Sadhan Kumar Ghosh Editor

Circular
Economy:
Global
Perspective
Circular Economy: Global Perspective
Sadhan Kumar Ghosh
Editor

Circular Economy: Global

Perspective

123
Editor
Sadhan Kumar Ghosh
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Jadavpur University
Kolkata, India

ISBN 978-981-15-1051-9 ISBN 978-981-15-1052-6 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard
to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Preface

The way our societies and businesses are organized, massive changes are essential
to have a transition to sustainable development. The circular economy (CE) model
offers a new chance of innovation and integration among natural ecosystems,
businesses reengineering, our daily lives and society and waste management. The
circular model of resources should be defined in a holistic manner that is interna-
tionally accepted. The rise in consumerism and disposable products is choking our
planet and exhausting it simultaneously. Actions must be taken seriously well
before we reach the day where more plastics in the sea exist than fish. According to
the World Economic Forum, moving toward a circular economy is the key, and a
“trillion-dollar opportunity, with huge potential for innovation, job creation,
resource conservation and economic growth”. Without urgent action, global waste
will increase by 70% on current levels by 2050, according to the World Bank’s
“What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to
2050” report. Driven by rapid urbanization and growing populations, global annual
waste generation is expected to jump to 3.4 billion tons over the next 30 years, up
from 2.01 billion tons in 2016, the report finds. In 2016, the world generated 242
million tons of plastic waste or 12% of all solid waste.
It is good to note that a new ISO technical committee has been formed very
recently in May 2019 intending to connect the dots in a circular economy and
address the above issues and something more. ISO/TC 323, Circular economy, is
currently made up of experts from over 65 different countries and growing. The idea
for the committee began with a seminar held by AFNOR, ISO’s member for
France, where business leaders from many sectors expressed the need to move from
a linear to a circular economy model. What followed was a French standard, XP
X30-901, Circular economy—Circular economy project management system—
Requirements and guidelines that was published in 2018. The response was so
positive that an international committee ISO/TC 323 was born in France for all.
Mankind has been following a linear model of production and consumption
since the industrial evolution. Researchers report that global material use has tripled
over the past four decades, with annual global extraction of materials growing from
22 billion tons (1970) to 70 billion tons (2010). This latest report from the

v
vi Preface

International Resource Panel, Global Material Flows and Resource Productivity,

provides a comprehensive, scientific overview of this important issue. It shows a
great disparity of material consumption per capita between developing and devel-
oped countries. This has tremendous implications for achieving the SDGs in the
next 11 years. Global material use has been accelerating. Material extraction per
capita increased from 7 to 10 tons from 1970 to 2010, indicating improvements in
the material standard of living in many parts of the world. Raw materials have been
transformed into goods that are afterward sold, used and turned into waste that has
been many times unconsciously discarded and managed. On the opposite, the
circular economy is an industrial model that is regenerative by intention. One of the
goals of the circular economy is to have a positive effect on the planet’s ecosystems
and to stop the excessive exploitation of natural resources. The circular economy
has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) and the use of raw
materials, optimize agricultural productivity, decrease the negative externalities
brought by the linear model and enhance resource efficiency and productivity.
When it comes to reducing greenhouse gases, a circular economy can be helpful.
The report Global Material Flows and Resource Productivity identified the large
gaps in material standards of living that exist between North America and Europe
and all other world regions. Annual per capita material footprint for the Asia
Pacific, Latin America, the Caribbean and West Asia is between 9 and 10 tons, or
half that of Europe and North America, which is about 20 to 25 tons per person. In
contrast, Africa has an average material footprint of below 3 tons per capita.
The uses of renewable energy in the long run are less polluting than fossil fuels.
Thanks to reusing and dematerializing a fewer materials and production processes.
Residues are seen as valuable in the circular model and are absorbed to the max-
imum possibilities in order to be reused in the process and subsequent processes in
turn. A study reported that a circular economy development path could halve
carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, relative to today’s levels. Waste management is
a major problem across the world; its effective disposal is one of the most plaguing
issues faced by the municipalities in different countries. The waste can act as a
major source of energy rather than a disposable material. Given the high volatility
of resource prices and the still heavy pollution of primary production, recycling
becomes mandatory.
Considering the importance of the circular economy, a research project entitled
“Global status of implementation of circular economy” was formulated and
established in which more than 50 experts from 34 countries have been partici-
pating from November 2017 to continue till December 2021 with an Indian expert
as the project lead. The project was launched in the meeting of the International
Scientific Committee at the International Conference on Sustainable Waste
Management platform in November 2017 at Hyderabad during 7th IconSWM in
India. The chapter in this book are the first-phase outcome of the research project of
International Society of Waste Management, Air and Water (ISWMAW).
Twenty countries from Asia (Australia, Afghanistan, Bhutan, China, Lao PDR,
India, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, Thailand, Asian Island country—Mauritius),
Western Asia (Israel), Europe (Germany, Italy, Norway, Serbia and the EU), Africa
Preface vii

(Kenya, Nigeria), the USA and Canada have participated and contributed their
articles in this volume of this book, Circular Economy: Global Perspective that has
been agreed by Springer Nature to publish. The main focus of this book has been
given on existence and implementation status of national and regional legislation on
resource efficiency, management of all types of wastes and circular economy,
resource recovery practices adopted, case studies of implementation circular
economy and 3Rs or any other innovative concepts. One chapter has been devoted
to the introduction of circular economy for easy understanding of the backdrop, the
sustainable development goals (SDG) and the relationship between the circular
economy and the SGDs. The chapters in this book have been thoroughly peer
reviewed, and required revisions were made by the authors before inclusion in this
book.
This book, including CE case studies from 20 countries for the first time, will be
helpful for the educational and research institutes, policy makers, government,
implementers, ULBs and NGOs. I request the readers to send feedback on any
of the related issues.

Bhubaneswar, India Prof. Sadhan Kumar Ghosh

November 2019 Editor and CE Project Leader
Acknowledgements

My Research Scholars
Rahul Baidya
Ipsita Saha
Raktim Dasgupta
Sourav Shaw
Members at M/s. Springer India Pvt. Ltd
Aninda Bose
Ashok Kumar
Radhakrishnan Madhavamani
All the authors and co-authors of the chapters in this book
My colleagues at Jadavpur University and ISWMAW-IconSWM
My Family Members
Sannidhya Kumar Ghosh, My son
Pranati Ghosh, My Wife
Prativa Ghosh, My mother

All others who have helped directly or indirectly in preparing this book.
Those who are working for innovation and implementation of Circular Economy
concepts worldwide.

ix
Contents

Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis

of Chapters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Sadhan Kumar Ghosh
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
P. S. M. Vaughan Levitzke
Solid Waste Management in Kabul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Hamidullah Nikzad
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Ugyen Tshomo, Chhimi Dorji and Yogeeta Dahal
Circular Economy in Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Jonathan Cocker and Kimberley Graham
Circular Economy in China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Xianlai Zeng and Jinhui Li
Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany . . . . . . . 131
Michael Nelles, Abdallah Nassour and Gert Morscheck
Solid Waste Management in Lao PDR: A Pathway Toward
the Circular Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Vatthanamixay Chansomphou
Circular Economy in India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
Sadhan Kumar Ghosh
Circular Economy—Situation in Israel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Shira Daskal and Ofira Ayalon
Circular Economy in Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Francesco Di Maria

xi
xii Contents

Circular Economy in Kenya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223

Michael K. Koech and Kaburu J. Munene
Circular Economy in Malaysia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran
An Overview of Circular Economy in Mauritius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
P. Kowlesser
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
Saheed A. Aremu, David O. Olukanni, Olubunmi A. Mokuolu,
Olumuyiwa A. Lasode, Michael A. Ahove and Olasunkanmi M. Ojowuro
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
Kåre Helge Karstensen, Christian John Engelsen and Palash Kumar Saha
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in Korea . . . . . . . 317
Seung-Whee Rhee
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
Milan Pavlović, Miroslav Vulić and Aleksandar Pavlović
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource Management:
The Case of Packaging Waste Sector in Thailand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
Siwaporn Tangwanichagapong, Mohanakrishnan Logan
and Chettiyappan Visvanathan
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union . . . . . . . . . . . 389
Andrew Farmer
Status of Plastics Waste in Circular Economy in the USA . . . . . . . . . . . 413
Serpil Guran, Ronald L. Mersky and Sannidhya K. Ghosh
Circular Economy in Vietnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423
Huynh Trung Hai, Nguyen Duc Quang, Nguyen Trung Thang
and Nguyen Hoang Nam
About the Editor

Prof. Dr. Sadhan Kumar Ghosh, Ph.D. (Engg.) is

the Dean of faculty of engineering and technology and
Professor & Former Head of the Mechanical
Engineering Department and Founder Coordinator
of the Centre for QMS at Jadavpur University, India.
A prominent figure in the fields of waste management,
circular economy, SME sustainability, green manufac-
turing, green factories, and TQM, he served as the
Director, CBWE, Ministry of Labour and Employment,
Government of India, and L&T Ltd. Prof Ghosh is also
the founder and Chairman of the IconSWM and
President of the International Society of Waste
Management, Air and Water, as well as the Chairman
of the Indian Congress on Quality, Environment,
Energy and Safety Management Systems (ICQESMS).
He was awarded a Distinguished Visiting Fellowship by
the Royal Academy of Engineering, UK, to work on
“Energy Recovery from Municipal Solid Waste” in
2012. He received the Boston Pledge and NABC 2006
award for the most eco-friendly innovation “Conversion
of plastics & jute waste to wealth” in the ESP/50K
Business Plan Competition at Houston, Texas, USA. He
holds patents on waste plastics processing technology
and high-speed jute ribboning technology preventing
water wastage and occupational hazards. He is member
of ISO Working Groups concerning waste management
(ISO/TC 297). His projects have been funded by
European Union Horizon 2020 (2018-2022) on waste
water, Royal Academy of Engineering (2018-2020 &
2012) on Circular economy in SMEs, Shota Rustaveli
National Science Foundation (SRNSF) of Georgia

xiii
xiv About the Editor

(2019-2021) on resource circulation from landfill,

GCRF 2019/2020 Pump Priming - Aston Project UK
on impact of wellbeing & mental health on productivity
& sustainability in Industries, UNCRD/DESA as Expert
(2016-2018) on SWM, Asian Productivity Organisation
(APO) (2016-2019) on green manufacturing, British
Council & DST (2012-2014), Royal Society (2015),
Erasmus Plus (2016-17), ISWMAW (2018-21), Indian
Statistical Institute (2019-2021), Institute of Global
Environmental Strategies (IGES, Japan) (2019),
South Asian Cooperation Environmental Programme
(SACEP, Sri Lanka)(2018-2020) for preparing SWM
roadmap for South Asian Countries, Jute Technology
Mission (2008-2011), Central Pollution Control Board
(1999-2002), Govt. of India on plastics waste manage-
ment and a few others. www.sadhankghosh.com
Introduction to Circular Economy
and Summary Analysis of Chapters

Sadhan Kumar Ghosh

1 Introduction

One-way model of production and consumption has been dominating over the past
one and a half century in the globe. In the supply chain in this one-way model, the
goods are manufactured from raw materials in production processes, sold, used, and
subsequently at the end of its lifetime as the specific product is discarded as waste to
landfill or incinerated. The raw materials are once extracted from the nature, usually
discarded at the end of the use of a particular product. This model simply runs on
a linear path and hence some times termed as linear model. Linear model does not
support environmental sustainability and resource efficiency.
With the ever-increasing global population growth, faster urbanization and indus-
trialization, growing demands of resource consumption, and negative impacts on
environment, it is becoming increasingly apparent that business in a usual linear
model cannot be continued for a sustainable future and development. Concept of
recirculation of resources has been discussed in the Stockholm Conference. Based
on that concept, recently the policy makers, researchers, major global companies and
implementers are attracted and increased their attention towards transition from the
existing linear model of economy to a circular one. World Economic Forum 2012 in
Davos, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) and McKinsey Company published
a report which evaluates the potential benefits of the transition to a circular economy
(CE): It could create an opportunity of US$630 billion a year for only a subset of
the EU manufacturing sectors (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2012, p. 5). Next to
the huge economic benefits, the EMF pointed out the significant environmental and
social benefits derived from a circular economy. These figures have created a huge

S. K. Ghosh (B)
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Technology,
Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
e-mail: sadhankghosh@gmail.com
International Society of Waste Management, Air and Water (ISWMAW), Kolkata, India

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 1

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_1
2 S. K. Ghosh

awareness for the topic as many companies were willing to seize their chance to get a
part of this potential revenue opportunity. Circular economy approach will be able to
decouple economic growth from resource use that can be achieved based on sharing,
leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing, and recycling, in an (almost) closed loop,
to limit the leakage of resources to the maximum extent possible. The implementa-
tion of circular economy for any products or process starts from the conceptual and
design stage. There are many theoretical interpretations of circular economy. Let us
first discuss the available definitions of circular economy.

2 Understand the Circular Economy

The design of a product should be such that it extends the useful life; however faced
with market saturation for their devices, companies are designing products for single
use and shorter life spans, thereby accelerating their replacement cycle. A longer
life span not only saves on the material resources but allows the carbon footprint of
the product to be spread out over a long period of time. There is a greater need to
design electrical equipment that is easier to upgrade and repair. The diagrammatic
representation of a circular economy is demonstrated in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1 Diagrammatic representation of a circular economy based on 6R approach. Source www.

spcadvance.com In RP, 2017
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters 3

Circular economy goes beyond recycling and is based around a restorative indus-
trial system focused to treat waste as a resource. Whenever a product reaches the
end of its useful life, the attempt is made to keep the materials within the produc-
tion boundary and use them productively enough to create further value out of it
(Ellen McArthur 2015). Figure 2 (Denmark without waste II. 2015) demonstrates a
typical value chain of the electronic and electrical equipment (EEE) sector includ-
ing designing, raw material supply, sub-components and subassembly production
and manufacturing, storing, distribution and retail, use phase, waste treatment, and
recycling.
Large quantities of easily accessible resources and energy are the key requirements
in linear “take-make-dispose” model and are increasingly unfit for the reality in
which it operates. Resource efficiency and eco-efficiency are also key incentives
that will strengthen efforts to improve the sustainability of economic growth in a
risky development context (Hicks and Dietmar 2007). In developing economies, the

Raw materials

ProducƟon of
Recycled subcomponents
materials

Waste
treatment

DistribuƟon
and retail

REPAIR

Fig. 2 Circular economy value chain of electronic and electric equipment

4 S. K. Ghosh

waste is being treated in the reduce, reuse and recycle (3R) concept under a broader
concept of circular economy. The circular economy refers to an industrial economy
that is restorative by intention; aims to rely on renewable energy; minimizes, tracks,
and eliminates the use of toxic chemicals; and eradicates waste through careful
design. In circular economy model, durable goods would be designed so that they
could be repaired rather than replaced and biological materials would be managed so
that they could be returned to the biosphere without contamination. Coincidentally,
the implementation of a circular economy is specifically based on both resource
efficiency and eco-efficiency, and its purpose is to acquire a set of key measures to
move toward a more circular, green, and sustainable economy (Yuan et al. 2006;
Geng et al. 2009). The literature review has shown that there are many initiatives
which support the circular economy either in the same name or in some other, but it is
evident that circular economy is an inevitable proposition in the present-day world.
Circular consumption is a significant part of a circular economic system for sus-
tainable economic growth and combating environmental degradation and resource
depletion. Circular consumption into practice can be addressed by reduce, recy-
cle and reuse (3R) principle. Circular consumption supports for converting wastes
into valuable products leading a zero-waste society. Circular economy covers entire
scopes of resource circulation and closed loop system in the areas of solid and liquid
waste management, pollution reduction in water, air and land, resource conservation,
greening of manufacturing sectors and many others activities.
Circular economy approach can deliver several benefits having untapped business
potential. Globally, replacing only 20% of single-use plastic packaging with reusable
alternatives offers an opportunity worth at least USD 10 billion (Ellen MacArthur
Foundation 2017, 2019). Reuse models can bring superior user experiences, user
insights, brand loyalty, and cost savings in some of the following ways:
1. Global alignment to act on plastic pollution: More than 350 organizations have
signed up to the vision of building a circular economy for plastics through the
New Plastics Economy Global Commitment. The Global Commitment has also
seen more than 100 business signatories of the Global Commitment who have
committed to move from single use to reusable packaging by 2025.
2. Shifting user preferences (Kantar World Panel 2017: Innovative reuse models
can significantly shift the preferences delivering better-looking, more functional
packaging which may contribute to gathering valuable user intelligence and allow
the user to customizing the product.
3. Climate and other environmental benefits (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2014):
Moving from single use to reuse will help eliminate plastic waste and pollution
and also offer significant reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with
other negative externalities.
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters 5

3 CE Definitions

The concept of circular economy has deep-rooted origins. The practical appli-
cations have gained momentum from the late 1970s or early 1980s to mod-
ern economic systems and industrial processes. Cradle-to-cradle (https://www.
ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/concept/schools-of-thought) con-
cept and certification process were initiated in Germany long back. The design
philosophy behind the concept is to consider all materials involved in industrial
and commercial processes to be nutrients, in which two main categories are the
actors: (a) technical and (b) biological. The cradle-to-cradle framework focuses
on design for effectiveness in terms of products with positive impact and reduc-
ing the negative impacts of commerce through efficiency. The safe and productive
processes of nature’s “biological metabolism” have been received in the cradle-to-
cradle design leading to a model for developing a “technical metabolism” flow of
industrial materials. It requires the product/components that can be designed for
recovery and reutilization on a continual basis as biological and technical nutrients
within these metabolisms.
Products, processes, and materials must be designed with life cycles that are
safe for the environment and human health. The system should be developed to
mobilize and recover the value of the materials subsequent to their use as a specific
product. The circular economy concept evolved from the cradle-to-cradle framework.
There are a number of researchers who defined the circular economy in various
ways. As the concept is being matured, the inputs to the subject and experience of
implementation raise many questions and clarity. The author evolved the definition
of circular economy as follows and finds it as one of the appropriate definitions
covering all related aspects.
Circular economy is a systems-level approach to economic development and a paradigm shift
from the traditional concept of linear economy model of extract-produce-consume-dispose-
deplete (epcd2 ) to an elevated echelon of achieving zero waste by resource conservation
through changed concept of design of production processes and materials selection for higher
life cycle, conservation of all kinds of resources, material and/or energy recovery all through
the processes, and at the end of the life cycle for a specific use of the product will be still
fit to be utilised as the input materials to a new production process in the value chain with a
close loop materials cycles that improves resource efficiency, resource productivity, benefit
businesses and the society, creates employment opportunities and provides environmental
sustainability.

Circular economy may be defined in the following ways those shared by several
researchers, though there are several others. Table 1 gives the collection of a number
of definitions cited by a few researchers in different times. It is not easy to specify
one perfect definition, but most of them are very much appropriate in one way or
other.
Over the years, the concept of the circular economy has also attracted much criti-
cism on several grounds including the reasons for having different definitions of the
concept. The circular economy has achieved a broad appeal among the academic,
policy, and business audiences (Vanner et al. 2014; Ghisellini et al. 2016), but its
6 S. K. Ghosh

Table 1 Circular economy definitions and interpretations

Source Definition/interpretation of circular Remarks
economy
Ghosh (2019) Circular economy is a systems-level It talks about paradigm shift,
(in this chapter) approach to economic development innovative resource conservation, all
and a paradigm shift from the kinds of resources, redesign of
traditional concept of linear process, material selection, recovery
economy model of extract-produce- of energy and materials, utilization
consume-dispose-deplete (epcd2 ) to of waste of first process as input to
an elevated echelon of achieving second process, closed-loop material
zero waste by resource conservation cycle, employment generation,
through changed concept of design business model, resource efficiency,
of production processes and and environmental sustainability
materials selection for higher life
cycle, conservation of all kinds of
resources, material and/or energy
recovery all through the processes,
and at the end of the life cycle for a
specific use of the product will be
still fit to be utilised as the input
materials to a new production
process in the value chain with a
close loop materials cycles that
improves resource efficiency,
resource productivity, benefit
businesses and the society, creates
employment opportunities and
provides environmental
sustainability
EEA (2016) It provides opportunities to create It talks about well-being, growth,
well-being, growth, and jobs, while and environmental pressure, all
reducing environmental pressures. kinds of natural resources, e.g.,
The concept can, in principle, be biotic and abiotic materials, water,
applied to all kinds of natural and land”
resources, including biotic and
abiotic materials, water, and land”
Ghisellini et al. The radical reshaping of all It talks about reshaping of all
(2016) processes across the life cycle of processes, innovation, material or
products conducted by innovative energy recovery, improvement of
actors has the potential to not only living and economic model
achieve material or energy recovery
but also to improve the entire living
and economic model
Sauvé et al. “Production and consumption of It talks about closed-loop material
(2016) goods through closed-loop material flows, environmental externalities,
flows that internalize environmental virgin resource extraction, linking to
externalities linked to virgin resource wastes/pollution
extraction and the generation of
waste (including pollution)”
(continued)
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters 7

Table 1 (continued)
Source Definition/interpretation of circular Remarks
economy
Mitchell (2015) A circular economy is an alternative It talks about, alternative to linear
to a traditional linear economy economy, longer life cycle of
(make, use, dispose) in which we resources, maximum value
keep resources in use for as long as extraction of resources, recovery,
possible, extracting the maximum and reuse
value from them while in use, then
recovering and reusing products and
materials
European The circular economy is an economy It talks about the value of products,
Commission “where the value of products, materials and resources to maintain
(2015) materials, and resources is for long time, and minimized waste
maintained in the economy for as
long as possible, and the generation
of waste minimized.” The transition
to a more circular economy would
make “an essential contribution to
the EU’s efforts to develop a
sustainable, low-carbon,
resource-efficient, and competitive
economy”
Ellen The circular economy as “an It talks about a restorative or
MacArthur industrial system that is restorative regenerative industrial system that is
Foundation or regenerative by intention and by intention and design,
(2013, p. 7) design. It replaces the ‘end-of-life’ regenerating natural systems,
concept with restoration, shifts redefine growth, focus on positive
toward the use of renewable energy, society-wide benefits, decoupling
eliminates the use of toxic economic activity from the
chemicals, which impair reuse, and consumption of finite resources
aims for the elimination of waste
through the superior design of
materials, products, systems, and,
within this, business models.” The
overall objective is to “enable
effective flows of materials, energy,
labor, and information so that natural
and social capital can be rebuilt”
Su et al. (2013) The focus of the circular economy It talks about the issues beyond
gradually extends beyond issues material management covering
related to material management and energy efficiency and conservation,
covers other aspects, such as energy land management, soil protection,
efficiency and conservation, land and water
management, soil protection, and
water
(continued)
8 S. K. Ghosh

Table 1 (continued)
Source Definition/interpretation of circular Remarks
economy
Bastein et al. The circular economy transition “is It talks about transition to a resilient
(2013) an essential condition for a resilient industrial system, new kinds of
industrial system that facilitates new economic activity, competitiveness,
kinds of economic activity, and employment generation
strengthens competitiveness, and
generates employment”
Preston (2012) “Circular economy is an approach It talks about transformation of
that would transform the function of function of resources, waste as
resources in the economy. Waste valuable input to another process,
from factories would become a repair, reuse, or upgraded instead of
valuable input to another thrown away
process—and products could be
repaired, reused, or upgraded instead
of thrown away”
Heck (2006) The utilization of sustainable energy It talks about sustainable energy
is crucial in a circular economy. The supply and utilization, decisive
transition to a circular economy action in agriculture, water, soil, and
would require addressing the biodiversity
challenge of establishing a
sustainable energy supply as well as
decisive action in several other areas
such as agriculture, water, soil, and
biodiversity
Source Vasileios Rizos et al. (2017)

interpretation and application have been very diverse. This in turn generated confu-
sion and hence reduced opportunities for international cooperation (Preston 2012).
One of the concerns of the interpretation issue is the challenge of assessing the impact
of the transition to circular economy. However, several studies by researchers have
emerged that the circular economy has the potential to deliver economic, environ-
mental, and social benefits though their focus and the aspects they measure are often
varied. Furthermore, according to EASAC (2015), this research field is still in its
early phase, and therefore the applied quantitative models are sometimes based on
simplifications and assumptions that could be challenged.

4 SDGs and Circular Economy

Circular economy and the Sustainable Development Goals have a close relationship
in many aspects. Circular economy will definitely help in implementation of SDG
2030 in the world. CE practices and related business models can help achieve several
of the SDGs’ targets. CE practices directly contribute to achieve twenty-one targets
of SDGs and indirectly to an additional 28 targets. Targets in SDG6, SDG7, SDG8,
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters 9

SDG12, and SDG15 have the strongest relationships with the CE practices. CE
practices also offer potential to create synergies between several SDGs, such as
those promoting economic growth and jobs, eliminating poverty, ending hunger and
sustainable food production, and those SDGs aiming for biodiversity protection in
the oceans and on land. CE practices will not solve all the issues to be addressed by
the SDGs as at least 35 of the targets have no or little influence to the CE practices
while the CE offers potential as an implementation approach for specific SDG targets
(Schroeder et al. 2018a, b). Table 2 gives a ready reference to the SDGs 2030.

5 Summary of the Chapters of Different Countries

Tables 3 and 4 demonstrate the summary of the chapters written on twenty coun-
tries around the world. These twenty countries can fall in distinct four categories
with regard to the implementation of CE. Countries like Germany, Norway, the
UK, and South Korea have matured CE-driven society and achieved significantly
higher echelon of CE implementation status, whereas Australia, Canada, China,
India, Malaysia, Serbia, Thailand, and USA have progressive CE-driven society.
They have either started the CE process long back with limited results or started the
CE process recently with significant results of implementation. A few more countries
like Bhutan and Vietnam have initiated CE-driven society with a number of actions
and strategies. They started minimization and utilization of resource consumption
in many fields of the economy and gaining results. Afghanistan, Lao PDR, Israel,
Kenya, Mauritius and Nigeria are at the primitive stage of implementation of CE
concepts though in isolation there are a few cases where resource recycling take
place on individual initiatives. All these twenty countries have been classified into
four major categories in this chapter, while it may be noted that the categorization has
been made based only on the information available in the chapters of this book and
the experience of the author which do not claim that the categorization as a whole
for respective countries. This information is not claiming the actual results of each of
the countries as a whole. This is the limitation of this study. It has also been observed
that each of the countries has an intention to go forward toward a CE-driven society.
It is expected that there will be a sea change in the resource circulation system in
these countries in a couple of years in the future. Table 4 summarizes salient points
from the chapters on countries.
10 S. K. Ghosh

Table 2 Ready reference to the SDGs 2030

SDG Contribution from sustainable waste management and circular economy
1 No poverty Provides livelihoods for millions of people
globally, ranging from street cleaning and
waste collection (including numerous
informal sector workers) to waste
treatment and material reprocessing. Right
to access to basic services such as waste
collection is included here
2 Zero hunger Reducing food waste is a priority for
reducing hunger amongst the world’s
poorest people. Reduce food waste and
create value from unavoidable food waste,
through composting and anaerobic
digestion, creating useful fertilizers and
energy
3 Good health and well-being Poor waste management practices, such as
open burning of waste and uncontrolled
dumping, cause serious health impacts,
particularly amongst those living close to
waste sites
Improving waste and resource
management will reduce these health
impacts
4 Quality education Many informal waste sector workers are
children. Working with the informal sector
will help get out of this sector and into
education
5 Gender equality The majority of informal waste sector
workers are women. Working with the
informal sector to improve their working
conditions will have a strong benefit to
women working in waste and resource
management
6 Clean water and sanitation Effective solid waste management is a
fundamental element of providing clean
water and sanitary conditions for all
7 Affordable and clean energy Waste has excellent potential as a source
of energy
8 Decent work and economic growth The waste and resource management
sector is a key employer and is essential
for economic growth. Clean cities attract
business and investment
9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure Waste and resource management is at the
center of innovation in the way that we use
materials and consume services
(continued)
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters 11

Table 2 (continued)
SDG Contribution from sustainable waste management and circular economy
10 Reduced inequities The poorest are harmed the most by poor
waste management. Improving waste
management will create benefits for those
most in need
11 Sustainable cities and communities Sustainable waste management is key to
making sure cities are inclusive, safe,
resilient, and sustainable, where everyone
has access to all the basic services
12 Sustainable consumption and production Developing sustainable models of
consumption and production requires that
we reduce waste and develop models of
production based on the principles of
circularity
13 Climate action Uncontrolled emissions from landfills and
dumpsites are one of the main sources of
global methane emissions, a powerful
greenhouse gas. Effective waste and
resource management will reduce these
emissions and offset emissions from other
sectors, including industrial production
(by encouraging the use of secondary
materials) and energy
14 Life below water Effective waste and resource management
is essential to prevent the leakage of waste
materials, particularly plastics, into the
world’s oceans
15 Life on land Poor waste management leads to pollution
of soils, rivers, and water bodies.
Providing waste management services for
all will eliminate these impacts
16 Peace, justice, and strong institution Waste management is a critical issue at
municipal level and can be used as an
indicator of good governance. Municipal
officials rank it amongst the most
important issues
17 Partnership for the goals The waste and resource sector is an
excellent example of a sector that, when
working effectively, involves stakeholders,
from government, the private sector and
the informal sector, all working together
12 S. K. Ghosh

