of the original soil layers over the craters, stabilizing of the soil chemical properties and reestablishing the vegetation. The issue with such a plan is the high levels of acidification in those reconstructed soil due to the presence of pyrite (FeS2) which is easily oxidized into sulfuric acid (H2SO4) in the presence of water or air [25]. Other serious environmental problems, including the loss of soil structure, decrease of organic matter, low rate of water infiltration, and soil erosion, were also reported [26,27]. The same environmental issues of soil and water contamination were also extensively reported for minerals extraction, which, according to many scientists, did inflict serious environmental damage mainly through heavy metal pollution [28e30].

40

The Circular Economy

➢ Petroleum: There are two possible soil and groundwater contamination routes by petroleum and derived petrochemical products. The first scenario is the most spectacular one caused by spills and leaks from petroleum wells, pipelines, and underground storage tanks [31]. The latest infamous accident is BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, with an estimated leak of 4.9 million barrels [32] and a heavy impact on the marine and coastal environments, and the fishing industry in the affected area [33]. The second scenario, and by far the most damaging one, is the contamination occurring in municipal landfills and industrial waste disposal sites, then propagating horizontally and vertically, to further contaminate surface and ground water, particularly, if the aquifer is shallow and not naturally sealed with a layer of low permeability material such as clay. Either way, the release of toxic and/or persistent petrochemical compounds into the environment can damage large terrains, thus altering the chemical properties and fertility of soils and making them unfit for agricultural activities [34]. Contaminating water sources, on the other hand, makes them undrinkable and could cause serious and widely spread health problems to exposed living organisms [35]. Besides, the treatment of soils and groundwater contaminated by petroleum or its derivates is an expensive and highly challenging endeavor because related remediation actions need to be taken quickly and efficiently to avoid the migration of toxic hydrocarbons and the pollution of larger areas. Another major source of soil and water contamination is the intensive and extended use of petrochemical compounds in the agricultural sector, especially chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides [36,37]. 2.2.1.2 Air pollution ➢ Coal: several environmental issues were reported in the coal sector, involving the strategic industrial activities of mining and energy production. The coal-related environmental problems affecting the air quality are mainly occurring during the extraction of this fossil resource (drilling and blasting), its conditioning (crushing to the desired size), handling (loading and unloading), transportation, and combustion [38]. The combustion of coal processing wastes is also an important source for air pollution [39]. The various pollution routes in the conventional, and linear, coal supply chain (from mines to power plants) includes the fugitive emissions of gas

Circular economy: here and now

41

from mining via ventilation air which contribute toward the global greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory [40]. In this concept, the problem of the methane fraction in those emissions is twofold, first, because methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and second, because of the lost business opportunity to valorize such a valuable side stream [41]. Along with well-known carbon dioxide (CO2) gas, coal combustion processes also emit toxic gases such as sulfur dioxide (SO2), a major contributor to acid rain, and nitrogen oxides (NOx), active contributors in photochemical smog and acid rain [42]. Other serious air pollution scenarios from coal combustion include the emissions of toxic heavy metals [43], and fine, ultrafine, and nano-sized particulate matter, easily accessible to the lungs, which leads to serious health complications, especially if enriched with heavy metals [44,45]. In order to accurately assess and predict the extent of the menace posed by linear-based industrial activities involving fossil coal, Fig. 2.1 illustrates the global map of coal-fired plants, and highlight the alarming 100% amplification of CO2 emissions between 1973 and 2014, and the fact that around 46% of the overall emissions of CO2 is from coal combustion. ➢ Petroleum: From the extraction of petroleum, its refining, the utilization of its various products, and to the disposal of its related wastes, several toxic gases are contaminating the air. The petrochemical and other industries, transportation, and agricultural sectors are significantly contributing to the global degradation of air quality, through the toxic emissions

Figure 2.1 Global map of coal-fired plants and installed capacity of selected countries [39].

42

The Circular Economy

and/or greenhouse gases into the atmosphere [46e48]. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in order to normalize the assessment of air quality. The six “criteria air pollutants” include ground-level ozone (O3), particulate matter (dust, dirt, soot, or smoke), carbon monoxide (CO), lead, SO2, and NOx [49]. Contamination scenarios include the release of SO2 in the petroleum refining emissions, which reacts (along with NOx) with the water molecules in the atmosphere to form acid rain, which could be harmful to living organisms, and corrosive to buildings and other infrastructure [50]. The incomplete combustion of petroleum is also responsible for emitting a mixture of toxic gases (CO, CO2, NOx .), as well as fine particulate matter. These fine particles are also continuously being emitted by vehicle exhausts, along with other gases [51]. In the fuel transportation sector, the use of lead as an additive to gasoline to boost the octane ratings, contributed in increasing the lead levels in the atmosphere, and links between this pollution case and child health issues were reported [52]. Furthermore, several scientific studies reported that many hazardous compounds in petroleum and its derived products are suspected of inducing severe health problems in case of acute exposure (concentration wise) or for long periods of time. These health issues include increased respiratory complications (decreased lung function, aggravated asthma, development of chronic bronchitis from the inhalation of SO2, NOx or fine particulate matter), and serious effects on the functions of vital organs (heart and the brain), and on maternal and perinatal health (increased risk of preterm delivery) [53e55]. 2.2.1.3 Global warming and climate change ➢ Coal: Notwithstanding the objectives stated in international treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol, and despite the declared goals made by numerous industrialized countries and international bodies such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to reduce the anthropogenic emissions of GHGs, and to prevent dangerous impacts on the climate system [56], the global reliance on fossil coal substantially increased. The situation was too paradoxical to many scientists and experts that this global trend was labeled as the “renaissance of coal.” Key factors leading to this odd phenomenon are the fact that coal is the

Circular economy: here and now

43

most carbon-intensive fossil fuel, and that its reserves are by far the leastused, in comparison with petroleum and natural gas [57,58]. The issue is being further aggravated by the large scale utilization of coal to fulfill the energy demand of developing and newly industrializing countries, thus repeating the same mistake of “fueling” economic growth using fossil resources. Overall, from these alarming assessments, another serious issue needs to be highlighted, which is the fracture between the scientific and the industrial world when it comes to fossil fuels. In this context, the fifth assessment report, published in 2014 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommended the replacement of coalfired power plants by less carbon-intensive energy technologies in order to reduce global emissions [59]. An article published in Nature in 2015, recommended that more than 80% of current coal reserves should remain unused between 2010 and 2050 in order to meet the target of 2 C (the average global temperature rise caused by GHG emissions) [60]. Despite these and many other recommendations from scientists to reverse course and start relying on renewable energy sources, the balance of power is still heavily tilted toward fossil fuels, and for decades to come. If petroleum is expected to be depleted in 30e40 years, fossil coal will still be available until 2112 [61]. ➢ Petroleum: Based on the assessments made by the scientists of the IPCC, the increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions is causing global warming. This includes a “cocktail” of GHGs gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), along with perfluorocarbons (PFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). IPCC experts also proved that the total annual GHG emissions from anthropogenic activities have continued to increase from 1970 to 2010, with larger absolute increases between 2000 and 2010 [62]. Over the course of the previous 50 years or so, fossil fuels used in the transportation sector, along with coal used in power plants, have been the primary causes of global warming as the principal sources of CO2 emissions [60,63]. In this regard, it was reported that around 26% of the global emissions of CO2 are coming from vehicle exhausts [64]. Furthermore, methane, a GHG 21 times more potent than CO2 [65], could be generated by the petroleum industry (extraction,

44

The Circular Economy

transportation, refining, and storage) as fugitive emissions [66], although usually associated with natural gas. Global warming and climate change are still subjects of debates even among scientists, with conflicting assessments; either way, severe climatic fluctuations, and extreme events are already witnessed by most residents on this planet. Indeed, storms are becoming stronger, heat waves more intense and droughts more severe [67]. Ice caps are melting, oceans and sea levels are rising, threatening the ecological equilibrium of many marine ecosystems mainly through the contamination of groundwater supplies in coastal aquifers, which could endanger human populations living near the coasts, and especially in islands [68]. Thus, keeping business “linear” as usual is not an option anymore, and replacing the current economic model, heavily relying on fossil resources, unsustainable management schemes and highly polluting and wastegenerating production procedures (and irresponsible consumption behavior and waste disposal), is obviously an urgent necessity that need to be dealt with without further ado.

2.2.2 Societal and geopolitical issues In this section, the focus will also be on the coal mining and petroleum industry, to have a brief but highly representative assessment of the various societal and geopolitical impacts of those strategic industrial sectors in the current LE concept. 2.2.2.1 Issues with the coal sector In the coal industry, mining activities are often reported to be the leading industry causing fatal injuries, either due to disastrous collapsing or explosion accidents or following chronic respiratory complications [43,69]. Furthermore, the communities living nearby coal mines are also adversely affected by toxic emissions and the mining operations including blasting, the collapse of abandoned mines, and the dispersal of dust from coal trucks [70]. Many reports showed that coal mining has a consistent inverse association with socioeconomic indicators related to population growth, local labor markets, entrepreneurship, which pose a real threat to future economic growth [71,72]. Overall, the scientific literature addressing the impacts of the coal sector (mining industry and coal combustion) is clearly divided. In many studies, the focus is on the economic and societal benefits of this sector, while ignoring the negative long-term consequences. Most of these studies are

Circular economy: here and now

45

mining industry-sponsored reports. Few exceptions do exist such as the research study funded by a mining company in central Queensland (Australia) to assess the social impacts of its mining activities in the Coppabella coal mine between 2002 and 2007 [73]. Several issues comprising demographic changes, housing and accommodation, social integration, traffic and fatigue, business opportunities and constraints, cultural heritage, and opportunities for indigenous people were investigated. The conclusions reached by the Australian researchers and other scientists, which are also valid for other mining industries around the world, include the failure by the mining companies and the involved communities to capture positive benefits (mainly economic development) and increased dependence on mining for local employment and income. Over time, the problems generated a new set of acute issues such as [73,74]: - lack of skilled labor in other industries. - reduced availability and affordability of accommodations. - increased traffic and fatigue-related road accidents. - increased pressure on emergency services. - increases in criminal and other antisocial behavior, and - Undermined communities’ institutional power. After decades of assessment studies conducted in various mining sites around the world, many research-related studies focusing on the environmental impacts, and to a lesser extent the societal factor, agreed that the exclusively economic short-term gains from the mining activities (if any in despotic countries) are quickly dissipated by the immediately following severe, expensive, and long-lasting repercussions on the economic, environmental, and social fronts. Such fate is typical of most industrial activities implemented according to the linear economy model. In a 2004 article, insightfully entitled “The Political Economy of Coal Mine Disasters in China: Your Rice Bowl or Your Life” [75], the author gives a valid condition to overcome or mitigate the coal-related issues, which is increasing family incomes in rural regions so that they have the “option to refuse to risk their lives.” Within a global perspective, this recommendation could be converted into creating local opportunities for increased, and more importantly, sustained incomes for families from profitable, eco-friendly, and socially beneficial industrial activities. We shall develop this point in the next Section 2.3, and throughout this book, to show and prove how CE could meet such global challenges.

46

The Circular Economy

2.2.2.2 Issues with the petroleum sector The current linear and market-based economic model is heavily relying on fossil fuels (petroleum, gas, and coal) to, supposedly, bring prosperity and welfare. For the few countries, most notably Norway [76], it did so by escaping the “resource curse” (slow or reverse growth) and the “Dutch disease” (significant contraction of the traded goods sector). But, for most of the rest, it triggered geopolitical tensions and even wars, incited social injustice, provoked famine, and caused environmental disasters [15]. One of the key issues reinforcing the seriousness of the impact of petroleum on economies and societies is its price volatility. Indeed, many studies proved that oil price volatility could have profound impacts by influencing strategic investment decisions [77] and even affect nonenergy commodity markets [78]. In this context, various analytical tools were applied to investigate the fluctuation patterns of oil price, while considering the involved geopolitical, societal, and economic connections [79]. Another major issue related to the petroleum sector, and many other valuable resources, is corruption. Over the last couple of decades, transparency and corruption monitoring have become key topics in the global development agenda, especially with respect to the management of natural resource wealth in the resource-rich, but still developing countries. Although these strategic and highly sought resources were believed to have solid and inherent potential to lift those countries to the rank of developed ones, nonetheless many of those countries showed quite the opposite trend with slow or stagnating economic growth (compared to developed countries with limited resources), along with poor performance against human development indicators, and economic and social instability frequently leading to violent and even armed conflicts [80]. A quick look at Transparency International’s corruption perceptions index of 2017 [81] unequivocally shows that many developed countries with limited resources are ranking high on the list (e.g., Denmark second, Finland and Switzerland third, and Singapore sixth), while resource-rich countries are plagued with corruption and mismanagement including Nigeria (148th), Uganda (151th), Angola (167th), Iraq and Venezuela (169th) and Libya (171th). The same list also shows why Norway, an oil-rich country ranking third in this transparency list, was successful in handling its petroleum bonanza through a zero-tolerance policy to corruption and vast savings in a sovereign wealth fund [82]. The latest strange case of “resource curse” is oil-rich South Sudan, where the latest reports are sadly warning against another famine in the country,

Circular economy: here and now

47

and ironically predicting a fuel shortage crisis [83,84]. In general, corruption cases in resource-rich countries takes two main schemes: rent-seeking and patronage [85]. In the former, huge resource rents make rent-seeking an “easy” and highly profitable strategy for the involved parties (sometimes only the despot and his family). In the second scheme, part of the huge revenues for resources are used to prompt political patronage as the ruling body (despot or unique party) pays off supporters to remain in power and to intimate or prosecute the opposition, which results in reduced accountability, systemic corruption, and mismanagement with the public funds [86]. This “resource curse” phenomenon and its links with corruption were heavily debated, and many opinions and arguments were proposed including a continuation of the colonial era objectives and practices, and even the predisposition of certain cultures to corruption, clientelism, favoritism for family members, etc. [87,88]. In the petroleum-based linear economy, markets are flooded with numerous affordable commodities from plastic items, heating fuels, paints, and pesticides, to clothes, footwear, shampoos, detergents, and many other cheap, but unsustainably produced, petrochemical commodities. This mass production strategy, typical of the LE concept, not only dissipated valuable raw resources, generated enormous amounts of wastes, and caused serious pollution problems, but also conditioned and fostered people to the culture/ideology of mass consumerism [89], through appealing (sometimes deceptive) marketing and advertising strategies. New waves of ethical, responsible and engaged consumption approaches were developed and promoted, respectively, including ethically green and political consumerisms [90,91], to counter this selfish and “enforced” behavior,. At the end of this section, including a brief account on the environmental, societal, and geopolitical issues related to the linear fossil-based economic model, it is clear that accomplishing global SDGs with this linear concept is mission impossible, and that there is an urgent need to replace it, first to avoid further harm to us, the environment and the next generations, and to benefit for this “transition phase” to implement a sustainable economic model for long times ahead. In this context, and based on the analyses of an extensive array of economic indicators conducted by many scientists around the world, it was confirmed that the extraction of fossil resources, and the related linear-based production and consumption patterns, although generating a short-term economic boom, are in most cases responsible for hampering long-term economic growth [92,93].

The Circular Economy

48

For instance, it was reported that the 1980s energy boom in the U.S. West (from petroleum and natural gas), enabling a strong short-term positive impact on employment and income, had negative long-term effects on income growth and other indicators of social welfare, such as increased crime level and decreased educational attainment [94]. For many decades, the main question regarding this serious global challenge was: where is the way out? Circular economy, although a still maturing concept as we shall see in Section 2.4 of this chapter, is already showing the road toward a sustainable and thriving future, and is candidly and confidently telling us to “take the high road and enjoy the journey,” a journey that needs to be started now and from everywhere.

2.3 Circular economy: here and there 2.3.1 Here, local CE The economic benefits from the local implementation of the CE principles are evident. Indeed, in most cases, locally sourced raw materials are cheaper than exported ones and less prone to volatility problems, which helps in shortening the supply chains, increasing the profitability and further securing the entire value chain of industrial, agricultural, or any other profitgenerating activity adopting the CE concept. As well, locally managed reverse logistics are also susceptible to increasing profits via operating more fluent and much less destructive recovery and recycling schemes of resources or materials. Along with the economic advantages, locally implementing CE was also reported to have interesting and long-term social and environmental benefits. Before detailing those aspects, the local dimension (CE here) needs to be specified. Considering the various administrative divisions in countries, we mean by “local” any national government entity including common names such as city, town, province, region, district, county, prefecture, department, municipality, etc. By extrapolation, the global dimension (CE there) involved international relationships and multinational corporation schemes. 2.3.1.1 Locally sourced raw materials Raw materials, locally extracted, cultivated, or harvested are able to induce substantial cost reductions in the production process with direct support to regional economies. Along with the obvious benefits from the reduction of shipping costs for transportation and handling, and the linked emissions,

Circular economy: here and now

49

sourcing raw materials locally, is a strategic decision for countries and companies alike. For instance, importing valuable resources from conflict zones, although from a short-sighted economic outlook, considered as a “cost-effective raw material sourcing,” is widely being condemned as unethical behavior [95], with severe global repercussions including aggravating the violence and instability in those resource-rich authoritarian countries, either in the form of civil war or foreign occupation [96,97]. Past and current related cases in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and South America are too well known to be reiterated. On the other hand, countries or companies economically affected by this unethical competitive edge might be “tempted” to do the same if no regulating penalties are enforced on transgressors. In the geopolitical arena, this issue is much more complicated since, in practice, the “balance of power” amid countries or corporations (and sometimes between countries and corporations) is the main driving force for “regulation,” with the outcome frequently favoring the most powerful entity. Local sourcing, along with other cost-innovative strategies, such as low labor costs and standardized components, were proven to be highly profitable endeavors, most notably in the emerging market firms based in China and India. Indeed, these firms gained highly competitive advantages through their ability to substantially reduce the procurement and production costs by locally implementing innovative and disruptive business models [98]. In this context, “good-enough innovation” is a new approach to development aimed at providing solutions to a range of resource constraints beyond capital limitations. Like in cost innovations, and through various disruptive technological innovations and business models (especially companies aiming at “capturing” new markets), the objective of achieving low price points needs to include the favorable aspects related to improved local sourcing conditions [99]. In Africa, the issue of local sourcing is of strategic significance and a key enabling factor for the implementation of the CE concept, continent-wise. This issue will be further developed in Chapter 5, but the conclusions from some research investigations conducted in resources-rich Nigeria briefly, but insightfully, illustrate the importance of this matter. In these studies, focusing on the iron, steel, petroleum, and natural gas industries, the authors reached the fact that a direct link exists between harnessing local raw materials and the economic development of the country. In addition, supporting the R&D effort targeting these strategic sectors was deemed necessary to

50

The Circular Economy

promote the local extraction and transformation of resources, and limit the drawbacks-related importation. The need for effective and well-targeted legislations and policies to promote the local harnessing of raw materials and the development or enhancement of indigenous technologies was also stressed upon [100,101]. Overall, several advantageous features are related to local sourcing. Nonetheless, such strategic procurement decision could face some challenges when applied on the ground. In this regard, the UK-based Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply (CIPS) reported some of those benefits and limitations associated with local sourcing, in comparison with global procurement schemes [102]: - Benefits: • Easier and cheaper logistics to suppliers for development, management, and periodic site inspections. • Shorter supply chains and reduced associated risks, and thus lower procurement costs and more predictability of delivery times. • Good for public relations since related investments will be highly visible for the local community. - Limitations: • Possible resistance to change, especially if the long-term benefits from local sourcing are overshadowed by the short-term gains from external procurement routes. • The supplier/buyer relationship could become too interdependent, leading to complacency. • Local suppliers that are small businesses may be less efficient with restricted economies of scale. 2.3.1.2 Short supply chains and integrated reverse logistics Although cost-efficient, most of today’s supply chain strategies are structurally complex and involving several geographically dispersed organizations. This makes the entire supply chain vulnerable to natural catastrophes or unexpected geopolitical events, affecting even one of the suppliers. This complex and dispersed character of current supply chains tends to increase the risk levels for multinational businesses, making the transparency of the entire procedure, both critical and complex [103,104]. Supply risk and the probability of supply disruptions is a key issue to supply chain management, and identifying which supplier has greater disruption potential is a critical first step in managing the frequency and impact of these disruptions in the supply chain. Thus, managing and mitigating disruption

Circular economy: here and now

51

risks related to the supply chains of critical raw materials is of paramount importance to reduce serious negative repercussions on the involved and affected companies, consumers, and economies [105,106]. In local supply chains, resources tend to “flow” in short, horizontal structures formed by a network of a few tiers, which allows an easier and more efficient control of the entire supply chain and makes the supplying process less prone to disruption. Several local and short supply chain management schemes will be discussed and analyzed throughout this book, especially with respect to the vital food sector and rural development strategies [107], and in humanitarian aid logistics [108]. On the other hand, although such supply chains are “locally dedicated” (municipality, city or region), their implementation on the ground will generate a network of “delocalized” supplying platforms, if looked upon as a whole from larger scales (i.e., region or nationwide). Such a network could provide valuable supply alternatives, enable more resilient procurement schemes, and mitigate potential issues with local sourcing. From a decision-making perspective, this issue is converted into the managerial choice regarding the level of centralization/decentralization in the companies’ SCM strategy. Each strategy has it owns pros and cons as illustrated in many scientific publications [109,110], and adopting either one is the outcome of rigorous economic and impact assessment analyses. Overall, and in compliance with the concept of CE, such local, short and decentralized supply chain schemes could form reliable and resilient platforms to establish mutually beneficial relationships in the “cautious” and pragmatic business world, build long-term strategic alliances between the small core group of suppliers [111], and thus, leading to beneficial global impacts as we shall see in Section 2.3.2. As for the integration of reverse logistics in local/short supply chains, the CE concept aims at promoting designs and planning decisions enabling the simultaneous integrating reverse logistics activities to the supply chain management schemes in order to develop closed-loop patterns. Thus, when CE is implemented at a local scale, the reverse logistics could generate several favorable “returns” in term of savings related to reduced transportation and handling costs for the collection, recovery, and reprocessing of spent resources and materials [112], along with the creation of new jobs and the substantial reduction of the wastes to be increased or landfilled, and the various soil-, air-, and water-related pollution issues. Other societal and environmental advantages prompted by the local implementation of the CE concept, and benefiting local communities and

52

The Circular Economy

preserving indigenous ecosystems, are presented in the following section on one of the CE concepts prone to local implementation: Eco-industrial parks. 2.3.1.3 Eco-industrial parks: locally implementing CE Circular economy was confirmed to have substantial potential to deliver economic, environmental, and social benefits. Enabling and promoting sustainable development via the adoption of CE principles is more relevant for local economies. One key manifestation of the CE concept at the local scale is the establishment of eco-industrial parks. In most cases, the gradual formation of such parks occurs at a regional scale with the gradual evolution of industrial symbiosis and by-products exchange networks between several local companies, fully or partly adopting the CE principles throughout their supply chains. Marian Chertow, a leading expert in the field of industrial ecology, highlighted the importance of the local dimension of industrial symbiosis in her definition of this concept, which reads as follows: “Industrial symbiosis engages traditionally separate industries in a collective approach to competitive advantage involving physical exchange of materials, energy, water, and/or by-products. The keys to industrial symbiosis are collaboration and the synergistic possibilities offered by geographic proximity” [113]. Several economic benefits arising from such symbiotic industrial clusters, insightfully labeled back in the late 1990s as “islands of sustainability” [114], were highlighted in the related literature [115,116], including: - Additional revenues from selling by-products, and the simultaneous reduction in discharge fees or disposal costs. - Reduced reliance of external sources for energy and materials, subject to fluctuating prices and vulnerable procurement routes, and the simultaneous reduction in related transportation costs. The alternative energetic sources and raw materials being locally generated or “by-produced” (depending on the advanced level of symbiosis in EIPs). Thus, the logical trend in an evolving EIP is the establishment of a symbiotic partnerships, enabling the formation of an autonomous network with increased economic benefits, reduced environmental footprints and improved social conditions for the local community directly or indirectly linked with the EIP. - Other related advantages include avoiding large investments, enabling agile and secure supply chains, promoting operational resiliency and innovations, and attracting/retaining a skilled workforce.

Circular economy: here and now

53

From an environmental perspective, it was reported that the net environmental improvements enabled through the local implementation of a circular-based industrial symbiosis involved in the production of heat and electricity for the local town were averaging between 5% and 20%. Furthermore, since such a cooperative scheme reduced the need for heat and electricity from external sources, less greenhouse gas emissions were generated [117]. Considering the importance of the environmental factor within sustainable development schemes in general, and CE and EIPs in specific, a European project entitled “Eco-Industrial Park Environmental Support System (EPESUS)” was conducted between 2009 and 2012 to help “industrial facilities in reducing their environmental impact” and “identify costefficient measures for environmental improvement” [118]. The main objectives of this project, which are valid EIPs, and any other circular industrial cluster or activity, include: - Assessing the environmental impact of the involved industries through the monitoring of material and energy process flows. - Establishing a management guide for waste and energy to provide executive managers with a tool putting forward potential development opportunities through a better inclusion of the environment in the overall management strategy. - Identifying the environmental footprints of the production procedures, products, or services. - Locating (or better anticipating) environmental issues in this sector to quickly enable the setting (or better the pre-planning) of environmental solutions. As for the societal benefits from eco-industrial parks, several scientists are emphasizing the substantial impact of the business location and local collaboration and partnership on the company’s productivity and profitability on the one hand, and the well-being of local communities on the other hand [119,120]. In this regard, some scientists are stating that firms can create economic value by creating societal value, especially by establishing symbiotic industry clusters around its location [121]. Although this assumption was contested, nonetheless the societal advantages from the implementation of EIPs were widely reported including the creation of new job opportunities in cleaner industries, better wages, improved quality of life in the neighborhood, pollution prevention and reduced waste to the local landfill [122,123]. EIPs could also be involved in sponsoring various cultural activities and events, and building recreation

54

The Circular Economy

facilities, and to promote and sustain communal activities [124]. In this regard, local governments should have a key role in promoting cluster development and firm competitiveness by setting clear and measurable social goals, which can promote social development and business sustainability including energy use, health and safety considerations, and infrastructure improvement) [125]. Throughout this book, and especially in Chapters 4 and 5, several successful and inspiring cases of EIPs in different countries will be presented and analyzed, for economic, environmental, and societal perspectives.

2.3.2 There, global CE 2.3.2.1 CE is a global concept The basic manifestation of the resilience CE concept is that circularity could be adopted and implemented throughout the entire supply and value changes at a local scale, as well as broader, national, and international scales. Nonetheless, in an era of a globalized economy, where most supply chains are of global aspect because involving either scarce or low-cost resources and considering the fact that the environmental and societal issues are occurring all over the world, the CE principles have to be implemented globally. Several studies analyzed and confirmed the worldwide dimension of CE by assessing the global flows of materials (from extraction to disposal), waste production, recycling, and the extent to which the resources are globally processed in cycles, either by society or by biogeochemical processes [126,127]. Thus, while some CE principles such as reuse, repair, and remanufacturing, tend to have a local or regional dimension, other CE concepts such as recycling and resources recovery have a global dimension. In this context, Walter Stahel, a leading figure in CE, warns that circular principles that are destined to be operated globally, such as recycling, could be “badly” influenced by the current global “principles of industrial production, such as economies of scale, specialization and employing the cheapest labor” [128]. Although the current global situation is still being dominated by “linear principles,” CE is increasingly being regarded by world business leaders, policy makers, and scientists as the most reliable alternative economic model, able to generate economic growth and solve the wide array of global economic and environmental challenges [129], through pragmatic raw material shift to gradually decouple economic growth for resources of fossil origin or from conflict zones (to be developed and discussed in Section 3 of the third chapter), and to create closed loops to recover resources and values on a global scale.

Circular economy: here and now

55

Even with the global expansion of recycling during the last decades, no real breakthroughs were achieved within the linear economic model to establish globally extended networks to secure constant and reliable flows of recycled supplies, in compliance with local and international regulations. Why was that? Because, conceptually, recycling in the linear economy mindset is, in most cases, perceived as a business strategy primarily aimed at minimizing waste, and thus, avoiding disposal fees and pollution taxes, and building a “green” reputation. To a much lesser extent, recycling was perceived and adopted as a business strategy to recover resources and retain value. In practice, recycling is an efficient procedure to deal with wastes such as metals, paper, and glass. However, this is not the case for many composite materials, which entitle more effort from the industrial or academic R&D departments to increase recycling rates [130] or explore other circular recovery options. In all cases, to be operated according to the “philosophy” of CE, recycling, along with the rest of “loop-closing” concepts, needs to be designed to enable products’ longer useful lives (through maintenance, reuse, refurbishment or remanufacture), and resilient supply management schemes to recover resources. In this regard, related concepts need to be optimized to allow simultaneous materials recovery and values preservation. 2.3.2.2 Global supply and value loops In the 2014 WEF report “Toward the Circular Economy: Accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains,” prepared in collaboration with the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey & Company, it was stated that the analysis of most advanced business cases confirm the fact that “a supply chain management approach that balances the forward and reverse loops and ensures uniform materials quality is critical to maximizing resource productivity globally” [131]. Worldwide, CE principles involving the recovery of valuable resources throughout the entire supply chain, could “lift” developing countries to the rank of industrialized nations, and enable developed and industrialized countries to reduce the vulnerability of their current supply chains, promote environmental preservation and, increase societal well-being [105]. For corporations, it can enable sustainable growth and give a competitive edge in a world sill, to a large extent, “exploited” and “governed” by unsustainable and sometimes risky procedures and decisions. For many decades, waste management strategies were basically searching for ways to “get rid” of wastes. In the linear economy model, wastes are

56

The Circular Economy

being generated worldwide to be either landfilled or incinerated. Both measures are still the most dominant disposal procedures around the world, which leads to the continued loss of valuable resources (especially nonrenewables), and the unrelenting deterioration of the environment (soil, air, and water) due to toxic emissions from landfills and incinerators. CE is providing new alternatives to these unsustainable waste management schemes enabling the recovery of “to-be-lost” resources and their embedded values, the preservation of the environment, and the promotion of the well-being of people (less pollution, more jobs,). In this context, the concept of “zero waste” is being promoted in the literature as one of the most visionary concepts for solving waste problems [132], and a zero waste index is being proposed to measure the performances of waste management systems and to help cities in reaching this goal [133]. Thus, the key factors supporting the implementation of the CE principles on the global scale include the exchange of designs and technologies to optimize the recovery of resources throughout the entire supply chain, often involving and necessitating “cross-borders” cooperation. Overall, the major endeavor enabling and facilitating the global expansion of CE is the development of global resources’ closed loops, including sharing and exchanging waste materials. In the previous Section 2.3.1, geographical proximity was emphasized by many scientists as a catalyzing factor for the successful establishment of industrial symbiosis (IS) clusters at a regional level. Recently, many reports are highlighting the fact that CE is a resilient concept that could equally be implemented at broader levels, including international and complex business environments [105]. In the IS sector, for instance, new trends are revealing interesting prospects and opportunities for “long-distance” exchanges of wastes. Exploring this option, away from one of the fundamental conceptions of IS (i.e., proximity) was mainly trigged by the failure of many EIPs [134] and the obvious fact that the supply/demand of waste is often geographically scattered. Selected advantageous features to IS from long distance and even crossborder exchanges of resources include [135e137]: - improving the company’s attitude to adopt CE principles by acquiring resources from various circular routes. - Stretching geographical limits may allow companies to engage and partner with multiple suppliers. - Such long-distance exchanges will help in increasing the volume of reused materials, thus making IS-related processes more appealing to investments.

Circular economy: here and now

57

Nonetheless, it has also to be mentioned that, in most cases, longdistance exchanges would require more complex and costly reverse logistics, which would lead to globally “dispersed” footprints, thus complicating the assessment of the environmental and societal impact of circular-based supply chains and manufacturing processes. Recently, the research field linked to the supply chains in CE started focusing on developing models and network designs for global closedloop supply chains, including “global factors” such as distance from markets, access to resources, exchange and tax rates, import tariffs, and trade regulations [138,139]. In this context, and in order to further optimize global supply chains, it was recommended that smart infrastructure and tracking technology need to widely spread, especially across emerging economies and other developing countries [105]. 2.3.2.3 Global societal and environmental benefits Although the economic benefits and prospects of CE were made visible to stakeholders and decision makers (e.g., CE has a global market value of at least USD 1000 billion [140]), debates over CE from an economic perspective are still going on in governmental, business and academic circles, as we shall develop in the next chapter’s Section 3.2.2. However, considering the undeniable fact that the current environmental and societal situations are too alarming in many parts of this world, and it will continue to deteriorate if we continue business as usual, the awareness and promotion of the societal and environmental benefits from the global implementation of CE seem to be more easier to be perceived and defended. Indeed, in the related literature, clear and unmistakable links between CE and sustainable societal development were reported [141,142]. Ideally, and through various innovative business patterns, CE is expected to “help society reach increased sustainability and wellbeing at low or no material, energy and environmental costs” [116]. From an environmental perspective, one of the global targets of CE is the protection and preservation of the environment with less recourse to pristine resources in general and finite ones in specific, minimized use of the environment as a sink for residuals, reduced wastes and emissions, and more renewables (energy and materials) throughout the entire value chain, etc. Nonetheless, the “relationship” between CE and the environment is fundamentally deeper. Indeed, experts in the field of environmental economics are emphasizing that the environmental profits within the CE concept should be observed not only for a physical perspective (visible impacts

58

The Circular Economy

such as reduced amounts of wastes going to landfills or reduced use of water resources, etc.) but also from an economic angle [143]. In layman’s terms, CE enables profits for and from the environment. Thus, several publications in the field of environmental economics, including the book “Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment” published in 1990 by British scientists David W. Pearce, and R. Kerry Turner clearly emphasized the fact that the environment has values on its own by providing removable and nonrenewable resources as feedstocks for our economic activities and by acting as a sink for toxic waterborne, airborne or solid residuals from those activities [144]. In most cases, these economic, environmental, and societal factors are interlinked. For instance, more resources will be recycled and recovered in CE, thus risky jobs in the mining sector, for example, could be avoided, and more safer green job opportunities will be made available, which will promote the social well-being of the involved workforce, their families and communities. The environment will also benefit from reduced polluting activities during the extraction, transportation, and transformation of pristine resources. The resulting improvement in the environmental conditions (water, air, soil, landscape, etc.) will also promote welfare in societies. For this reason, it is important to rely on tools monitoring socioeconomic and environmental factors in order to rationally evaluate the potential net benefits provided by the CE. In this context, analytical tools from the scientific field of environmental economics can be of great help to this effort by identifying which component or procedure in both forward and reverse supply chains can provide the highest benefits to the economy [143]. Sound feedbacks from such analyses are also valuable in the policy and decisionmaking processes, since an integrated understanding of the consequences of those decisions (especially strategic ones related to the energy, water, and food sectors), is a key endeavor to ensure their successful implementation and achieve the expected outcomes, mutually benefiting the economy, society, and the environment. To illustrate the importance of acquiring a holistic perception of the decision-related subject and reliable impact assessments, the on-going dilemma about the persistent use of fossil fuels in various economic sectors is a relevant example. Indeed, in spite of recurring scientific proofs that “burning” fossil fuels is contributing to the worsening of the global phenomena of global warming and climate change, and despite binding international commitments such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement [145,146], the major global tendency is the continued use of

Circular economy: here and now

59

“still cheap” fossil fuels, especially, fossil coal which will remain available up until the year 2112 [61]. Thus, from a purely economic perspective, coal is still highly available and cheap, and using it to “fuel” economic growth makes total sense. Putting the environmental, societal, and geopolitical factors on the table makes the decision making more complicated, but also more balanced, responsible, and far-sighted. How complicated is this decision? Well, we are the decision makers, and we are genuinely willing to decouple economic growth for fossil fuels. First, based on some scientists’ recommendations, and in order to avoid the large and negative environmental footprints of fossil fuels, we have to keep fossil fuels buried underground [60]. In this case, and regardless of the readiness of renewable energy sources to fill this “energy gap,” on a global scale, other scientists are very concerned about the risk of these buried reserves becoming “stranded assets” and creating a dangerous “carbon bubble” with large impacts on global financial markets [147]. So, should we use coal or not? We will get back to this dilemma in the next chapter (Section 3.3.2.1).

2.4 Conclusions After making the case for the CE concept by illustrating the heavy legacy of the current unsustainable fossil-based linear economy on the one hand, and briefly presenting the beneficial outcomes of implementing circular principles on the economy, society, and environment at local and global scales, on the other hand, it is very important to emphasize the following point: Embracing the CE principles “here” by a company or a city is a prerequisite for success, but it is not enough. Undeniably, in order to fully and genuinely embrace circularity, we need to promote it “elsewhere” too by helping others in implementing CE principles in their companies, regions, or countries. This proposal might be confusing for some of us and not even make sense for others, which is quite understandable in current times, overwhelmingly governed by self-centeredness and competitiveness. So, to better illustrate the philosophy behind CE, the importance of promoting and establishing partnerships and symbiosis connections (locally and globally), and the far-sightedness and benefits from helping “others” in adopting the CE concept, let us read and contemplate the following insightful story:

The Circular Economy

60

A farmer growing corn is well known in his village for working very hard throughout the whole season and for taking care of his land and crop in an exemplary manner. Each year, his plantation produces the highest corn yield of the village, which did not please some of his neighboring farmers who tried to “sabotage” him in vain. Years went by, and at the end of one season, he was blessed with a record yield of corn in his entire region. Soon after, regional officials invited the devoted farmer, and as a token of appreciation for his achievement, a sponsoring company gifted him the best corn seeds available on the market for the coming season. In this local gathering, the farmer was eagerly asked: What are you going to do with those super seeds? He directly replied: I will share them with my neighboring farmers. The entire audience, including the jealous farmers, remained astonished by the reply until one of them spontaneously shouted: Are you crazy man, why do that? The wise farmer calmly explained: If I was going to cultivate these super seeds in my land alone, inevitably a fraction of the crop will be pollinized by the pollen coming from nearby farms cultivating low-yielding corn varieties. So, sharing those seeds with my neighbors, along with my expertize and dedication, is the only recipe to beat my own record, and remain ahead for years to come.

Back to the real world, adopting, implementing, and promoting CE principles on a global scale will enable economies to benefit from substantial net material savings, mitigation of volatility and supply risks, potential employment benefits, reduced externalities, and long-term resilience of the economy [148]. To reach those sustainable goals, we need to start moving toward CE at an accelerated pace, and the keyword in this crucial and timely endeavor is “CHANGE,” as we shall see in detail in the following chapter.

References [1] Stahel WR. The circular economy. Nature News 2016;531(7595):435. [2] Esposito M, Tse T, Soufani K. Is the circular economy a new fast-expanding market? Thunderbird International Business Review 2017;59(1):9e14. [3] Moktadir MA, Rahman T, Rahman MH, Ali SM, Paul SK. Drivers to sustainable manufacturing practices and circular economy: a perspective of leather industries in Bangladesh. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;174:1366e80. [4] Horvath IT. Introduction: sustainable chemistry. Chemical Reviews 2018;118(2): 369e71. [5] Begum RA, Sohag K, Abdullah SMS, Jaafar M. CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic and population growth in Malaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015;41:594e601. [6] Tietenberg TH, Lewis L. Environmental and natural resource economics. 10th ed. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge; 2016. 605 pages.

Circular economy: here and now

61

[7] Giusti L. A review of waste management practices and their impact on human health. Waste Management 2009;29(8):2227e39. [8] Lee SG, Lye SW, Khoo MK. A multi-objective methodology for evaluating product end-of-life options and disassembly. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2001;18(2):148e56. [9] Lacy P, Rutqvist J. Waste to wealth: the circular economy advantage. Basingstoke UK: Palgrave Macmillan; 2015. 264 pages. [10] Nidumolu R, Prahalad CK, Rangaswami MR. Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation. Harvard Business Review 2009;87(9):56e64. [11] Chalmers I, Bracken MB, Djulbegovic B, Garattini S, Grant J, G€ ulmezoglu AM, Howells DW, Ioannidis JP, Oliver S. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. The Lancet 2014;383(9912):156e65. [12] Kumar S. Environmentally sensitive productivity growth: a global analysis using MalmquisteLuenberger index. Ecological Economics 2006;56(2):280e93. [13] Kummu M, de Moel H, Porkka M, Siebert S, Varis O, Ward PJ. Lost food, wasted resources: global food supply chain losses and their impacts on freshwater, cropland, and fertiliser use. The Science of the Total Environment 2012;438:477e89. [14] Arag on FM, Rud JP. Polluting industries and agricultural productivity: evidence from mining in Ghana. The Economic Journal 2016;126(597):1980e2011. [15] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Legacy of petroleum-based economy. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 1e27. [16] Gilbert N. Environment: the disappearing nutrient. Nature News 2009;461(7265): 716e8. [17] Arrow K, Bolin B, Costanza R, Dasgupta P, Folke C, Holling CS, Jansson BO, Levin S, M€aler KG, Perrings C, Pimentel D. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment. Ecological Economics 1995;15(2):91e5. [18] Gregory PJ, Ingram JS, Andersson R, Betts RA, Brovkin V, Chase TN, Grace PR, Gray AJ, Hamilton N, Hardy TB, Howden SM. Environmental consequences of alternative practices for intensifying crop production. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 2002;88(3):279e90. [19] Rockstr€ om J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin III FS, Lambin E, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B. Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 2009;14(2):32. [20] Li R, Leung GC. Coal consumption and economic growth in China. Energy Policy 2012;40:438e43. [21] Komnitsas K, Modis K. Soil risk assessment of as and Zn contamination in a coal mining region using geostatisretics. The Science of the Total Environment 2006; 371(1e3):190e6. [22] McCarthy TS. The impact of acid mine drainage in South Africa. South African Journal of Science 2011;107(5e6):1e7. [23] Silva LF, Wollenschlager M, Oliveira ML. A preliminary study of coal mining drainage and environmental health in the Santa Catarina Region, Brazil. Environmental Geochemistry and Health 2011;33(1):55e65. [24] Frouz J, Keplin B, Pizl V, Tajovský K, Starý J, Lukesova A, Novakova A, Balık V, Hanel L, Materna J, D€ uker C. Soil biota and upper soil layer development in two contrasting post-mining chronosequences. Ecological Engineering 2001;17(2e3): 275e84. [25] Pandey B, Agrawal M, Singh S. Coal mining activities change plant community structure due to air pollution and soil degradation. Ecotoxicology 2014;23(8): 1474e83.

62

The Circular Economy

[26] Haigh MJ, Sansom B. Soil compaction, runoff and erosion on reclaimed coal-lands (UK). International Journal of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Environment 1999;13(4):135e46. [27] Mukhopadhyay S, Masto RE, Yadav A, George J, Ram LC, Shukla SP. Soil quality index for evaluation of reclaimed coal mine spoil. The Science of the Total Environment 2016;542:540e50. [28] Navarro MC, Pérez-Sirvent C, Martínez-Sanchez MJ, Vidal J, Tovar PJ, Bech J. Abandoned mine sites as a source of contamination by heavy metals: a case study in a semi-arid zone. Journal of Geochemical Exploration 2008;96(2e3):183e93. [29] Li Z, Ma Z, van der Kuijp TJ, Yuan Z, Huang L. A review of soil heavy metal pollution from mines in China: pollution and health risk assessment. The Science of the Total Environment 2014;468:843e53. [30] Morales NA, Martínez D, García-Meza JV, Labastida I, Armienta MA, Razo I, Lara RH. Total and bioaccessible arsenic and lead in soils impacted by mining exploitation of Fe-oxide-rich ore deposit at Cerro de Mercado, Durango, Mexico. Environmental Earth Sciences 2015;73(7):3249e61. [31] Vinnem JE, Hestad JA, Kvaløy JT, Skogdalen JE. Analysis of root causes of major hazard precursors (hydrocarbon leaks) in the Norwegian offshore petroleum industry. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 2010;95(11):1142e53. [32] Finn K. BP lied about size of U.S. Gulf oil spill, lawyers tell trial. Reuters; October 1, 2013. Available online at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bp-trial/bp-liedabout-size-of-u-s-gulf-oil-spill-lawyers-tell-trial-idUSBRE98T13U20130930. [33] The Independent. BP oil spill: Disaster by numbers. September 13, 2010. Available online at: http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/bp-oil-spill-disaster-bynumbers-2078396.html. [34] Osuji LC, Nwoye I. An appraisal of the impact of petroleum hydrocarbons on soil fertility: the Owaza experience. African Journal of Agricultural Research 2007;2(7): 318e24. [35] Lee JY, Cheon JY, Lee KK, Lee SY, Lee MH. Statistical evaluation of geochemical parameter distribution in a ground water system contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons. Journal of Environmental Quality 2001;30(5):1548e63. [36] Re V, Sacchi E, Kammoun S, Tringali C, Trabelsi R, Zouari K, Daniele S. Integrated socio-hydrogeological approach to tackle nitrate contamination in groundwater resources. The case of Grombalia Basin (Tunisia). The Science of the Total Environment 2017;593:664e76. [37] Yadav IC, Devi NL, Syed JH, Cheng Z, Li J, Zhang G, Jones KC. Current status of persistent organic pesticides residues in air, water, and soil, and their possible effect on neighboring countries: a comprehensive review of India. The Science of the Total Environment 2015;511:123e37. [38] Ghose MK, Majee SR. Assessment of dust generation due to opencast coal mininge an Indian case study. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 2000;61(2):257e65. [39] Dmitrienko MA, Legros JC, Strizhak PA. Experimental evaluation of main emissions during coal processing waste combustion. Environmental Pollution 2018;233: 299e305. [40] Booth P, Brown H, Nemcik J, Ting R. Spatial context in the calculation of gas emissions for underground coal mines. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 2017;27(5):787e94. [41] Zhou F, Xia T, Wang X, Zhang Y, Sun Y, Liu J. Recent developments in coal mine methane extraction and utilization in China: a review. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2016;31:437e58.

Circular economy: here and now

63

[42] Hu Y, Naito S, Kobayashi N, Hasatani M. CO2, NOx and SO2 emissions from the combustion of coal with high oxygen concentration gases. Fuel 2000;79(15): 1925e32. [43] Pandey B, Agrawal M, Singh S. Assessment of air pollution around coal mining area: emphasizing on spatial distributions, seasonal variations and heavy metals, using cluster and principal component analysis. Atmospheric pollution research 2014;5(1):79e86. [44] Tian C, Lu Q, Liu Y, Zeng H, Zhao Y, Zhang J, Gupta R. Understanding of physicochemical properties and formation mechanisms of fine particular matter generated from Canadian coal combustion. Fuel 2016;165:224e34. [45] Oliveira ML, Navarro OG, Crissien TJ, Tutikian BF, da Boit K, Teixeira EC, Cabello JJ, Agudelo-Casta~ neda DM, Silva LF. Coal emissions adverse human health effects associated with ultrafine/nano-particles role and resultant engineering controls. Environmental Research 2017;158:450e5. [46] Cetin E, Odabasi M, Seyfioglu R. Ambient volatile organic compound (VOC) concentrations around a petrochemical complex and a petroleum refinery. The Science of the Total Environment 2003;312(1e3):103e12. [47] Yang WB, Yuan CS, Chen WH, Yang YH, Hung CH. Diurnal variation of greenhouse gas emission from petrochemical wastewater treatment processes using in-situ continuous monitoring system and the associated effect on emission factor estimation. Aerosol and Air Quality Research 2017;17:2608e23. [48] Herrero M, Henderson B, Havlík P, Thornton PK, Conant RT, Smith P, Wirsenius S, Hristov AN, Gerber P, Gill M, Butterbach-Bahl K. Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector. Nature Climate Change 2016;6(5):452. [49] US Environmental protection agency, EPA. Criteria air pollutants. Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants. [50] Vahedpour M, Zolfaghari F. Mechanistic study on the atmospheric formation of acid rain base on the sulfur dioxide. Structural Chemistry 2011;22(6):1331e8. [51] Park D, Yoon Y, Kwon SB, Jeong W, Cho Y, Lee K. The effects of operating conditions on particulate matter exhaust from diesel locomotive engines. The Science of the Total Environment 2012;419:76e80. [52] Zahran S, Iverson T, McElmurry SP, Weiler S. The effect of leaded aviation gasoline on blood lead in children. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 2017;4(2):575e610. [53] McKean-Cowdin R, Calle EE, Peters JM, Henley J, Hannan L, Thurston GD, Thun MJ, Preston-Martin S. Ambient air pollution and brain cancer mortality. Cancer Causes & Control 2009;20(9):1645e51. [54] Hackley B, Feinstein A, Dixon J. Air pollution: impact on maternal and perinatal health. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health 2007;52(5):435e43. [55] Lin MC, Chiu HF, Yu HS, Tsai SS, Cheng BH, Wu TN, Sung FC, Yang CY. Increased risk of preterm delivery in areas with air pollution from a petroleum refinery plant in Taiwan. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A 2001;64(8): 637e44. [56] Breidenich C, Magraw D, Rowley A, Rubin JW. The Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. American Journal of International Law 1998;92(2):315e31. [57] Steckel JC, Edenhofer O, Jakob M. Drivers for the renaissance of coal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2015;112(29):E3775e81. [58] Traa Y. Is a renaissance of coal imminent?dchallenges for catalysis. Chemical Communications 2010;46(13):2175e87. [59] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC. Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. NY: Cambridge University Press; 2014.

64

The Circular Economy

[60] McGlade C, Ekins P. The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2 C. Nature 2015;517(7533):187e90. [61] Shafiee S, Topal E. When will fossil fuel reserves be diminished? Energy Policy 2009; 37(1):181e9. [62] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC. Synthesis report of the IPCC Fifth assessment report. 2014. Available online at: https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_All_Topics.pdf. [63] H€ oo €k M, Tang X. Depletion of fossil fuels and anthropogenic climate changeda review. Energy Policy 2013;52:797e809. [64] Chapman L. Transport and climate change: a review. Journal of Transport Geography 2007;15(5):354e67. [65] Warmuzinski K. Harnessing methane emissions from coal mining. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 2008;86(5):315e20. [66] Schneising O, Burrows JP, Dickerson RR, Buchwitz M, Reuter M, Bovensmann H. Remote sensing of fugitive methane emissions from oil and gas production in North American tight geologic formations. Earth’s Future 2014;2(10):548e58. [67] Konisky DM, Hughes L, Kaylor CH. Extreme weather events and climate change concern. Climatic Change 2016;134(4):533e47. [68] Courchamp F, Hoffmann BD, Russell JC, Leclerc C, Bellard C. Climate change, sealevel rise, and conservation: keeping island biodiversity afloat. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2014;29(3):127e30. [69] Akanksha G. The world’s worst coal mining disasters. Mining Technology Magazine May 15, 2014. Available online at: http://www.mining-technology.com/features/ feature-world-worst-coal-mining-disasters-china/. [70] Reardon J. The effect of the United Mine Workers of America on the probability of severe injury in underground coal mines. Journal of Labor Research 1996;17(2): 239e52. [71] Black D, McKinnish T, Sanders S. The economic impact of the coal boom and bust. The Economic Journal 2005;115(503):449e76. [72] Betz MR, Partridge MD, Farren M, Lobao L. Coal mining, economic development, and the natural resources curse. Energy Economics 2015;50:105e16. [73] Lockie S, Franettovich M, Petkova-Timmer V, Rolfe J, Ivanova G. Coal mining and the resource community cycle: a longitudinal assessment of the social impacts of the Coppabella coal mine. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2009;29(5): 330e9. [74] Morrice E, Colagiuri R. Coal mining, social injustice and health: a universal conflict of power and priorities. Health & Place 2013;19:74e9. [75] Wright T. The political economy of coal mine disasters in China: “your rice bowl or your life”. The China Quarterly 2004;179:629e46. [76] Larsen ER. Escaping the resource curse and the Dutch disease?. In: When and why Norway caught up with and forged ahead of its neighbors. Discussion Papers No. 377, May 2004. Statistics Norway, Research Department; 2004. Available online at: https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/180569/dp377.pdf? sequence¼1&isAllowed¼y. [77] Henriques I, Sadorsky P. The effect of oil price volatility on strategic investment. Energy Economics 2011;33(1):79e87. [78] Ji Q, Fan Y. How does oil price volatility affect non-energy commodity markets? Applied Energy 2012;89(1):273e80. [79] Belyi AV. Why is the oil price not about equilibrium?: an economic sociology account of petroleum markets. Energy Policy 2016;96:45e9. [80] McPherson CP. Necessary but not sufficient: anti-corruption and transparency legislation. The Journal of World Energy Law & Business 2014;7:180e2.

Circular economy: here and now

65

[81] Transparency International. Corruption perceptions index 2017. Available online at: https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_ 2017#table. [82] Eriksen B, Søreide T. Zero-tolerance to corruption? Norway’s role in petroleumrelated corruption internationally. In: Le Billion P, Williams A, editors. Corruption, natural resources and development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2017. p. 28e43. [83] Morgan H. Oil-rich South Sudan faces fuel shortage crisis. Aljazeera News 2017. Available online at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/10/oil-rich-southsudan-faces-fuel-shortage-crisis-171011153018850.html. [84] Mednick S. Famine again a threat in South Sudan, new report says. ABS News 2018. Available online at: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/famine-threatsouth-sudan-report-53355396. [85] Ahmed S. The cultural setting: patronage and rent-seeking. In: Rentier capitalism. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2016. p. 84e102. [86] Kolstad I, Søreide T. Corruption in natural resource management: implications for policy makers. Resources Policy 2009;34(4):214e26. [87] Husted BW. Wealth, culture, and corruption. Journal of International Business Studies 1999;30(2):339e59. [88] Johnston M. Political corruption: readings in comparative analysis. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge; 2017. 582 pages. [89] Sklair L. Culture-ideology of consumerism. Hoboken, NJ, United States: The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Globalization. Wiley-Blackwell; 2012. [90] Clarke N. From ethical consumerism to political consumption. Geography Compass 2008;2(6):1870e84. [91] Chekima B, Wafa SAWSK, Igau OA, Chekima S, Sondoh Jr SL. Examining green consumerism motivational drivers: does premium price and demographics matter to green purchasing? Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;112:3436e50. [92] Sachs JD, Warner AM. The curse of natural resources. European Economic Review 2001;45(4e6):827e38. [93] Gylfason T, Zoega G. Natural resources and economic growth: the role of investment. The World Economy 2006;29(8):1091e115. [94] Haggerty J, Gude PH, Delorey M, Rasker R. Long-term effects of income specialization in oil and gas extraction: the US West, 1980e2011. Energy Economics 2014; 45:186e95. [95] Europena Commision. The EU’s new conflict minerals regulation. 2017. Available online at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/march/tradoc_155423.pdf. [96] Ross ML. What do we know about natural resources and civil war? Journal of Peace Research 2004;41(3):337e56. [97] Le Billon P. Corruption, reconstruction and oil governance in Iraq. Third World Quarterly 2005;26(4e5):685e703. [98] Williamson PJ. Cost innovation: preparing for a ‘value-for-money’ revolution. Long Range Planning 2010;43(2e3):343e53. [99] Zeschky MB, Winterhalter S, Gassmann O. From cost to frugal and reverse innovation: mapping the field and implications for global competitiveness. ResearchTechnology Management 2014;57(4):20e7. [100] Okorafor AO. Developing indigenous technology for harnessing local natural resources in Nigeria: the place of technical vocational education and training. International Journal of Science and Technology 2014;3(8):461e6. [101] Ocheri C, Ajani OO, Daniel A, Agbo N. Harnessing local raw materials for engineering and technological development in Nigeria. Journal of Powder Metallurgy and Mining 2017;6(1):1e5.

66

The Circular Economy

[102] Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply (CIPS). Global supply chains e The pro’s and con’s of local sourcing. Available online at: https://www.cips.org/en/ knowledge/procurement-topics-and-skills/srm-and-sc-management/global-supplychains/the-pros-and-cons-of-local-sourcing/#tabs-2. [103] Linich D. The path to supply chain transparency. Deloitte Insights; 2014. Published on July 18 2014. Available online at: https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/ topics/operations/supply-chain-transparency.html. [104] Kovacs GL, Paganelli P. A planning and management infrastructure for large, complex, distributed projectsdbeyond ERP and SCM. Computers in Industry 2003; 51(2):165e83. [105] Preston F. A global Redesign? Shaping the circular economy. Energy, Environment and Resource Governance; 2012. EERG BP 2012/02. Available online at: https:// www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/public/Research/Energy%2C %20Environment%20and%20Development/bp0312_preston.pdf. [106] Trkman P, McCormack K. Supply chain risk in turbulent environmentsda conceptual model for managing supply chain network risk. International Journal of Production Economics 2009;119(2):247e58. [107] Renting H, Marsden TK, Banks J. Understanding alternative food networks: exploring the role of short food supply chains in rural development. Environment & Planning A 2003;35(3):393e411. [108] Pettit S, Beresford A. Critical success factors in the context of humanitarian aid supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 2009; 39(6):450e68. [109] Xie G. Cooperative strategies for sustainability in a decentralized supply chain with competing suppliers. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;113:807e21. [110] Giannoccaro I. Centralized vs. decentralized supply chains: the importance of decision maker’s cognitive ability and resistance to change. Industrial Marketing Management 2018;Vo73:59e69. [111] Lambert DM, Cooper MC. Issues in supply chain management. Industrial Marketing Management 2000;29(1):65e83. [112] Cardoso SR, Barbosa-P ovoa APF, Relvas S. Design and planning of supply chains with integration of reverse logistics activities under demand uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research 2013;226(3):436e51. [113] Chertow MR. Industrial symbiosis: literature and taxonomy. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 2000;25(1):313e37. [114] Wallner HP, Narodoslawsky M. Evolution of regional socio-economic systems toward “islands of sustainability”. Journal of Environmental Systems 1996;24:221e40. [115] Jacobsen NB. Industrial symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark: a quantitative assessment of economic and environmental aspects. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2006;10(1-2): 239e55. [116] Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S. A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;114:11e32. [117] Sokka L, Lehtoranta S, Nissinen A, Melanen M. Analyzing the environmental benefits of industrial symbiosis. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2011;15(1):137e55. [118] European Commission, Eco-innovation projects database. Eco-Industrial Park Environmental Support System (EPESUS). Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/ environment/eco-innovation/projects/en/projects/epesus#benefits. [119] Veiga LBE, Magrini A. Eco-industrial park development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: a tool for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production 2009;17(7):653e61.

Circular economy: here and now

67

[120] Veleva V, Todorova S, Lowitt P, Angus N, Neely D. Understanding and addressing business needs and sustainability challenges: lessons from Devens eco-industrial park. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015;87:375e84. [121] Porter ME, Kramer MR. Creating shared value. In: Managing sustainable business. Dordrecht: Springer; 2019. p. 327e50. [122] Gibbs D, Deutz P. Reflections on implementing industrial ecology through ecoindustrial park development. Journal of Cleaner Production 2007;15(17):1683e95. [123] Hewes AK, Lyons DI. The humanistic side of eco-industrial parks: champions and the role of trust. Regional Studies 2008;42(10):1329e42. [124] Oh DS, Kim KB, Jeong SY. Eco-industrial park design: a Daedeok Technovalley case study. Habitat International 2005;29(2):269e84. [125] Deutz P, Gibbs D. Industrial ecology and regional development: eco-industrial development as cluster policy. Regional Studies 2008;42(10):1313e28. [126] Haas W, Krausmann F, Wiedenhofer D, Heinz M. How circular is the global economy?: an assessment of material flows, waste production, and recycling in the European Union and the world in 2005. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2015;19(5): 765e77. [127] Murray A, Skene K, Haynes K. The circular economy: an interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics 2017;140(3):369e80. [128] Stahel WR. Policy for material efficiencydsustainable taxation as a departure from the throwaway society. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 2013; 371:20110567. [129] Krarup M, Kiørboe N, Sramkova H. Moving towards a circular economy: successful Nordic business models. Copenhagen, Denmark: Nordic Council of Ministers; 2015. Available online at: http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:852029/FULLTEXT01.pdf. [130] Mugdal S, Tan A, Carreno AM, Trigo AP, Dias D, Pahal S, Fischer-Kowalski M. Analysis of the key contributions to resource efficiency e Final report. European Commission, DG Environment; 2011. available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/ environment/natres/pdf/Resource_Efficiency_Final.pdf. [131] World Economic Forum. Towards the circular economy: Accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains. 2014. Available online at: http://www3.weforum.org/ docs/WEF_ENV_TowardsCircularEconomy_Report_2014.pdf. [132] Greyson J. An economic instrument for zero waste, economic growth and sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production 2007;15(13e14):1382e90. [133] Zaman AU, Lehmann S. The zero waste index: a performance measurement tool for waste management systems in a ‘zero waste city’. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013; 50:123e32. [134] Heeres RR, Vermeulen WJ, De Walle FB. Eco-industrial park initiatives in the USA and The Netherlands: first lessons. Journal of Cleaner Production 2004;12(8e10): 985e95. [135] Sterr T, Ott T. The industrial region as a promising unit for eco-industrial development e reflections, practical experience and establishment of innovative instruments to support industrial ecology. Journal of Cleaner Production 2004;12(8e10):947e65. [136] Prosman EJ, Wæhrens BV, Liotta G. Closing global material loops: initial insights into firm-level challenges. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3):641e50. [137] Zhu J, Ruth M. Exploring the resilience of industrial ecosystems. Journal of Environmental Management 2013;122:65e75. [138] Hasani A, Zegordi SH, Nikbakhsh E. Robust closed-loop global supply chain network design under uncertainty: the case of the medical device industry. International Journal of Production Research 2015;53(5):1596e624.

68

The Circular Economy

[139] Amin SH, Baki F. A facility location model for global closed-loop supply chain network design. Applied Mathematical Modelling 2017;41:316e30. [140] Sitra. The opportunities of a circular economy for Finland. October 2015. Available online at: https://media.sitra.fi/2017/02/28142449/Selvityksia100.pdf. [141] Geissdoerfer M, Savaget P, Bocken NM, Hultink EJ. The circular economyea new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;143:757e68. [142] Korhonen J, Nuur C, Feldmann A, Birkie SE. Circular economy as an essentially contested concept. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;175:544e52. [143] Andersen MS. An introductory note on the environmental economics of the circular economy. Sustainability Science 2007;2(1):133e40. [144] Pearce DW, Turner KT. Economics of natural resources and the environment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1990. 378 pages. [145] United Nations - Climate Change, Kyoto protocol. Available online at: http:// unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php. [146] United Nations - Climate Change, The Paris agreement. Available online at: http:// unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php. [147] Heede R, Oreskes N. Potential emissions of CO2 and methane from proved reserves of fossil fuels: an alternative analysis. Global Environmental Change 2016;36:12e20. [148] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy e economic and business Rationale for an accelerated transition. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2013. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation. org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation-Towards-theCircular-Economy-vol.1.pdf. 98 pages.

CHAPTER THREE

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy 3.1 Introduction After illustrating the unsustainability and numerous serious limitations of the current linear economic model in the first chapter, and after justifying the need to shift to the most mature sustainable economic model, Circular Economy (CE), the logical next step is to start developing innovative procedures, and taking incentive measures to facilitate and accelerate this critical transition phase toward the global implementation of CE. Basically, the transition to the CE model implies: (i) maintaining the value of resources and derived products in the economy for as long as possible, along with (ii) minimizing the generation of unsafe, non-useful and low-value waste. Accelerating the implementation of related strategies, legislations, and processes is a key endeavor to accomplish the objectives sought from CE in the first place, that the development is sustainable, low carbon, resource efficient and competitive economy [1]. Thus, accelerating the implementation of CE on a global scale is a real and effective “catalyst” to attain many of the sustainable devolvement goals (SDGs) set by the United Nations, including reduced poverty and hunger, promoted economic growth and jobs, affordable and clean energy and water supplies, responsible production and consumption, etc. [2,3]. Considering the wide and valuable opportunities for growth offered by CE, and in order to enable and accelerate the effective implementation of these opportunities, it is very important that the holistic nature of the CE concept is captured by all. Thus, scientists, industrialists, stakeholders, policymakers, and all potential contributors need to find common platforms to identify common interests, explore new opportunities, exchanges novel ideas and jointly determine the best solutions to the various challenges slowing down the implementation of CE. This joint effort can be promoted by developing new business models and including CE messages at all levels of education. The role and impact of policymaking in this regard is crucial, through well-tailored policies and regulation measures to support these “circular” opportunities [4]. The Circular Economy ISBN: 978-0-12-815267-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815267-6.00003-7

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

69

j

70

The Circular Economy

Overall, the main aim of this transition phase is to ensure that investors, producers, consumers, and decision makers can, easily and quickly, capture the value of the multiple CE principles. According to a report published by the World Economic Forum (WEF), in collaboration with the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey & Company, such crucial effort will trigger action to implement innovative business models and create new job opportunities. Economic value and environmental gain can be tapped as a result [5]. As we shall see in this chapter, all involved parties can contribute to accelerating the transition phase toward CE, and harness its economic, environmental, and societal benefits.

3.2 Conceptual change: “rethinking the wheel” Change is the single keyword summarizing this very important transition era in the history of humanity. This might seem too exaggerated, but it is not. Too much is already at stake because we kept doing business as usual and we did not jointly and efficiently react to serious and recurrent alarming signs including extreme climatic events, transgressed planetary boundaries, and serious geopolitical complications related to the control of finite resources, etc. [6e8]. We were, some would say, still blinded by our impulsive pursuit of economic growth, at the expense of the environment, and ultimately at our own expense. From a psychological perspective, most people tend to be afraid of change, and they can even furiously oppose any fundamental change in their lives. This fear of change is deeply lodged in the psyche of individuals, societies, and some “conservative” companies, which makes the replacement of an economic model with a novel one is a challenging task facing CE, and it will remain so despite the fact that CE is a sustainable concept developed to replace a clearly unsustainable one. To be pragmatic, the current linear and fossil-based economic model is still effective in generating economic growth. Thus, no alternative economic model will be able to take over, no matter how “green” it is, until it becomes equally effective, or at least shows unmistakable signs of it. This is the only way to overcome this intrinsic fear of change, capable of considerably slowing down the implementation of CE, if not giving the appropriate consideration through both incentive and punitive measures. Overall, when it comes to any paradigm shift, some of us are willing to make minor concessions for some time, but none of us will be willing to make serious

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

71

concessions most of the time, and involved players in CE need to take this seriously especially in the policy-making process, and the education and media sectors.

3.2.1 From linearity to circularity No more take-make-dispose in the future is at the heart of the CE concept, simply because we are running out of resources to “sustain” this unsustainable economic model. Since the dawn of the industrial revolution, the economy remained fundamentally based on a unidirectional concept where a company A extracts and/or harvests resources, a company B uses those resources as feedstock to manufacture products, and a company C sells the product to a consumer X. At the end of the service life of the product, X dumps it. Ultimately, the resources used to make this product vanishes from the supply chain, and thus, company A extracts more of it until signs of resource depletion start to be visible. Then, increased fears of resource scarcity starts to build up, and leads to aggravated volatility of commodity prices. Eventually, consumer X cannot buy the product anymore because it has become too expensive, and since the economy growth was seriously affected, he is now worried about losing his job, and companies A, B, and C are struggling to stay in business. Thus, moving away from this linear concept makes perfect sense, especially if we know that around 65 billion tons of raw materials entered the global economy in 2010, and this figure is predicted to increase to 82 billion tons in 2020 [9]. Thus, if we keep doing business as usual, the potential of resources is just staggering. Moving away from the linear economy concept means moving toward a diametrically opposed economic model, a non-linear one, namely CE, enabling the recovery of recourses and reusing/recycling products and materials. For how long? For as long as our ingenuity will allow and facilitate. We shall explore these innovative features in more details in the present and the next chapters, including new circular business models (CBMs) and innovative “circularity-enabling” procedures and technologies. The real benefit from such fundamental shift toward a global CE is to catalyze a steady decoupling of what we are always expecting from our economy (that is growth, new jobs, prosperity, social welfare, etc.) from what we do not control (finite resources, most times in foreign countries), and only couple it with what we can control (renewable resources and wastes).

The Circular Economy

72

In order to reach this objective on a global scale, first, CE strategies need to be adopted to local economies, and then globally extended through the implementation of various measures targeting the sustainable and efficient management of resources and products [10]. • For resources: reducing the use of finite or pristine raw materials, valorizing existing assets, and reducing the output of waste. • For materials: promoting recovery and reuse schemes, lifetime extension, sharing and service models, circular design, and digital platforms. The following Fig. 3.1 is contrasting the linear economy and CE concepts, where the LE (left) underestimates (to say the least) the environmental impacts of its resource consumption and waste disposal schemes, leading to more pressure on pristine resource, the “wasteful” emission of wastes, and the generation of pollution. In contrast, the CE concept (right) moves resources and products in closed loops, thus reducing the pressure on resources, and limits the generation of wastes and emission of pollution, to manageable levels.

3.2.2 From skepticism to conviction As stated in Section 2.3.2.3, debates over the CE are still going on in government, business, and academic circles, although several experts, are emphasizing the fact that the CE concept is mature enough for wider implementation scenarios. Why is that? Simply because we have key players in various sectors, particularly in the entrepreneurial and political arenas,

Figure 3.1 Conceptual difference between linear and circular economy [11].

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

73

who are still skeptical about this new concept and its potentialities to “deliver” the high expectations promoted by scientists and other experts. Some skeptics would say that although recycling products and recovering resource is a “good thing,” but we need infrastructure, facilities, and resources to achieve these objectives, which in turn would also consume resources and generate harm to the environment. Others will start enumerating the various internal and external limitations to CE, put forward in the first place by scientists and researchers in order to focalize the R&D effort on those challenges and fix them. Hardcore skeptics would dismiss any novelty about the CE concept altogether by saying that the CE protagonists are trying to “sell” an old concept which has been going on and off since the 1960s without a clear breakthrough [12]. More articulate skeptics will tell that leading companies are already seizing most of the economically attractive opportunities to recycle, remanufacture, and reuse. Aiming at higher levels of circularity, would, therefore, incur substantial economic costs [13]. In the academic circles, some scientists also have doubts about the successful implementation of CE on the ground, but in a constructive manner (kind of an active skepticism). Thus, they always tend to publicize their concerns and highlight any serious shortcoming. On a related matter, Brocken et al. published an interesting research article entitled “The Circular Economy e Exploring the Introduction of the Concept Among S&P 500 Firms” [14]. In this article, the authors analyze the press releases from 101 companies listed on the Standard & Poors (S&P) 500 stock index during the period 2005e14. The main objective was to identify their priorities for materials management. For the completed bibliometric analysis including over 90,000 documents, the terms “maintenance” and “recycle” (i.e., recycle, recycled, recycling, etc.) were counted 6850 and 4326 times, respectively. Surprisingly, other CE defining terms such as “refurbish,” “reduce waste” and “remanufacture” appeared 392, 126 and 80 times, respectively. Other terms such as “closed loop” and “zero waste” were only counted 48 and 19 times, respectively. The only conclusion from these numbers is that the corporate world is approaching CE the wrong way. Indeed, while the rudimentary hierarchy of CE is “reduce, reuse, recycle,” industries tend to go the opposite way and prioritize what they are more acquainted with, recycling. Overall, this skepticism about CE remains a normal behavior, and is far from being all bad. Indeed, although from short term perspectives, skeptics can slow down the global implementation of CE, and this impact may be influenced by the position of those skeptics in the decision-making process.

74

The Circular Economy

In the long-term, however, what might appear now as an obstacle to CE, will turn out to be a real advantage because it has contributed to further maturing and strengthening the concept. Thus, rather than considering the still skeptical minds as adversaries to CE, we should consider them as “guardrails” who will safeguard CE from any potential negative impacts from overpessimism, often echoed in most CE-related literature. In this regard, the article published in 2018, by Korhonen et al. [15], entitled “Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations” is an illustrative example. The authors, well aware of the “popularity” of CE in the EU, and among governmental and business circles, rightfully noticed that the scientific and research content of the CE concept is still “superficial and unorganized.” Therefore, they focused their concern on the critical analysis of CE from the perspective of environmental sustainability. Thus, several challenges were highlighted, including thermodynamics limits and loose definition of the boundaries and challenges in the governance and management of the CE-related interorganizational and intersectoral material and energy flows. Interestingly, after revealing the limitations of CE, the authors concluded their paper by clearly stating that “Circular economy has a great inspirational strength and equipped with critical sustainability assessment it can be important for global net sustainability.”

3.2.3 Concept of “zero waste” cities In theory, zero waste city is a very inspiring concept aimed at recycling ALL municipal solid wastes and recovering ALL included resources. In practice, reaching these objectives is a challenging endeavor for many reasons, including • The enormous amounts of generated wastes in “overconsuming” and/or “overpopulated” cities, • Waste management systems have not received as much attention in the city planning process as other sectors like water or energy. Therefore, gaps can be observed in waste management in current city planning. • Most products are still manufactured to be used and disposed, with little effort to inherently enable future recycling or recovering options. Conscious about the prospects of zero waste cities and their role in local and global sustainability, several research studies were conducted to analyze the challenges, threats, and opportunities to transform traditional waste management systems toward zero waste systems [16,17]. Related investigations,

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

75

generally, start by analyzing the key elements governing municipal waste management schemes, then providing selected principles enabling the conversion of current cities into zero waste cities. These principles include both short and long-term strategies [18e20]: • Short-term strategies: • Extended producer and consumer responsibility • Legislation related to zero landfill and incineration • innovative industrial design • Long-term strategies: • Behavior change and sustainable consumption • 100% recycling of municipal solid waste • Awareness, education, and systems thinking In a related research study, and after suggesting similar principles of the “zero waste city,” the prolific authors in the field of zero waste management, Atiq Uz Zaman and Steffen Lehmann, provided various drivers enabling the conversion of current cities into zero waste cities, as depicted in Fig. 3.2. The same authors also developed a “zero waste index” (ZWI). According to the authors, the need for such index is highly justified because most cities are using waste diversion rate as a tool to measure the performance of their waste management systems. Nevertheless, within the zero waste

Figure 3.2 Drivers to transform “wasteful” linear cities into “zero waste” circular cities [21].

