It’s been just under 10 years since the Ellen MacArthur Foundation launched
in September of 2009 and catapulted the concept of a circular economy onto the
world stage. And at first glance, it may seem that the concept has come to
fruition — it is a regular topic in Davos, expounded by global money
managers including
Blackrock,
and even cited as a driver for
European
and US legislation.
Unfortunately, the truth is that while the term has entered into public
consciousness, according to Amsterdam think tank Circle Economy, as of 2018
the actual circularity of our global economy is only at 9
percent.
So, what are the hold-ups? In order for circularity to deliver on its potential
in this decade, we’ll need to see more of the following:
Extended producer responsibility and product stewardship
Whether through regulation or voluntary frameworks, extended producer
responsibility (EPR) is an essential element in building circularity. Not only
does EPR incentivize better material and product design by manufacturers for
further reuse, repair, recycling and/or proper end-of-life disposal; it ensures
that those manufacturers with the most knowledge of material specifications and
therefore recirculation options, have skin in the game with regards to proper
end of life disposal.
Currently, uptake of EPR varies greatly among brands and product types. Some
manufacturers of durable goods — such as Armstrong Ceiling Tiles,
IKEA
and
Interface;
and Netafim, a maker of drip irrigation tubing — have embraced product
takeback and reutilization as part of their service offering to their
clients. These
firms view EPR as a competitive advantage for both securing resources, as well
as helping clients meet their sustainability goals. For harder to dispose of
product types such as paint, electronics and syringes, private industry
has developed
solutions in
partnership with government and local retailers to ensure it’s not just
taxpayers who are left holding the bill for disposal.
One industry in which there’s been a lack of consensus or cooperation is
consumer goods packaging. While the EU has had an extensive producer
responsibility and deposit
system in
place for packaging since the ‘90s; and last year, the UK put forth a new
scheme
in which businesses and manufacturers pay the full cost of recycling or
disposing of their packaging waste; in the US, many consumer goods brands are
still fighting against
programs and
legislation that would help create and fund take-back programs for single-use
packaging.
Circularity — more than recycling
Much of the attention around circular models has been focused on the
recirculation of material once it reaches its end of life, and the recycling
industry has eagerly
touted its
role in enabling circularity.
While recycling is, of course, still a critical part of building a circular
economy, it’s important to remember that it’s the least value-added
process
in terms of reducing energy and resource use. To truly enable a circular economy
requires more growth in higher-value, upstream concepts that tackle the use and
recirculation of products, not just materials. These concepts could include
product-as-a-service models, as showcased by
Philips’
and Signify’s light-as-a-service models
and Michelin’s tire-leasing
service. Repair
and right-to-repair legislation
are also important in ensuring products remain in use for a longer life span.
And taking advantage of the internet of things can enable greater transparency
in product utilization, with firms such as Cohealo working with healthcare
systems to enable tracking and sharing of hospital equipment.
Battlegrounds for plastic bans expand
We’ve already gotten dozens of bans in
cities around
single-use plastics, covering items such as plastic shopping bags,
straws
and takeout
containers.
However, in the past few years, city-passed ordinances have been stalling — due
to state-level pre-emption laws led by plastics and petrochemical industry
groups such as the American Chemistry Council and the Plastics Lobbying
Association.
Regardless of industry pushback, there is still plenty of momentum and public
demand for more restrictions on single-use plastics (not to mention China’s
just-announced, countrywide
ban). The next
battlegrounds in this war? Public event venues
including stadiums are
increasingly bowing to public concern, as are festival producers such as Live
Nation.
And some of the world’s largest hotel chains — including Marriott, Kimpton,
Hilton,
Caesars and
Sandals
have commitments to eliminate the use of single-use plastics, targeting plastic
straws and toiletry items.
Encouragingly, the future may also include shunning the use of single-use
packaging altogether regardless of material type. Blue Bottle Coffee
is testing the
elimination of single-use cups, even those made of biodegradable plastic, in
favor of reusable options — and Starbucks has committed to do the
same.
The key question for bans and moving to reuse will be whether consumers value
sustainability over convenience.
With all of this momentum and much more continuing to emerge, the seeds have
been planted for a global transition to a circular economy. Already, there are
companies and governments who have embraced circularity’s positioning as a
win-win for both business and society. But there are limits to this model. While
the adoption of a circular economy will serve to lower our rate of virgin
resource use, in the longer run we still need to create an alternative economic
system that
is not focused on limitless growth in a resource-constrained planet.
Get the latest insights, trends, and innovations to help position yourself at the forefront of sustainable business leadership—delivered straight to your inbox.
Gina is the founder of the Upcyclers Network, and a passionate advocate for businesses that are creating value from “waste”. The Upcyclers Network was founded to challenge our reliance on natural resource extraction and build a sustainable economy where waste is simply a resource out of place.
Published Feb 4, 2020 1pm EST / 10am PST / 6pm GMT / 7pm CET