Table 3 Status of CE implementation in the countries

Country Matured Progressive Initiated Not yet Legislation
CE-driven CE-driven CE-driven started supporting
society society society CE
Australia X Yes
Afghanistan X No specific
legislation
Bhutan X No specific
legislation
Canada X Yes
China X Yes
Germany X Yes
Lao PDR X No specific
legislation
India X Yes
Israel X No specific
legislation
Kenya X No specific
legislation
Malaysia X Yes
Mauritius X No specific
legislation
Nigeria X No specific
legislation
Norway X Yes
South Korea X Yes
Serbia X Yes
Thailand X Yes
UK X Yes
USA X Yes
Vietnam X No specific
legislation
Table 4 Summary of the country chapters
Country Summary
Australia Most Australia states and territories have waste strategies and recently implemented container deposit systems. All states and territories are considering circular
economy policies or actions and are at different stages of development and implementation. In addition, more recently in response to China’s decision to restrict
the importing of mixed plastics and fiber (China’s National Sword Policy), Australia has been made more aware of the opportunities a circular economy may
provide, and a number of new initiatives at a national level and at state level have been implemented as a response. Recycling and waste industry associations
have also been calling on the Commonwealth and state governments for more integrated policy development, stronger leadership, and action to develop circular
economy policies and actions. Emphasis has been given on material recovery in the recycling and compost industries. The country sought for resource efficient
business in the water, waste water, solid waste and energy sectors. Reductions in waste to landfill and increasing recycling rates are also in the mandate in Australia
Afghanistan In Afghanistan, there is no individual policy/strategy/plan/program about the circular economy and did not work on system of resource utilization where
reduction, reuse, and recycling of elements prevail. Individual activities in isolation take place to reduce, reuse, and recycling of wastes in Afghanistan, rather as a
whole. South Dakota Army National Guard Soldiers and other service members initiated waste recycling pilot program, designed to provide a renewable heat
source for Afghans living in the capital of Kabul. In this invention, members of the 196th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade are volunteering their time to develop
a “fuel donut” made from recycled materials, which burns like a briquette and provides an alternative heat source for Afghan families who live in homes without
modern heating conveniences. Countrywide legislation is not available focusing CE
Bhutan Bhutan is widely renowned for its carbon negative status in the environmental arena. Different streams of wastes are emerging, and in particular, MSW is serious
issue in Bhutan with shift in consumption patterns and increasing population rate. Apart from the National Environment Commission (NEC) acting as an apex
body for regulating and monitoring waste management, similar initiatives have been taken by local governments, other government agencies, private enterprises,
and NGOs to create litter-free and healthy environment by implementing 3Es and 4Rs toward circular economy
The concept of circular economy in Bhutan got introduced with the Waste and Climate Change Project (WCC) of NEC and WWF Bhutan. The circular economy
concept is the main philosophy of the National Waste Management Strategy (NWMS) which aims to establish waste management as a national priority and
provide information, logical steps, and strategies required for its successful implementation. The NWMS aims to resolve data gaps, challenges, and issues
between agencies regarding waste management. It would also ensure that waste management programs are trickling down to the gross root systems fostering a
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters

national waste reduction, reuse, and recycling concept

(continued)
13
Table 4 (continued)
14

Country Summary
Canada Canada, specifically Ontario, has become the first jurisdiction in the Americas to enact a comprehensive circular economy law, the Resource Recovery and
Circular Economy Act, 2016 (“RRCEA”). Legislation [that] will tackle the problem of waste generation by increasing resource recovery and moving toward a
circular economy. Inside of Ontario and across the many other jurisdictions of North America, the transfer of obligation under the RRCEA from the government
designated IFOs directly to the Producers themselves is a shift of responsibility for diversion/resource recovery to a near fully private model is often termed
“individual producer responsibility” (or IPR). A number of environmental policy changes are proposed under the RRCEA. Circular economy is more than simply
another iteration of the IFO waste diversion programs
The RRCEA sets 6 IPR obligations for resource recovery directly upon the Producer. Provincial regulations under the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario),
dating from more than 20 years ago, mandated the IC&I sector to take positive steps in the reduction of waste. In Canada, of the 12% of plastics that are collected
for recycling processes, a large proportion is “downcycled”, meaning those plastics are no longer usable for their original purpose due to a change in their
chemical/physical properties. Closed-loop waste management in improved status exists focusing CE
China In 2002, China promulgated the Cleaner Production Promotion Law, which emphasizes the scientific and technological innovations and upgrading. In China,
circular economy along the supply chain generally involves two aspects such as cleaner production and waste recycling. Cleaner production is achieved primarily
in ecological industrial park (IP), and waste recycling is performed mostly in urban mining demonstration base. These two actions are the core practical
approaches of circular economy toward a sustainable society. In April 2017, fourteen ministries and commissions jointly promulgated the Action Plan for Circular
Economy Development, which would achieve an improvement of the resource productivity of 15% than in 2015 and the recycling rate of 54.6% for main types of
solid wastes. Creating a new strategic guarantee system on resources is one of the main objectives in this action plan. In the industrial level, circular transformation
of IPs was one of the major circular economy construction pilot programs, issued in the 12th Five-Year Plan by the China State Council. It comprised of seven
prime tasks to transform previously large resource- and energy-intensive production into high efficiency and low pollutant processing. By 2017, 129 IPs had been
approved for circular transformation by NDRC. In order to improve the performance of circular economy in industrial parks (IPs), in March 2012 National
Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the Ministry of Finance released the opinions on the promotion of circular transformation of IPs
(continued)
S. K. Ghosh
Table 4 (continued)
Country Summary
Germany In 1972, the first German waste regulation, the Waste Disposal Act (Abfallbeseitigungsgesetz, AbfG), was created. Today, the Act to Promote Closed Substance
Cycle and to Ensure Environmentally Compatible Waste Management (Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz, KrWG) is the core regulation of waste legislation. As a
successor regulation, the KrWG retains the essential structural elements of the old Closed Substance Cycle and Waste Management Act (KrW-/AbfG). Since
1978, the German government uses an eco-label called the “Blue Angel” [8]. For over 40 years, this label has been a reliable guide on sustainable consumption
by setting high standards for an environmentally friendly product design. Waste legislation in Germany is based on the Closed Substance Cycle Act (KrWG),
which came into force on June 1, 2012, and implements the requirements of European waste legislation
The law aims at promoting closed-loop recycling for the conversation of natural resources and the protection of people as well as the environment regarding the
generation and management of waste. Since January 2015, Germany has had separate collection obligations for biowaste, paper, metal, plastic, and glass waste.
For decades, it has been collected separately. However, the obligation has now also been laid down in law. The Closed Substance Cycle Act (KrWG), the German
Packaging Act, and the EU Packaging Directive lay down new minimum requirements for recycling quotas. With its own 10-point action plan “Marine protection
and sustainable fisheries,” the BMZ aims to help eliminate the causes of marine pollution. In the field of energy generation from waste (“waste to energy”), the
German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development supports the introduction of appropriate technologies. Closed-loop waste management in
improved status exists focusing CE in Germany as per EU Directives
Lao PDR National policy frameworks need to be strengthened to ensure that waste management practice shifts from an end-of-pipe approach to an integrated resource
management approach. In addition, at the local level, the 3Rs need to be integrated into waste management strategies and action plans for municipalities. These
need to be developed and implemented especially in Vientiane and other big cities. A sound solid waste management system is to be established in harmony with
city government and development by 2030
In Lao PDR, several government agencies involve in drafting and enacting laws and regulations relating to waste management. Recently in Vientiane Capital, the
trade of recyclable waste material (RWM) has been promoted to reduce amount of solid waste by VCOMS. The players involving in managing RWMs comprise
waste pickers, waste banks, junk shops, waste exporters, and recycling factories. Currently, waste collection services can be found in many districts and towns
throughout the country, but they simply collect and dispose solid wastes in the landfill directly. Official waste segregation scheme does not exist, while some
valuable wastes are collected and traded among informal waste pickers, scrap traders, community waste banks, and plastic recycling companies. Countrywide
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters

legislation is not available focusing CE

(continued)
15
Table 4 (continued)
16

Country Summary
India A National Committee on Environmental Planning and Coordination was set up by the Government of India, and Article 48A was added by the Constitution
(42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, which stated that, “State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the
country.” The implementation of sustainable development and promotion of cleaner production concepts started from 1972 in India. Various schemes and rules
focusing on circular economy and 5R encourage the implementation of CE. Very recent release of draft policy on National Resource Efficiency in 2019 will open
a new horizon for the CE implementation. National Resource Efficiency Authority (NREA) is proposed to be created as a dedicated institution for fostering
resource efficiency in the NREA, 2019, that draws its power from Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, to provide for the regulatory provisions of this policy.
More than 4237 cities are now implementing resource circulation in waste management. Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM), revision and introduction of seven waste
management rules, namely solid waste, e-wastes, plastic waste, hazardous wastes, biomedical waste, and battery recycling have given boost to the CE and 5R
initiative in the country. India has also pushed the action-driven plastic economy and plastic waste management through “Beat the Plastic Pollution” by hosting
the World Environment Day 2018. It has taken initiatives for waste minimization and recirculation through ZED and ELV recycling initiatives
Israel A national program for streamlining resources and a circular economy in the industry was developed (IMoE&I, 2018) and was approved by the government
(Decision No. 3768). The goal of the program is to motivate the industry toward more efficient use of resources and the handling of environmental problems by
new technological means, from the early design, design, and production stages, thereby turning environmental requirements into opportunities rather than
burdens on the industry. At the beginning of 2019, the IMoE&I started running a pilot project in which four companies will compete for the recycling of
industrial materials. A legislative framework related to circular economy is still lacking in Israel. The main legislation with regard to circular economy principles,
which relates to resource and material management, mainly deals with waste management and recycling. The introduction of an extended producer responsibility
(EPR) system in 2011 was an important component of the IMoEP recycling revolution, as the EPR system states that producers are legally responsible for the
entire life cycle of the products they manufacture, as well as the product’s packaging. Closing the MSW loop is a significant key factor in achieving a circular
economy. In 2017, the IMoEP presented a new waste management strategy for Israel, named the MSW 2030 strategic plan. The top target of this plan is to
minimize landfilling and promote recycling and recovery. The policy document outlines the ministry’s plan for an integrated waste management strategy, based
on striking the right balance between material recycling and energy recovery. Countrywide legislation is not available focusing CE
(continued)
S. K. Ghosh
Table 4 (continued)
Country Summary
Kenya In Kenya, there are several legislations and legal frameworks to enhance sustainable implementation of circular economy strategies. CE legislations in Kenya
include parliament acts, bills, bylaws, and legal publications in most governmental parastatals and lead agencies. The new Kenyan Constitution 2010 mainly
Chapter five Part 2 on Land and Environment mainly states all the obligations of its citizens to ensure sustainable exploitation of natural resources and sustainable
management and protection of the environment. Circular economy concepts in Kenya started to gain recognition since the development and implementation of
Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) of 1999. EMCA 1999 is a legal framework law on environmental management and conservation in
Kenya. EMCA 1999 has led to the establishment of the following institutions to help the country achieve environmental sustainability: National Environment
Management Authority (NEMA), Public Complaints Committee (PCC), National Environment Tribunal (NET), National Environment Action Plan (NEAP)
Committees, and County Environment Committee
Despite existence of regulations and policies that guide on waste management, weak implementation and unsustainable individual practices have led to
accumulation of waste in most urban centers in Kenya. Poor waste management has led to outbreak of waterborne disease and dengue fever, especially in
Mombasa and parts of northeastern counties. The plates below show examples of poor waste management in Kenya. In Kenya, the number of industrial plants
engaging themselves in Resource-Efficient Cleaner Production (RECP), the 3Rs programs—reduce, reuse and recycle—and Industrial Ecology (IE) is on the rise.
Some technologies in RECP, 3Rs, and IE are very expensive to adopt, especially among the small-scale manufacturing industries; thus, the government should
offer monetary support. The process of “greening” the Special Economic Zones (SEZs) has greatly helped Kenya attract green foreign direct investments (FDIs).
Countrywide implementation of legislation is not reflected focusing CE
Malaysia In 1996, under the Danish Cooperation for Environment and Development (DANCED), several projects introduced the implementation of circular economy at
firm level or cleaner production in Malaysia for the first time. Malaysia does not have a legal framework on the implementation of circular economy like other
nations, i.e., China, Japan, Germany, etc. However, there are certain sections in Environmental Quality Act 1974, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management
Act 2007, and Regulation 7 in Environmental Quality (Scheduled Waste) Regulation 2005 that promote the practice of resource circulation. Malaysia incorporated
sustainable production and consumption in 11th Malaysian Plan and aims to take holistic approach toward national waste management. Under the umbrella of
11th Malaysian Plan, Malaysia targets to reduce 40% of GHGs emission intensity from GDP compared to 2005 level and reach 22% of recycling of MSW with a
long-term goal of becoming zero-waste nation. Additionally, SWCorp launched SWCorp Strategic Plan from 2014 to 2020 to promote sustainable solid waste
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters

management services, and CIDB initiated CITP that has a target of incorporating 20% of recycled construction and demolition waste (tonnage) by the year 2020
from the baseline of 2016. Malaysia launched its latest national plan, 11th Malaysian Plan, from year 2016 to 2020. In this national plan, a great emphasis has
been given on the adaptation of sustainable consumption and production. The national target of MSW recycling is 22% by the end of 11th Malaysian Plan
As circular economy is not implemented at national or municipal level in Malaysia, the benefits of circular economy are only confined to the enterprises that are
practicing circular economy at enterprises. Due to the implementation of circular economy at firm level, the impact on GDP is not significant but the benefits of
implementation of circular economy at enterprise level are reduction in resource consumption, reduction in generation of waste, protection of environment and
human health, reduction in energy consumption, cost savings by reusing or recycling the waste, and additional profit gain by selling waste to potential industries
(continued)
17
Table 4 (continued)
18

Country Summary
Mauritius While some recycling is practiced on the island, circular economy is still in its infancy stage due to several obstacles faced by the local recyclers. Nevertheless, it
is expected that with the implementation of the forthcoming projects such as scrapyard facility, C&D waste storage sites, material recovery facility, and e-waste
management system, recycling will receive a major boost in Mauritius. In 2001, government promulgated the Environment Protection (Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Bottle Permit) Regulations 2001 to ensure the environmentally sound management of PET bottles. These regulations were based on the
concept of extended producer responsibility, implying that the producers of PET bottles had to pay for the waste and pollution they create. The Local Government
(Registration of Recycler and Exporter) Regulations were promulgated in 2013 in view to regulate the recyclers and exporters involved in the recycling industry.
One of the best practices of circular economy in Mauritius is the implementation of the project “Enhancement of resource productivity and environmental
performance of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise in six African countries through the concept of Industrial Symbiosis” under the SWITCH Africa Green
(SAG) Program. Under this project, waste is considered as a resource which can be valorized; for instance, waste from one firm can be an input/raw material for
another firm
Nigeria The problems militating against municipal waste management in Nigeria are numerous and diverse; these problems are related to economical, technological,
psychological, and political aspects. Nigeria, like many African countries, does not have large-scale recyclable collection from source, and less than 12% of
waste is formally recycled from dumpsites in an unsafe and hazardous condition. The poor waste disposal methods lead to clogged drains, flooding, and other
environmental problems. The Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEnv) with support from the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO),
other technical partners, and critical stakeholders in the public and private sectors developed the National Solid Waste Management Policy as a statement of intent
to be implemented as a procedure or protocol in the management of solid waste in Nigeria
(continued)
S. K. Ghosh
Table 4 (continued)
Country Summary
Norway The legislative framework for circular economy in Norway is based on the European Directives that need to be implemented through the European Economic
Area Agreement between EU and Norway. The European Waste Framework Directive (WFD, 2008) issued by the European Commission lays out common
recycling targets and strategies for the EU Member States. The objective is to achieve a level playing field and improved resource efficiency in waste
management. Six Member States landfilled less than 3% of their municipal waste in 2011, while 18 states landfilled over 50%, with some exceeding 90% (EC,
2015). Circular economy has a significant growth potential in Europe and in Norway. On average, recycled materials only meet less than 12% of the EU demand
for materials (EC, 2019). EU alone may save 600 billion US dollars annually after 2025 if industrial companies are able to turn their business around a circular
economy (MacArthur and McKinsey 2015). In addition, such a transformation can create more than two million jobs by 2030, according to the EU Commission.
In Norway, the total material recycling level in 2017 was around 45%, which indicates a huge potential for circular economy initiatives
The Norwegian government presented a White Paper to Parliament on waste policies in a circular economy with an emphasis on increasing reuse and recycling
on June 21, 2017. The White Paper also outlines Norway’s strategy to strengthen international commitment to combat marine litter through cooperation in the
Nordic region, the EU, other regional fora and through the UN. The fundamental idea behind EPR is to place a responsibility for the postconsumer phase of
certain goods on the producers. According to OECD, EPR is a policy approach under which producers are given a significant responsibility—financial and/or
physical—for the treatment or disposal of postconsumer products. Around 651 000 tons of waste were processed at biogas and composting plants in 2017, and
56% was used for biogas production (SSB, 2019). This is a significant increase the last 5 years. Some of the reason may be the prohibition to dispose
biodegradable waste in landfill from 2009
Stronger CE implementation. Closed-loop waste management in improved status exists focusing CE as per EU Directives
South Korea There is a paradigm shift of waste policy for circular economy in Korea that builds the means to promoting the recycling for circular economy. Circular economy
also flows in EPR system. The current waste policy is aimed at minimizing landfill and incineration of waste, and maximizing recycling by refraining from a
single use and disposal of wastes to create a resource circulation society in which wastes and an emitted energy are recirculated within the economic activity
areas for as much as possible. In accordance with the changes in the waste management paradigm, the Resources Circulation Basic Act was enacted from 2018
E-wastes and waste vehicles are not managed by EPR system but are managed by Eco-Assurance System (Eco-AS) in Korea. For the implementation of resource
circulation, the management of e-waste in Eco-AS is implemented in two means depending on the role of the subjects related discharging e-waste: prevention and
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters

post-management. As a privative means, manufacturers and importers must comply with the standards for hazardous materials in products and improve materials
and structure of the products to facilitate recycling. The post-management is a means to promote the recycling of e-wastes and waste vehicles similar to the EPR
system. This is a system that encompasses EU RoHS, WEEE, and ELV Directive. In Eco-AS, the circular economy flows for e-waste are similar to that of EPR,
with additional privative means. S. Korea made significant achievement of ambitious targets of recycling and reduction in landfill (from 14% at present to 3% by
2020)
Stronger CE implementation. The current waste policy is aimed at minimizing landfill and incineration of waste, and maximizing recycling by refraining from a
single use and disposal of wastes to create a resource circulation society in which wastes and an emitted energy are recirculated within the economic activity
areas for as much as possible
(continued)
19
Table 4 (continued)
20

Country Summary
Serbia The Republic of Serbia has been following the processes of adopting and introducing a circular economy in the European Union (EU) and has responded swiftly
by adopting EC recommendations on circular economy. One of the important development documents for the realization of a new vision of development is the
National Sustainable Development Strategy for the Republic of Serbia, which was adopted in 2008 and covers the period until 2017. The Ministry of
Environmental Protection has signed a cooperation agreement with the National Alliance for Local Economic Development (NALED) regarding sustainable
development of the CE in Serbia. Reduction of adverse environmental effects, conservation of natural resources (including minerals, metals, other materials,
water and air) and biodiversity are the focus in the Republic of Serbia
Thailand Several practices and initiatives relevant to postconsumer packaging recovery and utilization are already in place, which are mainly driven by value and demand
of PCP materials by retailers and business operator/production sectors
The existing policies and programs on CE are focused more toward 3R concepts and less on other subsectors of CE, e.g., products-as-services, next life sales,
product transformation, and collaborative consumption. CE indicators are primarily based on 3R concepts, whereas it is recommended that the other sub-sects of
CE should also be taken into consideration to measure the actual CE progress. Producers have started initiatives as part of CE practices that are carried out on a
voluntary basis
UK and EU The approach to bans is through Green Public Procurement—this does not ban a particular product on the market, but due to the purchasing power of public
institutions this can have a significant impact on use of plastics and can drive investment by producers in alternatives. An example is the commitment that the UK
central government offices are to be made single-use plastic free (HM Government, 2018). More reuse of plastics: A UK scheme which incentivizes consumers to
bring back their used appliances for recycling. Several actions to promote a circular economy concern issues such as product quality, and through this, there are
consequences for international trade. The EU is a single internal market for trade, and trade policy with non-EU countries is the competence of the EU, rather
than its Member States. The size of the EU economy means that decisions affecting what is allowed within its internal market have consequences for
manufacturers of products in non-EU countries wishing to export to the EU market. UK has been implementing the CE as per EU Directives and achieved
significant benefits. Stronger CE implementation in the UK and EU. Short-term and highly wasteful consumption patterns can be addressed
In UK, municipal wastes are being treated in waste to energy plants very effectively. The WtE plant in different parts of the UK generate power in the range of
10–25 MW per plants and provides heat as well to the city council. There are a number of e-waste recycling plants operating effectively in the UK
(continued)
S. K. Ghosh
Table 4 (continued)
Country Summary
USA Nationwide US waste management laws began in 1965 with the “Solid Waste Disposal Act” (Fig. 2). This was followed by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976. The RCRA program implemented by the US EPA and its partner states, tribes, and local governments protects communities and
the environment from the improper management of solid and hazardous waste, cleans land and water, conserves resources, and empowers citizens by delivering
information and opportunities that enable communities to participate in decision-making processes. RCRA also serves as a legislative basis for EPA’s Sustainable
Materials Management (SMM) program, which is a systemic approach for promoting using and reusing materials over their life cycle. The program has four
primary goals: to decrease the disposal rate; reduce environmental impacts; increase socioeconomic benefits; and increase the capacity of communities to adopt
SMM practices. RCRA also serves as a legislative basis for EPA’s Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) program, which is a systemic approach for
promoting using and reusing materials over their life cycle. The program has four primary goals: to decrease the disposal rate; reduce environmental impacts;
increase socioeconomic benefits; and increase the capacity of communities to adopt SMM practices
In USA, municipal wastes are being treated in waste to energy plants very effectively. The WtE plant in Philadelphia generated 84 MW of power where the MSW
is being transported by railway wagons from different cities/states. There are a number of e-waste recycling plants
Vietnam Up to present, even the circular economy term is not referred in any legislation; nevertheless, the Vietnamese government has made the great effort for the
minimization and utilization of resource consumption in many fields of the economy
The National Plan on Environment and Development for the period 1991–2000 (issued by the Decision No. 187-CT dated June 12, 1991) is considered as first
strategic foundation for sustainable development in Vietnam, though it did not refer directly to the minimization of resource consumption and utilization of
natural resources. Nevertheless, under the deployment of this plan, the first Environmental Protection Law (No. 29-L/CTN dated December 27, 1993, of the
National Assembly Chairman), in the Article 1, has declared that: “Environmental protection stipulated in this Law are activities to keep the environment clean,
clean, improve the environment, ensure ecological balance, prevent and overcome bad consequences of people and natural disasters to the environment,
exploitation and use reasonably economically the natural resources.” Landfill is still a dominated treatment method in Vietnam despite many efforts of the
government to promote 3R initiative. Although it is known as the most useful and cost-effective treatment, composting is taken a very small proportion
Vietnam has been conducted 3R model for a long time, especially in agriculture field. Starting from the utilization of cultivation and breeding wastes, it was
extended into different types of closed farm that now have been developed all over the countries. In the case of industry, the recycling of metals, paper, and plastic
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters

have been conducted from the 1960s, mostly for providing the materials for production industry, which was still limited even in terms of scale, capacity, and
sources
In paper industry, nearly 70% production is from scrap, while 60% steel facilities are used scrap as major input source
The issues of natural resource depletion, pollution, and climate change risk have raised the need for a change in the development model of Vietnam, where a
transition from linear economy to circular economy could be sensible. Therefore, some legislative framework to support the transition has been forming
gradually in the country
From resource utilization perspective, in a material circulation society (or closed economy), 3R, in general, and recycle, in particular, not only aim to treat or
reduce the amount of waste generated, but also aim to create new industries that are corresponding to the type of wastes and development needs, thereby bringing
waste back into the production process
21
22 S. K. Ghosh

6 Conclusion

Circular economy model is becoming a very popular concept throughout the world.
Using economic modeling and the information collected through 150 interviews
with experts, Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey Center for Business and
Environment (2015a, b, c) estimate that in the mobility, food systems and built envi-
ronment sector technological advancements combined with organizational innova-
tions would allow Europe’s resource productivity to grow by 3% by 2030, translating
to total annual benefits of e1.8 trillion. This includes the primary resource benefit
of e0.6 trillion as well as the non-resource and externality benefits (e.g., non-cash
health impacts of accidents, pollution, and noise) of e1.2 trillion. On the other hand,
there are concerns of the interpretation issue that becomes challenge for assessing the
impact of the transition from linear economy to circular economy. There are several
studies in the available literature that provide mappings of different circular processes
at company level. Different chapters of this book bring the status of implementation
of CE in twenty countries around the world that may be a real-life assessment of the
acceptability and implementation of CE. It will take a few more years to conclude
the future of circular economy.

References

Bastein, T., Roelofs, E., Rietveld, E., & Hoogendoorn, A. (2013). Opportunities for a circular
economy in the Netherlands. TNO, Report Commissioned by the Netherlands Ministry of Infras-
tructure and Environment.
Circular economy for productivity and sustainability, Productivity Week 2019, Productivity E-
Newsletter bulletin, National Productivity Council, New Delhi.
Denmark Without Waste II. (2015). The Danish Government.
EASAC (The European Academies Science Advisory Council). (2015). Circular economy: A com-
mentary from the perspectives of the natural and social sciences. Preston.
EEA (European Environment Agency). (2016). Circular Economy in Europe—Developing the
knowledge base. EEA Report No. 2/2016.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2012). Towards the circular economy: Economic business rationale
for an accelerated transition.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2014). Towards a circular economy: Accelerating the scale-up across
global supply chains (Vol. 3).
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2015a). Towards a circular economy: Business rationale for an
accelerated transition. https://tinyurl.com/zt8fhxw.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2015b). Potential for Denmark as a circular economy. A case study
from: Delivering the circular economy. https://tinyurl.com/zv8exrl.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2015c). Delivering the circular economy—A toolkit for policymak-
ers. https://tinyurl.com/ztd4f2u.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2017). The new plastics economy: Catalysing action.
Ellen Macarthur Foundation. (2019). Completing the picture how the circular economy tackles
climate change. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/Completing_The_
Picture_How_The_Circular_Economy-_Tackles_Climate_Change_V3_26_September.pdf.
Introduction to Circular Economy and Summary Analysis of Chapters 23

European Commission. (2015). Closing the loop—An EU action plan for the Circular Economy.
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM (2015) 614 final.
Geng, Y., Zhu, Q. H., Doberstein, B., & Fujita, T. (2009). Implementing China’s circular economy
concept at the regional level: A review of progress in Dalian, China. Waste Mangement, 29,
996–1002.
Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). A review on circular economy: the expected transition
to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production,
114, 11–32.
Heck, P. (2006). Circular economy related international practices and policy trends: Current situ-
ation and practices on sustainable production and consumption and international circular econ-
omy development policy summary and analysis. Institut für angewandtes Stoffstrommanagement
(IfaS).
Hicks, C., & Dietmar, R. (2007). Improving cleaner production through the application of environ-
mental management tool in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 395–408.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/70228635.cms?utm_source=
contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst.
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/concept/schools-of-thought.
Kantar World Panel. (2017). The future of e-commerce in FMCG.
Mitchell, P. (2015). Employment and the circular economy—Job creation through resource effi-
ciency in London. Report produced by WRAP for the London Sustainable Development Com-
mission, the London Waste and Recycling Board and the Greater London Authority.
Preston, F. (2012). A global redesign? Shaping the circular economy. Briefing Paper, London:
Chatham House.
Rizos, V., Tuokko, K., Behrens, A. (2017). The circular economy: A review of definitions, processes
and impacts. Centre for European Policy Studies, European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and
innovation Programme under Grant Agreement No. 730316.
Sauvé, S., Bernard, S., & Sloan, P. (2016). Environmental sciences, sustainable development and
circular economy: Alternative concepts for trans-disciplinary research. Environmental Develop-
ment, 17, 48–56.
Schroeder, P., Anggraeni, K., & Weber, U. (2018a). The relevance of circular economy practices
to the sustainable development goals. Journal of Industrial Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.
12732.
Schroeder, P., Anggraeni, K., & Weber, U. (2018b). The relevance of circular economy practices to
the sustainable development goals: Circular economy and SDGs. Journal of Industrial Ecology.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12732.
spcadavance.com. (2015).
Su, B., Heshmati, A., Geng, Y. & Yu, X. (2013). A review of the circular economy in China: Moving
from rhetoric to implementation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 42, 215–227.
Towards the Circular Economy. (2013). Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transi-
tion. Ellen MacArthur Foundation.
Vanner, R., Bicket, M., Withana, S., ten Brink, P., Razzini, P., van Dijl, E., et al. (2014). Scoping
study to identify potential circular economy actions, priority sectors, material flows & value
chains. Study prepared for the European Commission, DG Environment.
Yuan, Z. W., et al. (2006). The circular ecology: A new development strategy in China. Journal of
Industrial Ecology, 10, 4–8.
The Development of a Circular Economy
in Australia

P. S. M. Vaughan Levitzke

1 Background

Elements of the circular economy have been in play for many years in Australia. These
elements have included cleaner production programmes, waste to landfill levies (tax
on landfill disposal), collection and recycling of household packaging and paper,
metals recycling, regional waste strategies, infrastructure planning and investment,
waste and recycling legislation and other regulatory interventions under state-based
environment protection acts.
However, unlike Europe, where measures to transition towards a more circular
economy have gained considerable momentum and mandated through EU directives,
Australia has been more cautious and limited by much smaller dispersed population
centres and dependence on materials extraction through mining. Although it has a
well-developed advanced manufacturing sector, the economy has a greater reliance
on agriculture, forestry and mining activities, which are largely export-oriented.
Australia’s consumer market is also highly dependent on imported goods.
In addition, the Australian Constitution vests in the states’ responsibilities for
environmental issues. Therefore, state-based policies and governance models have
become more important, and these are linked to the environment and economic
activity in regions. This results in various approaches in different states, with some
common elements and some quite different or novel approaches. Some states are
arguably more advanced than others in these aspects.
Most Australia states and territories have waste strategies and quite recently imple-
mented container deposit systems. Notably, South Australia was first to do so in 1977,
followed by the Northern territory in 2012. New South Wales introduced a scheme
in 2017, Queensland in 2018, the Australian Capital Territory also in 2018, West-
ern Australia will have a scheme operational in 2020 and Tasmania has announced

P. S. M. V. Levitzke (B)
Green Industries South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
e-mail: Vaughan.Levitzke@sa.gov.au

© Crown 2020 25
S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_2
26 P. S. M. V. Levitzke

its intention to have a scheme in 2021. Victoria is the only Australian state to not
yet commit to a scheme. Most states also have waste levies, where a tax on landfill
disposal is imposed (exceptions are Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory and
Northern Territory, and however, some of these are as of 2019 reviewing that posi-
tion). These levies, through hypothecation, are often used to fund investment with the
private sector and local government in infrastructure to enable collection and sort-
ing of recyclable materials and to enable post-processing materials into secondary
products.
It is fair to say that all states and territories are also considering circular economy
policies or actions and are at different stages of development and implementation. In
addition, more recently in response to China’s decision to restrict the importing of
mixed plastics and fibre (China’s National Sword Policy), Australia has been made
more aware of the opportunities a circular economy may provide, and a number
of new initiatives at a national level and at state level have been implemented as a
response.
The significant reduction in certain recycled exports to China and the downturn for
prices paid for recycled materials globally has sent a clear message to the Australian
waste and recycling industry and governments. It is recognised that to overcome the
problem, more emphasis has to be placed on the following:
• Creation and diversification of markets locally through product development and
testing and recycled content procurement.
• Education of consumers to reinforce the need for increased and better recycling
(i.e. less contamination) and their engagement to enable better outcomes.
• Contamination reduction in recycled material to enable it to be used both locally
and internationally in new products.
• Investment in new state-of-the-art technology to better sort and process recyclables.
Recycling and waste industry associations have also been calling on the Com-
monwealth and state governments for more integrated policy development, stronger
leadership and action to develop circular economy policies and actions.
This chapter does not attempt to summarise all of the activity in Australia, but
to highlight some of the key actions and initiatives which are shaping the current
landscape for circular economy activities.
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia 27

1 National
Waste Policy 2019 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web
&cd=10&ved=2ahUKEwiPtfbdiOjiAhVRJHIKHQZPB3sQFjAJegQIBhAC&url=https%3A%2F
%2Fwww.environment.gov.au%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Fresources%2Fd523f4e9-d958-
466b-9fd1-3b7d6283f006%2Ffiles%2Fnational-waste-policy-2018.docx&usg=AOvVaw1-
kfKNtN07Zj7ACd3PBDYE.
28 P. S. M. V. Levitzke

2 Recycling and Waste Management in Australia

2016–20172

3 Australia’s Waste 2016–17

The 2018 report, reproduced Table 1 is a summary of each Australian jurisdiction’s

policy settings in relation to waste management.