76

The Circular Economy

concept, the sole assessment of the amount of wastes diverted from being landfilled is not a reliable tool. In this context, the proposed ZWI tool was developed to tackle this issue and give a holistic assessment of the zero waste performance of a city by forecasting the amount of virgin materials, energy, water, and greenhouse gas emissions substituted by the resources that are recovered from waste streams. From a conceptual perspective, “circular” objectives on zero waste cities such as 100% recycling, zero emissions, and responsible producers and consumers, might seem too optimistic for some and even impossible to achieve for others. To avoid these misperceptions, often linked with visionary concepts like zero waste city, we need to be pragmatic and start with easily implemented objectives to generate concrete impacts of the ground, build momentum, and then aim for more challenging objectives. Starting with objectives that are highly inspiring but difficult to apply (still maturing technologies or skeptic mindsets) could backlash and hinder the gradual implementation of this concept and weaken any industrial and/or governmental networks aimed at reaching such highly challenging, but vital, objectives. Overall, “zero waste” is a catchy notion, but industrialists and city officials struggling with waste management issues on a daily basis, tend to perceive zero wastes and zero emissions as “utopian” notions detached for the reality. To deal with such perceptions, researchers and scientists promoting these green concepts (circularity, zero wastes, zero emissions, etc.) need to do it pragmatically using simple, clear, and perceptible lexicons. How so? For example, when the EU sets a target for “zero recyclables or biodegradable waste by 2025 in landfill” [22], it makes more sense to everyone than just using the wide, and thus, the confusing notion of “zero waste,” although we are talking about the same thing.

3.2.4 Circular business models (CBMs) Inherently, CE is a knowledge-based, innovation-intensive concept; hence, the decisive role of scientific research and development in its successful implementation and expansion. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF), innovation is “the aspiration to replace one-way products with goods that are ‘circular by design’ and create reverse logistics networks and other systems to support the circular economy” [23]. Such aspiration is a key driving force to stimulate the emergence of new ideas developing in various CE-related fields. To ensure a continuously innovative CE concept, we need to move beyond “end-of-pipe” solutions, aiming at mitigating this and reducing

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

77

that (often to avoid fines) and focus on developing and applying innovative practices and technologies embedded carefully throughout the entire valuechain transformations [24]. Many scientists are concurring in their assessment that innovation in CE is a decisive factor in enabling the development and implementation of a genuinely sustainable concept [25e27], which fundamentally entails: • the recirculation of resources in close or open loops via various reuse, refurbishment, remanufacturing schemes. • a novel perception of the recycling strategies, as green and profitable tools enabling the “reconstruction” of inputs and “reshaping” of outputs. • The use of renewable resources and clean energy supplies, avoid the landfilling and incineration of resources-loaded wastes, and ultimately the elimination of wastes. Overall, innovation-intensive CE should, therefore, include and always aim at higher rates of technological development, improved materials recovery, more renewables, highly skilled workforce, optimum energy efficiency, and more innovative frugal and disruptive business models for companies. Selected CBMs are described in the following paragraphs. The rest of the innovative aspects in CE will be discussed in Section 3.3, and throughout this book. Regarding the innovative business models in CE, several frugal and disruptive concepts were reported in the related literature. Right off the bat, most of the proposed business models to generate circular growth are based on five major strategies [28]: i. Circular supply chain ii. Recovery and recycling iii. Product life extension iv. Sharing platform v. Product as a service Basically, a business model is the compilation of specific strategic decisions set by companies’ stakeholders with the ultimate purpose of creating, transferring, and capturing value, internally, according to their activities, and externally, through relationships with suppliers and customers [29,30]. Many experts are reporting that the actual emergence of the concept of the business model started in the 1990s with the development of new revenue mechanisms associated with the emergence of e-commerce platforms. In this context, the emerging concept of business model, back then, was mainly used to pitch simple but comprehensive business ideas to investors within a short time frame [31,32].

78

The Circular Economy

In most strategic management studies, business models are debated as a means to shape or reshape the strategy of companies. Hence, in the related literature, business models are often considered as drivers of competitiveness. Therefore, choosing and adopting the “right” business model is a vital decision for the company that defines how much competitive edge it can have, compared to competitors. Overall, most managers would consider the design of the business model as a strategic priority for their companies [33]. During the emergence of the CE concept, adopting CBMs was perceived as either a bold or crazy idea. The tricky aspect of such strategic decisions for companies resided in the following dilemma: • should we “capitalize” on novel promising business models, still emerging and not fully mature? and what would be the extent of such “introduction.” • or should we continue managing our activities-based strategic decisions from established and still profitable business models? The big question though is for how long will it remain so? and what if competing companies jump into this new robust, but still slow “circular wagon”; we will be behind for sure when it increases its speed? The simple thought of being behind is not acceptable for some companies, rich ones of courses. That is why most of them have embarked into the CE “wagon” and have taken bold decisions to adopt CBM (often partially or gradually). Other small-sized companies were pioneers, and still are, in their fields because they have adopted disruptive business models when others did not dare to. Such companies are operating either autonomously or, in most cases, under the sponsorship of larger corporations. We shall go into more details about this important subject in Chapter 4. From industrial and market perspectives, the implementation of CE principles depends on a well-planned and smooth transition. The transition phase itself necessitates the adoption of systemic changes in the ways companies follow in order to generate value, and do business [34]. From the institutional perspective, the transition toward adopting CBMs could be enabled through various regulative, normative, and cognitive processes [35]. In the following Fig. 3.3, the key features characterizing CBMs are depicted, in comparison with traditional and sustainable business models. In this transition phase to adopt CBMs, experimentation is an important facilitating endeavor aimed at improving innovative business model activities while limiting risks and resources through continuous and collective learning with stakeholders. In a recent study, the process and role of business model experimentation were analyzed, and a circular business

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

79

Figure 3.3 Comparison of sustainable and circular business models [36].

experimentation framework was developed and applied [37]. Eight case companies aiming at becoming a sustainable business were targeted as study cases. By focusing on CE as a “driver for sustainability,” it was found that experimentation: • helps creating internal and external engagement to initiate business sustainability transitions. • allows rigorous testing of various assumptions in every “building block” of the entire business model. • Enables collaboration with external partners. In this regard, the authors also reported that since experimentation is an iterative procedure that requires constant learning and regular sustainability checks, more research studies need to be carried out in this field, especially on how to integrate sustainability targets in the experimentation process. Overall, in the context of CBMs, companies, and institutions are required to collaborate and work closely within an “ecosystem” of stakeholders and other potential contributors. Such symbiotic partnerships will gradually enable involved parties to shift from a “firm-centric” logic to an “eco-systemic” mindset [38] and “systems thinking” [39]. Thus, this transition toward CE and sustainability necessitates companies, established and emerging ones alike, to rethink and redesign their current business models in a radical manner through various grassroots, frugal, and disruptive innovations [28,40e42].

80

The Circular Economy

3.2.5 Economic incentives: catalyzing change In order to speed up the full implementation of circular principles in our procurement, manufacturing, and consumption patterns, the CE concept should rely on economic incentives to ensure that the production and consumption loops are closed and that the entire economic system functions as an “ecosystem.” In layman’s term, encouraging less waste and penalizing wasteful practices. Such an approach is necessary and well justified, especially during the current transition phase toward circularity and sustainability. Nonetheless, several obstacles are still hindering CE in this respect. One of these obstacles is the profitability factor. Indeed, despite the continuous development in the manufacturing process, usually it is still more expensive to produce “circular goods” (i.e., long lasting and eco-friendly products) than the cheaper, quickly produced, and readily disposable counterparts. As well, many experts are highlighting the wide gap between the “good intentions” from relatively few incentive measures to promote CE and the actual achievements on the ground. For instance, it was reported that despite the high expectation that the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) would be a strong economic incentive to incite manufacturers to design products and packaging for CE, the current system fails to promote a zero waste design [43]. Nevertheless, despite the practical obstacles in the current situation, national and international authorities need to continue to incentivize circularbased supply procurement practices, manufacturing processes and waste management strategies, along with the related enabling technologies and business models. Various economic instruments, including diverse taxes and financial incentives, can ensure this role. To what extent? This is the real challenge. Although for obvious reasons, producers are more easily “targeted” than consumers (lesson learned for decades-long effort in promoting recycling), the need to send clear price signals to both producer and consumer is often emphasized. This way, “CE-friendly business models are more likely to emerge and become mainstream faster [44]. In this regard, many experts are stating that the shift from linear to CE profoundly relies on the ability of those incentive measures to change the current model where the regulatory framework overall favors business-asusual over circular products and services. Thus, various potential solutions were proposed to accelerate the implementation of CE and make it the mainstream economic model through economic incentives including

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

81

integrating externalities (related to the environment, health and other societal issues) to the cost of production and consumption of the goods, internalize it in the price paid by the consumers [11]. A business manifesto jointly prepared with a large coalition of EU business associations representing thousands of companies also highlighted some solutions to improve the CE regulatory framework, including economic incentives for CBMs [45]. Among the proposed solutions were: • The adjustment of European value-added tax (VAT) regulations in order to allow member states to choose for VAT rate differentiation on the basis of circularity. Such “flexibility” will incites consumers to buy circular products and services. • The introduction of a tax shift from labor to resources. • The extension and enhancement of EPR schemes by rewarding producers of circular products with lower costs, and allocating substantial funds to invest in innovative waste management schemes. • The promotion of research and pilots to develop the concept of “precycling” as a prerequisite for the future development of EPR. Overall, a key principle of CE is to redesign and re-engineer the resource-flow systems, and in this context, experts agree that there is no point designing a product for disassembly if “take-back” infrastructure and mechanisms are missing or ineffective. Thus, alongside new incentives policies and market levers, greater attention to transparency across supply chains is also required to facilitate the tracking and recovery of end-of-life products and materials in an effective manner. The success of such an integrated approach necessities investments in innovative technologies, organization, education, financial tools, and government policies [46].

3.3 Materialistic change: “reinventing the wheel” 3.3.1 Raw material shift The shift from unsustainable linear economy model toward “inherently” sustainable CE requires conceptual and technological changes to make it a de facto sustainable economic model, starting with the decoupling of global economic development from finite resources. In practice, the implementation of the CE concept on the ground could be carried out through various strategies. In this regard, alongside closing loops through local (closed) or global (open) schemes, the shift from fossil resources to recovered and/or renewable raw materials is also a strategic endeavor to promote circular and sustainable development.

82

The Circular Economy

The term “raw material” refers to “unprocessed organic or inorganic materials or substances used as feedstock for the primary production of energy, fuels and various intermediates and end products” [47]. Thus, the raw material shift in CE is of paramount importance to enable this highly anticipated change in global economies. Such shift will have substantial impacts from local decisions to national strategies and international regulatory policies. Securing a constant supply of raw materials at reasonable prices is and will remain, the prime objective of countries and corporations, and a constant challenge to supply management teams. As the competition over resources became fierce, whether between industries or between countries, the focus became more and more on the price of raw materials, and much less on from where it comes and at what environmental or societal cost. For many decades, and in order to ensure the economic success and development of their firms or countries, executive officers and government officials resorted to the “back then” cheap but finite resources (mainly fossil fuels, metals, and minerals). Disastrous environmental and societal repercussions soon followed throughout the entire supply chain, from extraction to disposal, and even the projected economic development and growth turned out to be momentary and discriminatory. Hence, one of the key missions of CE is to provide financial, technological, infrastructural, and legal “tools” to effectively and efficiently enable: ➢ the sustainable management of raw materials (valid for both nonrenewable and renewable ones), and ➢ the sustainable management of wastes (both biological and technological ones)

3.3.2 Sustainable management of raw materials 3.3.2.1 Nonrenewable resources Linking the concept of sustainability to nonrenewable resources does not make sense for many of us, and is an obvious contradiction for some, especially in CE circles. The following section may convince them otherwise, and reveal new perspectives, proposed by researchers and other experts from around the world, on how to manage finite (and highly critical for economic development) resources, in a sustainable and efficient manner. To this end, we will analyze and discuss this subject by targeting critical finite resources after grouping them into two main groups: the first one includes nonrenewable minerals, metals, and hydrocarbons (MMHs), and the second focuses on groundwater resources.

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

83

At this point, it is worth clarifying a key principle in CE, which is decoupling economic growth from finite resources. Some of us think that “decoupling” means “getting rid” of nonrenewables and replacing them with renewables. Such perception coming from CE fervent sympathizers actually plays against CE as a holistic concept. Indeed, willingly discarding valuable resources for the supply chains of various industrial activities, because they are nonrenewable, is simply in full disagreement with the CE philosophy. From a conceptual perspective, CE was established and is still being developed, to precisely “deal” with serious and complicated issues like the management of nonrenewable resources. We can all agree that supplies of MMH resources are very important especially nowadays where most of the modern conveniences we use (transport vehicles and infrastructure, building materials, fertilizers, laptops, solar panels, etc.) depend on this or that mineral, metal or fuel. In order to further illustrate this point, let us consider the case of solar energy. This is indeed a renewable energy source, and its harvesting necessitates the use of photovoltaic solar panels. If we carefully check those panels, we find protective front and back sheet films as the outermost layer of the photovoltaic module, which are used in the related industry to protect the inner components from weathering and to act as electrical insulators [48]. Many of those protective films are mainly made from ethylenetetrafluoroethylene (ETFE), polyvinyl fluoride (PVF) or polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and petroleum-derived thermoplastic polymers. In addition, solar cells contain layers of encapsulants made from copolymer ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA), polyvinyl butyral (PVB) or thermoplastic polyurethanes, all petrochemical compounds [49]. Overall, considering this point and the general agreement among scientists that resources are renewable only if they do not exceed their regenerative capacities [50], we stress on the need to pragmatically develop wise and efficient management strategies of both renewable and nonrenewable resource. Decoupling economic growth from finite resources starts by developing and implementing such management schemes because the issue with nonrenewable resources is by far more challenging and influencing on economies, societies, and the environment. i. Managing nonrenewable MMH resources: Most of the nonrenewable MMHs resources are critical feedstocks for various economic sectors, including primary ones such as agriculture, mining, forestry, and secondary ones covering manufacturing, engineering, and construction.

84

The Circular Economy

In the last few decades, the decreasing availability of many natural resources led to a growing concern in the key economic sectors, especially that such decrease coincided with a surge in the global demand for resources mainly from developing and highly populated countries. The obvious consequence was the huge increase in material turnover and commodity prices. As a response to such serious issue of global proportion, countries and big corporations alike, instinctually strived to intensify the exploitation of known deposits and the exploration of new reserves. Soon after such approaches showed obvious limitations (sustainability wise), then plans for higher efficiency in resources utilization were proposed, and with various breakthroughs in the scientific and technological fields, new strategies for recycling of materials and substitution of finite raw materials with renewable ones or easily recoverable ones quickly emerged (or re-emerged to be accurate), and were widely implemented to mitigate the alarming scenarios of raw material shortages on economies and societies all over the globe. As far as nonrenewable resources are concerned, we need to look into this serious matter from a CE perspective because this will fundamentally change how the world is going to deal with the remaining reserves of finite resources. In the linear economy, nonrenewable resources are simply lost at the end of the value chain. Slung with the obvious and substantial economic loss from such “waste,” threats to the environment and human health can occur from the unsafe release or discharge of spent MMH resources into the various ecosystems (seas, lakes, lands, etc.) [51e53]. In CE, however, loosing or wasting resources is an oxymoron, and it is not because some of them are finite, fossil, or nonrenewable that we are to going to push them aside. To the contrary, we need to develop strategies and technologies to maintain them within supply chains and keep benefiting from such resources, regularly within a strict framework. In this context, and for the case of mineral resources, it was justly reported that considering the development of such valuable resources as unsustainable is true “only if we ignore the complex interaction of economic growth, social development, and the environment” [54]. The author also stated that, despite the environmental impacts of their extraction and production, minerals would continue to be a key component to ensure the economic well-being of societies, if we manage those resources in a holistic framework taking into consideration the interactions between humans and the ecosystem. In practical terms, reinvest the

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

85

capital generated from using nonrenewable resources in economic, societal, and environmental activities, which, according to the author, will reconcile mineral resource development with sustainability. The same idea was also reiterated in the scientific discourse around the sustainable management of fossil fuels. Indeed, it was reported that since the exploitation of finite resources in a location can force out other production activities (divert potential investments and monopolize skilled workforce for example), expenditure plans need to be implemented through a balanced allocation of oil royalties between social expenditure and production investments [55]. According to the authors, this would pave the way toward a regional-scale sustainable development strategy. Overall, some would agree with such a “trade-off” strategy and see it as a gradual approach toward sustainability. Others, however, would strongly disagree and compare it to “money laundering-like” tactics. Back to the research effort on the sustainable management of finite resources, several studies highlighted the need to simultaneously implement efficient utilization practices and resource recovery technologies, especially for critical materials such as rare earth elements (REEs). In this regard, an interesting study addressed the research gap in the challenges related to the assessment of the potential for closing loops for REEs, specifically from risk and value perspectives [56]. In general, metals are in principle an infinitely recyclable resource. In practice, however, this is not the case due to several inefficient practices and irresponsible behaviors. The limiting factors include [57,58]: • Products designs making the recovery of the metal content, or any other resource for that matter, a challenging and costly task. • Recycling technologies needing further optimization to reach higher recovery rates in a cost-effective manner. • The thermodynamics of separation, and the related limits of removing the impure elements from target metals. Despite the current fact that we are still, from a global perspective, far away from a closed-loop material system, and many limitations (economic, technological, and behavioral ones) will continue impeding the complete closure of the materials cycle [59], several research studies were conducted with the objective of enhancing the recovery rates of common, specialty, and precious metals [60e62]. The main related actions focused on: • Increasing the collection rates of discarded products. • Improved design for recycling. • Deploying enhanced recycling methodology.

86

The Circular Economy

For the management of fossil fuels, the matter is more challenging because too much is at stake, including the obvious economic growth and climate change. The future scenarios based on continuing business, as usual, are very alarming. Even the outlooks of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases to mitigate global warming, emphasized by many international organizations [63,64] and agreed upon by 196 countries in the highly mediatized Paris agreement on climate change [65], are believed by many scientists to be only sufficient to decrease the growth of CO2 emissions, and not enough to stop it [66]. In this regard, the role of established and emerging technologies for carbon capture and storage (CCS) is still mitigated since experts are still divided between the ones who believe that CCS “can help meet ambitious CO2 emission reduction targets, while fossil fuels remain part of the energy systems” [67], and others, however, have some doubts about the efficiency and concrete impact of CCs considering the global scale of this problem and the various obstacles facing the full deployment CCS including the absence of a clear business case for CCS investment and economic incentives to support high capital and operating costs of the entire CCS process [68,69]. To this is added the geopolitical tensions around this subject [70,71]. In the cold war, it was about who will disarm first, the United States or USSR; Now it is about who will effectively reduce emissions first, the United States or China? Can you tell? ii. Groundwater resources: Groundwater resources are water sources which, “at present, are not part of the hydrologic cycle since neither precipitation nor infiltration provides recharge” [72]. Nonrenewable groundwater resources are mainly found in the semi-arid and arid zones in the Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia, and Southern Africa. Most countries in these regions, especially in The Middle East and North Africa (MENA), are among the world’s most water-stressed countries [73,74], where the intensive use of nonrenewable groundwater is still a common practice mainly for agricultural purposes. Although already in an alarming situation, the expected increase of population will put more pressure on an already high demand for drinking water. Diverting potable water by the industrial and leisure industries, the impact of climate change and various actual (or potential) contamination scenarios are worsening the problem. In such a precarious situation, well-planned sustainable management of groundwater resources is

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

87

not only urgent and necessary, it is simply a matter of life or death for hundreds of millions of people around the world. So, what is sustainable groundwater management? Broadly speaking, it refers to the various preventive, mitigating, and remediating actions, planned and implemented at local, regional, national or international scales, to preserve and enhance the quantitative and qualitative properties of groundwater resources. The objective of such a management scheme is to satisfy our current needs for clean water without compromising the needs of future generations for this vital resource. The need for sustainable groundwater management was strongly emphasized by scientists and other experts as a key strategy to deal with serious threats occurring worldwide such as droughts, flooding, and poor drinking water quality [75,76], and also to manage multiple and frequent use of groundwater resources in the same location, often seen in cases where the same groundwater is used as drinking water supply and for agriculture and/or industrial activities [77]. Several key elements linking groundwater management schemes to sustainability were reported [78], including: • Integrating the societal, environmental, and economic aspects, which is at the core of sustainable development. • Considering both quantity and quality aspects. • Alerting decision makers and the general public about the value of the natural capital and its potential uses. • Involving stakeholders. • Addressing the adequate scale levels • Prioritizing prevention over treatment, in case of pollution and other stressors. In particular, the sustainable management of groundwater starts by extending the “useful life” of the water by using it as effectively as possible. Eventually, this will lead to the depletion of the water source, but the point of this extension of useful life is to give researchers more time to test and develop new strategies and technologies to provide good quality water, and thus, fulfill the increasing global demand. The question now is, can new economically and ecologically viable methods be developed in such timeframe and under such public pressure? The reply is yes, we can. Indeed, current achievements in these fields and promising technologies and processes are already giving good signals. This includes solar or wind energy-powered desalination technologies of seawater and brackish waters [79,80], artificial

88

The Circular Economy

groundwater recharge by floodwaters, reclaimed wastewaters, or desalinized seawaters [81,82], along with the continuous breakthroughs in water reclamation from wastewaters [83e85]. The combined application of these technologies is highly expected to substantially contribute to avoiding long-term supply bottlenecks, serious disruption to various ecosystems, and latent geopolitical tensions. As a related matter, but from a legislative context, many scientists still perceive the current policies related to groundwater management as inadequate to meet current and future needs, qualitatively, and equally important, from a qualitative perceptive. For overcoming such problems, it was proposed that the goals from new policies and regulations targeting groundwater need to be formulated taking into account the costs and benefits of all the potential intervention schemes to relieve the previously mentioned pressuring factors on groundwater resources. The question is how groundwater policy can be formulated to meet future needs, including national and trans-boundaries regulations? The European Water Framework Directive [86] and Groundwater Directive [87] are representative examples of such legislative effort, aiming at establishing a “legal framework to protect and restore clean water across Europe and ensure its long-term, sustainable use” [88]. At the end of the discussion around this challenging issue of sustainable management of nonrenewable resources (MMHs and groundwater), let us consider a key business model in CE, which is the product life-extension. If we can extend the life of a product, why not also extend the life of the resources which made that product? 3.3.2.2 Renewable resources: “circular bioeconomy” After making it clear that nonrenewable resources need to be managed in a sustainable manner, and the fact that such endeavor is far from being an easy task, we also need to make it crystal clear that the CE concept needs to gradually and substantially increase the share of renewable resources in its various industrial activities. Let us first start by highlighting some intrinsic shortcomings in the current resources management schemes. Since the 18th century industrial revolution, economies heavily relied on the extraction of natural resources. These resources, referred to as primary raw materials, are often grouped into four main categories, including mineral resources (non-metallic), metal ores, biomass, and fossil energy resources [89]. Secondary raw materials, or wastes, can be derived from these primary materials during or after

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

89

manufacturing or consuming the product. In this regard, it was estimated that around 20% of the raw materials extracted worldwide ends up as waste, corresponding to approximately 12 billion tons (Gt) of waste per year. The BRIICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia, China, and South Africa) nearly account for 60% (7 Gt) of global waste generation, and the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries account for about one-third (4 Gt) [90]. Ecofys, the international energy, and climate consultancy reported that around 60 billion tons of raw materials are extracted each year, and that about half of the currently extracted materials cannot be recovered either because they are combusted like fossil fuels or consumed like food and feed products that we eat [10]. It was also emphasized that a substantial share of the “unconsumed” resources is used in applications where they become “unavailable” for an extended period of time (decades or centuries). The best example of such resources are materials extracted for construction applications, including various minerals and metals. Most materials used in construction are physically “locked” in rigid and/or complex structures and thus are out of supply chains for long periods. Recirculating those resources back into the economy is definitely beneficial economically and environmentally [91]. In practice, however, such materials can only be recovered after the demolishing of housing building, bridges, old factories etc., and are in most cases “downcycled” to other applications such as the production of concrete, ceramic, pavement products, or insulation [92]. Although the issue of managing renewable resources seems less challenging than the management of nonrenewable ones, the matter remains very important and highly critical for the global expansion of the CE concept considering the undoubtable fact that renewable raw materials will be key components of various green industrial activities [93]. Basically, when it comes to renewable resources in CE, two major challenging objectives need to be simultaneously and successfully achieved, because the successful implementation of CE on a global scale is tightly linked to them: (i) the gradual replacement of fossil resources by renewable ones in key economy sectors, and (ii) the sustainable management of renewable raw materials. The use of fossil resources in numerous economic sectors (various industries, agriculture, transport, etc.) is still the most profitable option. However, with every scientific breakthrough and technological innovation, the use of renewable resources is gaining more solid ground since it enables connecting economic and environmental benefits. Many scientists emphasized the need

90

The Circular Economy

for this R&D effort to be pursued and prompted in order to make the shift from nonrenewables to renewables feasible and economically advantageous, thus appealing to stakeholders [94,95]. Key strategic objectives in this regard include decreasing the initial investment, quickening the profit generation phase, and stabilizing the profitability for a long period of time [96]. In practice, how can such shift be planned and implemented, especially in the industrial sector? Two major schemes are envisioned: ➢ Stakeholders who can cope with the financial burden of the slow and often costly implementation process of sustainable production units using renewables, until becoming profitable. High initial investments are necessary to enable the purchase and installation of highly efficient production units from the start. This costly “investment plan” is the price to pay to stay ahead of competitors deciding to continue business as usual. On a medium to long-term, the production yields are highly excepted to increase, and the operational costs will decrease, thus leading to an increased profitably tending toward stabilization when the production process reaches “maturity,” often coinciding with serious procurement issues for the nonrenewable counterparts [97,98]. For obvious reasons, such bold and costly strategy could be adopted and implemented by big companies, either genuinely committed to CE principles, or partly so often via a careful investment plan to diversify their portfolio, enhance the returns, and lowering the risks and overall volatility [99,100]. ➢ Most companies, even the ones willing to join the CE movement, cannot “tolerate” such high initial investment. Thus, scientists are recommending a gradual transition phase [101e103]. In practice, this means continuing with the already operating production facilities while gradually incorporating renewable raw materials in their supply chains. Such a strategy helps avoid high initial investment and leads over time to significant cost savings. These savings could be used to fund the acquisition of more efficient technologies and the hiring of more skilled personnel. Combining these technological and human factors is highly expected to lead to more sustainable and profitable exploitation and conversion schemes of renewable raw materials, and production procedures of recyclable/biodegradable goods, from which resources can easily be recovered [104]. For example, profitable industrial complexes like fossil-fuel power plants, petroleum refineries, and wood-based industries could be upgraded to the biorefinery concept, trading fossil resources for renewable ones and thus:

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

•

91

benefiting from the economic, environmental, and societal advantage of the “circular bioeconomy” concept, related to the renewal of forest-based manufacturing [105], the production of various renewable and eco-friendly fuels [106], bio-based products from CO2 sequestration [107], etc. • avoiding serious future complications related to the current unsustainable management of inherently highly volatile fossil resources. Overall, the numerous advantageous aspects of using renewable resources including (but far from being limited to) renewability and availability at relatively low cost, will act as a magnet attracting governmental and private investment capitals to CE-based business models, wholly or partly relying on renewables. From an environmental perspective, the use of renewable resources, materials or energy, will generate less pollution and less carbon footprints, compared to industrial processes involved during the extraction and transformation of fossil resources [108]. In this regard, related taxation legislation and policies are highly anticipated to become more stringent [109,110], which will justify and promote investment plans aiming at increasing the share of renewable resources in key economic sectors. For obvious reasons, the energy sector is the most dynamic economic segment through the current global quest for alternative sources of energy [111e113]. Other sectors, especially in the various industrial activities, may not be in a precarious situation like the energy sector, nonetheless, if business is continued to be conducted, as usual, the same fate is waiting, Thus, it is wiser to take some initiatives, even if it entails additional expenditures, to increase the share of renewable resources in the chemical, textile, and agro-industrial sectors, to name a few [114e116]. Overall, there is a clear and genuine orientation in both the public and private sectors to gradually decouple economic growth from the use of fossil resources, out of necessity in most cases. This strategic and widely expected objective needs to be undertaken pragmatically. Indeed, such objectives necessitate, like we have discussed in this section, the development and implementation of highly efficient management schemes, targeting first, the most challenging issue of nonrenewable raw materials, and the equally important but lesser problematic issue of managing renewables. For renewable resources, one might think about how we can sustainably manage a “sustainable” renewable resources. We can by simply ensuring that the exploitation rates are much less than the resources regeneration rates. This practically means that the exploitation of renewable resources should

92

The Circular Economy

not only permit the “peaceful” regeneration of the natural resources itself but also avoiding any pressure on the entire ecosystem. Several research studies are being carried out to provide useful theoretical and analytical tools to help in the worldwide effort to ensure sustainable and efficient management of valuable renewable resources. This research effort includes surveying the applications of viability theory to the sustainable exploitation of renewable resources [117] and providing solutions to deal with the management of renewable resources in a seasonally fluctuating environment with restricted harvesting effort [118]. Although from a conceptual perspective, the task seems relatively easy because most of the “job” to produce raw materials is being done by nature, and we need to harvest it. Nonetheless, in practice, the highly competitive global race for resources is expected to make it a very challenging task, unless the CE philosophy is genuinely adopted in the minds and then start acting accordingly, as we shall see in Chapter 4.

3.3.3 Sustainable management of wastes A key principle in the CE concept is to minimize the generation of wastes through the efficient use of resources. Thus, when a product reaches the end of its service life, several CBMs, along with selected chemical, mechanical, and biological processes are applied to keep the product or its composed materials, otherwise known as waste, within the economy and retain their values. To what extent can this be achieved, quantity- and quality-wise? This is the real challenge for the currently operating, and the to be proposed, recycling and resources recovery processes and technologies. 3.3.3.1 Which waste? Wastes can be generated at all three stages: resources processing, production (in the form of emissions and solid waste), and consumption of goods. In general, wastes can be divided into two major groups [119]: / Materials-related group including wastes such as metals, glass, textiles, paper/cardboard, plastics/rubber, wood, and other biowaste. / Product-related group including packaging, electric/electronic wastes, end-of-life vehicles, mining, construction, and demolition wastes. Other potential classification categorizes waste into four categories: industrial, agricultural, sanitary, and solid urban wastes. The solid urban residues can be further divided into glass, paper/cardboard, plastics (mixed or separated), metals, organic matter, and other subdivisions [120].

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

93

In the CE concept, “waste” water is also considered as a valuable source of water, energy, nutrients, fertilizers, and other value-added products [121,122], to the remarkable extent that the reuse of wastewater “pollutants” is being investigated [123]. Most of the previously mentioned municipal and industrial wastes are well known, so let us just focus on two important related topics: the irrational magnitude of food wastes, and the issue of critical raw materials in wastes (CRMs). Nonetheless, if further details are needed on the other various wastes and their management, the selected following reports and scientific articles can be consulted [124e127]. • Regarding food wastes, the issue is of global and staggering proportions since we are throwing away around one billion tons of edible food waste every year. The total amount of waste in the food supply chain waste is estimated at several billion tons. The carbon value of such volumes of organic matter is comparable to that in all of the chemicals and plastics we use every year in society but with the obvious advantage that it is renewable [128]. In Europe (EU-28), around 90 million tons of food wastes are generated every year, with households generating the major part of it (42%). The associated costs of this wasteful behavior are very high and estimated at around 143 billion euros [129]. A systematic literature review was recently conducted with the objective of assessing food losses and waste estimates across the food supply chain in developed countries (Europe and North America). About 55 relevant studies were identified, and the compiled estimates revealed that most of the wastes in the food supply chain (about 43.6%) came from the consumption stage, with an annual average of 114.3 kg/capita/year. Throughout the entire food supply chain, the total amount of wasted foodstuff in the targeted developed countries amounted to around 199 kg/capita, each year [130], with significantly higher numbers for the North American estimates compared to the European ones. Putting aside the serious ethical issue around food waste in a world full of starving people, the valorization of such easily biodegradable waste is full of potential (feedstock for the production of value-added chemicals, fuels, and materials) [131], but due to complicated logistical and behavioral challenges [132], such potential is “wasted,” and in the best scenarios food wastes are used as either animal feed or in composting [133], i.e., downcycled in the CE lexicon. • As for the issue of critical raw materials (CRMs), including various metals or groups of metals, a great deal of research effort is being dedicated to

94

The Circular Economy

enhance the recovery rates of those valuable elements. For obvious economic reasons, CRMs are already recovered at the highest rates, compared to other elements, through a mature recycling infrastructure and processes [125]. Nonetheless, scientists, industrialists, and government officials are still emphasizing the need to further optimize those recycling/recovery rates. Among CRMs, REEs are a good example of materials of critical importance perceiving increasing attention in the last decade or so. REEs are key components of various products such as permanent magnets, chemical catalysts, alloys, and polishing and glass. Thus, a secure supply chain of REEs is critical to many industrial activities, including electronics, environmental and energy technology, metallurgy, and military technology [134]. Along with the obvious value of REEs in several economic sectors, the geopolitical factor seems to be another major driving force pushing toward optimizing the management schemes for REEs. This is currently very relevant for many developed countries in North America and Europe, as well as in Japan, because China is producing around 95% of the world supply of REEs, and is applying export restrictions [135]. The main issue with these complex group of wastes (food, CRMs, and others) is that the opportunities for reuse, recycling, or resources recovery substantially differ from one group to the other, and from one product to the other within the same group. For instance, several products are practically unrecoverable after use, which is the case of many chemical and petrochemical products (paints, lubricants, cleaning agents, etc.). Most of the products are practically recoverable, but the current waste management schemes and recycling/recovery technologies do not allow high recycling rates of many products which hinders their reutilization potential. In this context, several logistical issues in the reserve supply chain of various sectors such as the textile and construction industries are contributing to this loss of valuable resources, and so are the inadequate (sometimes completely missing) recycling-related economic incentives or penalties. Currently, although materials such as metals, glass, and plastics are recovered at relatively high rates, the global picture about waste is still gloomy since a mere 7% of the materials used by the global economy are recycled and reused [10]. Therefore, this is clearly one of the main priorities for CE, and bold (yet achievable) objectives to increase this meager 7% need to be established and gradually enforced on a global scale.

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

95

Within the CE concept, resources could be managed basically in two major cycles or loops [136]: (i) the “biological materials,” often carbon-based ones, which can be decomposed by living organisms, and (ii) the “technical” materials, often circulating in industrial cycles such as metals and some polymers. In both cases, CE should aim at tightly closing related supply chains, continuously reducing the resources’ leakage, retaining their value or adding more value to the recycled materials and recovered resources. Groundbreaking R&D and well-crafted legislations are very important tools for achieving such objectives. 3.3.3.2 Circularity in waste management As we have previously seen in this chapter, the efficient use of resources and waste reduction in CE include practical measures such as maintenance/ repair, reuse/redistribute, refurbish/remanufacture, and ultimately recycle the existing materials and products. Various achievements on the ground and new developments in this regard will be presented and analyzed in the following Chapters 4 and 5, with selected study cases from all over the world. Through the application of these concepts, most of what used to considered as “waste” and destined to be dumped or incinerated in the linear economy model, is maintained in the economy as a valuable resource, to the best of what science and technology would allow, and regulations would specify. From a conceptual perspective, minimizing the generation of wastes is indeed a valuable endeavor toward substantiality with clear economic and environmental benefits related to substantial saving in feedstock procurement costs, and potential waste-related taxes [137,138]. Nonetheless, despite inspiring concepts in CE such as the “zero waste city,” the reality on the ground clearly shows that “waste” will remain a highly puzzling issue even within CE circles. Wastes are full of potential, we can all agree on that, but we need also to accept the fact that waste management will remain a serious challenge to companies, cities, and countries. To assess the extent of the issue, here are some cold facts that need to be considered if we genuinely think of CE as a holistic and global concept. It was reported that the global economy produces more than one billion tons of solid waste per year, mainly composed of paper, plastics, metals, organic wastes, along with other by-products [139].

The Circular Economy

96

Nowadays, humanity is generating more waste than ever before, and World Bank experts are predicting that the trend will continue increasing. Indeed, if the world cities are currently generating about 1.3 billion tons of solid waste on an annual basis, the volume is expected to increase to 2.2 billion tons by 2025 [140]. In the same report, it was predicted that the rates of waste generation would more than double over the next couple of decades in low-income countries. Regarding costs related to solid waste, today’s annual cost estimated at $205.4 billion will significantly increase to around $375.5 billion in 2025, corresponding to a fivefold increase in low-income countries, where the issue of solid wastes is the most problematic. Other report are predicting that the global waste generation will approximately be 27 billion tons per year by 2050, one-third of which will come from Asia, mainly, China and India [141]. In India, 31.6 million tons of waste were generated in 2001, 47.3 million tons in 2017, and recent estimates are predicting a staggering fivefold increase in urban India’s waste generation (161 million tons by 2041) [142]. In China, and as shown in Fig. 3.4, there is a clear trend for an increased generation of wastes (industrial wastes in this case) over the years. Recent studies are reporting the intensification of municipal solid waste disposal in the country [144].

3500

3228

3000 2500

2251

Increasing

2000

1756 1344

1500 1000

1004

1901

2039

1515

1084

500 0

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Figure 3.4 Trend of industrial waste generation in China [143].

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

97

Does this constitute a big problem or a valuable future opportunity? Legislation, policies, and R&D efforts in the most populated countries in the world will soon make known. In poor regions and countries, the problem of waste management is further complicated for obvious economic, social, and political reasons, but the problematic aspect remains valid in rich countries also because, in most cities, the expenditure associated with municipal waste management is often the city’s largest budgetary item [145], which seriously hinders the ability of those cities to upgrade related infrastructure and facilities (let alone invest in new ones), and thus, postpones any objective of increasing the recovery rates of resources and recycling rates of materials and products. Although the implementation of the CE concept will substantially help in reducing the generation of wastes, and mitigating related economic, environmental, and sanitation burden, the issue of waste will remain as of now for decades to come. In this critical context, CE is currently promoted as the most reliable model to change the perception of waste from “problem” to “valuable resource.” Nonetheless, in most literature related to CE and waste, the concept is often portrayed as a preventive measure, which is a one-sided perception. Actually, both waste prevention and waste management are indivisible circular activities, simultaneously enabling a coherent and holistic approach, taking into account the efficient use of resources and the various recovery/recycling options at every stage of the product life cycle [124]. Thus, CE needs to “reinforce” its waste management arsenal and continuously develop new methods and technologies to maximize recycling and recovery rates, and most importantly to develop bespoken management schemes targeting wide arrays of toxic wastes in specific, and hazardous materials and chemicals in general. Debates over the circularity of hazardous materials were launched [146,147], and several R&D studies are being conducted to tackle this issue and try to reuse and retain the value of many “useful pollutants.” Capturing the value of a “benign waste” is easily perceived; capturing the value of a harmful material or chemical compound, on the other hand, is not much. In this regard, the development of alternative ecofriendly and nontoxic materials is one of the major focus areas. Several related investigations were conducted in various industrial sectors such as the chemical [148,149], medical and pharmaceutical [150,151], and fuel [152,153] industries. The most challenging endeavor, however, is how to keep hazardous substances in the economy and fully benefit from their potential, while “neutralizing”

The Circular Economy

98

their harmful impact? Researchers working in this emerging field need to be inspired by humanity’s expertise in developing the cure from the poison. Theoretically, the CE concept is the most suitable platform to deal with hazardous substances. The primary reflex is to put harmful substances in something closed, so why not in a closed loop. However, the single most important condition is that this loop is fully closed with no leakage whatsoever. If such a condition can be fulfilled, the notion of pollution can be reconsidered. Overall, in order to introduce circularity to waste management, several measures need to be implemented from the early stage of waste generation to the various recycling/recovery schemes, and even to the landfilling of nonrecyclable wastes (at least for now). This goes without saying that circular principles need to be implemented right from the design and manufacturing of the product itself, but in this section, practical recommendations are given to deal with numerous, still inevitable wastes. Table 3.1 compiles those suggestions. Table 3.1 Practical recommendations to improve waste management and induce more circularity [154]. Waste sorting and Waste generation Waste collection recovery

- Further improving the extended producer responsibility in all consumption product fields. - Extending the application of “duty of care” from hazardous wastes to other solid wastes. - Improving the source separated collection and treatment of specific waste generated by households and industrial/ commercial activities.

- Reducing emissions during waste transportation. - Enforcing the implementation of solid waste management processes in cities or eco-industrial parks. - Developing coordinated logistics within a city involving innovative collection and storage schemes. - Setting differentiated waste collection fees.

- Encouraging strategic regional planning for waste treatment facilities. - Promoting upstream sorting and letting the market guide the downstream sorting and recovery by choosing and applying the appropriate processes and technologies.

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

99

3.4 Conclusions Resource efficiency is definitely at the core of the CE concept. Countries and companies will endeavor to find alternative raw materials to the depleting fossil resources, and continue developing and applying innovative and disruptive business models. Consumers, at the end of the “forward” supply chain and the start of the “reverse” ones, will have a key role in enabling the various recycling/recovery options, and thus, making a significant contribution toward the successful implementation of CE, providing deep behavioral changes. Basically, like any economic model, the creation or expansion of markets could be “catalyzed” by promoting demand and/or supply [155]: - Demand can be stimulated by sending a clear message about favoring circular products in public procurement, and by educating consumers that purchasing these kinds of commodities will support CE and sustainability. - Supply, on the other hand, can be stimulated by sustaining an opportune investment environment around CE-based activities. Promoting innovative R&D and upgrading the infrastructure to facilitate the execution of CE principles on the ground (especially the reserve flow of materials and resources) are also key enabling factors. In CE, and when it comes to the critical issue of managing natural resources or waste, countries and corporations will need to make extra efforts not only locally, but also on the international scene. In this regard, key objectives according to the OECD should be further improving the resource efficiency and material productivity of economies (at all stages of the material life-cycle) and avoiding waste of resources. Decisions and action plans to realize these objectives necessitate the involvement of various policy areas, including economy, trade, innovation, and technology development, natural resource, and environmental management, as well as human health [90]. At the end of this section, we need to emphasize the undeniable fact that CE, although full with potential, is currently far from being perfect. Indeed, several internal and external limiting factors, gaps, and barriers are slowing down the full and global implementation of CE, as reported by scientists from various disciplinary backgrounds [15,156e158]. A related bibliometric analysis compiled the various CE barriers reported in the academic literature [159]. The main limiting factors were technical (35%), institutional/regulatory (23%), economic/financial/market (22%), and social/cultural (20%) obstacles, which need to be seriously and dealt with timely in order to ensure the implementation of an efficient, resilient, and sustainable CE model.

100

The Circular Economy

Finally, all the assets and challenges should be equally considered as driving forces to continue working on perfecting the CE concept, facilitating its implementation, and accelerating the global transition for linearity to circularity in various economic sectors, as we shall see in the next chapter.

References [1] EU Commission. Closing the loop e An EU action plan for the Circular Economy. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions COM, 614 final. 2015. Available online at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource. html?uri¼cellar:8a8ef5e8-99a0-11e5-b3b7-01aa75ed71a1.0012.02/DOC_ 1&format¼PDF. [2] United Nations. Sustainable development goals. Available online at: http://www.un. org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/. [3] Kopnina H, Shoreman-Ouimet E, editors. Sustainability: key issues. Abingdon, UK: Routledge; 2015. 410 pp. [4] Wu HQ, Shi Y, Xia Q, Zhu WD. Effectiveness of the policy of circular economy in China: a DEA-based analysis for the period of 11th five-year-plan. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2014;83:163e75. [5] World Economic Forum. Towards the circular economy: accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains. 2014. Available online at: http://www3.weforum.org/ docs/WEF_ENV_TowardsCircularEconomy_Report_2014.pdf. [6] Beniston M, Stephenson DB. Extreme climatic events and their evolution under changing climatic conditions. Global and Planetary Change 2004;44(1e4):1e9. [7] Rockstr€ om J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin III FS, Lambin E, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B. Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 2009;14(2):32. [8] Humphreys M. Natural resources, conflict, and conflict resolution: uncovering the mechanisms. Journal of Conflict Resolution 2005;49(4):508e37. [9] Potocnik J. Raw materials: not just about economics but physics! In: 3rd annual European raw materials conference Brussels, March 19, 2013. Available online at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-242_en.htm. [10] Blok K, Hoogzaad J, Ramkumar S, Ridley A, Srivastav P, Tan I, Terlouw W, de Wit M. ECOFYS e implementing circular economy globally makes Paris targets achievable. White paper published in June 28, 2016. Available online at: https://www. ecofys.com/files/files/circle-economy-ecofys-2016-circular-economy-white-paper. pdf. [11] Sauvé S, Bernard S, Sloan P. Environmental sciences, sustainable development and circular economy: alternative concepts for trans-disciplinary research. Environmental Development 2016;17:48e56. [12] Sorensen PB. The basic environmental economics of the circular economy. Department of Economics, University of Copenhagen; 2017. Available online at: http:// www.econ.ku.dk/Kalender/seminarerepru/17112017/paper/Circular_Economy_ general_model.pdf. [13] Murphy C, Rosenfield J, editors. The circular economy: moving from theory to practice. McKinsey Center for Business and Environment Special Edition; 2016. Available online at: https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Business% 20Functions/Sustainability%20and%20Resource%20Productivity/Our%20Insights/ The%20circular%20economy%20Moving%20from%20theory%20to%20practice/ The%20circular%20economy%20Moving%20from%20theory%20to%20practice.ashx.

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

101

[14] Bocken NM, Ritala P, Huotari P. The circular economy: exploring the introduction of the concept among S&P 500 firms. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3): 487e90. [15] Korhonen J, Honkasalo A, Sepp€al€a J. Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecological Economics 2018;143:37e46. [16] Fujita K, Hill RC. The zero waste city: Tokyo’s quest for a sustainable environment. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 2007;9(4):405e25. [17] Zaman AU, Lehmann S. Urban growth and waste management optimization towards ‘zero waste city’. City, Culture and Society 2011;2(4):177e87. [18] Hoornweg D, Bhada-Tata P, Kennedy C. Environment: waste production must peak this century. Nature News 2013;502(7473):615. [19] Zaman AU, Lehmann S. Challenges and opportunities in transforming a city into a “zero waste city”. Challenges 2011;2(4):73e93. [20] Zaman AU. A comprehensive review of the development of zero waste management: lessons learned and guidelines. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015;91:12e25. [21] Zaman AU, Lehmann S. The zero waste index: a performance measurement tool for waste management systems in a ‘zero waste city’. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013; 50:123e32. [22] European Commission - DG Environment. Towards a circular economy: a zero waste programme for Europe. 2014. Available online at: https://www.oecd.org/ env/outreach/EC-Circular-econonomy.pdf. [23] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy e economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2013. 98 pp. Available online at: https://www.ellenma carthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthurFoundation-Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf. [24] Kemp R. Eco-Innovation: definition, measurement and open research issues. Economia Politica 2010;27(3):397e420. [25] Clark JH, Farmer TJ, Herrero-Davila L, Sherwood J. Circular economy design considerations for research and process development in the chemical sciences. Green Chemistry 2016;18(14):3914e34. [26] Stahel WR. The circular economy. Nature News 2016;531(7595):435. [27] Geng Y, Sarkis J, Ulgiati S. Sustainability, well-being, and the circular economy in China and worldwide. Science 2016;6278(Supplement):73e6. [28] Lacy P, Rutqvist J. Waste to wealth: the circular economy advantage. UK: Palgrave Macmillan; 2015. 264 pp. [29] Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y. Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons; 2010. 288 pp. [30] Urbinati A, Chiaroni D, Chiesa V. Towards a new taxonomy of circular economy business models. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;168:487e98. [31] Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y, Tucci CL. Clarifying business models: origins, present, and future of the concept. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 2005;16(1):1e25. [32] Zott C, Amit R, Massa L. The business model: recent developments and future research. Journal of Management 2011;37(4):1019e42. [33] Chesbrough H. Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers. Long Range Planning 2010;43(2e3):354e63. [34] de Padua Pieroni M, Pigosso DC, McAloone TC. Sustainable qualifying criteria for designing circular business models. Procedia CIRP 2018;69:799e804.

102

The Circular Economy

[35] Stål HI, Corvellec H. A decoupling perspective on circular business model implementation: illustrations from Swedish apparel. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018; 171:630e43. [36] Geissdoerfer M, Morioka SN, de Carvalho MM, Evans S. Business models and supply chains for the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;190:712e21. [37] Bocken NMP, Schuit CSC, Kraaijenhagen C. Experimenting with a circular business model: lessons from eight cases. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 2018;28:79e95. [38] Aminoff A, Valkokari K, Antikainen M, Kettunen O. Exploring disruptive business model innovation for the circular economy. In: International conference on sustainable design and manufacturing. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 525e36. [39] Bocken NM, de Pauw I, Bakker C, van der Grinten B. Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering 2016;33(5):308e20. [40] Charter M, Keiller S. Grassroots innovation and the circular economy. The Centre for Sustainable DesignÒ University for the Creative Arts; 2014. Available online at: https://www.research.ucreative.ac.uk/2722/1/Survey-of-Repair-Cafes-andHackerspaces.pdf. [41] Lev€anen J, Hossain M, Lyytinen T, Hyv€arinen A, Numminen S, Halme M. Implications of frugal innovations on sustainable development: evaluating water and energy innovations. Sustainability 2015;8(1):4. [42] Antikainen M, Valkokari K. A framework for sustainable circular business model innovation. Technology Innovation Management Review 2016;6(7):5e12. [43] Rodrigo A. Europe must design economic incentives fit for a circular economy. Zero waste Europe’s press release on 10/11/2017. Available online at: https:// zerowasteeurope.eu/2017/11/europe-must-design-economic-incentives-fitcircular-economy/. [44] The European Environmental Bureau. Economic instruments for a circular economy. 2012. Available online at: https://euagenda.eu/upload/publications/untitled88054-ea.pdf. [45] ten Wolde A. Global Economic Symposium e strengthen circular economy package with economic incentives. 2015. Available online at: http://www.global-economicsymposium.org/knowledgebase/re-assessing-waste-management-and-the-circulareconomy/solutions/solution.2016-07-06.6079158669. [46] European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC). Circular economy: a commentary from the perspectives of the natural and social sciences. November 2015. Available online at: https://www.easac.eu/fileadmin/PDF_s/reports_ statements/EASAC_Circular_Economy_Web.pdf. [47] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Bioeconomy: the path to sustainability. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 29e53. [48] Willeke GP, Weber ER. Advances in photovoltaics: Part 2. Massachusetts: Academic Press; 2013. [49] Schulze S, Pander M, Naumenko K, Altenbach H. Analysis of laminated glass beams for photovoltaic applications. International Journal of Solids and Structure 2012;49: 2027e36. [50] Alcoforado F. Planet earth and its limits on use of natural resources. Opinion piece published by Word Resources Forum in July 8, 2015. Available online at: https:// www.wrforum.org/opinion/planet-earth-limits-natural-resources/. [51] Wuana RA, Okieimen FE. Heavy metals in contaminated soils: a review of sources, chemistry, risks and best available strategies for remediation. ISRN Ecology 2011; 2011:1e20.

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

103

[52] Luo C, Liu C, Wang Y, Liu X, Li F, Zhang G, Li X. Heavy metal contamination in soils and vegetables near an e-waste processing site, south China. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2011;186(1):481e90. [53] Conley DJ, Paerl HW, Howarth RW, Boesch DF, Seitzinger SP, Havens KE, Lancelot C, Likens GE. Controlling eutrophication: nitrogen and phosphorus. Science 2009;323(5917):1014e5. [54] Nooten GA. Sustainable development and nonrenewable resourcesda multilateral perspective. In: Proceedings for a workshop on deposit modeling, mineral resource assessment, and their role in sustainable development; August 2000. p. 36. Available online at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2007/1294/circ1294.pdf?bcsi_scan_1fe59ba8c 561fa18¼yHESOROVYxG#page¼43. [55] Viccaro M, Rocchi B, Cozzi M, Romano S. The sustainability of non-renewable resources use at regional level: a case study on allocation of oil royalties. In: The sustainability of agro-food and natural resource systems in the Mediterranean basin. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2015. p. 225e41. [56] Machacek E, Richter JL, Lane R. Governance and riskevalue constructions in closing loops of rare earth elements in global value chains. Resources 2017;6(4):59. [57] Reuter M, van Schaik A. Thermodynamic metrics for measuring the “sustainability” of design for recycling. JOM 2008;60(8):39e46. [58] Nakajima K, Takeda O, Miki T, Nagasaka T. Evaluation method of metal resource recyclability based on thermodynamic analysis. Materials Transactions 2009;50(3): 453e60. [59] Reck BK, Graedel TE. Challenges in metal recycling. Science 2012;337(6095): 690e5. [60] Graedel TE, Allwood J, Birat JP, Buchert M, Hagel€ uken C, Reck BK, Sibley SF, Sonnemann G. What do we know about metal recycling rates? Journal of Industrial Ecology 2011;15(3):355e66. [61] Lu X, Hiraki T, Nakajima K, Takeda O, Matsuabe K, Zhu HM, Nakamura S, Nagasaka T. Thermodynamic analysis of separation of alloying elements in recycling of end-of-life titanium products. Separation and Purification Technology 2012;89: 135e41. [62] Charles RG, Douglas P, Hallin IL, Matthews I, Liversage G. An investigation of trends in precious metal and copper content of RAM modules in WEEE: implications for long term recycling potential. Waste Management 2017;60:505e20. [63] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC. 4th assessment report: climate change. 2007. Available online at: https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf. [64] International Energy Agency (IEA). Key world energy statistics 2017. Available online at: https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/KeyWorld 2017.pdf. [65] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Adoption of the Paris agreement. 2015. Available online at: https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/ cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf. [66] Schirone L, Pellitteri F. Energy policies and sustainable management of energy sources. Sustainability 2017;9(12):2321. [67] Foster S, Elzinga D. The role of fossil fuels in a sustainable energy system. UN Chronicle 2013;52(3):17e9. [68] Leung DY, Caramanna G, Maroto-Valer MM. An overview of current status of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2014;39:426e43. [69] Rahman FA, Aziz MMA, Saidur R, Bakar WAWA, Hainin MR, Putrajaya R, Hassan NA. Pollution to solution: capture and sequestration of carbon dioxide

104

[70]

[71] [72]

[73] [74] [75]

[76] [77]

[78] [79] [80]

[81] [82] [83] [84] [85] [86]

The Circular Economy

(CO2) and its utilization as a renewable energy source for a sustainable future. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017;71:112e26. Gillis J, Popovich N. The US is the biggest carbon polluter in history. It just walked away from the Paris climate deal. The New York Times; 2017. Available online at: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/01/climate/us-biggest-carbonpolluter-in-history-will-it-walk-away-from-the-paris-climate-deal.html. Bradsher K, Friedman L. China’s emissions: more than U.S. plus Europe, and still rising. The New York Times; 2018. Available online at: https://www.nytimes. com/2018/01/25/business/china-davos-climate-change.html. Polak M, Klingbeil R, Struckmeier W. Strategies for the sustainable management of non-renewable groundwater resources. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, commissioned by German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development; 2007. Available online at: https://www.bgr.bund.de/EN/ Themen/Zusammenarbeit/TechnZusammenarb/Politikberatung_GW/ Downloads/pbgw_strategies_nrgw.pdf?__blob¼publicationFile&v¼2. Kuper M, Amichi H, Mayaux PL. Groundwater use in North Africa as a cautionary tale for climate change adaptation. Water International 2017;42(6):725e40. Lezzaik K, Milewski A. A quantitative assessment of groundwater resources in the Middle East and North Africa region. Hydrogeology Journal 2018;26(1):251e66. Shah T, Molden D, Sakthivadivel R, Seckler D. The global groundwater situation: overview of opportunities and challenges. IWMI Books, Reports H025885. International Water Management Institute; 2000. Available online at: http://publications. iwmi.org/pdf/H025885.pdf. Gorelick SM, Zheng C. Global change and the groundwater management challenge. Water Resources Research 2015;51(5):3031e51. van den Brink C, Zaadnoordijk WJ, van der Grift B, de Ruiter PC, Griffioen J. Using a groundwater quality negotiation support system to change land-use management near a drinking-water abstraction in the Netherlands. Journal of Hydrology 2008; 350(3e4):339e56. Tuinstra J, van Wensem J. Ecosystem services in sustainable groundwater management. Science of the Total Environment 2014;485:798e803. Fujiwara M, Kikuchi M. Solar desalination of seawater using double-dye-modified PTFE membrane. Water Research 2017;127:96e103. Mahmoudi H, Spahis N, Goosen MF, Sablani S, Abdul-wahab SA, Ghaffour N, Drouiche N. Assessment of wind energy to power solar brackish water greenhouse desalination units: a case study from Algeria. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13(8):2149e55. Al-Assa’d TA, Abdulla FA. Artificial groundwater recharge to a semi-arid basin: case study of Mujib aquifer, Jordan. Environmental Earth Sciences 2010;60(4):845e59. Fournier ED, Keller AA, Geyer R, Frew J. Investigating the energy-water usage efficiency of the reuse of treated municipal wastewater for artificial groundwater recharge. Environmental Science and Technology 2016;50(4):2044e53. Yuan H, He Z. Integrating membrane filtration into bioelectrochemical systems as next generation energy-efficient wastewater treatment technologies for water reclamation: a review. Bioresource Technology 2015;195:202e9. Siegrist RL. Introduction to decentralized infrastructure for wastewater treatment and water reclamation. In: Decentralized water reclamation engineering. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 1e37. Ghernaout D. Increasing trends towards drinking water reclamation from treated wastewater. World Journal of Applied Chemistry 2018;3(1):1e9. Official Journal of the European Union. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the community action in the field

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

[87]

[88] [89] [90]

[91]

[92]

[93] [94] [95] [96] [97] [98] [99] [100] [101] [102]

105

of water policy. Available online at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html? uri¼cellar:5c835afb-2ec6-4577-bdf8-756d3d694eeb.0004.02/DOC_1&format¼ PDF. Official Journal of the European Union. Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of December 12, 2006 on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration. Available online at: http://eur-lex.europa. eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri¼OJ:L:2006:372:0019:0031:EN:PDF. European Commission (DG Environment). Water notes on the implementation of the water framework directive. 2008. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/ environment/water/participation/pdf/waternotes/water_note1_joining_forces.pdf. European Commission. Eurostat, Environmental Data Centre on Natural Resources, Natural Resources. Raw materials. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/ environmental-data-centre-on-natural-resources/natural-resources/raw-materials. OECD Green Growth. Resources, productivity and the environment e key findings. Available online at: http://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/MATERIAL%20RES OURCES,%20PRODUCTIVITY%20AND%20THE%20ENVIRONMENT_ key%20findings.pdf. Dahlbo H, Bachér J, L€ahtinen K, Jouttij€arvi T, Suoheimo P, Mattila T, Sironen S, Myllymaa T, Saram€aki K. Construction and demolition waste management e a holistic evaluation of environmental performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015; 107:333e41. Ferriz-Papi JA, Thomas S. Recycled aggregates from construction and demolition waste in the production of concrete blocks. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Architectural and Environmental Engineering 2017;11(10):1397e402. Manninen K, Koskela S, Antikainen R, Bocken N, Dahlbo H, Aminoff A. Do circular economy business models capture intended environmental value propositions? Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;171:413e22. Ahmad S, Tahar RM. Selection of renewable energy sources for sustainable development of electricity generation system using analytic hierarchy process: a case of Malaysia. Renewable Energy 2014;63:458e66. Park E. Potentiality of renewable resources: economic feasibility perspectives in South Korea. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017;79:61e70. Zilberman D, Kim E, Kirschner S, Kaplan S, Reeves J. Technology and the future bioeconomy. Agricultural Economics 2013;44:95e102. Lee B, Preston F, Kooroshy J, Bailey R, Lahn G. Resources futures, Vol. 14. London: Chatham House; 2012. Available online at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi¼10.1.1.357.4912&rep¼rep1&type¼pdf. Kikuchi Y, Kimura S, Koyama M. Present status of Japan’s energy. In: Energy technology roadmaps of Japan. Tokyo: Springer; 2016. p. 23e32. Tietenberg TH, Lewis L. Environmental and natural resource economics. 10th ed. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge; 2016. Cancino-Sol orzano Y, Paredes-Sanchez JP, Gutiérrez-Trashorras AJ, XibertaBernat J. The development of renewable energy resources in the State of Veracruz, Mexico. Utilities Policy 2016;39:1e4. Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S. A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;114:11e32. Heshmati A. A review of the circular economy and its implementation. International Journal of Green Economics 2017;11(3e4):251e88.

106

The Circular Economy

[103] Genovese A, Acquaye AA, Figueroa A, Koh SL. Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: evidence and some applications. Omega 2017;66:344e57. [104] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Bioeconomy: the path to sustainability. In: A sustainable bioeconomy e the green industrial revolution. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 29e53. [105] Antikainen R, Dalhammar C, Hildén M, Judl J, J€a€askel€ainen T, Kautto P, Koskela S, Kuisma M, Lazarevic D, M€aenp€a€a I, Ovaska JP. Renewal of forest based manufacturing towards a sustainable circular bioeconomy. 2017. Available online at: https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/186080. [106] Zabaniotou A. Redesigning a bioenergy sector in EU in the transition to circular waste-based bioeconomy e a multidisciplinary review. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;177(10):197e206. [107] Mohan SV, Modestra JA, Amulya K, Butti SK, Velvizhi G. A circular bioeconomy with biobased products from CO2 sequestration. Trends in Biotechnology 2016; 34(6):506e19. [108] Schandl H, Hatfield-Dodds S, Wiedmann T, Geschke A, Cai Y, West J, Newth D, Baynes T, Lenzen M, Owen A. Decoupling global environmental pressure and economic growth: scenarios for energy use, materials use and carbon emissions. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;132:45e56. [109] Spratt S. Environmental taxation and development: a scoping study. IDS Working Papers 2013;433:1e52. [110] Blumenschein F, Brandi C, Carin B, Flores R, Gruenig M, Helgenberger S, Kraemer RA, Mathur A, Ott H, Quitzow R, Ruet J. Green shift to sustainability: co-benefits & impacts of energy transformation on resource industries, trade, growth, and taxes. 2017. Available online at: http://www.g20-insights.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/green-shift-sustainability-co-benefits-impacts-energy-transformationresource-industries-trade-growth-taxes-1496164781.pdf. [111] Mundaca L, Richter JL. Assessing ‘green energy economy’ stimulus packages: evidence from the US programs targeting renewable energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015;42:1174e86. [112] Abdmouleh Z, Alammari RA, Gastli A. Review of policies encouraging renewable energy integration & best practices. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015;45:249e62. [113] Gasparatos A, Doll CN, Esteban M, Ahmed A, Olang TA. Renewable energy and biodiversity: implications for transitioning to a Green Economy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017;70:161e84. [114] Marion P, Bernela B, Piccirilli A, Estrine B, Patouillard N, Guilbot J, Jér^ ome F. Sustainable chemistry: how to produce better and more from less? Green Chemistry 2017;19(21):4973e89. [115] Alay E, Duran K, Korlu A. A sample work on green manufacturing in textile industry. Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy 2016;3:39e46. [116] Gao Y, Li J, Song Z, Song J, Shang S, Xiao G, Wang Z, Rao X. Turning renewable resources into value-added products: development of rosin-based insecticide candidates. Industrial Crops and Products 2015;76:660e71. [117] Oubraham A, Zaccour G. A survey of applications of viability theory to the sustainable exploitation of renewable resources. Ecological Economics 2018;145:346e67. [118] Srinivasu PDN, Zawka SD. Renewable resource management in a seasonally fluctuating environment with restricted harvesting effort. Mathematical Biosciences 2018; 301:1e9. [119] Bourguignon D. Understanding waste streams: treatment of specific waste e Briefing. European Parliamentary Research Service; 2015. Available online at: http://www.

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

[120] [121] [122] [123] [124] [125]

[126] [127]

[128] [129]

[130] [131]

[132] [133]

[134]

107

europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/EPRS-Briefing-564398-Understanding-waste-streamsFINAL.pdf. Clark JH, Matharu AS. Waste to wealth using green chemistry. In: Hester RE, Harrison RM, editors. Waste as a resource. London, United Kingdom: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2013. p. 66e82. Uhlenbrook S, Connor R, Koncagul E, Ortigara A. Closing the water cycle-the key role of water and wastewater management in a circular economy. In: EGU general assembly conference abstracts, Vol. 19; April 2017. p. 14388. Sgroi M, Vagliasindi FG, Roccaro P. Feasibility, sustainability and circular economy concepts in water reuse. Current Opinion in Environmental Science and Health 2018;2:20e5. Li WW, Yu HQ, Rittmann BE. Chemistry: reuse water pollutants. Nature News 2015;528(7580):29e31. Hoornweg D, Bhada-Tata P. What a waste: a global review of solid waste management. 2012. Pdf file. Available online at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/ handle/10986/17388. Lee P, Sims E, Bertham O, Symington H, Bell N, Pfaltzgraff L, Sj€ ogren P, Wilts CH, O’Brien M. Towards a circular economy: waste management in the EU; study. European Parliamentary Research Service; 2017. Available online at: http://www. europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/581913/EPRS_STU%282017% 29581913_EN.pdf. Gregson N, Crang M. From waste to resource: the trade in wastes and global recycling economies. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 2015;40:151e76. Iacovidou E, Millward-Hopkins J, Busch J, Purnell P, Velis CA, Hahladakis JN, Zwirner O, Brown A. A pathway to circular economy: developing a conceptual framework for complex value assessment of resources recovered from waste. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;168:1279e88. Luque R, Clark JH. Valorisation of food residues: waste to wealth using green chemical technologies. Sustainable Chemical Processes 2013;1:10. Åsa S, Jensen C, Quested T, Moates G, Buksti M, Cseh B, Juul S, Parry A, Alessandro P, Redlingshofer B, Scherhaufer S. Estimates of European food waste levels. Sztokholm: Fusions; 2016. Available online at: http://www.eu-fusions.org/ phocadownload/Publications/Estimates%20of%20European%20food%20waste% 20levels.pdf. van der Werf P, Gilliland JA. A systematic review of food losses and food waste generation in developed countries. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers e Waste and Resource Management May 2017;170(2):66e77. Lin CSK, Pfaltzgraff LA, Herrero-Davila L, Mubofu EB, Abderrahim S, Clark JH, Koutinas AA, Kopsahelis N, Stamatelatou K, Dickson F, Thankappan S. Food waste as a valuable resource for the production of chemicals, materials and fuels. Current situation and global perspective. Energy and Environmental Science 2013;6(2): 426e64. Thyberg KL, Tonjes DJ. Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2016;106:110e23. Salemdeeb R, zu Ermgassen EK, Kim MH, Balmford A, Al-Tabbaa A. Environmental and health impacts of using food waste as animal feed: a comparative analysis of food waste management options. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;140: 871e80. Mancini L, Sala S, Recchioni M, Benini L, Goralczyk M, Pennington D. Potential of life cycle assessment for supporting the management of critical raw materials. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2015;20(1):100e16.

108

The Circular Economy

[135] Mancheri NA. World trade in rare earths, Chinese export restrictions, and implications. Resources Policy 2015;46:262e71. [136] Braungart M. C2C design concept. Available online at: http://braungart.epeahamburg.org/en/content/c2c-design-concept. [137] French ML. Improving sustainability through effective reuse of product returns: minimizing waste in a batch blending process environment. Journal of Cleaner Production 2008;16(15):1679e87. [138] Dinan TM. Economic efficiency effects of alternative policies for reducing waste disposal. In: The economics of residential solid waste management. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge; 2017. p. 65e79. [139] Romero-Hernandez O, Romero S. Maximizing the value of waste: from waste management to the circular economy. Thunderbird International Business Review 2018; 60:1e8. [140] Hoornweg D, Bhada-Tata P. What a waste: a global review of solid waste management. World Bank’s Urban Development Series. 2012. Available online at: https:// siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANDEVELOPMENT/Resources/3363871334852610766/What_a_Waste2012_Final.pdf. [141] Modak P, Jiemian Y, Hongyuan Y, Mohanty CR. Municipal solid waste management: turning waste into resources. In: Shanghai manual: a guide for sustainable urban development in the 21st century; 2010. p. 1e36. Available online at: http://www. un.org/esa/dsd/susdevtopics/sdt_pdfs/shanghaimanual/Chapter%205%20-% 20Waste_management.pdf. [142] Kumar S, Smith SR, Fowler G, Velis C, Kumar SJ, Arya S, Kumar R, Cheeseman C. Challenges and opportunities associated with waste management in India. Royal Society Open Science 2017;4(3):1e11. 160764. [143] Song Q, Li J, Zeng X. Minimizing the increasing solid waste through zero waste strategy. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015;104:199e210. [144] Hong J, Chen Y, Wang M, Ye L, Qi C, Yuan H, Zheng T, Li X. Intensification of municipal solid waste disposal in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017;69:168e76. [145] Brunner PH, Rechberger H. Waste to energy e key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management 2015;37:3e12. [146] Bocken NM, Olivetti EA, Cullen JM, Potting J, Lifset R. Taking the circularity to the next level: a special issue on the circular economy. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3):476e82. [147] Goldberg T. What about the circularity of hazardous materials? Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3):491e3. [148] Hussin MH, Samad NA, Latif NHA, Rozuli NA, Yusoff SB, Gambier F, Brosse N. Production of oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) fronds lignin-derived non-toxic aldehyde for eco-friendly wood adhesive. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 2018;113:1266e72. [149] Nurioglu AG, Esteves ACC. Non-toxic, non-biocide-release antifouling coatings based on molecular structure design for marine applications. Journal of Materials Chemistry B 2015;3(32):6547e70. [150] Somers P, De Somer F, Cornelissen M, Bouchez S, Gasthuys F, Narine K, Cox E, Van Nooten G. Genipin blues: an alternative non-toxic crosslinker for heart valves? Journal of Heart Valve Disease 2008;17(6):682e8. [151] Royo B. Transfer hydrogenation with non-toxic metals for drug synthesis. In: Sustainable synthesis of pharmaceuticals. London, United Kingdom: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2018. p. 105e38. [152] Demirbas A. Importance of biodiesel as transportation fuel. Energy Policy 2007;35(9): 4661e70.

Accelerating the implementation of circular economy

109

[153] Park SH, Lee CS. Applicability of dimethyl ether (DME) in a compression ignition engine as an alternative fuel. Energy Conversion and Management 2014;86:848e63. [154] Pinjing H, Fan L, Hua Z, Liming S. Recent developments in the area of waste as a resource, with particular reference to the circular economy as a guiding principle. In: Hester RE, Harrison RM, editors. Waste as a resource. London, United Kingdom: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2013. p. 144e61. [155] Confederation of Finnish Industries. How can we speed up circular economy?. March 2015. Available online at: https://ek.fi/wp-content/uploads/How-can-we-speedup-circular-economy.pdf. [156] Fellner J, Lederer J, Scharff C, Laner D. Present potentials and limitations of a circular economy with respect to primary raw material demand. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3):494e6. [157] Kirchherr J, Piscicelli L, Bour R, Kostense-Smit E, Muller J, Huibrechtse-Truijens A, Hekkert M. Barriers to the circular economy: evidence from the European Union (EU). Ecological Economics 2018;150:264e72. [158] Govindan K, Hasanagic M. A systematic review on drivers, barriers, and practices towards circular economy: a supply chain perspective. International Journal of Production Research 2018;56:278e311. [159] De Jesus A, Mendonça S. Lost in transition? Drivers and barriers in the ecoinnovation road to the circular economy. Ecological Economics 2018;145:75e89.

CHAPTER FOUR

Circular economy in action: case studies about the transition from the linear economy in the chemical, mining, textile, agriculture, and water treatment industries 4.1 Introduction After thoroughly justifying the urgent need to replace the current linear model with the sustainable CE model, and after analyzing key elements necessary to accelerate this shift, from local, regional, and global perspectives, we now need to move from conceptual thinking to action plans and enterprises by having a closer and critical look on the actual achievement on the ground in key economic sectors. After decades of discussions in academic, entrepreneurial, and decisionmaking circles, the concept of CE has matured, thus, acting to implement it with concrete measures and initiatives is a priority in many countries and corporations, all convinced that the adoption of CE is the best platform for future economic development in highly competitive times (mainly resources and markets wise). In the EU, for instance, CE is viewed as a timely opportunity to transform the continent’s economy and generate and sustain a new competitive advantage. In this transition phase, European experts justly believe that industry has a key role to play in CE, especially by committing to sustainable sourcing and creating networks to enable cooperation across the entire value chain [1]. As we shall see in this chapter, circularity can be smoothly and steadily incorporated in many industrial, agricultural, and mining activities, along with other strategic areas, such as the water and wastewater treatment sector. The transition phase toward CE with concrete achievements and several “circular” schemes will be showcased and analyzed, with respect to the highly expected economic, environmental, and societal benefits. The Circular Economy ISBN: 978-0-12-815267-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815267-6.00004-9

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

111

j

112

The Circular Economy

Related initiatives from government and/or private sectors will be highlighted, along with the critical need for a consorted effort (especially from legal perspectives), cross-boundaries platforms for the flow of resources, and the various innovative “circular” designs and enabling technologies. Selected inspiring success stories from around the world will be presented, where the adoption of (or conversion into) CE enabled “generating money from sustainability.” More of these CE case studies will be presented and analyzed in Chapter 5.

