A Robust Indicator for Promoting Circular Economy through Recycling
09 Oct 2015-Journal of Environmental Protection (Scientific Research Publishing)-Vol. 06, Iss: 6, pp 1095-1104
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors proposed a new metric for the recycling rate based on the Circular Economy Index (CEI), which measures the ratio of the material value produced by the recycler (market value) by the intrinsic material value1 entering the recycling facility.
Abstract: In order to move towards a more sustainable development, it is necessary not only to minimize the use of materials in the design stage and to find new materials as alternatives to nonrenewable ones (e.g. optical fiber instead of copper, biopolymers instead of polymers from oil) but also to reclaim as much as possible material value through effective recycling. To this extent, recycling can play a key role in multiple dimensions, while providing new business opportunities for innovative companies, having positive impacts on the society and the environment and fostering an effective circular economy as well. Because of the advanced waste management infrastructures available in developed countries, it is possible to achieve an almost complete collection of solid wastes into a variety of controlled bulk material flows. However, the picture for the follow-up step, the recycling of raw materials such as steel, non-ferrous metals, polymers and glass from these flows, is less positive. Materials value recovered from waste represents a very small fraction of European GDP. The fundamental issue is that policymakers still lack an effective key performance indicator for stimulating the recycling industry. Therefore although recycling plays an important role in the circular economy perspective, it is necessary to radically change the metric used so far to compute the recycling rate. Nowadays, the recycling rate is computed measuring the amount of material entering the recycling facilities. This approach has brought about an inaccurate and somehow misleading indicator (the recycling rate) which contributed to wrong decision making and to poor innovation in the industry. The new approach proposed in this paper considers the use of a Circular Economy Index (CEI) as the ratio of the material value produced by the recycler (market value) by the intrinsic material value1 entering the recycling facility. It is argued that this index is related to strategic, economic and environmental aspects of recycling and it has very important implications as decision making tool. To compute the CEI it is necessary to know detailed information of the components and materials contained in each end of life (EOL) product entering the recycling facilities and how they end up in the recycled raw materials. Therefore an accurate accounting of materials (with standards if available), mass, chemical composition and smallest dimension (e.g. a screw, a plastic foil) is proposed.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: A systematic literature review exploring the state-of-the-art of academic research on circular economy (CE) is presented in this paper, where the authors examine the CE body of literature with a systematic approach, to provide an exhaustive analysis of the phenomenon with rigorous and reproducible research criteria.
698 citations
TL;DR: This work analyzes the current literature on CE assessment, then proposes a reference framework for the monitoring phase of a CE strategy, and the main existing environmental assessment methodologies based on indexes are analyzed according to their suitability to evaluate the circularity of a system.
523 citations
TL;DR: A classification framework to understand what indicators measure is proposed and none of the analysed indicators focuses on the preservation of functions.
Abstract: Circular Economy (CE) is a growing topic, especially in the European Union, that promotes the responsible and cyclical use of resources possibly contributing to sustainable development. CE is an umbrella concept incorporating different meanings. Despite the unclear concept, CE is turned into defined action plans supported by specific indicators. To understand what indicators used in CE measure specifically, we propose a classification framework to categorise indicators according to reasoning on what (CE strategies) and how (measurement scope). Despite different types, CE strategies can be grouped according to their attempt to preserve functions, products, components, materials, or embodied energy; additionally, indicators can measure the linear economy as a reference scenario. The measurement scope shows how indicators account for technological cycles with or without a Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) approach; or their effects on environmental, social, or economic dimensions. To illustrate the classification framework, we selected quantitative micro scale indicators from literature and macro scale indicators from the European Union 'CE monitoring framework'. The framework illustration shows that most of the indicators focus on the preservation of materials, with strategies such as recycling. However, micro scale indicators can also focus on other CE strategies considering LCT approach, while the European indicators mostly account for materials often without taking LCT into account. Furthermore, none of the available indicators can assess the preservation of functions instead of products, with strategies such as sharing platforms, schemes for product redundancy, or multifunctionality. Finally, the framework illustration suggests that a set of indicators should be used to assess CE instead of a single indicator.
517 citations
TL;DR: This study enriches the literature by giving a first need-driven taxonomy of C-indicators, and provides a synthesis and clarification to the emerging and must-needed research theme of CE, and sheds some light on remaining key challenges like their effective uptake by industry.
471 citations
Cites background from "A Robust Indicator for Promoting Ci..."
...…acknowledged that to promote CE, the introduction of monitoring and evaluation tools like indicators to measure and quantify this progress becomes essential (Walker et al. 2018; Acampora et al. 2017; Cayzer et al. 2017; Akerman, 2016; Di Maio and Rem, 2015; Su et al. 2013; Geng et al., 2012)....
[...]
TL;DR: This review aims to identify the foundations of circularity metrics used so far and their applications, evaluate the validity of currentcircularity metrics, based on predefined requirements and a CE definition anchored in the sustainability concept, and provide recommendations on how to measure circularity.