2 https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/7381c1de-31d0-429b-912c-

91a6dbc83af7/files/national-waste-report-2018.pdf.
Table 1 Summary of Australian state and territory circular economy and waste policy initiatives
Landfill levy (2016–17)—In $ Strategy document(s) Targets to increase recovery rate Other (incl. landfill bans)
Australian
ACT MSW C&I ACT Waste Management Strategy: Waste generation grows less than Landfill ban on computers and
Mixed C&I with >50% recyclable Towards a sustainable Canberra population. Expand reuse of televisions. Container deposit
material 2011–2025 goods. Waste sector is carbon system for beverage containers
$90.55/t Municipal Solid Waste neutral by 2020. Double energy introduced in 2018
$146.20/t Construction and generated from waste. Recover
Demolition waste waste resources for carbon
$199.20/t Mixed C&I waste sequestration
Not a landfill levy as ACT owns Recovery rate increases to over:
the landfill and sets fees • 85% by 2020
• 90% by 2025
(continued)
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia
29
Table 1 (continued)
30

Landfill levy (2016–17)—In $ Strategy document(s) Targets to increase recovery rate Other (incl. landfill bans)
Australian
NSW Metropolitan area $144/tonne NSW Waste Avoidance and By 2016–17, reduce litter items by Hazardous waste tracking system
Regional area 79.60/tonne Resource Recovery Strategy 40% compared with 2011–12 then in place
Virgin excavated natural material, 2014–21 continue to reduce to 2021–22. Container deposit scheme on
Shredder floc and Coal washery A new 20-year waste strategy is Also by 2021–22: beverage containers introduced in
rejects have a range of levies being developed (2019–2020) • reduce waste per capita December 2017
A Circular Economy Policy • reduce illegal dumping in
document has been developed and Sydney and the Illawarra,
released (2019) Hunter and
A Circular Economy Innovation Central Coast regions by 30%
Network has been launched • establish baseline data to
through the Office of the Chief develop additional targets
Scientist to bring together By 2021–22, increase recycling
stakeholders from academia, rates for:
government, industry and not for • Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
profit sector (2019) from 52% (in 2010–11) to 70%
• Commercial and Industrial
(C&I) waste from 57% to 70%
• Construction and Demolition
(C&D) waste from 75 to 80%
NT No landfill levy Waste Management Strategy for No specific targets are included in Container deposit scheme for
the Northern Territory 2015–2022 the strategy beverage containers in place since
2016
(continued)
P. S. M. V. Levitzke
Table 1 (continued)
Landfill levy (2016–17)—In $ Strategy document(s) Targets to increase recovery rate Other (incl. landfill bans)
Australian
Qld Landfill levy introduced in March Waste—Everyone’s responsibility: By 2024: Hazardous waste tracking system
2018 of $70/tonne, effective July Queensland Waste Avoidance and • reduce waste per capita by 5% in place
2019 Resource Productivity Strategy • reduce waste to landfill by 15%
(2014–2024) • improve management of
A Circular Economy platform is problem wastes (specific targets
being developed by the to be developed)
Queensland government and By 2024, increase:
consultants with major companies • state average MSW recycling
participatinga rate to 50% (from 33% in
2012–13)
• C&I recycling rate to 55% (from
42%)
• C&D recycling rate to 80%
(from 61%)
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia

SA Metropolitan Adelaide $110/tonne South Australia’s Waste Strategy 35% reduction in landfill from Landfill bans on a wide range of
Non-metropolitan Adelaide (50%) 2015–2020 2002–03 level by 2020 (30% by hazardous, problematic and
$51.50/tonne A new 5 year strategy is being 2017–18-achieved). 5% reduction recyclable materials, including
(100% discount currently in place developed for 2020–2025 in waste generation per capita by most e-waste, whole tyres,
for asbestos; smaller discount for 2020 (from 2015 baseline) separately collected recyclables
shredder floc from metal recyclers For metropolitan Adelaide: etc.
and charities from July 2019) • MSW landfill diversion of 70% Container deposit scheme for
$110/t for Adelaide metropolitan by 2020 beverage containers in place (since
area and $55/t for regional areas • C&I diversion of 80% by 2020 1977). Currently being reviewed
(Achieved 2018) to improve and expand scheme
• C&D diversion of 90% by 2020 Hazardous waste tracking system
(Achieved 2017) in place
Non-metropolitan
waste—maximise diversion for
MSW, C&I and C&D
31

(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
32

Landfill levy (2016–17)—In $ Strategy document(s) Targets to increase recovery rate Other (incl. landfill bans)
Australian
Tas Voluntary levy adopted at levels of The Tasmanian Waste and No quantified targets are included Container deposit scheme
$0 to $5/t at the time of writing Resource Management Strategy in the strategy announced to be implemented by
2022
Vic Metro and regional: Statewide Waste and Resource No numerical targets are included Landfill bans on paint, industrial
• MSW $65.90/t Recovery Infrastructure Plan in the plan transformers, grease trap, used oil
• C&I and C&D $65.90/t 2015–44 filters, whole tyres and large
• Rural: MSW $33.03/t A new Waste Strategy is under containers
• C&I and C&D Prescribed development and links to Circular Landfill ban on e-waste from July
industrial waste: Economy 2019
• Cat B $250/t Hazardous waste tracking system
• Cat C $70/t in place
• Asbestos $30/t
$53.35/t
$250/t $70/t $30/t
WA All solid waste $70/t Western Australian Waste Landfill diversion: Hazardous waste tracking system
Strategy: Creating the Right • 10% waste reduction per capita in place
Environment (March 2019) by 2025 and 20% by 2030
• Material recovery 70% by 2025
and 75% by 2030
Only 15% of waste to be landfilled
by 2030
Only residual waste to Waste to
Energy by 2020
Source Australian National Waste Report 2016
a http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2019/2/25/australian-first-circular-economy-lab-opens
P. S. M. V. Levitzke
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia 33

4 A National Waste Policy

The Commonwealth Government with all states and territories is currently (2019)
working on a new National Waste Policy document (the last one dates from 2009)
and various other initiatives that will support change, including agreeing to targets
for packaging recycling. The first part of the policy has been developed and publicly
available in late 2018 and is available online;3 however, the targets for specific waste
streams and implementation components remain a work in progress and could be
expected to be released later in 2019. The policy strongly references circular 73
economy principles. It states ‘New products and new technologies are changing the
way we create and manage materials. Changing international markets are affecting
the final destinations for recycled materials. Together, this means that improving
Australia’s domestic resource recovery capacity and sustainable consumption is
critical. A hypothetical five per cent improvement in efficient use of materials across
the Australian economy could benefit Australia’s GDP by as much as $24 billion.4
The 2018 National Waste Policy embodies a circular economy, shifting away from
“take, make, use and dispose” to a more circular approach where we maintain the
value of resources for as long as possible.
Australia is moving towards a circular economy, with businesses and governments
recognising the opportunities waste materials provide and the economic value they
retain. This move is also happening across the globe, including in the European
Union, Canada, and Australia’s major trading partners, including China.
By working together to improve waste management, we can create opportunities
for jobs, protect the environment and better manage valuable and finite resources’.5
The document goes on to spell out the five principles of a circular economy as:
1. Avoid waste:
• Prioritise waste avoidance, encourage efficient use, reuse and repair
• Design products so waste is minimised, they are made to last and we can more
easily recover materials.
2. Improve resource recovery:
• Improve material collection systems and processes for recycling
• Improve the quality of recycled material we produce.
3. Increase use of recycled material and build demand and markets for recycled
products.
4. Better manage material flows to benefit human health, the environment and the
economy.

3 https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/waste-resource-recovery/publications/national-

waste-policy-2018.
4 Centre for International Economics, Final report: Headline economic value for waste and materials

efficiency in Australia, 27 October 2017.

5 https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/waste-resource-recovery/publications/national-

waste-policy-2018.
34 P. S. M. V. Levitzke

5. Improve information to support innovation, guide investment and enable

informed consumer decisions.’6

5 Other National Activity

5.1 A National Food Waste Strategy

Australia’s National Food Waste Strategy was launched on 20 November 2017.7 The
national strategy aims to halve Australia’s food waste by 2030 and establishes a
framework to support actions that achieve this outcome. It was developed through
consultation with food charities, the food industry, universities, local government
and state governments.
The strategy contributes towards global action on reducing food waste by align-
ing with Sustainable Development Goal 12—ensures sustainable consumption and
production patterns8 and helps give effect to Australia’s obligations under the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change9 to reduce greenhouse gas emis-
sions, primarily through the diversion of food waste from landfill.
The strategy states that ‘Food waste is estimated to cost the Australian economy
$20 billion each year, as well as significant impacts on the environment through the
wasted use of resources such as land, water, labour, energy and fuel to produce and
distribute food. When disposed of in landfill, food waste has other environmental
impacts e.g. the production of greenhouse gas emissions’.10
The strategy goes on to state that ‘the volume and value of wasted food presents
a number of opportunities to identify where the greatest benefits can be achieved in
avoiding food waste or where it can be repurposed. This approach is consistent with
the idea of a circular economy where resources are kept in use for as long as possible
while also minimising negative impacts’.11
In Australia, there is already a significant amount of work underway to target food
waste that is making a difference locally, regionally and nationally. The Love Food
Hate Waste campaign which has been implemented in NSW and Vic has improved
food waste diversion by 23% away from landfill. Household food waste is also
collected in organics bins with garden waste and composted across many councils in
Australia. Organics collection from food manufacturing, restaurants, office buildings

6 ibid.
7 http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/waste-resource-recovery/publications/national-food-

waste-strategy.
8 https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org.
9 https://unfccc.int.
10 http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/waste-resource-recovery/publications/national-food-

waste-strategy.
11 ibid.
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia 35

and food courts is increasing in some jurisdictions such as SA, Vic and NSW. The
national strategy seeks to leverage these efforts and identifies four priority areas
where improvements can be made—policy support, business improvements, market
development and behaviour change.

6 Product Stewardship

Australia has three pieces of national legislation establishing product stewardship

schemes, including the:
• Product Stewardship (Oil) Act 2000
• Product Stewardship Act 2011
• National Environment Protection (Used Packaging Materials) Measure 2011.

7 Product Stewardship for Oil12

The product stewardship for oil scheme was established in 2001 and has supported
the establishment of an oil recycling industry in Australia. A levy of 8.5 cents per
litre of new oil imported or manufactured in Australia is collected through the tax
and customs systems. Benefits of up to 50 cents per litre are payable through the tax
system for recycling of oil, with the highest rate of benefit payable for re-refining of
oil such that it is suitable for reuse as lubricating oil.
More than 275 million litres of recycled oil are now being produced under the
scheme.

8 Product Stewardship Act 201113

The Australian Product Stewardship Act 2011 recognises that each product, material
and industry, is unique. Products and materials are addressed as the need arises, for
example, to keep step with Australia’s international obligations on managing certain
types of waste, or by virtue of common agreement that certain products need attention
because of such things as strong public interest, high pollution potential or lack of
recycling options.
Industry sectors and products can be regulated in several ways, while also making
provision for voluntary activities, these are explained further below.

12 http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/used-oil-recycling/product-stewardship-oil-program.
13 https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2012A00197/Html/Text.
36 P. S. M. V. Levitzke

The Act sets out governance arrangements, including reporting and audit require-
ments for organisations delivering product stewardship schemes and powers of the
Australian Government, comprising compliance, enforcement and penalties.
Voluntary accreditation encourages product stewardship without regulation.
Accredited arrangements do, however, need to manage their activities in a trans-
parent and accountable manner and, so doing, provide confidence to the community
that the arrangements are achieving what they claim to be.
Two voluntary schemes have been accredited so far:
• Mobile Muster, through which the mobile telecommunications industry funds the
recycling of mobile telephones; and
• FluoroCycle, under which commercial users of mercury-containing lamps commit
to recycling lamps at end of life and reporting on recycling rates.
The Act also provides for products to be identified as priorities for work by
industry and government. Voluntary schemes dealing with tyres and paint have been
established in this way. Paintback, a national scheme to collect and treat used paint,
and is funded by a 15c per litre levy on new paint was launched in 2016. Tyre
Stewardship Australia collects fa levy on new tyres and provides funding to research
and market development for rubber crumb and associated products.
Other products which have gained attention for future schemes include batteries
and photovoltaic panels.
Co-regulatory schemes are delivered by the industry sector and regulated by the
Australian Government. The regulations specify outcomes to be achieved and identify
the liable responsible parties. All identified liable parties acquit their responsibility
by joining a co-regulatory arrangement, which delivers the outcomes on their behalf.
The National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme of 2011 is the only
co-regulatory product stewardship scheme regulated under the Act and specifies out-
comes relating to collection and recycling of waste televisions and computers and
identifies importers and manufacturers as the liable parties. Co-regulatory arrange-
ments are also required to manage occupational work health and safety requirements,
environmental performance and other related issues.
Mandatory product stewardship places a legal obligation on liable parties to take
certain actions in relation to a product, possibly including labelling, arrangements
for recycling products, or requiring a deposit and refund to be applied to a product
or even banning certain substances or materials from use in products.
There are currently no mandatory product stewardship schemes in Australia.

9 The Australian Packaging Covenant14

Beginning in 1999, the Australian Packaging Covenant has been the national producer
responsibility measure to manage impacts of post-consumer packaging. It attempts

14 https://www.packagingcovenant.org.au.
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia 37

to optimise the resource recovery of consumer packaging through the supply chain
and prevent impacts of litter on the environment.
It is an industry-led of a co-regulatory arrangement underpinned by the National
Environment Protection (Used Packaging Materials) Measure 2011 (NEPM).
The Covenant currently applies to businesses in a supply chain that are con-
sumers of packaging or packaged products with an annual turnover of $5 million
or more. Liable businesses are required to choose between becoming a signatory to
the Covenant, or meet their obligations under the NEPM through laws of states and
territories.
Newly developed targets for the packaging industry have been committed to by
the industry and governments. These are as follows:
1. 100% of all Australia’s packaging will be reusable, recyclable or compostable
by 2025 or earlier
2. 70% of Australia’s plastic packaging will be recycled or composted by 2025
3. 30% average recycled content will be included across all packaging by 2025
4. Problematic and unnecessary single-use plastic packaging will be phased out
through design, innovation or introduction of alternatives.15
In addition to the targets, a new Australasian Recycling Label scheme is being
adopted voluntarily by brand owners. Developed in 2018 by Planet Ark and APCO,
and known as ARL, it tells customers what to do with the used packaging, i.e. into
which bin it should be placed. The label is based on the PREP software tool which
informs brand owners of the recyclability (or otherwise of their packaging. Finally,
Australia has a tool that influences design and a label that informs consumers.

10 Academic and National Research Agendas on Circular

Economy

Many Australian universities have been placing greater emphasis on sustainable

practices and researching ways to produce materials and products more efficiently
or to recover materials from waste streams. Much of this research remains largely
untapped, i.e. not yet commercialised. The Australian Commonwealth Science and
Research Organisation (CSIRO) has recently begun working in partnership with
universities to begin developing materials flow analysis and modelling that would
give greater understanding of what is currently happening with materials flows in
the Australian economy, juxtaposed to what perhaps should be happening or could
be happening if we were to be more circular.
OneSteel, a major steel producer in Australia, takes carbon from waste tyres
with coke to use in electric arc furnaces and was invented by Laureate Professor

15 ibid.
38 P. S. M. V. Levitzke

Veena Sahajwalla and her team at the Centre for Sustainable Materials Research and
Technology (SMaRT) at the University of New South Wales.16
Commercialisation of innovation is gaining greater attention in the tertiary edu-
cation sector, and circular economy is gaining more interest as part of this.

11 A Case Study for the Circular Economy—South

Australia

A circular economy17 builds upon the ‘reduce, reuse, recycle’ waste hierarchy that
has been largely adopted in South Australia and other states and territories in Australia
for the past decade.
In 2017, Green Industries South Australia commissioned Lifecycles in a joint
venture with EconSearch, Colby Industries and the University of Queensland to
investigate the potential benefits of a circular economy in South Australia. The report,
Creating Value, the Potential Benefits of a Circular Economy in South Australia18 ,
measures the possible impacts of a more circular economy in South Australia. The
report affirms South Australia’s achievements in recycling and recovery of solid
waste and its current focus on the development of a low carbon economy.
Employment opportunities associated with developing aspects of a more circu-
lar economy are highlighted. It estimates the environmental and social impacts of a
more circular economy by assessing 2030 greenhouse gas emissions and employ-
ment outcomes in South Australia. The report uses well-recognised macro-economic
modelling using an environmentally extended input-output model of the South Aus-
tralian economy.
The model depicts the interdependencies between 78 sectors, showing how input
from one sector may become an input to another. Assumptions and modelling tech-
niques were reviewed by an international panel of circular economy experts. To
assess material flows and energy use in South Australia, the circular economy is
regarded as consisting of two elements—‘material efficiency’ and ‘renewable and
energy efficiency’.
To quantify the greenhouse gas emissions and employment impacts of moving to
a more circular economy, assumptions are made relating to ‘material efficiency’ and
‘renewable and energy efficiency’ aspects.
These assumptions involve how long materials stay in use in South Australia,
energy efficiency levels and the replacement of fossil fuel by renewable energy. For
interpretation, results are referenced to a ‘Business as Usual’ scenario which assumes
current state growth projections to 2030.

16 https://www.csiro.au/en/Research/MRF/Areas/Resourceful-magazine/Issue-08/What-goes-

around-comes-around---towards-a-circular-economy.
17 Creating Value, the Potential Benefits of a Circular Economy in South Australia, www.

greenindustries.sa.gov.au/circular-economy.
18 www.greenindustries.sa.gov.au/circular-economy.
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia 39

While the report’s release appears to be well received by business, government

and the community, the opportunities of a more circular economy for South Australia
do need to be more specifically understood if interventions are to be championed and
delivered. The report has stimulated other similar investigations in Australia, includ-
ing New South Wales “Advantage NSW—Creating value in the Circular Economy”;
and “Too Good to Waste”—a discussion paper on circular economy approach for
NSW (October 2018).
Meanwhile, South Australia has further developed its circular economy creden-
tials by drawing upon local examples of businesses and policies which form the
nucleus of its Global Leadership Program on Circular Economy.19 These case stud-
ies/ examples include:
• construction and demolition waste recovery and recycling (more than 90% of C&D
waste is recycled in SA)
• refuse derived fuel used to replace natural gas for cement kilns (approx. 110,000
tonnes per annum are used in this manner)
• container deposit legislation, where a refundable 10c deposit is placed on certain
beverage containers
• recycling of water resources from sewage treatment plants to use in horticulture
• rain water harvesting and aquifer recharge for use in manufacturing
• renewable energy developments—this includes the world’s largest virtual power
plant, the world’s largest lithium-ion battery installation and will likely reach 75%
by 2025
• identification and commercialisation of innovation pathways, and
• evidence-based public education and engagement activities.
Supported by the United Nations Centre for Regional Development, it is a unique
initiative which presents practical case studies for experimental learning, knowledge
sharing and adoption.
There are many businesses in South Australia actively working in the circular
economy area, from composting operations to water utilities, electronics and the
construction and demolition industry. It also has highly developed intellectual prop-
erty across these industry sectors and a base of consultants that assist in actioning
circular economy training as well as implementation at the business level. There is a
growing willingness for SMEs to consider circular improvements, ranging from food
and beverage sector to larger, more iconic companies. Some have seen the business
case for circularity and are quietly implementing the changes.
A national conference on the circular economy held in Adelaide annually has
attracted participants from across the globe. Organised by Powering the Change,
businesses, policy makers and researchers compare approaches and case studies for
the development of a circular economy.20

19 See https://www.greenindustries.sa.gov.au/leadership-program.
20 https://www.poweringthechange.org.au.
40 P. S. M. V. Levitzke

12 Waste Management in South Australia

The circular economy is enshrined in the Green Industries Act 2004. The Act also
establishes a fund, governance arrangements for the statutory authority Green Indus-
tries SA.21
The governance arrangements for Green Industries include the establishment of
a skill-based board, the powers and functions of Green Industries SA and a require-
ment to prepare an annual business plan. It also establishes the South Australian
Waste Strategy (nominally every five years) which must be regarded in establish-
ing policy and regulation, for example, the Environment Protection Authority. The
Green industries Fund is used to fund the agency as well as invest in infrastructure,
community education, data collection and other activities with local government and
industry.
Each year, a Recycling Activity Survey is undertaken by Green Industries SA.
This has recorded data from industry going back to 2003.22 The results of the Survey
undertaken in 2016–17 show that South Australia diverted 83.4% of all waste gener-
ated, equating to 4.401 million tonnes of material diverted from landfill (see Table 2).
The long-term trend for resource recovery in South Australia remains upwards. In the
period since 2003–04 (baseline), the total reported resource recovery has increased
from 2 million to just over 4.4 million tonnes a year; and the diversion rate has
increased by nearly 22 percentage points over this period.

Table 2 Summary of 2016–17 Recycling Activity results for resource recovery, landfill disposal,
total waste generated and total diversion (waste to resource recovery) achieved in SA
2016–17 Recycling Activity Data Account Summary
Standard reporting Separately reported Total (all materials)
materialsa materials and clean
fillb
Resource recovery, 2.880 million 1.521 million 4.401 million
tonnes
Landfill disposal, 0.739 million 0.134 million 0.873 million
tonnes
Waste generated, 3.619 million 1.655 million 5.274 million
tonnes
Diversion, % to 79.6% 91.9% 83.4%
resource recovery
a Standard reporting materials and separately reported materials and clean fill, as specified in Dept
of Env and Energy (2015)
b Total waste generated = Resource recovery + landfill disposal

21 https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/GREEN%20INDUSTRIES%20SA%20ACT%

202004/CURRENT/2004.1.AUTH.PDF.
22 https://www.greenindustries.sa.gov.au/SArecycling.
The Development of a Circular Economy in Australia 41

With reported recycling rates among the best in the world, South Australia is a
leading example of turning policy into action. It was internationally recognised in
2010 in the UN-Habitat report on Solid Waste Management in the World’s Cities.
In addition to container deposits, it banned plastic bags in 2009 (other Australian
jurisdictions are following) and banned a number of problematic wastes from landfill,
including e-waste.

13 The Important of a Plastics Circular Economy

Recent policy announcements by the South Australian government include the fol-
lowing:
Single-use plastics are attracting considerable local, national and international
interest, and the South Australian community has increasingly been calling for action
on items such as plastic bags, coffee cups and polystyrene. In January and February
2019, Green Industries SA undertook consultation and engagement to understand
the attitudes and opinions of South Australians on this topic.
The ‘Turning the tide on single-use plastic products’ discussion paper sought to
further the public conversation around a range of single-use plastic products that
are impacting our environment. Community feedback was overwhelmingly positive
and the government has announced its intentions to phase out plastic straws, cutlery,
and stirrers, with take-away expanded polystyrene cups and trays after 12 months.
A multi-stake holder task force has also been appointed.23
Significant effort has also been placed in improving the fate for waste plastics
in South Australia. A major investment of $3m has played a significant role in
establishing a new state of the art 40,000 tonnes per annum mixed plastics recycling
centre in Adelaide. Nearby industries that manufacture plastic lumber have also
been supported, and use the pelletised material in their products. Work is underway
to improve market acceptance of recycled plastic lumber in engineering projects.
This demonstrates a circular economy in action for the plastics industry. Further
investments are planned for this sector, which will provide improved capacity for
more recycled plastic polymer material to find its way to engineered and fit for
purpose products.

14 Conclusion

As stated in the introduction, elements of the circular economy have been in play in
Australia for many years. This is seen in the emphasis on material recovery in the
recycling and compost industries, resource efficiency for business in water, waste
and energy and reductions in waste to landfill and increasing recycling rates. These

23 https://www.greenindustries.sa.gov.au/priorities/plastics.
42 P. S. M. V. Levitzke

are the initial elements of a more circular economy, but without necessarily being
described as ‘circular economy’ action.
To build momentum there is much more work required—from the development of
case studies to establish an evidence base to establishing partnerships with business
to pilot a circular economy approaches, and undertaking sector-by-sector analyses
to identify the opportunities involved in transitioning towards a circular economy: …
effective Circular Economy policymaking requires the combination of many policy
interventions, and does not rely on a ‘silver bullet’ or blanket solutions.24

24 https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/

EllenMacArthurFoundation_PolicymakerToolkit.pdf.
Solid Waste Management in Kabul

Hamidullah Nikzad

1 Introduction

Many developed countries have made great strides in addressing waste management,
particularly since the environment came onto the international agenda in the 1960s,
and there are many good practice examples available for the international community
to learn from.
However, the initial focus was on waste after it had been discarded, whereas
now attention has moved upstream, addressing the problem at its source through, for
example, designing out waste, preventing its generation, reducing both the quantities
and the uses of hazardous substances, minimizing and reusing, and, where residuals
do occur, keeping them concentrated and separate to preserve their intrinsic value
for recycling and recovery, and preventing them from contaminating other waste that
still has economic value for recovery.
Low- and middle-income countries still face major challenges in ensuring univer-
sal access to waste collection services, eliminating uncontrolled disposal, and burning
and moving towards environmentally sound management for all waste. Addressing
these challenges is made even more difficult by forecasts that major cities in the lowest
income countries are likely to double in population over the next 20 or so years, which
is also likely to increase the local political priority given to waste issues. Afghanistan,
as one of the low- and middle-income country, is facing major challenges in ensur-
ing universal access to waste collection services, eliminating uncontrolled disposal,
and burning and moving towards environmentally sound management for all wastes.
Kabul City, as the capital city of Afghanistan, has more than 4.5 million populations
in it, and it makes difficulties on the waste management activities in this city. In this
chapter, tried to discover the situation of all kinds of solid waste management in the
Kabul capital city of Afghanistan.

H. Nikzad (B)
Daikundi Province Environmental Protection Directorate, National Environmental Protection
Agency (NEPA), Daikundi Province, Afghanistan
e-mail: hamidullahnikzad94@gmail.com
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 43
S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_3
44 H. Nikzad

2 Recycling Mapping

2.1 Introduction

The first activity undertaken was the recycling mapping. The survey conducted by
Strong Hubs for Afghan Hope and Resilience (SHAHAR) by interviewing the infor-
mal recyclable collectors in different areas across Kabul collecting both recyclables
and food waste. During the SHAHAR Survey, advisors visited with multiple different
informal recyclers in different locations.
After data collection with multiple informal recyclers, the researcher went to the
location where the recyclers were selling the material. The material first went to
middle buyers who purchase many types of waste (Nawid Royaee 2014/2016).
After meeting with the middle buyers, the researchers went to the final destination
of the different material, mostly located in Districts. Many companies were visited;
they are outlined in the section entitled recycling companies.

2.2 Informal Recyclers

The informal recyclers are individuals collecting recyclable material throughout the
city, at the transfer station and at the landfill. The main materials they are after are
plastic bottles, paper, aluminum cans, metal, leather, bones, and food waste. Some
members collect a little bit of each, others focus on just food waste. These collectors
work both in groups and individually.

The average informal recycler in Kabul makes $2.60 USD per day if collecting
recyclables and food waste and not working at the transfer station. Informal
recyclers working at the transfer station make $3.98 per day. Food waste col-
lectors make around $1.32 per day.

Based on an extensive survey done by SHAHAR, an informal recycler collects on

average 57.87 kg per day of material which is mostly sold to middle buyers earning
on average 238 Afghani per person/per day. The amount an informal recycler is able
to collect depends on the location and type of material they are collecting. Those
collecting just food waste earned much less than those collecting a wide variety of
recyclable material.
While some of the informal recyclers collect recyclable material and food waste,
there are also individuals that focus on just food waste. Food waste can either be sold
per kilogram or collected for personal use in feeding a collector’s own livestock. Food
waste is eaten mostly by cows, sheep, goats, and chickens and consists of wet bread,
rice, potatoes, fruit, and vegetables. Out of the informal collectors of food waste,
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 45

Fig. 1 Informal recyclers, SHAHAR

most of them made around half as much as recyclers who collected both recyclables
and food waste (Hameedullah 2017).
The informal recyclers deliver the material mostly by bicycles to the middle
buyers, as it is a low cost and effective delivery mechanism due to heavy traffic in the
city. These middle buyers buy the products, congregate them and then resell them to
industries at slightly higher fees (Fig. 1).

2.3 Recycling Companies

After the informal recyclers take the waste to the middle buyer, the middle buy-
ers organize with the final users/recycling companies to collect the material. Every
company that was visited could recycle significantly more material than they were
currently collecting. Table 1 shows the breakdown of the different collectors of mate-
rial and their uses.

While many different materials are recyclable in Kabul, the buyers mentioned
that they do not accept especially dirty material. Plastic, paper, and food waste
that is very mixed or dirty are not collected. This shows that further material
would be recycled if at-source separation was more prevalent.

As Table 1 shows, most of the recycling is done in Kabul, which creates additional
jobs and has added environmental benefits. A wide variety of material has a market
throughout the city. We will be breaking down the percentage of waste in Kabul that
has a market in another part of this document that deals with the waste audit at the
transfer station and throughout different secondary collection points in Kabul.
46 H. Nikzad

Table 1 Recycler companies, SHAHAR

Item Companies Product
Paper There are over six different Toilet paper
paper companies in Kabul,
Nastrin Toilet Paper was visited
Plastic bottles (PET) Haji Azizullah Plastic Woolen Wool, mattresses, and blankets
Company is a plastic bottle
Plastic bags (soft plastic) While we heard about Plastic bags
companies buying plastic bags,
we could not find one to visit
Hard plastic (HDPE) Two companies were visited Made into pellets, pipes,
that recycle hard plastic: Mya buckets, and other plastic items
Abdul Karim Company, Hewad
Plastic Industry, and Bradran
Barjgi Pipe company
Metal cans/scrap metal There are multiple scrap metal They make the items into steel
and can buyers. The company bars
visited was named Steel Bar
Company
Aluminium cans Hayatullah Mohsin Zada These are made into pressure
Manufacturers buys aluminium cookers, cooker pots, and irons
cans and other scrap metal
Bones Chicken feed companies are These are crushed and used for
purchasing the bones chicken feed
Food waste There are many individuals Used to feed livestock
collecting food waste either for
their own animals or to sell to
other people keeping livestock
Dry bread There are many individuals Used to feed livestock
collecting food waste either for
their own animals or to sell to
other people keeping livestock
Leather This is purchased both by Reused or exported
people who export it and by
local shoemakers

2.4 Companies Visited

The following seven companies were visited:

1. Mya Abdul Karim Company: This company is recycling hard plastic into small
pellets which are sold to plastic bucket and pipe-making companies located in
the same subdistrict. The owner said that they purchase one ton of hard plastic
for 15,000 AFN, and after they are turned into pellets, sell it for 20,000 AFN per
ton (Fig. 2).
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 47

Fig. 2 Recycler hard plastic’s company, SHAHAR

2. Hewad Plastic Industry: This company is recycling only one type of hard plastic
into plastic buckets. They are producing 350 kg of plastic buckets per day. They
buy one ton of hard plastic for 30,000 AFN and sell the buckets for 100,000 AFN
per ton (Fig. 3).
3. Steel Bar Company: This company recycles all types of metal cans and other
scrap metal into steel bars. The scrap metal is purchased between 10 and 15
AFNs per kilogram. They also purchase aluminum for 80 AFNs per kilogram.
They press the material into bales before making them into steel bars (Fig. 4).

Fig. 3 Recycler hard plastic’s company, SHAHAR

48 H. Nikzad

Fig. 4 Illustrates the baled scrap metal in the company

4. Nastrin Toilet Paper: This company is recycling all types of paper into toilet
paper. They said that they can recycle 10 tons of paper per day. They purchase
one ton of waste paper for 3,500 AFG. They make the coloured toilet paper from
coloured paper and white toilet paper from white paper. They are just one of over
nine toilet paper companies in Kabul (Fig. 5).
5. Bradran Barjgi Pipe Company: This company is recycling 5 tons of hard plastic
per day; they buy a ton of plastic for 35,000 AFN. This is made into pipes (Fig. 6).
6. Hayatullah Mohsin Zada Manufactures: This company recycles 150 kg of
scrap metal per day; they make pressure cookers, cooker pots, and irons. They
buy aluminum for 80,000 AFN per ton. Most products are being sold locally.
7. Haji Azizullah Plastic Woolen Company: This company is one of two compa-
nies that is recycling plastic bottles—PET. They have a capacity of over 7,000 kg
per day but are nowhere close to meeting that capacity. They can not get enough
plastic bottles. They make the recycled bottles into wool, mattresses, and blan-
kets. This is quite advanced; many countries do not have this capability.

Fig. 5 Illustrates the collected waste paper from the city for recycling into toilet paper
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 49

Fig. 6 Illustrates the process of recycled pellets into pipes

3 Waste Audit at Six Collection Points

The second activity undertaken was the waste audit of six secondary collection points
across the city. One of the more difficult tasks that is needed for this waste audit is to
assess the actual amount of waste before the intervention of the informal recyclers.
If we weigh the waste at the landfill or at the transfer station, chances are some of
the most valuable material (plastic bottles, cans, tins, etc.) is already taken out. This
gives us inaccurate data of what is actually produced.
Therefore, we need to intervene and weigh the waste going to a collection point
in six locations before informal collectors take out material in order to assess how
much material is reduced by informal recyclers.
Moreover, it is also important to assess what sector the waste is coming from (res-
idential, industrial, commercial, construction/demolition, institutional, agricultural,
or medical). This will help us target different areas for income generation (Fig. 7).
The SHAHAR team went to the following locations on September 10–12 2018:
1. Saloy Markazi—District #4 (Nahya 4), Kabul city
2. Kheweshal Mena—District #5 (Nahya 5), Kabul city
3. Qwaye Markaz—District #2 (Nahya 2), Kabul city
4. Sarak e Antin—District #3 (Nahya 3), Kabul city
5. Sarak e Awal Sarsabzi—District #4 (Nahya 4), Kabul city
6. Sarak e Do Sarsabzi—District #4 (Nahya 4), Kabul city.
50 H. Nikzad

Fig. 7 Illustrates the separating of waste at the secondary collection point in Kabul

3.1 Waste Composition

The analyzed data by NEPA auditors in Gazak2 Dumping Site in Kabul on April
2019 shows that more than 32% of waste combined from organic waste. For more
information, go to Table 2.
Based on the audit data, the largest items of waste are food waste—31.97%,
soil/dirt—18.45%, plastic (plastic bags and other plastic) at 17.26% (Table 3).
Initiatives should be aimed at these four items as they make up 77.36%
You can see the full breakdown in Table 4.