4.2 Overview of circularity in the industrial sector Basically, all industrial activities are launched with the main objective of generating profit. We start by investing money (the higher the objective, the larger the investment) to produce or manufacture commodities, find suitable markets, and sell those products to generate revenues. After a while (the shorter, the better), the revenues will “reimburse” the initial investment and start generating net benefits. Maximizing those benefits is and will always remain the staging goal of any industrialist. How can this be achieved, and more importantly, how can it be sustained? Innovating, producing more, producing better quality products, optimizing the manufacturing process, hiring highly skilled workforce, diversifying the company’s portfolio and improving the brand value and reputation are among the most implemented strategies to maximize profits and benefits. Nonetheless, the shortest way to achieve such highly sought goals remains reducing the cost throughout [2]. Why? because innovating necessitates a continuous (often multidisciplinary) R&D efforts, which obviously requires spending substantial amounts of money. Most companies would be fine with such spending, should something in return be gained. But, this is not the case in R&D, because risks do exist to the point that experts need to manage it [3]. Hence, few big corporations, notably in the pharmaceutical industry, can afford to take such risks because if the process leads to a real breakthrough (new product, cheaper feedstock, more efficient production process, etc.), then it is the jackpot. How about producing more? Well, to succeed with such a strategy, you need to spend more in order to buy larger amounts of feedstocks and to upgrade the production facility to cope with such increases. More importantly, the supply of raw materials needs to be continuously secured, which is far from being an easy task considering the global competition and the various

Circular economy in action

113

specific issues around most resources (depletion, restrictions, regulations, geopolitical problems, etc.) [4,5]. Other applicable strategies to increase revenues and profitably (e.g., diversifying the portfolio, optimizing the manufacturing process, improving the brand value and reputation, etc.) require, among other factors, highly experienced and performing CEOs and highly skilled workforce, which again can be afforded by big companies. One of the key principles in CE is the elimination of wastes from industrial chains through the efficient use and conversion of resources. Such an objective is of paramount importance to industries since it is highly expected to lead to substantial cost savings and reduced dependence on new raw materials. Thus, it is quite obvious that introducing circularity in industrial activities is beneficial for both operational and strategic perspectives. This will bring more stability to highly speculative markets which would benefit both producers and consumers. Countries, endeavoring to implement CE on the ground, primarily in the industrial sector, are expected to Ref. [6]: - benefit for substantial net material savings - mitigate the “chronic” issue of volatility and supply risks, - create new jobs and deal with the global problem of unemployment, - provide drivers for innovation, - improve social welfare, and - ensure the long-term resilience of the economy. Most industrial sectors differ one from another with respect to the key activities of raw materials procurement and processing, and waste generation and management. Hence, within the CE concept, each sector needs to “figure out” the best sustainable practices for its activities, from acquiring raw materials to ensuring (or enabling) the reuse of the product or the recovery of the resources used in its manufacture. In this regard, the European Commission’s Joint Research Center on “circular economy and industrial leadership” compiled a series of reference documents, the “best available technique reference documents” covering a wide range of industrial sectors, including iron and steel production, textile industry, waste treatment, production of speciality chemicals and food, drink, and milk industries [7]. These documents provide descriptions of a range of industrial processes, with their respective operating conditions and emission rates. The EU Member States are required to take these documents into account when issuing permit requirements for industrial installations and when determining best available techniques in general, or for particular cases under the EU’s integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) directive [8,9].

114

The Circular Economy

In order to illustrate the economic opportunities and substantial worth of applying CE principles in the industrial sector, studies were conducted by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) to assess related net materials cost savings in industries producing complex products with medium life spans (electrical machinery and apparatus, furniture, communication devices, office machinery, and computers, etc.) [10]. It was reported that, at an EU level, introducing CE in these manufacturing sectors would enable net materials cost savings opportunity between US$ 340 and 380 billion per year for a “cautious” transition scenario, and US$ 520e630 billion per year for the “advanced” scenario. In another related report, EMF illustrates the assessing of the net materials cost savings for the fast-moving consumer goods (aka. consumer packaged goods), but from a global perspective [11]. In this report, it was estimated that the introduction of circularity in this sector would generate a global value of about US$ 700 billion in materials savings on a yearly basis, which represent around 20% of the materials input costs incurred by the fast-moving consumer goods industry in the linear economy model. After briefly showcasing some of the huge economic opportunities of applying CE principles in the industrial sector, and the substantial losses if we delay this transition (or more so if we continue business as usual), let us now explore the various implementation schemes of the CE concept in selected key industries, along with the current accomplishments and benefits, starting with the lucrative chemical industry.

4.3 Circular economy in the chemical industry During the last half century or so, a growing environmental and social awareness rose among consumers, mostly in developed countries. As a consequence of this change in consumer behaviors (whether out of cautiousness, responsibly, or eco-friendliness), products’ composition and their chemical origin became more scrutinized, and therefore, started influencing purchasing decisions [12,13]. Furthermore, the substantial increase in the quantity and quality of education programs related to sustainability in schools and universities increased the degree of awareness among the exposed students (future consumers) about natural resources, the current unsustainable way of managing them, emerging pollutants, along with the changes in market trends, and customer preferences related to the CE concept [14e16].

Circular economy in action

115

The chemical industry is one of the key industrial sectors with full potentialities to enable the implementation of CE principles from product designing, and its production processes, to waste management, and the various schemes to recover resources and/or valorizing waste into addedvalue products via “green” chemical processes. In the context, it is very important to see how much involved are the industrialists of the chemical sector in the concept of CE, and how do they perceive their role in promoting CE and suitability. A related position paper was published in 2015 by the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic), and it unambiguously stated that “the European chemical industry supports the transition toward a circular economy as part of a strategy to make Europe more resource efficient” [17]. Along with other recommendations to the European Parliament, Council and Commission (e.g., life-cycle thinking and safety consideration), Cefic also emphasized in its report on the ability of the chemical industry to make a contribution to the CE in the entire value chain, including: i. Product design: the application of sustainable chemistry is believed to be the best option to develop chemical substances enabling high performing products (i.e., durable, easy to repair, or recycle). Obviously, this would come at the expense of other performance characteristics, for instance, trading-off durability for recyclability [18]. Ultimately, consumers will decide which product to buy, and that is why in CE, responsible consumerism should go hand-in-hand with responsible manufacturing. ii. Production processes: The European chemical industry thinks that “competitive” CE should benefit from all available raw materials, including mineral, fossil-based resources, renewables, and secondary raw materials. Alternative feedstocks, such as carbon dioxide from industrial flue gases, should be promoted, along with high valueadded and resource efficient utilization schemes of biomass. The key endeavor of optimizing the use of raw materials relies heavily on the development of innovative and integrated production processes, able to maximize the efficient use of those resources [19e21]. In this context, we need to be aware that all industrialists will do their best to have access to raw materials at competitive (viz. cheap) price, that is why CE should develop price-related “guidelines” to promote the use of renewables and penalize the use of nonrenewables (if not, recovery options are planned). Could free markets do it, or do we need governmental intervention in market prices? Economists will argue, and time will tell.

116

The Circular Economy

iii. Waste management: many valuable substances, which can be easily reused (as such or after pretreatment) in the production process, are still defined as waste in the EU Waste Framework Directive. Thus, according to Cefic, the first step to undertake in order to prevent losing those secondary raw materials is to further clarify the concept of waste in the related directive by avoiding a wider interpretation of the term “waste” and exclude resources that can be reintegrated in the production process without safety and pollution risks. Many scientists are concurring with this recommendation [22,23].As for the “actual” wastes, a hierarchy framework based on life-cycle thinking was recommended to justify which end-of-life management operation needs to be adopted. In other terms, choosing between recycling, energy recovery, and landfilling should be based on economic and environmental considerations. These are indeed valid criteria, but in practice, if the economic cost and environmental impact do not go together (which is, often the case), which option would the industrialist choose? If we agree that most of them will adopt the environmental-friendly but costly option, we need to agree also that some would go the other way around. Thus, regulating policies, in this respect, are also required to show clear signs about the right waste hierarchy in CE. iv. From waste to resource: Cefic’s position on this matter is primarily linked to the principle of “safety first,” which is highly relevant in the chemical industry sector. Indeed, recycling chemical substances is already a challenging task, and dealing with toxic chemicals adds more perplexity to the matter. Issues related to hazardous chemicals in electronic wastes, toys, and other commodities are at the core of this dilemma. Furthermore, if we analyze the statement made by the European chemical industrialists in their position paper, we will clearly perceive a full commitment to CE and the existing chemical and product legislation, such as the regulation concerning the registration, evaluation, authorization, and restriction of chemicals (REACH) and the regulation on the Classification, Labeling, and Packaging of substances and mixtures (CLP) [24]. Such commitment is very important for the development and expansion of CE in Europe and elsewhere, but a latent problem is overshadowing such commitment and could be a serious obstacle before the implementation of CE in the chemical industry (and many other industries for that matter), which is the industries’ legitimate effort to protect their confidential business information. The key question will

Circular economy in action

117

be how much and which kind of information they can “share” to ensure high recycling rates of those chemicals, especially those of concern? Overall, as a base of the various CE principles, chemistry can “intervene” throughout all value chain processes [25,26], by: - improving the overall efficiency of production processes to maximize the use of all resources entering the system, including primary raw materials, water, and energy. - Further optimizing the use of raw materials by transforming the generated wastes into a new feedstock (secondary raw materials) for the production of other valuable chemicals and materials, and - enabling more efficient materials for recycling and resources recovery options. Such tasks, although very challenging in practice, are full of opportunities and promises for the companies operating in the sector of the chemical industry. The issue here is not to optimize the use of this resource or the valorization of that waste, the main challenge before the chemical industry is to introduce circularity in the entire product life-cycle [27e29]. Basically, in the chemical industry, such major objective should start with the production of base chemicals and then move forward with the following refining stages to produce the target product(s), often in a multistage process. Additional separation and purification processes are also required, which necessitates the use of more chemicals and materials. Such multiple-stages process is often linked to more waste generation. Therefore, as far as CE is concerned, avoiding wastes at each stage is of paramount importance to ensure higher efficiency of raw material use. Although, in practice, most industrial processes can reduce the generation of waste but cannot avoid it completely. In this case, applying one of the CE principles for waste management is necessary. This could be achieved through the valorization of the by-products, or the utilization of emitted CO2 as raw materials, thus, combining waste to chemicals and carbon capture. In other terms, mitigating CO2 emissions by chemical conversion [30,31]. Additional possibilities include chemical recycling (aka. feedstock recycling) [32], the utilization of renewable resources as raw materials for the production of chemicals, as we shall see in detail later in this section.

4.3.1 Green chemistry in CE Compared to “conventional” chemistry, green chemistry aims at designing chemical products and processes that minimize the use of raw substances and

118

The Circular Economy

eliminate the use or creation of hazardous chemicals. There are 12 commonly accepted principles of green chemistry developed by American chemists Paul Anastas and John Warner [33], which need to be applied to all stages of the chemical product life-cycle. As we shall see, most of these principles are closely linked with the concept of CE. The green chemistry principles include [34,35]: i. Prevention: It is common sense that preventing waste generation is better than the prospect of materials loss and costly waste treatment and disposal (in CE terms, minimizing waste throughout the entire supply chain). ii. Maximize atom economy: in green chemistry, chemical syntheses should be designed to maximize the incorporation of all raw materials used in the chemical process into the final product (in CE, this means resource efficiency at “atomic level”). iii. Less hazardous chemical syntheses: synthetic methods should be designed to use and generate substances that possess little or no toxicity to human health and the environment. iv. Designing safer chemicals: Chemical products should be designed to optimize their targeted function while minimizing their toxicity. v. Safer solvents and auxiliaries: Wherever possible, the use of auxiliary substances such as solvents and separation agents should be avoided. If necessary, nontoxic auxiliaries should be used. In the CE concept, another condition should be added, i.e., enabling the recovery and reuse of those solvents and other auxiliary chemical agents. vi. Design for energy efficiency: meaning that the energy requirements of chemical syntheses and other processes should be optimized, i.e., quantitatively minimized and qualitatively assessed for their environmental and economic impacts. Wherever possible, conducting chemical reactions at ambient temperature and pressure should be the prime objective. vii. Use of renewable feedstocks: GC promotes, like the concepts of bioeconomy and CE, the use of renewable raw material or feedstock rather than depleting ones. GC states that this objective should be sought whenever technically and economically practicable, and we add to this, as long as it is safe for the environment and human health. viii. Reduce derivatives: Wherever possible, avoiding or minimizing the recourse to chemical derivatization because this process requires additional reagents and can lead to waste generation.

Circular economy in action

119

ix. Catalysis: In GC, selective catalytic reagents are substantially more beneficial than stoichiometric reagents, which are used in excess and carry out a reaction only once. x. Design for degradation: chemical products should be designed in a sustainable way to ensure an easy and cost-effective break down of those products at the end of their function into safe and nonpersistent compounds. xi. Real-time analysis to prevent pollution: by developing analytical methodologies enabling real-time in-process monitoring in order to fully control the production process before the formation of hazardous compounds. xii. Safer Chemistry to prevent accidents: design chemicals and their formulations (solid, liquid, or gas) to minimize the potential for chemical accidents including explosions, fires, and releases to the environment. Overall, many common features do exist between CE and green chemistry, including waste minimization, the efficient use of resources, promoting recovery/reuse options, along with the prioritized use of renewable sources. Nonetheless, green chemistry adds another important aspect to these sustainable objectives, which is enabling the “safe” recycling/recovery of resources (from the design stage as we have seen earlier), thus permits the safe handling, processing, and release (if unavoidable) of the targeted chemical compounds [36,37]. This is also important from the economic perspectives because recycling markets will need “replenished” with safe and high-quality recycled materials and recovered chemicals. This is a critical prerequisite to enable a real competition with the still attractive market of pristine raw materials [38,39]. Indeed, hazardous substances remaining in recycled materials are a major obstacle before the growth and expansion of the recycling markets worldwide, and constitute a serious issue to the exposed population and the environment in many countries around the world [40e42]. For these reasons, along with the economic actor, it is very important that scientists and researchers in green chemistry need to focus on developing innovative products and processes enabling the production of safer and easily recycled products or recover substances, thus, promoting green chemistry and CE principles in the chemical industry and many other related economic sectors. In a recent bibliometric study, recent trends in green and sustainable chemistry, and waste valorization were highlighted within the context of CE [43]. It was reported that in both fields considerable progress toward sustainable development is being witnessed, based on the increased numbers of

120

The Circular Economy

research studies on the utilization of waste and renewable resources (mostly nonfood ones) to produce chemicals and materials, via benign reaction chemistry, novel catalysts, and satisfactory production efficiency. Fig. 4.1 clearly illustrates the general publication trends between 2012 and 2017 related to green chemistry and waste valorization on the one hand, and the increasing number of related publications in the same period, on the other hand. Furthermore, an important aspect related to green chemistry and circular economy needs to be highlighted, which is the need for strict regulatory frameworks targeting the management of hazardous substances throughout the entire material cycle. Indeed, even within the concept of CE, some industrial sectors cannot completely avoid the generation of wastes, and many products or part of products will eventually become waste, at least until we find new valorization schemes. Until then, it is crucial, especially in the present transition phase toward CE, to effectively treat those “wastes” in order to avoid the risk of re-circulating substances of concern into new products. For instance, materials containing substances identified under the European REACH regulation as substances of very high concern (SVHC) pose a serious challenge to recycling [44,45]. Indeed, recycling becomes more difficult when materials and products contain SVHCs for many reasons: - first, because those substances can be carcinogenic, mutagenic, toxic for reproduction, or very critical for the environment [46], and - second, because the use of those materials and products is highly restricted in the first place i.e., only to be used after specific authorization [47].

Figure 4.1 (A) Publication trends related to “green and sustainable chemistry” and/or “waste valorization” using ScienceDirect database from 2012 to 2017, and (B) increasing number of articles in peer-reviewed journals on related subjects [43].

Circular economy in action

121

Therefore, if any waste contains SVHC, its recycling will be even more difficult. In a related report published by experts from the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) in 2017 [48], some companies were interviewed on the subject of recyclability of wastes containing SVHC. Several practical measures were highlighted in this report, including: - a prior and detailed knowledge of the SVHC present in wastes - the need to separate waste containing SVHCs from SVHC-free waste streams, upstream of the waste recycling process. - The need for regulatory or financial incentives to promote and facilitate the implementation of specific separation processes, often requiring significant investment, operation, and maintenance cost. - The development of applications in which recycled SVHC can be safely incorporated into new materials or products. For instance, a three-layered sandwich PVC tube could be made with a middle layer containing SVHC and two outer layers made from SVHC-free material, thus, avoiding the risk of exposure. Overall, when it comes to green chemistry and CE, many actors in the chemical industry are well aware of the economic benefits and the sustainable impact of this “association” on their businesses, the environment and people living near “their plants and purchasing their products. For these and other reasons, industrialists in the chemical sector are actively preparing for and contributing to the global shift toward CE. A key endeavor in this regard is related to the strategic raw materials shift from depleting fossil raw materials to renewable feedstocks. The relevance of such materials shift is echoed in numerous related R&D studies considering the use of renewable resources including numerous bioresources and derived biochemicals (e.g., organic acids) or biomaterials (e.g., algal polymeric substances) as alternative feedstocks to fossil resources [49e51]. The shift to renewables is also clearly echoed in the strategic plans of various multinational, and world-renowned companies in the chemical sector, producing renewable chemicals or developing sustainable chemical technologies, such as BASF (Germany) [52], DuPont (US) [53], Novozymes (Denmark) [54], Neste (Finland) [55], Braskem (Brazil) [56], Avantium Technologies (Netherlands) [57], and many other companies [58,59], all contributing to the global shift toward a green chemical Industry, and benefiting from the tremendous growth opportunities for renewable chemicals.

122

The Circular Economy

For example, DuPont developed new processes (based on specifically engineered microbes) to convert renewable biomass into building block chemicals, which could be used for the production of various bio-based products [60]. For example, a joint venture between DuPont and Tate & Lyle is already producing 1,3 propanediol (Bio-PDO) from corn glucose [61], which is a key component in the production of various polymers such as polyesters, polyethers, and polyurethanes [62]. Overall, such clear commitment from the chemical industry to CE is highly expected to provide new and valuable momentum to facilitate the transformation of the entire industry and implement more green and circular principles in synthesizing and producing chemicals. Such strategic objectives will promote the development of innocuous, resource efficient, and ecofriendly solutions. Primarily, this includes the developing of chemicals with less hazardous properties (low toxicity and good degradability) and good functionality, which are key requirements in both green chemistry and CE. From a regulatory perspective, producing safer chemicals means safer handling, safer derived products, safer use, and safer and easier recycling/recovery options. This important safety feature in the chemical sector is above all the responsibility of the industries, with a framework of legal tools in order to “help” them meet this responsibility [63,64].

4.3.2 Chemicals from bioresource, biowaste, and recycled materials In the CE concept, various opportunities to produce high value-added chemicals from different kinds of wastes were proven by academic and industrial R&D studies, through various green chemical, biological and/or thermal procedures. The still predominant situation in the chemical industry is that most chemical substances are being produced from petroleum and used as feedstocks (building blocks or platform chemicals) for the production of various commodities including, but far from being limited to, paints, polymers, pesticides, fertilizers, tires, shampoos, solvents, adhesives, and even diapers, vitamins, and aspirin. Nonetheless, with the global emergence of sustainable economic models, such circular and bio-based economies, and the obvious environmental and economic limitations of continuing using depleting raw materials, chemical industrialists started exploring, based on a very extensive R&D investigations and breakthroughs, the various profitable opportunities to convert bioresources and wastes into value-added chemical compounds,

Circular economy in action

123

such as fine chemicals (including many organic acids), pharmaceutically active compounds, fuel and food additives, and biopesticides [65]. The following Table 4.1 illustrates various microbiological procedures to produce different organic acids (valuable platform chemicals for many industrial activities). Diverse bio-based feedstocks are presented including sugars from biomass (glucose and D-xylose), starch, and sugarcane molasses, as well as glycerol, a byproduct of the biodiesel production industry, and ethylene glycol, an organic compound from the catalytic conversion of cellulosic biomass. As opposed to the current unsustainable production of chemicals from fossil resources, and following the linear economy model, the use of renewable raw materials for the production of commodity chemicals, within the CE concept and based on green chemistry principles, need to be operated through sustainable production schemes to ensure the resource and energy efficiencies, eco-friendliness, and cost-effectiveness on the industrial process [36,87]. In order to achieve sustainable management of natural resources of industrial applications (to produce chemicals or other bio-based products for that matter), scientists are often emphasizing on two critical conditions [88e90]: - The exploitation rates of bioresources should neither exceed their natural regeneration rates nor pose any kind of stress affecting them in the long term, and - the generation rates of by-products or residues should not exceed the assimilation rates tolerated by the exposed ecosystems. The application of CE principles would make a substantial contribution in fulfilling both conditions since the recirculation of residues in the same industrial process, or other agro-industrial activities, would reduce the pressure on natural resources in the one hand, and reduce stress on the environment caused by industrial or municipal wastes, conventionally landfilled or incinerated (water, soil, and/or air pollution). In this regard, a valuable (hopefully unforgettable) lesson was learned for humanity’s mismanagement of fossil resources (petroleum, coal, and natural gas) and the generated heavy environmental, economic, and societal legacy, which will continue to be witnessed for decades ahead [91]. As a matter of fact, none of the previously mentioned two conditions are (and even could be) fulfilled if fossil resources are used. Indeed, besides the cold fact that those fossil fuels are being used, on a global scale, at rates impossible to be compensated with natural geological processes (basic definition of a fossil resource), the rates of generated of carbon dioxide cannot be

Glycolic acid (C2H4O3) Pyruvic acid (C3H4O3)

Lactic acid (C3H6O3)

3-Hydroxypro- pionic acid (C3H6O3) Succinic acid (C4H6O4)

Muconic acid (C6H6O4) Gluconic acid (C6H12O7)

Glucose Glycerol from biodiesel production Glucose/xylose mixture Glucose Molasses Clarified corn stover hydrolysate Glucose Glycerol Glycerol Cassava starch Glucose/glycerol mixture Glycerol/glucose mixture Glucose Glucose Glucose Glycerol Corn stover hydrolysate (without detoxification)

Gluconobacter oxydans Engineered Escherichia. coli Engineered E. coli Corynebacterium glutamicum Blastobotrys adeninivorans Yarrowia lipolytica

220.0 56.4 4.57 44.0

[66] [67] [68] [69]

43.2 41.0

[70] [71]

Engineered E. coli C. glutamicum Bacillus coagulans Bacillus coagulans (strain AD) E. coli E. coli Klebseilla pneumoniae E. coli Mannheimia succiniciproducens Recombinant E.coli ZJU-3HP01 Aspergillus terreus E. coli Pseudomonas Putida Engineered E. coli Aspergillus niger SIIM M276

39.0 195.0 168.0 22.1

[72] [73] [74] [75]

71.9 57.3 48.9 127.0 90.7

[76] [77] [78] [79] [80]

17.2

[81]

80.0 4.3 4.9 2.0 76.7

[82] [83] [84] [85] [86]

The Circular Economy

Itaconic acid (C5H6O4)

Ethylene glycol Glucose D-xylose Glucose

References

124

Table 4.1 Microbiological production of organic acids from different renewable bio-based feedstocks. Organic acid Substrate Microbial strain Max. titer (g/L)

Circular economy in action

125

assimilated by the natural sinks, leading to increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere, which according to many experts are a direct cause of global warming and climate change [92,93]. On the other hand, however, the utilization of biomass and biowastes to produce high-value chemicals or any other valuable commodities is highly believed to be one of the cornerstones of sustainable development and carbon neutral bio-based circular economy. Indeed, in addition to the obvious economic and environmental benefits from applying green and circular principles, such as resource efficiency and waste mitigation, replacing fossil resources by renewable raw materials could also be a viable platform to synthesize innocuous biochemicals at competitive cost, and use these biochemicals as precursors to produce safer and more eco-friendly products (or part of products) than the fossil-based counterparts. This includes the production of biocompatible and biodegradable synthetic polymers for medical applications, especially for drug delivery [94] and in the tissue engineering field [95]. Another example, highly relevant in the chemical industries, is the use of 1,4-diacids for the production of various renewable polymers. Many of these acids, such as succinic, malic, and fumaric acids, can be produced from renewable resources using microorganisms [96]. Table 4.2 displays a selection of commercial polymeric products derived for the platform, along with their application areas and large scale producers. Generally, bioresources and biowastes that are readily available to be converted for the production of chemicals can be grouped in different categories. In this section, we will assemble some of them in three main groups: lignocellulosic feedstock, food supply chain waste (FSCW), and marine biomass, mostly algal species. The use of “renewable” CO2 to produce chemicals will also be discussed in this section. 4.3.2.1 Lignocellulosic biomass Basically, the conversion of these “recalcitrant” resource relies on the use thermochemical or enzymatic processes to break down the complex structure of the lignocellulosic material into its main constituents: cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin. After a single multistage separation procedure, each component can be separated and converted into the desired products using specific microbial strains (mostly engineered ones) [98,99]. Lately, with the serious geopolitical complications around crude oil and the strategic place of fuels in many economic sector and industrial activities, the R&D effort related to the conversion and valorization of lignocellulosic

Polybutylene succinate (PBS) and its copolymers

Polybutylene terephthalate (PBT)

Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB) and its copolymers

Polyamide PA-4,6

Selected applications

Shopping bag, packaging film, agricultural mulch film, and plant pot, fishing gear (fishing net, fishing trap, fishing line, etc.) and containers (trays, food containers, bottles, etc.) Automotive parts, insulator in the electrical electronic industries, footwear, sportswear, recreation equipment, appliances, furniture, etc.

Cardiovascular, wound healing, orthopedic, drug delivery and tissue engineering such as heart valve, vascular grafts, stents, patches, sutures, etc. - Terethane (Invista, United Stretchable fabrics, artificial leather, States) apparel and clothing, compression - PolyTHF (BASF, Germany) garments, home furnishing, etc. - Stanyl (DSM, Netherlands) Electrical & electronic devices, automotive equipments, etc.

The Circular Economy

Polytetramethylene ether glycol (PTMEG), its copolymers

- GS Pla (Mitsubishi Chemical, Japan) - Bionolle (Showa, Japan) - Lunare SE (Nippon Shokubai, Japan) - Skygreen (SK Chemical, Korea) - Arnite (DSM, Netherlands) - Crastin (DuPont, United States) - Ultradur (BASF, Germany) - Celanex (Ticona, United States) - Toraycon (Toray, Japan) - Valox (SABIC, Saudi Arabia) - PHA4400 (Tepha Inc., United States)

126

Table 4.2 1,4-Diacids-derived products, their applications, and large-scale producers [97]. Products’ commercial names (producers, country) Polymers Chemical structures

Circular economy in action

127

biomass (from natural resources or waste) seems to be more focused on biofuel production schemes, especially the second generation fuels, mainly bioethanol [100] and to a lesser extent biobutanol [101]. More recently, with the continuous breakthroughs in the chemical and microbiological research fields, and the adoption of the CE concept by various chemical industries, a clear orientation toward the production of high-value platform chemicals for lignocellulosic biomass is emerging [102,103]. Many experts believe that producing basic and fine chemicals from lignocellulosic biomass (especially from residues and waste) is a key endeavor in the transition phase from fossil-based refining to bio-based refining in the chemical sector. Indeed, several valuable chemicals were successfully produced from lignocellulosic materials and their derived components (cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin), including, for instance, the production of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF). HMF is a valuable platform chemical derived from sugars (fructose, glucose, and sucrose) extracted from cellulosic biomass [104]. Once subjected to catalytic chemical processes (oxidation and/or reduction), HMF can be converted to furanic compounds such as 2,5-dimethylfuran (DMF), 2,5-furandicarboxylic acid (FDCA) and 5-ethoxymethylfurfural (EMF) [105,106]. The EMF compound, a product of catalytic HMF etherification with ethanol, is considered as a promising biofuel and additive for diesel [107]. Despite the rich opportunities for HMF to be used as a platform molecule in the chemical industry, its production from lignocelluosederived sugars is still limited due to high production costs [108], mainly, because most related production processes are being operated in smallscale batch processes. Producing these valuable bio-based chemicals in large scale production schemes should bring down the production cost, and therefore, the products’ market price. Several other chemicals, such as methanol, acetone, butanol, ethanol, and various types of organic acids can also be produced from renewable lignocellulosic biomass [109e111]. Finally, as far as lignocellulosic biomass is concerned, and following green and circular principles, most recent R&D studies are focusing on developing and optimizing one-pot catalytic processes for the direct conversion of lignocellulosic biomass into valuable chemical and/or fuels [112,113]. 4.3.2.2 Food supply chain waste (FSCW) FSCW is one of the most available biomass resources prone to circular processing. It includes agricultural and agro-industrial wastes as well as

128

The Circular Economy

“unavoidable” residues generated during food harvest, foodstuff production, and postconsumption. The emergence and wider implementation of the CE concept and sustainable development goals led to the increased awareness about the inherent value of such resource, conventionally perceived in the linear economy model as worthless waste. Intensive R&S studies were conducted to investigate the various opportunities to use FSCW as secondary feedstock for the production of added-value commodities, mostly chemicals and fuels [114e116]. Key driving forces for such effort are the abundant volumes globally generated (Cf. Fig. 4.2), the rich biochemical composition, and the economic opportunities for higher value applications. FSCW such as peel, seeds, leaves, and other fruit and vegetable processing wastes were scientifically proven to be viable feedstocks to produce numerous valuable chemicals. This includes, for example, the production of bioactive antioxidant compounds (flavonols, phenolic acids, and carotenoids) from fruit processing wastes [118]. Orange peel residues can also be converted into chemicals, such as limonene and terpineols (both used in perfumes or as solvent), along with the coproduction of pectin (a valuable material for food thickening) and protein-rich material useful as animal feed [119]. Also, peel and seeds residues from the industrial processing of tomatoes in Tunisia were used as raw material to generate lycopene and b-carotene, along with oleoresin [120].

Figure 4.2 Globally generated volumes of selected FSCW [117].

Circular economy in action

129

Regarding seafood wastes, global production is estimated at six to eight million tons of crab, shrimp, and lobster shells wastes per year [121]. With such huge potential, many attempts were made to benefit from these resources; nonetheless, most valorization schemes still involve the utilization of those wastes as animal feed or for the extraction of materials, mainly, collagen/gelatin and chitin/chitosan. Despite the obvious economic and environmental benefits of such approach, the involvement of the chemical industry is highly expected to generate more benefits through the development of green and large-scale processes to convert seafood waste in highervalue chemicals. The current schemes mainly involve the production of antioxidant agents and pigments [122], but we can safely anticipate that academic and industrial R&D teams can produce more valuable chemicals from seafood waste, The joint production of the other products (gelatin, chitin, etc.) will enable the implementation of a more circular and efficient cascading biorefining process of wastes. 4.3.2.3 Algal biomass Algal biomass, another marine resource useful as a renewable raw material in various circular and integrated industrial platforms in the chemical sector. Along with its renewability, rich biochemical composition, and high biomass productivity [123], the increasing interest in algae for industrial processing is also related to the fact that these marine bioresources do not compete with food crops over fresh water and land, as well as the possibility for large scale cultivation in artificial aquatic systems and even on nonarable lands with wastewaters [89,124,125]. Currently, most advances in the industrial use of both macro-and microalgae are related to the production of the so-called third generation biofuel [126]. Such a trend is expected to increase considering the obvious benefits of using such highly available biomass and highly boosting market signs. Indeed, it was reported that the global algae biofuel market is expected to reach USD 10.73 billion by 2025, with a growth rate of 8.8% [127]. Nonetheless, recent studies are providing new and inspiring insights on better economic and environmental benefits related to the production of high-value chemicals in algal biorefineries [128]. Thus, in addition to increased economic gains, such wider valorization strategy of algal resources is highly justified in the CE concept, as it ensures higher levels of resource efficiency and enables the production of eco-friendly and economically competitive chemicals or materials, compared to the fossil-based counterparts.

130

The Circular Economy

Currently, this economic competitiveness remains the major challenge. However, with the breakthroughs in R&D investigations and the continued optimization of related processes and technologies (cultivation, extraction, purification, etc.), the production costs from algae are expected to be substantially diminished, which would create a more favorable context to expand industrial production initiatives of biochemicals and/or bio-products from algae (or any other renewable resources for that matter). According to research studies, algal-derived chemicals include bioactive carotenoids, lutein, and b-carotene pigments, omega-3 fatty acids DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) and EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) [129e131], and a wide arrays of commercially available nutraceuticals [132]. In this context, the very limited number of scientific publications on the production of value-added biochemicals from algal biomass needs to be emphasized upon, because it is far from echoing the real opportunities from these marine resources for a sustainable future; hence, the urgent need to shift some of the extensive research efforts on algal biofuels to biochemicals, or at least on integrated production procedures. From a commercialization perspective, some renewable chemicals produced from biomass are already commercialized including, for instance, dihydrolevoglucosenone (Cyrene), a cellulose-derived green solvent (alternative for dipolar aprotic solvents) [133] and the polymer precursor furandicarboxylic acid (FDCA), a selectively oxidized bio-based HMF [134]. In this regard, it was reported that the successful commercialization of those biochemicals is due, among other factors, to distinctive production (i.e., safer, less costly, etc.) and/or functional (i.e., more reactive) properties, compared to equivalent chemical from fossil feedstock. For the case of the bio-based Cyrene solvent, its nontoxicity and production for renewable biomass promoted its use as a safer alternative to hazardous solvents used in many industrial activities such as the manufacturing of plastics [135]. As for bio-based FDCA, it can be used for the production of polyethylene furanoate (PEF), and thus, replace terephthalic acid (TA), a petroleum-based monomer mainly used for the production of PET. According to Avantium, 100% bio-based PEF is a next-generation polyester offering superior barrier and thermal properties, which makes it an ideal material for the packaging of soft drinks, water, beverages, and fruit juices, and is, therefore, a viable alternative to PET. Currently, Avantium is cooperating with companies such as Coca Cola and Danone to produce100% bio-based PEF bottles and bring them to the market [136].

Circular economy in action

131

Similar tests concluded by DuPont Tate & Lyle revealed that bio-based 1,3-PDO (propanediol) had similar properties to the petroleum-derived equivalent, along with substantial environmental benefits, It was reported that bio-based 1,3-PDO produces 56% less greenhouse gas emissions and consumes 42% less nonrenewable energy than petroleum-based 1,3-PDO [137]. Such raw material shift is highly relevant considering the wide application schemes of 1,3-PDO in the manufacturing of polytrimethylene terephthalate (PTT), polyurethane, cosmetics, personal care, and many cleaning products, along with a market value estimated to reach $621.2 million by 2021 [138]. These and many other successful industrial achievements, demonstrating the feasibility and gains from replacing fossil precursors with bio-based renewable ones to produce safer and easily recyclable products is a very effective tool to “encourage” other firms to follow suit. The role of researchers, scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to “catalyze” this shift is highly important, as well as any joint effort toward “greening” chemical industrial processes with more biomass and biowaste as feedstocks for the production of high-value chemicals. 4.3.2.4 Chemicals from CO2 During the last couple of decades, alongside the extensive investigation of biomass as viable feedstock for chemicals, the capture and use of “renewable” CO2 as feedstock to synthesize value-added chemicals mainly via catalytic (photocatalytic or electrocatalytic) or biochemical (enzymatic) conversion schemes is also gaining a great deal of interest among scientists and researchers [30,31,139,140]. The application of nonthermal plasma technology for the conversion of CO2 is also under investigation [141]. Chemicals possibly produced from CO2 include urea, methanol, formaldehyde, salicylic and formic acids, and many other platform chemicals [142,143]. Fig. 4.3 depicts a selection of chemical products produced from CO2 via reductive and nonreductive routes. 4.3.2.5 Challenges related to biomass and wastes valorization Before detailing this important subject, we need to shed light on a critical emerging issue within the sustainable CE concept, which is around the key question of converting renewable biomass and wastes to produce what? Currently, most of the biomass and biowastes from agro-industrial activities are burned to generate heat and/or electricity, which is simply unwise

132

The Circular Economy

Figure 4.3 Selected chemicals from CO2 conversion via nonreductive routes (A and B), electro-reductive route (C), and hydrogenation (D) [144].

because replacing fossil fuels by renewable and low-cost biomass or biowastes to produce higher-value chemicals is a more profitable, and thus logical, approach. On the other hand, the effort to convert renewable bioresources into biofuels precisely for the transportation sector also seems to be very challenging because the vast majority of crude oil is being converted into transportation fuels. Most importantly, electric vehicles are highly excepted to re-emerge in this sector with more performing batteries or fuel cells [145,146], which will reduce the dependency of this sector on liquid or gaseous fuels, either from fossil or renewable origin.

Circular economy in action

133

Thus, if biomass is instead used as a feedstock for the chemical industry, many of the problems associated with fuel production are avoided. The currently available biomass should be sufficient to replace fossil resources for the production of chemicals, and the characteristics of biomass and many bulk chemicals are similar. Furthermore, by the sensible choice of target chemicals, the value addition could be significantly higher. Since the cost of developing the necessary processes can be significant, and also because the initial process will inevitably be relatively inefficient, it makes sense to focus on high-value products, thus, allowing faster widespread adoption [147]. For these and many other economic, environmental, and geopolitical reasons, it is well justified to speed up the shift from fossil to renewable raw materials as a major objective, and to focus on prioritizing the use of wastes, as well as bioresources of interest (i.e., availability and biochemical composition) as feedstocks to produce high value chemicals or materials, while continuing the development of the various biofuels for large scale production, as we shall see in the following Section 4.3. However, it has to be noted that within the CE concept and in auspicious conditions, the integrated production of fuels and chemicals from biomass or biowaste is also an interesting approach especially for biorefining companies, based on numerous R&D findings [148,149]. The next step is to upgrade such an integrated production scheme to larger scales in order to assess its economic viability. More insights on the role of biorefining in CE will be given in Section 4.6, with a special focus on waste biorefineries as one of the key enablers of circularity and sustainability. Back to the challenges around bio-based chemical, the location of the biological raw materials and its vicinity to the chemical processing facility is considered as an important factor for an impartial assessment of the environmental benefits related to the production of any bio-based chemicals and derived products. Indeed, transporting large volumes of low-value raw materials across long distances (even of renewable ones) do not make any economic sense due to the additional transportation and handling costs and the possible deterioration of the feedstock quality. Even if in some cases, such long-distance transfer is economically justified, the environmental impact linked to the transportation emissions does not justify it. The location of the chemical manufacturing facilities is also subject to debate from global, societal, and economic perspectives. Indeed, many scientists and activists believe that many manufacturing sites are “wisely” located in developing countries (because of the availability of raw materials

134

The Circular Economy

and nearby fast-growing markets), but for the wrong reasons including cheap labor and relaxed environmental protection regulations, etc. [150], which, in some cases, are considered as opportunities to be captured. Thus, exporting pollution by relocating production units abroad to less developed countries is no longer an option [151], first and foremost because throwing your “garbage” in your distant defenseless neighbor’s backyard was, is, and never will be a civilized practice. The implementation of green and circular principles in the chemical sector would make a substantial contribution to keep chemical firms at home and reduce their global environmental and societal footprints, by - prioritizing making money from locally available raw materials, - mitigating the generation of wastes, - securing the safe disposal of unavoidable ones, and even better, - try to recover and valorize those “pollutants.”

4.3.3 The circular concepts of “chemical leasing” and “payper-use” One of the most promising strategies embodying the CE concept is the sharing and service model, through which chemicals or products can be “offered” as a service through pay-per-use schemes and leasing platforms to maximize utilization of those commodities, thus, maximizing the lifetime value of those assets and avoid wasting resources after a one-time use as it is accustomed in the linear economy model. 4.3.3.1 Chemical leasing The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) defines chemical leasing as “a service-oriented business model that shifts the focus from increasing sales volume of chemicals toward a value-added approach” [152]. With such a concept, the entire business model is turned upside down since profit is decoupled from the quantity/volume of sold chemicals, and rather related to the service linked with the chemicals’ applications such as the volume of water treated, the number of parts painted, the lengths of pipes cleaned, etc. Many companies around the world started adopting, and benefiting, from the implementation of the chemical leasing model. For instance, SAFECHEM, through its innovative business model, COMPLEASE Chemical Leasing, is providing solutions to reduce the use of solvents in many industrial applications such as industrial metal parts cleaning and textile cleaning. Using modern equipment, and through a COMPLEASE

Circular economy in action

135

partnership, the company reported that some of its customers had experienced a reduction in solvent usage of 93% while achieving machine utilization of 99% [152]. In another case, the Egyptian company ABB ARAB for Electrical Industries, has a serious challenge with the high costs related to painting operations, mainly due to substantial powder waste and high quantity of rejects due to poor painting quality. To resolve this problem, the company started seeking solutions with its powder coatings supplier, Akzo Nobel Powder Coatings S.A.E., a multinational and global leader in the field. Consequently, a chemical leasing contract was signed in 2008 and resulted in more efficient use of chemicals and resources. The consumption of powder coating per product area was reduced by 20%, powder waste was taken back for recycling and the zero waste objective was achieved, along with the reduction in energy consumption and the frequency of maintenance. Related direct savings were estimated at around US$ 68,000 per year [153]. Many other chemical leasing case studies are showcased in other industrial, academic, and counseling publications [154e157], so let us briefly develop on another important subject, which is the design of a leasing contract. In contrast to the conventional sale contract passing the ownership of the chemical compounds from the supplier to the user upon purchase, the latter, within the chemical leasing concept, remains the owner of the chemical compounds to be used. Specific options related to the design of this kind of contracting agreement include [158]: • Location of the applier and ownership: whether the chemical compound can be applied both on the site of the supplier and the user. Possible transfer of the chemicals’ ownership to the user. • Proprietorship of the equipment: applying the chemicals requires the use of equipment, which can be owned either by the supplier, the user, or a third-party equipment provider. • Application of the chemical: the actual application of the chemicals is often the responsibility of the supplier. Nonetheless, it can also be assigned to the user or a third party. • Operation of the equipment: whether the equipment can be operated by the user or may be the responsibility of either the lessor or the lessee. • Recycling: The user, supplier, or a third-party provider of a recycling service can be assigned. The major barrier hindering the expansion of the chemical leasing platform is still the deep-rooted assumption that a successful chemical producer

136

The Circular Economy

is the one who sells more to earn more. Unfortunately, such a mindset led to the current inefficient use of chemicals, the generation of hazardous waste, and unsustainable management of chemicals. Overall, building on a mutual trust and strong cooperation between partners (suppliers, users, and potential third-parties), chemical leasing would increase the efficient use of chemicals, enable large resource and cost savings, reduce potential risks to human health, and improve the business performance of companies adopting this circular concept [159,160]. Special attention should be paid to the drafting of the leasing contract to be mutually beneficial to the chemical supplier and user because this is the starting point to foster a viable shift from the traditional sale of chemicals to the implementation of chemical leasing business models. 4.3.3.2 Pay-per-use chemicals Adopting pay-per-use business models is gradually becoming a major objective for many established manufacturing firms. New companies, launched exclusively based on these models are benefiting from considerable advantage. In certain economic sectors, companies imperatively need to adopt the pay-per-use scheme in order to remain competitive in their respective fields. This is very relevant in the media and telecommunication industries, and for various technology-developing companies [107]. For other sectors, such as the chemical industry, the implementation of par-per/use concept is highly expected to provide a viable competitive edge and enable reaching new clientele and exploring markets. Several economic and environmental benefits were reported for the adoption of the pay-per-use model in the chemical industry. This includes: • significant savings opportunities. Indeed, in the pay-per-use model, the customer pays for the service rendered by the chemicals. Thus, the volume of chemicals to be used becomes a cost driver for the supplier, who is then incentivized to reduce the amount of consumed chemicals, and to explore all options to reuse recoverable chemicals. • the direct involvement of the suppliers in the users’ process would increase both resource and process efficiencies by benefiting from the supplier’s expertise on chemicals on site, including real-time monitoring and optimization of the required volumes or quantities of chemicals. • the implementation of the pay-per-use model enables the reduction of resource and energy consumption and waste emissions.

Circular economy in action

137

• pay-per-use chemicals can also contribute to eliminating the use of toxic substances. Globally, many chemical firms are currently adopting the pay-per-use model, and thus, offering the service rendered by their chemicals (and not selling those chemicals). The list includes, for instance, Ref. [161]: • DuPont, selling paint per number of painted parts • AkzoNobel, charging its clientele interested in surface coatings by square meters of the treated surface. • Henkel, providing adhesives per number of labeled bottles. • Ecolab, proposing detergents per square meters of the cleaned surface. • Nalco, supplying chemicals for water treatment per volume of purified water.

4.3.4 Cases of circular innovations in the chemical industry In addition to the industrial implementation of the chemical leasing and payper-use models, many other industrial activities in the chemical sector are reducing their environmental footprints and benefiting economically through the application of other circular principles, as illustrated in Table 4.3. To conclude this section on CE in the chemical industry, we reiterate the critical need for the companies involved in this sector, especially the established and globally renowned ones, to take the lead and deploy their full technical and technological arsenal and decades-long expertise in chemical synthesis and conversion to benefit producers, consumers, and the environment, by fostering the implementation of circular and green principles in their feedstock procurement schemes and single or integrated production processes. Such efforts would be a strong “catalyzer” for the local development and global expansion of CE. In order to achieve a successful sustainable CE, enhanced collaboration schemes need to be developed and deepened between the chemical industry and all potential partners in the value chain. Academic and industrial R&D in the chemistry and related scientific and technological fields should be further supported, and, last but not least, regulatory, administrative, and financial barriers should be removed. The same recommendations are also valid for all the industrial activities to be presented and discussed in the following sections, and also in the next chapter for industries related to the agricultural, water, and biorefining sectors.

Optimize resource efficiency and product performance

Waste valorization and

Raw materials shift toward renewables

Recycled nutrients from industrial and municipal sewage sludge, and agricultural side streams Recycling waste produced from printing, coatings, automotive, aerospace, and painting industries

Kemira (Finland) BASF (Germany)

Hexion (USA) Johnson & Johnson (USA) UPM Biofore (Finland) Solvay (France)

Enerkem (Canada) BASF (Germany) DuPont Tate & Lyle BioProducts (USA) Neste (Finland)

Royal Haskoning (Netherlands) Veolia (France) Nexeo Solutions (USA) Chemoxy (UK) Gasum (Finland) Maratek environmental (Canada)

The Circular Economy

Recovery/recycling and closing the loop

Innovative drinking solutions to enable 100% of recovered pulp in final products Integrated production schemes for optimized resource efficiency, waste management, and industrial symbiosis in the chemical industry. Optimal reuse of a catalyst Optimal reuse of cleaning solvents The production of chemical building blocks and value-added materials from wood-processing residues Recycling of rare earth elements from wasted fluorescent lamps (up to 90% of phosphorescent powders can be revalorized) Renewable chemicals are derived from waste instead of petroleum Bio-based feedstock in integrated chemical production. Plant-based feedstock to produce bio-based chemicals and polymers Counseling and technical solutions to convert biomass to biochemicals via gasification, cracking, fermentation, and purification The Take-Back Chemicals concept Solutions for solvents recovery and recycling in various industrial activities

Involved company (country)

138

Table 4.3 Selected industrial cases of circular applications in the chemical sector [17,162e169]. CE principle Circular chemical application

Circular economy in action

139

4.4 Circular economy in the mining industry One of the key principles in the CE concept and unsustainable development lexicon is to decouple economic growth from the use of extracted primary resource and to rather link it with the use of secondary raw materials flowing through closed loops, including the mining sector [170]. Nonetheless, key questions still need to be answered are: how fast and to what extent this raw material shift toward secondary materials can be achieved while providing enough resources for an increasing global demand? In practice, and in the mining field, many scientists and experts strongly believe that societies and economies will continue requiring extracted primary resources, such as metals from mining activities in the short, medium, and even longer term, despite the continuous improvements in related recycling activities [171,172]. In this context, a great deal of research efforts and experts’ analyses are being carried out to highlight the key role of the mining industry in the CE concept and to facilitate the transition phase toward more sustainable practices, mainly by Ref. [173]: • operating mines for as long as minerals can be extracted at acceptable environmental costs. • Establishing and maintaining circular flows of mined resources within the economy through efficient recovery processes and multiusage schemes, for as long as possible, thus, minimizing the loss of a nonrenewable metal and mineral resources and limiting final waste disposal. Should the role of the mining industry to the CE concept be underestimated, especially with respect to the R&D effort, several valuable opportunities for technically and economically feasible recovery schemes of “wasted” valuable metals and minerals can be lost. Furthermore, this would also lead to the loss of a timely occasion (may the last one) to tackle and remediate some of the heavy environmental and societal legacy generated by the mining industry, operating for long times under the unsustainable linear economic model. In this section, we will explore the challenges related to the introduction of circular principles and sustainable objectives in the “conventional” mining activities, with a special focus on metals and construction minerals, and the serious global issue for mining waste management. Valuable opportunities to recover metallic and mineral resources from wastes through urban and landfill mining activities are also presented and discussed to illustrate their role in implementing circular practices in the mining sector.

140

The Circular Economy

4.4.1 Conventional mining At first glance, talking about nonrenewable resources within the context of sustainable development might appear inconsistent for some of us, and even absurd for others. However, with the global emergence of the CE concept, such a dilemma (or misconception to be more accurate) started to be resolved. First, the concept of sustainable management of finite resource started to be easier to capture with various circular principles such as resources’ efficient use and recycling/recovery options. Thus, from a conceptual perspective, if CE can manage nonrenewable mined resources in tightly closed loops, where those resources can be used and reused (as such or in other recoverable forms), then the character “nonrenewable” should not be relevant anymore. However, for particular reasons, the management of finite resources cannot (in the foreseeable future) escape generating wastes during the mining activity itself, or losing a fraction of the mined resources during the utilization of the derived products (temporary or definitively, depending on the applications). Therefore, it makes more sense, for obvious economic and environmental reasons, that the R&D effort with CE focuses on sustaining the management of nonrenewable resources, more so than renewable ones, since the former is much more problematic and challenging than the latter, especially considering the current transition phase toward CE and sustainable development. In this regard, most experts believe that finite resources, including mineral and metal resources, will remain as key components for the economic development and societal welfare. Indeed, most of our modern commodities and conveniences require metals and minerals to be manufactured or constructed. To name a few, this includes: - Transportation vehicles and infrastructure (cars, airplanes, highways, etc.), - Buildings (housing facilities, airports, school, hospitals, etc.), - Mobile phones, television sets, computers, solar panels, etc. - Fertilizers and pesticides for increased food production. Thus, considering the critical need for such resources, some scientists and decision makers still think that their extraction from earth will remain a major procurement source, for many decades to come, and the environmental impacts associated with these mining activities need to (and could) be mitigated with advanced technologies [174,175], but still, they remain unavoidable [176].

Circular economy in action

141

To what extent this assumption is valid, and how the adoption and implementation of CE principles in the conventional mining sector can “avoid” those negative impacts, for instance, by extending the life-cycle of mined resources? In the following section, we will discuss this matter in the case of metal and mineral resources. In order to avoid overloading this section with global extraction and consumption data, or to give an account on one country (which could be a misrepresentative analysis), we will focus on Europe to analyze from a more representative and continental perspective. 4.4.1.1 Metals With the substantial decrease in domestic extraction of metal ores, on the one hand, and the continued increase in the domestic consumption of total metal ores in Europe (340 million tons in 2017, compared to 317 million tons in 2008 and 250 million tons in 1970) on the other, the share of imported metal resources (ores and intermediate products) is gradually escalating [177,178]. Table 4.4 depicts the market shares of EU gross imports for selected metal ores and intermediate products. The metals with the highest consumption by EU processing industries include iron and steel, aluminum, zinc, copper, and lead. The utilization trends vary from one metal to another, as well as the related economic gains and environmental impacts. This includes: • The high energy consumption related to the industrial processing of steel and aluminum. • Lead and cadmium pose serious ecotoxicological and health issues. • Substantial amount of wastes during the production of copper and some precious metals constitute a major concern for involved industries. Overall, all phases of the life-cycle of metals are highly relevant for both economic and environmental considerations, from mining and subsequent processing and manufacturing activities to the end use and final disposal. Indeed, most current extraction processes are damaging to landscapes, sometimes in an irreversible manner, along with the generation of mining wastes,

Table 4.4 Market shares (%) of EU Gross imports of ores and intermediate products [179]. Metal Iron Copper Aluminum Tin Platinum

Lithium

Ore Intermediates Scrap

27 73 e

56 41 3

39 46 15

39 66 3

e 71 e

12 88 e

142

The Circular Economy

which constitutes one of the largest waste streams in Europe [180]. The extraction of several metals including gold, nickel, and copper is often conducted via environmentally intensive mining technologies, generating large volumes of waste streams, polluting water resources and soils, and destructing landscapes [181,182]. Further metals-processing industrial activities such as crude metal ore concentration/refining, smelting and forming are, in addition to their high energy requirements, also directly responsible for serious environmental problems [183,184]. In most application schemes, metals have a long life-cycle as they end up in end products useable for many years or decades, including “durable products,” such as cars, buildings, industrial infrastructure, and machinery. Nonetheless, a small amount of the metal input can be channeled to waste management facilities after a relatively short period of use, such as the case for metals in beverages cans and other packaging materials. Other selected heavy metals (e.g., copper, zinc and tin) can be lost through corrosion during the utilization of the including products, such as zinc-coated steel products and copper-based roofs, which in addition to wasting metal resources, could lead to serious health risks and environmental complications [185,186], if ineffectively treated or unsafely discharged into the air or water bodies. From a combined economic and geopolitical perspective, the case of rare earth metals constitutes a major challenge to Europe and other developed countries. Indeed, during the last couple of decades or so, many developed countries found themselves vulnerable to the “disturbances” in the supply of diverse mineral resources, of paramount importance to most Western economies. China, on the other hand, raised its position in this sector from the leading global producer of nine minerals and metals commodities in 1992 to the leading global producer of 27 minerals and metals in 2008, with a global production share of 50% and more for 12 of the commodities [187]. In order to avoid the disruption in such strategic supply, recycling still constitutes the most common procedure to extend the life-cycle of metals, and thus, protecting primary raw material inputs, and reducing the recourse to the extraction of metal ores and the related negative environmental repercussions. In practice, high recycling rates have been achieved for some metals. As well, the share of the “secondary” fraction (scrap in the total input to production/smelting) for silver, copper, and lead surpasses 50%, and is between 35% and 50% for steel, aluminum, and zinc. Nonetheless, quantity wise, the currently recycled amounts of metals cannot completely replace primary

Circular economy in action

143

metals, mainly considering the constant increase in global demand. In a related assessment, it was reported that less than 30% of 60 studied metals have a recycling rate above 50%, although many of those metals are of critical importance for the development of clean technologies including batteries for hybrid cars or magnets in wind turbines [188]. On a related matter, the large amounts of metals “temporarily” stocked in buildings, infrastructure, and other durable items are now conceived as future sources for metallic supplies. Hence, in order to increase the future recycling rates of metals for such sources, buildings and products need to be designed and constructed/manufactured in a manner that will facilitate the recovery and recycling of the metallic compounds, such as the easy dismantling of products (vehicles, electrical, and electronic devices, etc.) [189,190]. As well, innovative, highly efficient, and economic viable metals recovery procedures and systems need to be developed through the combined involvement of architects, engineering (civil, materials, process engineering, etc.), and researchers in the field of metallurgy, to name a few. 4.4.1.2 Construction minerals (CMs) The term “construction minerals” is used to describe all minerals and metals used by the construction industry, for example in road making, in concrete, in building construction, etc. Thus, CMs comprise a wide variety of mineral compounds with various propositions such as sand, gravel, natural stones, clay, limestone, and to a lesser extent, quartz, chalk, anhydride, and gypsum. Typically, the main fraction of CMs is formed by sand, gravel, and crushed natural stone, all grouped under the term constructions aggregates. In Europe, and from the total generated waste estimated at 2.5 billion tons in 2010, construction and demolition activities account for 34% of the total amount of waste (859 million tons), followed by mining activities (27% of the total with 672 million tons of waste) [191]. Of the combined waste generated by these two major economic sectors, 97% is made of mineral waste or soils (road construction and demolition waste, construction waste, waste rocks, excavated earth, etc.). In practice, CMs tend to have long life spans. Nonetheless, due the increasing demand for such resources for the continually growing construction projects in many largely populated countries, the extraction and industrial processing of minerals on a larger scale are, thus needed, which pose serious environmental challenges from the extraction phase all the way through the entire life-cycle including landscape degradation, habitat loss, waste generation, decreased water quality, and ecosystem pollution.

144

The Circular Economy

Indeed, considering that large amounts of minerals need to be extracted and processed to meet the increasing demand, the related extraction procedures become very damaging to landscapes, generate noise, and have negative impacts on biodiversity. Subsequent industrial processing activities for the manufacturing of products such as cement, ceramics, and bricks and tiles, also pose serious environmental problems [192]. While in use in buildings and infrastructures, CMs could have a life expectancy of several decades, which leads to other negative economic and environmental repercussions related to the “maintenance” activities. For instance, buildings have high energy requirements for heating and/or cooling, and lighting, leading, therefore, to high maintenance costs globally. Also, expanding the transport infrastructures in many countries may induce additional traffic, which, in turn, could increase the volumes of exhaust emissions from vehicles, further complicating the already precious global warming issue. Of course, such life-cycle impacts of CMs, as it is also for construction metals, is clearly overestimated due to the problem of double counting because the environmental impacts of the use phase are determined mainly by the structures in which those minerals and metals are embodied rather than by the construction materials themselves. That being said, CMs still have a substantial impact on the environment, and in some cases, the environmental impacts of the use and disposal of construction minerals could be higher than those related to the extraction. After the use phase, construction minerals become demolition wastes, which is one of the heaviest and most voluminous waste streams generated in Europe, accounting for nearly 25%e30% of all wastes generated in the EU [193]. For all these reasons, the recycling of construction minerals is an urgent necessity to reduce the environmental risks related to the extraction of primary raw materials and their postuse disposal. However, in particular, the amount of demolition waste that can potentially be recycled is only about 0.8 ton per capita annually, compared to 7e8 tons per capita of extracted pristine resources. Thus, secondary materials from recycled construction minerals cannot replace primary raw materials, but can just substitute a fraction of it. Thus, in order to further promote sustainable development in the construction industry, alternative renewable construction materials from bioresources (such as fibrous materials and other bio-composites) are believed to be viable and eco-friendly substitutes to extracted mineral resources [194].

Circular economy in action

145

On a related context, many experts stressed on the importance of reducing the environmental impacts throughout the construction minerals’ life-cycle, which is a key endeavor toward their sustainable usage in the construction industry, or any other industrial activity for that matter. Thus, several measures need to be taken and innovative technologies and processes need to be developed including [176,195]: - the use of cleaner and more efficient process technologies to reduce emissions and wastes generated by energy-intensive manufacturing processes, such as the production of cement, glass, and ceramics. - Land requirements for buildings could be reduced through construction on brownfield sites (abandoned industrial areas). - Innovative designs enabling the construction of buildings and infrastructures with less and easyily recoverable construction materials. Related innovations to reduce the energy requirements of buildings and infrastructures is also needed. - New technologies allowing the efficient and safe renewal of minerals supply need to be developed, especially focusing not only on recycling and substitution, but also on eco-friendly exploration and extraction processes since recycled mineral resources can cover only a fraction of the increasing global demand. In this regard, it is worth highlighting that innovative and eco-friendly technologies, processes, or business models need time to emerge, and more time to be implemented in large scale. Thus, in an interesting article published in Science [196], scientists from MIT and Cambridge stated that it is urgent to pursue more evolutionary strategies aiming at minimizing impacts and improving the environmental sustainability of materials through lifetime extension, dematerialization, manufacturing efficiency, substitution, and recovery. It was recommended that these single strategies have to be evaluated in concert, in practice, and from a life-cycle perspective, because efficiencies in one dimension may be correlated with increases elsewhere.

4.4.2 Circularity in the mining sector The conventional mining industry relies on a unidirectional flow of mineral resources: extracted resource, primary processed resource, manufactured end-product, postuse waste to be disposed, i.e., to be wasted. Instigating the CE concept in the strategic mining sector entails modifying the entire exploitation approach by adopting a circular economic

146

The Circular Economy

system, which follows the “natural flow” of mineral resources and mineral products, and applying highly efficient and eco-friendly technologies and processes for the exploitation and utilization of mineral resources. It constitutes a closed-loop material flow as: mineral resources, mineral products, and then flow back as recycled mineral resources. In practice, the implementation of the CE concept in the mining sector and in mining-related activities is based on the 3Rs principles: Reduce, Reuse, Recover/Recycle. - Reduce: the related set of practices aims at reducing the flow of material and energy requirements throughout the entire supply chain of mined resources. Thus, during the exploitation, processing, and utilization of the mineral resources, “Reduce” means: • ensuring the efficient exploitation of resources by mechanization, automation, and optimization; • reducing mining dilution ratio and ore loss ratio and enhancing the recovery rate of mineral-processing and smelting to improve the total recovery of resources by studying mining processing and melting technology of complex difficult mining and refractory ore. • raising the comprehensive benefit of resource development by reducing emissions of various pollutants such as tailings, and mining wastewater [197]. - Reuse: includes all the methods and procedures set to extend the utilization life span of mined products, and related services. - Recover/Recycle: aiming at recovering the mined materials after their use and rechanneling such valuable resources back to the supply chain. Such objectives could be summarized by the CE definition set by the Waste and Resources Action Program (WRAP) in the UK, which states that, contrary to the traditional linear economy, the CE ultimately aims at keeping “resources in use for as long as possible, extract the maximum value from them while in use, then recover and regenerate products and materials at the end of each service life” [198]. Mining activities are the starting point of many “linear” product value chains, and therefore, are clearly responsible for the dissipation of nonrenewable mineral resources in various ways. In this context, the implementation of CE principles in this sector is a well-justified and timely endeavor. In this regard, it is both necessary and urgent to effectively deal with solid and/or liquid mining wastes present in both closed or abandoned mining sites, as well as currently operating mines by mounting restorative loops, thus concretizing the CE notion of waste-to-wealth. In practice, and

Circular economy in action

147

similarly to scrap metal from manufacturing industries, mining wastes are also industrial rejects that could be minimize or, better, revalorized using CE-enabling processes, technologies, and strategies [173]. For instance, achieving the cyclic utilization of mining wastewater is a major R&D effort in the field of CE in the mining sector. Conventionally, the main sources of mining wastewater are discharged ore pit water and wastewater discharged from concentration plant or other processes. There are physical, chemical, and biological processes for the treatment of such wastewaters. The main objective is to separate the harmful substances and try to turn it into harmless substances. In the coal mining sector in China, an increasing number of concentration plants or coal preparation plants started using the closed cycle technology, thus, avoiding the unsafe discharge of their wastewaters and enabling the reutilization of treated water. Such approach is highly relevant in the Chinese context considering the environmental issues, and since around 70% of coal mine areas in the country are in water-scarce regions [199]. On a related matter, and from a global perspective, the expansion of current CE system boundaries is highly expected to reduce the requirement for new mine openings to exploit pristine ore deposits. Thus, considering the substantial, and sometimes irreversible, negative impact of mine openings on the environment, some experts think that is it worth prolonging current operations rather than starting new ones (providing that certain operational conditions are met) [200]. Indeed, the lack of long-term consideration for the whole life of the mine and the inherent instability of mining projects could contribute to irreversible mineral losses and resource sterilization [173]. To avoid such serious challenge, further research should address the identification of practices and strategies that: - anticipate for future use of material beyond the closure of a mining project - contribute to making mining projects economically viable in the longer term (and consequently avoid interruptions). The transition toward more sustainable practices in mining should also include changes in business models and in management culture. Overall, although this idea of prolonging mining operations is connected to the concept of CE, nonetheless, other practices are more intertwined with circularity, especially recovery and recycling strategies. In this regard, the two major mining activities embodying the CE paradigm are the concepts of urban mining and landfill mining.

148

The Circular Economy

4.4.2.1 Urban mining (UM) In recent decades, and due to an increasing number of issues around primary mining resources (scarcity, difficult and costly accessibility, price fluctuation, etc.), improving the mining of secondary resources became a necessity [201]. In this context, considering urban areas as “mines” to recover metals such as copper, gold, silver, and rare earth elements has become a strategic target in many cities, and hence, the emergence of UM concept. Fig. 4.4 depicts a differentiation between the origin (natural vs. anthropogenic) and generation dynamics (stock vs. flow) of various kind of sources of material resources. Basically, UM concerns all the activities and processes aiming at reclaiming elements, compounds, and energy from products, buildings, and waste generated from “urban catabolism” [203]. Thus, urban spaces are considered as sources of anthropogenic materials which can be cyclically used, recycled, and reused [204]. China is among the largest producers and consumers of resources and energy in the world. So let us explore the place of UM in the country. Historically, the concept of urban mining was introduced in China in the early 21st century, mainly through research effort conducted in the country. After the scientific “promotion” of the concept, detailing the economic and

Figure 4.4 Various origins and generation dynamics of different sources of material resources [202].

Circular economy in action

149

environmental benefits from UM, the Chinese Government adopted the concept and instigated the Urban Mining Demonstration Base Construction (UMDBC) program in 2010 [205]. Through this UM-based program, China is trying to establish a new strategy for the use of resources and materials in order to: - mitigate the crippling effects of resource depletion and energy shortages, especially that the country is heavily relying on natural resources for its economic growth. - help in reducing the environmental pollution related to resources extradition, processing, and disposal. - achieve carbon emission reductions [206]. In this regard, it was reported that, in comparison with the use of raw natural resources, the UMDBC Program can reduce energy consumption by 35 million tons of standard coal, the discharge of wastewater by 2.2 billion tons, sulfur dioxide emissions by 0.78 million tons, and carbon dioxide emissions by 80 million tons [207]. Overall, in order to plan sustainable cities, it is essential to connect local material and energy loops, which are adapted to local circumstances to reduce the pressure on virgin resources in production. Urban mining supports cities and countries to reduce the pressure on virgin resources, reduce extraction-related air and water pollution, and avoid wasting valuable resources. Such “circular” initiatives will ease and speed up the transition process toward sustainable cities, which in turn will foster the development of many new extraction and processing industries and open new related jobs. 4.4.2.2 Landfill mining (LFM) Along with urban mining, the involvement of the mining industry and other related processing industries in the “re-mining” of landfill waste is another sustainable connection between the primary resource sector and the waste management sector, aiming at closing a large and vital loop in the CE concept, and thus, ensuring an efficient management of resources. Alongside the common practice of producing energy resource from landfills through biogas extraction (specifically methane), there is the potential of excavating old landfills for the recovery of material resource, and the process in commonly known “landfill mining.” Krook et al. [208] defined LFM as “process for extracting materials or other solid natural resources from waste materials that previously have been disposed of by burying them in the ground landfill mining.” At first, LFM was perceived as a means to solve pressing issues related to solid waste management including

150

The Circular Economy

the lack of landfill space and local pollution threats. Then, although some initiatives were taken aiming at recovering a fraction of the “wasted” resources, such as cover soil, resource of the resources was by far a secondary objective. With the emergence of the CE concept, LFM become a sustainable strategy able to effectively tackle the global issue of solid wastes through a set of principles and processes, namely excavation, processing, treatment and/or recycling of landfilled materials, alongside the mature energy production processes. More recently, the concept of enhanced landfill mining (ELFM) was proposed by many researchers as a more inclusive strategy, compared to conventional LFM, through a comprehensive processing and valorization of the various waste streams, using innovative technologies to recover as much resources and energy as possible while meeting ecological and social criteria [209,210]. In this regard, Kieckh€afer et al. [211] conducted a material flow-based economic assessment of landfill mining processes, and analyzed various related scenarios. Fig. 4.5 depicts the proposed enhanced landfill mining process with high processing effort.

Figure 4.5 Enhanced landfill mining process with high processing effort [211].

Circular economy in action

151

Overall, it is clear that LFM within the CE paradigm must be continuously enhanced by aiming at recovering most materials and energy resources (as far as current technologies enable), and dealing with environmental issues. Hence, the set of objectives of implementing an LFM strategy should include: - concentrating on the excavation of landfilled waste to reduce its space/ volume for lifetime extension, especially that the amounts of generated waste will continue to increase. - removing sources (and potential sources) of pollution, thus, preserving the environment and improving public health. - recovering energy and material resources. - Conducting well-planned reorganization and remediation before the waste is landfilled again. The adoption of the LFM strategy and the implementation related processes and procedures is highly relevant on a global scale considering the current issues around solid waste management (economic losses and environmental issues), and the fact that waste generation rates are rising worldwide. Indeed, according to the World Bank, in 2016, cities around the world generated around 2 billion tons of solid waste. For various reasons including the rapid population growth and urbanization, annual waste generation is expected to increase by 70% from 2016 levels to 3.40 billion tons in 2050 [212]. That being said, we have to put into consideration that most landfills consist of 50%e60% of soil-type material (mainly daily cover and heavily degraded waste), 20%e30% combustibles (e.g., plastic, paper, and wood) and 10% inorganics (e.g., concrete, stones, and glass), as well as a small percentage of mainly, ferrous metals [213]. Thus, considering such heterogeneous composition, any objective aiming at recovering resources from landfills should be reasonable, and with a clear prioritization approach (i.e., focusing on recovering valuable components and easily reclaimed ones). In practice, the economic factor (especially related to the cost of recovering and further processing landfilled materials) on the one hand, and the market demand, on the other hand, will “adjust” the priority to recover this or that resource from landfills. Overall, managing waste properly is essential for building sustainable and livable cities, but it remains a challenge for many developing countries and cities. Effective waste management is still expensive, often comprising 20% e50% of municipal budgets. Operating this essential municipal service

152

The Circular Economy

requires integrated systems that are efficient, sustainable, and socially supported, including LFM but also many other sustainable management schemes.

4.5 Circular economy in the textile industry Within the CE concept, products from the textile industry could be subjected to various lifetime extension strategies including, but not limited to, sharing, second-hand reusing, and remanufacturing. These strategies offer interesting prospects to preserve resources, reduce cost, mitigate production-related emissions and wastes, and create new job openings. All those benefits would have a global impact considering the wide implementation of outsourcing strategies in this industry and its global production networks [214,215]. Overall, introducing CE principles in the textile industry, and in most manufacturing industries for that matter, would induce more sustainability in this sector by keeping products (and thus resources) in circulation in the economy, reducing the share of short-lived items and gradually placing them with long-lived ones. Globally, the textile industry is often seen as a polluting industry with severe negative impacts on the environment due to the combined: - consumption of large amounts of resources (natural and synthetic fibers, chemicals, and especially water), and - generation of large amounts of solid and liquid wastes. In this regard, for the 80 billion kilograms of textile annually produced, 10 kg of CO2 are emitted per kilogram of textile. As a result, the global textile industry accounts for 10% of total CO2 emissions. Furthermore, 5% of total waste worldwide are generated by the textile industry [216]. Such numbers are highly expected to rise in the coming years because on an average most consumers are buying low-cost, low-quality garments that are produced in low-wage countries and are sold in high volumes in markets all over the world. These numbers are indeed alarming if we continue business as usual. But from a CE perspective, these same numbers are making the textile industry as one of the industrial sectors with major opportunities for CE for resources’ reduction (primary ones), recovery, and recycling, with substantial economic and environmental benefits.

