Over the last decade, the concept of the circular economy has regained attention, especially related to efforts to achieve a more sustainable society. The ‘revival’ of the circular economy has been accompanied by controversies and confusions across different actors in science and practice. With this article we attempt at contributing to advanced clarity in the field and providing a heuristic that is useful in practice. Initially, we take a focus on the historical development of the concept of circular economy and value retention options (ROs) for products and materials aiming for increased circularity. We propose to distinguish three phases in the evolution of the circular economy and argue that the concept – in its dominant framing – is not as new as frequently claimed. Having established this background knowledge, we give insights into ‘how far we are’ globally, with respect to the implementation of circularity, arguing that high levels of circularity have already been reached in different parts of the globe with regard to longer loop value retention options, such as energy recovery and recycling. Subsequently, we show that the confusion surrounding the circular economy is more far reaching. We summarize the divergent perspectives on retention options and unite the most common views a 10R typology. From our analyses, we conclude that policymakers and businesses should focus their efforts on realization of the more desirable, shorter loop retention options, like remanufacturing, refurbishing and repurposing – yet with a view on feasibility and overall system effects. Scholars, on the other hand, should assist the parties contributing to an increased circular economy in practice by taking up a more active role in attaining consensus in conceptualizing the circular economy.

The circular economy: New or Refurbished as CE 3.0? — Exploring Controversies in the Conceptualization of the Circular Economy through a Focus on History and Resource Value Retention Options

Central sorting and recovery of MSW recyclable materials: A review of technological state-of-the-art, cases, practice and implications for materials recycling.

Today, considerable amounts of resources are landfilled or incinerated, and recyclable materials such as metal, glass, plastic, and paper are disposed of as residual waste instead of being sorted into recyclable fractions. Recycling is one way of transitioning towards a circular economy and a more resource-efficient society. However, in many older cities there is insufficient space for waste bins, which makes waste sorting difficult. The aim of the study was to test how the introduction of a new kerbside collection system, using different-coloured plastic bags, would influence the amounts of residual waste and separately collected food waste. Coloured plastic bags were introduced in an old city centre in Kalmar, in the southeast of Sweden. This type of kerbside collection was applied to 38 apartments with a total of 87 residents for four weeks. Results show that residual waste decreased directly by 15 percent and the collected amount of food waste increased directly by 35 percent. The residents perceived that the sorting system facilitated sorting and that the sorting of recyclable materials increased. Kerbside collection, close to properties, seemed to be an important factor in reducing the amount of residual waste, leading to increased sorting, and hence improved recycling.

https://www.mdpi.com/2313-4321/4/2/20/pdf

Coloured Plastic Bags for Kerbside Collection of Waste from Households—To Improve Waste Recycling

Cross-boundary collaboration in waste management research: A network analysis

Efficient packaging waste management systems are essential considering recent revisions of the European legislation on packaging waste management that sets ambitious targets. European rules aim to deal with the increasing quantities of packaging waste, which cause environmental problems. Consequently, it is necessary to identify functional packaging waste management systems to achieve these targets effectively and efficiently. However, given the heterogeneity of the different packaging management systems, policymakers, scholars, and industry operators struggle to have a comparative view. The number of non-harmonized laws in force across countries, autonomous recycling targets, and constant updates are prominent problems that make it difficult to obtain comparable information for research, business, and policymaking. To fill this gap, our research question consists of assigning responsibilities for prevention, collection, recycling, and recovery and an overview of some models at a glance with respect to the general governance and functioning of the system. We base our research on a multiple-case design since more cases are examined using complementary data collection methods, analysis of the previous literature, reports, legislation, and business and institutional websites. Our results provide insights from the following cases: Germany, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Portugal, Denmark, Spain, and Italy. In addition, policy implications emerge as our insights help overcome barriers in the European market’s development caused by the different rules on packaging management and design serving policymakers that aim to harmonize the management of packaging waste. The paper also contains managerial implications for circular economy business models that can be used by managers who aim to design or upgrade their business models according to both recent legislative upgrades and packaging management systems.

/pdf/an-overview-of-packaging-waste-models-in-some-european-2z9vjfx3.pdf

An Overview of Packaging Waste Models in Some European Countries

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0734242X12455089

Pieter Reus

Papers

New developments in waste management in the Netherlands.