Table 2 Percentage of waste, NEPA

Material Percentage (%)
Organic waste 32.192
Construction waste 25.32
Plastic 21.964
Textile 12.186
Glass 4.345
Paper 3.300
Metal 0.278

Table 3 Percentage of waste, SHAHAR

Material Percentage (%)
Food waste 31.97
Soil/dirt 18.45
Plastic (bags and other plastics) 17.26
Paper (cardboard, paper, tetrapak) 9.68
Table 4 Volume and percentage of wastes by areas, SHAHAR
Location Nahya 4 Nahya 5 Nahya 2 Nahya 3 Nahya 4 Nahya 4
Type Kilograms Kilograms Kilograms Kilograms Kilograms Kilograms Total Percentage (%)
Paper 7 2 1.5 8 4.12 5.22 27.84 4.29
Cardboard 8.5 10 8 2.5 0 0 29 4.47
Tetrapak 2 2 0.5 1.5 0 0 6 0.92
Solid Waste Management in Kabul

Glass 4 10 1 0 0 0 15 2.31
Plastic bags 18.5 8 I8.5 6 9.17 7.27 67.44 10.39
Other plastic 14 8.5 5.5 7.12 3.41 6.02 44.58 6.87
Aluminium, can/tins 0.8 0.3 0.8 0.3 0.18 2 4.38 0.63
Other metal 1 0.6 1.5 0.8 0 0 3.9 0.60
Food waste 56 18 45 32 28.5 27.9 207.4 31.97
Green waste 6.7 2 0 4.4 0 0 13.1 2.02
Building waste 0 15.5 0 12.5 0 0 28 4.32
Timber/lumber 1 1.5 10 8.5 0 0 21 3.24
Soil and dirt 33 30.5 13.5 16.6 26.1 119.7 18.45
Hazardous waste 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0.2 0.03
Leather and fabric 3.8 0 0.5 0.5 2.8 7.2 14.8 2.23
Other 16.5 0 16 14 0 0 46.5 7.17
Total 172.8 108.9 109 111.62 64.78 81.71 643.31
51
52 H. Nikzad

Table 5 Average of wastes by areas, SHAHAR

Type Nahya Nahya Nahya Nahya Nahya Nahya Average
4 (%) 5 (%) 2 (%) 3 (%) 4 (%) 4 (%) (%)
Residential 20 48 45 61 67 72 52
Commercial 50 47 40 24 33 28 37
Industrial 23 0 0 0 0 0 4
Medical 0 5 9 0 0 0 2
Agriculture 4 0 0 0 0 0 1
Institutional 3 0 0 0 0 0 1

3.2 Waste Producers

The SHAHAR team went further and broke up the waste into different streams.
A noted researcher biased for this study was that different locations were chosen
that would have a more diverse mix of waste from multiple sectors. There is a lot
of variance between Nahyas (districts) and thus this data is difficult to extrapolate.
From the collection points chosen, there is one area where more than 72% of the
waste comes from residents and another one where only 20% of the waste comes
from residents. It is also important to note that this data was collected on Monday,
Tuesday, and Wednesday. The percentage coming from residents will likely be much
higher during Friday since many businesses and institutions are closed.
This is still able to give us a general idea. As the data states, the majority of waste
come from residents, with commercial and then industrial following. There is very
little agricultural or medical waste (Table 5).
The first sample from Nahya 4 is a very clear outlier with the location known for
its commercial and industrial footprint. Due to this fact, it is important to exclude
this when extrapolating across the entire city. A more accurate average for amount
of waste coming from residential areas is 58.6%.

During a weekday, around 59% of the total waste in Kabul comes from resi-
dents. Since many institutions and businesses are closed on Friday, this rate is
likely even higher then.

3.3 Recycling Rates

Lastly, as part of this audit, after the material was separated, the SHAHAR team
allowed the informal recyclers to take out the material they would normally remove.
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 53

Table 6 General recycling rate of wastes, SHAHAR

Material Recycling rate (%)
Paper 100
Cardboard 93
Tetrapak 100
Glass 5
Plastic bags 71
Other plastics 97
Aluminum, can/tins 100
Other metal 100
Food waste 13
Green/garden waste 0
Building/demolition waste 0
Timber/lumber 0
Soil and dirt 0
Hazardous and electronic wastes 0
Leather and fabric 0
Other (describe in comments) 0
Total 26

With the intervention from informal recyclers, around 26% of the material was recy-
cled. Paper, aluminum, and metal are almost always recycled. Tetrapak is often taken
out as well, but it is used for burning in the house (which is bad for the environment
and health of the citizens). Food waste, plastic bags, and cardboard would be recycled
at a much higher rate if they were not mixed, as the informal recyclers cannot collect
them if they are dirty. Table 6 shows the rate of recycling of each material.

4 Transfer Station

As part of the waste audit, the SHAHAR researchers segregated and weighed a
representative quantity of the mixed waste stream at the transfer station to determine
the percentage of various waste components, and which items would be taken out for
recycling. This also helps identify a percentage recycled rate for the transfer station
by breaking down the waste components at the transfer station and in the previous
section at the different secondary collection points (Fig. 8).
54 H. Nikzad

Fig. 8 Illustrates the separating of waste at the transfer station in Kabul

4.1 Waste Composition

The waste composition at the transfer station is quite comparable to the composition
done at the different secondary collection points. It is clear that some of the material
is taken out before arriving at the transfer station, but still the top three types of
waste remain the same: namely—food waste, soil/dirt, and plastic. Table 7 shows
the breakdown of the top six items.
Initiatives that seek to reduce waste to landfill in Kabul should focus on food
waste, soil/dirt, and plastic reduction—as these items make up 72% of all waste in
the city. The waste composition at the transfer station broke down over 1 ton of waste.
Table 8 shows the complete breakdown per kilogram (Fig. 9).

Table 7 Composition of wastes at the secondary collection points, SHAHAR

Material Percentage (%)
Food waste 41
Soil/dirt 11
Plastic (bags and other plastics) 20
Leather and fabric 8
Paper (cardboard, paper, tetrapak) 7
Other 7
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 55

Table 8 Composition of wastes at the transfer station per kilogram, SHAHAR

Type (location) Kilograms (transfer station) Percentage of waste (%)
Paper 46.2 4
Cardboard 24.6 2
Tetrapak 9.15 1
Glass 10 1
Plastic bags 195.4 18
Other plastics 17.6 2
Aluminum, can/tins 1.6 0
Other metal 6 1
Food waste 441.1 41
Green/garden waste 33.5 3
Building/demolition waste 0 0
Timber/lumber 0 0
Soil and dirt 119.9 11
Hazardous and electronic wastes 4.2 0
Leather and fabric 89.74 8
Other (describe in comments) 75.5 7
Total 1,074.49

Fig. 9 Composition of wastes at the transfer station per kilogram

4.2 Recycling Rate at Transfer Station

Just like the audit that took place at the secondary collection locations, the audit team
segregated the waste and then allowed the informal recyclers to collect the material
for recycling, and the remaining portion was weighed. The transfer station rate of
recycling was about half of the rate of recycling in the secondary collection locations
56 H. Nikzad

Table 9 Recycling rate of waste components, SHAHAR

Material Recycling rate (%)
Paper 100
Cardboard 100
Tetrapak 0
Glass 0
Plastic bags 7
Other plastics 100
Aluminum, can/tins 100
Other metal 100
Food waste 4
Green/garden waste 0
Building/demolition waste 0
Timber/lumber 0
Soil and dirt 0
Hazardous and electronic wastes 100
Leather and fabric 0
Other (describe in comments) 0
Total 12

(12% vs. 26%). This had a lot to do with the fact that some of the waste is already
taken out before reaching the transfer station.
The other issue is that the food waste and the plastic bags have been mixed during
the journey to the transfer station and are more difficult to recover. The audit team
also mentioned that the informal recyclers would have taken more material out at
the transfer station, but there was more waste than people could handle, so they
primarily focused on the higher value material (paper, hard plastic, and aluminum).
It is suggested to allow for more informal recyclers at the transfer station (Table 9).
It is difficult to determine a total recycling rate for the city since occasionally the
waste may go through both the informal recyclers at a secondary location and the
transfer station, and other times it may go straight to the transfer station without any
intervention from informal recyclers, so there could be some double counting. To
further complicate things, there are also further scavengers at the landfill. This paper
will assume that around 38% is recycled regularly, combining the two rates, though
this will likely not happen all the time.
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 57

Table 10 Per capita waste generation and composition of waste in Kabul, SHAHAR
Strata type No. of people in Weight of waste Weight of waste Solid waste
household (kg) (2 days) (kg) (1 day) (kg/capita/day)
High-income 1634 2622.6 1311.3 0.81
households
Middle-income 1760 2118.2 1059.1 0.61
households
Low-income 1911 1549.15 774.58 0.41
households
Average 0.61
Weighted average 0.45

5 Household Data

Good data has been collected by PhD candidate Ahmad Khoshbeen on per capita
waste generation and composition of waste in Kabul with a sample of 600 house-
holds in June and July of 2018. Based on the comprehensive research data of Mr.
Khoshbeen, high-income households produce nearly twice as much waste per person
than low-income households (Table 10).
Most estimates of Kabul residents state that 80% of households are living in
informal areas and are thus low-income households. For the weighted average, we
estimated that 5% of residents in Kabul are high-income households, 10% are middle
income, and 85% are low income. These are estimates based on available data, but
should be further explored.
Mr. Khoshbeen also did a detailed waste composition. The data he found is similar
to the composition of the waste from the SHAHAR audits—both the secondary
collection and the transfer station audit. The only material that is missing is soil/dirt,
which is not categorized in his study. This is probably due to the fact that the large
quantity of soil/dirt is coming from sweeping the streets and/or construction sites
(Table 11).

6 Landfill

Fortunately, the Ghazak 2 landfill in Kabul has a weighbridge making it easy to find
the amount of waste going to the landfill on a daily/monthly basis.
Based on data from the Sanitation Division of Kabul Municipality, the landfill
receives on average 1,415.79 tons of waste per day from 208 trucks. This is 43,889.68
tons per month or 516,765.54 tons per year. This is around 0.31 kg per person per day
if Kabul has an estimated population of 4.5 million (Fig. 10) (Kabul Municipality).
This will now be compared to the other data in order to establish an estimate of
total waste collection in Kabul (Fig. 11).
58 H. Nikzad

Table 11 Household waste composition in Kabul, SHAHAR

Material Percentage (%)
Food waste 49
Plastic (bags and other plastics) 17
Paper (cardboard, paper, tetrapak) 20
Aluminum cans 4
Glass 3
Green waste 2
Textile 1
Hazardous 2
Inert 1

Fig. 10 Number of vehicle for waste transfer in Kabul

Solid Waste Management in Kabul 59

Fig. 11 Gazak landfill site, Kabul

Based on the household data, the average person creates 0.45 kg of waste per
person per day. This is assuming that a weighted average of 5% of residents in Kabul
are high-income households, 10% are middle income, and 85% are low income.
However, on the above waste audit on six collection points, we note that only
58.6% of waste is coming from residential areas during weekdays, meaning a full
41.4% is coming from commercial, industry, agriculture, medical, or institutional.
To make this more complicated, while residents continue to produce waste during
the weekend (Friday is the main day off in Kabul), most institutions, businesses, and
industries do not. Therefore, we can assume that waste per person on Friday will
drop by an estimated 41.4%. This is generally accurate with accepted literature on
waste in developing countries.
Therefore, household data represents only 58.6% of the total waste created six
days per week and 100% one day per week. When the waste from all other sectors
is added and weighed based on this, the total waste per person is around 0.71 kg per
person per day.
Since there are an estimated 4.5 million people in Kabul, this would mean that
around 3,195 tons are created per day. Out of that as much as 38% is recycled, leaving
1,980.9 tons. If the landfill is collecting on average 1,415.79 tons per day, that means
the 71% of the waste in the city that is being produced and not recycled/reused is
being collected and taken to the landfill.

As much as 29% of the total waste in Kabul is not being collected and taken
to the landfill. Instead, it is being burned, buried, or illegally dumped.
60 H. Nikzad

7 Medical and Medicinal Waste

The collected information before year 2012 shows that only low volumes of phar-
maceutical wastes are being managed and it is maybe about 75 tons in total. This
operation does not normally include all waste of medicines, so this is incomplete
information all over the country.
In general, it is believed that the amount of waste products currently collected is
not from the official supply chain of private sector and governmental organizations
and is primarily a poor quality and counterfeit that has been recorded by the Ministry
of Public Health is wiped off the market and the country’s entry points. For example,
in 2008, about 300 tons have been reported that this amount of waste will require
four times the current storage for central storage of medicines; if these figures are
true, it only shows the amount of garbage collected one day of the cable.
The World Health Organization (WHO) suggests that if the medicinal wastes are
to be wasted, should burned in heat above 1200 °C, the commercial combustion price
for every 4.1 kg of materials is about 2.2 USD. Therefore, this is a very high price
process in Afghanistan (3R Country Report, 2016–2021).
About healthcare waste management, major government and large private hospi-
tals are sorting their waste and handling it by incineration and proper safe disposal.
Common practice for disposal of healthcare wastes is open dumping, ordinary land-
filling, and highly controlled air incineration (3R Country Report, 2016–2021).

8 Electronic Waste

About environmentally sound management of e-waste, there is no specific legislative

stage, including collection, storage, transportation, recovery, recycling, treatment,
and disposal in Afghanistan; therefore, people usually sell their e-waste (waste elec-
trical and electronic equipment) to the retailer and to the second-hand shops for reuse
(3R Country Report, 2016).
Unfortunately, there are no specific policies and regulations in place to ensure
health and safety aspects of those involved in e-waste management. In addition,
there is no specific data for amount of e-waste generation and recycle per specific
timing (3R Country Report, 2016).

9 Chemicals and Hazardous Waste

Afghanistan published its national action plan for the Stockholm Convention on Per-
sistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in 2017, four years after accession to the conven-
tion highlights a number of sources of concern. These include the presence of ageing
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 61

stocks of banned pesticides, oils containing PCBs in old and damaged electrical dis-
tribution equipment, and emission of dioxins and furans from combustion processes.
As with many other environmental issues facing the country, the plan suffered from
a lack of quantitative environmental data, in part due to NEPA’s limited resources
but also the access problems caused by the security situation. Resolving some of
these issues—such as the threat from oils containing PCBs—will require signifi-
cant international financial and technical assistance. The cost of PCB management
alone is estimated at US$20 million, while the installation of incinerators at hospi-
tals to dispose of clinical waste without producing dioxins would cost US$50 million
(Ministry of Public health of AFG).
NEPA has established mechanisms under the Basel Convention for preventing
illegal and inappropriate export and import of waste, including transit trade, espe-
cially of hazardous waste and e-waste. Recently, NEPA has prepared a procedure for
transferring old batteries and waste of NATO forces abroad of the country by private
companies (NEPA).
Large quantities of hazardous waste material have accumulated in Afghanistan
during more than eleven years of NATO presence and operations in the country.
Gearing up retrograde activities now that combat operation “Enduring Freedom” has
drawn to a close; NATO must now comply with international standards to dispose
of this hazardous ecowaste appropriately.
The huge scale and diversity of the waste include fuels, oils, oil filter waste
and lubricants, paints and solvents, and chemical products such as pesticides and
detergents. There are also compressed gas cylinders and all types of bulbs and bat-
teries, including lead-acid, nickel-metal hydride, dry cells, gel, nickel-cadmium, and
lithium. Trickier troubles include waste containing asbestos and contaminated soils.
All of this ecowaste requires an exceptional range of equipment and technical skills
to comply with European Commission directives and regulations for disposal.
In spite of an $80-million investment in building incinerators for hazardous waste
disposal in Afghanistan, the U.S. military left many of them unused, resulting in
increased use of open-air burn pits whose dangerous fumes put thousands of soldiers
and civilians at risk.
The repeated use by the U.S. military of burn pits to dispose of solid and hazardous
wastes—from batteries, plastics, and aerosol cans to tires and entire vehicles—was
one of the foulest stories to come out of the Afghanistan war. The practice produced
acrid smoke and exposed tens of thousands of soldiers and civilian personnel to
toxic fumes that have been linked to serious health problems, including cancer,
cardiopulmonary diseases, and reduced lung function.
To address the problem and reduce exposure to military personnel, the Department
of Defense (DOD) invested $81 million on 23 solid waste incineration systems for
nine installations in Afghanistan.
62 H. Nikzad

10 Plastic Waste

Plastic wastes are another environmental issue in Afghanistan. Based on the interview
of an official of NEPA on 2018 by the BBC Persian, daily four tons of plastic bags
are consumed in Kabul city, where the life of its use is “from shop to Home” and
then become waste. The official added that on a daily basis 3 tons of other types of
plastic materials also enter the Kabul environment, which is disturbing.
In Afghanistan, about 800 factories are producing and supplying hundreds of
plastic products to markets daily. Entering this amount of plastic into the environ-
ment, the ring of plastic use brought to sound. In Kabul and other major cities of
Afghanistan, most citizens use plastic bags to move goods from stores and even bread
from bakeries to home. This plastic bag will be converted into effortless waste after
a short period of time, which will last for about 100 years, (10).
To solve the problems caused by the plastic waste mentioned above, the National
Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) provided the Action Plan to reduce and
remove the use of plastic bags and represented to the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Afghanistan for approval. The plan is under the process of approval by
the Government for implementing in Kabul and other big cities (NEPA).

11 Circular Economy

In Afghanistan, there is no individual policy, strategy, plan, and program about the
circular economy and did not work on system of resources utilization where reduc-
tion, reuse, and recycling of elements prevails. It does not mean that there are no
activities on reduction, reuse, and recycling of wastes in Afghanistan, rather is some
individual activities. For example, South Dakota Army National Guard Soldiers and
other service members stationed here are getting environmentally conscious by ini-
tiating a waste recycling pilot program, designed to provide a renewable heat source
for Afghans living in the capital of Kabul. In this invention, members of the 196th
Maneuver Enhancement Brigade are volunteering their time to develop a “fuel donut”
made from recycled materials, which burns like a briquette and provides an alter-
native heat source for Afghan families who live in homes without modern heating
conveniences. Using shredded paper and sawdust from the camp, the material is com-
bined with water and ash and pressed into shape of a doughnut or roll. The doughnut
can burn for about an hour, providing heat for warmth or cooking and gives off few
emissions.
Another example is the Community-based Plastic Waste Management for Wetland
Conservation project implemented by Afghanistan Young Greens (AYG) at Kol-e
Hashmat Khan protected area in Kabul on March 2017 to March 2019. The result
of this project is raising the awareness of families and school students and being
existence a number of volunteers to monitor and prevent waste disposal at the lake,
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 63

and the area is now being kept free from plastics, positively affecting health and
welfare of the community members, (8).
In addition, there are some informal activities done by different persons, NGOs,
Organizations to aim their specific goals, but the side effects are resulting in the
circular economy. These activities can include the activities of informal waste pickers
to second-hand shops and informal recyclers, (Author).

12 Current Policies/Strategies/Plans

Government of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan has added the waste management

issue in the 2030 Agenda of UN (SDGs Agenda). The SDGs Agenda is aligned
with Afghanistan National Priority Programs (NPPs). Therefore, Afghanistan sets
its basis toward the sustainable management of wastes.
In addition, the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) is currently
working on revising the Solid Waste Management National Policy to be included in
the 3R and circular economic policies in this national policy.
About the plastic waste, also NEPA is working on making the National Action
Plan on Management of Plastic Waste in Afghanistan. In this phase, NEPA has done
the survey on effects of plastic pollution on health and environment. The earliest
period the data will analyze to finalizing the National Action Plan on Management
of Plastic Waste.
Fortunately, Afghanistan has Medical Waste Management Regulation, beside that
NEPA and Kabul Municipality jointly are working on finalizing the Urban Solid
Waste Management Regulation. In addition, Kabul Municipality designed the Inte-
grated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) Program in Kabul city with collaboration
of ADB in Kabul city (ISWM 2018).
Solid Waste Management Manual, Guideline, and Landfill Design Guideline pre-
pared and Incineration plan, composting plan and recycling plan have been planned
by government subjected to the donor funds availability for years 2016–2021 (AFG,
3R).

13 Conclusions

The extensive waste audit in Kabul has provided a lot of detail on the composition,
weight, and recycling potential of the waste in Kabul. The city produces on average
3,195 tons per day. More than half of this waste is categorized as residential (58.6%)
with a third categorized as commercial, and the rest coming from agriculture, indus-
trial, institutional, or medical sectors.
From a household level, we have noted that wealthier residents produce nearly
double the amount of waste per person as less affluent residents (0.81 vs. 0.41)
with the median amount being around 0.61 kg per person per day from households.
64 H. Nikzad

However, this average needs to be weighted since the majority of residents in Kabul
are low income. Based on our weighted average, the average person produces 0.45 kg
per day. Since on average only 58.6% of waste comes from residents, it is safe to
assume that including commercial, agricultural, institutional, industrial, and medical
activities, the amount of waste per day per person produced in Kabul is around
0.71 kg. If the population of Kabul is 4.5 million, the waste produced per day in
Kabul is around 3,195 tons per day. Of that, the majority is food waste between 32
and 41%. The next is plastic, soil/dirt, and paper.
Fortunately, large portions of waste can be recycled, with paper and scrap metal
reaching high recycling rates both at the secondary collection point and the transfer
station. From secondary collection locations, as much as 26% of material is recycled
regularly. From the transfer station (or even at the landfill), additional material can
also be collected, as much as 12%. This paper assumes that around 38% of the
material in Kabul is regularly recycled. Based on that, 1,980.9 tons of waste should
be going to the landfill per day, or burned/buried somewhere else in the city. The
landfill is currently receiving 1,415.79 tons per day on average. Therefore, 29% of
the total waste produced in the city that is not being recycled or reused is either
burned, dumped illegally, or buried somewhere other than the legal landfill.
More interventions should be done to help more food waste and plastic be col-
lected. This should include at-source separation schemes for food waste, recyclables,
and general waste. If more of these two items are recycled, it could reduce waste by
another 40%.
Additional transfer stations should be allocated across the city; this can help
reduce the waste to landfill by a minimum of 11%. This also creates jobs that pay
around $3.98 per day—one-third more than those collecting at secondary locations.
The current transfer station should allow more informal recyclers to collect there, as
the current recyclers cannot collect all of the recyclable material.
Materials like plastic bags could be banned or reduced. While paper bags can
be worse for the environment if they end up in the landfill (because they release
methane as they decompose), this audit has seen that paper bags have a much higher
chance of being recycled. Nearly, 100% of paper is recycled in Kabul. This could also
support the local pulping industries in and around Kabul in providing them with both
market and supply. Any efforts should be coordinated with private paper companies
to ensure success.
If food waste was separated, there is a market for it as fodder for livestock. Though
much more food waste available than currently being collected (food waste recycling
rates are around 4–13%), there seems to still be a market for additional material if it is
separated. Other important initiatives such as biogas could be interesting alternatives
if fodder for livestock reaches peak supply.
Informal recyclers are doing the heavy lifting throughout Kabul when it comes to
recycling and waste reduction, along with the local companies processing the mate-
rial. Both informal recyclers and local recycling companies should be supported
through equipment and regulation to help them increase the material they are col-
lecting which will create jobs, reduce waste to landfill, reduce pollution, and save
the municipality money.
Solid Waste Management in Kabul 65

Information and data about other types of wastes, such as e-waste, chemicals and
hazardous wastes, plastic wastes, and medical wastes do not exist, if there is very
little and informal published data.
Lastly, any revenue collection initiative should make sure to target both residential
areas and commercial areas as these make up around 89% of the waste.

References

Afghanistan 3R Country Report. (2016).

Afghanistan Ministry of Public Health. (2015). Technical report of pharmaceutical waste fading in
Afghanistan (pp. 10–11).
Afghanistan Ministry of Public Health. (2016). Waste disposal of pharmaceutical national policy.
Chen, S., De Bruyne, C., Manasa, B. (2019). Plastics and circular economy community solutions.
United Nations Development Programme. www.sgp.undp.org.
Hameedullah, N. (2017). Solid waste management in Kabul city. Thesis presented in partial ful-
fillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master in International Cooperation and Policy
Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University (pp. 31–34).
https://ceobs.org/the-slow-violence-of-pollution-in-afghanistan/.
http://www.bbc.com/persian/afghanistan-44370421.
Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM). (2018). Presentation, presented in Integrated Solid
Waste Management Workshop (p. 6).
Kabul Municipality. http://km.gov.af/.
Nawid Royaee—Urban Management Masters Program. (2014/2016). Solid waste management.
Berlin: University of Technology.
Strong Hubs for Afghan Hope and Resilience (SHAHAR). (2018). Solid Waste Audit in Kabul
(pp. 1–23). AID-306-C-14-00016.
Waste Database of Afghanistan National Environmental Protection Agency. (2019). http://www.
nepa.gov.af/.
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan

Ugyen Tshomo, Chhimi Dorji and Yogeeta Dahal

Abstract Bhutan is widely renowned for its carbon negative status in the environ-
mental arena. However, owing to its geographical location as a Himalayan country
sandwiched between China and India, the influence of globalization from the north
and south has drastically increased the rate of urbanization and economic activities
in Bhutan over the years. This paper provides an account on waste management, pol-
icy, and initiatives taken by government, NGOs, and enterprises in Bhutan. Different
streams of wastes are emerging and in particular, municipal solid wastes are serious
waste management issues in Bhutan with a shift in consumption patterns and increas-
ing population rate. Apart from the National Environment Commission (NEC) acting
as an apex body for regulating and monitoring waste management, similar initiatives
have been taken by local governments, other government agencies, private enter-
prises, and non-governmental organizations (NGO) to create litter-free and healthy
environment by implementing 3Es and 4Rs towards circular economy. The concept
of circular economy in Bhutan got introduced with the Waste and Climate Change
Project (WWC) of NEC and WWF Bhutan. The circular economy concept is the
main philosophy of the National Waste Management Strategy (NWMS) which aims
to establish waste management as a national priority and provide information, logical
steps and strategies required for its successful implementation. The NWMS aims to
resolve data gaps, challenges, and issues between agencies regarding waste manage-
ment. It would also ensure that waste management programmes are trickling down
to the gross root systems fostering a national waste reduction, reuse, and recycling
concept.

Keywords Circular economy · Waste management · 3R · 4R · Bhutan

U. Tshomo (B)
Waste Management Division, National Environment Commission, Thimphu, Bhutan
e-mail: utsho17a@gmail.com
C. Dorji
Chhimid Consulting, Thimphu, Bhutan
e-mail: chimi6@gmail.com
Y. Dahal
Environment& Climate Studies, College of Natural Resources, Punakha, Bhutan
e-mail: yogeeta.cnr@rub.edu.bt

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 67

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_4
68 U. Tshomo et al.

1 Introduction

The constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan is under the Article 5: Environment man-
dates a minimum of sixty percent of Bhutan’s total land of forest cover for all time.
Concurrently, environmental conservation plays an important role be it in the four
pillars of the Gross National Happiness. With visionary policies in place, Bhutan is
widely renowned for its carbon negative status in environmental arena around the
world. However, owing to its geographical location as a small Himalayan country
sandwiched between developed countries, China and India, the influence of global-
ization from the north and south has drastically increased the rate of urbanization and
economic activities in Bhutan over the past years. In the late 1980s and early 1990s,
more than 90% of Bhutan’s total population of 600,000 were estimated to have lived
in rural areas within a total country area of 38,394 km (Planning Commission 1989).
During that time, the percentage of urban settlement was negligible and most of the
population resided in rural areas was practising subsistence agriculture. However, in
2005, population has increased to 634,982 with the rise of 30.9% of total population
residing in urban areas and the remaining 69.1% of total population living in rural
areas (PHCB 2005). The pattern of consumption of goods in urban area has shifted
from domestic organic agro goods to commercial goods that are imported from the
neighbouring countries. These industrial manufactured goods generate enormous
amount of waste and need systematic method of disposal to avoid any sort of pol-
lution in the soil, water, air, and its environmental vicinities. Different streams of
wastes are emerging and in particular solid wastes are serious waste management
issues in Bhutan (NEC 2019).
The emerging waste issues in the country have been recognized at the highest
level. His Majesty the Fifth DrukGyalpo of Bhutan during the Royal Bhutan Flower
Exhibition on 1 April 2015, addressed the significance of having a clean and safe
environment for everyone to live: ‘Where we live must be clean, safe, organized,
and beautiful, for national integrity, national pride, and for our bright future. This
too is nation building’. In addition, His Majesty reiterated the waste concern of his
beloved father the Fourth Kind of Bhutan, always watchful, His Majesty the Fourth
King would observe litter that blights our pristine environment, and express concerns
on the growth of waste and their proper disposal on 11 November 2015, Changlim-
ithang, Thimphu. His Majesty the King always emphasized on shared responsibili-
ties to manage our own waste at individual and community level. During the 109th
National Day celebration on 17 December 2016, His Majesty underscored the role
of every Bhutanese towards waste management, ‘It is our collective responsibility
to ensure that where we live remain clean, safe, well organized, and beautiful, for
all times to come’. Similarly, Her Majesty the Queen is as equally concern towards
waste management as a royal ambassador to the environment. During the World Envi-
ronment Day in 2018, Her Majesty in her speech addressed, ‘for any initiative to be
successful, dedication and consistency is essential. We must all remind ourselves that
our actions on the World Environment Day should not remain symbolic, standalone
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 69

activities but instead must be practiced every day’. In this context, Bhutan is oppor-
tune to have royal support and visionary guidance in addressing waste management
concerns and environmental conservation. Similarly, Her Majesty on 2 June 2019
also launched the National Waste Management Strategy for Bhutan and the Flagship
Project on waste management.
In recent times, numbers of good initiatives in Bhutan pertaining to waste man-
agement have been recognized with good partnerships and supported by the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in terms of promoting recycling busi-
nesses at small and micro-enterprises through public advocacy and engagement of
the private sectors. However, public health has become another concern due to open
dumping of solid waste and contamination of the natural environment by the choked
drains and polluted waterways. Proper waste collection and segregation at source are
limited to only few urban towns of Bhutan either with safe disposal or recycling of
waste materials as the end processes of waste management. Currently, in Bhutan, a
systematic approach of an integrated solid waste management which addresses all
processes of solid waste management (SWM) cycle and sustainability aspects is not
in place owing to the scarce institutional set-up, trained human capacity and financial
resources.
In a circular economy, all materials are utilized in loops at each phase of its
production, utilization or disposal. This ensures that there is minimum input of virgin
natural resources, maximum use of goods and services, minimum waste generation
followed by utmost reuse and recycling as shown in Fig. 1.
In Bhutan’s case, the concept of circular economy got introduced with the Waste
and Climate Change Project (WWC) of National Environment Commission and
WWF Bhutan. The concept of a circular economy, which is a paradigm shift in the
way we look at designing, producing, transporting, consuming and managing waste,
has been adopted as the most suitable model in planning for waste management
in Bhutan (NEC 2019). National Waste Management Strategy and Thimphu Waste
Management in Bhutan include waste management activities designed to enable
recovery and recycling as much as possible. Both the reports put strong emphasis
in the reduction of waste, reuse, refuse and recycling from the cradle to grave of all
associated activities.
While there have been earlier initiatives on 3Rs on waste management, the model
of circular economy is implemented in planning of waste management activities.
In line with this, enhanced education/awareness and capacity building are being
provided to reduce waste generation, while also looking at various initiatives of
recycling and reuse of materials. Use of waste PET bottles for decoration, plastics
for cushions, tetra packs for shopping baskets, paper waste for egg trays, plastics
for road construction and also HDPE for fencing poles are recent initiatives by
various individuals and firms. The government on its part is making the environment
conducive for such measures and also providing loans, subsidies and policy support.
70 U. Tshomo et al.