Circular economy in action

153

4.5.1 Circularity in the textile business The textile business is a complex ecosystem from the production to global distribution of clothing and textiles. The production chain and its environmental impacts are directly related to the raw material source (natural and synthetic) and the various used chemicals and quantum of water in processes, such as dyeing, printing, and finishing. The impact goes beyond the manufacturing processes to involve the distribution phase (department stores, boutiques, markets, etc.). One of the key features of the textile industry is its global impact. Indeed, textile fibers produced in one continent can be transported across the globe for product manufacture in another continent. Then, the produced garment could be sold in a third continent. Also, as a labor-intensive industry, the textile manufacturing sector is often based (or relocated) in regions where the wages are low, and in some cases where environmental regulations are loose. Discarded wastes from the manufacturing processes and end-of-life textiles are posing dual set of problems in the textile and fashion businesses: - First, the amount of generated wastes. In Finland, for instance, around 72 million kilograms of textile waste are accumulated annually, from which only 20% is collected separately (16.5% reused, 1.5% recycled mechanically, and 2% of the total textile waste goes to energy production [217]. - Second, the lost opportunities. In the UK, WRAP estimates that between 2.5 and 2.7 million tons of household textiles (clothing, footwear, and other textiles products like carpets and mattresses) are consumed annually in the country. In 2010, an estimated £238 - £249 million of re-useable or recyclable textiles were discarded through kerbside residual waste collections. Recovering just 10% of this would generate a potential sales value of almost £25 million [218]. To turn those materials and economic wastes into wealth according to the CE concept, several innovative business strategies can be adopted to transform the dominantly linear textile industry into a circular industry based on three approaches: (i) circular material flows, i.e., valorizing waste; (ii) servitization emphasizing functionality over ownership; and (iii) sufficiency based on the effective use of resources. Several circular initiatives were launched with the objective of implementing CE principles in the textile industry. This includes the Relooping Fashion Initiative focused on circular material flows by demonstrating closed

154

The Circular Economy

loop recycling for discarded textiles [219]. The main objective of this initiative is to prove the feasibility of producing business opportunities and shared value for all parties within value chain. The research consortium included actors from all stages of the value chain, thus, covering the service, production, design, and business themes, and enabling a practical implementation of postconsumer textile recycling. In the project’s pilot, The Helsinki Metropolitan Area Reuse Center collected postconsumer textiles from their normal textiles donation feed and sorted out cotton materials not suitable for reuse. The materials were then crushed by SUEZ (currently Remeo), and delivered to VTT for processing into new cellulosic fibers. The role of the Sepp€al€a clothing company was to design and produce a clothing line using the novel fibers in cooperation with Pure Waste Textiles. Reusable packaging by RePack enabled delivery of new clothes and return of used clothing from the consumer back to the cycle, thus closing the loop. It has to be highlighted that the Relooping Fashion consortium emphasized the fact that re-producing old cotton clothing into new material has been very challenging, and this is mainly because the worn-out fibers were too short to be spun into new thread. Therefore, new cotton fibers were added to each batch, which makes 100% postconsumer-waste textiles an “impossible dream.” Nonetheless, the interesting initiative managed to effectively introduce key circular business models in the textile sector, including: • Circular supplies: provide renewable, bio-based, and recyclable input material to replace single life-cycle inputs. • Resource recovery: recover useful resources out of disposed products. • Product life extension: extend working life-cycle of products’ components (fibers in this case). Another illustrative example of an effective partnership between scientists and textile manufacturers within the CE concept, is the discovery of switchable adhesives for carpet tiles [220]. In this carpet sector, the wasted quantity of end-of-life carpets is estimated at more than 4 million tons a year [221], which opens up valuable opportunities for researchers and industrialists to profit from such wasted resource. Composition wise, carpets are generally composed of a significant fraction of nylon, polypropylene, and polyester fiber. A key limiting factor to recycling is effective design and development of the reverse production system to collect and reprocess this large volume of valuable material [222]. The new trend in related R&D effort is to develop more efficient approaches than the already available end-of-pipe recycling solutions. In this

Circular economy in action

155

regard, introduction of switchable adhesives is reported to enable the production of carpets inherently designed for easy disassembly and recycling using specific chemicals. The binder between the carpet fibers and the bitumen backing is made from acetylated starch. When needed, this binder can be controllably deactivated with a mild alkali solution, thus separating the carpet tile components. Then, the recover fibers can be recycled and the backing remanufactured into more carpet tiles [220,223]. On the other hand, the utilization of starch-based adhesives has other obvious advantageous features, such as eliminating the need to add brominated flame retardants that are classified as emerging pollutants with known environmental and health risks. In addition, avoiding the adding of these hazardous chemicals enables the recycling of materials from used carpet tiles a safer and more effective manner [150]. In CE, consumers have a key role in the successful implementation of the whole concept. In the textile sector, small consumers’ behavioral changes can make substantial impact on resources preservation and reduce manufacturing and postconsumption related environmental impacts. Such changes affect our way to buy and use clothing, or other textile products, including: - choosing clothing designed to last longer. - increasing the use of existing clothing. - smart laundering practices. - repair and alteration. - choosing pre-owned clothing (where appropriate)

4.5.2 Circularity in the textile dyeing industry Along with solid wastes the textile manufacturing industry is also generating huge volumes of wastewaters, mainly from the processes related to dyeing of clothes and other textile items. These wastewaters are often extremely voluminous, and leading to various environmental issues, especially in regions where water resources are scarce and/or in countries where environmental regulations are “flexible.” As a vital product in many countries around the world, water in the CE concept needs to be preserved and systematically reclaimed using conventional and advanced water purification methods targeting the removal of dyestuff and other organic and inorganic chemicals from textile wastewaters. Table 4.5. presents a selection of water treatment technologies applied for the treatment of effluents from the textile dyeing industry.

The Circular Economy

156

Table 4.5 Technologies for the treatment of textile wastewaters [224e226]. Technology Advantages Disadvantages

Electrolysis Filtration

Coagulation/ flocculation Fenton oxidation

Ozonation

Adsorption

Biodegradation (mainly fungi and bacteria)

Photocatalysis

Full decolorization; relatively cheap High performance; reuse of water, salts, and heat Full decolorization; water reuse Full decolorization; relatively low capital and running costs Full decolorization; water reuse Full decolorization (for highly performing adsorbents); relatively cheap Full decolorization (for highly performing species and strains) Full decolorization (as post treatment)

Foaming and electrode lifespan Handling and disposal of concentrates side stream Sludge disposal e Relatively expensive; by-products formation Disposal of spent materials; high regeneration cost

e

Relatively expensive; possible reduction in efficiency due scavenging reactions

Recently, the latest advances in the textile industry are promoting the complete elimination of water in dyeing processes, which is a highly relevant and beneficial approach considering the huge volumes of “wasted” water. Indeed, it is estimated that 12%e40% of the dye used in textile manufacturing are discharged with the effluent, which amounts to 40 L or more for every kilogram of textiles produced [227]. In this regard, several studies were conducted on water-free dyeing using supercritical carbon dioxide [228]. The use of specific organic solvents fully recyclable systems was also promoted as a viable alternative to save water resources and minimize effluents in the textile dyeing industry. For instance, the use of nonnucleophilic solvents was reported to induce excellent color consistency and colorfastness

Circular economy in action

157

with a >99% reduction in the disposal of both organic wastes and salts [229]. Ionic liquids can also be used in dyeing, and the addition of 1-(2hydroxyethyl)-3-methylimidazolium chloride to the dye bath was proven efficient in eliminating color leaching into the washed water, thus, preventing the contamination of the effluents [230]. Overall, the competitive edge of companies involved in the textile industry relies on their ability to innovate or at least benefit from the scientific knowledge and know-how in the field. In this regard, more attention should be paid to: - the development of new eco-friendly production processes, complying with the strict environmental regulations, - the adoption and implementation of a “greener” approach by using biobased and/or recycled raw materials, utilizing enzymes, applying waterfree dyeing and finishing technologies, - the development of integrated and intensified processes able to effectively replace chemical processing. Biotechnology is one of the interesting R&D fields to archive such sustainable objective.

4.6 Circular economy in the agricultural sector 4.6.1 Global food security Achieving food security in some countries is an achievable strategic objective. On a global scale, it is one of the most challenging and alarming issue due to the occurrence of two simultaneous factors: recurrent food shortages in many parts of the world, and a continuously increasing world population. By 2050, mankind population is predicted to increase by 1.7 billion, which will pose an even greater pressure of water and food resources, and further worsen the already precarious conditions of around a billion people on earth suffering from chronic hunger [231]. Ironically, in times when we had plenty of food on a global scale, around 16% of the world population were “chronically hungry.” So, what would happen when we will no longer be to produce more food This is indeed a global and vital issue that all the parties involved in CE and sustainability need to get involved in and anticipate catastrophic future for next generations, with readily applicable preventive and protective solutions. Why precisely CE? Simply because producing more food to feed more people is a dead end strategy, especially that the lands to produce food are

158

The Circular Economy

already overexploited, and chemically and biologically improvised. Furthermore, increasing volumes of water resources are becoming unfit for agricultural activities due to pollution and/or salinization scenarios [232]. On the other hand, despite the fact that the precarious situation did not suddenly emerge, and from foreseeable decades ago, the unsustainable exploitation of food-related resources (water, nutrients, wastes, etc.) continued, which further accentuated the problem. In order to a make a tangible contribution in the worldwide efforts aiming at global food security (research institutions, farmers, agro-industrialists, policymakers, government officials, media, etc.), CE needs to approach in a holistic manner by inducing circular principles and strategies into the various components of the food security concept. In this regard, the FAO/UNICEF are describing food security as a multilayer concept founded on four fundamental pillars: i. food availability, ii. food access, which includes physical and economical access to food, iii. food utilization based on cultural and dietary requirements, and iv. food stability, i.e., the stability of its provision. Fig. 4.6 illustrates the various elements in each of the food security pillar.

Figure 4.6 The four pillars of food security concept [233].

Circular economy in action

159

4.6.2 Issues in the current food sector No doubt that last century’s “Green Revolution” helped lifting millions of farmers around the world out of chronic poverty, and saving hundreds of millions of people from starvation and malnutrition-related diseases, via chemical and technological innovations that have disrupted the agricultural sector. Indeed, the productivity of many crops were increased multifold with the use of chemically synthesized fertilizers and pesticides, the mechanization of agricultural equipment and the artificial hybridization of sevral cultivated plants [233e236]. But looking at the big picture, this achievement came at a high prize. This included the undeniable and well-documented pollution scenarios related to food production systems such as water contamination, soil degradation, greenhouse emissions for livestock breeding, adverse impact on biodiversity, etc. [237e239]. Furthermore, these “modern” industrialized food systems progressively transformed food supply from predominantly local farms serving local markets, into a complex network of farmers, agribusinesses, and stakeholders. In order to succeed in such highly competitive global food marketplace, the involved actors in the food sector needed to make food available in all places, at all times, and at lower cost, thus, considering food as a mere marketable product like any other commodity on the market. The problem is that combining those market-driven targets is not applicable in the agricultural sector for obvious reasons. Can a farmer have milk from his cow 24/7? Can a beekeeper make his bees produce honey all year long? On the ground, this unsustainable ambition for high production yields and lower costs, adapted from other economic sectors, has led to additional serious concerns. One important aspect is the still ongoing fact that such “externalities” are rarely included in traditional economic metrics, so that even though we appear to pay less for food, this does not reflect the actual wider costs to the environment and society [240]. Thus, as long as the degrading impact of intensive agricultural activities is not included in the cost of the products, more harm will be caused to natural ecosystems, fearfully, until reaching an irreversible status of lands degradation and unproductivity. Why is it then that the current food production model kept on expanding despite those obvious negative impacts on the environment and in many parts of the world on humans’ health? Because people need to be fed,

160

The Circular Economy

farmers need to make a living out of their food products, companies have to sell their fertilizers, pesticides, tractors, pumps, etc. Governments need also to sustain a productive agricultural sector for strategic economy and societal reasons. The key questions that have faced any decision maker (and still is) in the food supply chain, how much “damage” can be tolerated to achieve this vital objective of food security? If additional geopolitical considerations are added to this decisionmaking process, then all of a sudden the damage tolerance becomes higher, which partly explains the current disastrous situation in the agricultural sector in many countries (loose environmental regulations, overexploitation of water resources, unsustainable farming practices, child labor, etc.). For these and many other reasons, it was practically impossible to reach a global consensus on the clear limitations of the modern industrialized agriculture. Take, for example, a consumer in a developed country looking at a pile of good-looking bananas in the nearby supermarket during the winter season. He/she will be thinking that these bananas will be delicious in a smoothie. Is he/she going to think of the large carbon footprint to grow and ship those tropical fruits to his/her country? Or did the cultivation of those bananas increase water stress in the country of origin or lead to soil pollution? Unfortunately not; so why should his/her government make a fuss out of such a “distant” issue. Nonetheless, despite such subjectivities, there are some systemic problems that simply cannot be ignored, including [240]: 1. The industrial food system contributes to environmental degradation; each year 7.5 million hectares of forests are cut down and 75 billion tons of topsoil are lost. 2. The system is wasteful: on average 30% of all food produced does not make it to the plate, in China 500 million people could be fed by the food that is lost in the supply chain . 3. The system is not resilient and does not produce healthy outcomes: the ironic and clear indicator for this is that almost 1 billion people are hungry or undernourished; while at the same time 2.1 billion people are obese or overweight.

4.6.3 Why do we need circularity in the food sector? All the previously mentioned shortcomings are clear manifestations of the serious limitations of the linear economic model in the strategic and vital food sector. After following this unsustainable concept for many decades,

Circular economy in action

161

agriculture reached its limit and thus needs to be managed in a circular and sustainable manner. This is a highly relevant and urgent matter especially considering the increasing pressure on the food system from populations growth, dietary patterns shift in many countries, and the unpredictable impacts of climate change on the still available land and water resources. In order to highlight the importance of CE and its emphasis on resource efficiency, here are some numbers showcasing what was lost when the linear economy was in action (and will remain so if we continue business as usual). It was reported that in the U.S. between 30% and 50% of food produced is never consumed and inevitably goes to waste, following the one way pattern of “farm to fork to landfill” [241]. Also, on a yearly basis, U.S. citizens waste up to 180 Kg of food per person, closely followed by Europeans with around 173 Kg of food wasted each year. In 2012, the total cost associated with food waste in Europe (EU-28) was estimated at 143 billion euros. Similar statistics have revealed that the US spends up to 218 billion dollars per year (1.3% of GDP) on growing, processing and transporting food that is never eaten. In Canada, it is estimated that food wasted annually is worth more than 25 billion dollars, nearly 2% of the gross domestic product [242]. Furthermore, international prices of one of the key commodities in agriculture, cereals, are projected to increase by 20% even without climate change. With climate change, across a range of general circulation models, the mean price increase between 2010 and 2050 is projected to be approximately 50%. Meat prices are projected to increase by 20% as well, with a slight decline in prices after 2040 as developed countries, China, and Brazil reduce their per capita meat consumption. Often, the food industry is considered as the world’s largest industry, with more than one billion people working each day to grow, process, transport, market, cook, pack, sell or deliver food. The resources required to sustain agriculture and relate food industry are enormous including 50% of earth’s habitable land and 70% of freshwater. Thus, the implementation of CE principles in agricultural practices and agroindustrial activities is more than justified. It is a necessary and timely endeavor to “sustain” a key economic sector, reduce the pressure on already stressed natural recourses (soil, water, air, biodiversity, etc.), and recover valuable resources for agricultural activities (closed loops) or other relevant industries (open loops).

162

The Circular Economy

4.6.4 Circular economy for sustainable food production The global food is quite complex because numerous actors are involved in the food value chain, and all are tightly interlinked. Furthermore, many experts consider that the impact of these interconnectivities go beyond the food system itself by influencing other vital systems such as climate, water, energy resources, as well as land use and biodiversity [243e245]. Thus, the global adoption of sustainable agricultural practices and implementation of CE principles in the food industry, will not only affect our capabilities to produce enough and safe food for mankind without destructing the biodiversity around us, but will also contribute in the preservation of water resources, the mitigation of climate change related phenomena, and in many cases relieve potent geopolitical tensions around land and water resources. In general, there are two major food production system: the small-scale farming system and the large-scale intensive industrial system. Taking such distinction into consideration when planning to introduce the CE concept in food related activities in aa region or a country is very important because most of the “damage” is done by the industrial system. Indeed, it was reported that industrial food system uses around 70% of the resources to produce only 30% of the global food supply. On the other hand, the small farming system uses 30% of the available resources to produce around 70% of the food [246], with much lower negative repercussions on the environment (either directly on natural ecosystems, and indirectly on climate change, land use, water, health, etc.). Therefore, within the CE paradigm, the mainstream perception that large-scale industrial agriculture is the solution to feed an ever increasing world’s population needs to be challenged, since small farms (about 25 acres or less) along with family-owned operations produce over 70% of the world’s food [247]. 4.6.4.1 A circular economy for food: where to focus? As a highly interconnected and complex network, any food system can be easily influenced by many factors throughout the entire value chain, either negatively via a linear approach or positively through a circular and sustainable strategy. These multiple factors include climate, geography, pedology, agricultural practices, and resource availability in the beginning of the chain, infrastructure and transportation means in the middle, and eating habits and waste management behaviors at the end of the chain. The combination of some or

Circular economy in action

163

all of these impacting factors tend to complicate the transition of food systems for the water linear approach to the sustainable circular paradigm. Nonetheless, several circular principles and strategies are often proposed in the related literature as the key levers for the transformation of the current food systems into advanced, regenerative, resilient, less polluting and less wasteful food-producing “ecosystems.” These key strategies include [246,248]: • Employing regenerative agriculture and closing loops of nutrients (and other materials): the concept of regenerative agriculture primarily aims at preserving arable lands’ health by considering those lands as part of a larger ecosystem where each component is symbiotically linked with the other parts. In practice, this includes any activity or processes aiming at returning organic and inorganic matter to the soil in the form of nutrients flow from wastewater composted by-products, food waste, digestates from agro-industrial activities, etc. Regenerating and strengthening a soil for a sustainable agriculture also include the improvement of its structure (by amending biochars for example), its preservation from erosion, and especially the reliance on synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. • Cascading value from by-products: this includes recovering and reutilizing valuable chemicals, materials and energy, for the agricultural activities as well as any other industrial activity generating residues or byproducts. Such approach will help in providing renewable secondary raw materials on an industrial scale, thus, mitigating the negative externalities related to the exploitation of primary feedstocks, and promoting the sustainable economic concepts of CE and bioeconomy. • Diversity of production: establishing shorter supply chains between farmers and retailers/consumers, reduce the waste associated with transport, create local jobs and strengthen resilience as well as urban-rural links. • Digitalization and other enablers: digitalization in the food value chain is highly expected to facilitate the measurement, tracking and location of food products and production-related chemicals and materials with more precision. Such digital control will enable a more effective management and allocation of resources throughout the entire supply chain. Tailored policies, education, and media coverage are also key enablers to steer and empower the transition toward more sustainable and efficient agriculture and food systems, based on the CE paradigm. Although many farmers, cities, and companies are already applying one or more of those circular strategies in their food production systems, and despite the obvious benefits from implementing circular principles in the

164

The Circular Economy

food sector (healthy soils, high quality products, water and biodiversity preservation, reduced disposal costs, additional revenues from the valorization of side streams, etc.), we are still far from witnessing a global movement toward “CE for food.” In the following section, practical measures are presented to facilitate and speed up the transition from linear to circular systems in the food sector, based on the propositions made by many experts in the field. 4.6.4.2 Easing the transition to circular food systems The CE concept is well equipped to provide practical solutions to “catalyze” the transition toward a sustainable food system. In order to induce circularity in the entire food value chain, those solutions need to be applied in the three major areas of food production, food consumption, and the management of food wastes (and in some cased food surplus). Thus, it is of paramount importance to readjust or change related infrastructures and technologies, while at the same time analyzing the dynamics of transitions in a socio-technical context [249] and reconfiguring the food system accordingly in order to make sure that sustainable practices are genuinely and effectively implemented in the production, consumption, and waste management stages. In the literature, several potential solutions were reported. For instance, to close the nutrients’ loop, recovering and reusing nutrients from livestock manure, municipal wastewaters, sewage sludge, digestates [250e252], and the cascading use of chemical and materials [253]. Solutions related to citizens and consumers often include community supported agriculture, different strategies toward shifting to more rational and healthy diets (eat less but better), and education on food waste minimization [254,255]. The successful adoption and application of those strategies will mitigate the issues around food waste management, in concert with well-tailored policies and regulations. 4.6.4.2.1 Circularity in food production

Since nutrient flows impact multiple users and sectors, regulation of nutrient flows should be conducted using a cross-sectoral approach. The use of nutrients according to the CE concept could involve various actors, processes, and technologies [256]: - in the agricultural sector: the farmers are the nutrient-users. - in the waste sector: wastewater treatment plants concentrate and recover nutrients. - in the energy sector: biogas plants can produce energy and recycled nutrients from the digestates.

Circular economy in action

165

- in food outlets (groceries, markets, restaurants, etc.): consumers are the final users of food products, and their behavior will condition the success of any subsequent nutrients recovery strategy. - in urban planning: the sanitation and (solid and liquid) waste systems determine how nutrients can be managed, and in what form it can be recovered, based on the availability of appropriate recovering process and technologies. In this context of nutrients recovery, special attention is being paid to the case of phosphorus (P), a scarce and depleting resource, yet vital for agricultural activities [257]. For this reason, and despite the fact that regulating the flow of any nutrient is a complicated endeavor, nonetheless, for the case of P, it is well justified. Consequently, many scientists emphasized the urgent need for new policies to ensure that all P exported from agricultural activities is compensated by the P recovered from waste streams, thus, avoiding the recourse to P mined from phosphate rock [258]. In order to achieve such challenging objectives, and along with the technological breakthroughs in the R&D field, more focus and incentives should also be given to nutrient recovery and recycling practices from political and legislative bodies. This includes promoting processes and technologies aiming at substituting mined or imported nutrients (even partial substitution to begin with). As well, establishing an integrated network can help in assessing the overall flow of P through the ecological and human systems in a more reliable manner, and thus, help in identifying potential hotspots where the use and/or reuse of P can be improved and what technologies will be better suited to this end [259,260]. Other experts consider that promoting and consolidating local food systems is a viable approach to increase sustainability of food systems [261,262]. Localized food systems have strong potential for increased environmental sustainability through localized nutrient cycling and waste reduction (regionally or nationally). For instance, combining local and seasonal elements in short-supply chains can reduce the storage and transportation of those local foods while providing better demand-supply balance, thus reducing food waste, which is a key objective in the CE concept [263]. It has to be noted that the debate between global and local food systems, and which one is more sustainable, is still going on within the scientific community. This section is not the place to engage in this debate, but elements of response to this dilemma can be found in the related literature [264,265]. Overall, while local food initiatives provide interesting cases of circular economy in the food sector, it is important to reemphasize that circularity

166

The Circular Economy

needs to be implemented throughout the entire food value chain in order to achieve sustainable food systems able to produce enough food for this generation, without compromising the ability of future generations to reconcile quantity and quality in food production. 4.6.4.2.2 Circularity in food consumption

Generally, the social, cultural, and religious background of a society has a critical impact on the food consumption behaviors of its individuals, Thus, in order to make any substantial shift in food composition habits, we need to understand and work on these key driving forces conditioning food consumption patterns in a society to enable this paradigm shift toward CE and make the mainstream pattern. To achieve such behavioral changes, two possible approaches can be proposed, the government-imposed measures or a bottom-up strategy; changes related to the implementation of the former are perceived as superficial and need additional resources to be enforced. On the other hand, the bottom-up approach is frequently perceived as the genuine approach for profound behavioral shifts. Critics often highlight the lengthy aspect of such approach, but for the CE concept and sustainable development, causing a genuine involvement of consumers in the development of substantial consumption habits is the most important factor conditioning the success of this entire paradigm shift key. Thus, a strong emphasis on media and education is needed, along with the inputs from scientists and other experts from various fields (nutritionists, chemists, psychoanalysts, etc.). In this context, meat consumption in some developed countries is a good illustrative example to showcase the effort to change food consumption habits. Many scientists analyzed this topic and concluded that the high consumption of meat was one of the most relevant topics to be addressed if Western consumers are to shift toward a more sustainable diet [266,267]. Along with potential health issues related to the excessive and extended consumption of red meat (e.g., cardiovascular disease and colon cancer) [268], the scale and intensity of animal production generates an increasing proportion of global environmental pressure, including climate change. In this regard, it was reported that the large impact of the livestock sector on climate change, although increasingly acknowledged, is still underestimated, and that a global transition toward low-meat diets, may reduce the costs of climate change mitigation by as much as 50% in 2050, along with the associated health benefits [269].

Circular economy in action

167

With the objective of constructing consumer-oriented pathways toward meat substitution, Dutch scientists surveyed consumers in the Netherlands on their practices related to meat, meat substitution, and meat reduction [270]. The practices reflected a cultural gradient of meat substitution options running from other products of animal origin and conventional meat free meals to real vegetarian meals. In this study, and in order to assesses various meat substitution options, a variety of meals without meat were presented using photos, which were rated by the participants in terms of attractiveness and chances that they would prepare a similar meal at home. The results revealed meals’ presentation, product familiarity, cooking skills, and preferences for certain plant-based foods were the main factors “facilitating” the shift from meat-based food. Based on these findings, four policy-relevant pathways were proposed for a transition toward a diet with less meat and more plants, including: - an incremental change toward more health-conscious vegetarian meals, - a pathway that utilizes the trend toward convenience, - a pathway of reduced portion size, and - practice-oriented change toward vegetarian meals. Another interesting illustration is the healthy and eco-friendly eating patterns of the so-called Nordic diet. The effort around this notion aims at translating health-promoting dietary recommendations into practical and culturally appropriate measures tailored to a national or regional context [271]. The main traits of this Nordic diet is to avoid or minimize the recourse to industrially produced meat from animal-breeding farms, and prioritize the consumption of native fish and other seafood, along with wild and pasture-fed land-based animals. This is indeed a locally oriented food consumption pattern with clear health and environment benefits, but its success does not rely on the sustainable consumption behaviors from Nordic citizens alone; it is made possible because there are enough resources for a relatively limited number of people. In many other countries, the balance is reversed (i.e., more people with limited local food resources); then, what diet and food consumption patterns would be recommended? This bring us the key dilemma in the CE concept; should we start by implementing it locally and then a global movement will emerge spontaneously? or should we aim at the simultaneous development of CE locally and internationally? For holistic concepts like CE and sustainable development, the latter makes more sense. It is like drawing a circle with a pen, you start

168

The Circular Economy

from one point (local CE) and in the same move you keep on drawing to make the circle (global CE), and ultimately returning to the starting point. Overall, when it comes to food products (or any other commodity for that matter), consumers have a very important role to play in the current transition phase toward CE by making simple yet influential consumption choices on an individual base, but also promoting those sustainable choices among family members, friends, colleagues, and society in general. In elections seasons, consumers become voters with a powerful tool for change by supporting candidates with clear sustainable policies and sustainable development objectives. Other influential consumers (teachers in schools, professors in universities, journalists, celebrities, etc.) can make a significant impact in this paradigm shift toward circularity of sustainability, each one in its sphere of influence. For this a more efective role of consumers in setting and mainlining the pace of change toward CE is crucial, and the more energetic and stronger is the popular momentum behind CE, the sooner this sustainable economic change will occur and flourish worldwide. 4.6.4.2.3 Circular food waste management

First of all, we all need to agree that when it comes to food waste, prevention strategies are important and necessary (and well embedded in the CE concept), but with a partial impact because a substantial fraction of food waste is unavoidable, and hence, the various related valorization procedures (another fundamental principle in CE). Therefore, in order to set effective management strategies targeting food wastes, differentiating between avoidable and unavoidable food waste is a prerequisite, based on which management priorities and methods can be developed and applied. For example, the first and primary approach to deal with avoidable food waste is prevention. For the small fraction “escaping” preventive measures, it can be collected and treated with the unavoidable food wastes, via various recycling and valorization schemes, such as the production of animal feed, composts, biochars, adsorbents, bioenergy, and biochemicals [272e275]. Currently, most food waste-related policies and regulations are mainly centered around waste management strategies, thus, echoing the perception of waste management as the area where the solution to this issue can be found. Although this is partly true (i.e., waste management is a solution), but in the CE concept, it is far from being the main (let alone be the only) solution. If legislative and policy making bodies keep on thinking this way, the mindset of “end-of-pipe” solutions will continue generating

Circular economy in action

169

limited and short-term solutions, thus, impeding the expansion of the circular economic model. To avoid such a scenario, the challenge of food waste needs to be dealt with in a more holistic approach; hence, the urgent need to promote the sustainable and all-inclusive economic models like CE in all food-related sectors including agriculture, food processing, transportation, storage, retail, and then waste management. In practice, several technological advances and service initiatives have been successful in reducing food waste [276,277]. Monitoring material flows through easily controlled systems is an important tool to understand food production chain [278], and to point out wasteful hotspots in the chain. As a consequence, targeted introduction of circular principles can be carried out to close material cycle in the food chain. Such approach is especially recommended for localized food networks to achieve sustainable food systems. In the agricultural sector, several experts consider that the current quota limits and subsidies need to be revised (at least partially) according to consumption volumes, and with the objective of avoiding any incentive measure directly or indirectly encouraging farmers to produce crops which [256]: - are not necessarily the most-needed products from a food production system, running at its full capacity in many countries. - are not sustainable from the point of view of the land productivity in the long run. - are more efficiently cultivated/farmed in other locations. In the retail sector, policies regarding food labeling (especial date labels) need to be regaled in a more strict manner, to add more clarity and harmony to an unnecessary confusing matter [279]. A consumer with a clear and just expiry date can make easy decisions to prevent avoidable food waste for the nearly expiring food [280]. The retailers are already proposing discounts for the same objective. Passed the expiry date, the food product is still not wasted, as long as there are incentives encouraging producers and retailers to, respectively, reclaim or redistribute unwanted/unclaimed food in other safely controlled outlets.

4.6.5 Urban agriculture (UA) In the last couple of decades, most of the discussions and achievements in the food industry were focused on the urgent need to shift toward new agricultural production system. In this regard, one of the emerging aspects

170

The Circular Economy

is the new perception, the “urban concept.” Up until recently, urban areas were exclusively perceived as food demanding and waste-generating entities. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that this linear conceptualization is omitting the huge potentialities of cities and other urban areas to produce food and valorize wastes (either food production systems or other industrial activities), thus, delivering additional economic, environmental, health, and wellbeing benefits through the concept of urban agriculture. Many experts believe that UA has a vital role to play in attaining food security in many countries around the globe along with enabling various sustainable concepts and practices, such as closing loops within the urban areas, helping to solve pervasive and enduring urban problems (disposal of organic waste, treatment of wastewaters, and whenever possible, the use of gray water) [281e283]. UA is also expected to promote biodiversity in urban areas, and to have a positive impact on the preservation of local varieties and breeds, thus contributing to the preservation of the genetic diversity. Promoting UA to enable scientific and societal breakthroughs, and to make substantial contributions in the pursuit of sustainable development, it is often reported by experts as a timely endeavor. In this regard, several enabling tools and strategies are being discussed and promoted, including [284]: • The promotion of grassroots participatory processes to help creating new forms and platforms of involvement in and commitment to urban agricultural activities, with the ultimate target of involving the entire urban population, and therefore, creating a genuine and sustained momentum behind this green movement. • the development of new approaches using systemic thinking to ecoinnovation, based on circular economy, nature-based solutions, and urban ecosystem’s environmental services. • Improving urban agriculture cropping systems, identifying the best practices at each scale, promoting the judicious use of production factors and the use of unconventional sources of water (reclaimed) and fertilizers (recovered from organic urban waste). • Getting hold of cutting-edge digital technology to design and implement tools to promote and ease the involvement of a larger number of stakeholders in decision-making, and participating in data collection and monitoring activities. This will also allow the dissemination of knowledge to the different types of urban farmers and the creation of a warning system, based on data collected at the experimental sites and

Circular economy in action

171

from information gathered by the stakeholders in a citizen science context. • UA has the potential for inclusiveness, to improve food safety, to increase income and to promote informal ways of contact between the urban inhabitants. Therefore, quickly overcoming the current knowledge deficiency about UA in very important, not from technical, economic, and environmental standpoints, but also from political, social, and cultural perspectives. Food security benefits from UA is clearly evidenced by 100e200 million urban farmers worldwide providing city markets mainly with fresh horticultural goods. Also, UA is favoring social improvement in developing countries where most urban farmers belong to poorest populations, and the citizens with the least incomes tend to spend up to 85% of their wages in food purchase. As well, urban farming favors both social inclusion and reduction of gender inequalities since 6% of urban farmers are women [285]. The promoting of UA by both the public and private sectors is an important prerequisite to enable the sustainable functioning of urban ecosystems, and thus generating the beneficial impacts on the quality of life in urban communities and the overall reduction of the negative impacts related impact with urban settlements. Experts also believe that UA has the potential to implement innovative solutions to low carbon and circular economy, and the prospects to involve or impact more than half of mankind in environmental sound activities contributing to sustainable development, by actively involving and committing the stakeholders (e.g., potentially the entire urban population) [286]. This is expected to contribute to strengthen the sense of belonging, commitment and citizenship level, allowing citizens to join and develop more elaborate systems of self-regulation and participation, pushing democracy forward and building new forms of participation and responsibility.

4.6.6 The “AgroCycle” project Continuing population growth and increasing consumption are driving global food demand, with agricultural activity expanding to keep pace. Modern agricultural systems (mostly conceived following a linear paradigm) are wasteful. For instance, Europe is responsible of generating around 1.3 billion tons of wastes on a yearly basis including 700 million tons of agricultural and food wastes [287].

172

The Circular Economy

In this context, AgroCycle was launched as a Horizon 2020 collaborative project with 26 partners from eight EU countries, two partners from mainland China, and one from Hong Kong. Led by the School of Biosystems and Food Engineering at University College Dublin, and involving other institutions such as the Agricultural Center for Sustainable Energy Systems at Harper Adams University, the AgroCycle project addressed the “agri-food” waste-related issues focusing on minimization strategies and recycling/valorization opportunities through the direct implementation of the circular economy concept across the European agri-food sector [288]. The main objective of this project is to deliver sustainable waste valorization pathways addressing the European policy target of reducing food waste by 50% by 2030, alsol contributing to the wave of change that is occurring in China in relation to sustainability. In order to attain such a goal, the project’s partners undertook a holistic analysis of agri-food waste value chains, from farm-to-table, including livestock and crop production, food processing, and the retail sector. They also addressed a wide range of valorization pathways, including bio-fuels, high value-added biopolymers, energy, and microbial fuel cells. The following Fig. 4.7 summarizes the integral analysis of the agri-food value chain, (livestock and crop production, food processing, and retail sector), providing mechanisms to achieve an increase in the recycling and valorization of agricultural waste by maximizing the use of by-products and coproducts via the creation of new sustainable value chains.

4.7 Circular economy in the water sector: treatment and reclamation In order to fully grasp the importance of the water sector in the CE concept, it is necessary to know what is at stake if we continue business as usual in managing our water resources and especially our “wasted” municipal and industrial waters. Even though water does not change quantity wise, its quality, geographical distribution as well as its availability vary considerably. In recent decades, the water issue has being aggravated by three major problems: scarcity in arid regions (home of around 2 billion people), and various environmental pollution and new risks associated with climate change, both occurring on a global scale.

Circular economy in action

173

Figure 4.7 Innovations in the agricultural production chain according to the AgroCycle project, AgroCycle project’s schematic overview [289]. Used with permission from AgroCycle, http://www.agrocycle.eu/#project.

- Scarcity: In the face of a population boom (the population is going to reach 10 billion people in 40 years), an increasing urbanization (66% of the world population will live in towns by 2050) and a drastic change in the lifestyles in highly populated countries, namely China and India. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 40% of the world population is already living in regions affected by the hydric stress. By 2025, more than 1.8 billion inhabitants will live in conditions of “absolute” water scarcity (3 mg/L O2). The optimal temperature is between 25 and 35 C and optimal pH between 6,5 and 8,5. The process can be tailored and used for municipal as well for industrial wastewater treatment, for BOD/COD reduction, nitrification, denitrification. Furthermore, the reactor can be used in aerobic, anaerobic and anoxic treatments, and pretreatment or posttreatment reactors can be used in addition of the existing system. In combination with other techniques, such as chemical precipitation, the MBBR system can be successfully used for the removal or reduction of nutrients from municipal wastewaters [314]. 4.7.1.3 Integrated processes - Membrane bioreactor (MBR): This process is a combination of a suspended biological treatment (activated sludge) with a membrane filtration technology, typically low-pressure microfiltration (MF) or ultrafiltration (UF) membranes. It replaces secondary and tertiary clarifiers aimed at

Circular economy in action

179

separating the pollutants (organic and inorganic) and pathogens from the wastewater. In the process, bacterial microorganisms are used to degrade organic pollutants that are then filtered by a series of submerged membranes. Air is introduced with diffusers to continually clean membrane surfaces during filtration, facilitate mixing, and in some cases provide oxygen to the biological process [315]. Currently, MBRs are being used for the treatment of both municipal and industrial wastewaters [316]. - Integrated fixed film activated sludge (IFAS): this process combines attached growth and suspended growth technologies. It composed by a fixed film media (moving or stationary) and activated sludge. The process can be implemented in an existing activate sludge-based plant (ASP). The only need is to add the film media and related operational requirements. This integrated process is believed to improve nutrients removal in conventional ASP plants, by improving nitrification and denitrification, especially when the plant has space limitation [317]. Indeed, in ASP more tankage and more flows are needed to have better efficiency, but in the IFAS process, the same tank can be used and just new media is added, which minimizes site constraints as well as additional cost limitations. - Bioelectrochemical wastewater treatment: Bioelectrochemical systems (BES) are advanced processes based on the electrochemical activity of microorganisms to catalyze catholic and/or anodic reactions. These microorganisms are capable of extracellular electron transfer, and are, thus, able to transfer electrons to the electrode. Also, the oxidative attack on organic compounds occurs simultaneously. The known examples of these BESs, include microbial fuel cells [318] and microbial electrolysis cells [319], via which wastewater treatment is combined with the production of renewable energy such as bioelectricity and hydrogen.

4.7.2 Industrial wastewaters: pollution removal and resources recovery 4.7.2.1 Case of the mining industry The mining of certain minerals, including gold, copper, and nickel, is associated with acid mine and rick drainage problems, currently considered as one of the most widespread forms of pollution worldwide that can cause long-term impairment to waterways and biodiversity [320]. Indeed, many mining and metallurgical industries generate large volumes of process water loaded with toxic substances, such as cyanides and dissolved heavy metals, as well as valuable metals to be recovered and recycled.

180

The Circular Economy

Metals of particular interest in acid mine drainage and industrial wastewaters, include copper, zinc, cadmium, arsenic, manganese, aluminum, lead, nickel, silver, mercury, chromium and iron, in concentrations ranging from 106e102 g/L [321]. 4.7.2.1.1 Decontaminating mining effluents

More than 70% of pollutants from the mining industry are emitted into water. Therefore, the removal of these pollutants prior to the discharge in water bodies is receiving significant attention considering the serious risks to the receiving ecosystems and then to the food-chain. In this regard, local requirements are becoming more stringent, which constitutes an additional motive for the development and application of efficient treatment technologies, including: - Oxidation: used at the beginning of mine wastewater treatment process to modify dissolved ions to be more insoluble. It is used also to enhance the removal of arsenic and manganese from wastewaters. Oxidation can be done by cascade aeration, biologically, mechanically or chemically. Biological oxidization requires dissolved oxygen, which is generated by pumping air or oxygen into wastewater. It can only be used in very dilute solutions because impurities such as Cd, Cu, Ni, and Zn inhibit the process, and addition of oxygen into water requires more energy input. Biological oxidation is cost-effective and can handle a large volume of water [322]. On the other hand, chemical oxidation is performed by adding hydrogen peroxide, hypochlorite, or potassium permanganate to wastewater. This method is often used when wastewater does not include biodegradable pollutants. Chemical oxidation is fast and does not need large installations to operate, but it is expensive and may produce toxic compounds that require further treatment depending on the oxidizer that is used [323]. - Ion-exchange: this method is based on chemical exchange reactions in which the targeted ions (cations and/or anions) to be removed from the wastewater are replaced with counter ions from the ion exchanging resin. Upon saturation, the used resin needs to be regenerated with concentrated acid or salt solution, which, in turn, produces wastes requiring further treatment. This method is often reported to be an efficient procedure to remove heavy metals, ionizable inorganic compounds, and soluble organic compounds [324]. - Membrane technologies: In membrane filtration, effluents are pumped through a membrane filters, often made from organic polymers.

Circular economy in action

181

Membrane separates purified water from wastewaters that include, among other constituents, various metal ions, sulfate, nitrate, and ammonia [325]. In mining wastewater treatment, the membrane separation technologies of microfiltration, ultrafiltration, nanofiltration, and reverse osmosis (RO) are suitable for treating many dilute streams and effluents generated in mining and mineral processing. Membrane technologies are capable of treating these dilute streams in order to produce clean permeate water for recycle and a concentrate that can potentially be used for valuable metals recovery [326]. Among these separation technologies, RO requires high pressure and in some case the pretreatment for the effluent, which makes it an expensive procedure in mining wastewater treatment. Nonetheless, within the concept of CE, the possible recovery of valuable resources from mining effluents via RO and other membranebased technologies (nutrients and precious metals) can be justified [327]. - Electrodialysis (ED): is a membrane process during which ions are transported through semipermeable membrane under the influence of an electric potential. This technology has proven to be an efficient and environmental friendly procedure for industrial applications, which includes brackish water desalination, boiler feed and process water, demineralization of food products, table salt production, waste treatment in galvanic industries, etc. [328,329]. ED could not only lower the concentrations of the targeted pollutant, but also concentrate the useful ingredients in wastewater for further reuse [330]. More recently, the application of ED to remove the toxic substances and reuse ionized species from miming effluents is gaining interest among researchers including studies on gold mine effluents [331] and acid mine drainage [332]. 4.7.2.1.2 Resources recovery from mining effluents

- Gold recovery from various secondary sources including mining effluents was proven to be possible by many researches via a variety of methods including chemical precipitation, solvent extraction, ion exchange, adsorption, biosorption, electro-wining and coagulation [333]. In the search for cost effective recovering processes, various low-cost biosorbents such as bacteria, yeasts, fungi, algae, biopolymers, and some biowastes have been reported in the literature as promising and efficient substrates for the recovery of gold from spent secondary sources [334].

182

The Circular Economy

- Other metals could also be recovered from mining effluents. For instance, it was reported that a modular ion exchange process is used to remove copper and cobalt from discharge waters of underground iron mine located in Soudan State Park, MN, USA [335]. The used material is a commercial cation resin. After the implementation of this recovery process, cobalt and copper concentrations became under the detection limits (2 mg/L and 4.3 mg/L, respectively). In the same context, the selective recovery of nickel ions, several dissolved metals and rare earth elements from acid mine drainage were also reported using separation technologies such as ion exchange, controlled precipitation and electrochemical reactions [336,337]. 4.7.2.2 Case of the pulp and paper industry The pulp and paper industry (PPI) used to be considered as one of the most polluting industries with its bleaching and pulping processes. Nowadays, with the replacement of toxic chemicals such as chorine and mercury with eco-friendly compounds, and the application of wastewater treatment technologies to treat the effluents from relates industrial activities, the environmental threat related to the PPI was substantially reduced. Nonetheless, considering the large volumes of water used in PPI, its effluents still pose a serious issue for the treatment procedures before discharge. For instance, it is assumed that the production of one ton of pulp would necessitate from 25 to 225 m3 of water [338]. The PPI produces high concentration of chemicals for example sodium hydroxide, sodium carbonate, sodium sulfide, elemental chlorine, chlorine dioxide, and other oxides as well as hydrochloric acid. However, the biggest issues with the PPI wastewaters are the high organics content (20e110 kg COD/air dried ton paper), absorbable organic halide (AOX), toxic pollutants, and dark brown coloration [339]. Solid wastes such as lime mud, green liquor dregs, boiler and furnace ash, and wood processing residuals also pose another set of problems. Therefore, the wastewater effluents of PPI contain: (i) toxic compounds to be removed before releasing the water back in to the waterways, and (ii) interesting metallic, minera,l and organic resources to be recovered and recycled. 4.7.2.2.1 Treatment of PPI effluents

Wastewaters from PPI are mainly treated with primary and secondary treatment. Since it contains high organic contents, both biological and physicochemical treatments are valid options. In practice, PPI effluents are often

Circular economy in action

183

subjected to a pretreatment stage aiming at removing large particles such as bark particles, fiber, filler and coating materials, along with other suspended organic solids. Technologies that are used in this primary treatment include clarification, sedimentation, dissolved air flotation and filtration. As a secondary treatment, aerobic lagoons, activated sludge systems, anaerobic treatment, and fungal treatment are used to remove color, chemical oxygen demand (COD), biological oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids (SS), AOX, acids and other organic compounds from wastewaters [340]. In recalcitrant cases, additional tertiary treatments can be applied using membrane filtration, coagulation and precipitation, adsorption and chemical oxidation [341,342]. The targeted pollutants for this tertiary treatment are residual color, COD, AOX, salts, heavy metals, total dissolved solids and dissolved organic carbon. 4.7.2.2.2 Valorizing PPI side streams

- Paper mill sludge: In wastewater there are two types of sludge. First is the primary sludge, which is collected in the beginning of the treatment process with a method, such as dissolved air flotation. The larger particles, fibers, and fillers are, thus, removed in this stage. The secondary or biological sludge is collected from the clarifier. This sludge consists mostly of organic matter. These sludge can be mixed or collected separately depending of the planned reuse or disposal scheme. Primary sludge can be used in many applications after dewatering, mostly when mixed with other sludge from the paper and pulp mills, including construction, agriculture and as feedstock for energy production such as second generation bioethanol [343,344]. A mixture of primary and secondary sludge can also be made into pellets, when mixed with sawdust for energy application [345]. It was also stated that paper mill sludge constitutes potential soil fertilizer, provided that harmful compounds are removed or neutralized during composting [346] or the application of thermal treatment to convert it into biochars, later used for soil amendment [347]. - Primary paper mill sludge for activated carbon: the sludge is the solid waste collected from the paper mills effluents, and ammonium lignosulfonate is a by-product from cellulose pulp manufacturing. By using this sludge as raw material and ammonium lignosulfonate as binding agent, granular activated carbons can be produced and applied for the removal of emerging pharmaceuticals from contaminated waters [348].

The Circular Economy

184

- Residual cellulose into bioethanol: several research studies confirmed the possibility of recovering the cellulosic fraction in the paper mill side streams for the production of bioethanol via a first stage of chemical or enzymatic hydrolysis into simple sugars, followed by a fermentation stage [349]. In a related study, it was demonstrated that removing the fillers content (ash and calcium carbonate) from the paper mill sludge increased the enzymatic hydrolysis performance dramatically with higher cellulose conversion at faster rates. Furthermore, the addition of accelerant and hydrogen peroxide pretreatment further improved the hydrolysis yields by 16% and 25% (g glucose/g cellulose), respectively with the de-ashed sludge. The fermentation process of produced sugars achieved up to 95% of the maximum theoretical ethanol yield and higher ethanol productivities within 9 h of fermentation [350]. - Valorizing lignin: Owing to the massive amounts of lignin available in the pulp mills (around 50 million tons per year [351]), the new technological advances, and the emergence of the biorefining and circular economy concepts, numerous research and development investigations were conducted to find out new valorization schemes to lignin, previously considered as a mere by-product to be burnt for heat or electricity in the best cases. Thus, numerous “green” products from PPI extracted lignin were reported in the literature including biohydrogen, renewable chemicals, bio-oil, and various liquid fuels [352,353].

4.8 Conclusions and outlook Each industrial sector is a “special” case when it comes to resource use, nature and volumes of generated wastes and their overall management. With its wide arrays of circular principles and business models, the CE concept could be tailored to fit each industry and to develop and sustain symbiotic connections between various industrial sectors. In this regard, the European Commission is promoting the recourse to the most efficient practices in different industrial sectors through its “best available technique reference documents” (BREFs). The BREFs are “series of reference documents covering, as far as is practicable, the industrial activities listed in Annex 1 to the EU’s IPPC Directive. They provide descriptions of a range of industrial processes and for example, their respective operating conditions and emission rates. Member States are required to take these documents into account when determining best available techniques generally or in specific cases under the Directive” [354].

Circular economy in action

185

In numerous cases, the EU reference documents clearly refer to circular practices as best available techniques. For instance, in the waste treatment industry, several recovery options were recommended including the reconcentration of acids and bases, the recovery of metals from various liquid and solid wastes, the regeneration of organic solvents and spent ion exchange resins, and the re-refining of waste oils. Nonetheless, more has to be done since many European countries are spearheading the CE “movement” in the world. Thus, preparing and publishing reference documents on “best circular practices” in various industrial activities should not be perceived as an objective on its own, but rather as a strong initiative to create a major momentum for the expansion of CE in the European continent and elsewhere. A special attention should be paid to the important role of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), representing 99% of all businesses in the EU, in the successful implementation of CE paradigm on the ground. For this, movements and large companies need to help SMEs flourish by benefitting from the circular business opportunities, and access to innovative processes and technologies. Also, equally important to the effort of implementing circular practices within each industry, is the effort to develop innovative and sustained symbiosis between industries. Such symbiotic partnership is commonly perceived as a platform enabling the use of waste or by-products of one industry as feedstock for another industry. This is indeed a major target for such network, and most of the time the triggering factor, but it should not be the only target. Such networks built around circular opportunities need to further advance their connections by sharing experiences and information, thus, capturing the added synergistic value, often neglected or not perceived in such consortia. In this regard, a systemic change in the direction of a CE requires the genuine and active participation from all of society across sectoral and industry boundaries. The interfaces between different organizations and industries provide the most attractive opportunities for new operating methods and circular material flows. Such calls for working together and changing the way of thinking according to the CE paradigm are starting to be widely echoed in governmental and parliamentary sessions and in industries’ steering groups meetings in many countries around the word. In Finland the world’s first road map to a CE has been published by Sitra, the Finnish Innovation Fund, entitled “Leading the cycle e Finnish road map to a circular economy 2016e25” [355]. It outlines the steps to sustainable success, and the practical implementation of the road map and promoting Finland’s

186

The Circular Economy

export measures for a competitive CE. Four focus areas were selected for the road map, all of which have mutual synergies and those that apply to other loops. According the authors of the road map, this is not a matter of industries, but a search for actions and pilots via the focus areas selected in this first phase. The nest phase consists of joint actions. This includes initiatives that are essential to systemic change, applicable to the entire society. The loops should be closely linked to each other, and an integral part of the surrounding society, legislators, companies, universities, and research institutes, consumers, and citizens and are all needed to achieve this change. Communications and diverse interaction schemes are particularly important when implementing such joint actions. Overall, the CE concept is showing huge potential to build engagement and galvanize a network around the opportunities offered by designing for a CE, and the need to support, connect, and encourage this network through the sharing of experiences and information that activate new ways of thinking. Establishing such networks, and in addition to being economically valuable, is also replicable and scalable. Hence, amplifying these success (or failure) stories is a key endeavor to transfer the learning across industry sectors and enable accelerated development in the current transition phase from linear economy to CE [356]. With CE, multiple sustainable development goals can be achieved, with new mindsets, new businesses, new jobs, and numerous opportunities to catch; that is why CE should or must be on governments’ priority list.

References [1] EU Commission. Closing the loop-an EU action plan for the circular economy. In: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions COM, 614 final; 2015. Available online at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ resource.html?uri¼cellar:8a8ef5e8-99a0-11e5-b3b7-01aa75ed71a1.0012.02/DOC_ 1&format¼PDF. [2] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Bioeconomy: the path to sustainability. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 29e53. [3] DiMasi JA, Feldman L, Seckler A, Wilson A. Trends in risks associated with new drug development: success rates for investigational drugs. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 2010;87(3):272e7. [4] Tsoulfas GT, Pappis CP. Environmental principles applicable to supply chains design and operation. Journal of Cleaner Production 2006;14(18):1593e602. [5] Korinek J, Kim J. Export restrictions on strategic raw materials and their impact on trade and global supply. Journal of World Trade 2011;45:255e81. [6] World Economic Forum. Towards the circular economy: accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains. 2014. Available online at: http://www3.weforum.org/ docs/WEF_ENV_TowardsCircularEconomy_Report_2014.pdf.

Circular economy in action

187

[7] European Commission. Joint research center - circular economy and industrial leadership. Reference documents under the IPPC directive and the IED. Available online at: http://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/reference/. [8] European Environment Agency (EEA). Reference documents under the IPPC Directive and the IED. Available online at: http://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ reference/. [9] European Commission. Revision of the IPPC Directive e towards an improved policy on industrial policy. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ archives/air/stationary/ippc/ippc_revision.htm. [10] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy e economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2013. 98 pages. Available online at: https://www. ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthurFoundation-Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf. [11] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy e opportunities for the consumer goods sector. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing; 2013. 112 pages. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/ downloads/publications/TCE_Report-2013.pdf. [12] Moser AK. Thinking green, buying green? Drivers of pro-environmental purchasing behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing 2015;32(3):167e75. [13] Matus KJM, Xiao X, Zimmerman JB. Green chemistry and green engineering in China: drivers, policies and barriers to innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production 2012;32:193e203. [14] Pappas E. A new systems approach to sustainability: university responsibility for teaching sustainability in contexts. Journal of Sustainability Education 2012;3(1):3e18. [15] Finlayson A, Markewitz K, Frayret J-M. Postsecondary education in industrial ecology across the world. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2014;18:931e41. [16] Prieto-Sandoval V, Jaca C, Ormazabal M. Towards a consensus on the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;179:605e15. [17] European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic). Position paper: Cefic views on the circular economy. December 2015 e Annex: February 2016. Available online at: http://www.cefic.org/Documents/RESOURCES/PositionPapers/Circular-EconomyCefic-Position-Paper-2015.pdf. [18] Henry M, Pardo G, Nishimura T, Kato Y. Balancing durability and environmental impact in concrete combining low-grade recycled aggregates and mineral admixtures. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2011;55(11):1060e9. [19] Herring H, Roy R. Technological innovation, energy efficient design and the rebound effect. Technovation 2007;27(4):194e203. [20] Serra LM, Lozano MA, Ramos J, Ensinas AV, Nebra SA. Polygeneration and efficient use of natural resources. Energy 2009;34(5):575e86. [21] Planko J, Cramer J, Hekkert MP, Chappin MM. Combining the technological innovation systems framework with the entrepreneurs’ perspective on innovation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 2017;29(6):614e25. [22] Khurum M, Petersen K, Gorschek T. Extending value stream mapping through waste definition beyond customer perspective. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process 2014;26(12):1074e105. [23] Th€ urer M, Tomasevic I, Stevenson M. On the meaning of ‘Waste’: review and definition. Production Planning and Control 2017;28(3):244e55. [24] Chemical Inspection and Regulation Service (CIRS). REACH regulation & CLP regulation. Available online at: http://www.cirs-reach.com/REACH/REACH_ CLP.html.

188

The Circular Economy

[25] European technology platform for sustainable chemistry (SusChem). Policies e circular economy. Available online at: http://www.suschem.org/policies/circulareconomy. [26] SusChem position paper on the circular economy. Available online at: http:// suschem.blogspot.com/2015/10/suschem-position-paper-on-circular.html. [27] Zhijun F, Nailing Y. Putting a circular economy into practice in China. Sustainability Science 2007;2(1):95e101. [28] Jawahir IS, Bradley R. Technological elements of circular economy and the principles of 6R-based closed-loop material flow in sustainable manufacturing. Procedia CIRP 2016;40:103e8. [29] Genovese A, Acquaye AA, Figueroa A, Koh SL. Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: evidence and some applications. Omega 2017;66:344e57. [30] Xiaoding X, Moulijn JA. Mitigation of CO2 by chemical conversion: plausible chemical reactions and promising products. Energy and Fuels 1996;10(2):305e25. [31] Ma S, Kenis PJ. Electrochemical conversion of CO2 to useful chemicals: current status, remaining challenges, and future opportunities. Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2013;2(2):191e9. [32] Deloitte. Chemistry 4.0 e growth through innovation in a transforming world. Available online at: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/de/ Documents/consumer-industrial-products/Deloitte_Chemistry4-0-2017-short% 20version.PDF. [33] Anastas PT, Warner JC. Green chemistry: theory and practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1998. [34] American Chemical Society (ACS).What is green chemistry? 12 principles of green chemistry. Available online at: https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/ greenchemistry/what-is-green-chemistry/principles/12-principles-of-green-chemistry.html. [35] United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Basics of green chemistry. Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/greenchemistry/basics-green-chemistry. [36] Sheldon RA. Fundamentals of green chemistry: efficiency in reaction design. Chemical Society Reviews 2012;41(4):1437e51. [37] Hao Q, Tian J, Li X, Chen L. Using a hybrid of green chemistry and industrial ecology to make chemical production greener. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2017;122:106e13. [38] Clark JH. Green chemistry: challenges and opportunities. Green Chemistry 1999; 1(1):1e8. [39] Marion P, Bernela B, Piccirilli A, Estrine B, Patouillard N, Guilbot J, Jér^ ome F. Sustainable chemistry: how to produce better and more from less? Green Chemistry 2017;19(21):4973e89. [40] Del Rey I, Ayuso J, Galvín AP, Jiménez JR, L opez M, García-Garrido ML. Analysis of chromium and sulphate origins in construction recycled materials based on leaching test results. Waste Management 2015;46:278e86. [41] Rodriguez-Proteau R, Grant RL. Toxicity evaluation and human health risk assessment of surface and ground water contaminated by recycled hazardous waste materials. In: Water pollution. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2005. p. 133e89. [42] Suciu NA, Tiberto F, Vasileiadis S, Lamastra L, Trevisan M. Recycled paper e paperboard for food contact materials: contaminants suspected and migration into foods and food simulant. Food Chemistry 2013;141(4):4146e51. [43] Kaur G, Uisan K, Ong KL, Lin CSK. Recent trends in green and sustainable chemistry & waste valorisation: rethinking plastics in a circular economy. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry 2018;9:30e9.

Circular economy in action

189

[44] Pivnenko K, Eriksson E, Astrup TF. Chemicals in material cycles. In: Margherita di Pula S, editor. Proceedings Sardinia 2015: fifteenth international waste management and landfill symposium Cagliari, Italy. CISA Publisher; 2015. Available online at: http://orbit.dtu.dk/ws/files/118106717/Paper_published.pdf. [45] Pivnenko K, Eriksen MK, Martín-Fernandez JA, Eriksson E, Astrup TF. Recycling of plastic waste: presence of phthalates in plastics from households and industry. Waste Management 2016;54:44e52. [46] Klaschka U. Where are the SVHCs?. 10 years consumer’s ‘right to know’ about substances of very high concern. Environmental Sciences Europe 2017;29(1):24. [47] Chemical Inspection and Regulation Service. REACH SVHC listjSVHC testing. Available online at: http://www.cirs-reach.com/REACH/REACH_SVHC.html. [48] Janssen MPM, van Broekhuizen FA. Waste handling and REACH - recycling of materials containing SVHCs: daily practice challenges. 2017. Report RIVM Letter report 2016d0159. Available online at: https://www.rivm.nl/dsresource? objectid¼c4ff06a2-3f04-4d59-a756-f51c4a36d730&type¼pdf&disposition¼inline. [49] Willke TH, Vorlop KD. Industrial bioconversion of renewable resources as an alternative to conventional chemistry. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2004; 66(2):131e42. [50] Sheldon RA. Green and sustainable manufacture of chemicals from biomass: state of the art. Green Chemistry 2014;16(3):950e63. [51] Clomburg JM, Crumbley AM, Gonzalez R. Industrial biomanufacturing: the future of chemical production. Science 2017;355(6320):aag0804. [52] BASF. Renewable raw materials. Available online at: https://www.basf.com/en/ company/sustainability/environment/resources-and-ecosystems/rene 2014 sustainability progress report - DuPontwable-raw-materials.html. [53] DuPont. report2015 sustainability progress report. Available online at: http://www. dupont.com/content/dam/dupont/corporate/our-approach/sustainability/documents/DuPont-Sustainability-Report-2015_111615.pdf. [54] Falholt P. Novozymes and renewable chemicals. In: Nomura global chemical leaders conference, Venice, March 21, 2013; 2013. Available online at: https://www. nomura.com/events/nomura-global-chemical-industry-leaders-conference-2013/ resources/upload/novozymes.pdf. [55] Neste. Renewable chemicals. Available online at: https://www.neste.com/ companies/products/renewable-chemicals. [56] Braskem. Braskem begins operation in Boston to strengthen its renewable chemicals strategy. 2018. Available online at: https://www.braskem.com.br/news-detail/ braskem-begins-operation-in-boston-to-strengthen-its-renewable-chemicalsstrategy. [57] Avantium Technologies. Avantium renewable chemistry. Available online at: https://www.avantium.com/renewable-chemistry/. [58] PRNewswire. Global renewable chemicals industry. 2018. Available online at: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-renewable-chemicals-industry300584980.html. [59] GlobeNewswire. Renewable chemicals e global strategic business report 2018: focus on environment, food & beverage, consumer healthcare, industrial, garments & textiles & automotive. 2018. Available online at: https://globenewswire.com/news-release/ 2018/03/23/1449349/0/en/Renewable-Chemicals-Global-Strategic-Business-Report2018-Focus-on-Environment-Food-Beverage-Consumer-Healthcare-IndustrialGarments-Textiles-Automotive.html. [60] Deutsch CH. DuPont looking to displace fossil fuels as building blocks of chemicals. New York Times 2006. Available online at: https://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/ 28/business/dupont-looking-to-displace-fossil-fuels-as-building-blocks-of.html.

190

The Circular Economy

[61] DuPont Tate & Lyle Bio Products Company, LLC. DuPont Tate & Lyle Bio Products begin Bio- PDOÔ production in Tennessee. Available online at: http://www. duponttateandlyle.com/news_112706. [62] Lee CS, Aroua MK, Daud WMAW, Cognet P, Péres-Lucchese Y, Fabre PL, Reynes O, Latapie L. A review: conversion of bioglycerol into 1, 3-propanediol via biological and chemical method. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015;42:963e72. [63] Chemical Watch. Green chemistry and the circular economy. Available online at: https://chemicalwatch.com/43067/green-chemistry-and-the-circular-economy. [64] Phillips M. A chemicals industry safety strategy. Processing Magazine 2017. Available online at: https://www.processingmagazine.com/chemicals-industry-safetystrategy/. [65] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Biochemicals. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 141e83. [66] Hua X, Zhou X, Xu Y. Improving techno-economics of bioproduct glycolic acid by successive recycled-cell catalysis of ethylene glycol with Gluconobacter oxydans. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering 2018:1e5. [67] Deng Y, Mao Y, Zhang X. Metabolic engineering of E. coli for efficient production of glycolic acid from glucose. Biochemical Engineering Journal 2015;103:256e62. [68] Cabulong RB, Lee WK, Ba~ nares AB, Ramos KRM, Nisola GM, Valdehuesa KNG, Chung WJ. Engineering Escherichia coli for glycolic acid production from D-xylose through the Dahms pathway and glyoxylate bypass. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2018;102(5):2179e89. [69] Wieschalka S, Blombach B, Bott M, Eikmanns BJ. Bio-based production of organic acids with Corynebacterium glutamicum. Microbial Biotechnology 2013;6:87e102. [70] Kamzolova SV, Morgunov IG. Biosynthesis of pyruvic acid from glucose by Blastobotrys adeninivorans. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2016;100(17): 7689e97. [71] Kamzolova SV, Morgunov IG. Biosynthesis of pyruvic acid from glycerol-containing substrates and its regulation in the yeast Yarrowia lipolytica. Bioresource Technology 2018;266:125e33. [72] Maleki N, Safari M, Eiteman MA. Conversion of glucose-xylose mixtures to pyruvate using a consortium of metabolically engineered Escherichia coli. Engineering in Life Sciences 2018;18(1):40e7. [73] Tsuge Y, Yamamoto S, Kato N, Suda M, Vertes AA, Yukawa H, Inui M. Overexpression of the phosphofructokinase encoding gene is crucial for achieving high production of D-lactate in Corynebacterium glutamicum under oxygen deprivation. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2015;99(11):4679e89. [74] Xu K, Xu P. Efficient production of L-lactic acid using co-feeding strategy based on cane molasses/glucose carbon sources. Bioresource Technology 2014;153:23e9. [75] Ahring BK, Traverso JJ, Murali N, Srinivas K. Continuous fermentation of clarified corn stover hydrolysate for the production of lactic acid at high yield and productivity. Biochemical Engineering Journal 2016;109:162e9. [76] Chu HS, Kim YS, Lee CM, Lee JH, Jung WS, Ahn JH, Song SH, Choi IS, Cho KM. Metabolic engineering of 3-hydroxypropionic acid biosynthesis in Escherichia coli. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 2015;112(2):356e64. [77] Kim K, Kim SK, Park YC, Seo JH. Enhanced production of 3-hydroxypropionic acid from glycerol by modulation of glycerol metabolism in recombinant Escherichia coli. Bioresource Technology 2014;156:170e5. [78] Huang Y, Li Z, Shimizu K, Ye Q. Co-production of 3-hydroxypropionic acid and 1, 3-propanediol by Klebseilla pneumoniae expressing aldH under microaerobic conditions. Bioresource Technology 2013;128:505e12.

Circular economy in action

191

[79] Chen C, Ding S, Wang D, Li Z, Ye Q. Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of cassava to succinic acid by Escherichia coli NZN111. Bioresource Technology 2014;163:100e5. [80] Choi S, Song H, Lim SW, Kim TY, Ahn JH, Lee JW, Lee MH, Lee SY. Highly selective production of succinic acid by metabolically engineered Mannheimia succiniciproducens and its efficient purification. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 2016; 113(10):2168e77. [81] Niu K, Xiong T, Qin HB, Wu H, Liu ZQ, Zheng YG. 3-Hydroxypropionic acid production by recombinant Escherichia coli ZJU-3HP01 using glyceroleglucose dual-substrate fermentative strategy. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry 2017;64(4):572e8. [82] Huang X, Lu X, Li Y, Li X, Li JJ. Improving itaconic acid production through genetic engineering of an industrial Aspergillus terreus strain. Microbial Cell Factories 2014;13: 119. [83] Okamoto S, Chin T, Hiratsuka K, Aso Y, Tanaka Y, Takahashi T, Ohara H. Production of itaconic acid using metabolically engineered Escherichia coli. The Journal of General and Applied Microbiology 2014;60(5):191e7. [84] Johnson CW, Salvach ua D, Khanna P, Smith H, Peterson DJ, Beckham GT. Enhancing muconic acid production from glucose and lignin-derived aromatic compounds via increased protocatechuate decarboxylase activity. Metabolic Engineering Communications 2016;3:111e9. [85] Zhang H, Li Z, Pereira B, Stephanopoulos G. Engineering E. colieE. coli cocultures for production of muconic acid from glycerol. Microbial Cell Factories 2015;14(1): 134. [86] Zhang H, Zhang J, Bao J. High titer gluconic acid fermentation by Aspergillus niger from dry dilute acid pretreated corn stover without detoxification. Bioresource Technology 2016;203:211e9. [87] Li CJ, Trost BM. Green chemistry for chemical synthesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2008;105(36):13197e202. [88] Clark JH, Macquarrie DJ, editors. Handbook of green chemistry and technology. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons; 2008. 560 pages. [89] Gaspard S, Ncibi MC, editors. Biomass for sustainable applications: pollution remediation and energy. London, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2013. 430 pages. [90] Abdulhameed S, Pradeep NS, Sugathan S, editors. Bioresources and bioprocess in biotechnology. Status and strategies for exploration, vol. 1. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 443e54. [91] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Legacy of petroleum-based economy. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017. p. 1e27. [92] Cox PM, Betts RA, Jones CD, Spall SA, Totterdell IJ. Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model. Nature 2000; 408(6809):184e7. [93] Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Seyboth K, Matschoss P, Kadner S, Zwickel T, Eickemeier P, Hansen G, Schl€ omer S, von Stechow C. IPCC special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation. Prepared by working group III of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2011. [94] Soppimath KS, Aminabhavi TM, Kulkarni AR, Rudzinski WE. Biodegradable polymeric nanoparticles as drug delivery devices. Journal of Controlled Release 2001; 70(1e2):1e20. [95] Gunatillake PA, Adhikari R. Biodegradable synthetic polymers for tissue engineering. European Cells and Materials 2003;5(1):1e16.

192

The Circular Economy

[96] Li Q, Xing J. Production of 1, 4-diacids (succinic, fumaric, and malic) from biomass. In: Production of platform chemicals from sustainable resources. Singapore: Springer; 2017. p. 231e62. [97] Isikgor FH, Becer CR. Lignocellulosic biomass: a sustainable platform for the production of bio-based chemicals and polymers. Polymer Chemistry 2015;6(25): 4497e559. [98] Ncibi MC, Hamissa AMB, Gaspard S. Plantae and marine biomass for biofuels. In: Gaspard S, Ncibi MC, editors. Biomass for sustainable applications: pollution remediation and energy. London , UK: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2013. p. 290e334. [99] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi MC. Biofuels and bioenergy. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 79e139. [100] Ncibi MC. Bioconversion of renewable bioresources and agricultural by-products into bioethanol. Recent Patents on Chemical Engineering 2010;3(3):165e79. [101] Morone A, Pandey RA. Lignocellulosic biobutanol production: gridlocks and potential remedies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2014;37:21e35. [102] Zhou CH, Xia X, Lin CX, Tong DS, Beltramini J. Catalytic conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to fine chemicals and fuels. Chemical Society Reviews 2011;40(11): 5588e617. [103] Alonso DM, Hakim SH, Zhou S, Won W, Hosseinaei O, Tao J, Garcia-Negron V, Motagamwala AH, Mellmer MA, Huang K, Houtman CJ. Increasing the revenue from lignocellulosic biomass: maximizing feedstock utilization. Science Advances 2017;3(5):e1603301. [104] Howard J, Rackemann DW, Bartley JP, Samori C, Doherty WO. Conversion of sugar cane molasses to 5-hydroxymethylfurfural using molasses and bagasse-derived catalysts. ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering 2018;6(4):4531e8. [105] Roman-Leshkov Y, Barrett CJ, Liu ZY, Dumesic JA. Production of dimethylfuran for liquid fuels from biomass-derived carbohydrates. Nature 2007;447:982e5. [106] Casanova O, Iborra S, Corma A. Biomass into chemicals: one pot-base free oxidative esterification of 5-hydroxymethyl-2-furfural into 2, 5-dimethylfuroate with gold on nanoparticulated ceria. Journal of Catalysis 2009;265(1):109e16. [107] Deloitte. Flexible consumption: transition to win with pay-per-use business models. Available online at: https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/technology-mediaand-telecommunications/solutions/pay-per-use-model-flexible-consumption-services.html. [108] Kougioumtzis MA, Marianou A, Atsonios K, Michailof C, Nikolopoulos N, Koukouzas N, Triantafyllidis K, Lappas A, Kakaras E. Production of 5-HMF from cellulosic biomass: experimental results and integrated process simulation. Waste and Biomass Valorization 2018:1e13. [109] Cherubini F, Strømman AH. Chemicals from lignocellulosic biomass: opportunities, perspectives, and potential of biorefinery systems. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 2011;5(5):548e61. [110] Khoo HH, Ee WL, Isoni V. Bio-chemicals from lignocellulose feedstock: sustainability, LCA and the green conundrum. Green Chemistry 2016;18(7):1912e22. [111] Den W, Sharma VK, Lee M, Nadadur G, Varma RS. Lignocellulosic biomass transformations via greener oxidative pretreatment processes: access to energy and valueadded chemicals. Frontiers in Chemistry 2018;6:141. [112] Matson TD, Barta K, Iretskii AV, Ford PC. One-pot catalytic conversion of cellulose and of woody biomass solids to liquid fuels. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2011;133(35):14090e7. [113] Dutta S, De S, Alam MI, Abu-Omar MM, Saha B. Direct conversion of cellulose and lignocellulosic biomass into chemicals and biofuel with metal chloride catalysts. Journal of Catalysis 2012;288:8e15.

