A Critical Review of Academic Approaches, Methods and Tools to Assess Circular Economy at the Micro Level

Transitioning from the current linear economic development model to a circular economy (CE) is a hot topic in academic literature, public governance, and the corporate domain. Actors have implemented CE strategies to reduce their resource use and its associated impacts, while boosting economic competitiveness and generating positive social impact. Companies are identified as key actors in transitioning to a CE, and many academics have proposed tools to assess CE and guide them in this process. This paper critically reviews such academic ‘assessment approaches’ at the micro level in order to reflect on their key properties. Seventy-four approaches are inventoried through a systematic literature review of academic literature. A critical review framework is constructed and applied, containing four perspectives: A general perspective, a descriptive perspective (methodological aspects), a normative perspective (connections to Sustainable Development), and a prescriptive perspective (implementation-focused). Methodologically, the 74 approaches are highly diverse, having various connections to previously established methodologies. Eighteen of the reviewed assessment approaches include all three dimensions of Sustainable Development (SD), in addition to a ‘circular’ dimension. Roughly one quarter of the approaches apply a participatory design approach. Suggested key desired properties of CE assessment approaches include making use of existing assessment methodologies such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), and a closer collaboration between science and practitioners to consider end-user needs in the design of CE assessment approaches

Product-oriented environmental management system (POEMS): a sustainable management framework for the food industry

Abstract: POEMS is a new tool designed to bring together traditional environmental management systems and tools oriented to the environmental evaluation of products. The aim of this paper is to present the preliminary results of the Eco-Management for Food Project (PRIN No. 2008TXFBYT) co-funded by the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research that has the purpose to design and implement a POEMS framework for the agri-food industry in which: 1. the underlying basis is an Integrated Quality and Environmental Management System..

A typology of circular economy discourses: Navigating the diverse visions of a contested paradigm

The circular economy (CE) has recently become a popular discourse especially in government and corporate sectors. Given the socio-ecological challenges of the Anthropocene, the concept of CE could indeed help the transition to a sustainable, just and resilient future. However, the actual definition, objectives and forms of implementation of the CE are still unclear, inconsistent, and contested. Different actors and sectors are thus articulating circular discourses which align with their interests, and which often do not sufficiently examine the ecological, social and political implications of circularity. In this context, this research asks how to better navigate and analyse the history, complexity and plurality of circularity discourses by conceptually differentiating them in a comprehensive discourse typology. To answer this question a critical literature review has been carried out, which first, examines and reflects on the core challenges, gaps and limitations of the CE concept. Second, this research develops a comprehensive timeline of circularity thinking, which identifies and conceptually classifies 72 different CE-related concepts from the Global North and South (such as Gandhian and steady-state economics, buen vivir, doughnut economics and degrowth). This leads to the development of a typology of circularity discourses, which classifies circularity visions according to their position on fundamental social, technological, political and ecological issues. This research thus seeks to provide a basis for a more inclusive and comprehensive discussion on the topic, which opens the imaginary regarding the many circular futures that can exist and allows for a cross-pollination of ideas, policy options, strategies, practices and solutions

Analysing European Union circular economy policies: words versus actions

Since the publication of the European Union's Circular Economy Action Plan in 2015, this new sustainability paradigm has become a guiding force behind the environmental and economic policies of the Junker Commission. The European Union (EU) has taken a particular approach to circularity, with high expectations to increase competitiveness, promote economic growth and create jobs while reducing environmental impacts and resource dependency. However, the circular economy (CE) is a contested paradigm, for which many competing interpretations exist, each seeking varying degrees of social, ecological and political transformation. Considering the emerging and contested state of the academic literature on CE, the EU's embrace of the concept is a remarkable phenomenon, which remains poorly researched. The aim of this paper is thus to address this research gap by analysing the CE discourse and policies of the Junker Commission (2014-2019) in order to critically discuss their sustainability implications and develop key policy recommendations. To do so, this research uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. The paper first critically analyses the EU's discourse based on a typology of circularity discourses. It then reviews the complex set of concrete CE policies and actions adopted by the EU and compares them to its discourse. Results show a dichotomy between words and actions, with a discourse that is rather holistic, while policies focus on “end of pipe” solutions and do not address the many socio-ecological implications of a circularity transition. Several actions are thus recommended to tackle the systemic challenges of a circular future from a plural perspective

Circular economy in corporate sustainability reporting: A review of organisational approaches

A growing commitment from companies to implement circular economy (CE) strategies demands the development of guidelines for consistent related external communication. The fields of non-financial reporting and sustainability are well established with numerous available international reporting frameworks and approaches; however, there is still an absence of standardised reporting principles and procedures for publishing progress on circularity. In this context, this article aims to explore how companies could include CE within their corporate sustainability reports, through an academic literature review and content analysis of existent reporting approaches. Results showed a clear disconnection between CE and sustainability reporting literature. Overall, only a few of the revised reporting approaches explicitly mention CE, and the guidance given to companies is very general, inconsistent and places the responsibility of selecting performance assessment approaches on the companies. The analysis contributes to identifying opportunities for transparent external communication of CE issues, as well as exploring the challenges and limitations

Transition to a Sustainable Circular Plastics Economy in The Netherlands: Discourse and Policy Analysis