Fig. 1 Outline of the circular economy (Paquot 2017)

2 Policy Framework on Waste in Bhutan

2.1 NEPA

The National Environment Commission (NEC) periodically produces Bhutan State of

the Environment Report (BSER) in accordance with the mandate under the National
Environment Protection Act of Bhutan, 2007 (NEPA). The BSER analyses the current
environment issues, provides scientific information, raises awareness on current state
of environment for informed decision-making, helps in effective management of the
environmentand makes recommendation for strengthening of environmental policies,
plans and programmes (NEC 2016).

2.2 EA Act

The Environment Assessment Act of Bhutan establishes assessment procedures of

potential effect from policy, programmes and projects on the environment. The
Environment Assessment Act considers sustainable development and middle path
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 71

by recognizing the country’s development without compromising country’s cultural

integrity, heritage, environment and quality of life of the future generation. The royal
government of Bhutan ensures that environmental concerns are taken into account as
per the rules and regulations when implementing any policy, programme or projects
(NEC 2000).

2.3 Water Act

Water is one of the most important natural resources in Bhutan. Although Bhutan
has abundant of water resources, local scarcity of water for drinking and agricultural
purpose exists. The existing policy is determined to protect the environment and its
resources through integrated water resource management. The government, stake-
holders and communities participate for sustainable use of water resources by plan-
ning for conservation, development and management of water resources. Prevention
and control of water pollution from sources such as release of effluent and hazardous
waste must comply with effluent discharge standards before being released into the
water bodies. The National Environment Commission is responsible for develop-
ing, implementing and monitoring the water quality standards and effluent discharge
standards of Bhutan (NEC 2014a, b).

2.4 Waste Act, Waste Regulation

The Waste Prevention and Management Act and Regulation of Bhutan aims to
establish a sound waste management system that includes monitoring procedures at
every organization level including efficient collection, segregation, treatment, stor-
age, transportation, reduction, reuse, recycling and safe disposal of solid, liquid and
gaseous wastes. Additionally, being mindful of adverse impact of waste to the envi-
ronment, ecology of the country, human health though sound waste management in
pursuit of Gross National Happiness and living in harmony with nature(NEC 2009,
2012).
The Waste Prevention and Management Regulation has categorized the waste into
following:
(1) Medical waste
(2) Municipal waste
(3) Industrial waste
(4) E-waste
(5) Other waste.
To make the waste management system effective, education and awareness are
provided to public. The implementing agency, National Environment Commission,
along with Road Safety and Transport Authority, Ministry of Health, Ministry of
72 U. Tshomo et al.

Work and Human Settlement, Ministry of Economic affairs (Department of Indus-

tries) are responsible for management of waste generated from each sector. Addition-
ally, education and training institutes include waste management in their curriculum
and co-curricular activities and the Non-Government Organization and Civil Soci-
ety Organizations are also involved in management to waste and initiating research
works. Policies to stop illegal dumping of solid wastes and release of effluent include
levy fee charges for waste collection, treatment and transpiration and impose fine
incurred for recover costs including polluters pay principle for non-compliance with
rules (NEC 2019).

2.5 Integrated Solid Waste Management 2014

Bhutan is beginning to experience the challenges of changing lifestyle while also

transforming from subsistence farming to consumerist economy where waste gener-
ation is increasing with increase in population. The policies and practices of waste
management require new strategies to resolve the new set of environmental chal-
lenges especially with excessive waste generation and improper disposal. The waste
management system in Bhutan is in its initial stage and the country requires ini-
tializing integrated solid waste management (ISWM) with engagement of not only
the policy makers and relevant agency but also including broad stakeholders includ-
ing legislators, private sectors, local communities and civil society groups at the
central and local levels. The ISWM initiated by NEC in 2011 aims to move towards
zero waste Bhutan through maximizing resource recovery, creating sustainable waste
management systems, protecting the natural ecology of Bhutan, promoting and prac-
ticing of 4Rs and developing ISWM at par with international standards by 2022.

2.5.1 Summary of IWMS

Awareness and education are chosen as a key for successful implementation of waste
management plans. Inclusion of people especially by providing them with under-
standing of the importance of waste management will bring about maximum change.
Therefore, the strategies to create awareness in ISWM for successful implementa-
tion includes dissemination of information, demonstrations of 4R programmes, waste
management programmes, clean up campaigns, volunteerism and use of media to
reach information to various stakeholders such as educational institutions, urban
communities, rural communities and commercial entities.

2.5.2 Summary of National Waste Management Strategy Document

The National Waste Management Strategy (NWMS) of Bhutan has been launched
by Her Majesty the Gyaltsuen on 2 June 2019 in Thimphu. The NWMS’ goal is to
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 73

continuously move/promote towards ‘Zero Waste Bhutan by 2030’ in partnership

with the public, industry, civil society organizations, government authorities at local
and sectoral levels, municipalities and potential development partners. This strat-
egy highlights waste as an evolving environmental issue in the Bhutan and aims
to accomplish a better understanding and awareness on waste; incorporation of the
concept of principles of 4Rs; stakeholder participation, timely and appropriate waste
collection and disposal, and proper waste monitoring and evaluation.
There are sets of goals for the short terms to which within 2019–2023 and long-
term activities to achieve waste prevention and reduction further, through medium
and long-term targets which are as below:
The strategic objectives is planned to be attained by implementing right strategic
tools. The tools are as follows;
(a) Sustainable Financing
Set up a sustainable waste management fund through government funding and inno-
vative financing systems.
(b) Technology Development
The key concept of circular economy is planned to be truly implemented by exploring
technology and methods that are less wasteful and sustainable. Technologies that are
both cost-effective and green are to be explored, piloted and implemented.
(c) Establish Communities and School Waste Banks
It is also proposed that waste segregation is implemented at the community levels
through establishment of waste banks and drop-off centres. Under the waste bank
programme, households and schools who participate in waste bank activities will
receive benefits, both in the form of money and improvement in environmental qual-
ity. Certain amount of capital injection might be necessary in the initial years of bank
operation. This could be funded by the National Waste Management Fund and direct
subsidies by the government.
(d) Capacity Development
A nationally coordinated capacity building programme will need to be developed
that will address those capacity building barriers. Trainings would be provided for
waste handlers to engineers and managers to private entities.
(e) Voluntary Agreement
The NEC could enter into voluntary agreement with companies to pilot Extended
Producer Responsibility (EPR) Scheme for waste products generated by them beyond
point of sale with inclusion of corporate social responsibility (CSR). This arrange-
ment should be based on the understanding that those companies have potential to
contribute towards effective waste management.
74 U. Tshomo et al.

(f) Behavioural Change Through Education and Awareness Programme

Behaviour change is the most important aspect in ensuring cooperation from the
public and waste management. Targeted programmes that can be continuous overall
for longer period of time will be crucial to ensure that required behavioural changes
are brought about to all sections of the society from manufactures to consumers.
Education of children and adults from all walks of life through all medium such as
television, Internet, social media, etc. are necessary as part of regular waste programs.
(g) Mandatory Budget Head Creation for All LGs (Link to Annual Performance
Agreement (APA)/Annual Work Plans (AWP) and Five-Year Plan (FYP).
In many cases, it has been found that there is no budget for waste management
activities at local level and designated institutions. Therefore, it is proposed that
all responsible offices plan, secure and disburse budget for waste management pro-
grammes in their respective sectors or jurisdiction. NECS shall work with these
agencies to plan out budgeting for the initial years.
(h) Data and Information Collection
For the process policy development and the choice and implementation of the strategy,
the central key players depend on data and information exchange, and collection.
Information on implementation of programmes and monitoring and evaluation shall
be maintained and assessed from time to time.
Cross-cutting issues on waste management during public gatherings and also
involvement of women in the sector are also looked into in the NWMS. Measuring
the progress of the strategy is through periodic performance auditing of the imple-
mentation of the strategy by an oversight agency. The NEC will need to review the
strategy as and when necessary to ensure effectiveness and adequacy of this strategy
in addressing waste management issues, if such needs arise in future (Fig. 2).
As part of Strategic Tools for Sound Waste Management, Table 1 shows the various
activities that will be carried out under each tool. The implementation plan of each
activity is given in Table 1.

3 Waste Management in Bhutan

Until 2001, Bhutan does not have waste management system. Firstly, there was no
information on waste quality or generation in terms of quantity in Bhutan. Secondly,
Bhutan did not have specialists or experts in waste management area. And thirdly,
subsistence agriculture played a huge role in the livelihood dependency of rural
area that was densely populated. Agricultural products were usually biodegradable
and eco-friendly. Developmental activities have created employment opportunities
in urban areas and easy access to facilities like health, education and technology.
To upgrade daily earning income and standard of living, people have migrated to
Thimphu. Thimphu alone has a total of 98,676 population of which 79,185 person
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 75

Fig. 2 Strategic interventions for NSWM (NEC 2019)

account for its urban population that is almost 80.3% of its population contributing
it as one of the largest urban population among all other 20 Dzongkhags. Thimphu
had 98,676 population compared to 3,116 in Gasa district, which is located in the
north of Thimphu. Therefore, accumulation of municipal solid waste generation has
become a concerned issue in a prominent city like Thimphu with high density of
population at a rapid pace of urbanization with poor waste management (Phuntsho
et al. 2010).
i. Municipal Solid Waste
According to the waste Composition and Quantity Survey carried out by the National
Environment Commission in 2018, it was indicated that total organic waste consti-
tuted the largest fraction of the Municipal Solid Waste (58.05%), and subsequently
by plastics (13%), paper/paperboards (9.2%) (Fig. 3).
In Bhutan, the pressure of urbanization is observed only in few cities as they are
densely populated compared to other remote districts. The capital city Thimphu alone
76 U. Tshomo et al.

Table 1 Activities under strategic tool (NEC 2019)

Strategic tool Activities
Sustainable financing Creation of National Waste Management Fund (WMF)
Initiate economic instruments
Technology Development Assess feasible environmentally sound technologies for
waste collection and treatment
Set up waste collection and treatment facilities as needed
Capacity development Develop a nationally coordinated capacity building
programme
Implement training programmes for all relevant stakeholders
Voluntary agreement Work on corporate social responsibility ( CSR ) initiatives
with Bhutanese companies to pilot Extended Producer
Responsibility Scheme for waste products generated by them
Waste banks Set up waste separation and waste banks at schools and
communitiesa
Establish functional recycling programs for the waste banks
with proper modus operandi
Behaviour change Education programme on waste for schools
Waste management education through integration in the
curriculum
Curriculum development and programs in the tertiary
education system
Assessment of the awareness programmes at periodic
interval
Improved delivery of public waste management awareness
Use of mass media, websites and social media for education
on waste
Link with APA and IWP Ensure that waste management activities are included in all
respective agency’s APA/AWP and reflected in individual
IWPs as part of FYPs
Seek financial support for the activities as per plans
Data and information collection Set up a pollutant release and transfer registers programs
Develop a waste management network
Set up a database on waste
Periodic monitoring of waste management activities, targets
and achievements
a This is similar to the waste drop-Off Centre initiated in Thimphu Thromde in September 2018
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 77

Fig. 3 Average composition of MSW for Thimphu (NEC 2018)

exceeds 40% of the total urban population in Bhutan followed by Phuentsholing in

the southern part which is the closest city to Indian border (PHCB 2005). In 2005,
The Royal Society for Protection of Nature’s survey in 2005 reported that daily
wastes collection from Thimphu City was 36.7 tons (RSPN 2006). This amount
of waste generation has increased to 64.5 tons per day by 2007. If we go back to
1992, waste generation was assumed to 17.5 tonnes on a daily basis by the Thimphu
City Corportation project document though it is difficult to get an accurate data
on waste management since inventory prior to 2001 did not exist and some were
poorly documented into paper. A clear-cut amount of waste generation can be drawn
from 2007 and 1992’s data: it has increased by four folds. The waste composition
and analysis survey carried out in 2018 as a part of developing the National Waste
Management Strategy confirmed that the total waste generated in Thimphu Thromde
was 40.3 tons per day accounting to 0.35 kg/capita/day (NEC 2018). By 2020, waste
generation from Thimphu Municipality is projected to increase up to 110 tons per
day if continued with similar existing trends and urban population growth.
Waste Prevention and Management Act 2009 defined waste as ‘any material or
substance in whatever form, whether solid, liquid, or gaseous, hazardous or non-
hazardous, organic or inorganic that has lost its primary value and is disposed of,
intended to be disposed of or recycled’ (NEC 2009). NEC has refrained from referring
waste as merely useless material and added more values with inclusion of ‘recycle’
to turn it into a useful material in its definition. To add value to the circular economy
and to reduce the organic waste, Thimphu City Corporation has started Takakura
waste composting at household levels in Bhutan. This initiative started in March
78 U. Tshomo et al.

2018. Thimphu City Corporation has reached to more than 15 community compost-
ing centres mostly run by Self-Help Group (SHG) women including Jigme Dorji
Wangchuck National Referral Hospital, Royal Bhutan Army to mention few.
ii. Medical Waste
As per the Waste Inventory and Baseline Study for Developing National and City
Level Waste Management Strategies and Action Plans (2018), about 70% consti-
tutes of general waste from hospitals. General wastes like papers and plastics have
the potential to recycle and contribute to the circular economy of the hospital commu-
nities and similarly, reduce the amount of hazardous waste which includes infectious
waste, sharps, pathological waste, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, radioactive waste and
genotoxic waste.
Currently, Bhutan has 24 hospitals, 1 National Referral Hospital, 2 Regional
Referral Hospital, 24 Basic Health Unit-I, 184 Basic Health Unit-II, Sub post 28
and 494 Outreach Centres (MoH 2016). The medical waste generated from these
health facilities is increasing each year at the rate of about 15–20%. For instance,
in 2017, the total medical waste generated increased from 378 tonnes to 428 tonnes
with increase of 13.2% (MoH 2018).
For medical wastes, source segregation practices are being implemented using
colour-coded bins and plastics. Red for infectious and pathological wastes, green
for general waste like papers and plastics, blue for food waste like leftover food,
fruits and vegetable piles, yellow/white for sharps: needle, blades, chemotherapy
waste with red bucket labelled ‘Biohazard’, pharmaceutical waste-cartoon boxes and
chemicals—bottles/containers. Ministry of Health has emphasized on deep pit burial
where the biomedical wastes like sharps are eventually disposed after autoclaving
and pathological wastes, too. Even though hospitals throughout the country have
well-sealed pits but BHU’s have open pits that require attention because it will
become easy for chemicals and other liquid wastes to leach out and mix with other
non-hazardous wastes in the soil and water.
Ministry of Health has successfully carried out a pilot project on Model Health
Care Waste Management at Phuentsholing General Hospital on 21 June 2016. Con-
currently, the waste treatment and storage house under this pilot project will serve
as a training centre for support staff on waste management in the coming days. Staff
would enhance their skills and generate revenue from these sellable waste items to
support health facilities. This pilot project models will be replicated to other four
hospitals like Gelephu, Samtse, Wangdue and Damphu and eight more other districts
through Asian Development Bank during the 12th Five-Year Plan.
iii. Industrial Waste
Industrial wastes are disposed at Pasakha Industrial Landfill which is under the
purview of Ministry of Economic Affairs and at Association of Bhutan Industries
landfill. A total of 520 tons of industrial wastes are disposed each year. There is no
other landfill at other five industrial estates (NEC 2019). A tipping fee for waste
collection and disposal of Nu. 1240 per ton is collected from the Industries. A total
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 79

Table 2 Current situation of

S. No Waste stream Quantity Year
waste management (NEC
2019) 1 Municipal solid waste 861.4 Mt/week 2017
2 Industrial waste 520 tons/year 2017
3 Medical waste 428 tons/year 2017
4 E-Waste 912 items 2017

sum of Nu. 2.5 million has been collected as waste tipping fee from DoI as of now,
which is directly deposited to the government revenue account at Ministry of Finance
(NEC 2019).

3Rs Initiative
3Rs’ initiative is widely practiced in industrial estate areas. For instance, industrial
wastes like dusts produced from metal industries are reused within the metal indus-
tries, and some sold to the other industries as raw material or to the local markets. It
helps in reduction of generation of waste from source. Sludge waste is reused in land
filling within the industrial premises. And similarly, oil and lubricant waste from the
automobile workshops are either reused or sold. Metal scraps are sold to the local
vendors and recycled into other products from the neighbouring country’s recycling
facilities.

iv. E-Waste

As per the Waste Inventory and Baseline Study for Developing National and City
Level Waste Management Strategies and Action Plans (2018), approximately 912
e-waste items were generated in 2017 (NEC 2019). The Department of Informa-
tion Technology and Telecom (DITT) is responsible for e-waste management. The
DITT hands over to the Department of National Properties (DNP) the e-waste items
recorded from the government offices and DNP auctions to the private scrap dealers
(Table 2).

3.1 Other Practices: Youth Action for 4Rs in Schools

Youth Action for 4Rs was launched on 4th June 2015 by Her Majesty the Gyaltsuen
Jetsun Pema Wangchuck led by the National Environment Commission in 15 schools
with primary objectives:
i. To build sustainable waste management partnership between the NEC and the
schools;
ii. To build a conducive environmentally friendly civic responsibilities among our
youths; and
iii. To have youth goodwill ambassadors for waste management in schools, families
and society.
80 U. Tshomo et al.

The schools carry out the following activities:

i. A focal person in the school dealing with waste management activities;
ii. Ensure an active membership for at least 10 members for effectively carrying
out activities/programs;
iii. Carry out at least three waste management programmes annually of which, one
will involve a programme with a community/town;
iv. Adopt a stream or river and maintain its hygiene and protection at all times to
come;
v. Promote segregation, reuse and recycling of wastes in the school practicing
waste bank model. Schools sell their recyclable waste items to the private entities
and the generated money is used for other activities in the schools;
vi. After segregation, maintain a periodic (pre-determined time) record of the
amount of waste generated in weight;
vii. Incorporate at least, a week-long morning assembly speech program on waste
issues/initiatives in the school by the club and/or others.

3.2 Clean Bhutan

Clean Bhutan is a registered Civil Society Organization and was established on 5

February 2014. Through Advocating Behavioural Change programmes and prac-
tice of the 3Rs, the main aims of Clean Bhutan is to change the mindset of every
Bhutanese to be responsible citizens and practice sustainable consumption by using
available resources most efficiently (Clean Bhutan 2017). Clean Bhutan has worked
with more than 6,819 volunteers and has successfully carried out Empowering Women
and Youth through Waste Entrepreneurship project in 2017–2018. With the financial
support received from EU-Helvetas Bhutan of total Nu. 1,227,000, Clean Bhutan
conducted hands-on training for self-help groups (SHGs) comprised of women and
youth to develop skill and generate additional income to boost up the circular econ-
omy. Women and youths learned how to weave basket out of plastic waste to develop
products and to use plastic as secondary resource. More than 245 participants from
the Royal Bhutan Army, Royal Bhutan Police, Royal Body Guard and youth group
attended the hands-on training. Concurrently, Clean Bhutan could successfully min-
imize waste disposal at landfill with reduction of 465 kgs of plastic waste. Through
this project, participants could venture out into small home-made business such as
selling of baskets made of waste plastic. One of the good practices is Aum Dechen
Pelzom of Royal Bhutan Army, who has earned around Nu. 37,000. Similarly, several
other trainees have ventured out into small business and are making these baskets
available in Thimphu City fulfilling the objective of the project to help the community
in developing small production unit at household level for housewives to generate
additional income. The profit will be shared and utilized as community welfare fund
to support during the adverse situation and other emerging new entrepreneurs within
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 81

their community to avail soft loans. The goal is to make these self-help groups func-
tion independently. Through such initiatives, the communities are well informed
about waste management, its scope in circular economy and to reduce the amount of
plastic waste into the landfill.

3.3 Greener Way

Greener way is Bhutan’s first private waste management and recycling firm which
was established on 8 March 2010 in Thimphu by Mr. Karma Yonten under Small
and Medium Size Enterprises (SMEs).
Its main missions (3Es) are:
(a) E1: To save Environment
(b) E2: To create Employment
(c) E3: To boost Bhutan’s Economy.

Services:
(a) They collect and dispose municipal solid waste in central and southern zones
of Thimphu through rag pickers and trucks.
(b) They provide service on demand of customers even out central and southern
zones of Thimphu
(c) They offer their evening service even for office-goers
(d) They segregate waste from the source into dry (inorganic waste) and wet (organic
waste). They transport wet waste to waste drop-off centre and transfer station,
some dry waste to plastic recycling units and some are sold to the local scrap
dealers at different rates. Currently, the drop-off centre is run by the Thimphu
City Corporation. There are five different disposal bins, one each for pet bot-
tles, plastics, papers, metals, and food and other wastes. The caretakers have
to segregate wastes before dumping into the landfill. In return, the caretakers
could keep whatever income is generated from sellable wastes. The National
Environment Commission Secretariat also intends to install more waste drop-off
centres at strategic location and promotes in different districts across the coun-
try as reflected in the National Waste Management Strategy. Similarly, Greener
Way has its own transfer station at Olakha, Thimphu. Greener Way segregates
waste and earns money from the sellable wastes (Images 1 and 2).

Segregation of waste from the source has helped Memelakha landfill from mixing
up of waste.
In 2015, Greener Way has collected 1,731 tons of dry waste and 957 tons of wet
waste. The amount of collection has drastically increased in 2016: 2,748 tons of dry
waste and 1,321 tons of wet waste.
82 U. Tshomo et al.

Image 1 Waste drop-off centre below Kelki Higher Secondary School, Thimphu in 2018

Image 2 Transfer station at Olakha, Thimphu in 2018

Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 83

3.4 Challenges for Waste Management in Bhutan

Despite the above-mentioned programmes, Waste Management in Bhutan is still at

nascent stage due to:

Municipal Wastes

1. Improper segregation of wastes at source;

2. Lack of public participation and cooperation;
3. Illegal waste dumping;
4. Unsuitable waste collection timing;
5. Overflowing landfill sites and improper management;
6. No proper disposal sites for segregated wastes;
7. Strict advocacy and implementation of Acts, rules and regulations;
8. No proper management of rural wastes; and
9. Lack of fund and resources for implementing agencies.

Medical Wastes

1. No storage for medical wastes;

2. Disposal of infectious and general waste at BHUs are in the same pit;
3. Segregated waste is dumped together into the municipal trucks; and
4. Lack of compliance and/or awareness among new staff or interns and students
or patients.

Wastewater

1. Septic tanks with soak pits are not as per standards;

2. Sludge from the septic tanks are not treated;
3. Network lines and treatment plants are always over loaded as the sludge from
the septic tank areas are pumped into the sewer line; and
4. No treatment/management of grey water.

Industrial Wastes

1. Lack of fund to build treatment plant for industrial estates;

2. Hazardous waste assessment and sound management;
3. Operational budget is centralized and districts are usually short of budget for
proper segregation and awareness; and
4. The tipping fee collected and submitted to the government is not utilized directly
for waste related activities.

E-Wastes

1. No treatment (recovery and recycling) facilities;

2. Lack of expertise;
3. Storage facilities is not adequate to store all the wastes;
4. No proper system of monitoring e-waste disposal by the winning bidders;
84 U. Tshomo et al.

Graph 1 Level of 3R knowledge by residents in Thimphu (Penjor 2007)

5. No proper rules on segregation of waste;

6. Technical limitations and manpower shortage to really evaluate and assess the
actual valuation of the surrendered assets; and
7. Costly affairs to transport all surrendered equipment, vehicle and scraps all the
way to Thimphu.

The National Waste Management Strategy, 2019 has also identified barriers for
sound management of waste specifically institutional barrier, policy barrier, technical
barrier, financial barrier, capacity barrier, informational barrier and public support
barrier. Similarly, lack of public awareness and advocacy is still a pressing issue.
Waste management concept, implementations of 3R and safe disposal of e-waste
awareness campaigns and programmes will also help in reduction of waste. Waste
management education as a part of school teaching curriculum is felt pertinent for
behavioural change and inculcate civic sense towards proper waste management from
early ages in the schools and for wider outreach of general public. To cite an example,
Penjor (2007) carried out a survey among the residents of Thimphu to understand
people’s knowledge on 3R for his study entitled ‘Enhancing Municipal Solid Waste
Management System with 3R Options in Thimphu’. It was astonishing to see that
most of people have no idea about 3R as indicated below (Graph 1).

4 Conclusion

The increased demand for resources and its competing use has enabled the focus
of waste management strategy to be on efficient use of resources. The municipal
authorities, to a large extent, have established waste collection systems in the urban
areas either directly or through private waste management entities. Waste segregation
has been initiated in some of the Dzongkhags and most urban centres in the country.
Over the years, waste management practices in the country have also progressed
with involvement of the private sector and volunteers, especially for solid waste
Integrated Waste Management in Bhutan 85

management. Initiatives such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottle collection

by the schools and their linkages with recycling industries have started to make its
mark on the waste scenario in the country. There have been visible private sector
interest and involvement in waste management, including an establishment of a
plant for recycling plastic waste as road surfacing material, PET bottles for arts and
decoration, tetra packs for shopping baskets, HDPE for fencing poles, used school
uniforms for school bags, etc. initiatives to reduce, refuse, reuse and recycle goods
at all stages set Bhutan’s economy towards the trajectory of a circular economy. The
concept is introduced and gaining popularity and acceptance.
The benefits of circular economy are that it would necessitate only minimum
goods and services in the first place. With the improvement in their life span and
utility, one good can be used for multiple use and longer duration. These would
not require lesser waste collection services, but also reduce the need to handle and
treat/dispose them. Thus, the benefit of circular economy concept is multiple folds.
Inclusion of circular economy concept in the National Waste Management Strategy
is timely and brilliant. The main aim of the strategy will be to establish waste as a
national priority and providing the information, logical steps and strategies required
for implementation. The NWMS will also help resolve any data gaps, challenges and
issues that are there between agencies. It would also ensure that waste management
programs are trickling down to the gross root systems fostering a national waste
reduction, reuse and recycling concept.
On the same note, the government of Bhutan also launched the Flagship project on
Waste Management through the Prime Minister’s Office. It is proposed to address the
immediate needs for waste management through establishment of a special unit at the
Prime Minister’s Office (PMO). The unit shall formulate programs for waste reduc-
tion, awareness, segregation, recycling, transport, treatment, disposal and enforce-
ment across the country in coordination with central government agencies, local
governments, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), educational centres and
the public.

References

Clean Bhutan. (2017). 2017 annual report. Bhutan: Thimphu.

MoH. (2016). Annual health bulletin 2016. Ministry of Health, Royal Government of Bhutan.
MoH. (2018). Annual waste report for 2018. Ministry of Health, Royal Government of Bhutan.
NEC. (2000). Environment assessment act of Bhutan. National Environment Commission, Royal
Government of Bhutan.
NEC. (2009). Waste prevention and management act. National Environment Commission, Royal
Government of Bhutan.
NEC. (2012). Waste prevention and management regulation. National Environment Commission,
Royal Government of Bhutan.
NEC. (2014). National solid waste management strategy. National Environment Commission, Royal
Government of Bhutan.
NEC. (2014).The water regulation of Bhutan. National Environment Commission, Royal Govern-
ment of Bhutan.
86 U. Tshomo et al.

NEC. (2016). Bhutan state of environment report. National Environment Commission, Royal Gov-
ernment of Bhutan.
NEC. (2018). Waste inventory and baseline study for developing national and city level waste
management strategies and action plans. Baseline Report. National Environment Commission,
Royal Government of Bhutan.
NEC. (2019). National waste management strategy 2019. National Environment Commission, Royal
Government of Bhutan. Retrieved from http://www.nec.gov.bt/nec1/wp-content/uploads/2019/
07/National-Waste-Management-Strategy-2019.pdf.
Paquot, L. (Ed.). (2017). Moving towards a circular economy with EMAS. Best practices to imple-
ment circular economy strategies (with case study examples). European Union: Luxembourg
Publications. https://doi.org/10.2779/463312.
Penjor, Y. (2007). Enhancing municipal solid waste management system with 3R options in
Thimphu, Bhutan. Retrieved from http://faculty.ait.ac.th/visu/public/uploads/Data/AITThesis/
Master%20Thesis%20final/yp.pdf.
PHCB. (2005). Population and housing census of Bhutan 2005. Office of the Census Commis-
sioner. Royal Government of Bhutan. Retrieved from http://www.nsb.gov.bt/publication/files/
pub6ri44cs.pdf.
Phuntsho, S., Dulal, I., Yangden, D., Ugyen, T. M., Herat, S., Shon, H., & Vigneshwaran, S. (2010).
Studying municipal solid waste generation and composition in the urban areas of Bhutan. Waste
Management and Research. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242x09343118.
Planning Commission. (1989). Human settlements: 6th Five Year plan. Planning Commission,
Royal Government of Bhutan.
RSPN. (2006). Public private partnership for urban environment (PPPUE). Policy framework for
solid waste management. Royal Society for Protection ofNature, Bhutan.
Circular Economy in Canada

Jonathan Cocker and Kimberley Graham

Abstract Canada, specifically Ontario, has become the first jurisdiction in the Amer-
icas to enact a comprehensive circular economy law, the Resource Recovery and
Circular Economy Act, 2016 (“RRCEA”) (SO 2016 c. 12). Previously, waste diver-
sion existed in Ontario under the Waste Diversion Act (“WDA”) (SO 2002, c 6), a
government-managed scheme that was meant to oversee the diversion of target waste
streams away from landfills. The WDA tasked Waste Diversion Ontario (“WDO”) to
be the industry regulator, and the province designated industry-funded organizations
(“IFOs”) as service providers to coordinate waste management activities for their
respective industries. The fatal systemic flaw of this framework, however, was that
these two bodies were placed between the “Producers” (namely the manufacturers,
first importers, and brand owners) and the end-of-life supply chain. The RRCEA
will allow the province to more effectively preserve and recover resources, divert
materials from landfills, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from waste, with the
overall aim of implementing a “circular economy.” Under the RRCEA, the Producers
will be the primary resource recovery party, solely responsible for complying with
the Ministry’s mandated obligations for resource recovery, with non-transferable
liabilities. By naming the Producer as the operator of the product’s end-of-life (or
“reverse”) supply chain, their decisions as to a product’s composition, content, and
deconstruction attributes are now relevant to the waste management process—giving
rise to an integrated circular economy market. Canada’s treatment of plastics gives
interesting insight into how a circular economy might be implemented. Additionally,
to address these requirements and liability issues, Producers are looking to Producer
Responsibility Organizations (“PROs”) as waste management third parties to help
address the new and often daunting obligations, as examined in this paper’s case
study on the used tire industry in Ontario. To help implement RRCEA, Ontario has
identified no less than 15 actions to help facilitate the smooth transition to a circular
economy, with the express interest of creating scalable solutions which can then be
mass-produced across North America.

J. Cocker (B) · K. Graham

Baker & McKenzie LLP, An Ontario Limited Liability Partnership, Is a Member of Baker &
McKenzie International, A Swiss Verein, Toronto, ON, Canada
e-mail: jonathan.cocker@bakermckenzie.com

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 87

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_5
88 J. Cocker and K. Graham

1 Introduction

In 2016, Canada became the first country in the Americas to enact a comprehensive
circular economy law, which Glen Murray, Former Minister of the Environment and
Climate Change for the Government of Ontario, describes as “legislation [that] will
tackle the problem of waste generation by increasing resource recovery and moving
toward a circular economy. At the heart of the legislation is the idea that Producers
should be responsible for the end-of-life management of their products and packag-
ing.”1 Specifically, the landmark RRCEA was enacted in Canada’s largest province,
Ontario, with the complementary goals of preserving/recovering more resources,
diverting more materials from landfills, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from
waste, all with the express overall aim of implementing a “circular economy” in
Ontario.2
The RRCEA does not, however, arise in a regulatory vacuum. Instead, the Province
of Ontario (along with all of the other provinces and territories of Canada) has
legislated waste diversion programs for a number of different products/waste streams,
generally consistent in purpose, if somewhat more limited, than those of the European
Union and elsewhere.3 Many of the activities now captured under the RRCEA were
previously cast as “waste diversion” and regulated under conventional recycling
laws,4 with a more prescribed and less ambitious set of environmental and product
life cycle goals.
What is also new and potentially profound in its effects upon waste management
both inside of Ontario and across the many other jurisdictions of North America
is the transfer of obligation under the RRCEA from the government designated
IFOs directly to the Producers themselves.5 This shift of responsibility for diver-
sion/resource recovery to a near fully private model is often termed “individual
Producer responsibility” (or IPR), and it is this shift, along with a number of envi-
ronmental policy changes, which are proposed as the means under which to make
the RRCEA, and the circular economy, more than simply another iteration of the
IFO waste diversion programs.