Circular economy in action

193

[114] Lin CSK, Pfaltzgraff LA, Herrero-Davila L, Mubofu EB, Abderrahim S, Clark JH, Koutinas AA, Kopsahelis N, Stamatelatou K, Dickson F, Thankappan S. Food waste as a valuable resource for the production of chemicals, materials and fuels. Current situation and global perspective. Energy and Environmental Science 2013;6(2): 426e64. [115] Pfaltzgraff LA, Cooper EC, Budarin V, Clark JH. Food waste biomass: a resource for high-value chemicals. Green Chemistry 2013;15(2):307e14. [116] Esteban J, Ladero M. Food waste as a source of value-added chemicals and materials: a biorefinery perspective. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2018; 53(5):1095e108. [117] Matharu AS, de Melo EM, Houghton JA. Opportunity for high value-added chemicals from food supply chain wastes. Bioresource Technology 2016;215:123e30. [118] Banerjee J, Singh R, Vijayaraghavan R, MacFarlane D, Patti AF, Arora A. Bioactives from fruit processing wastes: green approaches to valuable chemicals. Food Chemistry 2017;225:10e22. [119] Balu AM, Budarin V, Shuttleworth PS, Pfaltzgraff LA, Waldron K, Luque R, Clark JH. Valorisation of orange peel residues: waste to biochemicals and nanoporous materials. ChemSusChem 2012;5(9):1694e7. [120] Kehili M, Schmidt LM, Reynolds W, Zammel A, Zetzl C, Smirnova I, Allouche N, Sayadi S. Biorefinery cascade processing for creating added value on tomato industrial by-products from Tunisia. Biotechnology for Biofuels 2016;9(1):261. [121] Yan N, Chen X. Don’t waste seafood waste: turning cast-off shells into nitrogen-rich chemicals would benefit economies and the environment. Nature 2015;524(7564): 155e8. [122] Shahidi F, editor. Maximising the value of marine by-products. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing; 2006. 531 pages. [123] Kim NJ, Li H, Jung K, Chang HN, Lee PC. Ethanol production from marine algal hydrolysates using Escherichia coli KO11. Bioresource Technology 2011;102(16): 7466e9. [124] Chiu SY, Kao CY, Chen TY, Chang YB, Kuo CM, Lin CS. Cultivation of microalgal chlorella for biomass and lipid production using wastewater as nutrient resource. Bioresource Technology 2015;184:179e89. [125] Bharathiraja B, Chakravarthy M, Kumar RR, Yogendran D, Yuvaraj D, Jayamuthunagai J, Kumar RP, Palani S. Aquatic biomass (algae) as a future feed stock for bio-refineries: a review on cultivation, processing and products. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015;47:634e53. [126] Alam F, Mobin S, Chowdhury H. Third generation biofuel from algae. Procedia Engineering 2015;105:763e8. [127] Grand View Research. Algae biofuel market worth $10.73 billion by 2025jgrowth rate: 8.8%. 2017. Available online at: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/pressrelease/global-algae-biofuel-market. [128] Rizwan M, Lee JH, Gani R. Optimal design of microalgae-based biorefinery: economics, opportunities and challenges. Applied Energy 2015;150:69e79. [129] Zuin VG, Segatto ML, Ramin LZ. Plants as resources for organic molecules: facing the green and sustainable future today. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry 2017;9:1e7. [130] Gilbert-L opez B, Mendiola JA, van den Broek LA, Houweling-Tan B, Sijtsma L, Cifuentes A, Herrero M, Iban ~ez E. Green compressed fluid technologies for downstream processing of Scenedesmus obliquus in a biorefinery approach. Algal Research 2017;24:111e21. [131] Chauton MS, Reitan KI, Norsker NH, Tveterås R, Kleivdal HT. A technoeconomic analysis of industrial production of marine microalgae as a source of EPA

194

[132] [133]

[134] [135]

[136] [137] [138]

[139]

[140] [141] [142] [143] [144] [145] [146] [147] [148]

The Circular Economy

and DHA-rich raw material for aquafeed: research challenges and possibilities. Aquaculture 2015;436:95e103. Griffiths M, Harrison ST, Smit M, Maharajh D. Major commercial products from micro-and macroalgae. In: Algae biotechnology. Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 269e300. Sherwood J, Constantinou A, Moity L, McElroy CR, Farmer TJ, Duncan T, Raverty W, Hunt AJ, Clark JH. Dihydrolevoglucosenone (Cyrene) as a bio-based alternative for dipolar aprotic solvents. Chemical Communications 2014;50(68): 9650e2. Motagamwala AH, Won W, Sener C, Alonso DM, Maravelias CT, Dumesic JA. Toward biomass-derived renewable plastics: production of 2,5-furandicarboxylic acid from fructose. Science Advances 2018;4(1):eaap9722. Duereh A, Sato Y, Smith JrJr, Inomata H. Replacement of hazardous chemicals used in engineering plastics with safe and renewable hydrogen-bond donor and acceptor solvent-pair mixtures. ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering 2015;3(8): 1881e9. Avantium. Products & applications e from plant based materials to FDCA and PEF. Available online at: https://www.avantium.com/yxy/products-applications/. DuPont Tate & Lyle. Our process e DuPont Tate & Lyle bio products. Available online at: http://duponttateandlyle.com/our_process. Markets and Markets. 1,3-Propanediol (PDO) market by applications (PTT, polyurethane, cosmetic, personal care & home cleaning & others) & geography - global market trends & forecasts to 2021. 2015. Available online at: https://www. marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/1-3-propanediol-pdo-market-760.html? gclid¼EAIaIQobChMI3cWy482W3AIVGUkZCh0_9AlAEAAYASAAEgIbN_D_ BwE. Kondratenko EV, Mul G, Baltrusaitis J, Larrazabal GO, Pérez-Ramírez J. Status and perspectives of CO2 conversion into fuels and chemicals by catalytic, photocatalytic and electrocatalytic processes. Energy and Environmental Science 2013;6(11): 3112e35. B€ uttner H, Steinbauer J, Wulf C, Dindaroglu M, Schmalz HG, Werner T. Organocatalyzed synthesis of oleochemical carbonates from CO2 and renewables. ChemSusChem 2017;10(6):1076e9. Bogaerts A, Kozak T, Van Laer K, Snoeckx R. Plasma-based conversion of CO2: current status and future challenges. Faraday Discussions 2015;183:217e32. Alper E, Orhan OY. CO2 utilization: developments in conversion processes. Petroleum 2017;3(1):109e26. Aresta M, editor. Carbon dioxide as chemical feedstock. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons; 2010. 414 pages. Olajire AA. Recent progress on the nanoparticles-assisted greenhouse carbon dioxide conversion processes. Journal of CO2 Utilization 2018;24:522e47. Ehsani M, Gao Y, Longo S, Ebrahimi K. Modern electric, hybrid electric, and fuel cell vehicles. Boca Raton, Florida, US: CRC Press; 2018. 572 pages. Nykvist B, Nilsson M. Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles. Nature Climate Change 2015;5(4):329e32. Vennestrøm PNR, Osmundsen CM, Christensen CH, Taarning E. Beyond petrochemicals: the renewable chemicals industry. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2011;50(45):10502e9. Wettstein SG, Alonso DM, G€ urb€ uz EI, Dumesic JA. A roadmap for conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to chemicals and fuels. Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2012;1(3):218e24.

Circular economy in action

195

[149] Kabir G, Hameed BH. Recent progress on catalytic pyrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass to high-grade bio-oil and bio-chemicals. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017;70:945e67. [150] Clark JH, Farmer TJ, Herrero-Davila L, Sherwood J. Circular economy design considerations for research and process development in the chemical sciences. Green Chemistry 2016;18(14):3914e34. [151] Castleman B. The export of hazardous industries in 2015. Environmental Health 2016;15:8. [152] Safechem. If you’re into efficiency, COMPLEASEÔ is for you. Available online at: http://www.safechem.com/en/metal-cleaning/compleasetm.html. [153] Chemicalleasing.org. Case study: Surface protection in the Egyptian fabricated metal products manufacturing industry. Available online at: https://www.chemicalleasing. org/sites/default/files/case-study_egypt-surface-protection.pdf. [154] Blok K, Hoogzaad J, Ramkumar S, Ridley A, Srivastav P, Tan I, Terlouw W, de Wit M. ECOFYS e implementing circular economy globally makes Paris targets achievable. 2016. Available online at: https://www.ecofys.com/files/files/circleeconomy-ecofys-2016-circular-economy-white-paper.pdf. [155] Schwager P, Moser F. The application of chemical leasing business models in Mexico. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2006;13(2):131e7. [156] Moser F, Jakl T. Chemical leasing e a review of implementation in the past decade. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2015;22(8):6325e48. [157] Chemicalleasing.org. Lubrication in the Ugandan beverage industry. Available online at: https://www.chemicalleasing.org/sites/default/files/case-study_ugandalubrication.pdf. [158] Ohl C, Moser F. Chemical leasing business modelsda contribution to the effective risk management of chemical substances. Risk Analysis: An International Journal 2007;27(4):999e1007. [159] United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). Chemical leasing. Available online at: https://www.unido.org/our-focus/safeguarding-environment/ resource-efficient-and-low-carbon-industrial-production/chemical-leasing. [160] Joas R, Abraham V, Joas A. Chemical leasing: a business model to drive resource efficiency in the supply chain. In: Lehmann H, editor. Factor X. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 395e403. [161] le Moigne R. Reversible reaction: even chemicals can be leased. Circulate. 2017. Available online at: https://circulatenews.org/2017/03/reversible-reaction-evenchemicals-can-be-leased/. [162] Klein D, Frietsch S. Biobased feedstock in integrated chemical production. Kunststoffe International 2015/06-07. 2015. Available online at: https://www. kunststoffe.de/en/journal/archive/article/mass-balance-approach-for-renewableresources-saves-oil-1039763.html. [163] Solvay “LOOP” Project e LIFE11/ENV/FR/00744. An innovative process of rare earth recycling from used fluorescent lamps. Available online at: https://www.solvay. com/en/binaries/Solvay%20Loop%20Fr_En%20NUM-197429.pdf. [164] European Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform. The functional economy in the chemical industry: 8 case studies demonstrate efficiency and sustainability. Available online at: https://circulareconomy.europa.eu/platform/en/good-practices/ functional-economy-chemical-industry-8-case-studies-demonstrate-efficiency-andsustainability. [165] Royal Haskoning. Take back chemicals. Available online at: https://www. royalhaskoningdhv.com/en-gb/services/a-z-services/take-back-chemicals/1215. [166] Veolia. Solvent recovery and recycling. Available online at: https://www.veolia.co. uk/solvent-recovery-and-recycling.

196

The Circular Economy

[167] Chemoxy. Chemoxy offers a range of solvent recovery solutions. Available online at: https://www.chemoxy.com/solvent-recovery/. [168] Gasum. Gasum invests in further refining of recycled nutrients. 2017. Available online at: https://www.gasum.com/en/About-gasum/for-the-media/News/2017/gasuminvests-in-further-refining-of-recycled-nutrients/. [169] Maratek Environmental. Recycling and recovery services. Available online at: https://www.maratek.com/recycling-services. [170] Ayres RU. Metals recycling: economic and environmental implications. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 1997;21(3):145e73. [171] Prior T, Giurco D, Mudd G, Mason L, Behrisch J. Resource depletion, peak minerals and the implications for sustainable resource management. Global Environmental Change 2012;22(3):577e87. [172] Allwood JM. Squaring the circular economy: the role of recycling within a hierarchy of material management strategies. In: Worrell E, Reuter MA, editors. Handbook of recycling. Waltham, MA, USA: Elsevier; 2014. p. 445e77. [173] Lebre E, Corder G, Golev A. The role of the mining industry in a circular economy: a framework for resource management at the mine site level. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3):662e72. [174] Grunwald A. The imperative of sustainable development: elements of an ethics of using georesources responsibly. In: Grunwald A, Wyss M, Peppoloni S, editors. Geoethics: ethical challenges and case studies in earth sciences; 2015. p. 25e35. [175] Hailu D. Seven things to consider when managing non-renewable natural resources. United Nations Development Programme; 2015. Available online at: http://www. undp.org/content/undp/en/home/blog/2015/3/19/Seven-things-to-considerwhen-managing-non-renewable-natural-resources.html. [176] Nooten GA. Sustainable development and nonrenewable resources e a multilateral perspective. In: Proceedings for a workshop on deposit modeling, mineral resource assessment, and their role in sustainable development. U.S. Geological Survey; 2007. Available online at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2007/1294/circ1294.pdf? bcsi_scan_1fe59ba8c561fa18¼yHESOROVYxG#page¼43. [177] European Environment Agency (EEA). Metal ores: domestic extraction, imports, exports, and domestic consumption, EU-15 1970-2001. 2009. Available online at: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/metal-ores-domestic-extractionimports-exports-and-domestic-consumption-eu-15-1970-2001/figure-03-14.eps. [178] Eurostat. Material flow accounts [env_ac_mfa]. 2018. Available online at: http:// appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do. [179] Sch€ uler D, Degreif S, Dolega P, Hay D, Manhart A, Buchert M. EU raw material import flows e acknowledging non-EU environmental and social footprints. Strategic dialogue on sustainable raw materials for Europe (STRADE) No. 02/2017. 2017. Available online at: http://www.stradeproject.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/ pdf/STRADEPolBrf_02-2017_RawMaterialFlows_Mar2017_FINAL.pdf. [180] European Commission e Environment. Extractive waste. 2018. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/mining/index.htm. [181] Kitula AGN. The environmental and socio-economic impacts of mining on local livelihoods in Tanzania: a case study of Geita district. Journal of Cleaner Production 2006;14(3e4):405e14. [182] Sprague DD, Vermaire JC. Legacy arsenic pollution of lakes near Cobalt, Ontario, Canada: arsenic in lake water and sediment remains elevated nearly a century after mining activity has ceased. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 2018;229(3):87. [183] Lu Y, Song S, Wang R, Liu Z, Meng J, Sweetman AJ, Jenkins A, Ferrier RC, Li H, Luo W, Wang T. Impacts of soil and water pollution on food safety and health risks in China. Environment International 2015;77:5e15.

Circular economy in action

197

[184] Protano G, Nannoni F. Influence of ore processing activity on Hg, As and Sb contamination and fractionation in soils in a former mining site of Monte Amiata ore district (Italy). Chemosphere 2018;199:320e30. [185] Bielmyer GK, Arnold WR, Tomasso JR, Isely JJ, Klaine SJ. Effects of roof and rainwater characteristics on copper concentrations in roof runoff. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 2012;184(5):2797e804. [186] Meza-Figueroa D, De la O-Villanueva M, De la Parra ML. Heavy metal distribution in dust from elementary schools in Hermosillo, Sonora, México. Atmospheric Environment 2007;41(2):276e88. [187] Critical minerals for the EU economy: foresight to 2030. Available online at: https:// warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/research/researchcentres/csgr/green/foresight/economy/ 2013_ec_critical_minerals_for_the_eu_economy_-_foresight_to_2030.pdf. [188] UNEP. Recycling rates of metals e a status report. In: Graedel TE, Allwood J, Birat J-P, Reck BK, Sibley SF, Sonnemann G, Buchert M, Hagel€ uken C, editors. A report of the working group on global metal flows to the international resource panel; 2011. Available online at: http://www.resourcepanel.org/reports/recyclingrates-metals. [189] Awasthi AK, Li J. An overview of the potential of eco-friendly hybrid strategy for metal recycling from WEEE. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2017;126: 228e39. [190] Wong YC, Al-Obaidi KM, Mahyuddin N. Recycling of end-of-life vehicles (ELVs) for building products: concept of processing framework from automotive to construction industries in Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;190:285e302. [191] Cardoso R, Silva RV, de Brito J, Dhir R. Use of recycled aggregates from construction and demolition waste in geotechnical applications: a literature review. Waste Management 2016;49:131e45. [192] Zhang X, Shen J, Wang Y, Qi Y, Liao W, Shui W, Li L, Qi H, Yu X. An environmental sustainability assessment of China’s cement industry based on emergy. Ecological Indicators 2017;72:452e8. [193] European Commission e Environment. Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW). Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/ construction_demolition.htm. [194] Ray D, editor. Biocomposites for high-performance applications: current barriers and future needs towards industrial development. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing; 2017. 336 pages. [195] reportEuropean Environment Agency. Sustainable use and management of natural resources. EEA Report No 9/2005. Available online at: https://www.eea.europa. eu/publications/eea_report_2005_9. [196] Olivetti EA, Cullen JM. Toward a sustainable materials system. Science 2018; 360(6396):1396e8. [197] Wang YS. China recycling economy development and its mineral resources’ sustainable development. Conservation and Utilization of Mineral Resources 2005;2. [198] The Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP); 2016. [199] Zhao Y, Zang L, Li Z, Qin J. Discussion on the model of mining circular economy. Energy Procedia 2012;16:438e43. [200] Weber, I., Actualizing sustainable mining: “whole mine, whole community, whole planet” through ‘industrial ecology’ and community-based strategies. Available online at: http://www.frameworkforresponsiblemining.org/pubs/Actualizing SustainableMining.pdf. [201] Arora R, Paterok K, Banerjee A, Saluja MS. Potential and relevance of urban mining in the context of sustainable cities. IIMB Management Review 2017;29(3):210e24.

198

The Circular Economy

[202] Mining U. Urban mining: concepts, terminology, challenges. Waste Management 2015;45:1e3. [203] Baccini P, Brunner P. Metabolism of the anthroposphere: analysis, evaluation, design. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2012. [204] Brunner PH. Urban mining a contribution to reindustrializing the city. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2011;15(3):339e41. [205] Yamamoto M, Hosoda E, editors. The economics of waste management in East Asia, vol. 155. NY: Routledge; 2016. 216 pages. [206] Hu Y, Poustie M. Urban mining demonstration bases in China: a new approach to the reclamation of resources. Waste Management 2018;79:689e99. [207] Ma R. Construction of national “urban mineral” demonstration base and next work arrangement. China Economy Trade Herald 2014;16:55e6. [208] Krook J, Svensson N, Eklund M. Landfill mining: a critical review of two decades of research. Waste Management 2012;32(3):513e20. [209] Hogland W, Hogland M, Marques M. Enhanced Landfill Mining: material recovery, energy utilisation and economics in the EU (Directive) perspective. In: International academic Symposium on enhanced landfill mining. Belgium: Houthalen-Helchteren; 2010. p. 233e47. [210] Jones PT, Geysen D, Tielemans Y, Van Passel S, Pontikes Y, Blanpain B, Quaghebeur M, Hoekstra N. Enhanced landfill mining in view of multiple resource recovery: a critical review. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013;55:45e55. [211] Kieckh€afer K, Breitenstein A, Spengler TS. Material flow-based economic assessment of landfill mining processes. Waste Management 2017;60:748e64. [212] The World Bank. Solid waste management. A brief published in September 20, 2018. Available online at: http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/brief/ solid-waste-management. [213] Watson GV, Powrie W. Landfill as a resource. Waste as a resource. In: Hester RE, Harrison RM, editors. Waste as a resource. UK: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2013. p. 205e26. [214] Sardar S, Lee YH, Memon MS. A sustainable outsourcing strategy regarding cost, capacity flexibility, and risk in a textile supply chain. Sustainability 2016;8(3):234. [215] Barrientos S, Gereffi G, Rossi A. Economic and social upgrading in global production networks: developing a framework for analysis. International Labor Review 2010; 150(3e4):319e40. [216] Finch & Beak. 5 Percent of the World’s Waste Comes from Textiles. News published on June 7, 2016. Available online at: https://www.finchandbeak.com/1208/5percent-the-world-waste-comes-from.htm. [217] Fontell P, Heikkil€a P. Model of circular business ecosystem for textiles, vol. 313. VTT Technology; 2017. Available online at: https://circulareconomy.europa.eu/platform/ sites/default/files/model-of-circular-business-ecosystem-for-textiles-11-2017.pdf. [218] WRAP. Textiles circular economy. Available online at: http://www.wrap.org.uk/ sites/files/wrap/Strategic%20loop%20-%20textiles.pdf. [219] Relooping Fashion. What is the relooping fashion initiative? Available online at: http://reloopingfashion.org/. [220] Shuttleworth PS, Clark JH, Mantle R, Stansfield N. Switchable adhesives for carpet tiles: a major breakthrough in sustainable flooring. Green Chemistry 2010;12(5): 798e803. [221] Miraftab M, Horrocks AR, editors. Ecotextiles: the way forward for sustainable development in textiles. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2007. 208 pages. [222] Realff MJ, Ammons JC, Newton D. Carpet recycling: determining the reverse production system design. Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering 1999;38(3): 547e67.

Circular economy in action

199

[223] Mihut C, Captain DK, Gadala-Maria F, Amiridis MD. Recycling of nylon from carpet waste. Polymer Engineering and Science 2001;41(9):1457e70. [224] Vandevivere PC, Bianchi R, Verstraete W. Treatment and reuse of wastewater from the textile wet-processing industry: review of emerging technologies. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology: International Research in Process, Environmental and Clean Technology 1998;72(4):289e302. [225] Cardoso JC, Bessegato GG, Zanoni MVB. Efficiency comparison of ozonation, photolysis, photocatalysis and photoelectrocatalysis methods in real textile wastewater decolorization. Water Research 2016;98:39e46. [226] Holkar CR, Jadhav AJ, Pinjari DV, Mahamuni NM, Pandit AB. A critical review on textile wastewater treatments: possible approaches. Journal of Environmental Management 2016;182:351e66. [227] Singh K, Arora S. Removal of synthetic textile dyes from wastewaters: a critical review on present treatment technologies. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 2011;41(9):807e78. [228] Van der Kraan M, Cid MF, Woerlee GF, Veugelers WJT, Witkamp GJ. Dyeing of natural and synthetic textiles in supercritical carbon dioxide with disperse reactive dyes. The Journal of Supercritical Fluids 2007;40(3):470e6. [229] Chen L, Wang B, Ruan X, Chen J, Yang Y. Hydrolysis-free and fully recyclable reactive dyeing of cotton in green, non-nucleophilic solvents for a sustainable textile industry. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015;107:550e6. [230] Bianchini R, Cevasco G, Chiappe C, Pomelli CS, Rodrıguez Douton MJ. Ionic liquids can significantly improve textile dyeing: an innovative application assuring economic and environmental benefits. ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering 2015;3(9):2303e8. [231] Alexandratos N, Bruinsma J. World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision. ESA Working Paper No. 12-03. Rome: Agricultural Development Economics Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); 2012. Available online at: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/esa/Global_ persepctives/world_ag_2030_50_2012_rev.pdf. [232] Ghassemi F, Jakeman AJ, Nix HA. Salinisation of land and water resources: human causes, extent, management and case studies. UK: CAB International. Wallingford; 1995. 544 pp. [233] McCarthy U, Uysal I, Melis RB, Mercier S, Donnell CO, Ktenioudaki A. Global food security e issues, challenges and technological solutions. Trends in Food Science and Technology 2018;77:11e20. [234] Plimmer JR. Chemicals for agriculture. IAEA Bulletin 1984;26(2):13e6. Available online at: https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/ bulletin/bull26-2/26205481316.pdf. [235] Pingali P. Agricultural mechanization: adoption patterns and economic impact. Handbook of Agricultural Economics 2007;3:2779e805. [236] Bellon MR, Berthaud J. Traditional Mexican agricultural systems and the potential impacts of transgenic varieties on maize diversity. Agriculture and Human Values 2006;23(1):3e14. [237] Moss B. Water pollution by agriculture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 2008;363(1491):659e66. [238] Oldeman LR, Hakkeling RTA, Sombroek WG. World map of the status of human-induced soil degradation: an explanatory note. 2017. Available online at: http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/19660/ExplanNote_1. pdf?sequence¼1. [239] Lamb A, Green R, Bateman I, Broadmeadow M, Bruce T, Burney J, Carey P, ́ Chadwick D, Crane E, Field R, Goulding K. The potential for land sparing to offset

200

[240] [241] [242] [243] [244] [245] [246] [247] [248] [249] [250] [251] [252] [253] [254] [255] [256]

The Circular Economy

greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Nature Climate Change 2016;6(5): 488e92. Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D, Muir JF, Pretty J, Robinson S, Thomas SM, Toulmin C. Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 2010;327(5967):812e8. Gunders D. Wasted: how America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill. Natural Resources Defense Council 2012;26. Available online at: https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/wasted-food-IP.pdf. Young L. Our biggest problem? We’re wasting food. Canada tosses 40 per cent of the food we produce each year. It’s bad for business and bad for the planet. 2012. Available online at: http://www.canadiangrocer.com/top-stories/what-a-waste-19736. Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH. Global consequences of land use. Science 2005;309(5734):570e4. Conway D, Van Garderen EA, Deryng D, Dorling S, Krueger T, Landman W, Lankford B, Lebek K, Osborn T, Ringler C, Thurlow J. Climate and southern Africa’s watereenergyefood nexus. Nature Climate Change 2015;5(9):837e46. Fischer J, Abson DJ, Bergsten A, Collier NF, Dorresteijn I, Hanspach J, Hylander K, Schultner J, Senbeta F. Reframing the foodebiodiversity challenge. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2017;32(5):335e45. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Cities and the circular economy for food. 2018. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/Citiesand-the-circular-economy-for-food-1.pdf. Nowakowski K. Why we need small farms. National Geographic; 2018. Published October 12, 2018. Available online at: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ environment/future-of-food/photos-farms-agriculture-national-farmers-day/. Jeffries N. A circular economy for food: 5 case studies. Medium; 2018. Published Feb. 9, 2018. Available online at: https://medium.com/circulatenews/a-circulareconomy-for-food-5-case-studies-5722728c9f1e. Geels FW. The dynamics of transitions in socio-technical systems: a multi-level analysis of the transition pathway from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles (1860e1930). Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 2005;17(4):445e76. Havukainen J, Nguyen MT, Hermann L, Horttanainen M, Mikkil€a M, Deviatkin I, Linnanen L. Potential of phosphorus recovery from sewage sludge and manure ash by thermochemical treatment. Waste Management 2016;49:221e9. Batstone DJ, H€ ulsen T, Mehta CM, Keller J. Platforms for energy and nutrient recovery from domestic wastewater: a review. Chemosphere 2015;140:2e11. Vaneeckhaute C, Lebuf V, Michels E, Belia E, Vanrolleghem PA, Tack FM, Meers E. Nutrient recovery from digestate: systematic technology review and product classification. Waste and Biomass Valorization 2017;8(1):p21e40. Kraska T, Kleinschmidt B, Weinand J, Pude R. Cascading use of Miscanthus as growing substrate in soilless cultivation of vegetables (tomatoes, cucumbers) and subsequent direct combustion. Scientia Horticulturae 2018;235:205e13. Vasquez A, Sherwood NE, Larson N, Story M. Community-supported agriculture as a dietary and health improvement strategy: a narrative review. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 2017;117(1):83e94. de Boer J, Sch€ osler H, Aiking H. “Meatless days” or “less but better”? Exploring strategies to adapt western meat consumption to health and sustainability challenges. Appetite 2014;76:120e8. Jurgilevich A, Birge T, Kentala-Lehtonen J, Korhonen-Kurki K, Pietik€ainen J, Saikku L, Sch€ osler H. Transition towards circular economy in the food system. Sustainability 2016;8(1):69.

Circular economy in action

201

[257] Desmidt E, Ghyselbrecht K, Zhang Y, Pinoy L, Van der Bruggen B, Verstraete W, Rabaey K, Meesschaert B. Global phosphorus scarcity and full-scale P-recovery techniques: a review. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 2015; 45(4):336e84. [258] Schr€ oder JJ, Smit AL, Cordell D, Rosemarin A. Improved phosphorus use efficiency in agriculture: a key requirement for its sustainable use. Chemosphere 2011;84(6): 822e31. [259] Cordell D, Rosemarin A, Schr€ oder JJ, Smit AL. Towards global phosphorus security: a systems framework for phosphorus recovery and reuse options. Chemosphere 2011; 84(6):747e58. [260] Kovacs A, Honti M, Zessner M, Eder A, Clement A, Bl€ oschl G. Identification of phosphorus emission hotspots in agricultural catchments. Science of the Total Environment 2012;433:74e88. [261] Feenstra GW. Local food systems and sustainable communities. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 1997;12(1):28e36. [262] Lamine C. Sustainability and resilience in agrifood systems: reconnecting agriculture, food and the environment. Sociologia Ruralis 2015;55(1):41e61. [263] European Commison. Report from the commission to the European parliament and the Council on the case for a local farming and direct sales labelling scheme. 2013. Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/sites/agriculture/files/quality/ local-farming-direct-sales/pdf/com-report-12-2013_en.pdf. [264] Brunori G, Galli F, Barjolle D, Van Broekhuizen R, Colombo L, Giampietro M, Kirwan J, Lang T, Mathijs E, Maye D, de Roest K. Are local food chains more sustainable than global food chains? Considerations for assessment. Sustainability 2016; 8(5):449. [265] Schmitt E, Galli F, Menozzi D, Maye D, Touzard JM, Marescotti A, Six J, Brunori G. Comparing the sustainability of local and global food products in Europe. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;165:346e59. [266] Reijnders L, Soret S. Quantification of the environmental impact of different dietary protein choices. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2003;78(3):664Se8S. [267] Daniel CR, Cross AJ, Koebnick C, Sinha R. Trends in meat consumption in the USA. Public Health Nutrition 2011;14(4):575e83. [268] McAfee AJ, McSorley EM, Cuskelly GJ, Moss BW, Wallace JM, Bonham MP, Fearon AM. Red meat consumption: an overview of the risks and benefits. Meat Science 2010;84(1):1e13. [269] Stehfest E, Bouwman L, Van Vuuren DP, Den Elzen MG, Eickhout B, Kabat P. Climate benefits of changing diet. Climatic Change 2009;95(1e2):83e102. [270] Sch€ osler H, De Boer J, Boersema JJ. Can we cut out the meat of the dish? Constructing consumer-oriented pathways towards meat substitution. Appetite 2012;58(1): 39e47. [271] Bere E, Brug J. Towards health-promoting and environmentally friendly regional diets e a Nordic example. Public Health Nutrition 2009;12(1):91e6. [272] Zhang R, El-Mashad HM, Hartman K, Wang F, Liu G, Choate C, Gamble P. Characterization of food waste as feedstock for anaerobic digestion. Bioresource Technology 2007;98(4):929e35. [273] Wong JH, Ho CS, Mansor NNA, Lee CT. Mitigation of greenhouse gases emission through food waste composting and replacement of chemical fertiliser. Chemical Engineering Transactions 2017;56:367e72. [274] Ma Y, Yin Y, Liu Y. A holistic approach for food waste management towards zerosolid disposal and energy/resource recovery. Bioresource Technology 2017;228: 56e61.

202

The Circular Economy

[275] Yates M, Gomez MR, Martin-Luengo MA, Iba~ nez VZ, Serrano AMM. Multivalorization of apple pomace towards materials and chemicals. Waste to wealth. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;143:847e53. [276] Campoy-Mu~ noz P, Cardenete MA, Delgado MC. Economic impact assessment of food waste reduction on European countries through social accounting matrices. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2017;122:202e9. [277] Qi D, Roe BE. Foodservice composting crowds out consumer food waste reduction behavior in a dining experiment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2017; 99(5):1159e71. [278] Kytzia S, Faist M, Baccini P. Economically extendeddMFA: a material flow approach for a better understanding of food production chain. Journal of Cleaner Production 2004;12(8e10):877e89. [279] Wilson NL, Rickard BJ, Saputo R, Ho ST. Food waste: the role of date labels, package size, and product category. Food Quality and Preference 2017;55:35e44. [280] Collart A, Interis M. Consumer imperfect information in the market for expired and nearly expired foods and implications for reducing food waste. Sustainability 2018; 10(11):3835. [281] Armar-Klemesu M. Urban agriculture and food security, nutrition and health. In: Bakker N, Dubbeling M, Guendel S, Sabel KU, de Zeeuw H, editors. Growing cities, growing food, urban agriculture on the policy Agenda. Feldafing, Germany: DSE; 2000. p. 99e118. [282] Cameira MR, Tedesco S, Leit~ao TE. Water and nitrogen budgets under different production systems in Lisbon urban farming. Biosystems Engineering 2014;125: 65e79. [283] Dieleman H. Urban agriculture in Mexico City; balancing between ecological, economic, social and symbolic value. Journal Cleaner Production 2017;163:S156e63. [284] Ferreira AJD, Guilherme R, Ferreira CSS, Oliveira MFL. Urban Agriculture, a tool towards more resilient urban communities? Current Opinion in Environmental Science and Health 2018;5:93e7. [285] Orsini F, Kahane R, Nono-Womdim R, Gianquinto G. Urban agriculture in the developing world: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2013;33(4): 695e720. [286] Ramalho CE, Hobbs RJ. Time for a change: dynamic urban ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2012;27(3):179e88. [287] Pawelczyk A. Eu policy and legislation on recycling of organic wastes to agriculture. International Society for Animal Hygiene 2005;1:64e71. [288] AgroCycle for a circular economy. Available online at: http://www.agrocycle.eu/ #project. [289] Toop TA, Ward S, Oldfield T, Hull M, Kirby ME, Theodorou MK. AgroCyclee developing a circular economy in agriculture. Energy Procedia 2017;123:76e80. [290] FAO. Land &water: water scarcity. 2019. Available online at: http://www.fao.org/ land-water/water/water-scarcity/en/. [291] Pal A, He Y, Jekel M, Reinhard M, Gin KYH. Emerging contaminants of public health significance as water quality indicator compounds in the urban water cycle. Environment International 2014;71:46e62. [292] Gosling SN, Arnell NW. A global assessment of the impact of climate change on water scarcity. Climatic Change 2016;134(3):371e85. [293] Zhang QH, Yang WN, Ngo HH, Guo WS, Jin PK, Dzakpasu M, Yang SJ, Wang Q, Wang XC, Ao D. Current status of urban wastewater treatment plants in China. Environment International 2016;92:11e22.

Circular economy in action

203

[294] Lyu S, Chen W, Zhang W, Fan Y, Jiao W. Wastewater reclamation and reuse in China: opportunities and challenges. Journal of Environmental Sciences 2016;39: 86e96. [295] Asano T, Cotruvo JA. Groundwater recharge with reclaimed municipal wastewater: health and regulatory considerations. Water Research 2004;38(8):1941e51. [296] Toze S. Reuse of effluent waterdbenefits and risks. Agricultural Water Management 2006;80(1e3):147e59. [297] Ncibi MC, Mahjoub B, Mahjoub O, Sillanp€a€a M. Remediation of emerging pollutants in contaminated wastewater and aquatic environments: biomass-based technologies. CleaneSoil, Air, Water 2017;45(5):1700101. [298] Lalmi A, Bouhidel KE, Sahraoui B, el Houda Anfif C. Removal of lead from polluted waters using ion exchange resin with Ca (NO3)2 for elution. Hydrometallurgy 2018; 178:287e93. [299] Williams AT, Zitomer DH, Mayer BK. Ion exchange-precipitation for nutrient recovery from dilute wastewater. Environmental Science: Water Research and Technology 2015;1(6):832e8. [300] Porada S, van Egmond WJ, Post JW, Saakes M, Hamelers HVM. Tailoring ion exchange membranes to enable low osmotic water transport and energy efficient electrodialysis. Journal of Membrane Science 2018;552:22e30. [301] Antoniou MG, Hey G, Vega SR, Spiliotopoulou A, Fick J, Tysklind M, la Cour Jansen J, Andersen HR. Required ozone doses for removing pharmaceuticals from wastewater effluents. Science of the Total Environment 2013;456:42e9. [302] Lee Y, von Gunten U. Oxidative transformation of micropollutants during municipal wastewater treatment: comparison of kinetic aspects of selective (chlorine, chlorine dioxide, ferrateVI, and ozone) and non-selective oxidants (hydroxyl radical). Water Research 2010;44:555e66. [303] Dodd MC, Kohler HPE, Von Gunten U. Oxidation of antibacterial compounds by ozone and hydroxyl radical: elimination of biological activity during aqueous ozonation processes. Environmental Science and Technology 2009;43(7):2498e504. [304] Reungoat J, Escher BI, Macova M, Argaud FX, Gernjak W, Keller J. Ozonation and biological activated carbon filtration of wastewater treatment plant effluents. Water Research 2012;46(3):863e72. [305] Magdeburg A, Stalter D, Schl€ usener M, Ternes T, Oehlmann J. Evaluating the efficiency of advanced wastewater treatment: target analysis of organic contaminants and (geno-) toxicity assessment tell a different story. Water Research 2014;50:35e47. [306] H€ ubner U, von Gunten U, Jekel M. Evaluation of the persistence of transformation products from ozonation of trace organic compounds e a critical review. Water Research 2015;68:150e70. [307] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi MC, Matilainen A. Advanced oxidation processes for the removal of natural organic matter from drinking water sources: a comprehensive review. Journal of Environmental Management 2018;208:56e76. [308] Gurung K, Ncibi MC, Thangaraj SK, J€anis J, Seyedsalehi M, Sillanp€a€a M. Removal of pharmaceutically active compounds (PhACs) from real membrane bioreactor (MBR) effluents by photocatalytic degradation using composite Ag2O/P-25 photocatalyst. Separation and Purification Technology 2019;125:317e28. [309] Szyma nski K, Morawski AW, Mozia S. Effectiveness of treatment of secondary effluent from a municipal wastewater treatment plant in a photocatalytic membrane reactor and hybrid UV/H2O2eultrafiltration system. Chemical Engineering and Processing e Process Intensification 2018;125:318e24. [310] Wang J, Tai Y, Man Y, Wang R, Feng X, Yang Y, Fan J, Guo J, Tao R, Yang Y, Chen Z. Capacity of various single-stage constructed wetlands to treat domestic

204

[311] [312] [313] [314] [315]

[316] [317] [318] [319] [320] [321] [322] [323] [324] [325] [326] [327] [328] [329]

The Circular Economy

sewage under optimal temperature in Guangzhou city, South China. Ecological Engineering 2018;115:35e44. Riggio VA, Ruffino B, Campo G, Comino E, Comoglio C, Zanetti M. Constructed wetlands for the reuse of industrial wastewater: a case-study. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;171:723e32. Bakar SNHA, Hasan HA, Mohammad AW, Abdullah SRS, Haan TY, Ngteni R, Yusof KMM. A review of moving-bed biofilm reactor technology for palm oil mill effluent treatment. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;171:1532e45. Ødegaard H. The moving bed biofilm reactor. Water Environmental Engineering and Reuse of Water 1999;575314:250e305. Wang XJ, Xia SQ, Chen L, Zhao JF, Renault NJ, Chovelon JM. Nutrients removal from municipal wastewater by chemical precipitation in a moving bed biofilm reactor. Process Biochem 2006;41(4):824e8. Gurung K, Ncibi MC, Sillanp€a€a M. Assessing membrane fouling and the performance of pilot-scale membrane bioreactor (MBR) to treat real municipal wastewater during winter season in Nordic regions. Science of the Total Environment 2017;579: 1289e97. Judd SJ. The status of industrial and municipal effluent treatment with membrane bioreactor technology. Chemical Engineering Journal 2016;305:37e45. Sriwiriyarat T, Randall CW. Performance of IFAS wastewater treatment processes for biological phosphorus removal. Water Research 2005;39(16):3873e84. Gude VG. Wastewater treatment in microbial fuel cells e an overview. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;122:287e307. Escapa A, Mateos R, Martínez EJ, Blanes J. Microbial electrolysis cells: an emerging technology for wastewater treatment and energy recovery. From laboratory to pilot plant and beyond. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2016;55:942e56. Iakovleva E, Sillanp€a€a M. The use of low-cost adsorbents for wastewater purification in mining industries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International 2013;20(11):7878e99. Huisman JL, Schouten G, Schultz C. Biologically produced sulphide for purification of process streams, effluent treatment and recovery of metals in the metal and mining industry. Hydrometallurgy 2006;83(1e4):106e13. Mosher JB, Figueroa L. Biological oxidation of cyanide: a viable treatment option for the minerals processing industry? Minerals Engineering 1996;9(5):573e81. Tay KS, Madehi N. Ozonation of ofloxacin in water: by-products, degradation pathway and ecotoxicity assessment. Science of the Total Environment 2015;520: 23e31. Gusek JJ, Figueroa LA, editors. Mitigation of metal mining influenced water, vol. 2. Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration (SME Publisher); 2009. Awadalla FT, Striez C, Lamb K. Removal of ammonium and nitrate ions from mine effluents by membrane technology. Separation Science and Technology 1994;29(4): 483e95. Feini LIU, Zhang G, Qin M, Zhang H. Performance of nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes in metal effluent treatment. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering 2008;16(3):441e5. Ricci BC, Ferreira CD, Aguiar AO, Amaral MC. Integration of nanofiltration and reverse osmosis for metal separation and sulfuric acid recovery from gold mining effluent. Separation and Purification Technology 2015;154:11e21. Buzzi DC, Viegas LS, Rodrigues MAS, Bernardes AM, Ten orio JAS. Water recovery from acid mine drainage by electrodialysis. Minerals Engineering 2013;40:82e9. Lee HJ, Sarfert F, Strathmann H, Moon SH. Designing of an electrodialysis desalination plant. Desalination 2002;142(3):267e86.

Circular economy in action

205

[330] Strathmann H. Electrodialysis, a mature technology with a multitude of new applications. Desalination 2010;264(3):268e88. [331] Zheng Y, Gao X, Wang X, Li Z, Wang Y, Gao C. Application of electrodialysis to remove copper and cyanide from simulated and real gold mine effluents. RSC Advances 2015;5(26):19807e17. [332] Martí-Calatayud MC, Buzzi DC, García-Gabald on M, Ortega E, Bernardes AM, Tenorio JAS, Pérez-Herranz V. Sulfuric acid recovery from acid mine drainage by means of electrodialysis. Desalination 2014;343:120e7. [333] Rhee KI, Lee JC, Lee CK, Joo KH, Yoon JK, Kang HR, Kim YS, Sohn HJ. A recovery of gold from electronic scrap by mechanical separation, acid leaching and electrowinning (No. CONF-951105-). Warrendale, PA (United States): Minerals, Metals and Materials Society; 1995. [334] Syed S. Recovery of gold from secondary sources e a review. Hydrometallurgy 2012; 115:30e51. [335] Eger P. Modular ion exchange treatment of mine water at Soudan State Park. Pittsburgh, PA: National Meeting of the American Society of Mining and Reclamation; 2010. Available online at: https://www.google.com/url?sa¼t&rct¼j&q¼ &esrc¼s&source¼web&cd¼3&ved¼2ahUKEwisusSOzOPfAhXILFAKHbbiCRQ QFjACegQIABAC&url¼https%3A%2F%2Fwww.asmr.us%2FPortals%2F0%2FD ocuments%2FConference-Proceedings%2F2010%2F0248-Eger.pdf&usg¼AOvVaw 2rzwGPUDW8xaI5b0UV2iPw. [336] Seo EY, Cheong YW, Yim GJ, Min KW, Geroni JN. Recovery of Fe, Al and Mn in acid coal mine drainage by sequential selective precipitation with control of pH. Catena 2017;148:11e6. [337] Park SM, Shin SY, Yang JS, Ji SW, Baek K. Selective recovery of dissolved metals from mine drainage using electrochemical reactions. Electrochim Acta 2015;181: 248e54. [338] Neves LC, De Souza JB, VIDAL CMDS, Martins KG, Manago BL. Pulp and paper mill effluent post-treatment using microfiltration and ultrafiltration membranes. Cellulose Chemistry and Technology 2017;51(5e6):579e88. [339] Savant DV, Abdul-Rahman R, Ranade DR. Anaerobic degradation of adsorbable organic halides (AOX) from pulp and paper industry wastewater. Bioresources Technology 2006;97(9):1092e104. [340] Ince BK, Cetecioglu Z, Ince O. Pollution prevention in the pulp and paper industries. In: Environmental management in practice. InTech; 2011. https://doi.org/10.5772/ 23709. Available from: https://www.intechopen.com/books/environmentalmanagement-in-practice/pollution-prevention-in-the-pulp-and-paper-industries. [341] Ashrafi O, Yerushalmi L, Haghighat F. Wastewater treatment in the pulp-and-paper industry: a review of treatment processes and the associated greenhouse gas emission. Journal of Environment Management 2015;158:146e57. [342] Kamali M, Khodaparast Z. Review on recent developments on pulp and paper mill wastewater treatment. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 2015;114: 326e42. [343] Sim~ao L, Hotza D, Raupp-Pereira F, Labrincha JA, Montedo ORK. Wastes from pulp and paper mills-a review of generation and recycling alternatives. Cer^amica 2018;64(371):443e53. [344] Branco R, Serafim L, Xavier A. Second generation bioethanol production: on the use of pulp and paper industry wastes as feedstock. Fermentation 2019;5(1):4. [345] Nosek R, Holubcik M, Jandacka J, Radacovska L. Analysis of paper sludge pellets for energy utilization. Bioresources 2017;12(4):7032e40.

206

The Circular Economy

[346] Hazarika J, Ghosh U, Kalamdhad AS, Khwairakpam M, Singh J. Transformation of elemental toxic metals into immobile fractions in paper mill sludge through rotary drum composting. Ecological Engineering 2017;101:185e92. [347] Van Zwieten L, Kimber S, Morris S, Chan KY, Downie A, Rust J, Joseph S, Cowie A. Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of papermill waste on agronomic performance and soil fertility. Plant Soil 2010;327(1e2):235e46. [348] Jaria G, Calisto V, Silva CP, Gil MV, Otero M, Esteves VI. Obtaining granular activated carbon from paper mill sludge e a challenge for application in the removal of pharmaceuticals from wastewater. Science of the Total Environment 2019;653: 393e400. [349] Soccol CR, de Souza Vandenberghe LP, Medeiros ABP, Karp SG, Buckeridge M, Ramos LP, Pitarelo AP, Ferreira-Leit~ao V, Gottschalk LMF, Ferrara MA, da Silva Bon EP. Bioethanol from lignocelluloses: status and perspectives in Brazil. Bioresources Technology 2010;101(13):4820e5. [350] Gurram RN, Al-Shannag M, Lecher NJ, Duncan SM, Singsaas EL, Alkasrawi M. Bioconversion of paper mill sludge to bioethanol in the presence of accelerants or hydrogen peroxide pretreatment. Bioresources Technology 2015; 192:529e39. [351] Zakzeski J, Bruijnincx PC, Jongerius AL, Weckhuysen BM. The catalytic valorization of lignin for the production of renewable chemicals. Chemistry Reviews 2010; 110(6):3552e99. [352] Gayubo AG, Valle B, Aguayo AT, Olazar M, Bilbao J. Pyrolytic lignin removal for the valorization of biomass pyrolysis crude bio-oil by catalytic transformation. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 2010;85(1):132e44. [353] Azadi P, Inderwildi OR, Farnood R, King DA. Liquid fuels, hydrogen and chemicals from lignin: a critical review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2013;21: 506e23. [354] European Environment Agency. EU Best Available Techniques reference documents (BREFs). Available online at: https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/air/links/ guidance-and-tools/eu-best-available-technology-reference. [355] Sitra. Finnish road map to a circular economy 2016e2025. 2017. Available online at: https://media.sitra.fi/2017/02/28142644/Selvityksia121.pdf. [356] The Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (The RSA). Guide on designing for a circular economy. 2016. Available on line at: https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/reports/the-great-recovery—designing-fora-circular-economy.pdf.

CHAPTER FIVE

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability 5.1 Introduction The economic, environmental and societal vulnerability generated in most parts of the world by decades of the linear economic model, based on the “take-make-dispose” scheme, needs to be fixed once and for all via an urgent and well planned shift toward more sustainable and more circular resources supply chains, production systems, consumption patterns and recycling practices. This shift is no longer an option and cannot be postponed any further. It is rapidly and steadily becoming a necessity for every country, every city and every company (and hopefully in every home) to sustain economic development, and thus, bring stability on local regional, national, and ultimately on a global scale. The aim of this movement is to build a cross-disciplinary network of active promoters and participants in various economic sectors to drive forward a new sustainable and resource-efficient economy via [1]: • raising the awareness of issues around increased resource scarcity and the current wasteful management of both resources and wastes. • building up a large understanding about the key principles of CE and its closed loop design, and • fostering ideas and exploring new opportunities through collaborative partnerships in the various supply chain, manufacturing, and waste management networks. Currently, and based on several reports, the CE concept is a global hot topic, and several world business leaders, policymakers, academics, industrialists and NGOs argue that the move toward a more circular economy is urgent and necessary in order to help solve global environmental and economic challenges [2]. In an interesting study, data related to the geographical origin of the CE concept were compiled, analyzed, and presented [3]. The data were collected from two literature sources: academic publications (articles) and government/institutional publications (reports). The country of origin of The Circular Economy ISBN: 978-0-12-815267-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815267-6.00005-0

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

207

j

208

The Circular Economy

each relevant CE example cited within the literature sources was recorded. Each article/report, from both the academic and institutional literature, cited several CE examples from different countries, and a total of 33 nations were covered across all the sources. The study clearly shows that the European continent is pioneering the CE movement throughout the world. As well, the rising role of China is prominent as its government appears to be actively involved in CE implementation, along with the academic corpus with numerous CE-related scientific articles in recent years. Overall, several European counties, North America, and China are showing clear signs of genuine commitment to CE, although with different perspectives as we shall see throughout the present chapter. Several strategic decisions and initiatives can effectively enable and/or catalyze the transition phase toward CE, and in this chapter, we will explore those CE-related visions in several countries around the world and analyze the associated achievements by showcasing the selected case studies from various economic sectors. Hence, the adoption and implementation of circular principles in various industries, agricultural practices, water and wastewater management, and waste management strategies will be studied, with the main objective of preserving valuable resources (especially depletable ones) in the economy, and generating economic, environmental, and societal benefits from sustainable circular strategies. It has to be noted that while the current crisis in resources management is widely acknowledged, societies at large seem to have little to no knowledge of (or interest in) what goes into making products that people consume on a daily basis, and this constitutes a serious hindering factor during the implementation of the CE. This momentum includes initiatives to “push” industrialists to produce more resource-efficient and ecofriendly products from recycled resources for example, and to pressure politicians and representatives in legislative bodies to propose and support laws and regulations promoting the implementation of CE principles in various industrial activities, through the entire supply and value chains, i.e., from resources acquisition and products manufacturing to recycling and the adoption of environmental protection measures. So, let us start our global journey regarding the adoption and implementation scenarios of the CE concept, and the related achievements and pioneering steps, in the pioneering countries and regions around the world.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

209

5.2 Circular economy in Europe 5.2.1 Strategic visions In 2012, the European Commission published a Manifesto for a “resource-efficient Europe,” in which it was clearly stated that “in a world with growing pressures on resources and the environment, the EU has no choice but to go for the transition to a resource-efficient and ultimately regenerative circular economy” [4]. According to the authors of this “manifesto,” Europe is taking important decisions on strengthening the economic and monetary union, the future EU budget and engaging with the international community in the follow up of the Rioþ20 Summit. In this context, the European Resource Efficiency Platform was elaborated to incite business, labor, and civil society leaders to support resource efficiency and the urgent transformation to a CE because this concept is highly believed to be the most reliable way out of the current crisis toward a reindustrialization of the European economy on the basis of a sustainable and resource-efficient growth. The visionary objectives behind such important and a timely paradigm shift toward a circular, resource-efficient, and resilient economy can be accomplished by Ref. [5]: - Encouraging innovation and accelerating public and private investment in resource-efficient technologies, systems, and skills, also in SMEs, through a dynamic and predictable political, economic and regulatory framework, a supportive financial system, and sustainable growth enhancing resource-efficient priorities in public expenditure and procurement. - Implementing, using, and adopting smart regulations, standards, and codes of conduct that create a level playing-field, reward front-runners, accelerate the transition and take into account the social and international implications of our actions. - Abolishing environmentally harmful subsidies and tax-breaks that waste public money on obsolete practices, taking care to address affordability for people whose incomes are hard-pressed. Shifting the tax burden away from jobs to encourage resource-efficiency, and using taxes and charges to stimulate innovation and development of a job-rich, socially cohesive, resource-efficient, and climate-resilient economy. - Creating better market conditions for products and services that have lower impacts across their life-cycles, and that are durable, repairable, and

210

The Circular Economy

recyclable, progressively taking the worst performing products off the market; inspiring sustainable lifestyles by informing and incentivizing consumers, using the latest insights into behavioral economics and information technology, and encouraging sustainable sourcing, new business models, and the use of waste as raw materials. - Integrating current and future resource scarcities and vulnerabilities more coherently into wider policy areas, at national, European and global level, such as in the fields of transport, food, water, and construction. - Providing clear signals to all economic actors by adopting policy goals to achieve a resource-efficient economy and society by the targeted timeframe, setting targets that give a clear direction and indicators to measure progress relating to the use of land, material, water, and greenhouse gas emissions, and biodiversity. In December 2015, the European Commission unveiled a new package on the concept of CE economy, replacing the package issued in 2014 within the framework of the EU2020 flagship initiative “A resource-efficient Europe.” The new package includes a series of modifications to the existing European legislation on waste treatment and recycling, and a communication entitled “Closing the loopdAn EU action plan for the circular economy” [6]. One of the main objectives of the package was to create a momentum, including all potential contributors in production, consumption, and secondary raw materials and waste management. It focuses on priority sectors such as plastics, food waste, construction/demolition, critical raw materials, and bio-based waste, as well as energy efficiency, water, and wastewater. The visions and strategies related to the CE concept in the European continent were also echoed in many research and review articles, and institutional reports. In the following section, we will explore those visions through the lenses of (i) the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF), (ii) The European Technology Platform for Sustainable Chemistry (SusChem), and (iii) the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC). i. EMF, along with the McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, and the Foundation for Environmental Economics and Sustainability, SUN (Stiftungsfonds f€ ur Umwelt€ okonomie und Nachhaltigkeit), elaborated an interesting report on the EU vision behind the adoption and implementation of CE in the three sectors of mobility, food systems, and the built environment. The report is entitled “Growth Within: A circular economy vision for a competitive Europe” [7] and was

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

211

presented at the European Commission’s stakeholder conference on the circular economy in Brussels on June 25, 2015. The findings were reported to be the result of a 9-month study, drawing on the expertise of academia, government, and industry. The insights of the report have been derived through extensive desk research, over 150 interviews, a new approach to modeling the economic impact of the circular economy, the largest comparative study on employment effects, and three in-depth sector analyses [8]. Briefly, the related analyses revealed that by adopting the CE concept, Europe could take advantage of the impending technology revolution to create a net benefit of V1.8 trillion by 2030 or V0.9 trillion more than in the current linear development path. Along with those economic benefits, the authors emphasized that the adoption of CE would also improve the societal conditions including an increase of V3000 in household income, a reduction in the cost of time lost to congestion by 16%, and a decrease in carbon dioxide emissions by 50% compared to the current levels. The report also acknowledged that Europe is still relying on a linear growth model, which is highly dependent on finite resources, and thus, exposing it to resource volatility, limited gains in productivity, and huge loss of value through waste. Several studies conducted by the EMF has quantified clear economic benefits of a transition to the circular economy, which aims to keep products, components, and materials at their highest value at all times. In this context, this joint report was produced to develop a vision of how the CE could look for three of Europe’s most resource-intensive basic needs, food, mobility, and the built environment, which together account for 60% of household costs. ii. SusChem, a European Technology Platform initiative established to improve the competitive situation of the European Union in the chemical sector, published a position paper on CE aiming at providing solutions based technologies developed by the chemical industry and its partners in academia, research, and technology organizations and other industrial players from a variety of different value-chains [9]. Basically, the paper is developing SusChem’s vision for a functioning CE in Europe (and globally) and provides some concrete implementation scenarios in the field of chemistry. Overall, the position paper has three main recommendations: • A sustainability-based approach: the integration of all aspects of sustainability is essential to the development of the CE concept in order to

212

The Circular Economy

effectively ensure a positive impact on society while mitigating environmental impacts and sustaining economic growth. • Technology development for a sustainable CE: SusChem is highlighting the fact that implementing the CE concept throughout new regulations, services, and business models should concurrently be accompanied by innovative enabling technologies. Indeed, advanced technologies are indispensable to enable better use of existing resources, along the whole value chain, to develop new productive and recycling paths. It was especially reported that the principle technology developments should take place in the following focus areas: - Utilization of sustainable alternative feedstock including secondary raw materials, lignocellulosic biomass, waste or CO2 from industrial flue gases. - Design of sustainable materials enabling eco-design of “products” that are easy to recycle, while maintaining or improving performance. - Improved efficiency for production processes to maximize the use of all resources entering the system, including primary and secondary raw materials, water, and energy. • Policy framework’s coherence and stability: SusChem also believes that coherence and stability over time for the policy framework is critical for European leadership. CE-related policies should be developed in coordination with other related policies, such as the Energy Union Package, to contribute fully to a sustainable economy. Policy coherence, as well as policy stability over time, is essential to establish a regulatory framework that enables investment in sustainable, resource efficient and innovative technologies in Europe. It can also ensure European leadership in sustainable and clean technologies [10]. The SusChem position paper concludes with five case studies describing selected potential contributions (i.e., technology solutions) to the CE concept by The European Technology Platform for Sustainable Chemistry. The case studies cover the utilization of CO2 as an alternative carbon resource, new composite materials, new catalysts, industrial symbiosis, and biorefineries. iii. EESC, the European Economic and Social Committee published a position paper on the CE concept, and it was reported that the EESC strongly supports the transition of the European economy toward a

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

213

greener, more resource-efficient patterns; a topic it has addressed in a rolling program of opinions including on the 2015 circular economy package. Mr. Cillian Lohan, rapporteur of the EESC opinion on the CE package stated that “the wider circular economy package now on offer is a good first step toward treating waste as a resource, rather than a burden, but there is room for improvement. The EESC is keen to see more ambitious economic and environmental targets front-loaded in the package in line with those in the proposed 2014 package” [11]. According to the EESC’s visions, CE should be an economy where circular principles should be implemented in a “long-lasting, small, local, and clean” manner. It should create opportunities for businesses, especially innovative and disruptive ones, such as leasing-based business models. A successful transition from linear to circular economy is believed to be able to provide a decisive boost for a greener and more sustainable European reindustrialization objective. Furthermore, it was recommended that the foreseen revision of the Eco-design Directive must take the full life cycle of the product into account including durability, reparability, availability/affordability of spare parts, and unconditional disclosure of repair and service information by manufacturers. The EESC also wants a total ban on products with builtin defects designed to end the product’s life. Interestingly, the authors of this position paper also looked into the behavior change that needs to go hand in hand with the other economic and technological enabling and promoting factors. In this regard, it was highlighted that such behavioral change is best achieved through clear price signals, and the EESC proposes to develop a support mechanism that will allow poor people access to higher quality and initially higher cost goods and services. These may include a government-backed lending scheme, or a manufacturer-backed financing scheme exclusively applied with lower rates to products with a certain minimum life expectancy. Clear and accurate labeling helping consumers to choose the most sustainable instead of the cheapest-priced product was also emphasized upon [12].

5.2.2 National strategies 5.2.2.1 Finland In Finland, the CE concept is particularly driven by the Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra, whose work has gained National, European, and worldwide

214

The Circular Economy

recognition. Hence, the Finnish CE, as well as the related strategies and objectives, will be explored through Sitra’s activities and publications. The Finnish public organization started building a CE “movement” in Finland by first creating the world’s first National Road Map for the Circular Economy 2016e25, a plan of action that consists of numerous key and pilot projects. Based on the road map, Sitra and the Government of Finland also co-launched a National Action Program on the Circular Economy in the Autumn of 2017 that further demonstrates Finland’s commitment [13]. In this respect, Sitra has listed several examples of Finnish companies that have changed their operations and revenue models according to the CE model. It has also established the world’s first roadmap to CE: “Leading the CycledFinnish Roadmap to a Circular Economy 2016e25”. The initiative was launched in spring 2016 to build a CE roadmap for Finland. The work was done under the direction of Sitra, in collaboration with the Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment, business life, and other important stakeholders. The major aim of this roadmap is to promote the global position of the country “from being an adapter of the circular economy to a leader” by 2025 [14]. The ongoing strategic change occurring in Finland is emphasizing the important role of key enabling and facilitating actors and activities, namely the government, strong companies, and flourishing research, development and innovation activities, all working on searching and providing comprehensive solutions and co-operation covering the entire value chain in several economic sectors. In practice, Finland is actively seeking a leading position in CE by concentrating on five focus areas: • sustainable food system, • forest-based loops, • technical loops, • transport and logistics, and • joint national actions. According to Sitra, Finland’s strengths and expertise, the importance of the focus to the economy and its significance in terms of realizing the circular economy as a whole have been taken into account in those focus areas [15]. In its report “The opportunities of a circular economy for Finland” published in 2015 [16], Sitra’s working group on this CE-promoting project stressed upon the necessity of identifying how much Finnish companies can influence each sector’s value chain and the sectoral potential offered by the CE model.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

215

Furthermore, it was reported that, within Finnish society, the successful implementation of CE and the full exploitation of the country’s potentialities is affected by certain special characteristics of the economy: - First, in sectors, such as the pulp and paper and mining industries, most raw materials produced in Finland are further processed and exported. In this context, most production in the paper industry is based on domestic raw materials, but the products are consumed abroad. Thus, with the CE parading, Finland should focus on side streams rather than wondering how to promote the recycling of end products. - Second, food is the only consumer good that is primarily produced in the country. Indeed, in the food production value chain, the flow of materials is more domestic than in many other developed economies. A large percentage of food products is also consumed domestically. These factors increase the potential to influence how materials and nutrients are circulated, which enables the promotion of the circular approach throughout the chain. - Third, Finland’s industrial activities are increasingly centered around the immaterial section of the value chain, and many production activities have been offshored. Thus, in industrial production, the circular approach is less about promoting the concept and more about identifying how Finnish companies can use CE principles to improve their international competitiveness. After presenting the Finnish vision on CE from Sitra’s public perspective, and in order to widen our understanding about the place of CE in this Nordic country, let us now briefly explore the outlook of Finnish companies on the CE concept through the survey carried out by the Confederation of Finnish Industries, EK. In this survey, EK interviewed people from over 20 companies. The related report [17] was prepared in close cooperation with EK’s member federations. According to the respondents, the driving force in the CE concept is the partnership. This report provided a concrete description of how to build circular solutions together, involving networks offering active roles to companies of different sizes. Thus, from an industrial perspective, CE is perceived as the best economic model to keep materials in circulation for as long as possible, thus retaining their value and reducing their harmful impact on the environment, if prematurely and unsafely discarded. In CE networks, no waste should be generated since one company’s side streams (surplus of materials) are raw

216

The Circular Economy

materials for other companies (open loop), or the same company if having various production schemes (closed loop). Following this vision, many Finnish companies are making headway in the implementation of CE principles in their production and manufacturing activities. This became evident when EK interviewed over 20 companies from large industrial companies to small start-ups that are looking for growth in the circular economy. The goal was to find out how companies understand the rising trends of the CE model and seize the opportunities it offers. Based on the extensive research carried out during this survey, EK identified four areas in which companies can seek substantial growth: • Make use of material flows across sectors, • Create new value with design and branding, • Expand from products to services, and • Generate new types of growth with platforms Within each area, there are several inspiring companies that generate new growth together. In this publication, a closer look at these opportunities was conducted, showing how Finnish companies are already closely engaged in the CE paradigm [18]. Along with those opportunities, the interviews also highlighted several problems related to companies’ operating environments that may slow down or complicate the implementation and/or expansion of CE in Finland. For addressing these concerns, the above report provided a summary from the perspective of business and industry on how to improve the business environment to promote the CE model. Better cooperation across different industrial sectors and with different actors, including, for example, research institutions and policymakers, was reported to be a prerequisite in making CE a Finnish and European success story. In its 2017 State of the Environment report, the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) documented and analyzed the shift from a linear to a circular economy in Finland [19]. The report emphasized five focus areas: • Utilizing municipal waste as material and generating energy. • Promoting the sustainable use of natural resources. • Recycling plastic waste • Textile circulation • Nutrient recycling in the food sector For instance, regarding the first focus, SYKE rightfully stated that one of the most significant measures assessing the functioning of the CE is the quantities of municipal waste and the degree of their valorization. In

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

217

Finland, most municipal waste (65%) is generated by households. Trends in amounts of municipal waste have closely reflected wider economic trends. Currently, negligible amounts of municipal waste end up in landfills. Instead, its material content is first sorted to enable reuse. Any remaining unusable waste is incinerated to generate energy in a nationwide network of waste-fueled power plants. The Riikinvoima Ekovoimalaitos Waste-to-Energy plant, operating near the town of Varkaus in Eastern Finland since October 2016, receives 145,000 tons of source-sorted municipal waste a year as fuel, and it generates 180 GWh of district heat and 90 GWh of electricity for the surrounding region [20]. This development is particularly the result of a ban on the disposal of organic waste in landfill sites, and this policy aims to reduce the climate impacts of waste management. However, for the future, Finland needs to develop and apply more innovative valorization procedures (compared to the rather conventional waste-to-energy), by subjecting source-sorted municipal waste to more profitable conversion schemes viz the emerging waste biorefining concept [21], which is more aligned with the CE paradigm. 5.2.2.2 Germany The waste management policy, which has been adapted in Germany over the past 20 years, is based on closed cycles and assigns disposal responsibilities to manufacturers and distributors of products. This has made industrialists and manufacturers more aware of the necessity to separate waste. This led to the introduction of new disposal technologies and increased recycling capacities, which constituted the foundation upon which the CE concept is being developed in Germany. Nowadays, 14% of the raw materials used by the German industry are recovered waste, and thus, leads to a reduction of the extraction levels and of the related environmental impacts [22]. Modern closed cycle management contributes, with a share of approximately 20%, to achieve the German Kyoto targets on the reduction of climate-relevant emissions. Closed cycle management is not only a contribution to the environmental protection but also pays off economically. The waste management industry has become an extensive and powerful economic sector in Germany. Indeed, almost 200,000 people are employed in approximately 3000 companies, which generate an annual turnover of approximately 40 billion euro. Around 15,000 installations contribute to resource efficiency by recycling and recovery procedures. High recycling rates were achieved,

218

The Circular Economy

including approximately 60% for municipal waste, 60% for commercial waste, and 90% construction and demolition waste [23]. With the CE paradigm, such achievements in waste management are highly praised, but still need to be complemented with additional contributions from other actors and the implementation of other CE principles to establish a highly valorizing network for the recovered wastes, thus, achieving a successful circular economy. In this regard, and compared to classical waste management, the industry should play a considerably more important role. From its perspective, the trend toward CE offers significant potential for improving Germany’s long-term competitiveness, because the use of secondary raw materials as input for industrial production processes can frequently make a crucial contribution to the security of supply (in addition to the associated cost savings) [24]. As a resource-poor country, Germany is increasingly dependent on raw material imports, some of which are classified as “critical” for example, by the European Commission. Important production processes depend on these raw materials (for example flat-screen televisions and monitors still cannot be made without indium); at the same time, the supply is riskprone, with existing reserves concentrated in individual countries or companies [25]. Recirculation of such raw materials is believed to be a reliable strategy to make Germany more independent and to protect its various economic sectors from the considerable price fluctuations often associated with these commodities. In Germany, the annual domestic consumption of raw materials is 15 tons per capita, twice the global average. To decouple economic growth from resource consumption, the government is encouraging innovation in product design. In this context, the German government has set the goal of conserving natural resources and increasing total raw material productivity in Germany. In this regard, total raw material productivity grew by 26% between 2000 and 2014 in the country, and according to the German government, an average growth of 1.5% of total raw material productivity has to be achieved between 2010 and 2030 [26]. One of the government’s programs to achieve this objective is the Resource Efficient Circular Economy d Innovative Product Cycles initiative, which provides grants over the period from 2019 to 2022 to collaborative projects that focus on innovative product designs that lower environmental impacts and costs across the life cycle, as well as enable subsequent repairing and upgrading.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

219

The initiative encourages consortiums, that preferably include small-tomedium enterprises, to develop and implement economically viable product cycles, networks, and systems. Research topics that are eligible for funding include [27]: - New design concepts and instruments for the recycling of products, integration of additional functions, and interfaces for digital systems that involve the cooperation of actors along the product life cycle - Innovative business models and new forms of cooperation as well as business research that encourages resource efficiency - Closing of the loop through digital technologies, simulation, and control of resource efficiency effects and IT-based solutions for business models - Networking initiatives that foster the implementation of joint projects According to many German experts, the successful shift from linear to circular economy necessitates a coordinated effort of frameworks, initiatives, regulations, and instrumentations, including: i. Novel product design: improved and waste-avoiding product design will have to be one of the central levers for implementing the circular economy. Better design can help to make products with longer life or will be easier to repair, refurbish, or upgrade. It can assist recycling businesses when they dismantle products to reclaim valuable materials and components. As a result, valuable resources can be saved following optimized product designing. In this regard, since most products are not manufactured to be marketed in national markets only, the effort to promote better product design should be coordinated by the European Commission through the introduction of CE principles in future regulations under the Eco-design Directive. Thus, the current objective of improving the efficiency and ecological performance of energy-related products [28], need to be supplemented with aspects related to repairability, durability, upgradeability, and recyclability. ii. Innovative business models: Disruptive and innovative business models based on closed loops, cascading cycles, and resource efficiency targets are among the most powerful driving forces to speed up the transition phase toward CE. Where successfully established, such business models, often based on service-orientated concepts, will have a direct and sustained impact on the economic system, and at the same time catalyze the adoption of the necessary frameworks, and help in establishing harmonized networks. In order to promote such important efforts, it is often recommended that the implementation

220

The Circular Economy

of new business models must be tailored to national and regional contexts and circumstances, and that new financing models should be simultaneously developed and made available [29,30]. In Germany, developing programs and funding formats tailored to regional innovation potential is principally carried out at federal states level. iii. Extended producer responsibility: the responsibility of manufacturers for their products after the use phase is a crucial element in the CE concept. However, in Germany, and many other developed countries for that matter, it has not yet been effectively implemented. The issue is that achieving this goal requires “individual” responsibility from each manufacturer. But in practice, this responsibility is delegated to external third parties often located in counties where laws and regulations are loosely and/or selectivity applied. Under these circumstances, the whole CE model is endangered, and will soon lose its sustainability incentives and revert into a “quasi-linear” paradigm. So far, the concepts for extended producer responsibility have been implemented almost exclusively at the national level, with differences in approach between EU member states frequently causing high administrative costs for businesses. With respect to concepts for individual producer responsibility, it would be useful if the European Union established a framework for the European single market [31]. iv. Prevent illegal waste exports: If an effective CE is to be implemented, it will be imperative to stop the illegal “exportation” of wastes. In the case of used motor vehicles, it was reported that Germany possesses the necessary technologies and treatment facilities to fulfill even the European Commission’s increased recycling target of 95%. Nonetheless, only about 17% of the 3e3.5 million vehicles deregistered every year are actually recycled in Germany, and considerable numbers are exported, sometimes illegally, to countries that have much lower environmental standards for operating and dismantling road vehicles. In the area of used electrical devices, despite the reformed German legislation stipulating that exporters must demonstrate that their exports are not waste, illegal exports still remain a problem [24]. 5.2.2.3 Netherlands The Dutch government sent an ambiguous sign of commitment to the concept of CE by clearly stating in their official website that it “wants the Dutch economy to be circular by 2050” [32].