The circular economy (CE) has become a key sustainability discourse in the last decade. The Netherlands seeks to become fully circular by 2050 and the EU has set ambitious circularity targets in its CE Action Plan of 2015. The plastics sector, in particular, has gained a lot of attention as it is a priority area of both the EU and Dutch CE policies. However, there has been little research on the different and often contested discourses, governance processes and policy mechanisms guiding the transition to a circular economy and society. This paper aims to fill these gaps by asking what circular discourses and policies are being promoted in the Netherlands and what sustainability implications and recommendations can be drawn from it. It does so through a mix of media analysis, policy analysis, semi-structured interviews, and surveys using Q-methodology. Results indicate a dominance of technocentric imaginaries, and a general lack of discussion on holistic, and transformative visions, which integrate the full social, political, and ecological implication of a circular future. To address those challenges, this research brings key policy insights and recommendations which can help both academics and practitioners better understand and implement the transition towards a sustainable circular plastics economy

Sustainable circular cities? Analysing urban circular economy policies in Amsterdam, Glasgow, and Copenhagen

Cities play a central role in the circular economy (CE) as they are important centres of production and consumption, responsible for 80% of global GDP. European cities are particularly important due to their position of power in the global economy as major markets, and places of industrial and social innovation. Yet urban CE policies and discourses remain poorly researched and understood. This paper addresses this research gap by analysing and comparing the CE policies and discourses in different European cities to draw critical insights and recommendations. It does so by first reviewing academic literature on urban CE policies to develop a new conceptual framework to analyse CE discourses and policies. This framework is then used to analyse and compare the CE policies of three European cities: Glasgow, Amsterdam, and Copenhagen. Results show that technocentric approaches to CE are dominant in the three cities. Moreover, they have very limited social justice policies for a fair distribution of the costs and benefits of a CE transition. Key policy recommendations to address these shortcomings are thus proposed. The insights brought about by this paper are valuable for both practitioners and academics seeking to improve urban CE policies

Transition to a Sustainable Circular Society: More than Just Resource Efficiency

While the conceptual underpinnings of the circular economy (CE) date back to the 1970s, the concept has recently become a major discourse in contemporary sustainability debates. The idea of CE, as it is now understood, is thus rather new and remains in conceptual development. Moreover, it is a contested concept with many different circular visions competing in the discursive sphere. Many researchers have evidenced that dominant CE propositions focus on technocentric solutions and do not address crucial social, political, and ecological implications. This opinion paper seeks to help address this gap by going to the root of the CE metaphor and asking: What do circles, cycles, and flows mean for an economy and a society? To answer this question, this article unpacks the idea of cycles, loops, and flows by analysing what socio-ecological cycles are most relevant for sustainability and circularity. It thus finds a set of seven cycles that are key to better understanding CE and its relation to human and planetary well-being (biogeochemical, ecosystem, resource, power, wealth, knowledge, and care cycles). This article then analyses how and whether dominant CE discourses currently address these cycles. This paper proposes the idea of a circular society as an umbrella concept that can help us better address the critical ecological, social, and political implications of a circularity transition. Moreover, this article develops a set of interrelated strategies to operationalise the circular society concept. This paper thus hopes to contribute to expanding the imaginary regarding the concept of circularity that can help the cross-pollination of ideas, solutions, and approaches to face the manyfold socio-ecological challenges of the twenty-first century

Towards a framework for corporate disclosure of circular economy : Company perspectives and recommendations

Circular economy (CE) is becoming an increasingly mandatory material issue within corporate sustainability reporting, however, what remains unaddressed within literature are the perspectives and capacities of the companies which must soon adapt to meet the evolving reporting requirements. This research aims to capture insights from companies engaged with CE in order to develop recommendations that support the integration of CE within corporate sustainability reports. To do this, a series of semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with companies operating in Italy or the Netherlands, not limited by sector. The results provide a list of challenges experienced-and benefits gained-by companies from externally communicating CE. Companies are urged to consider not only risks associated with staying in the linear economy but also those associated with the implementation of new circular practices, to communicate potential sustainability trade-offs and reduce potential claims of CE-related greenwashing. Practical recommendations are offered for developing targets and indicators for CE as well as identifying and reporting CE-specific risks and opportunities

Correction: Calisto Friant et al. Transition to a Sustainable Circular Plastics Economy in The Netherlands: Discourse and Policy Analysis. Sustainability 2022, 14, 190

The authors would like to make the following corrections to the published paper [1]. The changes are as follows: (1) There is a copyediting mistake in the paper, which affects the article’s readability and understanding. A correction has been made in Section 2.1.1: “To better navigate and understand these differences, this research uses the discourse typology developed by Calisto-Friant et al. (2020), which has also been used to analyze the EU’s CE policies [64], CE discourses in Norway [65,66], the European plastics strategy [67] and competing discourses on the CE in Australiaindustry practices in Italy and the Netherlands [68]”. This has been changed to: “To better navigate and understand these differences, this research uses the discourse typology developed by Calisto-Friant et al. (2020), which has also been used to analyze the EU’s CE policies [64], CE discourses in Norway [65,66], the European plastics strategy [67] and competing discourses on the CE in Australia [68]”. (2) A correction has been made in Section 4.3: “Future research should further analyze these and other policy options and approaches to addressing the CE 95 for plastics”