1 https://www.ontario.ca/page/strategy-waste-free-ontario-building-circular-economy.
2 The RRCEA defines “circular economy” as an economy in which participants strive, (a) to minimize

the use of raw materials, (b) to maximize the useful life of materials and other resources through
resource recovery, and (c) to minimize waste generated at the end-of-life of products and packaging.
3 This paper has focused its analysis upon the RRCEA as the only comprehensive circular economy

law, but a somewhat lesser commitment to resource recovery and “circularity” can be seen in a
number of provincial programs across Canada.
4 Waste Diversion Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 6 (https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/02w06).
5 As described in more detail below, the RRCEA and the Tire Regulation place the "Producer" at

the epicenter of the obligations for resource recovery and this party can be the manufacturer, brand
owner, importer, distributor, dealer, or retailer.
Circular Economy in Canada 89

This paper will consider (i) the experience of the waste management parties under
the IFO model and its relevance in the transition to a circular economy; (ii) the
centrality played by IPR—where Producers are directly tasked with operating an
end-of-life supply chain with non-transferable liabilities; (iii) the policy goals and
mechanisms of the RRCEA; (iv) a case study of how the used tire waste management
industry participants have responded and positioned themselves to meet the first cir-
cular economy product law, the Tire Regulation6 ; and (v) the supporting government
infrastructure measures deemed necessary to IPR’s success.

2 Part I: The Transition from Diversion to Circular

Economy

2.1 Ontario Waste Market Necessitated Diversion

The Province of Ontario is Canada’s largest by population and has a waste genera-
tion profile all-too typical in North America. In 2014, for example, approximately
11.5 million tonnes of waste were generated in the province—nearly a tonne of waste
per person per year.7 Forty percent of this waste is generated by households with the
other 60% coming from industry, commercial businesses, and institutions. Ontario
municipalities are responsible for the waste generated from households and collect,
process, market, and dispose of 4.9 million tonnes of material each year, at a cost of
$1.2 billion Canadian dollars.
Municipalities in Ontario have some of the most sophisticated diversion programs
in North America, with 95% of Ontario households having access to curbside recy-
cling (Blue Box) and curbside compost programs made available to 71% of house-
holds in the province. Ontario’s Blue Box Program for printed paper and packaging
has achieved a recycling performance of 65%.
While municipalities have been driven to increase recycling through programs and
regulatory provisions, such progress has not happened elsewhere in the economy and,
unfortunately, 3/4 of Ontario’s waste has been sent to landfill for the past 10 years.8

6 O. Reg. 225/18: TIRES (April 9, 2018) filed under the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy
Act, 2016, S.O. 2016, c. 12, Sched. 1.
7 Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (2016a) at p. 4 (“Strategy for a Waste-

Free Ontario”).
8 Ibid.
90 J. Cocker and K. Graham

The Ontario government has recently recognized its diminishing waste capac-
ity, the need for resource conservation, and the missed economic and environmental
opportunities. In fact, waste diversion has been made a critical piece of the province’s
Climate Change Action Plan.9 The larger benefit, however, as the province has identi-
fied, is replacing virgin resources in the economy with recovered resources available
in Ontario.

2.2 What Did Ontario Previously Create?

The predecessor to the RRCEA is the WDA which created the WDO as the regulator
tasked with indirectly overseeing the diversion from landfill of a number of waste
streams. Included within this group were:
– waste electrical and electronic equipment including computers, screens, periph-
erals, and audio/visual equipment;
– municipal solid waste streams including glass, metals, printed paper and pack-
aging, and plastics;
– municipal hazardous and special wastes, including batteries, pressurized and
aerosol containers, fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides and pesticides, paints and
coatings, oil bottles and filters, and antifreeze and solvents; and
– used tires, including on-road passenger and truck tires and off-the-road tires.

2.3 Industry-Funded Organizations

Through the WDA, the province designated IFOs for each of the target waste
streams.10 IFOs enlisted service providers and coordinated the waste management
activities of all of waste diversion participants for each waste stream, including the
Producers, haulers, collectors, processors, and remanufacturers (depending upon the
waste stream). These IFOs allocated volumes, set fee structures, rated performance,
and conducted auditing and performance assessments of all the regulated parties.

9 Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (2016b). At the time of writing, a new
Ontario government has expressed an intention to discontinue the Climate Change Action Plan and
to reorient the Province’s sustainability strategy elsewhere.
10 There were, in addition, certain more narrowly focused Industry Stewardship Plans, which acted

very similarly to IFOs.

Circular Economy in Canada 91

With the WDO and the IFOs, two intermediary bodies were, however, placed
between the Producers11 (namely manufacturers, first importers, and brand owners)
and the end-of-life supply chain. This was arguably a fatal design flaw that prevented
a harmonized approach between regulator and industry.
WDO was to effectively represent the provincial environmental interests regarding
waste diversion targets, education, and promotion. The IFOs, in turn, were notionally
a coordinating body of industry interests, staffed by industry personnel, making
specific allocations of waste resources to the various waste diversion participants in
order to coordinate the overall waste diversion enterprise (the “Command Diversion
Framework”). From inception, IFOs had an unclear enforcement mandate under the
Command Diversion Framework in spite of their centrality within it.
An equivalent of the Command Diversion Framework had not been tried on a broad
province or statewide scale previously in North America, and there was clearly going
to be an element of trial and error in its execution with one or more of the regulated
waste streams. The problems, unfortunately, were systemic.

2.4 What Went Wrong with the Command Diversion

Framework?

Participants in Ontario’s waste diversion programs have a long list of complaints with
both the structure and the administration of the Command Diversion Framework,
including:
– the failure to make waste reduction and reuse preferable to recycling—it did not
incentivize these activities distinctly from recycling, making it the near default
diversion strategy;
– Producers were permitted to externalize their responsibility (both financial and
liability), making them disinterested parties with no inducements to innovate;
– as IFOs effectively controlled sector monopolies, service providers and Producers
were locked into protocols that left little room for needed deviation;
– the Producers’ waste diversion fees were, too often, disconnected from the actual
costs of diverting the waste;
– poor enforcement and sanction mechanisms permitted a complacent compliance
culture in some areas which resulted in an unaccounted for Producer segment
operating outside of the Command Diversion Framework;

11 S. 59 of the RRCEA uses the term “brand holder,” defined as a person who owns or licenses a

brand or who otherwise has rights to market a product under a brand. The Tire Regulation reverts
to “Producer” to expressly delineate the obligated party formula.
92 J. Cocker and K. Graham

– below optimal diversion rates for organics;

– no effective incentives to reduce waste;
– exclusion of important streams, such as Industrial Commercial and Institutional
(“IC&I”) waste; and
– (perceptions of) lack of fairness, transparency, and certainty in the manner in which
the waste resources were allocated among participants, creating uncertainty in the
market.
With these attendant problems visible within the first years of inception, calls
for a fundamental overhaul have been made repeatedly in the past decade from all
stakeholders, with the provincial government finally acceding that the Command
Diversion Framework simply did not achieve its goals12 for most, if not all, of the
regulated waste streams.13

2.5 Dismantling the Command Diversion Framework

On November 30, 2016, the Province of Ontario finally passed the RRCEA which
enabled the passage of transitional legislation, the Waste Diversion Transition Act,
2016,14 thereby permitting the province to move away from the Command Diver-
sion Framework. The transition from a government-managed scheme to the RRCEA
without the disruption or diminution of waste diversion services and activities is not
going to be easy, and the government’s planning for the changeover includes:
– moving the government oversight of Ontario waste diversion from the WDO to the
resource productivity and recovery authority (the “Authority”), with the Authority
assuming more of a night watchman role;
– enabling the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (“MOECP”
or the “Ministry”)15 to directly change current diversion programs; and
– permitting the MOECP to request the windup of the IFOs, which is anticipated to
be a staged and gradual process in light of the need for continuity.

12 Strategy for a Waste-Free Ontario, supra at p.4.

13 Notably, IFO Ontario Tire Stewardship had the highest diversion rates for reasons which are only

partially attributable to its relatively manageable and specialized set of waste diversion participants.
14 SO 2016, c 12, Sch. 2.
15 At the time of passage of the RRCEA, the provincial environmental regulator was the Ministry

of the Environment and Climate Change.

Circular Economy in Canada 93

In short, the WDA and its mixed legacy are near an end, while the waste industry
stakeholders (both from within Ontario and elsewhere) scramble to respond to the
new regime and its challenges and opportunities.

3 Part II: RRCEA and IPR

3.1 Circular Economy Under the RRCEA

Viewed from the vantage point of waste diversion programs across North Amer-
ica and elsewhere, the RRCEA combines ambitious waste diversion goals with the
dynamism of a mandated but relatively unfettered diversion market. Shades of the
European Union’s innovation with waste diversion16 can be seen in the outcomes
sought:
– a registry of all introduced products and their primary, convenience packaging17
and transportation packaging18 (giving rise to regulated wastes) will be established;
– “cradle-to-cradle” stewardship obligations imposed upon brand holders;
– design-for-environment; and
– expanded scope of obligated parties to include those with a “commercial connec-
tion.”19

3.2 Resource Recovery Extends Beyond Recycling

One of the features of the RRCEA which makes it a circular economy law and not
merely a privatized waste diversion law is the broader recognition of activities which
constitute “resource recovery.” Specifically, the RRCEA deems all of the following
as “resource recovery”:
the extraction of useful materials or other resources from things that might otherwise be
waste, including through reuse, recycling, reintegration, regeneration or other activities20

16 European Commission, Closing the loop—An EU action plan for the Circular Economy (EUR-
Lex: European Commission, Brussels, 2.12.2015).
17 Defined under RRCEA as “material used in addition to primary packaging to facilitate consumer’s

handling or transportation of one or more products, such as boxes and bags.”

18 Defined under the RRCEA as “material used in addition to primary packaging to facilitate the

handling or transportation of one or more products by persons other than consumers, such as pallets,
bail wrap, and boxes, but does not include shipping containers designed for transporting things by
road, ship, rail, or air.”
19 Under s.61(3) of RRCEA, a person who imports, wholesales, leases, or retails product or is

otherwise involved in the regulated product’s distribution.

20 S.O. 2016, c, 12—Part I—General, Definitions.
94 J. Cocker and K. Graham

This is significant in that it creates a dynamism within the existing and new waste
management industry to find new, less costly and maybe more product-specific recov-
ery activities. Under the Tire Regulation, used tire reuse and recapping have expanded
the recovery options available to Producers potentially creating new secondary mar-
kets. It also finally makes the Producers’ decisions as to its product composition,
content, deconstruction attributes, etc., relevant to the waste management process—
giving rise to a true, integrated circular economy market.

3.3 Producer as Primary Resource Recovery Party

The RRCEA expressly sets six IPR obligations for resource recovery directly upon
the Producers:
1. Designate Materials—Producers must self define and designate its products and
related packaging for resource recovery.
2. Define Responsible Parties—brand owners, distributors, importers, and retailers
must confirm which party is the Producer for every product and related packaging
based on regulatory priority rules.
3. Set up a Collection and Management System for the End-of-Life Products and
Related Packaging—either individually or through private collectives, Producers
must operate a resource recovery supply chain for their products and related
packaging.
4. Provide Promotion and Education—Producers must create and/or implement a
promotion and education program to increase product and related packaging
collection, reuse, recycling, and recovery.
5. Register, Report, Auditing, and Recordkeeping—a central database will be cre-
ated by the enforcement body resource recovery and productivity authority (the
“Authority”) which will track product and related packaging resource recovery
activities.
6. Reduce Waste—Producers will be obligated to engage in design-for-environment
in both reducing waste and better-capturing resources at end-of-life.
These six obligations effectively place Producers in a new and unfamiliar role as
operators of product end-of-life (or “reverse”) supply chains.

3.4 Authority as “Night Watchman” Under IPR?

There is also a clear divide between market participants and the Authority, which
shall, under the IPR model, only:
– operate as a data registry for waste diversion participants (namely Producers and
service providers);
Circular Economy in Canada 95

– engage in compliance and enforcement independent from the industry itself (which
will include inspections, compliance orders, and administrative penalties); and
– provide limited direct oversight of obligated parties, which may well include Pro-
ducers, municipalities, service providers, and privately formed collectives of obli-
gated and related service parties.
Notable in its absence is an Authority mandate over policy or waste diversion
program development, which shall be assumed directly by the MOECP.21 Instead,
the Authority has signaled and, as of the date of writing, continues to maintain
a willingness to enforce the RRCEA mandated outcomes, but the means used in
achieving them will principally remain with the market participants.
Of the approaches highlighting this more circumspect regulatory position, the
Authority (and, indirectly the MOECP) has, to date:
– permitted various waste management parties to act as PROs for obligated Producers
under the RRCEA;
– assumed no coordinating or “clearinghouse” role in the collection, movement, or
distribution of resources subjected to recovery activities;
– allowed for the transfer of recovered resources, and perhaps even verification
credits, among and between Producers and PROs; and
– not sought to mandate commercial contract terms, including prices, for any parties
in the reverse supply chain.
This “night watchman” role for the Authority may, however, be reflective of
the current transition to a circular economy and the need to allow for the waste
diversion-era parties to first implement a form of IPR before restraints on market
activities, including aberrant practices, are introduced over time. The content of
those restraints will, in all likelihood, emanate from its broad “provincial interests”
mandate (discussed below).

3.5 Balancing Market Certainty and “Provincial Interests”

The RRCEA is notable both its commitment to IPR and the governmental oversight
and program direction powers which are retained by the Ministry. Specifically, the
RRCEA specifies the “provincial interest” retained by the government as follows:
Provincial interest
2 It is in the provincial interest that Ontario has a system of resource recovery and
waste reduction that aims to,
(a) protect the natural environment and human health;
(b) foster the continued growth and development of the circular economy;

21 It could be argued that WDO also omitted any policy development work, but their central position

and obfuscated mandate crowded out the MOECP from much policy initiative.
96 J. Cocker and K. Graham

(c) minimize greenhouse gas emissions resulting from resource recovery activities
and waste reduction activities;
(d) minimize the generation of waste, including waste from products and packag-
ing;
(e) increase the durability, reusability, and recyclability of products and packaging;
(f) hold persons who are most responsible for the design of products and packaging
responsible for the products and packaging at the end-of-life;
(g) decrease hazardous and toxic substances in products and packaging;
(h) minimize the need for waste disposal;
(i) minimize the environmental impacts that result from resource recovery activi-
ties and waste reduction activities, including from waste disposal;
(j) provide efficient, effective, convenient, and reliable services related to resource
recovery and waste reduction, including waste management services;
(k) increase the reuse and recycling of waste across all sectors of the economy;
(l) increase opportunities and markets for recovered resources;
(m) promote public education and awareness with respect to resource recovery and
waste reduction;
(n) promote cooperation and coordination among various persons and entities
involved in resource recovery activities and waste reduction activities;
(o) promote competition in the provision of resource recovery services and waste
reduction services;
(p) foster fairness for consumers; and
(q) do any other related thing that may be prescribed.

Notable among this list are those which purport to reinsert the Ministry into the
middle of waste sector commercial relationships, such as:
(l) Increase opportunities and markets for recovered resources.
(n) Promote cooperation and coordination among various persons and entities
involved in resource recovery activities and waste reduction activities.
(o) Promote competition in the provision of resource recovery services and waste
reduction services.
Many of these provincial interests have the ability to profoundly make and remake
any or all of the specific circular economy product programs.

3.6 Extent of Provincial Interest Policy-Making?

What is unclear is the extent to which the Ministry will evoke any of these powers
and how, in doing so, they will balance existing interests (and investments) with these
goals.
As participants under the IPR model, every evocation of a provincial interest will
create concerns as the predictability and stability of the circular economy model.
Conversely, a resource recovery model predicated simply upon cost reductions and
Circular Economy in Canada 97

meeting disposal restrictions and bans will not achieve all of the environmental policy
aspirations of a circular economy.
This concern over the intrusive role which may be played by the MOECP is not
merely hypothetical. Section 11 of the RRCEA expressly anticipates that the Ministry
will issue policy statements evoking provincial interests rights:
Policy statements
11 (1) For the purpose of furthering the provincial interest described in Section 2,
the Minister, with the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, may issue
resource recovery and waste reduction policy statements.
Development of policy statements
(2) In developing a policy statement, the Minister shall consult, in the manner
the Minister considers appropriate, with,
(a) representatives of municipalities;
(b) representatives of persons engaging in resource recovery activities and
waste reduction activities;
(c) representatives of environmental organizations;
(d) the public; and
(e) such other persons as the Minister considers advisable.
While IPR is embedded in the structure of the RRCEA (and Tire Regulation),
there is no legislated right for a party to claim non-interference from the Authority
or MOECP in the form of IPR freedom from regulatory oversight and management.
In other words, IPR is not a provincial interest and waste management parties will
want to understand the significance of this in considering long-term commitments
such as capital investments. Further, the limited law which emerged during the diver-
sion era appeared to confirm that legislated environmental promotion powers may
be license for all types of policy changes without regard for market impacts.22

4 Part III: Canada’s Approach to Circular Economy

in Plastics

4.1 Canada’s Approach to Circular Economy in Plastics

The linear economy that previously existed in Canada created a problem in plastics,
and the current take-make-waste model for manufacture, use, and disposal of plastics,
is environmentally unsustainable. Had recovery and recycling been more effectively
utilized, energy and emissions necessary for each production cycle in plastics would
have been alleviated. A move toward a closed loop is necessary, and what is needed
is for Canada’s chemical industry to innovate how plastics and chemical compounds

22 Sims Group Recycling v. Minister of the Environment and Waste Diversion Ontario, 2013 ONSC

209.
98 J. Cocker and K. Graham

Fig. 1 Usman Valiante;

Report: a vision for a circular
economy for plastics in
Canada, february 2019: pg.
5. https://institute.
smartprosperity.ca/sites/
default/files/report-
circulareconomy-
february14-final.pdf;
infographic

used in the production of plastics to be reused or more effectively recovered and

recycled. However, Canada faces several deterrents for a circular economy for plastics
in Canada, cost being the primary one, with technological and informational barriers
following closely behind due to the jurisdictional nature of waste management.

4.2 Current, Linear Approach to Plastics

Canada’s current approach to plastics is referred to as a “take-make-waste model,”

whereby raw materials are extracted and used to manufacture polymers in plastics
and then disposed of into a landfill at their end-of-life. As per the Smart Prosperity
Institute’s report, dated February 2019, “In Canada, only about 11–12% of approxi-
mately 3.84 million tonnes of plastic generated annually is collected for recycling.”23
Most of the waste plastics are disposed of via landfill, incineration, or export. Some
plastic waste finds its way directly into the environment through litter, illegal dump-
ing, ineffective waste management, and even through untreated sewage (Fig. 1).24

23 Valiante (2019).
24 Tevegini Matveev, "The Biggest Source of Ocean Plastic may not be What you Think." Canadian

Broadcasting Corporation News. July 2, 2018.

Circular Economy in Canada 99

Canada’s use of linear, end-of-life models still remains the cheapest form of
manufacturing. This reality is only made more difficult with the fluctuating prices
of oil and gas, leading to a drop in domestic demand for recycled plastics.25 This
directly impacts how much stakeholders can invest in recycled plastics. The cheaper
the virgin resources, the less demand there is to recycle plastics due to an additional
and economically prohibitive affiliated cost. Canada does not appear to be an outlier
in this regard, however. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, globally only
about 2% of plastics are recycled for manufacturing to replace virgin resources in a
closed-loop system.26

4.3 Intergovernmental Collaboration Toward Circular

Economy for Plastics

Within Canada, waste management is handled primarily at the provincial/territorial

level, and waste collection activities often fall to municipalities. Jurisdictionally,
Canada has inconsistent policies and definitions creating a patchwork of incongruent
regulatory requirements and standards.27 Intergovernmental collaboration between
these jurisdictions is needed to harmonize an effective circular economy model on
plastics. The federal government has received, via the Canadian Environmental Pro-
tection Act (CEPA), a blueprint for establishing a regulatory framework for plastics.
For example, under the CEPA’s Schedule 1 (Toxic Substances List),28 any substance
that is identified as a toxic under this legislature is subjected to regulation no mat-
ter the stage of a product’s life cycle. This framework is also useful for developing
environmental objectives, national standards, and pollution protection plans.29

4.4 Support for a Circular Economy

One of the challenges is the division among plastic industry stakeholders as to what
the circular economy outcome should be. Canada has a large chemical industry which
produces plastics (natural gas), and there are three ways to replace fossil fuel-derived
resins with renewable ones30 :

25 Valiante. “A Vision for a Circular Economy for Plastics in Canada,” 8.

26 https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/news/the-new-plastics-economy-rethinking-the-

future-of-plastics-infographics.
27 Valiante. “A Vision for a Circular Economy for Plastics in Canada,” 25.
28 https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/canadian-environmental-

protection-act-registry/publications/canadian-environmental-protection-act-1999/schedules.html#
sch1.
29 Valiante. “A Vision for a Circular Economy for Plastics in Canada,” 25.
30 Ibid., 12.
100 J. Cocker and K. Graham

1. Combining hydrogen and CO2 monomers (ethylene, styrene, or polypropylene).

Carbon Engineering, a company based in Squamish, BC has developed a way to
extract carbon directly from the air.
2. Gasification of biomass (woody biomass from forestry slash) to convert particles
into monomers.
3. Manufacture renewable resins from the production of bio-plastics, such as poly-
lactic acid (PLA) which is derived from cultivated biomass (corn).
However, the development of these initiatives will depend largely on economic
cost and commercialization of the above-noted processes. Despite their pioneer sta-
tus, these are promising future developments for the chemical processing and recover
polymers for plastic resins. This type of innovation is necessary for long-term renew-
able plastics; however, the more pressing concern is the reuse of plastics in the current
Canadian economy (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 Usman Valiante; The goal: a circular economy for plastics; Report: a vision for a circular
economy for plastics in Canada, february 2019: pg. 11. https://institute.smartprosperity.ca/sites/
default/files/report-circulareconomy-february14-final.pdf; diagram
Circular Economy in Canada 101

4.5 Recovery Activities to Be Adopted

A. Recirculation
In Canada, of the 12% of plastics that are collected for recycling processes, a large
proportion is “downcycled,” meaning those plastics are no longer usable for their
original purpose due to a change in their chemical/physical properties.31 Recycling,
therefore, cannot be the only reliable method for waste recovery and action plan
for end-of-life products. Instead, the Smart Prosperity Institute has identified four
complimentary pathways to recover plastic waste and reintegrate plastics into the
next product life cycle32 :
1. reuse;
2. mechanically processed and recycled (to be used over virgin resources);
3. chemically processed and recycled (chemolysis and pyrolysis processes, catalytic
cracking, gasification, etc.).
Examples of commercialization
a. Quebec-based Loop Industries;
b. Ontario-based Pyrowave Inc.;
c. Quebec-based Enerkem facility in Edmonton.
4. CO2 recirculation and energy recovery.
B. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Model
One of the most effective policies for implementing a circular economy in Canada
is to adopt a policy that will incentivize reverse supply chains to evolve into a plastic
circular economy. There must be policy in place that will determine and assign Pro-
ducers responsibility, regulatory requirements, and recycling targets for end-of-life
plastics. Or in other words, EPR is regulation that “specifies required outcomes or
objectives, rather than the means by which they must be achieved.”33 Such mod-
els will inject competition into the market, for Producers to find ways to meet their
non-transferable obligations and liabilities respect the end-of-life products they man-
ufacture.
Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs) are the likely answer for the plastic
industry. British Columbia has successfully implemented EPR regulatory structures
using this model. Encorp Pacific (a PRO for beverage Producers) recovered 73.9% of
plastic beverage containers supplied into BC in 2017.34 Similarly, and also in 2017,
the BC Used Oil Management Association (BCUOMA), recovered 82.5% of plastic
used oil and antifreeze containers supplied into the province.35

31 Valiante. “A Vision for a Circular Economy for Plastics in Canada,” 8.

32 Ibid., 12–13.
33 Coglianese et al. (2002)
34 Valiante. "A Vision for a Circular Economy for Plastics in Canada," 20.
35 Ibid., 20.
102 J. Cocker and K. Graham

These high recovery percentages are the result of collaboration and consideration
of all stages of a product life cycle. With Producers being directly tied to the product’s
end-of-life with financial and legal non-transferable liabilities, there is now a vested
interest in the management of recycling systems. This will also help by verifying the
outcomes of performance standards while providing Producers with the freedom to
meet their regulatory obligations. This will likely result in commercial collaboration
and among industry associations and address incongruity between Producers and
plastic recyclers.
C. Recycled Content Performance Standards
This is more on the demand side of the economic policy, whereby materials that would
have been otherwise recycled are now sought after materials which will reinforce
commercial investment in recycling. A market is created for recovered materials
that will ensure demand despite costs from other sources of feedstock. This can also
protect against the global market fluctuation of virgin raw material pricing.

4.6 Other Options for Reducing the Amount of Virgin

Plastics

In their February 2019 Report, the Smart Prosperity Institute notes two compelling
strategies for reducing the amounts of virgin plastics for use in Canada:
(1) Bans on the Sale of Plastic Products and Packaging
Following the EU’s example, there has been an international surge in the number of
laws that prohibit the use of certain kinds of single-use plastics (straws, drink contain-
ers, cutlery, etc.). Bans on such single-use plastic products represent a small fraction
of plastic waste, but if implemented at national level could maximize their impact.36
Although impactful at the consumer level for individual awareness surrounding the
issue of plastic waste, it may not be the most effective method.
(2) Single-use Plastic Taxes
Taxes that are implemented on single-use plastics, such as shopping bags, have a
similar result to bans, as observed in EU countries such as England, Ireland, Por-
tugal, and Denmark.37 A tax on the production of single-use plastics discourages
both wasteful use and the considerations for manufacturing a product that would
put additional stresses on recycling systems. Norway provides a compelling case
study regarding their single-use bottle tax. Collectively, once Producers achieve a
95% recycling target, the aforementioned tax is lifted.38 With such an incentive,
Producers created a strategy that refunded deposits which resulted in the recycling

36 Walker and Xanthos (2018).

37 Valiante. "A Vision for a Circular Economy for Plastics in Canada," 27.
38 Ibid., 27.
Circular Economy in Canada 103

of 97% of all beverage containers sold to consumers, with 92% being remade into
other beverage containers.39 These taxes serve to help consumers both make envi-
ronmentally conscious choices when purchasing products and also provide revenue
for governments to offset recycling costs.

5 Part IV: Case Study—Used Tires in Ontario

In drafting the new Tire Regulation under RRCEA, the Government of Ontario posted
a notice on the Environmental Registry to seek feedback from industry association
groups and the general public. The consultation was open from December 1, 2017
to January 22, 2018.40 Since then, the Tire Regulation41 has come into full force.
Used tires in Ontario, and the processes that currently exist to divert, recover, and
recycle them, provide a compelling case study in how the tire industry previously
met compliance obligations under the Command Division Framework and how the
industry will need to adjust to comply with the Tire Regulation.
Previously, as discussed earlier in this paper, the government-managed scheme
under the WDA was meant to oversee the diversion of waste from landfills, with
Waste Diversion Ontario functioning as the industry regulator. Under this systemic
structure, provinces further designated industry-funded organizations to act as service
providers to coordinate all waste management activities. Within the tire industry,
Ontario Tire Stewardship (“OTS”) emerged as a prominent IFO that managed its
own stewardship program, to which members paid fees, to coordinate the end-of-life
supply chain for tires.

39 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/12/can-norway-help-us-solve-the-plastic-

crisis-one-bottle-at-a-time, The Guardian, July 12, 2018.

40 Environmental Registry. Government of Ontario. (2016). https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/013-1716 .
41 Tires, O. Reg. 225/18.
104 J. Cocker and K. Graham

The tonnes supplied and collected for passenger and light truck (“PLT”) tires,
medium truck (“MT”) tires, and off-the-road (“OTR”) tires in Ontario have been as
follows under the OTS plan:

Amounts Supplied in Tonnes by the OTS42

Tire type 2017 2016 2015

PLT (supplied) 118,740 116,230 113,524
MT (supplied) 46,080 45,448 44,858
OTR (supplied) 20,937 18,225 18,422
Total supplied 185,757 179,903 176,804

Amounts Collected in Tonnes by the OTS

Tire type 2017 2016 2015

PLT (collected) 88,399 90,036 88,835
MT (collected) 35,457 34,155 32,122
OTR (collected) 17,827 18,412 16,472
Total collected 141,683 142,603 137,429

The used tire supply and collection can be further segregated by tire type43 :

Amounts Supplied in Units by the OTS

Tire type 2017 2016 2015

PLT (supplied) 11,874,000 11,623,000 11,352,400
MT (supplied) 921,600 908,960 897,160
OTR (supplied) 209,370 182,250 184,220

Amounts Collected in Units by the OTS

Tire type 2017 2016 2015

PLT (collected) 8,839,900 9,003,600 8,883,500
MT (collected) 709,140 683,100 642,440
OTR (collected) 178,270 184,120 164,720

42 Annual Reports, Ontario Tire Stewardship, 2018, online: https://rethinktires.ca/about-us/annual-

report/#sthash.IwYRpwNq.dpbs.
43 The following ratios can be used to calculate the number of individual tires:

1 PLT = 10 kg
1 MT = 50 kg
1 OTR = 100 kg.
Circular Economy in Canada 105

The statistics reaffirm that there remains a delta between tires supplied and col-
lected. Under the IFO regime, OTS managed its stewardship program with no less
than 18 different tire classifications (Fig. 3).
OTS Tire Classification44
Under OTS, the following other tire types were expressly excluded45 :
• push lawn mowers;
• tires on toys;
• bicycle tires
• inner tubes;

Fig. 3 OTS Tire Classification; Ontario Tire Stewardship; 2013; http://rethinktires.ca/wp-content/

uploads/OTS-Tire-Classification-April-2013-Final.pdf; chart

44 "OTS Tire Classification," Ontario Tire Stewardship (2013), online: http://rethinktires.ca/wp-

content/uploads/OTS-Tire-Classification-April-2013-Final.pdf.
45 General Program Information, Ontario Tire Stewardship, online: http://rethinktires.ca/program-

participants/faq/#sthash.I0ZSUEx6.dpbs.
106 J. Cocker and K. Graham

• polyurethane tires;
• wheel barrel;
• manual dollies;
• manual hand trucks;
• laminate tires—comprised of used tire components;
• personal mobility device tires;
• commercial aircraft tires.

5.1 Incentives for Processors46

The OTS plan provided an incentive ranking system for certain secondary tire prod-
ucts.47 Specifically, an incentive ranking system was used for the following product
categories, with crumb rubber receiving the highest incentive level:
• crumb rubber;
• shred;
• fabricated products;
• manufactured products.