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

221

In order to ensure that in 2050, everyone has enough to eat and can buy the goods they need, like clothing and electrical devices, the Dutch are convinced that their economy needs to become circular because in a CE there is no waste, and because products are better designed and materials are reused as much as possible. For achieving this, the Government-wide program for a Circular Economy was launched in September 2016. In this program, the focus was on developing the CE model in the Netherlands by 2050. One of the key objectives is a 50% reduction in the use of primary raw materials (minerals, fossil, and metals) by 2030. Such an objective is highly relevant in the Netherlands and many other European countries. Indeed, the country depends greatly on the import of products and raw materials as it is importing around 68% of its raw materials from abroad. For example, in 2010, 161 million tons of raw materials were imported, and the indirect dependence on raw materials was reported to be even greater [33]. By committing to the implementing CE by 2050, Dutch decision and policymakers aim at the preservation of natural capital of the country, which is the starting point in the economic system, including prioritizing the use of renewable and generally available raw materials. In this regard, raw materials are optimally deployed and reused without any risks for health and the environment, and primary raw materials, insofar as they are still needed, are extracted in a sustainable manner [34]. The transition involves a shift from “take, make, and waste” to a system that uses, as few, new raw materials, as possible. In many sectors, the Dutch economy is already on the way to becoming a CE and can primarily be classed as a “reuse economy,” where the amount of waste is decreasing as the economy grows and waste is being reused to an ever increasing degree. The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) is also fully invested in promoting the CE concept in the Netherlands, and according to the agency: “The transition toward a circular economy offers economic opportunities for the Netherlands, can make the country less dependent on imported, scarce raw materials and other resources, and will contribute to a cleaner environment.” [35]. It is clear that the Dutch CE is more focused on the necessity to preserve the natural capital and to establish sustainable acquisition schemes of raw materials (in order to provide future generations with their fair share of raw materials). Such perception of the CE concept is well justified considering the previously mentioned restrictions in term of availability and diversity of local feedstocks for industrial activities, and the adverse economic and geopolitical

222

The Circular Economy

repercussions of importing raw materials from aboard (often from politically unstable regions or economic rivals). With a pragmatic touch, the Dutch government program on CE realistically stated that although “the circle will never be entirely closed,” and that the complete decoupling at the global level seems to be feasible only in the very long term, this program will remain focused on this decoupling of growth and material use, until a system in which the sustainable extraction of raw materials is achieved. Logically, such official commitment to and investment in CE lead to the establishment of several incentivizing measures aiming at promoting and easing the transition phase from a linear to a circular economy. Thus, legislation and regulations are being changed, and investments are being made, targeting “circular” businesses, and others willing to become so. These encouraging measures include [36]: i. Fostering legislation and regulations: it is well known that legislation and regulations can encourage innovation, but can also impede it. With the CE concept, any law or regulation that hampers innovation must be changed or removed. The example of the regulations related to transporting waste across borders is an illustrative case on the impact of regulation. Companies often decide not to transport waste because of all the red tape. This means that waste is not reused even though it could be. Legislation and regulations encouraging innovation should be developed further. This includes laws and rules, promoting a sharing economy by making it easier to share used items like cars or tools. ii. Intelligent market incentives: Intelligent market incentives can help turn the market for products and services into a circular economy. For example, by encouraging producers to use raw materials that can be reused more often, or requiring government departments to buy only circular products. iii. Financing: Investing in circular products and services carries different risks than investing in linear products and services. For instance, the risk profiles and depreciation periods are different. The distribution of costs and benefits is also different. As yet, little is known about how the costs of companies in the circular economy relate to their revenues. That is why the Dutch government is planning to study this in collaboration with the Netherlands Investment Agency. The government also wants to invest in entrepreneurs who are active in the fields of renewable energy, energy saving, and reducing CO2 emissions.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

223

iv. Knowledge and innovation: To create a successful CE, education, research, and the spreading and sharing of their generated knowledge within networks are vital in respect of the CE concept. That is why, in the Netherlands, knowledge from enabling technologies and incentivizing grants is very important, and the government is, therefore, stimulating the creation of knowledge networks and different ways of exchanging such knowledge. v. International cooperation: To create a CE in the Netherlands, changes are needed in Europe and worldwide. This is because raw material supply chains and waste flows are global. Also, many Dutch businesses operate internationally. That is why the government is working with other countries as much as possible, especially within Europe, and also the United Nations. In order to attain such ambitious objectives setting a monitoring system is crucial to assess the progress of CE in the country. Monitoring the progress in the transition toward CE is even more vital, and it requires indicators for the effects as well as for the transition process. The effects can already be monitored for raw material consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and waste processing. Following a 7% decline over the 2010e14 period, the volume of direct raw materials remained virtually stable over the 2014e16 period [37]. Also, monitoring of activities are showing that many of the already initiated actions are related to recycling, waste processing, development of instruments and network formation, and far less attention has been given to prevention, reuse, and repair. Is has to be noted that not every indicator proposed in this monitoring system can already be measured; there is particularly little information about the transition process. The monitoring system will need to be developed further, also in view of measurable indicators for the implementation of transition agendas on biomass and food, construction, consumer goods, plastics, and the manufacturing industry. The monitoring system should be seen as a growth model, to be worked out in collaboration with the parties involved in these transition agendas as well as with other Dutch knowledge institutions. Overall, the Netherlands already has one of the highest recycling percentages in Europe. However, for a genuine CE, more is needed, including innovative designs, reuse, and repair of products, and high-quality recycling of materials. Realizing the transition toward a CE is indeed an enormous task; hence, the need for promoting government policies aiming at

224

The Circular Economy

removing barriers and making the way resources are used radically more efficient [38]. 5.2.2.4 United Kingdom The CE debate in the UK has evolved over the last decades from a number of converging strands of thinking and activity, with their origins chiefly in Europe [39]. European Commission policy development on waste has been a key foundation for CE debate in the UK, involving various academic institutions, think tanks, and leading businesses. After perceiving the urgent need to change course for linear to circular economy, and the challenge back then on how to translate those conceptual aspirations into more progressive policies in the four countries comprising the UK, and one of the key actors in the CE promotion effort in the UK is the Ellen MacArthur Foundation [40], whose related endeavors were thoroughly presented in Chapter 1. It was reported that what links the various strands of “circular economy” discourse in the UK is “systems thinking,” i.e., that keeping resources in productive use is not just a matter for individual firms or consumers but part of the whole economic system. This holistic view distinguishes these initiatives from much of waste management policies in the UK since the 1980s until the early 21st century, which were primarily established based on a linear “end of pipe solutions” to the waste problems. As well, the emergence of the resource efficiency issue into the British political and academic discourse, helped in introducing the concept of CE, although most of the focus was reported to be related to industrial process efficiency rather than the whole life cycle of products, and was often unspecific as to which resources it is considering and what kind of efficiencies count most [41]. In this context, the UK’s Waste and Resources Action Program (WRAP) was launched in the year 2000 to promote sustainable waste management. It was established to work with governments, businesses, and communities in the UK, aiming at delivering practical solutions to improve resource efficiency and accelerating the move to a sustainable, resourceefficient economy through [42]: - reinventing how to design, produce, and sell products, - rethinking how to use and consume products, and - redefining what is possible through reuse and recycling. By promoting CE, WRAP aims at keeping resources in use for as long as possible, extracting the maximum value from them while in use, and then recovering and regenerating products and materials at the end of each service

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

225

life. By widely implementing CE principles in the various British economic sectors, WRAP strongly and rightfully believes that CE will enable new and valuable opportunities for growth, by Ref. [43]: - reducing waste. - driving greater resource productivity. - delivering a more competitive UK economy. - positioning the UK to better address emerging resource security/scarcity issues in the future. - help in reducing the environmental impacts of production and consumption in both the UK and abroad. The multifaceted effort of WRAP to support CE in the UK was reported to have catalyzed change across entire sectors, delivering tangible impact such as generating around £2.2billion of benefit to the UK economy between 2008 and 2011. To attain such achievement, WRAP worked (and still do) on critical focus areas in the CE concept including making resource use more efficient, reducing the production of waste, maximizing the recycling of waste, and identifying alternative business models [44]. The return on investment was clear as the work with businesses, local authorities, and consumers has generated £18 of benefit for every pound spent by WRAP. In addition, this effort prevented 6.6 million tons of greenhouse gasses (equivalent of taking 2.2 million cars off the road for a year) and prevented 12.6 million tons of waste. Over the next decade, WRAP is predicting that its current activities should generate around £3 billion, in additional sales for the UK recycling and reprocessing sector, and help businesses, consumers, and the public sector save £18 billion [45]. Another calculation, highlighting the substantial economic benefits from adopting CE, was conducted by Defra, UK’s Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs. It estimated that UK businesses could benefit by up to £23 billion per year through low cost or no cost improvements in the efficient use of resources [46]. Worldwide, McKinsey and Company estimated that the global value of resource efficiency could eventually reach $3.7 trillion on a yearly basis [47]. From the local perspective of implementing CE in the UK, the city of London is playing a major role, which is currently of high relevance if we know that the capital city’s population is predicted to reach over 11 million by 2050. Hence, there is an urgent need to shift to more sustainable approaches to produce/consume commodities, to build houses, to manage wastes, and to deal with critical infrastructure.

226

The Circular Economy

In this regard, the London Waste and Recycling Board (LWARB) launched its Circular Economy Route Map in June 2017 to accelerate London’s transition to become a circular city. In this Route Map, LWARB recommended several actions for a wide range of stakeholders, including London’s higher education, digital, and community sectors, as well as London’s businesses, social enterprises, and its finance sector. Some stakeholders were reported to have already signed up to deliver actions, but LWARB is looking for others to get involved and help make London a city where circular economy businesses can flourish. An economic analysis of this action-orientated route map estimated that the actions within it could contribute £2.8bn toward the £7bn opportunity identified. By 2036, the CE could provide London with net benefits of at least £7bn every year in the sectors of the built environment, food, textiles, electrical devices, and plastics, as well as 12,000 net new jobs in the areas of reuse, remanufacturing, and materials innovation [48]. Another player in the CE movement in the UK is the Green Building Council (UKGBC), a membership organization, established in 2007, which aims to “radically improve the sustainability of the built environment, by transforming the way it is planned, designed, constructed, maintained and operated” [49]. With regard to the CE concept, UKGBC is running a series of live experiments, testing the application of circular principles on real estate assets and construction projects in order to facilitate collaborative approaches to overcome common obstacles and to share these findings with the wider membership and industry. The main objective of this program is to synchronize the built environment in the UK with the concept of CE, where waste is eliminated, and materials retain value long after their original use. To reach this goal of a circular built environment, UKGBC enabled several platforms and opportunities to collaborative involvement between its members including sponsorship, training, events and task groups, working groups, and consulting on the program output. Through the Circular Economy Research Survey, UKGBC members highlighted the need to overcome common obstacles, including [50]: • Limited practical action and engagement across the value chain • Limited awareness and understanding • Lack of business case evidence • Product liabilities • Unsupportive business models and strategic, long-term thinking

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

227

5.2.2.5 Italy Growing environmental, economic, and social challenges are putting sustainable development at the core of the global agenda and induced the international community to act in order to strengthen and share worldwide sustainable development commitments. The last economic crisis has provided evidence for the growth of inequalities in Italy, and a number of factors underlie this long-term process. Many of them are directly linked to the decades-long recourse on the wasteful linear economic model, and the lack of appropriate responses to several critical issues including globalization, trade and financial integration, technological transformation, labor market, demographic trends, and migration. According to the UN’s identifying and sharing policy solutions capable of reviving and balancing growth and making it sustainable is, thus, essential. Spreading the benefits of increased prosperity requires, in turn, a multidimensional and country-specific approach since there is no preordained and universal formula. A set of coherent and effective policies is needed, going beyond an income-oriented approach, addressing other key dimensions of welfare and targeted socioeconomic groups (in particular lowincome families). Inequality can only be effectively fought by adopting an integrated vision and restoring a sustainable, balanced, and inclusive development. To this end, all available instruments must be used, including budgetary policies and structural reforms [51]. Like many other industrialized countries, Italy is a country with a strong tradition in manufacturing but confronted with the issue of lacks in raw materials. Precisely, this is where Italy’s propensity toward circularity comes from. Using around 256 tons of materials produced for every million euros, Eurostat puts Italy in first place for efficient materials consumption, after Great Britain (which uses 223 tons of materials per million euros and, in any case, has an economy grounded more in financial services). Italy’s performance has improved since 2008, and the country has halved its consumption of materials [52]. The same report highlighted that, in terms of industrial recycling, Italy is recycling 48.5 million tons of the nonhazardous waste to be recycled, compared to 59.2 million tons in Germany, and 29.9 million tons in France. This level of recycling was reported to enable significant savings on primary energy (over 17 million tons of petrol a year), and to reduce CO2 emissions by around 60 million tons, according to data from Ambiente Italia (an Italian Institute focusing on Environmental Research).

228

The Circular Economy

In this critical context, Italy is fully aware of the global dimension of this challenge and has been actively promoting UN’s Agenda 2030 and the sustainable development goals (SDGs) during its G7 Presidency in 2017 [53]. Furthermore, Italy is committed to integrating the 2030 SDGs to the country’s economic, social, and environmental programming, through drafting the “National Sustainable Development Strategy 2017/2030” [54]. Through the adoption and implementation of the visions behind UN’s 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement, Italy is developing new strategies to shape a new vision toward a circular, low-emission economy, resilient to climate impacts and to other global changes endangering local communities, prioritizing the ht against biodiversity loss, alteration of the fundamental biogeochemical cycles (carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus), and land-use change [55]. Within this context of sustainable development and CE, and in academic circles, the publisher Edizioni Ambiente is one of the leading forces in Italy on these matters, and their book “Economia circolare in Italia” (Circular Economy in Italy), authored by Duccio Bianchi is making a significant contribution to this effort [56]. Furthermore, From an industrial perspective, increasing numbers of Italian companies are redesigning their production models to meet a circular format. This means “Made in Italy” supply chains are genuinely confirming sustainability patterns. A little while after the European package got the green light, the Circular Economy Network was set up by the “Fondazione per lo Sviluppo Sostenibile” (Foundation for Sustainable Development), alongside a group of 13 businesses and associations of businesses: some are recycling consortia, others operate in the bioplastics or mineral water industries; multi-utility service providers and more. Their objective is to promote the CE in Italy, by coming up with policy proposals and helping to spread best practices and innovation throughout the production system [57]. Similarity, an Italian Atlas of CE, was established. The objective of this “Atlante” is to build a network of companies and associations working in the field in order to create potential synergies and increase their visibility [58]. Users can freely browse through the experiences collected, searching through regions and/or the main category of products or services offered. The Atlas is regularly updated with new experiences, and the mapping process is participatory. So far, more than 100 experiences of CE in Italy are already included in this Atlas. The mapped companies and associations work in various sectors;

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

229

18% provide waste collection services, 15% produce clothing and accessories, 14% furniture and construction, and 10% are in the food sector [59]. Regarding the policy landscape around the CE concept in Italy, the latest developments related to eco-innovation policy measures, funding schemes, and policy targets at the regional and national levels can be summarized as follows. The main reference is the bill “Collegato ambientale,” which entered into force on February 4th, 2016. It contains a national plan for sustainable consumption and production, as well as many new policies and funding schemes for waste, resources, and CE objectives. This policy landscape around CE in Italy targeted several economic sectors and activities [60], including - Energy efficiency in buildings, - Support for eco-innovation and organizational innovations, - Consumption of reused and recycled products, - Measures to increase separated collection and recycling, - Efficiency, energy and private/public transport, and - Renewable energy Overall, from an economic point of view, building a CE in Italy means stimulating the reactivity of the Italian entrepreneurial system as a function of the economic exploitation of the reuse of materials so that materials never become waste. Investing in research and development through a cooperative network is a real possibility for the country’s companies, especially SMEs, to rethink and change their production/service models and to consolidate their presence in the national and global value chains. Additionally, the adoption and implementation of the CE concept throughout the country are strongly believed to be able to help in resolving a series of problems, typical of the Italian production system, and to transform those problems into opportunities. First, it was reported that it is necessary to generate more information on production processes (use of resources, the quantity of recycled material used or not sent to landfill, etc.). The resulting greater transparency, on the one hand, helps reduce illegal practices, both in the phase of production and waste disposal and on the other hand, allows consumers to reward virtuous enterprises for the quality of their productions based on clear traceability [61]. Furthermore, the use and reuse of internally generated recycled materials should allow a country like Italy, poor in raw materials, to be less dependent on foreign supplies, with lesser vulnerability to price volatility, especially at a

230

The Circular Economy

time of great instability in countries owning the greatest endowments of these resources [62].

5.2.3 CE the European way: selected case studies 5.2.3.1 In Nordic countries In its report entitled “Moving toward a circular economy e successful Nordic business models,” the Nordic Council of Ministers, Norden, compiled several interesting examples and case studies from Nordic countries showcasing a range of implementation scenarios of CE in practice [63]. In the following section, selected cases covering a wide range of business types and business models are presented, especially the ones aiming at waste prevention and waste valorization, which are at the core of the CE concept, and among the top priorities in Nordic countries, as well as in Europe. • Agito Medical is a Nordic company founded in 2004 providing solution to flexible and cost-efficient imaging equipment solutions for hospitals, clinics, and distributors worldwide, through preowned imaging equipment, rental solutions, spare parts, and service contracts [64]. Currently, the company is basing its business model on three circular principles: - Extending product lifetime: by purchasing, refurbishing, remarketing, and reselling used medical equipment (MRI, CT, and Ultrasound systems, X-ray, etc.). For this, the company is cooperating globally with medical equipment manufacturers, clinics, hospitals, and laboratories. - Service support and maintenance: by offering service contracts on equipment such as CT and MRI, including delivering spare parts and engineering maintenance services for repairs or upgrading. - Mobile rental solutions: based on a fleet of equipped mobile trailers equipped with imaging solutions that can be sent to hospitals and clinics to help deal with fluctuating patient flows. From its base in the Danish city of Aalborg, Agito Medical has expanded and established facilities in France, Germany, Netherlands, and Spain. Although being one of the market leaders in preowned medical equipment, Agito Medical anticipates further expansion. Demand for medical equipment from healthcare institutions worldwide is set to rise [65], with an aging population and an increasing incidence of lifestyle-related disease. • TouchPoint is a Finnish company established in 2008 specializing in converting textile and plastic waste into work clothes. In presenting its business model, the company highlighted that the current disastrous situation

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

231

of waste in the textile sector is “not the material fault,” but the fault of a prevailing disposable culture and lack of imagination. “For if you have vision and an eye for creativity, almost anything can be turned into something new and functional e more stylish than old, smarter than brand new” [66]. In Finland, more than 70 million kilograms of waste textiles are generated each year. Most companies produce waste textiles when, its staff’s work clothing (or an item of it) reaches the end of its useful life or need to be updated (more joyful colors, a new logo, etc.). In this context, TouchPoint intervenes via a range of services, including making work clothes from surplus or recycled materials. The company can utilize materials made from recycled plastic bottles and infinity fabrics that can be recycled up to eight times by reconstituting a fabric’s fibers to make a new item. In addition to providing an opportunity to turn waste into raw material, TouchPoint also provides its customers with a comprehensive service, ranging from the design of a work clothing collection, the selection of environmentally friendly materials, the making of the clothes, and taking care of the used textiles [67]. • Arla Foods is a cooperative dairy company owned by 12,000 European dairy farmers, selling food products to consumers in more than 100 countries. It is the largest producer of dairy products in Scandinavia. Globally, it is the world’s fifth largest dairy company and the world’s largest producer of organic dairy products [68]. In term of responsibility, the company is stating that it continues to reduce the climate impact of their activities and to optimize the use of resources along the entire supply chain (from cow to consumer), despite challenges of increased production and related production, transport, and packaging issues [69]. The company’s Environmental Strategy 2020 includes a zero waste vision. But since waste is unavoidable, Arla plans to consider it as a resource to be reused or recycled. Three strategies were implemented to achieve this vison. - Recyclable packaging: aiming at achieving 100% recyclable packaging by 2020 through cooperation with suppliers, researchers, and partnerships with key customers, and by evaluating and selecting the right packaging in relation to design and materials. - Reduce food waste: the aim is to help consumers bring down their food waste by 50% by planning ahead in food purchases and through guiding in making full use of products. Another method is optimal packaging in terms of portion size and ability to be completely emptied by consumers.

232

The Circular Economy

- Valorize waste from the production: aims to eliminate waste to landfill from production by using the waste product for animal feed or biogas production, cooperating with waste management vendors or suppliers to recycle or reuse solid waste. Arla also has an environmental strategy for water and energy resources, with a 2020 target of 50% of energy supply from renewable sources, and annual reduction targets of 3% for energy and water consumption in operations and 1% reduction in fuel for transport [70]. The related action plan includes increased heat recovery and water reuse, as well as optimized planning of logistics. • Neste is a Finnish company in the oil refining and marketing sector. The interesting story here is that Neste is a large company operating in a conventional industry in 14 countries. Nonetheless, it managed to generate important and innovative new business since 2007, the year in which Neste’s first renewable diesel plant was opened in Porvoo, Finland. The company has been using waste and residue since the beginning, and in 10 years, their use as raw materials has grown to almost 80% [71]. The majority of the raw materials used in the product are waste and residue fat and vegetable oils from the food manufacturing industry. The renewable products offer 40%e90% lower carbon dioxide emissions over a life cycle, compared with fossil diesel. The product has been enabled by Neste’s investments in research and development in areas such as renewable raw materials and products and the NEXBTL technology. The company has more than trebled its investment commitment in this area in the last 10 years [72]. In 2016, Neste reported that its renewable products contributed 21% of the company’s net sales and nearly 48% of its operating profit (V469 million) [73]. Many other examples of CE-implementing companies were reported in the previously mentioned report on CE in Nordic countries [63], and in the Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra’s database on the most interesting companies in the CE in Finland [74]. All had adopted one or more of the following circular categories: • Product design • Service- and function based models • Collaborative consumption • Reuse • Repair • Recycling and waste management

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

233

5.2.3.2 In the Netherlands By 2050, The Dutch economy is set to run completely on reusable raw materials. Various government, business, and nongovernment organizations have shown unambiguous signs of commitment to CE. Government funds have been set aside to improve waste separation so that discarded products can be reused. As a result, valuable raw materials will no longer be lost in landfill sites. At the same time, innovations will focus on improving the recycling capability of products [75]. Under such a thriving and incentivizing context, many Dutch companies adopted circular business models or integrated circular principles into their ongoing business. The far from extensive list includes: • Vitens is the largest drinking water company in The Netherlands, extracting, purifying, and suppling drinking water to companies and around 5.6 million people in a “reliable, affordable and sustainable” manner [76]. How so? By conducting their business based on circular principles, especially reclaiming and valorizing by-products waste. At one time, the costs of disposing residual waste streams from Vitens’ drinking water facilities amounted to around 1.8 million euros a year. To deal with this challenge, Vitens developed a new approach by process optimization and upcycling to reuse these materials productively, leading to economic and environmental benefits. Several R&D studies were conducted in this regard, in collaboration with the University of Wageningen, Royal HaskoningDHV, and other partners. The results showed that these by-products could be used effectively in other sectors and could be sold at a profit. Thus, Vitens developed HumVi technology to produce pure humic acid during the drinking water treatment process based on ion exchange and membrane technologies. Humic acid is often discharged as a waste product. Vitens’ HumVi technology allows the humic acid to be reclaimed sustainably in its pure form, thus providing an organic soil improver [77]. This made Vitens one of the largest humic acid producers of Europe. In addition, applications have been developed for animal nutrition. As a result, Vitens now also produces for the agriculture and animal feed sector [78]. • Black Bear Carbon (BBC) is a Dutch company operating since 2010 in the tire sector with a business model aiming at using the CE concept to transform used-tires into high-quality, safe, simple to use and sustainable products [79]. Discarded car tires make up one of the largest and most problematic waste streams. Dutch company BBC has developed a

234

The Circular Economy

technology that allows it to recycle used car tires in a clean and sustainable way while generating energy. First, the used tires are heated in the absence of oxygen (pyrolysis) to break down the rubber, simultaneously producing oil, gas, and char. Char or carbonized rubber is rich in carbon black, which is then upgraded to high-grade carbon black for use in various industrial applications. The pyrolysis gas generated is partially condensed into oil and partly converted into electricity in a cogeneration plant, to be utilized locally or supplied to the grid [80]. • Philips is a Dutch multinational company among the largest electronics companies in the world. For a sustainable world, Philips sees the transition from a linear to a circular economy as a “necessary boundary condition” [81]. In the current global shift toward CE, the Dutch giant took concrete action to be among the pioneering companies in CE. Its circular business models include: - The “light as service” or “pay-per-lux” model through which Philips Lighting NV, currently Signify NV, is committing to its customers to provide guaranteed lighting performance with regard to energy, light level, and uptime, while owning the reuse, refurbishing or recycling loop to ensure that the customers get maximum value from the lighting system [82]. Several companies have already implemented Philips Circular lighting to achieve savings and minimize their carbon footprint, including the Schiphol airport and Bruynzeel [83]. - Refurbishing solutions for MRI systems: with its refurbished healthcare products, Philips is offering medical facilities access to highquality systems within budget. They also enable the company’s healthcare business to reuse vital components, thus, driving CE value creation [84]. • The city of Amsterdam. The Dutch “Nederland Circulair” initiative established in 2015 is an online CE-enabling community platform which opened up opportunities for entrepreneurs, industrialists, and other third parties to meet, cooperate, and invest in CE activities [85]. CE is written into the Amsterdam sustainability agenda, which also includes energy, climate-change resilience, and air-quality. Since then, Amsterdam’s Strategies for Sustainability are emphasized on a full action program with “circularity” as a key aspect will reinforce the CE [86]. Policymakers take a cross-sectoral interpretation of CE, and the city’s strategy covers all the circular city principles outlined in the ReSOLVE framework. The project map, depicted in Fig. 5.1, shows that a fairly

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

235

Figure 5.1 Initiatives identified in Amsterdam (Re: Regenerate, S: Share, O: Optimize, L: Loop, V: Virtualize, and E: Exchange) [89].

even balance across policy measures is taken, with procurement and infrastructure being used for specific areas, whereas collaboration platforms, business support schemes, and knowledge development activities address many. Similarly, the Dutch CE consultancy “Circle Economy” plays an important role in the city’s CE activities by supporting benchmarking research on the city’s physical resource flows (using its circular city mapping tool, city scan, and city dashboard) giving policymakers information to manage the city’s resources effectively [87]. Logically, the first Circle City Scan was completed with the city of Amsterdam. The extensive related analysis, prepared by “Circle Economy,” FABRIC and TNO, was published in 2016 under the title “CIRCULAR AMSTERDAM e A vision and action agenda for the city and metropolitan area” [88]. 5.2.3.3 In Italy Italy’s eco-innovation and CE development are being implemented in several economic sectors, especially related to recycling and waste, renewable energy generation, transportation, and technological innovations.

236

The Circular Economy

Selected case studies echoing the adoption of Italian CE on the ground include: • ReMade in Italy is a nonprofit, nongovernmental organization aimed to promote recycled products through independent third-party certification. It was founded in 2009, and in 2014, ACCREDIA (Italian National Accreditation Body) recognized it as the first certification scheme in Italy and Europe to verify the recycled content in a product [90]. The certification Remade in Italy certifies traceability of production within the same production chain, from the verification of the origins of incoming raw materials to the output of the certified products, making it a tool specifically recognized in green public procurement as a model for the verification of the quality and sustainability of recycling. Remade in Italy products are identified by a label that contains information about the sustainability characteristics of the product, in terms of raw material savings, reduction of energy consumption, and reduced CO2 emissions [91]. • ENEA, The Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Economic Sustainable Development, is active in the field of ecoinnovation. It develops and implements technologies, methodologies, and integrated approaches for the efficient use of resources, and the closure of loops through recycling technologies applicable up to preindustrial pilot-scale technologies [92]. With regard to the specific sector of critical raw materials recovery from electric and electronic equipment waste (WEEE), an innovative hydrometallurgical process for the recovery of added value raw materials such as gold, tin, silver and copper from printed circuit boards (PCBs) has been developed, tested, and patented [93]. This has been completed with the realization of a modular and flexible pilot plant at preindustrial scale, named “ROMEO” (Recovery Of MEtals by hydrOmetallurgy) located at the ENEA Casaccia Research Center, Rome. The pilot plant allows the testing of hydrometallurgical processes to recover valuable materials from complex end-of-life products, urban waste, and industrial scraps [94]. • CIB, Consorzio Italiano Biogas. The Italian Biogas Consortium aggregates and represents the agricultural biogas and biomethane value chain in Italy. Formed in March 2006, CIB provides information to its members to improve, optimize, and innovate biogas production processes,

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

237

fostering greener and efficient low carbon farming practices through its flagship initiative Biogasdoneright. This initiative integrating anaerobic digestion (AD) technologies with other industrial and agricultural report was to help in increasing the net primary production of farmland and lowering the negative externalities associated with modern conventional agricultural practices, along with managing new organic matter input to the soils via green mulching and AD digestate spreading [95]. Overall, CIB brings together farmers that run biogas plants; industrial companies that supply equipment and technology; companies operating in the fields of agriculture, consultancy, mechanization, and transports; research centers and agricultural associations that supply data and promote anaerobic digestion in agriculture [96].

5.3 Circular economy in North America A database launched by the Circular Economy Club revealed that approximately 62% of the 3000 circular economy initiatives highlighted were based in Europe. North America lagged far behind with just 12%, followed by 11% in Latin America, 10% in Asia and Africa with 6% [97]. Nonetheless, as we shall see in the present chapter’s section, CE and circular business models hold the promise of vibrant and strong economies and sustainable growth, through the implementation of circular principles enabling the overcoming of the dual challenges of rising and fluctuating commodity prices and resource depletion, which is highly relevant for North American companies. Many stories in the US and Canada about the economic and environmental impacts of waste streams like plastic in the oceans [98], or electronic wastes in landfills [99], have changed how North American companies think about the materials used in their manufacturing process, and the wasted resources after discarding the used items. There is a clear CE movement in North America to shift production and manufacturing patterns, predominantly carried out based on the linear economy model, toward the sustainable CE concept, where the reuse, refurbishment, recycling, etc., systemically replace end-of-life disposal scheme. Valuable resources will be persevered, the environment will be protected, and economic growth will be decoupled from often unstable raw materials supply markets.

238

The Circular Economy

5.3.1 Circular economy in the US For many decades, large corporations like McDonald’s and Starbucks were looking for ways to minimize plastic packaging with their food and beverage containers. Many packaging suppliers and independent researchers and inventors investigated in their R&D activities the development of coatings that make those containers more convenient and practical [100], but also biodegradable and recyclable [101]. Thus, from simple items such as a paper cup to sophisticated medical equipment, the U.S. companies are evaluating and often redesigning their process to adopt circular practices in their manufacturing processes, to incorporate more sustainable materials, and to implement economically advantageous and ecofriendly waste management strategies. 5.3.1.1 Challenges, opportunities and initiatives in the US Since 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recognized the need for a fundamental change to its core legislation to ensure a more effective waste and materials management. One of the suggested core concepts deals with the fundamental reconsideration of the waste versus nonwaste core regulatory construct. One approach would be to treat all potentially hazardous materials to similar management controls/incentives based on their risk potential rather than as waste, i.e., shifting from “waste” management to “materials” management. Under this fundamental change, materials would be regarded and managed as waste only once they were destined for disposal. By reducing the distinction between waste and materials, although not as sharp as the one within CE, these changes were expected to dramatically improve recycling and reuse rates, and thus, resolve the unexpected negative impacts of waste legislation that has locked the valorization of waste as secondary materials, hindered benefiting from the recovery and reuse of “spent” primary raw materials [102]. In order to promote CE in the US, develop new CE opportunities, and quicken the achievement of the targeted objectives, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation has launched a U.S. chapter of its Circular Economy 100 (CE100) program in 2016. The international CE100, established in 2013, includes corporations, universities, city and government authorities, and include brands such as Google, Coca-Cola, eBay, Apple, Novelis, IBM, and others. Special programs were developed to help members learn, build capacity, network, and collaborate with key organizations around the CE concept [103].

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

239

The U.S. CE100 is a well-justified and timely initiative, especially when government agencies such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation states that the 5589 largest publicly traded companies in the US, in 2014, sent around 342 million metric tons of waste to landfills and incinerators. And on average, companies generate 7.81 metric tons of waste for every million dollars in revenue [104]. One of the highly indicative signs for this study is that if these same companies reduced their paper waste by a mere 1%, it would save them nearly one billion US $ in total [105]. A fundamental principle in CE is the establishment of highly efficient waste management strategies to ensure the recirculation of raw or recovered resources in the economy in loop schemes. Until recently, this would have constituted an issue in the US since a sustainable fraction of the country’s huge waste are shipped abroad, mainly to Asia. With the emergence of the CE concept, keeping those wastes in the country and internally valorizing them made perfect sense. Nonetheless, this move required, new funds, infrastructure, innovative and customized technologies, and dedicated workforces. Was it worth it? Fortunately for the Americans, China halted the to-be lengthy debate. How so? Well, let us consult the following developments collected by Cole Rosengren, Senior Editor of Waste Dive, in his article about China’s impact on the domestic recycling market in the US [106]. Up until recent years, the US has traditionally exported about 30% of its recyclable material, primarily to China. In July 2017, China informed the World Trade Organization that it would be banning 24 types of scrap material and setting an allowable contamination rate for everything else at near zero [107]. The full ban took effect in January 2018. New contamination standards were enforced starting in March. In May of the same year, China banned additional material categories and announced a freeze on import licenses that continued into June. In late summer, the country enacted a 25% tariff in response to one from the US. Shortly after China’s announcement, the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI) released a statement calling this policy potentially “devastating” and “catastrophic” for the U.S. recycling industry. ISRI estimates that the US exported $5.6 billion in scrap commodities to China last year and has conducted an analysis showing that the domestic scrap industry supports hundreds of thousands of jobs [108]. It has to be noted, from a linear economy perspective, this is indeed a catastrophe, but from the CE lens, there is a big opportunity. This clearly shows how fundamentally aberrant is the LE model and how effective is CE.

240

The Circular Economy

So, throughout this transition, Americans hoped that Southeast Asian countries would fill the gap. While that has been proven true to some extent, and some countries did continue importing those materials, many have taken their own steps to limit or ban the growing amount of displaced scrap including Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Taiwan. As a logical consequence, Americans needed to put more and more attention in turning inward for ways to handle this “issue” at home. And exactly, this is why CE is highly needed to resolve such issue, and generate opportunity from an otherwise problematic development. Equally important, this led the way to set preventive initiatives in anticipation of similar problems. As seen previously, one of the key promoters of the CE concept in the US is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation (USCCF). In one of its publication, the foundation stated that the ongoing shift toward circularity and sustainability needs to employ a systems-level approach and a focused strategy to avoid wasting resources and to design products and manage materials for longer circulation and greater reusability. The objectives are to generate more value and to ensure economic opportunity with less material and energy consumption. Thus, according to USCCF, interesting benefits can be generated from CE using the four following “powers” [109]: - the power of the inner circle, i.e., staying in the inner loops to save in terms of embedded resources and impacts. - the power of circulating longer, i.e., keeping materials in play through multiple cycling or by lengthening cycling duration to save on virgin material inputs. - the power of cascaded use, i.e., transforming materials across product categories to offset the need for virgin material inputs, and - the power of pure materials, i.e., designing better products to facilitate reverse logistics and maintain material quality. As circular economy initiatives take hold in North America, it is important that companies understand the benefits of embracing these new business models, including the opportunity for new revenue streams, reduced costs, more efficient supply chains, and improved business intelligence. And it is not just large corporations that can benefit from circular business practices. Companies, financiers, and institutions in the circular supply chains often work together in a network of collaboration and co-creation, thus, providing economic advantages to them, as well as societal and environmental benefits to all.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

241

Along with the various regulatory and technological tools to advance the implementation of CE, the financial sector also has a crucial enabling role to play in easing and quickening the transition from a linear to the circular economy. In this regard, and as a member of the CE100 program, ING, the multinational banking and financial services corporation, is positioning itself as one of the main proponents of the CE paradigm. And as the company puts it, since finance is a key barrier to (or catalyst for) the evolution of the circular economy, it is “important that North American businesses have access to financial partners who understand their funding requirements” [110]. In practice, ING has its own circular initiative, namely the “Orange Circle” program [111], which covers five major areas: - Knowledge: in which ING’s Economics Department analyzes the financial benefits of going circular. - Operations: using its purchasing power, the company can create market demand for circular products. - Deals: by conducting circular deals and building relationships with circular clients. - Ecosystem: by exploring the funding for circular business models with its financial partners. - Innovation: aiming at developing circular propositions in cooperation with the company’s clients. 5.3.1.2 Circularity in US companies Most companies in the US are believed to be in the early stages of understanding what the CE means and how they could work within it. When asked what is at the core of the model, most executives say that it is about reducing waste or making sure that products are recycled, missing the full picture of benefits, if products and materials stay in longer use. That also means less resource extraction and less risk in supply chains and cutting climate pollution [112]. Most companies, therefore, have an unhelpfully narrow perception of CE as a new model that saves money if the company’s generated wastes are reused in factories instead of being discarded. Nonetheless, an increasing number of companies are more familiar with the new opportunities that a circular model can bring, especially with the highly publicized success stories coming from Europe, where many pioneering countries in CE started benefiting economically, environmentally, and societally from the implementation of circular principles in key economic sectors [113].

242

The Circular Economy

Overall, U.S. companies are adopting CE either to enhance the sustainability of their operations and activities by focusing on how to effectively use resources and reuse waste to reduce expenses, or by taking fundamental steps toward CE and sustainability by implementing innovative circular business models in order to take a leading role in the country’s shift from linear economy to CE, and to benefit from the various circular opportunities. Recently, ING surveyed 300 U.S. executives across four sectors (automotive, consumer electronics/telecoms, food/agriculture, and healthcare) to analyze the willingness and readiness of U.S. entrepreneurs and industrialists to adopt this paradigm shift to sustainability, and CE at its core [114]. The five major findings reported by ING, based on the results of its 2019 survey, are illustrated below [115]: i. By prioritizing sustainability, U.S. businesses are growing: Compared to 2018, twice as many U.S. firms are embedding sustainability in strategic decision making in 2019. There has been a marked jump in the number of executives who say that sustainability is influencing business growth strategy: 85% say this today, compared to just 48% who reported this in ING’s 2018 study [116]. Businesses are recognizing the benefits that sustainability strategies can provide, but there is still a lot of room to grow. ii. Businesses see a future in the circular economy: most U.S. businesses are embracing circular practices in a “fragmented fashion,” and while only 16% of U.S. firms say they have already adopted a CE framework, there is strategic intent to do so from 62% of the surveyed businesses. On the ground, there are a substantial number of circular initiatives undertaken across the production cycle, and a lesser number to transform product models, demonstrating that circular thinking is becoming increasingly relevant in the US iii. Businesses are still struggling to unlock the full value of CE: For businesses in the US, circularity remains a story of unidentified value. Current perceptions about circular practices will need to evolve to help U.S. firms gain most of the possible benefits from, often disruptive, circular business models. So far, the ING surveyed U.S. businesses are mainly focusing on costsaving aspects of circular initiatives rather than the value retention and creation that can be achieved through closing material loops. A minority of companies are implementing a more advanced circular strategy in response to evolving consumer trends, which is a key driver for those firms to pursue circular initiatives.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

243

iv. Circular thinking requires new relationships with consumers: ING 2019 survey shows that consumers are more aware about circularity and sustainability, and are, therefore, increasingly demanding for circular practices. Hence, both consumers and firms need to establish new ways to reuse and recycle products and materials. In this regard, 33% of firms said that they have adopted a circular framework because of customer demand, which sends a clear message about the necessity to adopt circular practices jointly between the company and its customers. And the pivotal role of customers in any recovery or recycling schemes is a prerequisite for the successful implementation of any CE model [117]. v. Challenges remain, but opportunity awaits through collaboration: ING stated that the successful implementation of circular models is not something a company can do alone. To reach full potential, firms need to work: - with supply chain partners, to assess the possibility of collaborating on circular initiatives, and explore new business relationships. - with customers, cities, and communities, to encourage greater resource recovery and end of use products recycling. - financing partners, to assess whether they are prepared to provide financing solutions for circular models - and even with competitors, to explore possible cooperation areas on circular solutions mutual benefiting all involved parties, e.g., jointly generating new revenue streams from the valorization of each other’s byproducts and waste in the form of spent materials, excess energy, water, etc. The first report focusing on analyzing the CE landscape in the US is entitled “The State of the Circular Economy in America,” and was elaborated by the American platform Circular CoLab (CCL) [118]. By providing an analysis of over 200 US-based circular initiatives, this report offers concrete examples of circular solutions in diverse sectors. As well, it demonstrates the diverse array of stakeholders and industries that are already participating in the creation of the Circular Economy in America. According to the team of CCL, the goals of the report on the state of CE in the US are threefold, including [119]: i. Providing concrete examples of Circular Economy solutions to drive understanding of the Circular Economy: this report and the accompanying database provided applied examples of CE solutions and business models, and illustrated the diverse and broad range of stakeholders and approaches that are currently being pursued in the US The objective of showcasing

244

The Circular Economy

those examples was fostering a deeper understanding of approaches that are needed to shift from linear to CE, as well as building a momentum for the development of further circular solutions ii. Highlighting trends and opportunities in the U.S. Circular Economy landscape: This report provided the first national scan about the CE initiatives that are being launched in the US. By categorizing each of the 202 initiatives according to their business model(s) and industry focus, the report aims at providing investors, policymakers, educators, corporations, and entrepreneurs with a better understanding of trends within the United States CE landscape, as well as identifying areas of future opportunities. Furthermore, the report offered numerous case studies of organizations adopting innovative circular business models. Selected examples will be presented in the following section 5.3.3. iii. Catalyzing further collaboration around Circular Economy solutions: According to CCL, the paradigm shift toward CE will require the participation of all potential participants including entrepreneurs, policymakers, executive directors, financiers, researchers, educators, and consumers. In the absence of a national CE framework in the US, this report is endeavoring to facilitate more conversations and support for the development of CE solutions in America, and thus, not only benefitting economically from adopting a CE, but also providing environmental benefit and opportunities for new job growth and sustained economic development. By utilizing this report and the associated database, CCL believe that ultimately, this will lead to building circular networks advocating for the development of a national CE strategy in the United States. Overall, accelerating the transition toward a CE in the US requires a multi-stakeholder approach and the implementation of incentivizing measures and inspiring achievements to empower American corporations and organizations to reach their CE goals faster. In order to capture cost savings, build or adopt innovative business models, and benefit from new CE opportunities, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation recommends the Americans, in its CE100 USA, to focus on [120]: • Insights and Analysis: continuously being up-to-date with the latest CE analyses, intelligence, tools, and templates. • Capacity building: develop an understanding of the CE as an innovation framework, and build organizational capacity. • Collaboration: develop tailored activities to stimulate cross-company, cross-sector, and precompetitive collaboration.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

245

• Network: establish networks of CE experts, businesses and public bodies, across sectors, and across industries

5.3.2 Circular economy in Canada 5.3.2.1 Challenges and initiatives in Canada Many experts stated that Canada (and North America as a whole), is way behind many European and Asian countries retrieving the benefits of economic circularity. Those benefits include opportunities for Canadian businesses to lower input and manufacturing costs, create new jobs, and reduce pollution and environmental damage caused by waste management and resource extraction. Thus, a CE movement was launched in Canada to shed light on those benefits, and to invite industrialists, entrepreneurs, and policymakers to take necessary actions and put promising circular strategies for a healthier, more prosperous Canada, with a leading position in the global CE. Such a paradigm shift requires fundamental changes in the way Canadians live, work, do business, and deal with resources in general and wastes in particular. The CE concept is also believed to be able to provide promising strategies to deliver results for some of the more complex environmental issues governments currently struggle to manage [121]. Within the Canadian CE movement, several actors emerged and distinguished themselves with their effort to promote the implementation of circularity and sustainability in the North American country. Thus, we shall explore Canada’s CE vision and objectives through the various strategies and action plans set by those CE “enthusiasts,” including organizations, provinces, and cities. • The Circular Economy Leadership Coalition (CELC) is a newly formed collaboration of major business leaders, academics, and nongovernmental organizations committed to accelerating Canada’s transition to a CE. Founding members of the CELC include Unilever Canada, IKEA Canada, Loblaw Companies Limited, Walmart Canada, International Institute for Sustainable Development, National Zero Waste Council, and NEI Investments LP. As Canada grapples with the impacts of climate change and unsustainable, wasteful activities, CELC is working with decision makers in government and business to readjust policies, products, services, and related infrastructure. As well, the Coalition is working with Canadian people to engage them in shifting mindsets and behaviors, and encourage their broad participation in the transition to the CE by clearly explaining

246

The Circular Economy

the benefits of a CE, and thus, ensuring the Canadian vision of a cleaner, more prosperous future is “not wasted” [122]. Thus, in order to eliminate consumer and business waste while generating wealth and jobs for Canadians and regenerating damaged ecosystems, CELC believes that a fundamental shift from the still dominant linear economy to a CE requires [123]: - increasing resource productivity, - designing items to use less material, to last longer, to be repaired or to be reused, - offering Products as services instead of ownership, - Designed products to oust pollution and toxins from the system, - Valorizing the “inevitable” little waste into valuable inputs back into the system. • Zero Waste Canada (ZWC) is a nonprofit grassroots organization, dedicated to ending Canadian “age of wastefulness” through improved industrial design and education for the 21st century” [124]. It operates in Canada to bring forward sustainable waste management schemes and policies amongst individuals, organizations, and communities. The main objective stated by ZWC is to support the continuous reuse of resources on the front-end, and simultaneously to advocate the elimination of landfills and waste-to-energy (incineration) on the back-end. In this regard, and with respect to China’s recent import ban of several types of scrap materials (previously discussed within the American context), ZWC issued a response to this issue. The organization stated that it is time to “reevaluate policies and practices and adjust to the changing markets.” ZWC also called for collaboration in North America toward introducing more strict policies to ensure a higher quality of materials. Overall, according to ZWC, China’s import ban should serve as an opportunity in Canada, and a driving force to implement sustainable resources and waste management schemes including higher collection and reuse of quality products and recycling at source, which would translate into higher amounts of products and materials available to extract value from. The organization is also rightfully warning involved parties against quick-fix solutions in the form of waste-to-energy recovery in response to China’s import policies [125]. • Circular Economy Lab (CEL) was launched in 2016 by The Natural Step Canada, with the aim of bringing together public and private sector leaders from different sectors and value chains to co-develop and implement CE solutions in Canada to eliminate waste, improve

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

247

productivity, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and foster value-creation and innovation. CEL partners’ list includes Unilever Canada, IKEA Canada, Canadian Tire, the Government of Ontario, Smart Prosperity Institute, BMO Financial Group, and others [126]. CEL is working collaboratively with its partners to Ref. [127]: • Define CE opportunities: the goal is to help governments and businesses in identifying and understanding the opportunities, barriers, and strategies for advancing the CE concept in the country’s provinces, cities, organizations, as well as value chains. • Accelerate promising ideas: by working with CEL’s partners to detect, incubate, and scale CE initiatives. These include strategic and collaborative initiatives to address systemic barriers that individual organizations cannot address alone. The aim from such descriptive initiatives, is to transform the Canadian economy with new or improved circular products, services, policies, business models, and strategies. • Build momentum for change: by increasing CE awareness, understanding, and commitment through strategic research, communications, education, and engagement activities for stakeholders across Canada. 5.3.2.2 Circular opportunities in Canada Unlike the Europe, where well-resourced collaborative multi-stakeholder initiatives have promoted and popularized the CE concept and shaped a public constituency in countries such as Finland, Netherlands, Austria, and Italy, Canada has not had an organized or influential constituency for the circular economy. As a result, the concept remains largely unfamiliar and underexploited outside selected academic and entrepreneurial circles. Nonetheless, as we have seen earlier, the CE movement has begun in Canada with the introduction of various circular initiatives and the establishment of diverse organizations such as the Circular Economy Lab, Zero Waste Canada, The Circular Economy Leadership Coalition, along with the National Zero Waste Council, Waste-Free Ontario Act, and the City of Vancouver’s Economic Commission, all aiming at positioning Canada as a regional and global leader by encouraging the wider adoption of circular approaches [128]. So far, and like many other countries slowly adopting the CE concept, most of the circular initiatives of Canadian cities, provinces, and federal governments have been predominantly pursued from a waste management perspective, specifically through extended producer responsibility programs

248

The Circular Economy

regulated and overseen by environment ministries and waste management departments. For instance, amongst several federal and provincial environmental and climate-related policies, Canada’s drive toward a CE has been partially led by the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment’s 2009 Canadawide Action Plan. The initiative was introduced across provinces to focus on products and packaging waste diversion while reducing public expenditure and encouraging innovation and new jobs through Extended Producer Responsibility programs. Thus, as per the Conference Board of Canada, beyond the environmental burden of waste, governments are keen to pass their $3.2 billion waste management cost burden onto producers [129]. Elsewhere, countries and international bodies are increasingly approaching the CE paradigm as an integrated environmental, economic development, and innovation strategy, as reflected by the leadership roles of agencies such as the European Commission, Finland’s Innovation Agency SITRA, the Dutch government, as well as the World Business Council for Sustainable Development and its “CEO Guide to the Circular Economy” [130]. In a world concerned about resources limitations, Canada, with its abundant resources, has long been identified as a resource-rich nation. Thus, how relevant or urgent can be the adoption of an emerging economic paradigm based on resources efficiency. For many Canadians, living in a resource-rich country do not justify postponing, let alone neglecting, the adoption of a sustainable economic model. Indeed, many experts are stating that Canada cannot afford to tune out the shifts in international market expectations for economic and competitiveness reasons, as much as sustainability reasons. Canada imports many raw materials and goods, and exports manufactured goods and services as well as raw materials into markets, which could, increasingly, be looking to minimize waste generation, reduce reliance on virgin materials, and turn to bold new technologies and strategies to virtualize consumption, optimize use of products and assets, and shift from nonrenewable to renewable sources of energy and materials [131]. Thus, Canadian firms risk losing market share, missing new growth opportunities, or falling behind the innovation curve as global competitors adopt disruptive new technologies and business strategies. And if, as forecast, supply constraints lead to volatilities in the prices of nonrenewable natural resources, enhanced recycling and material efficiency will allow Canada to capture greater value for these resources in the future. For Canadian

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

249

businesses, CE means opportunities to lower input and manufacturing costs, create new jobs, encourage innovation, keep Canada competitive as supply chains globalize and reduce pollution, including carbon. It could also mean a limit to environmental damage caused by waste management and resource extraction, and a connection with consumers who increasingly expect companies to meet sustainability standards [132]. Scott Vaughan, CEO of the International Institute for Sustainable Development and one of the prominent advocates for the transition to a CE in Canada, made an interesting parallel between Canada and Finland, and proposed taking the Nordic country pioneering in CE in Europe and in the world, as a role model that other countries can look to. Why? Because Finland is the first country ever to set out a CE roadmap that advances low-carbon innovation and inclusive jobs, this roadmap focuses on the research and implementation of sustainability initiatives. In 2016, Sitra and the Finnish government co-launched a national action program to put the ideas into practice. The plan focuses on food sustainability, forestry, transportation and construction, and machinery. With such conceptual and practical achievement, Vaughan emphasized the need to analyze and copy the Finnish CE experience, especially considering the numerous similarities between Finland and Canada, including the fact that both are northern countries with a vast amount of natural resources [133]. Many Canadian companies are already moving in the right direction, and are cutting their emissions and water consumption while making use of materials that in the past would have been sent to the landfill [134]. Vaughan, like many other Canadian CEOs, scientists and investors would like to soon see Canada’s own roadmap toward a CE, offering a systemic approach, pulling together different priorities from low-carbon pathways and freshwater stewardship to innovation, enhanced productivity, competitiveness, and green jobs.

5.3.3 Circular economy the North American way: selected case studies In the following section, selected case studies covering a wide range of businesses and business models in the US and Canada are presented. The objective is to showcase diverse opportunities to create prosperity through the adopting and implementation of circular businesses models able to generate profit, to create job growth and to attract investments, all while preserving the environment (soil, water, air, and biodiversity), and sustaining the availability of resources for the future generations.

250

The Circular Economy

Thus, with these study cases in North America, and in any part of the world for that matter, we should explore how the relationships between producers and consumers, and between us humans and the planet can be redefined. Following, is the nonexhaustive list of American and Canadian firms and organizations from both public and private sectors, all promoting and implementing the CE concept in their various activities: • DSM-Niaga: In the US, more than four billion pounds of used carpet is landfilled every year, making it one of the most common products in landfills today. DSM-Niaga is a joint venture that is producing the world’s first and fully recyclable carpet. Niaga Technology for carpet production is based on using a simple set of clean processes, ingredients, and materials that make the product 100% recyclable. This includes not using latex as an adhesive in the manufacturing process [135]. After the carpet is used, it is sold back to the manufacturer and turned into new carpet. The name “Niaga” means “Again” spelled backward, echoing the CE principle of using items again and again. Niaga works with a straightforward product design philosophy to make products healthier and fully recyclable [136]: • Keep it simple: Use the lowest possible diversity of ingredients. • Clean materials only: Only use materials that have been tested for their impact on our health and the environment. • Use reversible connections: Connect different materials only if they can be decoupled after use. • Enterra Feed: is a private company operating in the agriculture sector, founded in 2007, in Vancouver, BC, Canada. Established on a disruptive circular vision to transform the aquaculture and organics disposal industries, Enterra diverts recycled food products and converts it into ingredients for food production. Rising global demand for fish and poultry is placing increased pressure on food inputs and costs. At the same time, over 30% of the world’s food supply is sent to disposal or composting with considerable loss of complex food nutrients [137]. Enterra Feed addresses both issues by up-cycling waste food to grow sustainable protein, oil, and natural fertilizer products for use in food production, which the company calls “Renewable Food for Animals and Plants” [138]. Enterra’s natural process also creates an organic fertilizer which can replace chemical fertilizers. The company is targeting the processing of over 1000 tons of food discards daily from its existing and planned facilities [139].

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

251

• Enerkem: is a Canadian cleantech company founded in 2000, specializing in the conversion of pretreated municipal solid waste into transportation fuels and chemicals. In a context where global solid waste volumes are projected to increase from 1.3 to 2.2 billion tons by 2025, and where cities and communities are already struggling with their current strategies to manage their waste, Enerkem built its business model on the circular principle of using municipal solid and nonrecyclable waste as a feedstock to manufacture biofuels and renewable chemical products via its patented thermochemical process [140], and its multifeedstock/multiproduct technology platform [141]. Enerkem’s facility in Edmonton, Alberta is the world’s first commercial biorefinery of its kind that will process 100,000 dry tons of sorted municipal solid waste annually to produce synthetic gas and convert into a lowcarbon transportation biofuel, enough for 400,000 cars on a 5% ethanol blend. Enerkem is also helping the City of Edmonton in increasing its recycling diversion rate from around 50%e90% [142]. • Cohealo is a US-based technology company founded in 2012, operating in the health sector, with the objective of helping health systems increase medical equipment utilization, achieving greater financial and clinical value. On this, the company developed a cloud-based platform which allows healthcare systems to schedule, track in real-time, and share medical equipment [143], which is highly relevant in the industry because health systems usually spend millions of dollars on purchasing and renting equipment, yet utilization rates for owned equipment are often below 50% [144]. Besides offering technological support to facilitate sharing, Cohealo works closely with customers on using the analytics generated from the platform for smarter, data-driven capital expense planning. For instance, working with Cohealo, Kaiser Permanente, an American health insurance and medical care provider, deployed an alternative solution to the conventional and expensive buying or renting options. The solution, based on an Amazon Prime-like ordering service, was reported to have saved the health system $8.6 million in 2 years [145]. • Apple Inc.: in its 2014 Environmental Responsibility Report, the iconic American company highlighted the progress made in designing its products from the largest displays to the smallest cables to use fewer materials and to be durable and long-lasting. Toward that goal, Apple has set three priorities [146]:

252

The Circular Economy

- reduce their impact on climate change by using renewable energy sources and driving energy efficiency in their products. - pioneer the use of greener materials in products and processes. - Conserve precious resources. According to the company’s responsible recycling policy, every Apple Retail Store accepts Apple products for free. The GiveBack option allows customers in several countries to bring in older devices in exchange for credit toward a new model. The company operates or participates in recycling programs in 99% of the countries where it sells its products, including free shipping on recycling, returns, collection events, and ongoing take-back programs with governments and universities. By 2015, Apple reported that its efforts had diverted more than 597 million pounds of equipment from landfills since 1994 [147]. Apple also works with e-waste experts to better understand the impact of these programs by looking at how much aluminum, steel, and other materials have been collected and recovered for reuse. And the company continues to invest in new ways to better reuse materials and recover other rare elements, including its launch of Liam, the “recyclebot” that can disassemble an iPhone 6 every 11 s, and sort out its components so they can be recycled, reducing the need to mine those resources from the earth [148]. The robotic system can recover aluminum, copper, gold, platinum group metals, silver, tin, rare earth elements, cobalt, tungsten, and tantalum. • Best Buy and HP: Best Buy Inc., an American multinational consumer electronics retailer, has been collecting consumers’ used electronics since 2009, through their in-store recycling program. The program was established to solve its customers need and to keep potentially harmful materials out of landfills. The company has collected more than 1.7 billion pounds of electronics and appliances since the program started in 2009, and is on track to meet its goal of collecting two billion pounds by 2020 [149]. When Best Buy and HP joined forces to develop the idea of producing a printer using plastic from the recycling program, the task seemed challenging in the beginning. Indeed, it took several years for both companies to bring the strategic vision to life by building the process and developing the new products. Ultimately, plastic parts from old printers and other electronics that customers recycled at Best Buy were separated, shredded, melted, and put directly back into the manufacturing of three

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

253

new HP printers. The HP ENVY Photo 6200, 7100, and 7800 were the world’s first-in-class printers made from recycled printers and other electronics (more than 10% by weight) [150]. This was a good illustration that perseverance eventually pays off, that partnership in CE is key of success and beneficial to all involved parties: companies, customers, and the environment. • The American Chemistry Council (ACC): ACC’s Plastics Division has announced three ambitious goals that crystallize U.S. plastics resin producers’ commitment to recycle or recover all plastic packaging used in the US by 2040 and to further enhance plastic pellet stewardship by 2022. Specifically, members of ACC’s Plastics Division have set the following goals for capturing, recycling, and recovering plastics [151]: - 100% of plastics packaging is reused, recycled, or recovered by 2040 - 100% of plastics packaging is recyclable or recoverable by 2030 - 100% of the U.S. manufacturing sites operated by ACC’s Plastics Division members will participate in Operation Clean Sweep-Blue by 2020, with all of their manufacturing sites across North America involved by 2022. To achieve these goals, American plastic resin producers plan to focus on six key areas: (i) designing new products for greater efficiency, recycling, and reuse, (ii) developing new technologies and systems for collecting, sorting, recycling, and recovering materials, (iii) making it easier for more consumers to participate in recycling and recovery programs, (iv) expanding the types of plastics collected and repurposed, (v) aligning products with key end markets, and (vi) expanding awareness that used plastics are valuable resources awaiting their next use [152]. • Province of Ontario: Global recognition of resource depletion, cultural shifts demanding greater sustainability and pressure on companies to increase operational efficiencies are key drivers behind the rise of circular economic initiatives in North America and elsewhere. Sensing this shift, the province of Ontario, Canada, has passed North America’s first circular economy law. Accordingly, producers and importers of all electrical and electronic equipment sold in Ontario will soon be obliged to divert e-waste from landfills through recycling operations. In response to the regulations, Canadian electronics firms are already designing computers and peripherals with easier disassembly designs [153].

The Circular Economy

254

It is estimated that OECD countries spend 12% of their GDP on public procurement. With a $1.9 trillion GDP, Canada spends $230 billion on procurement alone, and Ontario spends $89 billion. By leveraging purchasing power to drive sustainability, Canadian experts believe that it can hasten the transition to an effective CE. That is why Recycling Council of Ontario is taking an active role to encourage and showcase governments and organizations on using procurement as a mechanism to address waste reduction and greenhouse gas emissions, and benefit from the associated costs savings [154]. Ontario’s Circular Economy Innovation Lab, organized by Natural Step Canada, is actively participating in the effort to promote CE in Canada and North America. For instance, it brought together 25 participants from across North America to focus on developing solutions and a vision for printed paper and packaging in a CE for Ontario. The participants represented stakeholder groups, including government, business, industry associations, academia, and think tanks. Slowly, the efforts are paying off as group members are beginning to develop a shared vision of what success will look like and a number of promising initiatives and projects are beginning to take shape [155,156].

5.4 Circular economy in China 5.4.1 A challenging context In their Nature article, John A. Mathews and Hao Tan analyzed China’s consumption of the world’s resources and qualified it as “reaching crisis levels” [157]. It was reported that in order to produce 46% of global aluminum, 50% of steel and 60% of the world’s cement, in 2011, the country consumed more raw materials than the 34 countries of the OECD combined, that is 25.2 billion tons [158]. China’s management of resources and waste is often inefficient and wasteful, respectively. For instance, China requires 2.5 kg of materials to generate US$1 of gross domestic product (GDP) compared with 0.54 kg in OECD countries (in 2005, dollars, adjusted for purchasing power parity). The country also generated 3.2 billion tons of industrial solid waste, of which only two billion tons was recovered by recycling, composting, incineration, or reuse. By comparison, firms and households in the 28 countries of the European Union generated 2.5 billion tons of waste in 2012, of which 1 billion was recycled or used for energy. In 2025, China is expected to produce almost one-quarter of the world’s municipal solid waste [159].

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

255

In its assessment of the developing CE in China, the World Bank (WB), also highlighted the combination of growing raw materials consumption and low efficiency of resources, which led to massive generation of waste and underinvestment in waste treatment. The WB also highlighted another important factor which hinders China’s effort toward sustainability: institutional and policy failures. It was stated these are a major cause of China’s environmental and resource use problems. Pervasive market and policy failures, including subsidies for raw materials, weak enforcement of antipollution regulations, and low waste disposal fees result in low-resource productivity and severe pollution; hence, the urgent need for reforms [160]. Based on the previously mentioned statistics, the lessons from Mathews and Tan’s analysis, and the WB assessment, China is consuming the most resources in the world and produces the most waste, but it also has the most advanced solutions. Let us then explore those institutional and policy reforms and circular solutions in China.

5.4.2 Circular economy policy in China A number of core policies have been put in place already. The Law of Promotion of Cleaner Production was promulgated in 2002 [161]. Preferential tax and other economic incentive policies have been given to waste recycling for many years. China also has had good experience of certification systems such as environmentally labeled products, energy-saving products, and organic food. For instance, there have been active initiatives in the development of new policies in China since 2005, including the Several Opinions on Speeding up the Development of Circular Economy, issued by the State Council, and in which China made the commitments of making “great efforts” in Ref. [162]: • promoting saving and reducing consumption by saving resources in production, construction, circulation, consumption, and various other fields to reduce the consumption of natural resources. • promoting overall clean production and reducing waste generation from the source so as to realize the transition from end-of-pipe control to pollution control and production process control. • carrying out comprehensive utilization of resources, realizing the recycling of wastes, and the recycling and reusing of renewable resources to the maximum extent.

256

The Circular Economy

• developing environmentally friendly technologies and equipment of “reduce, reuse and recycle”, for providing a technical safeguard for highly efficient resource utilization, recycling and reusing, and reducing waste discharge. In December 2005, China’s National Development and Reform Commission, as a leading governmental agency for the CE, announced eight initiatives in the formulation of circular economy policies. These include initiation of the legislation process, launching pilot projects, the development of economic instruments, research and development of technology, industrial restructuring, studies on measuring indicators, financing key pilot projects by using funds raised through state bonds, and training and education. Furthermore, in September 2006, China’s State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) issued the assessment standards for national experimental eco-industry parks. In October of the same year, the Ministry of Finance and SEPA jointly published the Opinions on Governmental Procurement of Environmentally Labeled Products. It required governmental and public organizations to first purchase available products with environmental labeling when using fiscal funding for purchases. This was believed to be a landmark government rule to initiate green public procurement in China [163]. For many years, Chinese scholars were also proposing a circular (or recycling) economy as a new model to help China make better use of resources and energy. Since then, the model has become an integral part of the national economic strategy and has been built upon throughout the last three Five-Year Plans. The adoption of the Circular Economy Promotion Law in 2008 marked China out as a frontrunner in CE legislation [164]. By entering this law into force in January 2009, the Chinese officials sent clear signals of the country’s adoption of the, still emerging, concept. The objective of this legal framework was to facilitate the introduction and implementation of CE, raise the resources utilization rate, protect and improve the environment, and achieve sustained development. The law outlined not only a basic administration system, but also recycling and resource recovery requirements, as well as incentive measures such as tax preferences for industrial activities conducive to promoting the circular principles investments and pricing policies, prioritizing resource conservation, and government procurement. China also has a number of CE-related pilot projects, including reconstructing circulation in industrial parks, urban mining, and processing household waste [131]. We will develop these achievements in the following section on circular case studies in China.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

257

This law is also helping to take action on preventing the import of poorquality recyclable materials and, in December 2017, imposed strict restrictions on plastic waste imports, with worldwide repercussions, as we have seen throughout the responses from the Americans and Canadians to this import ban. To give a perspective on the important impact of such a decision, it was estimated that 111 million metric tons of plastic waste will be displaced through this new Chinese policy by 2030 [165]. In China itself, this ban is also expected to cause a shortage of recycled materials, thus increase in prices of relevant products through the supply chain. Companies relying on foreign waste as their main materials will need to switch to raw materials which are generally more expensive or domestic waste [166]. Overall, despite short-term challenges, China’s foreign waste ban poses significant opportunities to all involved parties to adopt innovative and sustainable waste management strategies based on circular principles. The driving forces behind this dramatic development in China, a heavily populated country and one of the largest economies in the world, can basically be attributed to the changes in governance philosophy of the centralized Chinese government on the one hand, and the severe situation of a shortage of natural resources and environmental pollution on the other hand. Due to such a unique background, Chinese scholars strongly believe that the CE concept in China has its own understandings and focuses of practice compared with the relevant concepts and activities found in other countries, mainly European and to a lesser extent, neighboring Japan. Such conviction is clearly echoed by the high productivity in term of scientific articles and reports on CE in China. A related bibliometric study revealed that, between 2006 and 2016, researchers in China produced the highest number of cumulative CE publications: 142 using Web of Science (Cf. Fig. 5.2), and 755 using Scopus. China was also the leading country in the temporal breakdown, e.g., 28 publications in 2015, and 35 in 2016 [167]. According to the WB’s experts, and many other international observers, China’s government is well aware of the disastrous impact if business in kept being conducted, as usual, that is, in a predominantly linear paradigm. Thus, China became committed to building a resource-saving and environmentally friendly society, and establishing sustainable production and consumption models, as stated in the county’s 12th Five-Year Plan [168]. Adopting the CE concept as a core component of China’s sustainable development strategy is already done, and its implementing is gradually

258

The Circular Economy

Figure 5.2 The growth trends of circular economy-related publications in the seven most productive countries (WoS: Web of Science) [167].

being carried based on various supporting legal tools. Although, in the beginning, “recycling economy” was alternatingly used with CE, as the concept matured, CE in China is now a broader term covering activities that reduce, reuse and recycle materials (referred to as the 3Rs approach) in the production, distribution, and consumption models. It has to be noted that although that some experts are highlighting possible obstacles facing the CE in China, which need to avoided or fixed in order to ensure the successful implementation of “circularity” in the country. In this regard, although China is providing several relevant economic and environmental policies, many scholars are emphasizing that those policies are not or less effective if not backed with complementary measures (incentivizing or enforcing). Among the reported challenges, poor implementation mechanisms and inadequate penalties are often reported [169,170]. Also, the lack of insufficient awareness of some enterprises about the urgency and importance of CE, and their continual pursuit of short-term benefits is also to blame [171]. Overall, after making clear advances in setting the necessary legal framework for CE to thrive in China, it is equally important to address and solve those problems, and anticipate the occurrence of others along the road, by establishing reliable implementation modalities, as well as strict monitoring indicators and evaluation tools.

5.4.3 Implementation modalities and indicators 5.4.3.1 Implementation modalities According to many Chinese scientists focusing on circularity and sustainability, the successful implementation of the CE policy requires efforts at three different levels: micro-level, meso-level, and macro-level [172,173].

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

259

• At the micro-level: industrial and agricultural producers are encouraged or required to adopt cleaner production (CP) and eco-design. Cleaner production has been the most effective and widely developed measure compared to other practices, especially after the enactment of China’s “Cleaner Production Promotion Law” [174]. CP is a strategy for addressing the generation of pollution as well as the efficient use of resources at all stages of the production process. For the heavily polluting Chinese enterprises in mining, printing and dying, tannery and chemical industries, CP is a compulsory strategy considering its role in reducing the firms’ environmental externalities as well as their energy needs. It encourages heavily polluting companies in manufacturing and the process industries to generate more integrated, efficient, and sustainable ways for production through the innovative design of the production line [175]. A related study investigated the barriers hindering the application of CP in Chinese SMEs. It was revealed that the exterior barriers of policy and financial barriers should be stressed rather than the inner barriers such as technical and managerial barriers. Also, the eco-design should be more systematically incorporated into the design of production processes and the end products [176]. Whereas for companies in the electric and electronic sectors, eco-design involves proactively addressing environmental attributes in the earliest stage of the product development process in order to minimize the negative environmental impacts of a product throughout its entire life cycle [177]. Similarity, in terms of consumption, sustainable behaviors should be promoted since it can facilitate the use and purchase of environmentally friendly services and products. As well, in term of wastes, sustainable waste management schemes need to be encouraged and, if necessary, enforced upon companies to ensure establishing and maintaining resources in closed loops via the application of one or more of the circular principles. • At the meso-level: the practices include developing eco-industrial parks (EIPs), eco-agricultural system, environmentally friendly designs of parks, and the establishment of waste exchange platforms in industrial parks [178]. As for the EIPs, the involved networks of industries are developed based on the concept of industrial symbiosis through cooperative management of resources and wastes, improvements in environmental performance, and a decrease in overall production cost. In an EIP, firms are sharing common infrastructure and services and trading industrial by-products such as heat, energy, wastewater, and

260

The Circular Economy

manufacturing wastes. Such collaboration is a reliable platform to help local industries or agricultural farms to reduce (or eliminate) their dependencies on external resources, and to reduce their environmental externality [179]. Along with EIPs, the implementation of CE at meso-level involves the commitment to the “green” design of residential communities in order to reduce energy, water, and land consumption. Besides, a system should be designed where household wastewater and solid waste can be easily collected and recycled, with the general aim of restoring the ecosystem in cities and boosting the quality of life [180]. • At the macro-level: more complex and extensive cooperative networks between industries and industrial parks need to be promoted at the city or regional scale. As a prerequisite, in this regard, in order to ensure a successful implementation of CE projects, the infrastructure and industrial parks in cities and provinces need to be redesigned and rearranged to conform to circular principles, and according to local and regional characteristics. In the area of waste management, Chinese scientists are encouraging the urban symbiosis concept as an important extension for industrial symbiosis. This urban symbiosis is based on the synergistic opportunity arising from geographic proximity through the transfer of physical resources (i.e., waste materials) for environmental and economic benefits. Typical activities include environmentally friendly products and equipment, environmental test and analysis, utilization of recycled waste, materials, green technologies, and products, as well as the restoration and protection of natural ecosystems [181,182]. 5.4.3.2 Indicator system in China In order to make sure that the implementation of CE in China is conducted in a genuinely sustainable manner, experts are emphasizing the need for the Chinese government to set several indicators to monitor and evaluate related progress and the achievement degrees of the targeted goals. The formulation of these indicators is thus the basis for quantifying economic development and providing key criteria for evaluating the soundness of the implementation modalities. Gross domestic product (GDP), the traditional indicator of economic development, plays a key role in showing the economic strength of a nation. Nonetheless, experts believe that “GDP gets it totally wrong as a measure of our success” [183], since it fails to indicate changes in the wealth of a nation and in

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

261

the welfare of its people, as well as the negative impact of economic growth on the environment. With the emergence of environmental protection and sustainable development in the 1960s, some economists and statisticians, therefore, attempted to integrate environmental considerations into the national economic accounting system, leading to the term “green GDP”. In 2004, China implemented a National green GDP, but with no major breakthrough on the environmental preservation front [184]. Scholars all over the world are attempting to establish new systems of national accounting, and proposing indicators that stress balanced economic, social, and environmental development [185,186]. Overall, the objective of most of these indicators is to determine a genuine growth rate after deducting environmental “loss” from economic growth. And since the CE paradigm aims at establishing sustainable economies, with healthy and harmonized economic, environmental, and societal relationships, an indicator system should be dedicated to CE. Such a system needs to integrate an economic development index, a green development index, and a human development index. In this context, and in order to put a “circular economy into practice in China,” Zhijun and Nailing [187] gave the following recommendations for the establishment of a sound indicator system to monitor China’s CE: • For the economic development: the index should include economic strength indices such as per-capita GDP and growth rate of GDP, and economic efficiency indices, for example, Consumer Price Index, and the ratio of investment in fixed assets to GDP. • For green development: the index should include: i. reduction indicators, such as land-output ratio, an annual reduction ratio of material consumption per 10,000 output value, energy consumption per 10,000 output value, water consumption per 10,000 output value, and waste discharge per 10,000 output value. ii. reuse indicators, including reuse ratio of water for industrial purposes, reuse ratios of products and energy, and urban sewage-treatment ratio. iii. resource indicators, for example, utilization ratios of waste, industrial gases, solid wastes, and urban domestic wastes. • For human development: the index should include: i. a human habitation environment index, including urban air pollution indicators, sanitation indicators for drinking water, per-capita green space, and per capita road space.

262

The Circular Economy

ii. a social index, including unemployment rate, social security coverage, and Engel coefficient. In a related matter, Chinese experts believe that it is primordial that such indices and indicators are incorporated into performance evaluation systems for government officials, aiming at enhancing the accountability of local officials and corporate managers [188]. Furthermore, many scholars are highlighting challenges to the implementation of those indicators. Indeed, several factors potentially serving as barriers to the effective and efficient implementation of such CE indicators were reported. For instance, the lack of detailed description or standardized process on data collection, calculation, and submission was highlighted. The recommendation was that local governments should develop their own approaches with full responsibility to collect data, conduct the related calculations, and finally submit the outcomes to the centralized decision making bodies in China, in this case, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC). Without a transparent monitoring and auditing mechanism, NDRC’s capabilities to determine the validity and accuracy of the submitted data by the local authorities could be undermined [189], thus, potentially leading to ineffective decisions and/or improper implementation modalities. Local governmental officials may only select indicators and valuation approaches that make them look good rather than appropriate data [190]. As well, while relatively richer east China regions have genuine interests in improving resource efficiency and environmental performance, the poorer west China regions simply have a desire to gain access to national financial subsidies. Thus, various communicative approaches, including broad educational programs and compulsory reporting, should be adopted so as to improve CE awareness and knowledge, and to ensure that such a reporting mechanism is incorporated into the regional and industrial longterm development strategies [191]. Overall, many Chinese experts believe that a further revision on CE indicators is necessary so that quantitative values for all indicators can be constructed for the specific Chinese context (i.e., a combination of political, cultural, societal, and ecological factors).