Abstract: The circular economy (CE) is perceived as a sustainable economic system where the economic growth is decoupled from the resources use, through the reduction and recirculation of natural resources. In the shift towards the CE, quantifying the circularity of products and services (or their contribution to the CE) is crucial in designing policies and business strategies, and prioritizing sustainable solutions based on evidence. New circularity metrics are being developed for that purpose, but they often present contradiction in both form and content, which contributes to confusion and misunderstanding of the CE concept. This review aims to map methodological developments regarding circularity metrics for products and services, in order to: (1) identify the foundations of circularity metrics used so far and their applications, (2) evaluate the validity of current circularity metrics, based on predefined requirements and a CE definition anchored in the sustainability concept, and (3) provide recommendations on how to measure circularity. The literature search provided a wide variety of CE metrics being developed and applied (seven measurement indices, nine assessment indicators and three assessment frameworks). However, none of them are addressing the CE concept in full, potentially leading to undesirable burden shifting from reduced material consumption to increased environmental, economic or social impacts. Additionally, new metrics under-represent the complexities of multiple cycles and the consequences of material downcycling. Circularity metrics intended to sustainable decision making should be comprehensive enough to avoid burden shifting, and clearly indicate how the benefits of recycling are allocated between the primary and secondary products.
357 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the trade-off between environmental regulation and competitiveness unnecessarily raises costs and slows down environmental progress, and that instead of simply adding to cost, properly crafted environmental standards can trigger innovation offsets, allowing companies to improve their resource productivity.
Abstract: Accepting a fixed trade-off between environmental regulation and competitiveness unnecessarily raises costs and slows down environmental progress. Studies finding high environmental compliance costs have traditionally focused on static cost impacts, ignoring any offsetting productivity benefits from innovation. They typically overestimated compliance costs, neglected innovation offsets, and disregarded the affected industry's initial competitiveness. Rather than simply adding to cost, properly crafted environmental standards can trigger innovation offsets, allowing companies to improve their resource productivity. Shifting the debate from pollution control to pollution prevention was a step forward. It is now necessary to make the next step and focus on resource productivity.
8,154 citations
"A Robust Indicator for Promoting Ci..." refers background in this paper
...Such “innovation offsets,” [38], can not only lower the net cost of meeting environmental regulations, but can even lead to absolute advantages over firms in foreign countries not subject to similar regulations....
[...]
Book•
31 May 2002TL;DR: The Guide to LCA is a guide to the management of LCA projects: procedures and guiding principles for the present Guide, which aims to clarify goal and scope definition, impact assessment, and interpretation.
Abstract: Preface. Foreword. Part 1: LCA in Perspective. 1. Why a new Guide to LCA? 2. Main characteristics of LCA. 3. International developments. 4. Guiding principles for the present Guide. 5. Reading guide. Part 2a: Guide. Reading guidance. 1. Management of LCA projects: procedures. 2. Goal and scope definition. 3. Inventory analysis. 4. Impact assessment. 5. Interpretation. Appendix A: Terms, definitions and abbreviations. Part 2b: Operational annex. List of tables. Reading guidance. 1. Management of LCA projects: procedures. 2. Goal and scope definition. 3. Inventory analysis. 4. Impact assessment. 5. Interpretation. 6. References. Part 3: Scientific background. Reading guidance. 1. General introduction. 2. Goal and scope definition. 3. Inventory analysis. 4. Impact assessment. 5. Interpretation. 6. References. Annex A: Contributors. Appendix B: Areas of application of LCA. Appendix C: Partitioning economic inputs and outputs to product systems.
2,383 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide a cohesive categorisation of the most common sustainability assessment tools within the broader objective of lifting the understanding of tools from the environmentally-focused realm to that of the wider concept of sustainability.
1,306 citations
"A Robust Indicator for Promoting Ci..." refers background in this paper
...Moreover the LCA studies provide information only on the environmental domain of sustainability, neglecting the economic and social ones which should be addressed simultaneously [19] [21] [22]....
[...]
Posted Content•
1,117 citations
"A Robust Indicator for Promoting Ci..." refers background in this paper
...Besides the implications of the fact that materials extracted from the earth and utilized for economic purposes are not literally “consumed” but become waste residuals that do not disappear and may cause environmental damage and result in unpaid social costs [14], experts have calculated that without a rethink of how materials are used in the current linear “take-make-dispose” economy, the virgin stocks of several key materials appear inadequate to sustain the modern “developed world” quality of life for all earth’s peoples under contemporary technology [15]....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors proposed a framework for sustainability indicators as a tool for performance assessment and improvements in the mining and minerals industry, which includes economic, environmental, social and integrated indicators.
918 citations
"A Robust Indicator for Promoting Ci..." refers background in this paper
...The advantage of aggregate indicators is that the information is presented in a format tailored to decision makers [33]-[35]....
[...]