5.2 Tire Stewardship Fee (TSF) Chart48

In respect of the eco fees charted Producers, they range widely from $3.50 to over
$500 per tire depending upon size and related processing costs:

46 Incentives, Ontario Tire Stewardship, online: http://rethinktires.ca/program-participants/

processor/incentives/#sthash.hd4gSgeZ.dpbs.
47 Tire processors process tires and create multiple sizes of tire-derived product ("TDP"), which is

sold to recycled product manufacturers, who then use that TDP to create various products made
from recycled rubber (calendared, molded, and extruded products). Some consumer products that are
manufacturer include rubber landscape tiles, rubber mulch, playground surfacing, roofing shakes,
athletic flooring, acoustic underlay and carpet pads, rubber paving, and rubber bricks. See: “Why
Tire-Derived, Recycled Rubber Products?" Ontario Tire Stewardship, online: http://rethinktires.ca/
around-the-home/recycled-rubber-products/#sthash.100vm5Qo.vSrr2jbx.dpbs.
48 Tire Stewardship Fee (TSF) Chart, Ontario Tire Stewardship, online: http://rethinktires.ca/

program-participants/stewards/tsf-fee-chart/#sthash.0yH5OJOA.dpbs .
Tire category Tire description Tire class Tires supplied on or Tires supplied on or Tires supplied May Tires supplied April
after May 1, 2017 after May 1, 2016 1, 2014, to April 30, 1, 2013, to April 30,
2015 2014
TSF TSF TSF TSF
On-road tires Passenger and light 1 $3.30 $3.55 $5.43 $5.69
truck (PLT) tires
Circular Economy in Canada

Medium truck (MT) 2 $12.95 $12.95 $14.65 $14.65

Off-road pneumatic 1 to ≤ 15 kg 3 $5.55 $5.55 $5.88 $5.88
tires >15 to ≤30 kg 4 $11.10 $11.10 $11.76 $11.76
> 30 to ≤70 kg 5 $27.76 $27.76 $29.40 $29.40
> 70 to ≤120 kg and 6 $44.41 $44.41 $47.04 $47.04
agricultural tiresa
>70 to ≤250 kg
>120 to ≤250 kg 7 $111.03 $111.03 $117.60 $117.60
> 250 to ≤375 kg 8 $172.10 $172.10 $182.28 $182.28
and agricultural
tiresa >250 kg
> 375 to ≤700 kg 9 $333.09 $333.09 $352.80 $352.28
> 700 to ≤1200 kg 10 $516.29 $516.29 $546.84 $546.84
>1200 kg 11 $1,237.98 $1,237.98 $1,311.24 $1,311.24
Solid and resilient 1 to ≤30 kg 12 $11.10 $11.10 $11.76 $11.76
tires
>30 to ≤60 kg 13 $22.21 $22.21 $23.52 $23.52
> 60 to ≤250 kg 14 $55.51 $55.51 $58.80 $58.80
(continued)
107
(continued)
108

Tire category Tire description Tire class Tires supplied on or Tires supplied on or Tires supplied May Tires supplied April
after May 1, 2017 after May 1, 2016 1, 2014, to April 30, 1, 2013, to April 30,
2015 2014
TSF TSF TSF TSF
> 250 kg to ≤375 kg 15 $172.10 $172.10 $182.28 $182.28
>375 to ≤700 kg 16 $333.09 $333.09 $352.80 $352.80
>700 to ≤1200 kg 17 $516.29 $516.29 $546.84 $546.84
>1200 kg 18 $1,237.98 $1,237.98 $1,311.24 $1,311.24
a Agricultural
tires are defined as those tires listed as such in The Tire and Rim Association, Inc. Annual Year Book Section 5, which are used on agricultural
equipment and excluding industrial and log skidder tires
J. Cocker and K. Graham
Circular Economy in Canada 109

5.3 Who Is the Producer?

The first and likely most central determination to be made under the Tire Regulation is
an assessment as to which party in a tire supply chain is the “Producer.” As with many
consumer sectors, there is an ever-changing mix of parties, including manufacturers,
importers, distributors, dealers, and unaffiliated retailers, many of which can fall into
multiple categories depending upon the movement of tires.
The Tire Regulation seeks to define the Producer using a “waterfall” definition
predicated upon residency within the province:

3. (1) For the purposes of the definition of “producer” in subsection 1 (1), the
producer is

(a) subjected to subsections (2) and (3), with respect to new vehicles marketed to
consumers in Ontario, on which new tires are provided,
(i) if the manufacturer of the vehicle is resident in Ontario, the manufacturer;
(ii) if there is no person described in subclause (i) and the vehicle is imported
into Ontario by a person resident in Ontario, the importer;
(iii) if there is no person described in subclause (i) or (ii) and the vehicle is
marketed by a person resident in Ontario, the first person who marketed
the vehicle; or
(iv) if there is no person described in subclause (i), (ii), or (iii) and the vehicle
is marketed by a person not resident in Ontario, the person who marketed
the vehicle.

(b) with respect to new tires marketed to consumers in Ontario separately from a
vehicle,
(i) if the brand holder of the tires is resident in Ontario, the brand holder;
(ii) if there is no person described in subclause (i) and the tires are imported
into Ontario by a person resident in Ontario, the importer;
(iii) if there is no person described in subclause (i) or (ii) and the tires are
marketed by a person resident in Ontario, the first person who marketed
the tires; or
(iv) if there is no person described in subclause (i), (ii), or (iii) and the tires are
marketed by a person not resident in Ontario, the person who marketed
the tires.

As can be seen, the primary party is the resident manufacturer, failing which it is
the resident importer, and then the resident “marketer,” and, lastly, the nonresident
marketer. This formula has created some interesting dynamics among Producers,
where a company can be the Producer for some, but not necessarily all, of the tires
sold in the province. Under the Command Diversion model, these issues were easily
(and exhaustively) dealt with through a commercial agreement as to which party
would pay the stewardship fee.
110 J. Cocker and K. Graham

With direct Producer liability for such tires, and competing tire PROs with dif-
ferent reverse supply chains and cost structures, the question becomes much more
significant. Further, there appears to be reluctance among Producers and certainly
among PROs to transfer obligations for tire brands where there are multiple Produc-
ers responsible. Instead, precise accounting will be needed to make sure all of the
tires, but none more are subjected to the RRCEA recovery obligations as imposed
on individual Producers.
This convoluted formula, made worse by the web of intricacies within the tire
industry in the province, is a vestige of the Command Diversion model, under which
the priority was to locate a fee payer resident in the province. This model ceases to
make sense once the full extent of the circular economy obligations is understood.

5.4 The Test of Residency

The corporate presence within a sub-national jurisdiction, such as a province or state,

is typically used as the qualifying test for which party is obligated to assume stew-
ardship obligations for a waste-diverted product. This was true under the Command
Diversion model, and it is now been maintained under the Tire Regulation:
“resident in Ontario” means a person having a permanent establishment in Ontario within
the meaning of the Corporations Tax Act;

In the Ontario tire market, this has meant that some, but not all, of the largest
manufacturers are directly deemed Producers under this test, potentially creating
asymmetrical obligations among direct competitors within a PRO.

5.5 Tire Regulation Defines Key Producer Obligations

Among the six key obligations imposed upon Producers under the RRCEA, two
of those obligations will impose the most obligation and related liability among
Producers:
– establishing and operating a used tire collection network and
– managing the resource recovery activities in respect of the collected tires.
Each is discussed in turn below.

Tire Collection

(a) Tire Collection Amounts

The Tire Regulation proposes a formula for collection of used tires at 85% of the
Producer’s supply of new tires “into the market,” with a “rolling” three-year period,
set two years retrospectively. The 85% is notionally the loss of tire mass during the
Circular Economy in Canada 111

useful life of a new tire supplied into Ontario. It is not clear if this type of discount
would be used in other product/waste streams to discount other obligations, perhaps
due to shrinkage of the resource. As also noted above, the supply of tires (setting the
Producer’s recovery obligation) has traditionally been substantially higher than the
collection in Ontario. The formula is set out as follows:
4. (1) Subject to subsection (7), every calendar year, every producer shall collect a
minimum amount of tires in accordance with this section.

(2) The minimum amount of tires that must be collected each calendar year shall
be determined using the formula

(Y 3 + Y 4 + Y 5)/3 × 0.85

in which,
“Y3” is the calculated weight of tires supplied or provided on vehicles supplied in
Ontario by the producer in the calendar year three years prior to the collection
year.
“Y4” is the calculated weight of tires supplied or provided on vehicles supplied in
Ontario by the producer in the calendar year four years prior to the collection
year.
“Y5” is the calculated weight of tires supplied or provided on vehicles supplied in
Ontario by the producer in the calendar year five years prior to the collection
year.
The collection obligation also makes it clear that only used tires originating in the
province will qualify for meeting Producer recovery obligations and that the reverse
supply chain parties must also be registered with the Authority.
(3) No producer shall collect tires from outside of Ontario for the purpose of satis-
fying the minimum amount of tires required under subsection (2).
(4) The following conditions apply for the purposes of satisfying the minimum
amount of tires required under subsection (2):
1. Tires counted toward the minimum requirement must be
i. picked up by a tire hauler registered under Section 17 and provided to
a tire processor or tire retreader registered under Section 17 or
ii. provided to a person for reuse.
2. Tires must only be counted once and must not be counted by more than one
producer.
In addition to collection amounts, Producers are obligated to extend their col-
lection network to essentially anywhere that their tires are sold in the province by
anyone, not only the Producers themselves. For large Producers, this formula is as
follows:
112 J. Cocker and K. Graham

Tire collection, large Producer

6. (1) Every producer, other than a producer who only supplies large tires or vehicles
on which large tires are provided, who is required under Section 4 to collect 10,000 kg
or more of calculated weight in a calendar year shall.

(a) satisfy the following four requirements:

(i) In local municipalities with one or more retail locations that supplied the
producer’s tires or vehicles on which their tires were provided to con-
sumers in the previous calendar year, the producer shall establish and
operate as many tire collection sites in the subsequent calendar year as
are equal to or greater than 75% of the number of retail locations in the
municipality that were operating in the previous calendar year and had
supplied more than 1,000 kg of calculated weight in that year.
(ii) In local municipalities with a population of 5,000 or more, as reported by
Statistics Canada in the most recent official census, but without a retail
location that supplies the producer’s tires or vehicles on which their tires
are provided to consumers, the producer shall establish and operate at least
one tire collection site.
(iii) In territorial districts, the producer shall establish and operate a tire collec-
tion site within 30 km of each retail location that supplies the producer’s
tires or vehicles on which the tires are provided.
(iv) In territorial districts with a population of 1,000 or more, as reported by
Statistics Canada in the most recent official census, but without a retail
location that supplies the producer’s tires or vehicles on which their tires
are provided to consumers, the producer shall establish and operate at least
one tire collection site or hold at least one public tire collection event each
calendar year.
(b) satisfy the following two requirements:
(i) In local municipalities with a population of 1,000 or more, as reported
by Statistics Canada in the most recent official census, the producer shall
establish and operate.
(A) at least one tire collection site if the population is less than 3,000 or
(B) if the population is 3,000 or more, at least one tire collection site for
every 3,000 people or portion thereof
(ii) In territorial districts with a population of 1,000 or more, as reported by
Statistics Canada in the most recent official census, the producer shall
establish and operate at least one tire collection site.

This requirement is easily the most onerous logistically for any one Producer to
handle themselves, effectively pushing them into some form of collective action to
manage the obligation. The Tire Regulation expressly mandates that PROs, discussed
below, will serve this collective need.
Circular Economy in Canada 113

(b) Tire Resource Recovery

The other notable feature of the Tire Regulation is the obligation to manage
an effective reverse supply chain for used tires generated in the province. The
obligations are, on their face, profound in placing Producers into a waste man-
agement role without any clear ability to transfer liabilities for such liabilities
to their waste management third-party providers, including PROs.
Among the interesting features of these obligations are the qualifying resource
recovery activities, some of which are included as legacy approved activities
under the OTS plan. These rules, as observed from outside of the provincial tire
recycling industry, can appear arbitrary and the subject of special interests.

Management of tires

11. (1) Every producer shall, in addition to establishing and operating a collection
system for tires, establish and operate a system for managing the collected tires in
accordance with the requirements set out in this section.

(2) The producer shall ensure that, with respect to tires collected in a calendar year
for the purpose of satisfying the minimum amount requirement under Section 4
for that calendar year,
(a) one or more of the reuse, retreading, or processing activities referred to in
subsection (3) are undertaken with respect to the collected tires by March
31 in the following calendar year and
(b) the calculated weight of the tires that were reused or retreaded or the weight
of the processed materials used in place of raw materials, or a combination
thereof, amounts in total to at least 85% of the calculated weight of the
collected tires.
(3) The activities referred to in subsection (2) are the following:
1. The tires are reused without modification for their original purpose.
2. The tires are reused without modification for a new purpose, including for
the purpose of being reused as a bumper or similar apparatus for absorbing
shock or preventing damage, but not including for the purpose of being
deposited on land.
3. The tires are retreaded by a tire retreader registered under Section 17.
4. The tires are processed by a tire processor registered under Section 17, and
the processed materials are used in place of raw materials in the making of
new products or packaging, including the following:
i. blasting mats;
ii. paving products used in pavement, including products used to maintain
or repair pavement;
iii. rubber products used for indoor or outdoor surfaces, including poured-
in-place rubber products, mats, curbs, carpeting, or athletic or recre-
ational surfacing;
iv. rubber products used for bases to support signage;
114 J. Cocker and K. Graham

v. subject to subsection (5), mulch and landscaping material;

vi. subject to subsection (5), tire-derived aggregate used in roadbed con-
struction or repair.
(4) The producer shall not include the following in the 85% minimum requirement
referred to in clause (2) (b):
1. the calculated weight of tires or the weight of processed materials that are
land disposed;
2. the calculated weight of tires, the weight of processed materials, or the
weight of any products or packaging derived from tires or processed mate-
rials that are incinerated or used as a fuel or a fuel supplement;
3. the calculated weight of tires or the weight of processed materials that are
stored, stockpiled, or otherwise deposited on land, unless they are deposited
on land in a manner set out under paragraph 4 of subsection (3).
(5) Mulch and landscaping material and tire-derived aggregate used in roadbed
construction or repair must not, separately or combined, account for more than
20 per cent of the 85% minimum requirement referred to in clause (2) (b).
(6) Any producer who collects tires in a calendar year despite being exempt from
the requirement to collect tires in that calendar year pursuant to subsection 4
(7) shall ensure that the activities referred to in subsection (3) of this section are
undertaken with respect to those tires.

Contained within these rules are perhaps exercises of the “provincial interest.”
What is not clear is the origin and policy justification for these particular rules.

5.6 The Central Role of PROs

Finally, the accumulated obligations of Producers are the RRCEA and Tire Regula-
tion will, in practice, be primarily discharged by PROs, at least in the early years of
a circular economy regime. A PRO is defined in the Tire Regulation as:
“Producer Responsibility Organization” means a person retained by a Producer
for the purposes of carrying out one or more of the following Producer responsibilities
relating to tires:
1. arranging for the establishment or operation of a collection or management sys-
tem;
2. establishing or operating a collection or management system;
3. preparing and submitting reports.
The Tire Regulation is novel in fostering what are rightly be the first PROs in
North America. At the time of writing, the PROs have come from diverse origins:

– tire manufacturers’ industry association;

– large single tire retailer; and
Circular Economy in Canada 115

– existing tire processors.

What will likely prove difficult over time will be the management of the various
interests and priorities of the PRO members in light of the divergent paths and interests
of Producers.

6 Part V: Ontario’s Strategy to Support the RRCEA

In implementing the RRCEA, the province has recognized that it must actively create
the conditions necessary for the regime to succeed. Simply supplanting the WDO
with a market-based RRCEA is understood as insufficient for a true circular economy
to germinate. No fewer than 15 actions49 have been identified in the strategy:
Action #1: Empower the Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority
This is responsive to the widely held view that the WDO was lacking a sufficiently
robust enforcement mandate to compel compliance. The Authority is expressly tasked
with “ensuring producer compliance with regulated requirements and a fair system
that discourages non-compliance and prevents free riders.”50
Action #2: Issue Policy Statements to Provide Clear Direction on the Provincial
Interest
The province has a laundry list of lofty goals for the reorientation of the Ontario
economy away from its current disposal practices. Policy statements are intended
to be issued by the Minister and serve as directives to the Authority, updating and
supplementing the content of the RRCEA and regulations. They could directly impact
municipal decision-making and others that hold environmental approvals.
Action #3: Establish a Registry and Build Data Capacity to Provide for
Evidence-Based Decisions
The Authority is to “collect import data from producers and other parties that conduct
activities related to waste reduction and resource recovery. These efforts will help
the province effectively set targets and develop policies while the Authority monitors
and assesses producer performance.”51 If the province fully succeeds in electroni-
cally tracking the introduction and removal of waste volumes (which admittedly is
easier in some regulated waste streams than others), compliance levels will no doubt
improve, though there may be unintended consequences and resulting industry con-
cern associated with this level of monitoring.

49 Strategy for a Waste-Free Ontario, supra at 14–35.

50 Ibid., at 14.
51 Ibid., at 17.
116 J. Cocker and K. Graham

Action #4: Transition Existing Waste Diversion Programs Smoothly to New

Producer Responsibility Framework Without Disruption of Services
The province is highly sensitive to any disruptions in waste diversion services occa-
sioned by the transition. The most difficult waste diversion program to transition to
an IPR is Blue Box, a municipally run waste diversion program for printed paper and
packaging and based on 50–50 shared responsibility.52 This program is mandated
under Ontario Regulation 101/9453 and requires every Ontario municipality with at
least 5000 residents to operate a Blue Box program.
Action #5: Amend the 3Rs Regulations to Increase Resource Recovery Across
all Sectors
Provincial regulations under the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario), dating from
more than 20 years ago, mandated the IC&I sector to take positive steps in the
reduction of waste:
– Ont. Reg. 102/94 Waste Audits and Waste Reduction Work Plans54 ;
– Ont. Reg. 103/94 Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Source Separation Pro-
grams55 ; and
– Ont. Reg. 104/94 Packaging Audits and Packaging Reduction Work Plans.56
Together, these process-focused obligations (largely without concrete perfor-
mance targets) were the original foundational support for IC&I waste reduction
goals, frequently referred to as the “3Rs Regulations.”57 The province no longer
views the current 3Rs Regulations as forming part of the future IC&I waste strategy,
describing them as:
no longer adequately drive waste diversion. Their requirements are limited to large estab-
lishments and only select waste materials, and require only “reasonable efforts” to send
source-separated wastes for recycling or reuse.58

Proposed changes to IC&I waste diversion will mean the substantial revision, if
not wholesale replacement, of the 3Rs Regulations and are likely to include:
– concrete diversion thresholds;
– use of “new technologies” to measure performance;
– third-party monitoring, certification, and audits; and
– possible imposition of IPR obligations, along with selective disposal bans.
It is the disposal bans which will be viewed as the most onus of these requirements,
if, for no other reason, than the sheer volume of material to be diverted.

52 Many of these concerns are highlighted in Valiante (2016)

53 Recycling and Composting of Municipal Waste, O Reg 101/94.
54 Waste Audits and Waste Reduction Work Plans, O Reg 102/94.
55 Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Source Separation Programs, O Reg 103/94.
56 Packaging Audits and Packaging Reduction Work Plans, O Reg 104/94.
57 Draft Strategy for a Waste-Free Ontario, supra at 22.
58 Ibid., at 22.
Circular Economy in Canada 117

Action #6: Establish Service Provider Requirements to Protect the Environment

While Promoting Resource Recovery
The province takes the view that IPR and the RRCEA cannot succeed without a mod-
ernization of the support services, including hauling, processing, recycling, diversion,
and disposal. As part of this process, the government is seeking to adopt:
– new national, international, and industry standards for diversion and disposal;
– new technical recycling standards; and
– third-party monitoring, auditing, and public reporting.
Ontario’s recent end-of-life vehicle environmental standards for disposal sites,59
which covers depollution, waste storage, training, and recordkeeping, are held up
as the model for diversion standards for other regulated waste streams, including
diverted waste. There may well be some difficult transitions to come in the event that
comparable onerous diversion processing requirements are applied more broadly to
all current and impending regulated waste streams.
Action #7: Ensure Landfills are Well Planned and Managed to Minimize the
Need for Them and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The province estimates that more than 70% of products within the Ontario market-
place are ultimately sent to landfill.60 While the Strategy acknowledges that there will
still be a need for some additional landfills in the province, these will be subjected
to stringent new approval and operating standards to protect against environmental
harms, including to drinking water sources.
More notably, the province plans to develop a landfill gas recapture protocol,
focused on methane, which will permit the generation of offset credits under Ontario’s
new greenhouse gas reduction cap-and-trade scheme, which were made operational
in January 2017.61 This serves as another example of the interdependence of the
circular economy and climate change regulation.
Action #8: Establish Promotion and Education Requirements to Support Public
Participation in Resource Recovery
The RRCEA places promotion and education requirements for waste diversion upon
the industry participants themselves instead of the Authority, who are now obligated
under the RRCEA to “ensure consumers are getting the information they need to
properly participate in resource recovery efforts.”62
It is unclear whether those requirements will be tied to waste diversion perfor-
mance and exactly how such efforts will be overseen by the Authority. Clearly, there
will be a role for Producers and their Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs)
to coordinate on promotion and training.

59 Registrations Under Part II.2 of the Act—End-of-Life Vehicles, O Reg 85/16.

60 Strategy for a Waste-Free Ontario, supra at. 24.
61 Climate Change Mitigation and Low-carbon Economy Act, SO 2016, c 7.
62 Strategy for a Waste-Free Ontario, supra at 26.
118 J. Cocker and K. Graham

Action #9: Designate New Materials to Ensure Producers are Fully Responsible
for Recovering More Materials from Products and Packaging
The 2009 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Extended Producer
Responsibility Plan63 included a phased plan for the long-term expansion of waste
diversion programs to a number of other products and packaging sources. The
RRCEA focuses on three of these sources:
– printed paper and packaging;
– food and organic wastes; and
– construction and demolition materials.
Other waste streams will be resource recovered based on a host of considerations
including:
– viability of end-of-life markets for the diverted waste;
– infrastructure capacity;
– effectiveness of existing non-regulated efforts;
– experience of diversion of such waste streams outside of Ontario; and
– harmonization with existing international efforts.
It is anticipated that the first phase of additional materials to be subjected to
circular economy obligations, under the RRCEA, will include:
– appliances;
– electrical tools;
– batteries;
– fluorescent bulbs and tubes;
– mattresses;
– carpets;
– clothing and other textiles; and
– furniture and other “bulky” items.
It is hoped that the diversion of existing regulated materials, along with others
identified through this review and assessment process, will harmonize Ontario’s
efforts with those of the international community, thereby further opening the door to
the collective wisdom of the broader waste diversion industry, including the European
Union’s Action Plan for the Circular Economy.64
Action # 10: Implement an Action Plan to Reduce the Volume of Food and
Organic Waste Going to Landfill
Organics bans have yet to be broadly implemented across Canada. Ontario is consid-
ering an ambitious province-wide ban on organics which will clearly need to involve
municipalities (as the current collector and disposer of household organics) in any
such phased-in plan. Commercial organic waste generators will need to seek market
solutions to their impending diversion obligations.

63 Ibid., at 27.
64 Ibid., at 23.
Circular Economy in Canada 119

Action #11: Implement an Excess Soil Management Policy Framework to

Increase the Reuse of Excess Soil, While Protecting Human Health and the
Environment
The goal of excess soil management is to redeploy excavated soils wherever possi-
ble in place of the traditional practices of landfilling such soils as wastes regardless
of their current or treatable quality. This can only be done through ensuring that
generators of excess soil are implementing proper testing standards which will miti-
gate environmental risk and managing those soils consistent with any environmental
restrictions.
Action # 12: Adopt and Implement Modern Regulatory Approaches to Build on
And Promote Innovative Best Practices
A critical element in Ontario’s plan will be a fundamental reconsideration of what
constitutes a “waste” so that industry in Ontario can fulfill the fourth RRCEA goal—
namely exportable innovation for the use of recovered resources for secondary and
tertiary purposes. Notably, the Minister is to develop a:
Risk-based approach for compliance and enforcement will also simplify legal
requirements and business processes for activities which are lower risk and less
complex or have standard requirements, while continuing to protect the environment
and human health.65
In short, Ontario is seeking to revisit traditional waste sector presumptions that
material no longer fit for its original use is necessarily a waste to be destined for
landfilling. The impediments to innovation posed by the current MOECP waste
regulation and practice cannot be overestimated.
Action #13: Improve and Establish Environmental Standards to Provide for a
Level Playing Field and a Strong Foundation for Markets
The province is considering the adoption of a series of environmental standards for
recovered materials to ensure the consistency of feedstock for nascent secondary mar-
kets for diverted materials. Standards may include regulatory requirements, guide-
lines, best practices, and certification programs. The need for robust markets for the
diverted materials, fostered by clear standards, is also central to the Strategy.
Action #14: Use Green Procurement Practices to Build Market Demand for
Recovered Materials
Government procurement is to support the circular economy with its preference (in
some circumstances) for recovered resources and recycled content, as well as more
environmentally responsible service providers.
Action #15: Implement Disposal Bans to Direct Materials to End-Markets
Perhaps the most challenging of all circular economy measures coincident with the
RRCEA are the proposed disposal bans set for:

65 Ibid., at 32.
120 J. Cocker and K. Graham

– organics;
– existing diverted wastes;
– beverage containers;
– corrugated cardboard and some paper materials; and
– fluorescent bulbs and tubes.
Producers may well have allied interests in seeing that disposal bans can be used
to facilitate the diversion markets.

7 Part VI: Conclusion

7.1 Will the RRCEA Succeed?

In a vacuum, the introduction of the RRCEA into a “greenfield” municipal-based

waste disposal regime would be challenging, given the lack of industry experience,
including processing capacity. Given the (sometimes bitter) experience of the past
decade under the Command Diversion Framework, however, there is substantial
working knowledge of diversion of the existing regulated waste streams which,
when supplemented by technology and resource recovery expertise from outside
the province, may well be enough to make it viable in Ontario and then beyond.
There is certainly a view that some Producers will move slowly away from cur-
rent IFO-based historical groupings, perhaps keeping some of the IFO era practices
instead of adopting more “circular” initiatives.

7.2 Used Tires as IPR Test Case

As a first regulated waste stream under the RRCEA, used tires are viewed by many
inside Canada and elsewhere as the test case for IPR. The Tire Regulation clearly
reaffirms the intention by the MOECP to let private industry decide how to establish
and operate an end-of-life supply chain for used tires. Further, the Tire Regulation
does not propose specific quotas and scoring for the end recovery uses of such tires
other than a few restrictions discussed above. This may well engender the type of
innovation and industry which can be exported for used tire recovery operations
elsewhere, but will likely be years in germination.
Many uncertainties remain, however, including the most fundamental quandary
facing Producers such as how they can comply in diverting a waste stream that they
do not control and their PROs cannot command.
Further, like all resources, there will be more and less preferred sources, with
differential costing based on location, resource collection efficiencies, certainties of
supply, etc. There is already concern among Producers of various regulated waste
streams that the prime diversion sources need to be secured far in advance of the
Circular Economy in Canada 121

anticipated RRCEA compliance date and that they over collection by some may lead
to non-commercial practices.
Finally, the Strategy, in some sectors, seems to require an economy of scale that
effectively pushes segments of Producers into PROs, but this may create unintended
complications under Canada’s Competition Act,66 which contains prohibitions on
oligopolies and other restraints of trade. In other words, if some Producers act jointly
with due diligence and seek to secure the diversion supply they need to offset their
product waste, their actions may be punishable by Industry Canada where the result-
ing PROs are viewed as engaging in anticompetitive activities.

7.3 Could Ontario Become the Circular Economy Model

for North America?

Every other province and territory in Canada operates waste diversion programs,
along with many US states and municipal entities. The products subjected to diversion
under Ontario’s RRCEA will be predominantly the same supply “imported” into the
other provinces, states, and territories in North America. As such, a workable solution
in Ontario has the real benefit of being replicable at scale elsewhere in North America.
In fact, the Province of Ontario is effectively betting that, as a first mover in North
America in the circular economy, it develops the innovation with Ontario’s scheme
to then reproduce the know-how and industry elsewhere—a cottage industry with
aspirations as a North American leader.
In short, the ability to replicate the RRCEA elsewhere in North America is
arguably a fundamental premise upon which it has been legislated in Ontario so
its expansionist goals should come as no surprise. It remains to be seen just how
successful and amenable to replication these efforts may be.

References

Coglianese, C., Nash, J., & Olmstead, T. (2002). Performance based regulation: prospects and
limitations in health, safety and environmental protection. Regulatory Policy Program, Center
for Business and Government. Cambridge, MA, USA: John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University
Environmental Registry. Government of Ontario. (2016). Draft tire regulation under the Resource
Recover and Circular Economy Act, 2016. http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS-WEB-External/
displaynoticecontent.do?noticeId=MTMzODM2&statusId=MjAzNTY1&language=en.
Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. (2016). Strategy for a waste-free Ontario:
Building the circular economy. Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. (2016). Climate change Action Plan
2016–2020. Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. Accessed online: http://
www.applications.ene.gov.on.ca/ccap/products/CCAP_ENGLISH.pdf.

66 RSC 1985, c C-34.

122 J. Cocker and K. Graham

Valiante, U. (2016). A practical pathway to producer responsibility for paper products and pack-
aging in Ontario, December 6th, 2016, Corporate Policy Group LLP.
Valiante, U. (2019) Report: A vision for a circular economy for plastics in Canada—The bene-
fits of plastics without the waste and how we get it right. Smart Prosperity Institute. February,
2019. https://institute.smartprosperity.ca/sites/default/files/report-circulareconomy-february14-
final.pdf.
Walker, T. R., & Xanthos, D. (2018). A call for Canada to move toward zero plastic waste by
reducing and recycling single-use plastics. Resources, Conservation & Recycling.
Circular Economy in China

Xianlai Zeng and Jinhui Li

Abstract Circular economy is devoted to improving resource efficiency and recy-

cling rate. Its actions are being motivated by four major drivers: (i) regulatory control
led by a mix of US states, European Union legislation, and China’s environmental
law; (ii) competitive incentives for both cost decrease and technology innovation;
(iii) stakeholder promotion related to brand reputation and greater transparency; and
(iv) risks from supply chain broken caused by regional resource shortage and vis
major event (Dauvergne and LeBaron in New Polit Econ 18(3):410–430, 2013). In
China, these drivers and pressures have imposed evolution of circular economy.

