1
Circular Economy Policies in China and Europe
Will McDowall*, Yong Geng, Beijia Huang, Eva Barteková, Raimund Bleischwitz, Serdar
Türkeli, René Kemp, Teresa Doménech
*UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London WC1H 0NN, UK.
w.mcdowall@ucl.ac.uk
Summary
The idea of a Circular Economy has become prominent in both European and Chinese policy-
making. Chinese and European perspectives on a circular economy share a common
conceptual basis and exhibit many similar concerns in seeking to enhance resource
efficiency. Yet they also differ, and this paper explores differences in the focus of CE policy
in China and Europe.
We present evidence on the differing understandings of the CE concept in Chinese
and European policy discourse, drawing on qualitative and quantitative analysis of policy
documents, media articles and academic publications. We show that the Chinese
perspective on the circular economy is broad, incorporating pollution and other issues
alongside waste and resource concerns, and it is framed as a response to the environmental
challenges created by rapid growth and industrialization. In contrast, Europe’s conception of
the CE has a narrower environmental scope, focusing more narrowly on waste and
resources, and opportunities for business.
2
We then examine similarities and differences in the focus of policy activity in the two
regions, and in the indicators used to measure progress. We show differences in the
treatment of issues of scale and place, and different priorities across value chains (from
design to manufacture, consumption and waste management). We suggest some reasons
for the divergent policy articulation of the CE concept, and suggest lessons that each region
can learn from the other.
Introduction
China and Europe face a number of structural economic challenges. Growth rates
remain lower than expected in both regions, while environmental and social challenges
demand attention. The linear model of production – based on a 'take, make and dispose'
approach which relies on imports of virgin natural resources and disposal of wastes and
emissions – appears increasingly outdated. Both regions have adopted the idea of a “circular
economy” in pursuit of a more sustainable use of natural resources.
However, the policy articulation —and even the meaning—of the “circular economy”
(CE) differs in these regions. This article presents a comparative analysis of CE policy
approaches in China and Europe. In particular, we seek to identify differences in the way in
which the CE is understood and described in the two regions. The merits of a comparative
approach should be obvious: there are substantial opportunities for mutual learning from
the experiences in different regions. Moreover, a comparative perspective can inform
emerging international efforts to promote a circular economy.
3
This article first provides some background on the development of CE policy in each
region. We then explore how the CE is framed within Europe and China, drawing on analysis
of policy documents, media content analysis, and a bibliometric analysis of scientific
publications. We then examine similarities and differences in the focus of policy activity, and
in the indicators used to measure progress towards the circular economy.
Circular Economy Policy in China and Europe: background and
brief history
Origins
The CE concept emerged in Europe in the 1980s and 1990s (e.g. (Pearce and Turner
1990)), together with early policies of EU member states, drawing on ideas that can be
traced to the 1970s (Stahel and Reday 1977). Driven by a desire to divert waste from landfill,
The Netherlands and Germany pioneered concepts of waste prevention and reduction, with
the waste hierarchy introduced to the Dutch Parliament in 1979 (Parto et al. 2007).
CE policy in China
The concept of CE in China was introduced in the 1990s. It had origins in cleaner
production, industrial ecology and ecological modernization thinking, and was inspired by
examples of implementation in Europe, US and Japan (Shi et al. 2006; CCICED 2005). The
concept of a CE was formally accepted in 2002 by the central government as a new
development strategy. China’s main national-level framework for pursuing the CE is the
"Circular Economy Promotion Law", which came into force in 2009 (National People's
4
Congress 2008a). Various action plans have followed (e.g. (State Council 2013)), which
provide further details for specific sectors and provide clarity on the implementation of the
provisions of the CE promotion law. Further details of China’s policy framework have been
provided in a number of publications (e.g. (Geng et al. 2016; Geng et al. 2012; Geng and
Doberstein 2008; Su et al. 2013; Mathews and Tan 2016) in recent years.
CE Policy in Europe
Despite its European origins, the CE has only very recently become prominent at the highest
levels of European policymaking. Following concern around high commodity prices, the
European Commission launched a ‘flagship’ initiative on resource efficiency, which was first
operationalized through the ‘roadmap for a resource efficient Europe’ (2011). This was
followed-up with the announcement of a range of policy measures known collectively as the
“Circular Economy Package”. This was later replaced by the ‘Closing the Loop- An Action
Plan for the Circular Economy
1
(European Commission 2015a).
The Action Plan sets out a policy framework that builds on and integrates existing
policies and legal instruments. In particular, the European CE Action Plan proposes
amendments to legislation relating to waste and landfills (which were due for revision). The
Action Plan also proposes various new initiatives. Key elements of the action plan are shown
in Table 1.
1
Note that the Action Plan has yet to be approved by the European Parliament and Council
5
Table 1. Summary of the EU 2015 Action Plan for the Circular Economy, with examples of
specific policies
Area
Examples of specific policies
Production
Eco-design: proposal to adapt the existing eco-design work
plan (under Europe’s Eco-Design Directive) to incorporate
durability, reparability and recyclability criteria
Cleaner manufacturing: R&D funding, knowledge centers
Consumption
Proposed introduction of product labelling for durability
Pricing: member states are ‘encouraged’ to use pricing
instruments
Consumer protection rules: e.g. guarantee periods
Various proposed measures to promote ‘innovative
consumption’, including collaborative consumption models
based on leasing, lending and sharing.
Adapting existing public procurement rules
Waste management
New legislative proposals on waste and landfills, including new
binding targets
Proposed changes to extended produce responsibility rules to
reward products that are designed for easier repair,
remanufacture or recycling.
Direct funding support for ‘laggard’ regions via cohesion policy
Boosting markets for
secondary materials
Clarifying legal rules on definitions of ‘waste’; proposed
standards for various secondary materials to foster markets.
Priority areas:
Five priority areas are identified: Plastics; food waste; critical
raw materials; construction/demolition waste; biomass & bio-
products.
Innovation,
investment and
‘horizontal’ measures
Funding for research and innovation under Europe’s Horizon
2020 program, and also through the Cohesion Policy
Monitoring progress:
The action plan refers to the resource efficiency scoreboard
and raw materials scoreboard, with commitments to develop
new indicators for a range of CE topics. However, the action
plan does not include any explicit indicators for the circular
economy.