5.4.4 CE the Chinese way: selected case studies There are four main components to China’s circular economy strategy: i. Circular production: integrating the circular principles of reducing, reusing, and recycling into the whole production processes.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

263

ii. Circular systems of industry, agriculture, and services: supporting circular production by following the principle of optimizing industrial processes. iii. Growth of the recycling industry: to recycle and reuse urban waste streams, focusing on remanufacturing and renewable energy. iv. Green consumption “circular values”: to guide citizens toward smart, healthy, and safe consumption. The following case studies of Chinese companies and initiatives demonstrate each of these four priority areas. They also reflect the new economic reality in China: the transformation from a manufacturing giant into the world’s fastest-growing consumer market; https://medium.com/ circulatenews/circular-economy-in-china-six-examples-2709982763f2. • GEM Co., Ltd: While reuse, remanufacturing, and repair are central to the circular economy, when products have a short use period or can no longer be kept in service, it can make sense to recycle the materials. GEM, a Shenzhen-based company, is a market leader in the area of material recycling in China. It recycles materials from a number of industrial sectors, including electronics, automobiles, batteries, and wastewater [192]. Its large-scale waste battery and power battery material recycling industrial facilities covering an area of more than 2000 acres are processing a quantum of waste batteries and waste cobalt and nickel materials of about 300,000 tons annually. Thus, GEM’s activities in the area of battery recycling are of strategic importance to China due to the growth of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles. Electric vehicles are a key component of China’s plans for a smart and clean mobility system, as a way of relieving congestion and the high levels of air pollution in China’s growing cities. For instance, by 2020, the Chinese government plans to roll out five million additional electric vehicles, including the electrification of Beijing’s entire fleet of 70,000 taxis [193]. To support this, GEM has achieved the highest rate of battery reutilization, processing more than 10% of all used batteries, extracting nickel and cobalt to create chemicals that can be used to manufacture new batteries [194]. • Mobike: China has over 300 million vehicles, and data shows that almost half of the world’s most congested cities are in China. Such issues are very costly, both for the economy and public health. Mobike and other similar companies have rapidly spread through Chinese cities and are transforming urban mobility by offering a sharing solution. Mobike officially launched in April 2016 in Shanghai and, within the first year’s

264

The Circular Economy

operation, its customers have collectively cycled over 5.6 billion kilometers. The resulting carbon emission reduction is estimated at more than 1.2 million tons, the same as taking 350,000 cars off the road for a year [195]. “Mobikes” are equipped with GPS and proprietary smart-lock technology which enables users to locate, reserve, and unlock bikes with a smartphone. After reaching their destination, users can lock the bike and leave it on the roadside, making it available to the next rider. Currently, the use of the Mobike mobile app is available in more than 200 cities around the world [196]. Recently, Mobike’s decision to go deposit free will likely increase the pressure on rival Ofo, as competition hots up in a cash-intensive industry whose players have struggled to turn a profit [197]. • Guangzhou Huadu Worldwide Automatic Transmission Co., Ltd: the company was established in 1998, and is the largest supplier of after market automatic transmissions in China, which business includes automatic transmission remanufacturing, repair, sale, and training [198]. China has an enormous market potential for auto parts remanufacturing. The domestic automotive industry has been booming since 2000 and, in 2018, has a stock of 310 million cars. It has been estimated that 10 million cars, assuming an average life span of 10 years, will reach end-of-life, annually, by 2020. This opens up a huge market potential for auto parts remanufacturing businesses such as Guangzhou Huadu Worldwide, that are capitalizing on a market estimated at CNY120 billion (USD18 billion) by 2025 [199]. To ensure product quality, the company’s technicians typically go through thousands of hours of training to give them the skills to undertake the complicated repairs. The remanufactured products are insured by Pingan, one of China’s largest insurance companies [200]. • YCloset: China’s growing middle classes are accelerating the fast fashion phenomenon as they demand diversity and novelty in their everyday clothing. Such a trend has led to a large amount of discarded clothing. According to a 2016 report from the state news agency, Xinhua, China throws away 26 million tons of garments each year, and only less than 1% of it is reused [201]. In this context, YCloset was launched in 2015, offering an online clothes subscription service. Each month, subscribers can access up to 30 items from a catalog of over 150,000 mid- to-high-end clothing options for

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

265

a subscription fee of CNY499 (around USD74). The company operates in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, and has received in 2017, the joint sum of USD50 million as investments from Alibaba, SB China Capital, and Sequoia Capital [202]. Unlike its European and U.S. equivalents, such as Rent the Runway, YCloset offers everyday women’s clothing instead of just formal occasion clothing. The value proposition is providing access to a huge variety of clothing so that their targeted customers, urban white-collar women aged 20e35, can try out new styles regularly without having to make purchases [203]. • JD: is a Chinese E-commerce platform, one of the two massive B2C online retailers in China by transaction volume and revenue, and a major competitor to Alibaba-run Tmall. In 2018, JD had launched a reusable packaging initiative to promote sustainable consumption. The new program offers JD’s customers the option of ordering reusable packaging for their small and medium-sized parcels, returning the green boxes to delivery personnel after receiving their order. The firm estimates that the program can save CNY32.5 million (US$4.8 million) per year if 10% of orders use the new packaging. Customers who choose the packaging are rewarded with JD’s “Jingdou” loyalty points, which can be exchanged for products on JD [204]. JD also plans to invest USD150 billion to develop their reuse platform, with the immediate focus on high-end smartphones. To provide their “premium quality guarantee,” they have partnered with Aihuishou, an experienced player in the digital product recycling market. The technology partner checks each phone that comes in, undertakes technical and cosmetic repairs, and awards a quality classification. The guarantee is underpinned by a 7-day refund if the customer is not satisfied [205].

5.5 Conclusions and outlook In order to generate and sustain a global momentum around the CE concept, investors, industrialists, and manufacturers should be incentivized or “obliged” to produce more resource-efficient and ecofriendly products from sustainably resourced materials and feedstocks. As well, politicians and representatives in legislative bodies should be “pushed” by voters and any relevant association to propose and support laws and regulations promoting the implementation of CE principles in various industrial activities,

266

The Circular Economy

from resources acquisition and products’ manufacturing to recycling and the adoption of environmental protection measures. In the water sector for instance, despite the vitality of such resources, most people (even in arid regions) are acting as if no water scarcity issue is occurring in their countries. One of the initial endeavors of CE networks is to make sure that those people are well aware of what is at stake, and about the highly wasteful current production and consumption patterns. Indeed, large volumes of water can be reclaimed from municipal and industrial wastewaters. And if this important achievement requiring the use of advanced technologies is not accompanied with a sustainable use of the reclaimed water, the whole water management system will be compromised. Thus, it is important to develop CE-enabling technologies, and it is equally important to make people aware about the importance of preserving raw, reclaimed or recycled resources and products. In this regard, if mainstream media, newspapers, schools, and other public venues, are all working on telling and reminding people that a simple A4 piece of white paper requires 10 L of water to be produced [206], and that a cup of coffee generates a water footprint of about 140 L [207], then soon after, many will buy their papers sheets from a water-preserving pulp and paper company, and will make their morning coffee from beans produced by an ecofriendly company. More of these examples can be stated, but the main point is to highlight the fact that, implementing the CE concept by municipalities, countries, or companies (as we have explored in this chapter), should be simultaneously accompanied with the introduction of the CE concept and its economical, societal, and environmental benefits (and the numerous drawbacks of the linear concept) to the people among whom there are consumers, teachers, journalists, researchers, politicians, and voters (the latter being influential in democratic countries). Acknowledging the urgent need for a fundamental paradigm shift from the wasteful linear economic model to the sustainable CE in good, but far from being enough. Indeed, clear regulatory framework and action plans and circular initiatives are needed to pave the way for a successful implementation of CE, and the attainment of the targeted economic, environmental, and societal targets in a company, city, region, country, and beyond. Thus, it is crucial for both the public and private sectors adopting circular principles in their activities, to recognize the pivotal point that CE requires a new mindset, bold, innovative, and disruptive initiatives, and very

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

267

importantly, a set of enabling legislative and technological tools to shape and sustain the framework supporting CE, including, for instance, new policy instruments that extend far beyond existing waste legislation. As it was outlined in the present chapter, especially in the various circular case studies, such instrumented framework should operate in the interconnected areas of product design enabling recycling and resources recovery, business models minimizing waste, etc. And in order to ensure a full impact, those policy instruments need to be tailored toward local specificities [208,209]. The big challenge, even for the county pioneering in the implementation of CE, remains on how to integrate these instruments in a durable and reliable framework of policies, with a strong momentum supporting the CE movement in the country. Thus, the key for a successful implementation of CE is the establishment of a stable and credible framework, within which businesses will invest in innovative circular production processes and benefits from its economic advantages, and consumers will be able to benefit from the societal and environmental advantages of such a sustainable economic model.

References [1] The Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (The RSA). Investigating the role of design in the circular economy. 2013. Available online at: https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/reports/great-recovery-executivesummary-june-2013.pdf. [2] World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). New report explains how business and government can accelerate the circular built environment. 2018. Available online at: https://www.wbcsd.org/Programs/Circular-Economy/ Factor-10/News/how-business-and-government-can-accelerate-the-circular-builtenvironment. [3] De Jesus A, Mendonça S. Lost in transition? Drivers and barriers in the ecoinnovation road to the circular economy. Ecological Economics 2018;145:75e89. [4] European Commission. European resource efficiency platform e manifesto & policy recommendations. 2012. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ resource_efficiency/documents/erep_manifesto_and_policy_recommendations_3103-2014.pdf. [5] European Commission. Memo e manifesto for a resource-efficient Europe. 2012. Available online at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-989_en.htm. [6] European Environment Agency (EEA). Closing the loop e an EU action plan for the circular economy COM/2015/0614 final. 2015. Available online at: https://www. eea.europa.eu/policy-documents/com-2015-0614-final. [7] MacArthur E, Zumwinkel K, Stuchtey MR. Growth within: a circular economy vision for a competitive Europe. Ellen MacArthur Foundation; 2015. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/ EllenMacArthurFoundation_Growth-Within_July15.pdf.

268

The Circular Economy

[8] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Circular economy would increase European competitiveness and deliver better societal outcomes, new study reveals. 2015. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/news/circular-economywould-increase-european-competitiveness-and-deliver-better-societal-outcomesnew-study-reveals. [9] SusChem, the European Technology Platform for Sustainable Chemistry. Circular economy SusChem position paper. 2017. Available online at: www.suschem.org/ files/library/SusChem_Position_Paper_Circular-Economy_2017.pdf. [10] SusChem. SusChem position paper on the circular economy. 2015. Available online at: http://suschem.blogspot.com/2015/10/suschem-position-paper-on-circular. html. [11] European Economic and Social Committee (EESC). The circular economy package position paper e June 2016. 2016. Available online at: https://www.eesc.europa.eu/ sites/default/files/resources/docs/circulareconomy-ppaper-en.pdf. [12] Parlementaire Monitor. EESC calls for more ambition and comprehensive targets to be set for the circular economy. 2016. Available online at: https://www. parlementairemonitor.nl/9353000/1/j9vvij5epmj1ey0/vk3m5d4w1unh?ctx¼vjxzjv 7ta8z1&tab¼1&start_tab0¼100. [13] Sitra News. Sitra honoured as a leading driver of the circular economy. Available online at: https://www.sitra.fi/en/news/sitra-honoured-leading-driver-circulareconomy-can-world-learn-finland. [14] Valkokari P, Tura N, Ståhle M, Hanski J, Ahola T. Advancing circular business e from data to wisdom: approaches enabling circular economy. Available online at: http://lutpub.lut.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/159050/Advancing%20circular%20 business_Final%20report.pdf?sequence¼1&isAllowed¼y. [15] Sitra. Leading the cycle e Finnish road map to a circular economy 2016e2025. 2016. Available online at: https://media.sitra.fi/2017/02/28142644/Selvityksia121.pdf. [16] Arponen J, Granskog A, Pantsar M. The opportunities of a circular economy for Finland. Helsinki, Sitra. 2015. Available online at: https://media.sitra.fi/2017/02/ 28142449/Selvityksia100.pdf. [17] The Confederation of Finnish Industries (EK). Take a leap into circular economy. 2016. Available online at: https://ek.fi/wp-content/uploads/Take_a_Leap_into_ Circular_Economy.pdf. [18] EK. Take a leap into circular economy e a new report showcasing how pioneering Finnish companies are together making headway in the circular economy. 2016. Available online at: https://ek.fi/en/materials/take-a-leap-into-circular-economy/. [19] Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE). State of the environment report 2/2017 e shifting from a linear economy to a circular economy. 2017. Available online at: https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/187407/YT_2_2017_kiertotalous_ EN.pdf?sequence¼1. [20] ÅF. News e successful waste-to-energy project in Finland. 2017. Available online at: http://www.afconsult.com/en/newsroom/news/news/2017/successful-waste-toenergy-project-in-finland/. [21] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Biorefineries: industrial-scale production paving the way for bioeconomy. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 233e70. [22] Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi). The German government’s raw materials strategy safeguarding a sustainable supply of non-energy mineral resources for Germany. 2010. Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/ tools-databases/eip-raw-materials/en/system/files/ged/43%20raw-materials-strategy.pdf. [23] Nelles M, Gr€ unes J, Morscheck G. Waste management in Germanyedevelopment to a sustainable circular economy? Procedia Environmental Sciences 2016;35:6e14.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

269

[24] Wilts H. Germany on the road to a circular economy? Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung e economic and social policy. 2016. Available online at: https://library.fes.de/pdffiles/wiso/12622.pdf. [25] Werner TT, Mudd GM, Jowitt SM. Indium: key issues in assessing mineral resources and long-term supply from recycling. Applied Earth Science 2015;124(4):213e26. [26] The Umweltbundesamt. Important environmental indicators e indicator: total raw material productivity. 2018. Available online at: https://www.umweltbundesamt. de/en/indicator-total-raw-material-productivity#textpart-3. [27] Brears R. Germany’s 2022 circular economy. 2018. Available online at: https:// medium.com/mark-and-focus/germanys-2022-circular-economy-214b7ad8470f. [28] European Commission. Directive 2009/125/Ec of the European parliament and of the council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products. 2009. Available online at: https://eur-lex. europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri¼CELEX:32009L0125&from¼EN. [29] Tukker A. Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economyea review. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015;97:76e91. [30] Lewandowski M. Designing the business models for circular economydtowards the conceptual framework. Sustainability 2016;8(1):43. [31] Monier V, Hestin M, Cave J, et al. Development of guidance for extended producer responsibility, final report for the European Commission e DG environment, Brussels. 2014. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/pdf/target_ review/Guidance%20on%20EPR%20-%20Final%20Report.pdf. [32] Dutch government. From a linear to a circular economy. 2015. Available online at: https://www.government.nl/topics/circular-economy/from-a-linear-to-a-circulareconomy. [33] Central Bureau of Statistics. Bulk of raw materials from Europe. 2015. Available online at: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2012/46/bulk-van-grondstoffen-uit-europa [in Dutch]. [34] Dutch government. A policy note: a circular economy in the Netherlands by 2050 government-wide programme for a circular economy. 2016. Available online at: https://www.government.nl/binaries/government/documents/policy-notes/2016/ 09/14/a-circular-economy-in-the-netherlands-by-2050/17037þCirculaireþEconomie_ EN.PDF. [35] PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Opportunities for a circular economy. 2018. Available online at: https://themasites.pbl.nl/circular-economy/. [36] Dutch government. Encouraging a circular economy. 2015. Available online at: https://www.government.nl/topics/circular-economy/encouraging-a-circulareconomy. [37] National Institute for Public Health and the Environment Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport, Netherlands. The circular economy: starting progress measurement in the Netherlands. 2018. Available online at: https://www.rivm.nl/en/news/circulareconomy-starting-progress-measurement-in-netherlands. [38] PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. The circular economy starting progress measurement. 2018. Available online at: https://www.pbl.nl/en/news/ newsitems/2018/the-circular-economy-starting-progress-measurement. [39] Hill JE. The circular economy: from waste to resource stewardship, part I. In: Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers-waste and resource management, vol. 168, No. 1. Thomas Telford Ltd; October 2014. p. 3e13. [40] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Our mission is to accelerate the transition to a circular economy. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/ourstory/mission.

270

The Circular Economy

[41] Hill J. Circular economy and the policy landscape in the UK. In: Taking stock of industrial ecology. Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 265e74. [42] The Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP). WRAP’s vision is a world in which resources are used sustainably. 2019. Available online at: http://www.wrap. org.uk/about-us/about. [43] WRAP. WRAP and the circular economy. 2019. Available online at: http://www. wrap.org.uk/about-us/about/wrap-and-circular-economy. [44] WRAP. Towards resource efficiency. WRAP business plan 2008-11. 2011. A report on impact. Available online at: http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/WRAP% 20Business%20Plan%20Review.pdf. [45] WRAP. Closing the loop: WRAP’s contribution to economic growth. 2012. Available online at: http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/WRAP%20contribution% 20to%20economic%20growth_0.pdf. [46] UK’s Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra). Press release e research shows companies can save money by helping the environment. 2011. Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/research-shows-companiescan-save-money-by-helping-the-environment. [47] McKinsey Global Institute. Resource Revolution: meeting the world’s energy, materials, food, and water needs. 2011. Available online at: https://www.mckinsey. com/w/media/mckinsey/business%20functions/sustainability%20and%20resource %20productivity/our%20insights/resource%20revolution/mgi_resource_revolution_ executive_summary.ashx. [48] London Waste and Recycling Board (LWARB). Circular economy route map. 2017. Available online at: https://www.lwarb.gov.uk/what-we-do/circular-london/circulareconomy-route-map/. [49] UK Green Building Council (UKGBC). Our mission. Available online at: https:// www.ukgbc.org/our-mission/. [50] UKGBC. The circular economy programme. 2019. Available online at: https:// www.ukgbc.org/ukgbc-work/circular-economy/. [51] UN Sustainable Development. Italy and Agenda 2030 at a glance. Available online at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/16285Italy_Main_Message_ HLPF_2017.pdf. [52] Enel. Enel and Symbola Foundation present “100 Italian Circular Economy Stories”: the supply chains, technologies and champions of the made in Italy circular economy. 2018. Available online at: https://www.enel.com/media/press/d/2018/03/eneland-symbola-foundation-present-100-italian-circular-economy-stories-the-supplychains-technologies-and-champions-of-the-made-in-italy-circular-economy. [53] The Circular Economy Club (CEC). Towards a model of circular economy for Italy. 2017. Available online at: https://www.circulareconomyclub.com/listings/strategies/ italy-towards-a-model-of-circular-economy-for-italy/. [54] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Italy’s 2017 national sustainable development strategy (NSDS). 2018. Available online at: http://www.oecd.org/pcsd/20181016%20Italy_country%20profile.pdf. [55] UN Division for Sustainable Development Goals. Voluntary national review e Italy. National sustainable development strategy. 2017. Available online at: https:// sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/16341Italy.pdf. [56] Duccio B. Economia circolare in Italia. Economia circolare in Italia. Milan, Italy: Publisher Edizioni Ambiente; 2018. [57] Morning Future. Circular economy e Italy is already dressed for the occasion. 2018. Available online at: https://www.morningfuture.com/en/article/2018/10/31/circulareconomy-sustainable-development-in-italy/460/.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

271

[58] Atlante Italiano dell’Economia Circolare. Available online at: http://www. economiacircolare.com/latlante/ [in Italian]. [59] European Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform Stories of Circular Economy: an Italian Atlas and a competition. Available online at: https://circulareconomy.europa. eu/platform/en/good-practices/stories-circular-economy-italian-atlas-and-competition. [60] Mazzanti M, Ghisetti C, Gilli M. Eco-innovation in Italy, EIO country profile 20142015. 2015. Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/sites/ ecoap_stayconnected/files/field/field-country-files/italy_eco-innovation_2015.pdf. [61] Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare in collaborazione con il Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico. Towards a model of circular economy for Italy e overview and strategic framework. 2017. Available online at: https:// circulareconomy.europa.eu/platform/sites/default/files/strategy_-_towards_a_model_ eng_completo.pdf. [62] FocusEconomics. Italy economic outlook. 2019. Available online at: https://www. focus-economics.com/countries/italy. [63] Krarup M, Kiørboe N, Sramkova H. Moving towards a circular economy: successful Nordic business models. Copenhagen, Denmark: Nordic Council of Ministers; 2015. Available online at: http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:852029/FULLTEXT01.pdf. [64] Agito Medical. What we do. Available online at: https://www.agitomedical.com/ en/about-us. [65] BusinessWire. Top 4 drivers promoting growth for the refurbished medical devices market until 2020, reports Technavio. 2016. Available online at: https://www. businesswire.com/news/home/20160930005196/en/Top-4-Drivers-PromotingGrowth-Refurbished-Medical. [66] TouchPoint. Sustainable competitive advantage (working) garment at a time. Available online at: https://www.touchpoint.fi/en/yritys/. [67] Sitra. The most interesting companies in the circular economy in Finland. Textile and plastic waste into work clothes. Available online at: https://www.sitra.fi/en/cases/ textile-plastic-waste-work-clothes/. [68] Arla Foods Organic. Available online at: https://farmer.arla.com/about-us/organic1/. [69] Arla Foods. Climate impact & resource efficiency. Available online at: https://www. arla.com/company/responsibility/sustainable-dairy-production#climateimpact. [70] Arla Foods. Environmental strategy e water and energy. Available online at: https:// www.arla.com/company/responsibility/environmental-strategy/water-and-energy/. [71] Neste. Renewable raw materials. Available online at: https://www.neste.com/ companies/products/renewable-fuels/renewable-raw-materials. [72] Sitra. The most interesting companies in the circular economy in Finland. Diesel from waste and residues. Available online at: https://www.sitra.fi/en/cases/diesel-wasteresidues/. [73] Neste. Annual report 2016 e the next phase of growth. 2016. Available online at: http://ir-service.funkton.com/download/ahBzfmlyLXNlcnZpY2UtaHJkchsLEg5GaWxlQXR0YWNobWVudBiAgJDA846OCgw/Neste_Annual_Report_2016. pdf?action¼open. [74] Sitra. The most interesting companies in the circular economy in Finland. Available online at: https://www.sitra.fi/en/projects/interesting-companies-circular-economyfinland/#latest [Update on February 6, 2019]. [75] Hollandtradeandinvestcom. The Netherlands goes circular. Available online at: https://www.hollandtradeandinvest.com/dutch-solutions/circular-economy.

272

The Circular Economy

[76] Vitens. Organization and strategy. Available online at: https://www.vitens.com/ organisation/strategy. [77] Dutchwatersectorcom. Royal HaskoningDHV and vitens start worldwide marketing of technology to recover humic acid at drinking water plants. 2015. Available online at: https://www.dutchwatersector.com/news-events/news/12774-royal-haskoning dhv-and-vitens-start-worldwide-marketing-of-technology-to-recover-humic-acidat-drinking-water-plants.html. [78] Hollandtradeandinvestcom. Vitens e water as a source of the circular economy. Available online at: https://www.hollandtradeandinvest.com/dutch-solutions/ circular-economy/vitens-water-as-a-source-of-the-circular-economy. [79] Black Bear Carbon. What black bear believes. Available online at: https:// blackbearcarbon.com/about-us/. [80] Hollandtradeandinvestcom. Second life for discarded car tyres. Available online at: https://www.hollandtradeandinvest.com/dutch-solutions/circular-economy/secondlife-for-discarded-car-tyres. [81] Philips. Rethinking the future e our transition towards a circular economy. Available online at: https://www.philips.com/a-w/about/sustainability/sustainable-planet/ circular-economy.html. [82] Signify NV. Minimize waste and create instant savings. Available online at: https:// www.signify.com/global/sustainability/circular-lighting. [83] Philips. Philips Circular lighting success stories. Available online at: http://www. lighting.philips.com/main/services/circular-lighting. [84] Philips Healthcare. Refurbishing solutions for MRI systems. 2014. Available online at: https://www.philips.com/a-w/about/sustainability/sustainable-planet/circulareconomy/refurbished-medical-products.html. [85] Nederland circulair. Available online at: https://www.circulairondernemen.nl/ about-us [in Dutch]. [86] OECD’s Observatory of Public Sector Innovation. Circular Amsterdam: a vision and action agenda for the city and metropolitan area. Available online at: https://www. oecd.org/governance/observatory-public-sector-innovation/innovations/page/circularamsterdamavisionandactionagendaforthecityandmetropolitanarea.htm. [87] Circle Economy. Circle cities programme e creating value from the start by designing cities of the future. Available online at: https://www.circle-economy. com/tool/cities/#.XFxnzmNCeUk. [88] Circle Economy. Circular Amsterdam e a vision and action agenda for the city and metropolitan area. 2016. Available online at: https://www.circle-economy.com/wpcontent/uploads/2016/04/Circular-Amsterdam-EN-small-210316.pdf. [89] Prendeville S, Cherim E, Bocken N. Circular cities: mapping six cities in transition. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 2018;26:171e94. [90] ReMade in Italy. Circular economy companies association. Available online at: https:// www.remadeinitaly.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Remade-in-Italy-EN.pdf. [91] ReMade in Italy. L’etichetta Remade in ItalyÒ. Available online at: https://www. remadeinitaly.it/etichetta-remade-in-italy [in Italian]. [92] ENEA. Italian circular economy stakeholder platform e ICESP/Presentazione e lancio. 2018. Available online at: http://www.enea.it/it/seguici/events/icesp_31mag2018/ presentazione-e-lancio-icesp-italian-circular-economy-stakeholder-platform. [93] ENEA. Precious metals from PCs, a new ENEA-patented technology to exploit electronic circuit boards. 2015. Available online at: http://www.enea.it/en/news-enea/ news/precious-metals-from-pcs-a-new-enea-patented. [94] ENEA. ROMEO e impianto per la verifica in scala pilota di processi idrometallurgici per il recupero di materiali da matrici complesse. Available online at: http://www.enea.it/

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

[95]

[96] [97] [98] [99]

[100] [101] [102] [103]

[104] [105] [106] [107] [108] [109]

[110] [111]

273

it/ateco/schede/romeo-impianto-per-la-verifica-di-processi-idrometallurgici/ display_pdf [in Italian]. CIB, Consorzio Italiano Biogas. BiogasdonerightÒ e anaerobic digestion and soil carbon sequestration a sustainable, low cost, reliable and win win beccs solution. Available online at: https://www.consorziobiogas.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/ 05/Biogasdoneright-No-VEC-Web.pdf. CIB. The consortium. https://www.consorziobiogas.it/en/the-consortium/. Roberts G. Global circular economy database launched to coordinate circular innovation. Resource. 2018. Available online at: https://resource.co/article/globalcircular-economy-database-launched-coordinate-circular-innovation-12601. Geyer R, Jambeck JR, Law KL. Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made. Science Advances 2017;3(7):e1700782. Ongondo FO, Williams ID. Are WEEE in control? Rethinking strategies for managing waste electrical and electronic equipment. In: Integrated waste managementvolume II. InTech; 2011. Available online at: https://www.intechopen.com/ books/integrated-waste-management-volume-ii/are-weee-in-control-rethinkingstrategies-for-managing-waste-electrical-and-electronic-equipment/. Constant DR, BASF SE. Paper cup comprising a polyethylene copolymer coating and methods of making the same. U.S. Patent Application 14/909,950. 2016. Dayton DC, Park SK, Greater Good, Inc. Biodegradable container for liquid and/or semi-solid products. U.S. Patent 9,452,863. 2016. Lovells H. New EPA rule heavily regulates recycling. Lexology; 2014. Available online at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g¼4dad627f-76bf-48d69172-5d7a03b620b7. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Ellen MacArthur foundation’s circular economy 100 programme launches its USA network. 2016. Available online at: https://www. ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/news/the-ellen-macarthur-foundations-circulareconomy-100-programme-launches-its-usa-network. Hardcastle JL. Ellen MacArthur foundation launches US circular economy program. 2016. Available online at: https://www.environmentalleader.com/2016/03/ellenmacarthur-foundation-launches-us-circular-economy-program/. Goblon A. Circular economy growth in North America. European Circular Construction Alliance (ECCA). 2017. Available online at: http://circularconstruction. eu/2017/06/28/circular-economy-growth-in-north-america/. Rosengren C. What comes next after China’s scrap ban surprise? Waste dive. 2017. Available online at: https://www.wastedive.com/news/what-comes-next-afterchinas-scrap-ban-surprise/447704/. World Trade Organization. Committee on technical barriers to trade e notification G/TBT/N/CHN/1211. 2017. Available online at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/ dive_static/diveimages/ChinaWTO071817.pdf. Rosengren C. ISRI: proposed Chinese scrap import ban would be ’catastrophic’ to recycling industry. 2017. Available online at: https://www.wastedive.com/news/isriproposed-chinese-scrap-import-ban-would-be-catastrophic-to-recyclin/447373/. McGlyn J. Five megatrends that will unleash business value in the circular economy. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation; 2015. Available online at: https:// www.uschamberfoundation.org/blog/post/five-megatrends-will-unleash-businessvalue-circular-economy/42936. ING. New revenue streams: the circular economy in North America. Available online at: https://www.ingwb.com/themes/americas-here-i-come-articles/newrevenue-streams-the-circular-economy-in-north-america. ING. Sustainable business e circular economy. Available online at: https://www.ing. com/Sustainability/Sustainable-business/Circular-economy.htm.

274

The Circular Economy

[112] Peters A. Most U.S. companies say they are planning to transition to a circular economy. Fast Company; 2019. Available online at: https://www.fastcompany. com/90300741/most-u-s-companies-say-they-are-planning-to-transition-to-acircular-economy. [113] Iles J. Which country is leading the circular economy shift? Medium; 2018. Available online at: https://medium.com/circulatenews/which-country-is-leading-thecircular-economy-shift-3670467db4bb. [114] ING. Opportunity and disruption: how circular thinking could change US business models. 2019. Available online at: https://www.ingwb.com/media/2692501/ing_ us-circular-economy-survey-05-02-2019.pdf. [115] ING. How circular thinking could change US business models. 2019. Available online at: https://www.ingwb.com/themes/americas-here-i-come-articles/howcircular-thinking-could-change-us-business-models. [116] ING. Here’s what 200 US execs told us about sustainability and business value. 2018. Available online at: https://www.ing.com/Newsroom/All-news/Heres-what-200US-execs-told-us-about-sustainability-and-business-value.htm. [117] World Economic Forum. These 4 companies are embracing, and finding value in, the circular economy. 2017. Available online at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/ 2017/06/four-companies-embracing-the-circular-economy/. [118] Circular CoLab. The state of the circular economy in America. Available online at: https://www.circularcolab.org/us-circular-economy-report/. [119] Circular CoLab. The state of the circular economy in America. 2018. Available online at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a6ca9a2f14aa140556104c0/t/5baa5bcf 1905f44e420e6fe7/1537891289199/US_CE_Study_2018_FINAL.pdf. [120] The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. CE100 USA overview. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/Circular-economy-andCE100-USA-overview.pdf. [121] Wilson M, Vaughan S. Circular economy: a promising strategy for a healthier, more prosperous Canada. Politics. 2018. Available online at: https://ipolitics.ca/article/ circular-economy-a-promising-strategy-for-a-healthier-more-prosperous-canada/. [122] Circular Economy Leadership Coalition (CELC). Accelerating sustainable, profitable, zero-waste solutions to ensure Canadian leadership in the global circular economy. 2018. Available online at: http://circulareconomyleaders.ca/downloads/Folio_0918-18-Final.pdf. [123] CELC. Media Release e major business, NGO leaders call for Canada to go wastefree. 2018. Available online at: http://circulareconomyleaders.ca/downloads/ CELC_Media_Release_Final[EN].pdf. [124] Zero Waste Canada (ZWC). Who is zero waste Canada? Available online at: https:// zerowastecanada.ca/. [125] Workman M. Zero waste Canada responds to China’s import ban. Recycling today. 2018. Available online at: https://www.recyclingtodayglobal.com/article/zerowaste-canada-responds-china-ban/. [126] Smart Prosperity Institute. Project e Smart Prosperity Institute. Available online at: https://institute.smartprosperity.ca/content/circular-economy-lab-0. [127] Circular Economy Lab (CEL). About us. Available online at: http://circular economylab.com/about-ceil/. [128] National Zero Waste Council. Positioning Canada as a leader by encouraging the wider adoption of circular approaches. 2016. Available online at: http://www. nzwc.ca/focus/circular-economy/Pages/default.aspx. [129] Zabaneh M. Canada’s moving towards a circular economy e business must prepare now. Toronto sustainability speaker series. 2016. Available online at: http://tsss.ca/

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

[130] [131] [132]

[133] [134]

[135] [136] [137] [138] [139] [140] [141] [142]

[143]

[144] [145]

275

channels/business-sustainability/canadas-moving-towards-a-circular-economybusiness-must-prepare-now. World Business Council for Sustainable Development. CEO guide to the circular economy. 2017. Available online at: https://docs.wbcsd.org/2017/06/CEO_ Guide_to_CE.pdf. Cairns S, Ogden M, McFatridge S. Getting to a circular economy: a primer for Canadian policymakers. Smart Prosperity Institute; 2018. Available online at: https:// institute.smartprosperity.ca/sites/default/files/spipolicybrief-circulareconomy.pdf. Coyne J, Seale B. Canadian businesses need a ‘circular’ economy to remain competitive. The Globe and Mail. 2018. Available online at: https://www.theglobeandmail. com/business/commentary/article-canadian-businesses-need-a-circular-economy-toremain-competitive/. Druzin R. Circular economy holds the key to the future. Media planet. 2018. Available online at: http://www.industryandbusiness.ca/insight/circular-economy-holdsthe-key-to-the-future. National Zero Waste Council. Reducing food waste & cutting Canada’s carbon emissions. 2016. Available online at: http://www.nzwc.ca/focus/food/nationalfood-waste-strategy/Documents/NZWCSubmissionOnPan-CanadianFramework ForCombattingClimateChange.pdf. DMS-NIAGA. Redesigning everyday products. Available online at: https://www. dsm-niaga.com/what-we-do.html. DMS. No waste? No problem! It’s time to discard our throwaway culture. Available online at: https://www.dsm.com/corporate/science/resources-circularity/dsmniaga.html. Powlik S. Enterra Feed Corporation. Available online at: https://sandypowlik. wordpress.com/2015/02/02/enterra-feed-corporation/. Enterra Feed Corporation. Renewable food for animals and plants. Available online at: http://www.metrovancouver.org/events/community-breakfasts/Presentations/ StuartLilley-Enterra-RenewableFoodforAnimalsPlants.pdf. The National Zero Waste Council. Circular economy case study: Enterra Feed Corporation. Available online at: http://www.nzwc.ca/focus/circular-economy/casestudies/casestudies/enterrafeed.pdf. Enerkem. Waste conversion process e chemical recycling of carbon. Available online at: https://enerkem.com/waste-diversion/waste-conversion-process/. Enerkem. Exclusive thermochemical process. Available online at: https://enerkem. com/about-us/technology/. Gerholdt J. Five North American companies leading the circular economy transition. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation; 2017. Available online at: https:// www.uschamberfoundation.org/blog/post/five-north-american-companies-leadingcircular-economy-transition. BusinessWire. Cohealo introduces SaaS solution for real-time tracking of equipment utilization. 2018. Available online at: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/ 20180613005283/en/Cohealo-Introduces-SaaS-Solution-Real-Time-TrackingEquipment. World Business Council for Sustainable Development and The Boston Consulting Group. The new big circle. 2018. Available online at: http://docs.wbcsd.org/ 2018/01/The_new_big_circle.pdf. Goldschneider D. Case study: how Kaiser Permanente saved $8.6M with its ‘Amazon Prime’ for medical equipment. 2018. Available online at: https://cohealo.com/casestudy-how-hospitals-are-reducing-capital-expenses-with-cohealo/.

276

The Circular Economy

[146] Apple. Environmental responsibility report e 2014 progress report, covering FY 2013. 2014. Available online at: https://www.apple.com/environment/reports/ docs/apple_environmental_responsibility_report_0714.pdf. [147] Apple. Environmental responsibility report e 2016 progress report, covering FY 2015. 2015. Available online at: https://www.apple.com/mideast/environment/ pdf/ar/Apple_Environmental_Responsibility_Report_2016.pdf. [148] McSweeney K. How and why Apple’s robot Liam disassembles iPhones. 2017. Available online at: https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-and-why-apples-robot-liamdisassembles-iphones/. [149] Hikler S. Best buy reports on sustainability progress, goals for 2020. Best buy. 2018. Available online at: https://corporate.bestbuy.com/best-buy-reports-sustainabilityprogress-goals-2020/. [150] U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation. Messaging the circular economy. 2018. Available online at: https://www.uschamberfoundation.org/best-practices/messagingcircular-economy#ch-01-article-0. [151] American Chemistry Council, Inc. U.S. plastics resin producers set circular economy goals to recycle or recover 100% of plastic packaging by 2040. 2018. Available online at: https://www.americanchemistry.com/Media/PressReleasesTranscripts/ACCnews-releases/US-Plastics-Producers-Set-Circular-Economy-Goals-to-Recycle-orRecover-100-Percent-of-Plastic-Packaging-by-2040.html. [152] Mohan AM. U.S. plastic resin producers set circular economy goals. Greener Package; 2018. Available online at: https://www.greenerpackage.com/resins/us_plastic_ resin_producers_set_circular_economy_goals. [153] van Riel A. How the circular economy unlocks new revenue streams. GreenBiz; 2018. Available online at: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/how-circulareconomy-unlocks-new-revenue-streams. [154] Recycling Council of Ontario. Circular economy. 2018. Available online at: https:// rco.on.ca/circular-economy/. [155] Van Beilen N. A successful circular economy depends on collaboration. Toronto sustainability speaker series. 2017. Available online at: http://tsss.ca/channels/businesssustainability/a-successful-circular-economy-depends-on-collaboration. [156] Lindberg C. Accelerating the transition to a circular economy in Ontario. Circular Economy Lab. 2016. Available online at: http://circulareconomylab.com/ accelerating-the-transition-to-a-circular-economy-in-ontario/. [157] Mathews JA, Tan H. Circular economy: lessons from China. Nature News 2016; 531(7595):440. [158] Charter M, editor. Designing for the circular economy. Routledge; 2018. 396 pages. [159] Lehmacher W. The global supply chain e how technology and circular thinking transform our future. Springer International Publishing; 2017. 169 pages. [160] The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. China and the World Bank: a partnership for innovation. 2007. Available online at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCHINA/Resources/318862-11214212 93578/cn_bank_partnershp_innovation.pdf. [161] National People’s Congress of China. Law of the People’s Republic of China on promotion of cleaner production. 2002. Available online at: http://www.npc.gov.cn/ englishnpc/Law/2007-12/06/content_1382101.htm. [162] Lawinfochinacom. Several opinions of the state council on speeding up the development of circular economy. 2005. Available online at: http://www.lawinfochina. com/display.aspx?id¼4559&lib¼law. [163] Yong R. The circular economy in China. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management 2007;9(2):121e9.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

277

[164] Circular economy promotion law of the People’s Republic of China. 2008. Available online at: http://www.fdi.gov.cn/1800000121_39_597_0_7.html. [165] Brooks AL, Wang S, Jambeck JR. The Chinese import ban and its impact on global plastic waste trade. Science Advances 2018;4(6). eaat0131. [166] Qu S, Guo Y, Ma Z, et al. Implications of China’s foreign waste ban on the global circular economy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2019;144:252e5. [167] T€ urkeli S, Kemp R, Huang B, Bleischwitz R, McDowall W. Circular economy scientific knowledge in the European Union and China: a bibliometric, network and survey analysis (2006e2016). Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;197:1244e61. [168] Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in the Kingdom of Denmark. Introduction to the outline of the 12th five-year plan. 2011. Available online at: http://dk. china-embassy.org/eng/tzgg/t818863.htm. [169] Mol APJ, Carter NT. China’s environmental governance in transition. Environmental Politics 2006;15(2):149e70. [170] He G, Lu Y, Mol AP, Beckers T. Changes and challenges: China’s environmental management in transition. Environmental Development 2012;3:25e38. [171] Xinan L, Yanfu L. Driving forces on China’s circular economy: from government’s perspectives. Energy Procedia 2011;5:297e301. [172] Yuan Z, Bi J, Moriguichi Y. The circular economy: a new development strategy in China. J Ind Ecol 2006;10(1-2):4e8. [173] Su B, Heshmati A, Geng Y, Yu X. A review of the circular economy in China: moving from rhetoric to implementation. J Clean Prod 2013;42:215e27. [174] Geng Y, Xinbei W, Qinghua Z, Hengxin Z. Regional initiatives on promoting cleaner production in China: a case of Liaoning. Journal of Cleaner Production 2010;18(15):1502e8. [175] Hicks C, Dietmar R. Improving cleaner production through the application of environmental management tools in China. Journal of Cleaner Production 2007;15(5): 395e408. [176] Sizhen P, Yan L, Han S, Ping Z. Studies on barriers for promotion of clean technology in SMEs of China. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment 2005;3(1):9e17. [177] Hu J, Xiao Z, Zhou R, Deng W, Wang M, Ma S. Ecological utilization of leather tannery waste with circular economy model. Journal of Cleaner Production 2011; 19(2e3):221e8. [178] Geng Y, Zhang P, C^ oté RP, Fujita T. Assessment of the national eco-industrial park standard for promoting industrial symbiosis in China. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2009;13(1):15e26. [179] Yin CB, Tang HJ, Zhou Y. Suggestions on the intension, developing route and policy of circulating agriculture. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning 2006;27(1):4e8. [180] Zhu DJ, Huang XF. Building up a model for circular economy based on object, main body, and policy. Naikai Academic Journal 2005;4:86e93. [181] Dong L, Fujita T, Dai M, Geng Y, Ren J, Fujii M, Wang Y, Ohnishi S. Towards preventative eco-industrial development: an industrial and urban symbiosis case in one typical industrial city in China. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;114: 387e400. [182] Sun L, Li H, Dong L, Fang K, Ren J, Geng Y, Fujii M, Zhang W, Zhang N, Liu Z. Eco-benefits assessment on urban industrial symbiosis based on material flows analysis and emergy evaluation approach: a case of Liuzhou city, China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2017;119:78e88.

278

The Circular Economy

[183] Pilling D. 5 ways GDP gets it totally wrong as a measure of our success. World Economic Forum; 2018. Available online at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/ 01/gdp-frog-matchbox-david-pilling-growth-delusion/. [184] Rauch JN, Chi YF. The plight of green GDP in China. Consilience 2010;(3): 102e16. [185] Rennings K, Wiggering H. Steps towards indicators of sustainable development: linking economic and ecological concepts. Ecological Economics 1997;20(1):25e36. [186] Strezov V, Evans A, Evans TJ. Assessment of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of the indicators for sustainable development. Sustainable Development 2017;25(3):242e53. [187] Zhijun F, Nailing Y. Putting a circular economy into practice in China. Sustainability Science 2007;2(1):95e101. [188] Jing Y, Cui Y, Li D. The politics of performance measurement in China. Policy and Society 2015;34(1):49e61. [189] Lo CWH, Leung SW. Environmental agency and public opinion in Guangzhou: the limits of a popular approach to environmental governance. The China Quarterly 2000;163:677e704. [190] Geng Y, Fu J, Sarkis J, Xue B. Towards a national circular economy indicator system in China: an evaluation and critical analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production 2012; 23(1):216e24. [191] Xue B, Chen XP, Zhang WW, Geng Y. Study on the adjusting mechanism of regional circular economy. Soft Science 2010;24(8):74e8. [192] GEM Co., Ltd. Company Profile. Available online at: http://en.gem.com.cn/index. php/gongsijianjie/. [193] Earley, R., 20147. Electric transport in China. China carbon forum and MotionEco. Oslo 5 December 2017. Available online at: http://www.ofv.no/getfile.php/ 136094-1512549031/Dokumenter/OFV%20Frokostm%C3%B8ter/EV%20in%20 China%20developments%20draft_Robert_Early.pdf. [194] GEM. Waste battery and power battery material recycling industrial chain e industrial advantages. Available online at: http://en.gem.com.cn/index.php/ feijiudianchiheniefeiliao/. [195] The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Mobike e bike sharing with Chinese characteristics. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/ bike-sharing-in-china. [196] Mobike. Mobike the world. 2018. Available online at: https://mobike.com/global/. [197] Yang Y. China’s bike-sharing war seen entering crucial stage with Mobike going deposit free. South China Morning Post; 2018. Available online at: https://www.scmp. com/tech/article/2153959/mobikes-dockless-move-increases-pressure-ofo-bikesharing-race-enters-critical. [198] Made-in-Chinacom. Worldwide Auto Tech&Service(Guangzhou)Co., Ltd. Available online at: https://www.made-in-china.com/showroom/qqx123. [199] The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Huadu worldwide transmission e scaling up remanufacturing. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/ case-studies/remanufacturing-at-scale. [200] Jefferies N. Circular economy in China: six examples e Guangzhou Huadu. 2018. Available online at: https://medium.com/circulatenews/circular-economy-inchina-six-examples-2709982763f2. [201] EcoOutfitters. Fast fashion & the destruction of developing countries. 2016. Available online at: https://www.ecooutfitters.co.uk/blog/fast-fashion-the-destruction-ofdeveloping-countries/.

A “circular” world: reconciling profitability with sustainability

279

[202] Retail in Asia. Alibaba invests in China’s YCloset. 2018. Available online at: https:// retailinasia.com/in-trends/news/business__finance/alibaba-invests-in-chinas-ycloset/. [203] The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Ycloset e a wardrobe in the cloud. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/a-closet-in-the-cloud. [204] InsideRetailasia. JD launches reusable packaging initiative. 2018. Available online at: https://insideretail.asia/2018/10/25/jd-launches-reusable-packaging-initiative/. [205] Jefferies N. Circular economy in China: six examples e JD reuse platform. 2018. Available online at: https://medium.com/circulatenews/circular-economy-in-chinasix-examples-2709982763f2. [206] The Atlantic. It takes more than 3 gallons of water to make a single sheet of paper. 2012. Available online at: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/ 06/it-takes-more-than-3-gallons-of-water-to-make-a-single-sheet-of-paper/258838. [207] The Guardian. Companies must address water use in coffee production. 2011. Available online at: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/water-use-coffeesustainable-profitable. [208] Cunningham P, Edler J, Flanagan K, Laredo P. Innovation policy mix and instrument interaction: a review. Compendium of evidence on the effectiveness of innovation policy intervention project. Manchester, UK: Manchester Institute for Innovation Research, University of Manchester; 2013. Available online at: http://www. innovation-policy.org.uk/share/19_Policy%20mix_linked.pdf. [209] Wilts CH. Key challenges for transformations towards a circular economy: the status quo in Germany. 2017. Available online at: https://epub.wupperinst.org/frontdoor/ deliver/index/docId/6804/file/6804_Wilts.pdf.

CHAPTER SIX

Circular economy and sustainable development 6.1 Introduction Global economies are speeding up the pace to adopt and implement the CE concept with the objective of building more sustainable “circular” societies, where people, especially at the decision-making levels of both private and public sectors, are committed to promoting economic growth while solving environmental and societal challenges. This global effort, engaging policymakers, stakeholders, scientists, and others, is promoting “green” production and consumption norms, sustainable procurement procedures, and the education of the public about the limitations of linear economy and the benefits of CE [1e3], as well as the challenges still facing this emerging economic concept [4,5]. Now that the CE is widely acknowledged as the most reliable economic model to take pressing global challenges such as resources scarcity, climate change, jobs and growth, pollution disasters, energy crisis, food security, etc., scientists are actively working on illustrating and proving the intertwined relationship between the two holistic concepts of CE and sustainable development (SD) [6,7]. Hence, an important analytical endeavor was conducted: - first, to assess the sustainability of the CE paradigm and its related strategies, principles, and business models from a conceptual perspective, and - second, to measure the real impact of implementing CE on the ground, especially with respect to the achievements of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), through a set of sustainability indicators and metrics. Definitely, the shift from the wasteful and unsustainable linear economy to a novel resource-efficient and environmentally friendly economic model is a critical prerequisite for any plans to achieve local, regional, national or international SD including food and water security, affordable and clean energy, responsible production and consumption, sustainable cities and communities, etc. [8]. Hence, from an integrated and transdisciplinary perspective, CE is believed to be the best embodiment of this, almost The Circular Economy ISBN: 978-0-12-815267-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815267-6.00006-2

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

281

j

The Circular Economy

282

idealist, resource efficient, waste-free, and an environmentally friendly alternative. Circular principles such as renewable resources, increased resource efficiency, enhanced reuse and recycling, resource loop closing, innovative technologies, and disruptive business models are all indeed sustainabilityenabling strategies and tools. The basic questions that we want to address in this chapter are: i. to what extent is the CE concept inherently sustainable? ii. what should we do to reinforce its sustainability? iii. how can we assess the sustainability of CE? iv. and, what would be the impact of implementing CE on key SD issues such as greenhouse gas emissions, land and soil management poverty, and employment.

6.2 Sustainability 6.2.1 Circular economy and sustainability Frequently, CE is depicted by many scientists as a sustainable economic model, involving sustainable production and consumption, and waste management schemes [9,10]. Basically, the entire CE movement was launched as a logical consequence of the linear production limitations and the still occurring wasteful management of both resources and wastes, along with the related high pollution and energy consumption rates. From this perspective, CE seems like a reactionary stand against, and alternative to, an unsustainable economic model, which is partly true since, in addition, CE has emerged within the context of global pursuit for SD, coordinated internationally by the UN’s Division for SDGs, and is the detailed approach toward attaining them by mobilizing the United Nations network and other relevant organizations to support SD strategies and the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for SD [11]. Considering CE only as a mere concept to more appropriately deal with waste management is a very narrow perception of a concept inherently holistic, and this may lead to the unsuccessful implementation of CE because even wastes are managed in a perfectly organized manner, what about the management of the raw materials, especially the scarce and depleting ones, and what about the wasteful production schemes, responsible in the first place of generating these huge amounts of wastes. Furthermore, and on a related matter, scientists are highlighting that limiting the application of CE to “reduce, reuse or recovery” options, and not in the wider view

Circular economy and sustainable development

283

of sustainability, is also an underestimation of what CE is capable of achieving [12,13], as we have seen it throughout the previous chapters. As a new economic paradigm, CE aims to achieve economic growth and development, in a manner simultaneously supporting significant environmental, economic, and social benefits, at local and global levels. By implementing various circular principles throughout the entire value chains in various economic sectors, such as reducing, reusing, sharing, servicing, recycling, valorization, etc., a reliable and multidimensional framework is provided to support and facilitate the urgent replacement of “end-of-life” mindset and “end-of-pipe” solutions and the problematic current production and consumption practices. With such objectives and enabling tools, we, the authors, and many other experts strongly believe that promoting, adopting, and implementing CE is the one most reliable approach to accomplish SD, and that CE has direct and indirect links to most of the 17 SDGs, approved by the United Nations in 2015 [14e16]. Overall, the main driving principles in SDGs could be summarized in reducing poverty and hunger, improving health and well-being, and creating sustainable production and consumption patterns. Thus, SD entitles sustainable access to food, water, and energy, while protecting the environment and ecosystems’ biodiversity. And none of this is possible without changes to the economic playing field. For this, national policies and regulations, such as carbon pricing, should be strengthened and should place a value on natural capital and a cost on unsustainable actions. Also, the international regulatory frameworks should be reinforced through binding agreements on SD related issue such as climate change, by halting the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services and simultaneously addressing other sustainability concerns [17]. According to Griggs et al., in their article “Sustainable development goals for people and planet” in Nature [18], the SDG framework manages tradeoffs and maximizes synergies between targets, and can be implemented from city to global scale. The framework “integrates social, economic and environmental dimensions and provides guidance for humanity to prosper in the long term,” on which it operates is, word-for-word, what the CE is all about. In a related bibliometric study, those trade-offs and synergies were analyzed specifically with respect to the relationship between CE practices and the various SDG targets [19].

284

The Circular Economy

First, it was emphasized that previous studies focusing on SDG implementation were concerned with synergies and potential trade-offs between each of the SDGs [20e22]. For instance, increasing agricultural production to achieve SDH 2 (Zero hunger) can have negative impacts on biodiversity, which needs to be preserved according to by SDG 15 (Life on land). Second, and according to the bibliometric analysis, it was revealed that CE practices have the potential to address trade-offs; such is the case between SDG eight aiming for economic growth and SDG nine promoting industrialization and infrastructure, versus the need for climate protection under SDG 13 and biodiversity under SDG 15. More trade-offs between CE and SDGs were also highlighted. Further insights into SDGs synergies and trade-offs, specifically in relation to the CE concept and its various practices, were given. For the case of synergies and trade-offs related to the key circular practice of recycling of municipal household waste and E-waste, both SDG targets 11.6 and 12.5, respectively, aim at reducing waste and promoting recycling, which are key CE principles. However, in some countries where a substantial fraction of the recycling of municipal household waste is carried out by an informal sector [23], those synergies and trade-offs need to be reconsidered. For example, the contributions of informal plastic recycling in India to several of the SDGs have been highlighted by the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD) [24]. It was reported that the Indian informal sector collects 4.4 Mt of plastics annually, which is 22 times more than the amount of plastic waste collected by the formal municipal sector (around 0.2 Mt). However, WBCSD pointed out the environmental and social externalities of the related working conditions on workers, and the need to solve such issue in order to provide SDG 8 “decent work.” For the cases of E-waste, the issue is even more complicated because of its combined local and global dimensions respectively related to informal and unsafe recycling activities on the one hand, and the transboundary illegal shipments of e-waste, on the other hand [25,26]. Despite these local and global issues, e-waste is not specifically mentioned in the SDG framework, but there is a close link between these delicate recycling activities and the target 3.9 “substantially reduce by 2030 the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination” [19]. It has to be noted that e-waste recovery and recycling has significantly lower life cycle impacts and lesser environmental impacts (air, water, and soil) than the traditional linear options of incineration or landfilling [27].

Circular economy and sustainable development

285

Furthermore, advanced and integrated recycling technologies and processes for e-waste do not generate toxic emissions [28,29]. Nevertheless, most e-waste recycling operations are being conducted in some “developing” countries, where these, otherwise avoidable, risks are occurring and aggravated due to the lack of proper technologies and strict regulatory laws in those countries. This led to serious negative impacts on the environment [30,31] and more important on the health of exposed workers [32,33], which contradicts the basics of the SD philosophy. Other insightful SDGs synergies and trade-offs in relation with the CE concept were highlighted by Schroeder and coauthors in the sectors of water and sanitation, industrial symbiosis, remanufacturing, repair and refurbishment, reduction and reuse of products, and energy efficiency and renewables [19]. As another matter, and despite the quasisystematic association of CE with sustainability in most related literature, other scientists focused on revealing the differences between the two concepts. In a related study, several aspects differentiating CE from sustainability were proposed including the claim that the two concepts have different origins, goals, motivations, system prioritizations, institutionalizations, beneficiaries, timeframes, and perceptions of responsibilities [34]. Now, let us analyze some of those differences, and see to what extent CE differs from sustainability. First of all, for a comparison to be valid and reliable, it needs to be conducted on comparable entities or concepts in order to highlight the differences, thus helping in setting them apart to avoid confusions and ambiguities. But unlike the authors’ perception, CE long since moved from the conceptual phase and is now perceived from a “mechanistic” perspective, while sustainability is of a purely conceptual nature involving objectives, visions, ideals, etc. And here are the respective definitions of CE and sustainability from authoritative sources on the matter to further clarify this point (i.e., the mechanistic character of CE and conceptual nature of sustainability): - According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, CE is “an industrial system that is restorative or regenerative by intention and design. It replaces the end-of-life concept with restoration, shifts toward the use of renewable energy, eliminates the use of toxic chemicals, which impair reuse, and aims for the elimination of waste through the superior design of materials, products, systems and business models” [35].

286

The Circular Economy

- According to the United Nations Brundtland Commission, sustainability means “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [36]. Furthermore, in their selected differences between sustainability and the CE, the authors claimed, for instance, a difference based on the question “To whose benefit?.” For sustainability, it is for “the environment, the economy, and society at large.” As for CE, “economic actors are at the core, benefitting the economy and the environment. Society benefits from environmental improvements and certain add-ons and assumptions, like more manual labor or fairer taxation,” in other terms, the environment, economy, and society. Thus, CE is a set of tools and mechanisms necessary to reach targets of SD, or as Su
arez-Eiroa et al. put it “sustainable development establishes goals to be achieved in order to solve the problems and their consequences, whereas CE is a tool to address some of the causes of these problems” [37]. More elements of this debate can be found in their interesting article, along with the perception of the relationship between CE and SD, as illustrated in Fig. 6.1. Overall, CE is indeed a resource-efficient economic model, but in order to qualify it as a sustainable model, we need to take action by implementing it a sustainable manner; hence, the important recommendation from scholars to policymakers, investors, and other key players, to imperatively conceive and implement CE as a genuinely ethical and sustainable economic development model, because this is how it should be implemented in the first place, and this is how we can fully benefit from it.

Figure 6.1 Relationship between circular economy and sustainable development [37].

Circular economy and sustainable development

287

In this regard, and since the sustainability of CE needs to be ensured, several suggestions and recommendations were proposed, including [38e41]: • Establishing new production ethical codes and value principles of SD, which require (i) abandoning the traditional production model of mass production, consumption, and wastes, (ii) adopting CE as a sustainable economic growth model, and (iii) developing local or regional networks combining enterprises in symbiotic eco-industrial parks. Within such networks, each enterprise must adhere to production ethics codes such as cleaner production, emission reduction, resource conservation, environmental protection, and the full consideration of the bearing capacity of ecosystems. Such a joint effort will simultaneously help saving natural resources, and maximizing economic efficiency. • Establishing a sustainable consumption behavior of raw materials and resources for entrepreneurs (industry, agriculture, etc.), and products for regular consumers. Different models of economic development lead to different consumption ethics. Hence, compared to the traditional linear economic model, which pursues mass production and mass consumption, the CE model is essentially an ecological economy, aimed at increasing the recycling and reutilization of products and recovery of resources. Thus, the two economic models show fundamental differences in consumption patterns, with CE having a sustainable consumption pattern, with more ethical and moral appeals. Overall, within the CE model, companies and societies need to consume resources according to moderate consumption patterns, green consumption, and other ethical guidelines, to consider the extension of the lifetime use of items, and to establish new and effective concepts about recycling and resources recovery. • As a related matter, many produced commodities can be stocked in the economy for long time, sometimes half a century or more, which confer to CE an important time dimension. In this regard, the lifespan of the material stocks means that high recycling rates today will be translated into high-recycled contents only in the future, sometimes long-term. Thus, in order to consolidate the sustainable nature of CE, it needs to be implemented in a manner enabling the highest recycling of products and recovery rates of valuable organic, mineral and metal resources form wastes, and sides streams from agricultural and industrial activities. When materials are safely and efficiently recycled using advanced technologies, it will generate multiple SD benefits including

288

The Circular Economy

materials savings, reducing the need for primary raw materials, energy savings, as well as greenhouse gas emission reduction and a smaller environmental footprint. Of course, in CE planning for efficient recycling and resources recovery should start right from the beginning during products’ design, and they should be implemented as a last option after prioritizing the other circular principles of reuse, redistribution, refurbishment, and remanufacturing. • In order to ensure CE as sustainable, it should be implemented on the basis of ecological principles so that this economic development model can coevolve harmoniously with the natural environment. Diametrically opposed to the linear model, for which nature is both exploitation field and garbage bin for resources, CE regards environment as a source of renewable resources that need to be preserved, and as a source for inspiration from closed, yet thriving, ecosystems. In this regard, the development of a sustainable CE requires the improvement of science and technology, which not only shall consider the bearing capacity of nature, but must also take into account relevant repair function for the ecosystem, to meet the demands of total value of human society, benefit the whole ecological environment of human beings, balance human interests and natural rights, and guarantee the justice of resource rights for contemporary and future generations, which will be t the essence of the sustainability philosophy. • In order to give a practical modality for the effective implementation of sustainable CE, a hybrid top-down and bottom-up approach is believed to be the proper way to benefit from both implementation strategies. It combines the involvement of public institutions (topdown) and industry, academia, NGOs, etc. (bottom-up). Fig. 6.2. depicts a possible implementation strategy of an integrated top-down

Figure 6.2 Implementation modality of circular economy based on a hybrid top-down and bottom-up approach [40].

Circular economy and sustainable development

289

and bottom-up approach. Governmental bodies and policymakers advocate a collective consciousness about environmental issues as well as the societal benefit of industrial activities. Hence, there is a need for maximizing environmental benefits by strict control of industrial businesses. On the other hand, manufacturing companies possess potential awareness about the environmental impacts of their industrial activities. However, on the ground, and due to competitive pressure, environmental impacts tend to be unconsidered since the primary focus is (and will remain) on economic benefits and growth. For this, it is important to adopt this integrated approach to implement CE. Indeed, this scenario makes a concurrent process obligatory to converge and compromise interests of public institutions (top) and multiple industrials actors (bottom), with the aim of reconciling economic growth with sustainability, which is what sustainable CE is all about.

6.2.2 Supporting the transition to sustainability Essentially, managing and supporting the transition to sustainability within the CE context is a coordinated transdisciplinary effort aiming at enabling, facilitating and quickening the targeted large-scale changes based on circular principles and aiming at SDGs. The ongoing transitory stage is pivotal and necessary for the successful implementation of CE since breaking up with the conventional way of thinking and doing business (i.e., no more continuing business as usual) need time to change our mindsets and to promote CE on a global scale by introducing new opportunities from circular practices to be incorporated in ongoing business, or full adopted in new and disruptive circular business models. This coordinated effort, mainly led by scientists from multidisciplinary backgrounds, led to the emergence of new scientific fields to support this transition, such as the field of sustainability science. The founding principle of this science is obviously sustainability, and its objectives can be summarized as three main targets [42,43]: i. Understanding the fundamental interactions between nature and society ii. Guiding these interactions along sustainable trajectories iii. Promoting the social learning necessary to navigate the transition to sustainability Nowadays, after about 2 decades of research, development, and innovation, sustainability science has established itself as a thriving field of study and

290

The Circular Economy

research, and its substantially contributing in the transition phase toward CE and SD based on the increasing numbers of research investigations and analyses on related matters, and based on the increasing number of universities committed to teaching sustainably science in their curricula, and of scholars in this field of study [44,45]. The generated theoretical and practical results from extensive studies and debates on how to manage this transition phase paved the path for promoting SD. The whole process was developed by a large network of scientists, in collaboration with industrialists and decision-makers. Nonetheless, some researchers are urging for more progress down this path of sustainability as they think that socio-technical changes remain underappreciated and relatively unexplored in sustainability research, which is key for society and its institutions to articulate visions of sustainability [46]. At this point, it has to be highlighted that scientific and research endeavors cannot alone support the heavy responsibility of introducing changes in various strategic economic sectors. Such significant changes have to be managed in transitory stages through the combination of R&D efforts, government policies, market forces, and constructive initiatives from civil society. It has to be also noted that many gaps and uncertainties still exist about the knowledge of global environmental risks; how to enable economies to grow without damaging ecosystems’ natural equilibria or compromising people’s wellbeing, and how to empower societies to become sustainable, resource-efficient, and circular. To overcome such knowledge gaps, dedicated literature [47,48] and research initiatives such as UK Future Earth [49], a 10-year program bringing together existing international programs and projects working on global environmental change and SD, are needed to set and refine objectives and provide circular and sustainable solutions. And since every endeavor starts by taking the first step, we think that, among the various potential players in the field, the first step toward circularity and sustainability needs to be taken by policymakers to embrace and establish and sustain an integrated economic, environmental, and societal framework for CE and SD.

6.2.3 Circular economy and sustainable business A business model represents the rationale of how an organization makes, delivers, and captures value [50]. Thus, innovative business models are the ones enabling new ways of making, delivering, and capturing the value that is achieved through a change of one (or multiple) component(s) in the business model.

Circular economy and sustainable development

291

The notions of systems thinking and sustainable business thinking, as well as the need to consider a business entity as part of a wider system of stakeholders and the environment in which it operates, has long been discussed in the business literature [51,52]. Furthermore, the need to consider the important managing role of wider systems in business and accounting decisions is increasingly becoming prevalent within environmental management and sustainability reporting [53,54]. Overall, regardless of which managerial modality and implementation strategy should be adopted, the authors and many other scholars, strongly believe that the most important aspect is that revolutionary decisions, disruptive business models, and highly efficient and well-tailored innovations, are all needed in order to tackle current economics, environmental and societal challenges, and move toward CE and SD [55e57]. In its most basic form, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) defines CE as an economic concept, “which balances economic development with environmental and resource protection” [58]. And even in this loosely defined form, CE appears to be inseparable from industrial ecology and closely linked to the three SD pillars (i.e., economy, environment, and society). On the distinctive features of CE and its ability to simultaneously provide novel opportunities for economic growth, and develop effective and sustainable solutions to the serious economic and environmental challenges occurring worldwide, and this “uniqueness” mainly comes from two interconnected concepts: the closed-loop economy and “design to redesign” thinking [59]. In addition, the strong emphasis on restorative principles in CE is very important since it echoes the fact that this economic model is not merely a preventative approach to reduce pollution, but also aims to repair the severe damage caused by decades of “linearity” using circular and more efficient design systems and business models within the various industries. The other distinctive feature is that CE tends to focus on optimizing systems rather than components, and it goes beyond traditional notions of sustainability by focusing on the positive restoration of the environment within the industry and achieving value from redesigning and remanufacturing systems, rather than simply improving resource utilization [60,61]. Therefore, the entire business ecosystem needs to change by systematically incorporating innovative circular principles. This change toward sustainable and circular business model innovation should integrate elements from macro- (global trends and drivers), meso- (ecosystem and value

292

The Circular Economy

cocreation) and micro-levels (company, customers, and consumers) [62]. Trends and drivers include the analysis of the business environment and scanning current trends. For example, a new legislation might have a significant influence on the business model. The impact of the business model is divided into sustainability costs and benefit, adding the perspective of a triple bottom line to business model development. In a related study, a framework was developed based on the ideas and the structure of the business model canvas, other tools, and studies on the CE and sustainability [63]. The objective was to provide a generic model for business model innovation to support companies in designing, as well as reconfiguring, their business models. According to the authors of this study, the presented aspects (Cf. Fig. 6.3) are needed in order to gain factual data about the sustainability of the business model, which will help in optimizing the entire procedure and understanding the dynamics of the required processes. On the ground, and in order to promote and advance CE practices and business models such as industrial symbiosis, remanufacturing, closed-loop supply chains, et., experts think that we need more efforts on skills training, capacity building programs, technology development, and multistakeholder partnerships [64,65]. Active engagement of businesses along global supply chains will also be needed. It will be crucial to establish synergies with

Figure 6.3 Framework for sustainable circular business model innovation [63].

Circular economy and sustainable development

293

SDG 4 (quality education) to build the skills and capacity required for scaling-up and replicating CE practices. Which specific international implementation partnerships are suitable to include CE practices into their programming, and which effectiveness can help in achieving specific SDG targets, requires further in-depth empirical research [19]. In the academic circles, sustainable business models and circular business models are closely related literature streams, and they can be regarded as a subcategory of business models. A circular business model can be defined as the rationale of how an organization creates, delivers, and captures value with and within closed material loops [66]. Circular business model innovations are by nature networked; they require collaboration, communication, and coordination within complex networks of interdependent but independent actors/stakeholders. The challenge of redesigning business ecosystems is to find a “win-win-win” strategy that balances the self-interests of involved actors [67], thus, influencing and facilitating their joint actions for mutual benefits within a cooperatively shaped circular business model. However, in reality, neither 100% circular business models nor 100% linear business models exist due to physical and practical reasons. In previous literature on the CE, the focus has been on identifying characteristics of circular business models based on longevity, renewability, reuse, repair, upgrade, refurbishment, capacity sharing, and dematerialization [68]. In order to assist stakeholders in selecting or defining their future circular product design and circular business models, scholars have developed taxonomies to identify what business models or design strategies are the most suitable to their needs: - Lewandowski [64] presented an extensive analysis of 20 types of circular business models, identifying and classifying the CE characteristics according to a business model structure, such as the business model canvas. - Urbinati et al. [69] proposed a taxonomy of CE business models based on the degree of adoption of circularity along two major dimensions: (i) the customer value proposition and interface; and (ii) the value network. - L€ udeke-Freund et al. [70] conducted a review and analysis of 26 existing CE business models, which resulted in a taxonomy, relying on the six main patterns identified for these circular business models (i) repair and maintenance; (ii) reuse and redistribution; (iii) refurbishment and remanufacturing; (iv) recycling; (v) cascading and repurposing; and (vi) organic feedstock business model patterns. Furthermore, Moreno et al. [71] proposed a taxonomy of Design for X (DfX) approaches contributing to the implementation of circular design.

294

The Circular Economy

The taxonomy is based on three DfX approaches (a) design for resource conservation; (b) design for slowing resource loops; and (c) whole systems design. The taxonomy includes five circular design strategies: (1) design for circular supplies; (2) design for resource conservation; (3) design for long-life use of products; (4) design for multiple cycles; and (5) design for systems change. Then, the same team built a circular design tool to present this taxonomy in a nonscientific language with the aim to educate and inspire during the concept development phase.

6.2.4 Evaluating circular economy’s success and sustainability Sustainable development is a trajectory where future generations are secured in the same level of welfare as current generations, and CE is helping to fulfill this sustainability goal [13]. Thus, the successful implementation of CE leads to the successful achievement of SD. The question now is how to practically and effectively “measure” both the success and sustainability of CE? The straightforward answer, to be developed in this section, is a reliable framework of indicators. An indicator framework entails a collection of indicators that integrates the purposes of each constituting indicator, thus conveying a comprehensive assessment of the studied entity. Therefore, in order to provide an effective tool for measuring progress and performance of the CE model, or any other concept for that matter, a compilation of carefully selected indicators can help in assessing complex processes and phenomena. First of all, it is important to highlight that, along with the term “indicator,” other terms are often used in the related literature to describe such assessment and monitoring tools, including “measure,” “metric,” or “index.” Some scholar rightfully emphasized the fact that the use of suitable synonyms during the research process is fundamental to ensure a comprehensive identification of existing indicators. And even if slight semantic differences are noticed between those terms, most researchers use them interchangeably [72]. As such, for the wording used all along this section, the term “indicator” is privileged for a better understanding, but also because of its generality and common use in the literature. In the quest of reliable framework of circularity indicators, several scholars and experts conducted studies and investigations on this important matter, and as a result a wide range of indicators were proposed to monitor and assess the success, efficiency, and sustainability of CE-related to the three levels of implementation (i.e., micro, meso, and macro levels). Indeed, the

Circular economy and sustainable development

295

CE indicators can be divided into micro-level (organization, products, and consumers), meso-level (symbiosis association, industrial parks) and macro-level (city, province, region or country) indicators [73]. Therefore, since the CE model and its implementation scenarios are generally performed at three systemic levels, different indicator frameworks that measure the CE performance at local, regional, and national are thus required [74]. In this regard, a set of indicative tools to assess how well a product or a company perform within the CE were proposed in the Circularity Indicators Project (CIP). This assessment framework was reported to enable companies to estimate how advanced is their transformative progress from linearity to circularity, and can also be used in internal reporting or for procurement, investment decisions, and policy making [75]. In order to ensure the robustness and relevance of the measurement system developed, leading European businesses who had provided product data to test, and other stakeholders including universities and investors who worked with the CIP team to develop, test and refine the system, were included during the preparation of the methodology. In CIP, a main indicator, the Material Circularity Indicator, was proposed for measuring how restorative the material flows of a product or company are, along with complementary indicators that allow additional impacts and risks to be taken into account [76]. As far recycling is concerned, national recycling rates are often used to measure the extent of resource efficiency reached within a society. The issue here is that most national statistics refer to the amount of material collected in relation to the amount in goods consumed, which does only reflect on the input into recycling systems and not on the secondary material produce. In Europe, the action plan for CE includes the aim of a harmonized definition of recycling rates based on the input into the last recycling step (after sorting out impurities) [77]. Although some scholar proposals tried to propose indicators for material recovery that focuses on the production of secondary materials instead of collection rates [78], other scientists are highlighting that most related studies failed to include the quality of secondary materials and, consequently, do not allow for estimating the displacement resulting from recycling [79]. Within the CE, this issue takes another dimension. Indeed, rates for closed-loop recycling, implying that secondary materials are recycled back into the same product, and open-loop recycling, where secondary materials are used in another manufacturing process, are not determined separately but communicated as one rate.

296

The Circular Economy

Many experts believe that this is a problem that needs to be considered because open-loop recycling is commonly found in situations where recovered secondary materials are used in production systems with lower quality requirements [80]. From an environmental perspective, however, the benefits of recycling do not necessarily differentiate between closed-loop and open-loop recycling, but they tend to be dependent on the difference in impacts arising from supplying equivalent products from either primary or secondary materials [81]. By integrating the various related issues, Elia et al. [82] designed a guideline to support both researchers and practitioners in evaluating index methods to be applied for quantitatively measuring the effectiveness of a CE strategy at the micro level. The critical steps in the assessment are summarized in the flow diagram depicted in Fig.6.4. The process guideline was designed based on four key steps: - First, the identification of the system to analyze and the main process(es) to monitor. Thus, the assessment could be focused on a single process, on multiple methods or the whole supply chain, according to the scope and depth of the analysis, as well as the company strategy in adopting the CE paradigm. - Second, activities to be implemented that are supposed to have an impact on the performance of the system are identified, with respect to CE requirements. For instance, in a CE strategy based on the implementation

Figure 6.4 Critical steps in the assessment of a circular economy strategy [82].

Circular economy and sustainable development

297

of a product-service system aiming at reducing the material intensity, the use of natural resources and material losses can be monitored among all the requirements to verify its effectiveness. - Third, the focus of the analysis should be made clear, choosing one (or more) CE requirements to measure, i.e., reducing emission levels, increasing the share of renewable and recyclables resources, based on the information detailed in the previous two steps. - Fourth and last step: leads to the choice of an appropriate methodology to assess the circularity of a strategy, based on the classification and the results provided so far.

6.3 Addressing environmental considerations 6.3.1 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions The linear economic model not only threatens the availability of the very resources that enable it but also generates multiple disastrous impacts on the environment. Among these, climate change, caused by the emission of greenhouse gases, mostly originating from human consumption of fossil fuels and wasteful waste management schemes, is driving serious concerns around the world. For instance, it was reported that the missions from organic waste, rotting in landfills, and from waste burnt in incinerators, are responsible for about 6.6% of total anthropogenic GHG emissions [83]. For this, and more, the issue of climate change is still high on the international political agenda. Since CE consists in keeping materials and products “circulating” in the “technosphere,” it avoids the extraction and production of raw materials, and to a certain extent, processing and manufacturing steps. Therefore, it is important to consider that CE can indeed contribute in cutting down on GHG emissions, by reducing the amount of energy needed by industrial production processes to transform primary raw materials into useable products, and by closing the loop on resources, destined in the linear model to be wastefully and harmfully discarded in landfills or incinerated. The question now is to what extent CE can contribute to the global effort to mitigate climate change and global warming? and can CE “catalyze” the attainment of the Paris Agreement and its critical objective of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping the global temperature rise, during this century, well below 2 C above the preindustrial levels?

298

The Circular Economy

According to a recent study commissioned by the Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra and the European Climate Foundation (ECF), CE can play a vital role in achieving the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement at COP 21, based on the circular principles of extending the useful lifespan of products through improved design and servicing, and the continuous relocation of “waste” through closed (or open) loops, and thus, using resources more efficiently and avoiding the generating of waste [84]. One of the key findings in the related trailblazing report entitled “Re-configure: The Circular Economy e a Powerful Force for Climate Mitigation” [85], is that more CE initiatives in key economic sectors could cut EU industrial emissions by more than half by 2050. Basically, the study was conducted by Material Economics exploring a broad range of opportunities for steel, plastics, aluminum, and cement, and two large use segments for these materials (passenger cars and buildings). The measures identified could reduce EU industrial emissions by 56% (300 Mt) annually by 2050, more than half of what is necessary to achieve net zero emissions. Globally, the reductions could be 3.6 billion tons per year in the same period. Industry accounts for 24% of global CO2 emissions, which stood at 37 billion tons in 2017. The carbon budget to limit global warming below 2 C has been estimated at 800 billion tons by the end of this century [86]. In a related matter, some scholars think that the current climate and energy policies fall short of addressing and fully utilizing the potential of the resource management, and some issues regarding the GHG emissions accounting methodology are even misleading political action. One aspect is that national GHG inventories are often focused on emissions from national production and ignoring national consumption. The consumption-based approach captures direct and lifecycle GHG emissions of goods and services (including those from raw materials, manufacture, distribution, retail, and disposal), and thus, allocates GHG emissions to the final consumers of those goods and services, rather than to the original producers of those GHG emissions. In this way, wealthy countries with delocalized production and high consumption levels may appear to be lowering their contribution to climate change in their national emissions reporting, painting a misleading picture of how important it is to address wasteful consumption in order to tackle climate change [87].

Circular economy and sustainable development

299

6.3.2 Soil and land management Continuing population growth and increasing consumption are driving global food demand, with agricultural activity expanding to keep pace. The agricultural system in the linear economic model is very wasteful. For instance, Europe is generating some 700 million tons of agri-food (agricultural and food) waste each year [88]. Within the CE paradigm, the agricultural sector has the vital role of maintaining the productivity of countries’ farmlands, albeit growing pressure from environmental and safety regulations and climate change mitigation requirements. Thus, healthy soil and sustainable management of land is a prerequisite to apply all the other related CE-related activities including providing renewable raw materials for various economic sectors, and establishing the most efficient and balancing recycling “machinery,” the biological cycle. According to the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES), the role of soils in CE is especially important in terms of the contribution to the delivery of provisioning, regulation and maintenance services (providing raw materials, regulating ecosystems’ interactions, and maintaining balanced physicochemical and biotic environments [89]. As an inseparable part of the “soil-water-sediment” nexus, experts believe that soil should be acknowledged as a scarce natural resource; hence, its exploitation practices need to be developed to manage soil in such a way that desired services are enhanced without leading to irreversible damage to other services [90]. The conceptualization and reification of soil ecosystem services provide an opportunity for equipping policymakers with insights on the societal functions that soils fulfill [91]. For instance, the application of the ecosystem services concept can be useful and illustrating how the use of natural processes to solve societal challenges may reduce the dependence of technical solutions, thereby reducing the application of mineral resources and fossil fuel. In this context, one potential alternative for substituting the use of mineral resources and fossil fuels is the use of bio-based resources originating from agriculture or organic waste generated from other sources in the biological cycle. Biological resources (e.g., wood, crops, or fibers) can be used to produce goods (e.g., paper, food) and energy (e.g., biofuels). This is one of key principles linking the concepts of CE and bioeconomy. The latter being promoted for its ability to provide renewable alternatives for the use of mineral resources and fossil-based products and energy [92] is, therefore, a

300

The Circular Economy

valuable reinforcement to the CE objectives of promoting feedstocks’ renewability, and byproducts and residues” biodegradability and compostability [93]. A key aspect of the CE is the extended and efficient use/reuse of resources and products. As such, the use of renewable bio-based resources for multiple production schemes is of special importance to circular industrial activities. As a consequence, these multiple possibilities from the use of bio-based resources could generate competition and create pressure on land-use, since the potential increase in the use of bio-based resources is dependent on soil area, soil quality, and soil management. As such, the production of crops for biofuel production can compete with food and feed production for soil, water, energy, and minerals, thus exerting further pressure on natural mineral and nutrient cycles [94]. It also can lead to the degradation of natural habitats through land use change [95]. One of the CE innovative approaches in which soils may address such complex economic, environmental, and societal issue is urban farming. Indeed, soils deserve a place in urban green space management as they may help address challenges related to urbanization, climate change, and waste management. Urban gardening is part of an ongoing trend toward developing more parks and green areas in cities; consuming organic, locally grown products, and establishing a closer relationship with one’s living environment [96]. Like green spaces on unsealed soils, urban gardening stimulates the delivery of ecosystem services such as water storage and cooling services and thereby contributes to the development of climate-proof cities. At the neighborhood level, healthy soils in green areas may buffer traffic noise and reduce the exposure to air pollution [97,98]. Overall, urban gardening contributes to the quality of the physical environment through climate adaptation and the enhancement to environmental quality, and to the living environment therein, thereby contributing to the health and well-being of the local population, as well as the more efficient use of resources. It has to be noted that, with respect to land-use, some scholars believe that it can be very difficult to assess the overall global net sustainability contribution of land-use and use of space by CE activities [4]. The authors considered a situation in which mining of lithosphere is reduced and use of biosphere is increased, to confirm their point. Land demand for mines is, therefore, reduced but land required, for example, for renewable energy

Circular economy and sustainable development

301

production, is increased. With increased material cycles and recycling, more roads may be needed for transportation of recycled materials and less road infrastructure for transportation of virgin raw materials. Thus, the sustainability effects of these issues might get more complex than initially perceived, hence the constant need to apply holistic and integrated assessment frameworks, as we have discussed earlier in this chapter.

6.4 Reflecting on the societal factor 6.4.1 Why circular economy? Decades-long linear economy resulted in clear and profound divisions between developed and developing countries. For instance, a fifth of the world’s population live in the richest countries and account for 86% of the world gross domestic product [99]. Based from the UN’s SDG 10 “Reduce inequality within and among countries,” there is growing consensus among the international community that economic growth is not sufficient to reduce poverty if it is not inclusive, and if it does not involve the three dimensions of SD (i.e., economic, social, and environmental). As a result, the UN is stating that income inequality has been reduced both between and within countries. At the current time, the per capita income of 60 out of 94 countries with data has risen more rapidly than the national average. There has been some progress regarding the creating of favorable access conditions for exports from least developing countries as well [100]. In addition, reports from COP21 “Paris climate change conference 2015” argue that the climate change issue is the major driving force pushing toward ending the current unsustainable and irresponsible linear activities that create pressures on the earth’s systems, with serious consequences and threatening critical, global, and local thresholds [101]. In this context, the CE is steadily positioning itself as the most reliable economic model enabling more sustainable and green society, focusing on comprehensive circular approaches that ensure labor laws and human standards, and enabling people to assess their benefits of various development, social and environmental impacts [102]. After discussing the vital issue of food security in Chapter 4, we will explore the ability of CE to deal with the two other linked, and equally vital, societal issues of poverty and employment.

302

The Circular Economy

6.4.2 Poverty and employment In the UN’s 2030 Agenda for SD and its ultimate objective of “transforming our world,” a great emphasis is being put on the eradication of poverty, in all its forms and dimensions, while recognizing the integrated and indivisible economic, social and environmental dimensions of SD [103]. In this regard, the various established links between CE and the various SDGs are highlighting the important role to be played by CE in the societal context of poverty [104]. According to the World Bank statistics on extreme poverty, around 1.1 billion people have moved out of extreme poverty since 1990. In 2015, 736 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day, down from 1.85 billion in 1990, and most of this reduction in extreme poverty occurred in recent years in East and South Asian regions, notably China, Indonesia, and India [105]. Nonetheless, is a 2018 report, the WB pointed out that “the decline of global extreme poverty continues but has slowed” [106]. In a related matter, the rising middle classes in recent decades have demonstrated an increase in consumption habits and a throwaway culture of buying something new as signs of social progress. These developments have caused challenges to waste treatment capacities of many countries and led to various urban health problems; hence, the important role of CE to mitigate these problems, and to set in motion a grassroots’ paradigm shift partly based on sustainable and responsible consumption behaviors, and the promotion and adoption of resource-efficient and waste-free circular principles such as sharing items, prioritizing the purchase of products from renewable sources, and the reuse of repaired or refurbished items, instead of new ones, etc. At the same time, higher rates of recycling waste need to be attained worldwide, and this will help in creating more green jobs around the world, thus effectively addressing the poverty issue [107]. In this regard, it is worth noticing that many economies outside the OECD have also been able to recycle higher percentages of waste than some OECD countries (e.g., the plastic recycling rate in South Africa is 43.7%, well above Europe’s recycling rate of 31.1% [108]), which include the active role of the informal sector in recycling. In this regard, many scholars are highlighting the important role of “informal economy” as a significant contributor for CE in many developing nations [109]. On the employment front, the International Labor Organization (ILO) sees CE as “a source of job creation and recreation [110], and according to the

Circular economy and sustainable development

303

organization’s projections, CE can enable an increase in worldwide employment by 0.1% by 2030, in comparison with a business-as-usual scenario, with most employment growth in the services and waste management sectors (by roughly 50 million and 45 million jobs, respectively) [111]. Also, UK’s WRAP reported that growth in the CE could be expected to have lasting beneficial effects on the labor market. This is because, while these activities tend to be efficient in their use of natural resources, they can be relatively intensive in their use of labor, compared with the activities they replace. They have the capacity to create dispersed employment that could potentially be undertaken by those currently unemployed, or those losing mid-level skilled positions due to industrial change. Illustrative WRAP’s estimations suggest that by 2030, on the basis of the current development path, the CE could create over 200,000 gross jobs and reduce unemployment by about 54,000 in the UK. It could also have the potential to offset around 7% of the expected decline in skilled employment to the year 2022. It was also stated that more extensive expansion of CE activities could more than double these figures, creating around half a million gross jobs, reducing unemployment by around 102,000, and potentially offsetting around 18% of the expected loss in skilled employment over the next decade [112]. In the Netherlands, a 2017 report by Circle Economy and Ehero estimated that 8.1% of the Dutch workforce is currently employed in CE jobs. It highlighted a sharp drop in CE jobs following the 2008 global financial crisis, especially in what they classify as indirect CE jobs in education and the public sector. Currently, the biggest concentration of those employment opportunities is in activities that preserve and extend what is already made (i.e., reuse and recycling activities), accounting for 42% of total Dutch CE jobs, followed by CE jobs that incorporate digital technology (24% of the total) [113].

6.5 Conclusions The challenges associated with the ongoing paradigm shift from linear to CE are often related to its complexity, novelty (to a certain extent nowadays), and to the fact that, despite the widely acknowledged unsustainability of the latter, the sustainability of the former is still being debated. Hence, diverse inputs from scholars and CE experts were compiled and analyzed in this chapter, most of them, though, proving and confirming the sustainability of CE. This important debate was echoed from both

304

The Circular Economy

conceptual and practical viewpoints. Thus, various indicative tools to assess the sustainability of the CE paradigm and its related strategies, principles, and business models were discussed. Furthermore, another related crucial endeavor was presented, which is the necessity to measure the real impact of implementing CE on the ground, especially with respect to its potential and concrete achievements in relation to the sustainable development goals. From an environmental perspective, the CE, with it rich sustainability enabling “arsenal” of principles, strategies, and business models, is well equipped to permit the internalization of the cost of environmental damage in productive activities. Indeed, CE offers a more comprehensive approach, with each step in the production and useful life of the product, and its repair or dismantlement, thus, internalizing both the cost of using new material resources and energy and their release of contaminants that have negative impacts on the environment and human beings [114]. In this regard, finding the proper ways to internalize the full environmental costs is certainly an important challenge during the implementation of CE. Therefore, a comprehensive framework of reliable indicators must be put in place to assess and regulate this important effort, and to reduce the pressure on scarce resources or deleting raw materials through the reverse flows of products postconsumption, and closed loops of materials and resources according to the CE vision [115,116]. Regarding the implementation of CE, it is generally conducted at three levels: companies, eco-industrial parks, and cities/regions; that is why experts are emphasizing the need to establish specific indicators for each level, first to monitor the successful introduction of CE in the analyzed entity or process, and then with another set of complementary metrics, to follow and assess the sustainability of the involved objectives, strategies and practices, and the success of CE in general. From a sustainability perspective, one of the serious challenges facing CE, if not the most serious one, is to find ways to reconcile economic sustainability with the often undervalued environmental and social sustainability. Indeed, in most of the previous attempts to develop a sustainable economic model, the “economy” factor is often prioritized over the other SD pillars (i.e., environment and society) [117] and, in some cases, even over moral and ethical values [118]. So far, reports from international, regional and national bodies, such as the United Nations, the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, the EU commission, International Labor Organization, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, WRAP, and others, are highlighting that the future is that of

Circular economy and sustainable development

305

a world pollution of about 9 billion people by 2030, depleting raw materials, global warming, scare water resources all over the world, soaring unemployment rates, food security issues, etc., unless we manage to quickly and successfully embed “circularity” deep into our world economy, and collectively redesign our future accordingly.

References [1] Michelini G, Moraes RN, Cunha RN, Costa JM, Ometto AR. From linear to circular economy: PSS conducting the transition. Procedia CIRP 2017;64:2e6. [2] Stahel WR. The circular economy. Nature News 2016;531(7595):435. [3] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C. Legacy of petroleum-based economy. In: A sustainable bioeconomy. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 1e27. [4] Korhonen J, Honkasalo A, Sepp€al€a J. Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecological Economics 2018;143:37e46. [5] Fellner J, Lederer J, Scharff C, Laner D. Present potentials and limitations of a circular economy with respect to primary raw material demand. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3):494e6. [6] de Sousa Jabbour ABL, Jabbour CJC, Godinho Filho M, Roubaud D. Industry 4.0 and the circular economy: a proposed research agenda and original roadmap for sustainable operations. Annals of Operations Research 2018;270(1e2):273e86. [7] Sarkis J, Zhu H. Information technology and systems in China’s circular economy: implications for sustainability. Journal of Systems and Information Technology 2008;10(3):202e17. [8] The United Nations. The sustainable development goals. Available online at: https:// www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/. [9] De los Rios IC, Charnley FJ. Skills and capabilities for a sustainable and circular economy: the changing role of design. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;160:109e22. [10] Mohan SV, Nikhil GN, Chiranjeevi P, Reddy CN, Rohit MV, Kumar AN, Sarkar O. Waste biorefinery models towards sustainable circular bioeconomy: critical review and future perspectives. Bioresource Technology 2016;215:2e12. [11] UN’s Division for Sustainable Development Goals. Inter-Agency coordination. Available online at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/about/dsd. [12] Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S. A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;114:11e32. [13] Banait_e D. Towards circular economy: analysis of indicators in the context of sustainable development. Social Transformation in Contemporary Society 2016;4:142e50. [14] Drechsel P, Otoo M, Rao KC, Hanjra MA. Business models for a circular economy: linking waste management and sanitation with agriculture. In: Resource recovery from waste. Routledge; 2018. p. 3e15. [15] Leal Filho W, Azeiteiro U, Alves F, Pace P, Mifsud M, Brandli L, Caeiro SS, Disterheft A. Reinvigorating the sustainable development research agenda: the role of the sustainable development goals (SDG). The International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 2018;25(2):131e42. [16] Hoff H. Integrated SDG implementationdhow a cross-scale (vertical) and crossregional Nexus approach can complement cross-sectoral (horizontal) integration. In: Managing water, soil and waste resources to Achieve sustainable development goals. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 149e63.

306

The Circular Economy

[17] Biermann F, Abbott K, Andresen S, B€ackstrand K, Bernstein S, Betsill MM, Bulkeley H, Cashore B, Clapp J, Folke C, Gupta A. Navigating the Anthropocene: improving earth system governance. Science 2012;335(6074):1306e7. € [18] Griggs D, Stafford-Smith M, Gaffney O, Rockstr€ om J, Ohman MC, Shyamsundar P, Steffen W, Glaser G, Kanie N, Noble I. Policy: sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature 2013;495(7441):305. [19] Schroeder P, Anggraeni K, Weber U. The relevance of circular economy practices to the Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2018. https:// doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12732. [20] Pradhan P, Costa L, Rybski D, Lucht W, Kropp JP. A systematic study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) interactions. Earth’s Future 2017;5(11):1169e79. [21] Mainali B, Luukkanen J, Silveira S, Kaivo-oja J. Evaluating synergies and trade-offs among Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): explorative analyses of development paths in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Sustainability 2018;10(3):815. [22] ICSU (International Council for Science). A guide to SDG interactions: from science to implementation. 2017. Available online at: https://council.science/cms/2017/05/ SDGs-Guide-to-Interactions.pdf. [23] Ezeah C, Fazakerley JA, Roberts CL. Emerging trends in informal sector recycling in developing and transition countries. Waste Management 2013;33(11):2509e19. [24] WBCSD (World Business Council on Sustainable Development). Informal approaches towards a circular economydlearning from the plastics recycling sector in India. 2016. Available online at: https://www.wbcsd.org/Programs/CircularEconomy/Factor-10/Resources/Informal-approaches-towards-a-circular-economy. [25] Moore SA. Global garbage: waste, trash trading, and local garbage politics. Global political ecology. 2011. p. 133e44. [26] Orlins S, Guan D. China’s toxic informal e-waste recycling: local approaches to a global environmental problem. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;114:71e80. [27] W€ager PA, Hischier R, Eugster M. Environmental impacts of the Swiss collection and recovery systems for Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE): a follow-up. The Science of the Total Environment 2011;409(10):1746e56. [28] Li J, Lu H, Guo J, Xu Z, Zhou Y. Recycle technology for recovering resources and products from waste printed circuit boards. Environmental Science & Technology 2007;41(6):995e2000. [29] Zhou L, Xu Z. Response to waste electrical and electronic equipments in China: legislation, recycling system, and advanced integrated process. Environmental Science & Technology 2012;46(9):4713e24. [30] Osibanjo O, Nnorom IC. The challenge of electronic waste (e-waste) management in developing countries. Waste Management & Research 2007;25(6):489e501. [31] Ni HG, Zeng H, Tao S, Zeng EY. Environmental and human exposure to persistent halogenated compounds derived from e-waste in China. Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry 2010;29(6):1237e47. [32] Chakraborty P, Selvaraj S, Nakamura M, Prithiviraj B, Cincinelli A, Bang JJ. PCBs and PCDD/Fs in soil from informal e-waste recycling sites and open dumpsites in India: levels, congener profiles and health risk assessment. The Science of the Total Environment 2018;621:930e8. [33] Stowell AF, Warren S. The institutionalization of suffering: embodied inhabitation and the maintenance of health and safety in e-waste recycling. Organization Studies 2018;39(5e6):785e809. [34] Geissdoerfer M, Savaget P, Bocken NM, Hultink EJ. The circular economyea new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;143:757e68. [35] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy e economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation

Circular economy and sustainable development

[36]

[37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54]

307

Publishing; 2013. 98 pages. Available online at: https://www. ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthurFoundation-Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf. Brundtland GH, Khalid M, Agnelli S, Al-Athel S, Chidzero B, Fadika L. Our common future (report of the world commission on environment and development). New York, NY: United Nations; 2018. Available online at: http://www.undocuments.net/our-common-future.pdf. Su
arez-Eiroa B, Fern
andez E, Méndez-Martínez G, Soto-O~ nate D. Operational principles of circular economy for sustainable development: linking theory and practice. Journal of Cleaner Production 2019;214:952e61. Qiao F, Qiao N. Circular economy: an ethicaland sustainable economic development model. Prakseologia 2013;154:253e72. Birat JP. Life-cycle assessment, resource efficiency and recycling. Metallurgical Research & Technology 2015;112(2):206. Lieder M, Rashid A. Towards circular economy implementation: a comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016; 115:36e51. Genovese A, Acquaye AA, Figueroa A, Koh SL. Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: evidence and some applications. Omega 2017;66:344e57. Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R, Hall JM, Jaeger CC, Lowe I, McCarthy JJ, Schellnhuber HJ, Bolin B, Dickson NM, Faucheux S. Sustainability science. Science 2001;292(5517):641e2. Clark WC, Dickson NM. Sustainability science: the emerging research program. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2003;100(14):8059e61. Clark WC. Sustainability science: a room of its own. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2007;104:1737e8. Kemp R, Loorbach D. Governance for sustainability through transition management. In: Open meeting of Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Research Community, Montreal, Canada, Vol. 20; 2003, October. Loorbach D. Governance for sustainability. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 2007;3:1e5. Farrell AE, J€ager J, editors. Assessments of regional and global environmental risks: designing processes for the effective use of science in decision-making. Resources for the Future; 2006. 301 pages. Berg M, Lidskog R. Deliberative democracy meets democratised science: a deliberative systems approach to global environmental governance. Environmental Politics 2018;27(1):1e20. The Royal Society. UK Future Earth. Available online at: https://royalsociety.org/ about-us/international/international-work/uk-future-earth/. Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y. Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2010. Hester PT, Adams KM. Systemic thinking: fundamentals for understanding problems and messes. New York: Springer; 2014. Bocken NMP, Rana P, Short SW. Value mapping for sustainable business thinking. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering 2015;32(1):67e81. Gray R. Of messiness, systems and sustainability: towards a more social and environmental finance and accounting. The British Accounting Review 2002;34(4):357e86. Hilton RW, Platt DE. Managerial accounting: creating value in a dynamic business environment. McGraw-Hill Education; 2013.

308

The Circular Economy

[55] Boons F, Montalvo C, Quist J, Wagner M. Sustainable innovation, business models and economic performance: an overview. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013;45: 1e8. [56] Aminoff A, Valkokari K, Antikainen M, Kettunen O. Exploring disruptive business model innovation for the circular economy. In: International conference on sustainable design and manufacturing. Cham: Springer; 2017, April. p. 525e36. [57] Lacy P, Rutqvist J. Waste to wealth: the circular economy advantage. Springer; 2016. [58] United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Circular economy: an alternative for economic development. 2006. Available online at: http://www.unep.fr/shared/ publications/pdf/DTIx0919xPA-circulareconomyEN.pdf. [59] Murray A, Skene K, Haynes K. The circular economy: an interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics 2017;140(3):369e80. [60] Nakajima N. A vision of industrial ecology: State-of-the-art practices for a circular and service-based economy. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 2000;20: 154e69. [61] Pitt J, Heinemeyer C. Introducing ideas of a circular economy. In: Environment, ethics and cultures. Rotterdam: SensePublishers; 2015. p. 245e60. [62] Valkokari K, Valkokari P, Palom€aki K, Uusitalo T, Reunanen M, Macchi M, Rana P, Liyanage JP. Road-mapping the business potential of sustainability within the european manufacturing industry. Foresight 2014;16(4):360e84. [63] Antikainen M, Valkokari K. A framework for sustainable circular business model innovation. Technology Innovation Management Review 2016;6(7):5e12. [64] Lewandowski M. Designing the business models for circular economydtowards the conceptual framework. Sustainability 2016;8(1):43. [65] Roos G. Business model innovation to create and capture resource value in future circular material chains. Resources 2014;3(1):248e74. [66] Mentink B. Circular business model innovation: a process framework and a tool for business model innovation in a circular economy. 2014. Available online at: https:// repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:c2554c91-8aaf-4fdd-91b7-4ca08e8ea621. [67] Antikainen M, Valkokari K, Korhonen H, Wallenius M. Exploring Networked Innovation in Order to Shape Sustainable Markets. Paper presented at the XXIV ISPIM conference, June 16e19, Helsinki, Finland. 2013. [68] Esposito M, Tse T, Soufani K. Is the circular economy a new fast-expanding market? Thunderbird International Business Review 2017;59(1):9e14. [69] Urbinati A, Chiaroni D, Chiesa V. Towards a new taxonomy of circular economy business models. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;168:487e98. [70] L€ udeke-Freund F, Gold S, Bocken NM. A review and typology of circular economy business model patterns. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2018. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/jiec.12763. [71] Moreno M, De los Rios C, Rowe Z, Charnley F. A conceptual framework for circular design. Sustainability 2016;8(9):937. [72] Saidani M, Yannou B, Leroy Y, Cluzel F, Kendall A. A taxonomy of circular economy indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018;207:542e59. [73] Kirchherr J, Reike D, Hekkert M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: an analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2017;127:221e32. [74] Geng Y, Fu J, Sarkis J, Xue B. Towards a national circular economy indicator system in China: an evaluation and critical analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production 2012; 23(1):216e24.

Circular economy and sustainable development

309

[75] The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Circularity Indicators e an approach to measuring circularity. 2015. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/ assets/downloads/insight/Circularity-Indicators_Project-Overview_May2015.pdf. [76] Linder M, Sarasini S, van Loon P. A metric for quantifying product-level circularity. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3):545e58. [77] EU Commission. Closing the loop-An EU action plan for the circular economy. Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions COM, 614 final. Available online at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html? uri¼cellar:8a8ef5e8-99a0-11e5-b3b7-01aa75ed71a1.0012.02/DOC_1&format¼PDF; 2015. [78] Rigamonti L, Sterpi I, Grosso M. Integrated municipal waste management systems: an indicator to assess their environmental and economic sustainability. Ecological Indicators 2016;60:1e7. [79] Geyer R, Kuczenski B, Zink T, Henderson A. Common misconceptions about recycling. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2016;20(5):1010e7. [80] Haupt M, Vadenbo C, Hellweg S. Do we have the right performance indicators for the circular economy?: insight into the Swiss waste management system. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2017;21(3):615e27. [81] Meylan G, Ami H, Spoerri A. Transitions of municipal solid waste management. Part II: hybrid life cycle assessment of Swiss glass-packaging disposal. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2014;86:16e27. [82] Elia V, Gnoni MG, Tornese F. Measuring circular economy strategies through index methods: a critical analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;142:2741e51. [83] Fischedick M, et al. Industry. In: Edenhofer O, et al., editors. IPCC, climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working Group III to the fifth Assessment report of the intergovernmental Panel on climate change. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press; 2014. [84] UN Climate Change News. Circular economy is crucial to Paris goals e study. 2018. Available online at: https://unfccc.int/news/circular-economy-is-crucial-to-parisgoals-study. [85] Sitra. The circular economy a powerful force for climate mitigation. In: Transformative innovation for prosperous and low-carbon industry; 2018. Available online at: https://media.sitra.fi/2018/06/12132041/the-circular-economy-a-powerful-forcefor-climate-mitigation.pdf. [86] Sitra. Ground-breaking analysis finds that the circular economy could make it possible to keep global warming below 2 C. 2018. Available online at: https://www.sitra.fi/ en/news/ground-breaking-analysis-finds-circular-economy-make-possible-keepglobal-warming-2c/. [87] Vilella M. Zero waste circular economy e a systemic game-changer to climate change, Volume 44.3. Heinrich B€ oll Stiftung Publication Series Ecology; 2018. Available online at: https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/radical_realism_for_ climate_justice_volume_44_3.pdf. [88] Toop TA, Ward S, Oldfield T, Hull M, Kirby ME, Theodorou MK. AgroCyclee developing a circular economy in agriculture. Energy Procedia 2017;123:76e80. [89] Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES V4). Consultation briefing note. 2012. Available online at: https://cices.eu/content/uploads/sites/ 8/2012/07/CICES-v-4-Consultation-Briefing-Note.pdf. [90] Otte P, Maring L, De Cleen M, Boekhold S. Transition in soil policy and associated knowledge development. Current opinion in environmental sustainability 2012;4(5): 565e72.

310

The Circular Economy

[91] Breure AM, De Deyn GB, Dominati E, Eglin T, Hedlund K, Van Orshoven J, Posthuma L. Ecosystem services: a useful concept for soil policy making! Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012;4(5):578e85. [92] Sillanp€a€a M, Ncibi C, Sillanp€a€a ME. A sustainable bioeconomy. Springer; 2017. [93] Breure AM, Lijzen JPA, Maring L. Soil and land management in a circular economy. The Science of the Total Environment 2018;624:1125e30. [94] Harvey M, Pilgrim S. The new competition for land: food, energy, and climate change. Food Policy 2011;36:S40e51. [95] Perring MP, De Frenne P, Baeten L, Maes SL, Depauw L, Blondeel H, Car
on MM, Verheyen K. Global environmental change effects on ecosystems: the importance of land-use legacies. Global Change Biology 2016;22(4):1361e71. [96] Schram-Bijkerk D, Otte P, Dirven L, Breure AM. Indicators to support healthy urban gardening in urban management. The Science of the Total Environment 2018;621: 863e71. [97] Claessens J, Schram-Bijkerk D, Dirven-van Breemen L, Otte P, van Wijnen H. The soilewater system as basis for a climate proof and healthy urban environment: opportunities identified in a Dutch case-study. The Science of the Total Environment 2014;485:776e84. [98] WHO Regional Office for Europe. Urban green spaces and health. 2016. Available online at: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/321971/Urbangreen-spaces-and-health-review-evidence.pdf?ua¼1. [99] Maswood SJ. The South in international regimes e whose globalization? International political economy series. USA: Palgrave Macmillan; 2006. [100] UN Sustainable Development Goals. Goal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countries. Available online at: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/ inequality/. [101] Riedy C. The social practices of change agency in the context of community energy use. People and the planet 2013 conference Proceedings. Transforming the future, RMIT university, Melbourne, Australia, 2e4 July. Available online at: https:// www.researchgate.net/profile/Chris_Riedy/publication/260047861_The_Social_ Practices_of_Change_Agency_in_the_Context_of_Community_Energy_Use/links/ 0046352f35f32388ec000000/The-Social-Practices-of-Change-Agency-in-theContext-of-Community-Energy-Use.pdf; 2013. [102] Amartya S. The idea of justice. Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Cambridge; 2009. [103] UN. Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. 2015. Available online at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld. [104] Williams M, Schroeder P, Gower R, et al. Bending the curve e best practice interventions for the circular economy in developing countries. Tearfund; 2018. Available online at: https://learn.tearfund.org/w/media/files/tilz/circular_economy/2018tearfund-bending-the-curve-en.pdf?la¼en. [105] The World Bank. Poverty overview. 2018. Available online at: https://www. worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview. [106] The World Bank. Decline of global extreme poverty continues but has slowed. 2018. Available online at: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/09/ 19/decline-of-global-extreme-poverty-continues-but-has-slowed-world-bank. [107] Stokes K. Recycling waste, rebuilding lives: eliminating poverty through the clean economy. Huffington Post; 2012. Available online at: https://www. huffingtonpost.com/kabira-stokes/recycling-waste-rebuildin_b_1856497.html. [108] Frankson L. SA beats European plastic recycling rates. Infrastructure News; 2018. Available online at: http://www.infrastructurene.ws/2018/07/26/sa-beatseuropean-plastic-recycling/.

Circular economy and sustainable development

311

[109] Berg A, Antikainen R, Hartikainen E, Kauppi S, Kautto P, Lazarevic D, Piesik S, Saikku L. Circular economy for sustainable development. Reports of the Finnish Environment Institute; 2018. Available online at: https://helda.helsinki.fi/ bitstream/handle/10138/251516/SYKEre_26_2018.pdf? sequence¼1&isAllowed¼y. [110] The International Labour Organization (ILO). Circular economy a source of job creation and re-creation. 2018. Available online at: https://www.ilo.org/brussels/ information-resources/news/WCMS_619122/lang–en/index.htm. [111] ILO. World employment and social outlook 2018: Greening with jobs. 2018. Available online at: https://www.ilo.org/weso-greening/documents/WESO_ Greening_EN_web2.pdf. [112] WRAP. Employment and the circular economy e job creation in a more resource efficient Britain. 2015. Available online at: http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/ wrap/Employment%20and%20the%20circular%20economy%20summary.pdf. [113] Circualr Economy and Ehero. Circular jobs e understanding employment in the circular economy in The Netherlands. 2017. Available online at: https://www. circle-economy.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/goldschmeding-jobs-report20170322-lite.pdf. [114] Bonviu F. The European economy: from a linear to a circular economy. Romanian Journal of European Affairs 2014;14:78. [115] Liu Y, Bai Y. An exploration of firms’ awareness and behavior of developing circular economy: an empirical research in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2014;87:145e52. [116] Souza GC. Closed-loop supply chains: a critical review, and future research. Decision Sciences 2013;44(1):7e38. [117] Schneider A. Reflexivity in sustainability accounting and management: transcending the economic focus of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics 2015; 127(3):525e36. [118] Besio C, Pronzini A. Morality, ethics, and values outside and inside organizations: an example of the discourse on climate change. Journal of Business Ethics 2014;119(3): 287e300.

CHAPTER SEVEN

Full “circular” ahead 7.1 Introduction When Walter Stahel’s battered 1969 Toyota car approached the age of 30, he decided that her body deserved to be remanufactured. After 2 months and 100 h of work, “she returned home in her original beauty.” To this sight, one of his neighbors said to him, “I am so glad you finally bought a new car” [1]. To speed up the implementation of CE locally and globally, and take it to the next level, we need to approach our neighbors, community members, countrymen, and fellow humans with the message, that Walter indirectly conveyed to his neighbor, that quality is not necessarily associated with newness, but rather with caring, and that long-term use, sharing stuff, second-hand use are not synonyms for low living standards, but of higher and nobler ones, because it enables the preservation of valuable resources for our kids, protects our environment from pollution and “wastefullywasted waste,” and generates job opportunities for others to live a decent life, to name a few. Moreover, as we have seen in the previous chapters, many countries around the world have taken measures to promote and implement CE including Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, the U.S.A., the UK, China, as well as Austria, Japan, Spain, Australia, and many more. Other countries, confronted with the clear fact that continuing business, as usual, is leading to ruinous ends, have developed strategies, to some extent, compatible with circular economic activities [2]. Similar stands relying on minimalist measures or the passive approach of “wait and see” were equally taken by some companies. This is only delaying the full deployment of CE in the various economic sectors, and thus, postponing the application (in critical times) of circular solutions to the interlinked set of economic, environmental, and social problems. This is exactly why we need to help in conveying Stahel’s, Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s, Sitra’ss, and many other key CE players’ messages, and effectively and efficiently contribute to the expansion of the CE concept and its sustainable dimension in our universities, companies, city halls, talk shows, etc. For this, and as we shall see next, several enabling activities, The Circular Economy ISBN: 978-0-12-815267-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815267-6.00007-4

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

313

j

The Circular Economy

314

frameworks, and platforms can be used including the emerging and effective impact of digitalization, the catalyzing role of innovative R&D, and the promoting and highly influential role of education.

7.2 The future is circular and digital 7.2.1 Digitalizing circular economy Most experts perceive digitalization as one of the key enablers of CE because it allows real-time visibility, traceability, and monitoring of resources and products’ locations and conditions, as well as the availability of assets. And such features are highly relevant within circular business models relying on servicing instead of selling products, leasing, renting or sharing items and goods wherever possible, etc. [3,4]. Thus, pairing this digital revolution with CE can indeed transform the economy’s relationship to materials and finite resources, thus, unlocking additional value and generating positive outcomes, by decoupling economic value creation from resource consumption. According to the Ellen Macarthur Foundation, the four value drivers of CE (i.e., extending the usage cycle length of an asset, increasing utilization of an asset or resource, looping or cascading an asset through additional usage cycles, and regeneration of natural capital) can be combined with one (or several) of the three main intelligent asset value drivers: knowledge of the location, condition, and availability of products or assets [5]: - Knowledge of the product location in real time enables increases the products’ accessibility and improves the possibilities for end-of-life collection, refurbishment, remanufacturing, and recycling [6]. - Knowledge of the product condition enables predictive and conditionbased maintenance, advanced diagnostics and prognostics of the components, and products. Predictive maintenance increases product reliability and availability and enables extending the lifetime of products and further remanufacturing with the historical knowledge of the product [7]. - Knowledge of the availability of the product allows, for example, sharedusage schemes through digital platforms and market places [5,7]. In practice, promoting and applying digital tools and platforms such as cyber-physical systems, Big Data, data mining, data analytics, and Internet of Things (IoT), and digital technologies such as artificial intelligence or blockchain technology, are highly expected to bring novel ways to improve traceability and transparency throughout product lifetime, and could provide major opportunities toward more sustainable industrial value creation, value capture and CE [6e9].

Full “circular” ahead

315

7.2.2 Application of digital tools and technologies to CE In the related literature, several digital technologies were identified in connection with the CE concept. A possible grouping of those technologies is depicted in Fig. 7.1, based on the three architectural layers: data collection, data integration, and data analysis [11]. • Data collection includes the technologies of - Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), which is a data collection technology that has attracted significant attention within the context of CE. RFID uses electromagnetic fields to automatically identify and track tags attached to the items. Hence, it can help track material flows to enable value recovery, especially in reverse logistics supply chains and during the implementation of the circular strategies of reuse, repair, and remanufacture [12]. - IoT, which is based on sensors and actuators connected by networks to computing systems that can monitor or manage the condition and actions of connected objects and machines [13]. Thus, in the context of CE, IoT can collect information generated by sensors to connect stakeholders across the entire value chain. • Data integration includes various management systems such as - Relational Database Management Systems (RDBMS) are systems associated with the organization of data in formally described tables. They allow, along with database handling systems, the integration of heterogeneous data sources, by specifying a data architecture to enable the analytical requirements of the information architecture [14].

Figure 7.1 Grouping of digital technologies according to the three architectural layers [10].

316

The Circular Economy

- Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) systems are information management systems that can integrate data, processes, and business systems in extended enterprises. PLM systems can be interesting supporting tools in the transition to the CE, as they help in integrating information across multiple life cycles, and across various stakeholders in the value chain [10]. • Data analysis includes - Artificial Intelligence (AI), which is a machine-learning practice based on algorithms that can learn from data without relying on rules-based programming. The application of machine learning algorithms such as Neural Networks that rely on mass processing of data, rather than a complex set of rules, to identify patterns in the data and make predictions. AI can be applied in the context of CE to support the process and system optimization based on the huge amount of data [15]. - Big Data: since new technologies are collecting more data than ever before, Big Data provides the analytical platform to help examine large amounts of data, and to identify new opportunities, uncover hidden patterns, correlations, and other insights [16]. Within CE, Big Data enables the rapid and efficient use of the huge amounts of information from various systems (e.g., IoT), to enable better decision-making. For instance, the capabilities of Big Data to monitor CE-related production and consumption patterns can eventually allow material flows to be effectively closed [17]. Overall, in all aspects of CE, the generation and analysis of digital mass data play an increasingly important role, as does data exchange. Numerous technological options in the areas of connectivity, computing, and manufacturing technology affect the interface between digitalization and CE. Digitalization can, thus, enable the development of circular business models (e.g., re-design, resource-efficient production, return and recycling), accelerate them, and make them more efficient [18].

7.2.3 Challenges and research opportunities related to digitalization 7.2.3.1 Challenges to digitalization In the current global transition toward CE, the benefits of digitalization are undeniable. Nonetheless, in order to attain the full advantageous aspects of CE, several challenges need to be addressed and solved. Overall, these barriers can be divided into [4]: - financial barriers, such as measuring financial benefits, financial profitability, etc.;

Full “circular” ahead

317

- structural barriers, including the missing exchange of information, unclear responsibility distribution; - operational barriers, related to infrastructure, supply chain management, etc.; - attitudinal barriers, including the perception of sustainability, risk aversion; and - technological barriers related to the product design and integration of digital technologies into production processes. Although many scholars proved that digitalization has significantly increased the amount, accuracy, and cost of information, others rightfully still believe that more needs to be done. Currently, problems related to information can be seen as one of the major barriers to the implementation of the CE. For example, these include underdeveloped availability of information, increased transaction and search costs, and lack of knowledge [19]. Also, issues related to data integration are often neglected when studying the role of digital solutions in the CE [10,20]. Among those various challenges, the one related to data sharing is considered to be one of the most important ones. Indeed, in an atmosphere of ownership and privacy, sharing information is a very delicate matter. In CE, everyone agrees that sharing data between all the participants in an eco-industrial park, for example, is crucial for the success of the entire consortium, because it helps in identifying more synergistic opportunities [21]. In practice, however, the key question is to what extent this important data sharing data can occur between competitors, especially big multinational ones? This is a major barrier to the global implementation of CE. SMEs also are expected to be reticent when it comes to sharing their information because this might strip them from the small, but precious, knowledge based on which the entire company is built upon, often involving a dearly secured innovative idea or process. An even if CE manages to change mindsets, as it intends to change resources’ flow, the integration of big data owned by multiple actors and management of information flows would also constitute a challenge. 7.2.3.2 Research opportunities related to the digitalization of CE Despite the conceptual and technological advances and innovations connected to the digitalization of CE, such as AI, Big Data, and IoT, more specific research investigations need to be focused on, including [22e24]: • Exploring opportunities from “Industry 4.0,” an automation and data exchange concept in manufacturing technologies, to identify sustainability gains that may not yet be fully recognized.

The Circular Economy

318

• Mathematical and computer optimization models to provide support during the decision-making process, aiming at optimizing CE-related industrial activities such as industrial symbiosis practices, and allowing planners to optimize their environmental, economic, or employment objectives. • Operational data-driven analyses to produce reliable information among the supply chain and industrial networks, and to optimize resource usage or balance the triple-bottom-line decision-making pattern among crossindustry corporate groups, which is highly relevant within the CE concept, especially for industrial symbiosis in eco-industrial parks. • Using the big-data driven analysis to benchmark mutual trust, corporate culture, sustainable consumption, or corporate behavior in the supply chain or cross-industry networks for enhanced industrial sustainability.

7.3 R&D: “fundamentally innovative” 7.3.1 Innovation is the key Innovative and transformational technologies such as digital and engineering technologies, in combination with creative thinking about CE, are the major driving forces behind the current global changes across numerous strategic economic sectors [25]. Such a fundamental paradigm shift is, therefore, entailing significant impacts on the economy, environment, society, and sustainable development. Thus, understanding and anticipating those impacts is crucial for researchers as well as for policymakers for designing and implementing proper related policies and regulation. This requires developing a good knowledge of the concept, the different CE processes, and their expected effects on various sectors and value chains [26]. As a result, R&D on the CE is fragmented across various disciplines, and there are often different perspectives about the interpretation of the concept and the related aspects that need to be assessed, which constitute a major challenge to scholars and researchers working on CE-related principles, strategies, processes, technologies, policies, etc. In general, CE innovations are based on the principle of a closed loop value chains, where companies endeavor to develop innovative ways of designing products, reusing materials, shifting to renewables, etc., in order to make money while minimizing their environmental footprints. And in order to achieve these objectives and more, researchers from various backgrounds, have a critical enabling or catalyzing role to play, and the keyword in this multidisciplinary effort is innovation.

Full “circular” ahead

319

Indeed, in order to successfully implement CE and fully benefit from its multiple opportunities, innovation is required from all players along the value chain, including companies, public sector, stakeholders, and especially from universities and research institutes. In 2015, Deloitte Finland performed a research study, where it compared how international CE frontrunners and large Finnish companies are innovating in the area of CE. The research confirmed that there is an untapped potential for Finnish companies to leverage on the opportunities related to circular business development [27]. It was found that innovation related to CE seems to be focusing on companies’ processes and profit models, along with networks and products. The research demonstrated clearly that international CE frontrunners like Michelin, Philips, Puma, and Patagonia have more different types of innovation than the Finnish companies, who traditionally focus on the improvement of process efficiency. Also, it was highlighted that the most successful companies have managed to change their business model completely in terms of what customers are paying for and how they are doing business, principally through CE thinking and innovation. Obviously, the transition toward CE requires multiple value creation. In this regard, and for a research perspective, scholars believe that classical R&D management tools are not developed enough to enable an easy and reliable assessment of CE innovations. And this is an urgent challenge that needs to be addressed, especially that CE is increasingly being used as a criterion for steering R&D investments, as is the case in many European Horizon 2020 sub-programs [28]. To overcome such issue, scientists from the Netherlands’ Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) developed the IMPACT framework to support R&D in the assessment of such innovations on three levels of details (quick scan, brief assessment, and thorough assessment) and on three levels of implementation (project, production chain, and society) [29]: - on the project level, capacity building was analyzed; - on the production chain level, circular performances were measured; and - on the societal level, the sustainability of products was evaluated. The framework was then applied to wood products and wastes in the construction sector, and it generated valuable insights for the involved R&D specialists and their managers, by considering several potentially more valuable alternatives to the “conventional” incineration option. Based on this case study, the authors stipulated that this framework is showing potential to steer R&D decisions in support of more CE.

320

The Circular Economy

7.3.2 Spending on circular R&D In their effort to promote transnational cooperation during the transition to CE, the consortium of the EU co-funded the project MOVECO, including 16 partners from 10 Danube countries, worked on mapping R&D institutions supporting the transition to CE [30]. In the process, 88 R&D institutions were studied across all the involved partners’ countries. Based on the project analyses, it was found that R&D in the MOVECO countries is dominated by public universities. In general, except countries which belong to the group of innovation leaders, R&D mapping has shown that institutions inclined toward adopting CE have been more involved in waste reduction, recycling, and environmental protection projects. Only a few institutions are involved in product and service innovation providing environmental benefits in eco-design and eco-friendly systems innovation [31]. In Europe, where most CE pioneering countries are, “circular” R&D is promoted and incentivized by multiple and substantial funding schemes, targeting the economic, environmental, and societal dimensions of CE. In this regard, the European Commission has allocated around V1 billion in support of the CE in the European Union until 2020. The V941 million funding comes as part of the final program of work for the Horizon 2020 program, which is a V77 billion research and innovation funding program running from 2014 to 2020. For instance, the final program of work, covering the budgetary years of 2018, 2019, and 2020, dedicates a total of V30 billion to critical topics such as migration, security, climate, clean energy, and the digital economy [32]. The latest work program lists “connecting economic and environmental gains” through the CE as one of its flagship focus areas [33]. This means mobilizing R&D and innovation to support a number of actions intended to make a strong contribution to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, climate action, resource efficiency, jobs growth, and industrial competitiveness. These actions will include “making the transition toward a circular bioeconomy,” “climate action in support of the Paris Agreement,” “linking different industrial sectors and public bodies to enable industrial symbiosis,” and developing “more integrated value chains” [34]. For the actions, the following focus areas were defined: - much better use of resources, including energy and raw materials, - significant reductions in waste and pollution,

Full “circular” ahead

321

- sustaining and making use of natural cycles, - competitive advantages for existing businesses, and - opportunities for new businesses, including disruptive innovation.

7.4 Education system: “sustainable and circular thinking” Educational institutions, especially universities, have big responsibilities for accelerating pedagogical innovation to enable a more circular and sustainable future, for current and future generations.

7.4.1 Educating about sustainability A transition in the education system is an important prerequisite to enable and catalyze the transition to achieve sustainable cities and societies, well aware that energy, water, and environment need to be dealt with in a sustainable and efficient manner. While the role of education in supporting environmental sustainability has been underlined for the last half a century or so, the rapid escalation of global issues and the severity of related challenges have intensified the urgency of the matter [35]. From this perspective, the maintenance of a neutral stance in education is indicated to be largely insufficient. Instead, a goal-oriented approach to foster strategic thinking is deemed to be the most critical strategy for mobilizing the capacity to shift the trends of development away from business-as-usual scenarios [36]. On related matters, Beynaghi et al. identified the macro trends that are in the process of transforming universities to become the most significant drivers of enabling a more sustainable world. Accordingly, universities were indicated to be entering a new phase after a transitory phase necessary to adopt new views and approaches [37]. In a follow-up study, the same team put forth three scenarios for the future role of universities during a decade (2015e24). One scenario depicted the emergence of “environmentally oriented universities” in which universities are devoted to the pursuit of environmental sustainability by putting forth tools and strategies to address such issues as waste and pollution, renewable energy, and sustainable agriculture, among other issues [38]. In other related studies, the prospective roles of universities as change agents in forging partnerships for sustainability, and as assets to improve the sustainability of local communities, were examined [39e41].

322

The Circular Economy

7.4.2 Educating about circularity In order to implement CE in our societies and in our companies, locally and globally, we need a new kind of expertise, cooperation, development of the operating environment, and a general change in attitudes and operating methods. Professionals, experts, and decision-makers, both now and in the future, will play a decisive role in building a new circular and sustainable future, and education has a critical role developing, forming, and continuously updating those professionals, experts, and decision-making experts. In this context, Finland is probably the best illustrative example since this Nordic country is pioneering worldwide in both CE and education. Indeed, extensive work is being done in the education system in connection with the national CE movement. Sitra, the Finnish Innovation Fund, is heavily invested in this effort, and has a clear objective: they want to challenge the entire educational sector to consider what type of world they want to create. They want to make a “new normal” by educating tomorrow’s experts and professionals. For this, an effort must be made to ensure that every sector has experts in the CE, and to educate professionals in lifecycle thinking and extensive cooperation, and who understand that economic growth in a CE is not dependent on the consumption of natural resources [42]. On the ground, Sitra is involved in a number of education and CErelated projects, such as: - A CE toolbox for teachers: for this, Sitra has gathered material, ideas, and useful links for teachers to make the CE an integral part of their teaching. Since CE can be explored from a variety of perspectives, it can, therefore, be integrated into many different school subjects as well as into phenomenon-based and extensive modules. As well, CE provides a good cross-disciplinary perspective. Overall, the objective of this CE toolbox for teachers is to demonstrate what kind of society of the future is being built under CE, what kinds of new business opportunities will emerge, and what kinds of job opportunities today’s schoolchildren and students will have [43]. - Multidisciplinary study module on the circular economy: Five Finnish universities are in the process of developing a multidisciplinary study module that offers students of different universities new perspectives on CE and related opportunities for deepening their competence within their respective field. The cooperation project was launched in March 2018 and involves several departments from the Aalto University, the University of Helsinki, the University of Eastern Finland, the

Full “circular” ahead

323

Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology, and the University of Oulu. In the next, each university is expected to proceed, in collaboration with others, by planning and developing its own courses to make them suited for the study module, through an in-class, online, or blended learning approach [44]. The Ellen Macarthur Foundation (EMF), an international authority on CE, also believes that the transition from a linear to circular economy requires a fundamental transformation in the way we create products, services, and systems, and is dependent on how we learn and apply those learnings in the real world, as individuals, teams, and organizations. To support learning about the CE, EMF is placing emphasis on interdisciplinary, project-based and participatory approaches, with the objective of helping people, industrialists, and cession makers understand how they can influence the complex systems around them. Within this important effort, EMF is working with educational institutions including schools, colleges, and higher education programs. - For schools and colleges: the CE should engage students in one of the most challenging and complex issues facing our global economy, which is, as tohow to move beyond the linear “take-make-waste” model of production and consumption to one that is regenerative. By supporting CE learning, EMF is equipping young people with the skills, knowledge, and mindset needed to build a system that works for society, the economy, and the environment. To achieve this educative goal, EMF is collaborating with its education partners by providing teaching and learning resources, participating in curricula development, and providing tools and knowledge for professional development [45]. - For universities: EMF also works with higher education institutions worldwide to develop, share, and scale CE learning. The foundation also enables research collaborations to inform the effective application of the CE framework across sectors and industries [46].

7.5 Concluding remarks The transition from a linear to a circular economy, where the value of products, materials, resources, and waste is maintained in the economy for as long as possible, is a critical and timely global endeavor toward developing low-carbon, resource-efficient, waste-free and competitive economies, and sustainable and responsible societies. Such a paradigm shift is a momentous opportunity to many countries and corporations around the world to

324

The Circular Economy

embrace sustainability and to generate new and sustainable competitive advantages through “circularity.” Based on the large body of academic, entrepreneurial, and institutional literature consulted during the preparation of the present book, CE has a rich set of historical antecedents, but it is rapidly and steadily positioning itself as the most comprehensive and sustainable concept for economic development. Nonetheless, despite the numerous circular opportunities benefiting the economy, the environment, and society at large, some challenging issues are still hindering the full deployment of CE and its opportunities. And if we want CE to thrive, and thus, fully benefit from its advantages, a substantial part of our efforts, us scholars, investors, entrepreneurs, policymakers, etc., need to be focused on addressing the current, emerging, and expected challenges in an effective manner to ensure the adoption of sustainable implementation modalities and efficient management strategies. The first challenge is the inclination of investors, entrepreneurs, and decision-makers, to prioritize the economic dimension of CE, especially in current times of recurrent economic crises. Hence the imperative need to systemically include (or enforce) environmental and societal objective, and related assessment measures in circular strategies. In a CE, materials that can be recycled are injected back into the economy as new raw materials thus increasing the security of supply, and reducing the recourse to primary raw materials, often involving unsustainable exploitation schemes. One of the obstacles facing interested users is the uncertainty about the quality of those secondary raw materials, hence, the difficulty to integrate such valuable feedstock in their production lines, unless high-grade recycling and recovery schemes are fulfilled, along with the establishment of standardized quality metrics targeting secondary raw materials. Definitely, specific economic sectors and industries are of strategic importance within the local and/or national context. Thus, it is important that everybody knows (at least the key players) to what ends CE in being implemented in the city, the company or the country, and accordingly assess the expected net impacts across different sectors. This would help policymakers design well-targeted policies to effectively manage the transitional stage and mitigate any possible negative impact on local or national economies. Based on the related literature, the CE concept has a significant potential to deliver economic, environmental, and social benefits. In this regard,

Full “circular” ahead

325

another important challenge should be anticipated, which is our ability to monitor the medium- and long-term evolution of the various CE implementation strategies, to reliably assess the outcomes, and in due course, determine if CE is leading us toward sustainable development. Eventually, the CE will boost the competitiveness of countries and corporations implementing it, by protecting businesses against scarcity of resources and volatile prices, helping to create innovative business opportunities and more efficient ways of producing and consuming. It will create local jobs at all skills levels and opportunities for social integration and cohesion. At the same time, it will save energy and help avoid the irreversible damages to climate, biodiversity, air, soil, and water, caused by the unsustainable exploitation of resources. And finally, yes, CE can make this happen, but we need to promote, educate, coordinate, incentivize, regulate, and protect it, and above all believe in it. Can we?

References [1] Stahel WR. The circular economy. Nature News 2016;531(7595):435. [2] Heck P. Circular economy related international practices and policy trends: current situation and practices on sustainable production and consumption and international circular economy development policy. Institute for Applied Material Flow Management (IfaS), Environmental Campus Birkenfeld; 2006. Available online at: http:// siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEAPREGTOPENVIRONMENT/Resources/ CircularEconomy_Policy_FinalDraft_EN.pdf. [3] Bocken NM, de Pauw I, Bakker C, van der Grinten B. Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering 2016;33(5):308e20. [4] Antikainen M, Uusitalo T, Kivikyt€ o-Reponen P. Digitalisation as an enabler of circular economy. Procedia CIRP 2018;73:45e9. [5] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Intelligent assets: unlocking the circular economy potential. 2016. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/ downloads/publications/EllenMacArthurFoundation_Intelligent_Assets_080216.pdf. [6] Bressanelli G, Adrodegari F, Perona M, Saccani N. Exploring how usage-focused business models enable circular economy through digital technologies. Sustainability 2018; 10(3):639. [7] Stankovic M, Gupta R, Figueroa J. Industry 4.0 e opportunities behind the challenge. 2017. UNIDO Background paper. Available online at: https://www.unido.org/sites/ default/files/files/2017-11/UNIDO%20Background%20Paper%20on%20Industry% 204.0_27112017.pdf. [8] Raynor ME, Cotteleer MJ. The more things change. Value creation, value capture, and the internet of things. Deloitte Review 2015;(17). Available online at: https:// www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/deloitte-review/issue-17/value-creation-valuecapture-internet-of-things.html.

326

The Circular Economy

[9] Nobre GC, Tavares E. Scientific literature analysis on big data and internet of things applications on circular economy: a bibliometric study. Scientometrics 2017;111(1): 463e92. [10] Pagoropoulos A, Pigosso DC, McAloone TC. The emergent role of digital technologies in the circular economy: a review. Procedia CIRP 2017;64:19e24. [11] Sherman R. Business intelligence guidebook: from data integration to analytics. Massachusetts, United States: Morgan Kaufmann; 2014. [12] Jayaraman V, Ross AD, Agarwal A. Role of information technology and collaboration in reverse logistics supply chains. International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications 2008;11(6):409e25. [13] Manyika J, Chui M, Bisson P, Woetzel J, Dobbs R, Bughin J, Aharon D. Unlocking the potential of the internet of things. McKinsey Global Institute; 2015. Available online at: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/ourinsights/the-internet-of-things-the-value-of-digitizing-the-physical-world. [14] Batra R. Database management systems and tools. In: SQL primer. Berkeley, CA: Apress; 2018. p. 179e82. [15] Reuter MA. Digitalizing the circular economy. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B 2016;47(6):3194e220. [16] The SAS Institute Inc. Big data analytics. 2019. Available online at: https://www.sas. com/en_sa/insights/analytics/big-data-analytics.html. [17] Moreno M, Charnley F. April. Can re-distributed manufacturing and digital intelligence enable a regenerative economy? An integrative literature review. In: International conference on sustainable design and manufacturing. Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 563e75. [18] Deloitte. Chemistry 4.0 e growth through innovation in a transforming world. 2017. Available online at: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/de/Documents/ consumer-industrial-products/Deloitte_Chemistry4-0-2017-short%20version.PDF. [19] Wilts CH, Berg H. The digital circular economy: can the digital transformation pave the way for resource-efficient materials cycles?. 2017. Available online at: https:// epub.wupperinst.org/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/6978/file/6978_Wilts.pdf. € Barriers to the circular economyeintegration of perspectives [20] Ritzén S, Sandstr€ om GO. and domains. Procedia CIRP 2017;64:7e12. [21] Geng Y, Zhang P, C^ oté RP, Qi Y. Evaluating the applicability of the Chinese ecoindustrial park standard in two industrial zones. The International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 2008;15(6):543e52. [22] Chertow MR. Industrial symbiosis: literature and taxonomy. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 2000;25(1):313e37. [23] Tseng ML, Tan RR, Chiu AS, Chien CF, Kuo TC. Circular economy meets industry 4.0: can big data drive industrial symbiosis? Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2018;131:146e7. [24] Salminen V, Ruohomaa H, Kantola J. Digitalization and big data supporting responsible business co-evolution. In: Advances in human factors, business management, training and education. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 1055e67. [25] Vanner R, Bicket M, Withana S, et al. Scoping study to identify potential circular economy actions, priority sectors, material flows & value chains. Study prepared for the European Commission, DG Environment. 2014. Available online at: https:// www.eesc.europa.eu/resources/docs/scoping-study.pdf. [26] Rizos V, Tuokko K, Behrens A. The circular economy: a review of definitions, processes and impacts. CEPS research. Report No 2017/8, April 2017. 2017. Available online at: http://aei.pitt.edu/85892/1/RR2017%2D08_CircularEconomy_0.pdf.

Full “circular” ahead

327

[27] Poukka R. Circular economy innovation: untapped potential for Finnish companies. Finland: Deloitte; 2019. Available online at: https://www2.deloitte.com/fi/fi/pages/ risk/articles/circular-economy-innovation.html. [28] European Commission. Horizon 2020 e focus areas. Available online at: https://ec. europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/cross-cutting-activities-focusareas. [29] Verstraeten-Jochemsen J, Keijzer E, van Harmelen T, Kootstra L, Kuindersma P, Koch R. IMPACT: a tool for R&D management of circular economy innovations. Procedia CIRP 2018;69:769e74. [30] Danube Transnational Programme. MOVECO e a journey in the circular economy. 2019. Available online at: http://www.interreg-danube.eu/news-and-events/projectnews/3680. [31] Danube Transnational Programme. Transnational report on R&D activities in circular economy e MOVECO project. 2018. Available online at: www.interreg-danube.eu/ media/download/13249. [32] European Union External Action (EEAS). Commission to invest V30 billion in new solutions for societal challenges and breakthrough innovation. 2017. Available online at: https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/34942/commissioninvest-%E2%82%AC30-billion-new-solutions-societal-challenges-and-breakthroughinnovation_nb. [33] European Commission. Topics of H2020 2018-2020 focus area “connecting economic and environmental gains e the circular economy”. Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/ focus-area/circular_econonmy.html#c,topics¼callStatus/t/Forthcoming/1/1/0/ default-group&callStatus/t/Open/1/1/0/default-group&callStatus/t/Closed/0/1/0/ default-group&þidentifier/desc. [34] Cole R. EU commits V1bn of Horizon 2020 funding to circular economy until 2020. Resource; 2017. Available online at: https://resource.co/article/eu-commits-1bnhorizon-2020-funding-circular-economy-until-2020-12198. [35] Bonnett M. Environmental concern, moral education and our place in nature. Journal of Moral Education 2012;41(3):285e300. [36] Kopnina H. Sustainability in environmental education: new strategic thinking. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2015;17(5):987e1002. [37] Beynaghi A, Moztarzadeh F, Maknoon R, Waas T, Mozafari M, Hugé J, Leal Filho W. Towards an orientation of higher education in the post Rioþ 20 process: how is the game changing? Futures 2014;63:49e67. [38] Beynaghi A, Trencher G, Moztarzadeh F, Mozafari M, Maknoon R, Leal Filho W. Future sustainability scenarios for universities: moving beyond the United Nations decade of education for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;112:3464e78. [39] Hansen JA, Lehmann M. Agents of change: universities as development hubs. Journal of Cleaner Production 2006;14(9e11):820e9. [40] Peer V, Stoeglehner G. Universities as change agents for sustainabilityeframing the role of knowledge transfer and generation in regional development processes. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013;44:85e95. [41] Kılkıs¸ S¸, Kılkıs¸ B. Integrated circular economy and education model to address aspects of an energy-water-food nexus in a dairy facility and local contexts. Journal of Cleaner Production 2017;167:1084e98. [42] The Finnish Innovation Fund (Sitra). Circular economy teaching for all levels of education. Available online at: https://www.sitra.fi/en/projects/circular-economyteaching-levels-education/.

328

The Circular Economy

[43] Sitra. A circular economy toolbox for teachers. Available online at: https://www.sitra. fi/en/projects/circular-economy-toolbox-teachers/. [44] Sitra. Multidisciplinary study module on the circular economy. Available online at: https://www.sitra.fi/en/projects/multidisciplinary-study-module-circular-economy/ #what-is-it-about. [45] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Learning e schools & colleges. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/our-work/activities/schools-colleges. [46] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Learning e higher education. Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/our-work/activities/universities.

Index ‘Note: Page numbers followed by “f ” indicate figures and “t” indicates tables.’

A Agito Medical, 230 Agricultural sector circular economy for sustainable food production, 162e169 circularity in food sector, 160e161 global food security, 157e158 issues in current food sector, 159e160 urban agriculture (UA), 169e171 “AgroCycle” project, 171e172, 173f Air pollution coal, 40e41 petroleum, 41e42 Algal biomass, 129e131 American Chemistry Council (ACC), 253 Anaerobic digestion (AD) technologies, 236e237 Apple Inc., 251e252 Arla Foods, 231e232 Artificial Intelligence (AI), 317

B Big data, 317 Bio-based Cyrene solvent, 130 Bioeconomy, 14 Biomass, 131e134 Biomimicry, 17e18 Bioresource, chemicals from, 122e134 Biowaste, chemicals from, 122e134 Black Bear Carbon (BBC), 233e234

C Canada, circular economy in, 245e249 Canadawide Action Plan, 248 Canadian CE movement, 245e247 Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply (CIPS), 50 Chemical industry, 114e137 cases of circular innovations in, 137 chemicals from bioresource, biowaste, and recycled materials, 122e134

algal biomass, 129e131 challenges related to biomass and wastes valorization, 131e134 chemicals from CO2, 131 food supply chain waste (FSCW), 127e129, 128f lignocellulosic biomass, 125e127 green chemistry in CE, 117e122 Chemical leasing, 134e136 Chemicals from CO2, 131 China case studies, 262e265 circular economy in, 254e265 implementation modalities and indicators., 258e262 Chinese E-commerce platform, 265 Circular bioeconomy, 88e92 Circular business models (CBMs), 71 Circular CoLab (CCL), 243e244 Circular Economy (CE) in agricultural sector “AgroCycle” project, 171e172, 173f circular economy for sustainable food production, 162e169 circularity in food sector, 160e161 global food security, 157e158 issues in current food sector, 159e160 urban agriculture (UA), 169e171 bioeconomy, 14 biomimicry, 17e18 in Canada, 245e249 in chemical industry, 114e137 in China, 254e265 circular supply chain, 19e26 circular supply chain management, 21e22, 22t closed-loop supply chain (CLSC), 23e25, 24f reverse logistics, 25e26, 25f sustainable supply chain management, 20e21

329

j

Index

330 Circular Economy (CE) (Continued ) Cradle to Cradle (C2C), 16 definition, 7e19 evaluations, 11e13 interpretation, 13e14 official and nonofficial bodies, 8e10 scientists and professionals, 10e11 environmental economics, 4 in Europe Finland, 213e217 Germany, 217e220 Italy, 227e230, 235e237 Netherlands, 220e224, 233e235 Nordic countries, 230e232 strategic visions, 209e213 United Kingdom, 224e226 founding fathers, 3e7 green chemistry in, 117e122 green economy, 14e15 industrial ecology, 15 industrial symbiosis, 15 linear economy (LE), 1, 18e19, 18f in mining industry circularity in mining sector, 145e152 conventional mining, 140e145 modern concept, 3e7 natural capitalism, 16e17 new political and economic philosophies, 1e2 in North America, 237e254 performance economy, 16 regenerative design, 17 roots, 1e3 in textile industry, 242e243 in the US, 238e245 “virtual” mastership, 1 in water sector, 172e184 industrial wastewaters, 179e184 water reclamation from municipal wastewaters, 174e179 Circular Economy Lab (CEL), 246e247 Circular Economy Leadership Coalition (CELC), 245e246 Circular Economy Promotion Law, 256 Circular Economy Research Survey, 226 Circular food systems, 164e169

Circular food waste management, 168e169 Circular innovations, 137 Circularity food sector, 160e161 industrial sector, 112e114 mining sector, 145e152 landfill mining (LFM), 149e152 urban mining (UM), 148e149 Circular supply chain, 19e26 circular supply chain management, 21e22, 22t closed-loop supply chain (CLSC), 23e25, 24f reverse logistics, 25e26, 25f sustainable supply chain management, 20e21 Climate change, 42e44 Closed cycle management, 217e218 Cohealo, 251 “Collegato ambientale”, 229 Consorzio Italiano Biogas (CIB), 236e237 Conventional mining, 140e145 construction minerals (CMs), 143e145 metals, 141e143 Cradle to Cradle (C2C), 16 Current food sector, 159e160

D Data analysis, 317 Design for X (DfX) approaches, 293e294 DfX approaches. See Design for X (DfX) approaches 1,4-Diacids-derived products, 125, 126t Digitalization application, 315e316 architectural layers, 315f challenges, 316e317 circular R&D, 320e321 data collection, 317 education system, 321e323 circularity, 322e323 sustainability, 321 Ellen Macarthur Foundation (EMF), 323 innovation, 318e319 research opportunities, 318e321 technologies, 315e316

Index

DSM-Niaga, 250 DuPont, 122

E Ecofys, 89 Eco-Industrial Park Environmental Support System (EPESUS), 53 Eco-industrial parks, 52e54 Education system, 321e323 Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF), 6e7, 114, 210e211, 238, 323 EMF. See Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) Employment, 302e303 ENEA, 236 Enerkem, 251 Enhanced landfill mining (ELFM), 150, 150f Enterra Feed, 250 Environmental benefits, 57e59 Environmental economics, 4 European Commission, 209e210 European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), 212e213 European Resource Efficiency Platform, 209 Europe, circular economy in Finland, 213e217 Germany, 217e220 Italy, 227e230, 235e237 Netherlands, 220e224, 233e235 Nordic countries, 230e232 strategic visions, 209e213 United Kingdom, 224e226

F Finland, 213e217 Finnish public organization, 214 Food consumption, 166e168 Food supply chain waste (FSCW), 127e129, 128f Fossil resources, 89e90 FSCW. See Food supply chain waste (FSCW)

G Germany, 217e220 Global food security, 157e158 Global societal benefits, 57e59

331 Global supply, 55e57 Global warming, 42e44 Good production, 164e166 Green chemistry, 117e122 Green economy, 14e15 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 297e298 Gross domestic product (GDP), 260e261

H 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), 127

I Implementation, CE circular business models (CBMs), 71, 76e79 “ circularity-enabling ” procedures, 71 conceptual change, 70e81 driver for sustainability, 78e79 economic incentives:, 80e81 eco-systemic mindset, 79 firm-centric logic, 79 hardcore skeptics, 73 linearity to circularity, 71e72, 72f long-term strategies, 75 materialistic change, 81e98 raw material shift, 81e82 sustainable management, 82e92 short-term strategies, 75 skepticism to conviction, 72e74 systems thinking, 79 value-added tax (VAT), 81 World Economic Forum (WEF), 70 zero waste city, 74e76 zero waste index (ZWI), 75e76, 75f Indicator system, China, 260e262 Industrial ecology, 15 Industrial sector, 112e114 Industrial symbiosis, 15 Industrial wastewaters, 179e184 case of mining industry, 179e182 Innovation, 318e319 Innovative business models, 219e220 Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI), 239 Integrated reverse logistics, 50e52 Intelligent market incentives, 222 International Labor Organization (ILO), 302e303

Index

332 Islands of sustainability, 52 Italian Atlas of CE, 228 Italy, 227e230, 235e237

K Kyoto Protocol, 58e59

L Landfill mining (LFM), 149e152 Land management, 299e301 Law of Promotion of Cleaner Production, 255 Lignocellulosic biomass, 125e127 Linear economic (LE) model, 18e19, 18f air pollution, 40e42, 41f climate change, 42e44 environmental issues, 38e44 global warming, 42e44 societal and geopolitical issues, 44e48 coal sector issues, 44e45 petroleum sector issues, 46e48 soil degradation, 39e40 water pollution, 39e40 Locally sourced raw materials, 48e50 London Waste and Recycling Board (LWARB), 226

M Maturity, 90 Metals, 141e143 Metals-processing industrial activities, 142 Mining effluents decontaminating, 180e181 resources recovery from, 181e182 Mining industry circular economy in, 139e152 circular economy (CE) in circularity in mining sector, 145e152 conventional mining, 140e145 circularity in, 145e152 Mobike, 263e264 Municipal wastewaters water reclamation from, 174e179 biological processes, 177e178 chemical processes, 175e177 integrated processes, 178e179

N National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), 262 Natural capitalism, 16e17 Neste, 232 Netherlands, 220e224, 233e235 Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL), 221 Nordic countries, 230e232 North America, Circular economy in, 237e254 Novel product design, 219

O Ongoing transitory stage, 289

P Paris Agreement, 58e59 Paris climate change conference 2015, 301 Pay-per-use chemicals, 136e137 Philips, 234 Poverty, 302e303 “Premium quality guarantee”, 265 Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) systems, 317 Pulp and paper industry (PPI), 182e184

R Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), 317 Recycled materials, chemicals from, 122e134 Regenerative design, 17 Relational Database Management Systems (RDBMS), 317 ReMade in Italy, 236 Renewable bio-based feedstocks, 123, 124t Research opportunities, 318e321 “Resource-effcient Europe”, 209 “Rethinking the wheel”, 70e81 Riikinvoima Ekovoimalaitos Waste-toEnergy plant, 216e217

S Short supply chains, 50e52 Sitra, 214

Index

Soil management, 299e301 Stakeholders, 86e88 Standard & Poors (S&P), 73 State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA), 256 Substances of very high concern (SVHC), 120e121 SusChem, 211e212 sustainability-based approach, 211e212 Sustainable development (SD) circular economy, 282e289, 286f critical steps, 296f design for X (DfX) approaches, 293e294 employment, 302e303 environmental considerations, 297e301 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 297e298 International Labor Organization (ILO), 302e303 ongoing transitory stage, 289 poverty, 302e303 principles, 282 quasisystematic association, 285 SDGs synergies, 285 societal factor, 301e303 soil and land management, 299e301 success evaluation, 294e297 sustainable business, 290e294, 292f transition, 289e290 UK ’ s WRAP, 303 Sustainable economic models, 122e123 Sustainable food production, 162e169 Sustainable management raw materials ethylene-tetra fluoroethylene (ETFE), 83 ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA), 83 groundwater resources, 86e88 limiting factors, 85 minerals, metals, and hydrocarbons (MMHs), 82 MMH resources, 83 nonrenewable resources, 82e88 polyvinyl butyral (PVB), 83 polyvinyl fluoride (PVF), 83

333 renewable resources, 88e92 wastes, 92e98, 98t biological materials, 95 circularity, 95e98 critical raw materials (CRM), 93e94 humanity, 96 materials-related group, 92 product-related group, 92 technical materials, 95

T

“Take-make-dispose” scheme, 207 Textile business, 153e155 Textile dyeing industry, 155e157 Third generation biofuel, 129 TouchPoint, 230e231

U UK is the Green Building Council (UKGBC), 226 United Kingdom, 224e226 United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), 134 Urban agriculture (UA), 169e171 Urban mining (UM), 148e149 U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation (USCCF), 240 US companies, 241e245 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 238

V Value loops, 55e57 “Virtual” mastership, 1 Vitens, 233

W Waste and Resources Action Program (WRAP), 146, 224e225 Waste management, 115 policy, 217 strategies, 239 Wastes valorization, 131e134 Water pollution coal mining activities, 39 petroleum, 40

Index

334 Water reclamation from municipal wastewaters, 174 biological processes, 177e178 chemical processes, 175e177 integrated processes, 178e179 Water sector, 172e184 industrial wastewaters, 179e184 water reclamation from municipal wastewaters, 174e179 World Trade Organization, 239

WRAP. See Waste and Resources Action Program (WRAP)

Y YCloset, 264e265

Z Zero Waste Canada (ZWC), 246