1 China’s Adventure Process

Since the policy of reform and open was initiated in 1978, China has transferred from
a centrally planned to a market-based economy, which enables the rapid economic
and social progress in the recent four decades. Gross domestic product (GDP) growth
has averaged nearly 10% per year, which is the rarely sustained expansion by a major
economy in history. Thus, over 800 million peoples have got rid of poverty. China
not only realized all the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015 but also
created a prime contribution to the global achievement of the MDGs. Although
China’s GDP growing rate has gradually descended since 2012, it is still impressive
on current global standards. In 2018, China’s GDP surpassed 90 trillion CNY (Fig. 1).
With a population of nearly 1.4 billion, China is the second largest economy and has
become the largest contributor to international growth since the global financial
crisis of 2008. These achievements are majorly performed by more than 40 million
companies around China.
In China, circular economy along the supply chain generally involves two aspects
as cleaner production and waste recycling. Cleaner production is achieved primarily

X. Zeng (B) · J. Li
School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
e-mail: xlzeng@tsinghua.edu.cn
J. Li
e-mail: jinhui@tsinghua.edu.cn
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 123
S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_6
124 X. Zeng and J. Li

1400 100
Population
GDP
1300 80

GDP (Trillion CNY)

Population (Million)

1200 60

1100 40

1000 20

900 0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Year

Fig. 1 China’s population and GDP from 1978 to 2018. Note Data source from China Statistics,
http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/

in ecological industrial park (IP), and waste recycling is performed mostly in urban
mining demonstrate base. These two actions are the core practical approaches of
circular economy towards a sustainable society. In this chapter, we will address them
to outline the policy and technology along the adventure.
(1) Before 1970
In order to improve circular economy subject to resource efficiency and waste recy-
cling, some small enterprises were gathered and scaled up, known for IP. The tra-
ditional IP can be tracked back to 1950s. But the IP was characterized with the led
by the national enterprise in remote place. They had no relevant facilities and single
industry type so that they were the mixed industry with labour and intensified land
between pollution and non-pollution. There was no legislation system on environ-
mental protection and waste recycling. Almost all the industrial waste and municipal
solid waste were disposed with open dump without environmental consideration.
Additionally, there was lack of technical process for waste recycling and circular
economy (Fig. 2).
(2) 1970–1995
In this period, especially after 1980, China’s economy was rapidly lifted. In 1979,
Environmental Protection Law (trial run) was implemented so that the legislation
system of environmental protection started to establish, and environmental protection
was regulated as one national policy. But the philosophy of ‘pollute first, then clean
up’ dominated. As a result, waste disposal with simple landfilling was popular without
some efficient recycling (Fig. 2). Five economic special economic zones and 14
open cities emerged with a couple of economic development zones. Modern IPs
Circular Economy in China 125

Fig. 2 China’s adventure of industry and pollution controlling

were established with feasible land plan and environmental plan. More and more
environmental pollution occurred in the cities.
(3) 1996–2004
As a ‘world factory’, China exported functional products, but consumed natural
resources and left the majority pollutants behind for domestic land (Liu and Dia-
mond 2005). Accordingly, China became the largest contributor of sulphur oxides
and chlorofluorocarbons to the atmosphere. On April 1, 1996, Solid Waste Pollution
Prevention Law was enforced so that waste recycling and safety disposal were regu-
lated. In August, 1996, the environmental policy of ‘one controlling and two meets’
was released by State Council: all the industrial source should meet the emission
standard, and the fifteen types small enterprises should be closed, covering about
84,000 small electroplating, small papermaking, and small chemical plant. Until 31
December 2000, 97.7% of industrial sources met the emission standard, and 93.6%
of priority pollution enterprises realized the requirement of emission standard.
In 2002, China promulgated the Cleaner Production Promotion Law, which
emphasizes the scientific and technological innovations and upgrading. Two years
later, China amended the regulation to grant a legal status for nongovernment-owned
enterprises. Since most cleaner productions occurred in these enterprises, such a leg-
islative system indicates China’s broad acknowledgement of the significance of the
private sector, which in turn was conducive to accelerate cleaner production.
Regarding the IPs, they had established stronger link with the city and served
more functions like housing, entertainment, and trade. In 2002, 49 national economic
development zones obtained the GDP of 311 billion CNY, and their total industrial
126 X. Zeng and J. Li

output value reached 78.7 billion CNY. With the updating of global industry structure,
IP was transformed into high-tech development zone. In 2000, 53 high-tech zones
had gained 794.2 billion CNY with the annual increasing rate of 60% in the year of
1990–2000.
(4) 2005–2012
The government initially imposed a great deal input on environmental protection.
China’s economy, given by high polluting and low efficiency industry, is gradu-
ally being updated by a circular economy philosophy that employs the principles of
‘reduce, reuse, and recycle’ (or called ‘3R’) or adopts one process’s waste as another
process’s resource. In 2005, China State Council initially proposed the need of circu-
lar economy propelling and enacted Outline of the National Program for Long- and
Medium-term Scientific and Technological Development (2006–2020). Later, China
released Circular Economy Promotion Law in August 2008. Thus, it is almost con-
sensus that fulfilling circular economy can solve the problem of economic growth
and resource shortage.
By the end of 2010, there was 83 national high-tech development zones and 107
national economic development zones. All the provinces, almost all the cities and
countries, have established industrial parks. With respect to the IP, in order to further
improve the performance of circular economy, in March 2012, National Development
and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the Ministry of Finance released the opinions
on the promotion of circular transformation of IPs.
(5) 2013–
To screw the ecological civilization construction, a new environmental protection law
was implemented in 2015. It is the nation’s first attempt to merge economic and social
consideration to fit for environmental maintenance. The new law was recognized as
the most progressive and stringent regulation in the history of environmental concern
in China. It in detail addressed the harsher penalties for environmental offences—for
instance, for acts of tampering and falsifying information, discharging contaminants
surreptitiously, and evading governmental supervision. It involved many provisions
for tackling pollution, raising public awareness, and preserving whistle-blowers.
This law not only put more responsibility and accountability on local governments
and law-enforcement agencies, but also set higher standards for enterprises from
producer to recycler. To date, more than 100 environmental regulations and policies
have been enacted to cover all the supply chain.
In the industrial level, circular transformation of IPs was one of the major circular
economy constructions pilot programs, issued in the 12th Five-Year Plan by the
China State Council. It comprised of seven prime tasks to transform previously large
resource- and energy-intensive production into high efficiency and low pollutant
processing. By 2017, 129 IPs had been approved for circular transformation by
NDRC.
Circular Economy in China 127

2 Regulation and Policy of Circular Economy

Historically, the attitudes as regulation and policy of government to SMEs have varied
considerably: at the initial phase, SMEs were motivated to promote the economic
progress. When the environmental problems came out from SMEs, the government
sets regulation or law to control their manners. Regulation and policy serve as the
lever to adjust and green SMEs in recent decades. Main regulations and policies can
be seen at Table 1.

Table 1 Examples of policies, guidance, and regulation for circular economy published during
2005–2016
No. Title Year Government
1 Opinions on Accelerating Growth of 2005 State Council
Circular Economy
2 Recovery and Management Measures 2007 State Council
on Renewable Resources
3 The Regulation for the Administration 2008 State Council
of Collection and Treatment of Waste
Electrical and Electronic Equipment
4 Notice on Demonstration Base 2010 NDRC
Construction of Urban Mining
5 12th Five-Year Plan of Mineral 2011 Ministry of Land and Resources
resources saving and comprehensive
utilization
6 12th Five-Year Plan of Major industrial 2011 Ministry of Industry and Information
solid waste comprehensive utilization Technology
7 Implementation Plan of 2011 NDRC, Ministry of Finance, Ministry
Comprehensive Utilization of Crop of Agriculture
and Straw during 12th Five-Year Plan
8 The Opinions on the Promotion of 2012 NDRC, Ministry of Finance
Circular transformation of Industrial
Parks
9 Comprehensive Utilization of 2012 NDRC
Resources Guidance during 12th
Five-Year Plan
10 Circular Economy Development 2013 State Council
Strategy and the Recent Action Plan
11 Action Plan of Energy development 2014 State Council
strategy(2014–2020)
12 Opinions about Pushing the 2015 State Council
Construction of Ecological
Civilization
13 Guide Plan for Circular development 2016 NDRC
(Draft open to public advice)
128 X. Zeng and J. Li

Before China making a clear definition of urban mining in 2010, policies are
established for renewable resources and circular economy. The Chinese government
initiated the establishing of venous industrial parks in 2006, and the development
of renewable resources industry was seen as an important part of circular economy
in the 11th Five-Year Plans. The subsequently proposed major measures to create
a resource-saving and environment-friendly society further reveal the determination
of the country on sustainable development and renewable industry. Based on pilot
cities on recycling renewable resources and venous industry parks, industry chain
was gradually formed, involving collection, transport, sorting, and treatment in many
areas. It shows a potential for the building of a national urban mining and industrial
development pattern.
To promote the scale up and industrial development of urban mining industry,
to elevate the utilization level of urban mining, the NDRC and Ministry of Finance
issued the notice for establishing national pilot bases for urban mining in 2010 to
cover the shortage of lacking natural resources and to alleviate the tense on resources
and environment for socio-economic development. This notice defines the concept
of urban mining and means the government formally acknowledge and accept urban
mining, and direct plan the layout of pilot bases, which is a major shift of national view
and strategy on resources. By July 2017, 43 national pilot bases had been established
shown in Fig. 3 (Hu and Poustie 2018). The present regional distribution of national
pilot bases shows a pattern of more locating in southeast and less in northwest, which
is closely related to regional economic development level. A dense distribution of
pilot bases around coastal areas can be attributed to easy importation of renewable
resources. Regional centres aggregating a large amount of resources are formed

Fig. 3 Distribution of urban mining demonstration bases in China

Circular Economy in China 129

around the existing waste materials exchange market. These bases mainly located
in three regions, including those in Circum-Bohai Sea region to utilize renewable
resources home and abroad, the ones in Yangtze River Delta region to produce high-
value-added products relying on technology advantages, and the ones in Central
Region to comprehensive develop urban mines under the background of the regional
economy.
Urban mining industry is considered as an important strategic emerging industry
in the national development plan of strategic emerging industries during the 13th
Five-Year Period issued by the State Council in Nov. 2016. It is required to promote
urban mining and the utilization on wastes with low recycling value. In April 2017,
fourteen ministries and commissions jointly promulgated the Action Plan for Circu-
lar Economy Development, which would achieve an improvement of the resource
productivity of 15% than in 2015 and the recycling rate of 54.6% for main types of
solid wastes. Creating a new strategic guarantee system on resources is one of the
main objectives in this action plan.

References

Dauvergne, P., & LeBaron, G. (2013). The social cost of environmental solutions. New Political
Economy, 18(3), 410–430.
Hu, Y., & Poustie, M. (2018). Urban mining demonstration bases in China: A new approach to the
reclamation of resources. Waste Management, 79, 689–699.
Liu, J., & Diamond, J. (2005). China’s environment in a globalizing world. Nature, 435(7046),
1179–1186.
Status and Development of the Circular
Economy in Germany

Michael Nelles, Abdallah Nassour and Gert Morscheck

1 Introduction in the Context of Implementation

of Circular Economy

What is circular economy? Wikipedia says:

Circular economy is a regenerative system in which resource input and waste, emission, and
energy leakage are minimised by slowing, closing, and narrowing energy and material loops;
this can be achieved through long-lasting design, maintenance, repair, reuse, remanufactur-
ing, refurbishing, recycling, and upcycling.

Circular economy is actually very old. People have always reused or recycled
materials after use. Of course, that was not due to ecological thinking. Economic
constraints and the absence of raw materials were the reasons. Only the constant
and inexpensive availability of raw materials led to their disrespect and waste. This
environment-destroying economy and way of living have spread worldwide.
The European Union produces more than 2.5 billion tonnes of waste a year. It is
currently updating its waste legislation to promote the transition from a linear to a
circular economy.
In Germany, the relationship to the circular economy was also shaped by the
political division of the country into two states. In the socialist East, the circular
economy played a major role due to economic hardship. In the 1970s, the idea of the
circular economy began to take root everywhere.
It quickly became clear that only binding legal requirements and financial incen-
tives can drive the circular economy and therefore the conservation of resources.
Every year around 360 million tonnes of waste are collected, transported, sorted,
processed, recycled or disposed of in Germany. Each German citizen thus accounts

M. Nelles (B) · A. Nassour · G. Morscheck

Waste Management and Material Flow, Rostock University, Rostock, Germany
e-mail: michael.nelles@uni-rostock.de
M. Nelles
German Biomass Research Centre gGmbH (DBFZ), Leipzig, Germany

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 131

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_7
132 M. Nelles et al.

for more than 4 tonnes of waste per year. The largest part of the waste consists of
construction and demolition waste or arises in the extraction and treatment of nat-
ural resources. The focus of the circular economy and public interest, however, is
primarily on the 56 million tonnes of waste, mainly from industry and commerce,
and 52 million tonnes of municipal solid waste, of which around 37 million tonnes
are produced in private households.
Recycling rates in Germany are high by international comparison. However, the
amount of waste increases especially in the private sector! The avoidance of waste is
very difficult for the Germans. Recycling often includes the thermal recycling (incin-
eration) of waste. From a scientific point of view, however, only material recycling
makes sense!
New regulations will force more material recycling (especially of plastic waste)
in the future.
It is about more recycling, higher recycling rates and more recycling and reuse.
Consistent recycling dampens demand for primary raw materials. The life and useful
life of consumer goods and capital goods must be extended.
Waste prevention has to be much more promoted! The European Union has set
itself ambitious recycling targets this year under new waste and recycling legislation.
Improving waste management can not only benefit the environment, the climate and
human health. The four legal acts of the new “recycling package” are part of a shift
in the EU policy towards a circular economy. The idea is to create a system that
preserves the value of products, materials and resources in the economy for as long
as possible.
Many raw materials are finite. Therefore, it is necessary to manage the resources
(Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Range of coverage of reserves in years (Oberösterreichische Zukunftsakademie 2013)

Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany 133

The improvement of the recycling economy could bring advantages:

– Less pressure on the environment,
– Increased security of raw material supply,
– Increasing competitiveness,
– Innovation, growth and employment (creating 580,000 jobs in the EU).
In a closed-loop economy, consumers benefit from more durable and innovative
products that lead to cost savings and a better quality of life (Fig. 2).
The new rules require that from 2025, at least 55% of municipal waste must be
recycled; from 2030, this applies to 60% and from 2035 to 65%. Recycling targets
for packaging are 65% from 2025 and 70% from 2030 with specific targets for paper
and cardboard, plastics, glass, metal and wood. Germany currently has a recycling
quota of municipal waste of about 66% (European Commission (EC) 2019).
According to the new regulations, the maximum landfill quota for municipal waste
from 2035 may only be 10%. Some EU countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark,
Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden) dump no household waste in landfills. Other
EU countries (Cyprus, Croatia, Greece, Latvia and Malta) still landfill more than
three-quarters of their municipal waste.
It was also agreed that biowaste must be collected separately from 2024 across
the EU. The same applies to textiles and household waste classified as hazardous

Fig. 2 Circular economy system diagram (Circular Economy System Diagram 2018)
134 M. Nelles et al.

from 2025. In line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, Member
States should aim to reduce food waste by 30% by 2025 and 50% by 2030. In order
to avoid food waste, Member States should encourage the collection of unsold food
and its safe redistribution. Consumer awareness of the importance of shelf life data
on labels should also be improved (European Commission (EC) 2019).

2 Legislation in the European Union and Germany

2.1 Legislation in the European Union

A sustainable policy of conserving natural resources attaches great importance to the

creation of closed material cycles. Modern waste policy is a very important part of
it. It ensures that wastes generated are reused or recycled as high as possible.
The goal of material flow management is to use the materials taken from nature
as intensively as possible in order to save resources and avoid waste. The aim is to
decouple economic growth and the impact on human health and the environment
associated with waste generation.
In order to harmonise the requirements for the prevention, recycling, recovery and
disposal of waste in all EU Member States, the EU has adopted numerous regulations
since 1974. The key European requirement in this policy area is the 2008 updated
EU Waste Framework Directive (EU Directive 2008/98/EC on waste).
Waste legislation is characterised by a large number of European legal acts. While
regulations have direct effect in the Member States, directives must be transposed
into national law. The Waste Framework Directive defines essential waste-related
terminology and specifies, among other things, a five-level waste hierarchy. The
guideline contains important requirements for German waste legislation.
The EU has made major changes to the EU waste prevention, recovery and disposal
policies. Many things in the right direction: more recycling, more re-use, but there
are also weak points.
Four key European waste legislations will be amended:
• the Waste Framework Directive,
• the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive,
• the Landfill Directive as well as
• the directives on end-of-life vehicles, batteries and accumulators, old batteries and
accumulators, and waste electrical and electronic equipment.
The proposed amendments to the Waste Framework Directive (European Com-
mission (EC) 2018) essentially include expanded requirements for promoting waste
prevention, setting targets for recycling and preparing for the reuse of municipal
waste. An output-based calculation method is used. There are now minimum require-
ments for extended producer responsibility (EPR) systems, extended criteria for end-
of-waste assessment and new requirements for separate collection.
Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany 135

The requirements for the separate collection are significantly expanded. From
now on, Member States will have to collect paper, metal, plastics, glass and, from
2025, used textiles separately. Construction waste is also regulated to a greater extent:
for selective removal, for example, welcome that gypsum is recorded as a separate
material fraction. This creates an important prerequisite for high-quality recycling
and the discharge of impurities.
The requirements for the prevention of waste are significantly expanded.
The core elements of the amendment to the Packaging Directive are the new
minimum recycling rates for packaging waste. The Packaging Directive also includes
approaches to strengthen the reuse of packaging. The EC counts the composting of
biodegradable packaging for recycling. That is not the case in Germany.

2.2 Federal Law in Germany

In Germany, the first nationwide regulation of waste law was created in 1972 with
the Waste Disposal Act (Abfallbeseitigungsgesetz, AbfG). Today, the Act to promote
closed substance cycle and to ensure environmentally compatible waste management
(Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz, KrWG) is the core regulation of waste legislation. As a
successor regulation, the KrWG retains the essential structural elements of the old
Closed Substance Cycle and Waste Management Act (KrW-/AbfG).
Regulations for specific product waste can also be found in the End-of-Life Vehi-
cles Ordinance (AltfahrzeugV), the Battery Act (BatterieG) and the Electrical and
Electronic Equipment Act (ElektroG).
Waste legislation in Germany is based on the Closed Substance Cycle Act
(KrWG), which came into force on 1 June 2012 and implements the requirements of
European waste legislation. The aim of this law is to promote closed-loop recycling
in order to conserve natural resources and to ensure the protection of people and the
environment in the generation and management of waste.
A central principle of the law is the five-level waste hierarchy:
1. avoid or reduce waste
2. preparation for re-use of waste
3. waste recycling
4. other recovery of waste (energy recovery, backfilling of excavation or mining
sites, etc.)
5. disposal of waste.
On the basis of these principles, the waste management measure best suited to the
protection of man and the environment shall be selected. Technical, economic and
social aspects must be taken into account.
With a few exceptions, there is a ban on mixing hazardous waste. The mixing of
waste in order to reduce contents and thereby comply with limit values is prohibited.
136 M. Nelles et al.

Since January 2015, Germany has had separate collection obligations for biowaste,
paper, metal, plastic and glass waste. For decades, it has been collected separately.
However, the obligation has now also been laid down in law.
The Closed Substance Cycle Act (KrWG), the German Packaging Act and the
EU Packaging Directive lay down new minimum requirements for recycling quotas
(Table 1).
More recycling generates raw materials that no longer have to be taken from the
environment. Between 1995 and 2010, the share of secondary raw material on all
raw materials is showed a clear overall increase, excluding mineral oil, uranium, coal
and gas (Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln 2010), (Fig. 3).
In some industrial sectors, the share of secondary raw materials (recycled waste) is
already very high. Especially for very rare or very expensive or environmentally dam-
aging raw materials, the proportion of secondary raw materials has to be increased
(Fig. 4).

2.3 Federal Waste Prevention Programme

On 31 July 2013, the Federal Government ratified the federal waste prevention pro-
gramme. It systematically and comprehensively records targeted public approaches
to waste prevention in the form of concrete recommendations, instruments and mea-
sures. It analyses various waste avoidance measures in production, product design,
trade, industry and the use of products, also taking into account economic, social and
legal criteria.
Thus, for the first time, systematic and comprehensive targeted public approaches
to waste avoidance were recorded in the form of recommendations for concrete
instruments and measures. At the same time, the cabinet decision marks the start
of a dialogue between the Federal Government, the Federal States, local authorities
and other stakeholders on waste prevention. The programme was drawn up with the
participation of the Federal States.
The waste prevention programme analyses various waste prevention measures
that affect the various life cycle stages of products, including approaches that take
into account production, product design, trade, commerce and the use of products. In
addition to the key criteria of waste prevention potential and environmental impacts,
the analysis also looks at economic, social and legal criteria. The waste prevention
programme only recommends measures that can be expected to have a positive impact
if all these criteria are taken into account.
In addition to information and sensitisation as well as research and develop-
ment, the following approaches, among others, are pursued in the waste prevention
programme:
• Active monitoring of European research on waste-saving criteria within the frame-
work of the EU Eco-design Directive
Table 1 Recycling quotas of the EU packaging directive (applies to all packaging waste) and the packaging act in Germany (applies only to packaging waste
from private end consumers) as well as the rate of recycling of all materials in Germany in 2017 (European Commission (EC) 2019; Statistisches Bundesamt
(Destatis), Abfallwirtschaft 2017; and own estimations)
Current EU Packaging Future EU Packaging Directive Packaging Act Germany Material recycling
Directive
2008 By 31.12.2025 By 31.12.2030 From 01.01.2019 From 01.01.2022 Germany in 2017
Plastics 22.5 50 55 58.5 63 34
Wood 15 25 30 – – 26
Ferrous metals 50 70 80 80 90 92
Aluminium 50 60 80 90 88
Glass 60 70 75 80 90 85
Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany

Paper, cardboard 60 75 85 85 90 86
Beverage carton packaging – – 75 80 –
Another composite – – 55 70 –
packaging
137
138 M. Nelles et al.

Fig. 3 Growing shares of secondary raw materials in Germany in raw materials in total (without
mineral oil, uranium, coal and gas), in percent (Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln 2010)

Fig. 4 Use of secondary raw materials for production in Germany (BMWI 2016)

• Organizational or financial promotion of structures for the reuse or multiple use

of products and repair centres
• Promotion of the concept of “use instead of own” with the aim that consumer
goods are used more intensively and by a larger circle of users (e.g. car sharing).
• Concerted actions and agreements between public sector and industry or commerce
to reduce food waste generated along the production and supply chain.
• Inclusion of further product groups in the Blue Angel’s portfolio; creation of
practical working aids for contracting authorities for increased consideration of
resource efficiency and waste avoidance aspects.
The Blue Angel is the German eco-label (https://www.blauer-engel.de/en). The
Blue Angel has been the German government’s eco-label since 1978. The Blue Angel
sets high standards for environmentally friendly product design and has proven itself
over the past 40 years as a reliable guide to more sustainable consumption.
Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany 139

2.4 Waste Law of the Federal States

Politically, the Federal Republic of Germany is divided into 16 Federal States. Due
to their constitutions, these states form a federal republic, not a loose confederation
of states.
The Federal Closed Substance Cycle Waste Management Act is supplemented
and substantiated by the waste laws of the 16 Federal States. Due to the competing
legislative competence of the federation for waste management (Art. 74 Para. 1 No.
24 GG), however, federal state legislation is only possible in areas that are not already
covered by federal law. The states waste laws therefore essentially concern questions
of enforcement; for example, the determination of the bodies responsible for waste
management and the competent authorities in the waste sector.

2.5 Municipal Waste Law

The collection and processing of household waste are laid down at municipal level in
the form of statutes. For example, waste statutes contain regulations on compulsory
connection and use. Charges for the use of waste disposal are levied on the basis of
municipal waste charge statutes.

3 Nuclear Waste Management

In Germany, radioactive waste is not subject to waste management regulations.

Radioactive waste is disposed of under special conditions. Radioactive wastes are
subject to nuclear law.
The basic law of the Federal Republic of Germany (for historical reasons the
term constitution is not used in Germany) contains provisions on the competences
of the Federal Government and the Länder with regard to the use of nuclear energy
(Articles 73(14), 87c and 85). Accordingly, the Federal Government has exclusive
legislative competence in this area. As the competent licensing and supervisory
authorities, the Länder implement nuclear law on behalf of the federation (Federal
Mandate Administration). In doing so, the federation exercises legal and expediency
supervision and can, if it deems it necessary, draw on the expertise.
The state is obliged to make every effort to identify potential hazards at an early
stage and to counter them with the necessary constitutional means. The legislature has
therefore enacted provisions of nuclear protection law and radiation protection law.
They are directed towards a comprehensive and interlocking structure of standards
that ensure the complete sovereign control and monitoring of all behaviour patterns
and facilities for the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
140 M. Nelles et al.

The Atomic Energy Act (AtG) was promulgated on 23 December 1959 after the
Federal Republic of Germany declared its renunciation of nuclear weapons and has
since been amended several times. The purpose of the Atomic Energy Act is, among
other things, to protect life, health and property against the dangers of nuclear energy
and the harmful effects of ionising radiation.
Against the background of the accident at the Japanese nuclear power plant
Fukushima in March 2011, the Federal Government decided to accelerate the energy
system transformation and to gradually abandon completely the generation of elec-
tricity in German nuclear power plants until the end of 2022.
The Atomic Energy Act contains the basic national regulations for protection and
precautionary measures, radiation protection and the disposal of radioactive waste
and irradiated fuel elements in Germany and is the basis for the associated ordinances.
Since 1962, a total of 37 nuclear power plants (NPPs) have been constructed in
Germany and have started commercial operation. Some of them were only briefly
connected to the grid.
At present, there are still seven nuclear power plants on the grid, all of which will
be shut down by the end of 2022 at the latest.
In addition to the commercial generation of electricity from nuclear energy,
nuclear technology is used in Germany in a variety of processes in medicine, industry
and research. This use as high technology will be needed in Germany beyond 2022.
The precautionary measures required for this—such as nuclear safety and radiation
protection—must therefore continue to be guaranteed.
A number of different companies in the nuclear industry are located in Germany:
Uranium supply companies, companies in the field of uranium enrichment and fuel
element production, planners and constructors of nuclear facilities as well as compa-
nies involved in the transport of nuclear fuels, the treatment and storage of radioactive
waste and the decommissioning and rehabilitation of nuclear power plants, including
their suppliers and service companies. Many of these companies also export.

Intermediate Storage

The irradiated fuel elements and the waste from reprocessing are stored in transport
container storage facilities. In addition to the on-site interim storage facilities at
the nuclear power plant sites, there are the transport container storage facilities in
Gorleben, Ahaus and the interim storage facility North.
It is expected that by 2027, all fuel elements used in the power reactors will
have been placed in transport and storage casks in transport cask storage facilities.
The radioactive waste resulting from reprocessing is also contained in transport and
storage casks.
Sufficient interim storage capacities for the storage of all irradiated fuel elements
and radioactive waste from reprocessing are available in Germany.
According to the licences issued, the storage period for transport and storage casks
is limited to 40 years.
Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany 141

Final Disposal

In Germany, the Konrad shaft has been approved as a repository for low- and
intermediate-level radioactive waste. The former mine has been converted into a
repository since 2007 and is expected to go into operation in 2027, receiving up to
303,000 m3 of radioactive waste with negligible heat generation.
Germany is currently looking for a site for a repository for heat-generating radioac-
tive waste:
– The waste is to be disposed of in Germany, in a repository in deep geological
formations.
– The aim is to finally close the repository mine—with the possibility of retrieval
for the duration of the operating phase and recovery for 500 years after closure.
– The safe containment of the waste must be guaranteed for a period of one million
years.

4 Benefits

In practice, the concept of closed-loop waste management involves keeping waste

to a minimum. Once a product has reached the end of its service life, the materials
it contains remain in the economic cycle as far as possible. In this way, they can be
used again and again in the manufacture of products and contribute further to added
value. Measures leading to a circular economy include the reuse, repair, overhaul
and recycling of existing materials and the products made from them. What used to
be considered “waste” can now be transformed into a valuable resource.
The transition to a closed-loop economy will reduce the pressure on the envi-
ronment, increase the security of raw material supply, increase competitiveness,
innovation and growth and create jobs.

5 Learning from Other Countries and Collaboration

with Other Countries

Waste is a potential source of raw materials that are becoming increasingly important
in view of the global scarcity of resources. If, however, waste is incorrectly disposed
of, it endangers the environment and health. Germany supports its partner countries
in avoiding, collecting, recycling and disposing of waste in an ecological, social and
economic way.
Waste volumes are rising rapidly worldwide, but around two billion people still do
not have access to regulated waste collection. Waste often ends up on the roadside, in
rivers and uncontrolled landfills, or is improperly incinerated in backyards. Poor air,
142 M. Nelles et al.

polluted water and contaminated soil are the consequences—and thus health risks,
climate-damaging greenhouse gas emissions and threats to biological diversity.
With Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development, the United Nations and Ger-
man Development Cooperation are striving to achieve environmentally sound man-
agement of all waste. Waste volumes are to be reduced as far as possible through
avoidance, reuse and recycling. In particular, cities are called upon to reduce their
environmental impact through improved waste management. Pollution of the seas
by waste from the mainland must also be significantly reduced.
The German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development
(BMZ) supports partner institutions in developing strategies and legal regulations
and in setting up corresponding structures (https://www.bmz.de/de/themen/abfall/
index.html). It also promotes the initial and further training of technical and man-
agerial staff. It provides financing instruments for the construction of recycling and
disposal facilities.
In order to exploit the opportunities offered by improved waste management and
environmental services, the BMZ promotes partnerships with the private sector, non-
governmental organisations and international initiatives. The ministry ensures that
waste collectors in the partner countries are also involved and that their working and
living conditions are improved.
Current development cooperation focuses on waste and recycling management,
urban waste management, marine waste, electronic waste, climate change and
Agenda 2030.

5.1 Development of an Integrated Urban Waste Management

System

The population of large cities in developing and emerging countries is rising rapidly,
consumer behaviour is changing and waste problems are also growing as a result.
Worldwide around two billion tons of municipal waste are produced each year. In the
cities alone, the amount of waste is expected to double from 1.3 to 2.6 billion tons
per year by 2025.
Waste management is the least developed urban service in many countries. There
is often a lack of know-how, clear responsibilities and adequate financing. Municipal
administrations are faced with the challenge of further developing their waste and
recycling management systems in order to ensure a healthy living environment for
their citizens and to better exploit the economic potential of waste recycling.
The “New Urban Agenda” adopted by the United Nations in October 2016 calls
for universal access to environmentally sound waste management in cities. This
requires comprehensive investment in sustainable infrastructure and support for
urban decision-makers.
In order to develop an integrated urban waste management system, technical, legal
and institutional issues must be tackled jointly. This is the only way to exploit the
Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany 143

potential for environmental and climate protection and for the creation of jobs and
training places.
Care must be taken to ensure that the many waste collectors who have hitherto
been active outside formal employment relationships are included in the value chains.
Only then can their working and living conditions improve.
Germany supports its partner countries in developing waste management con-
cepts, training specialists and monitoring the collection, recycling and disposal of
waste. Awareness-raising among the population is also promoted.
In order to increase the recycling rate, adapted solutions for the sorted collection of
recyclable materials and organic waste are being developed. In addition, the German
Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development supports the partners
in financing waste management on a cost-covering basis, for example by further
developing fee models or introducing take-back and deposit systems.
Appropriate financing instruments are being promoted to establish suitable infras-
tructure for the collection, recycling and disposal of waste. Interactions with other
sectors, such as the protection of groundwater when planning landfills, are taken into
account.

5.2 Marine Waste—A Danger for Humans and Animals

Marine waste poses a global threat to marine ecosystems, fisheries, tourism and, pos-
sibly, human health through the food chain. It is estimated that every year between
4.8 and 12.7 million tonnes of plastic waste are transported from land to sea world-
wide. Much of this comes from developing and emerging countries, including South-
east Asia and the Mediterranean. In addition, there are fishing nets lost at sea and
microplastics from cosmetics, textiles and other products contained in wastewater.
Negative effects of marine waste on around 800 animal species are currently
known. Seabirds and marine mammals in particular, as well as marine reptiles and
fish, absorb or trap plastic in their food.

Reduce Marine Litter

With Agenda 2030, the United Nations aims to significantly reduce marine pollu-
tion, especially from marine waste and land nutrients, by 2025. Decisions within the
framework of the UN Environment Assembly and the Biodiversity Convention as
well as regional marine waste action plans call for the development of environmen-
tally sound waste management and the adoption of further measures.
The Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development supports the
G7 Action Plan and the G20 activities to combat marine waste.
With its own 10-point action plan “Marine protection and sustainable fisheries”,
the BMZ aims to help eliminate the causes of marine pollution. To this end, it is
expanding environmental policy cooperation with its partner countries and working
144 M. Nelles et al.

with them to develop model approaches to integrated waste management. In addi-

tion, the BMZ is committed to the exchange of knowledge between developing and
emerging countries and to partnerships with the private sector.

5.3 Electronic Scrap—Recycling Valuable Raw Materials

In 2018, around 50 million tons of electronic scrap is expected to be generated world-

wide; for example, refrigerators, televisions, computers, mobile phones and batteries.
In 2014, the figure was around 42 million tons. In many developing and emerging
countries, the volume of waste electrical and electronic equipment is growing par-
ticularly rapidly. The reasons for this are rising prosperity, digitalisation, changing
consumer habits and population growth. In addition, there are often illegal imports
of scrap from industrialised countries.
According to the International Basel Convention (1989), e-waste must not be
exported to countries that do not have an adequate recycling infrastructure. However,
used equipment may be exported and is more affordable for the local population than
new equipment. However, they too will sooner or later end up on the mountain of
waste. An estimated 1.5 million tonnes of used electrical appliances were exported
from the European Union in 2012. Of these, around 400,000 tonnes were electrical
scrap.
Very Few Official Collection and Recycling Systems
In most developing and emerging countries, there are neither official collection sys-
tems for old appliances nor legal regulations and corresponding facilities for recy-
cling and disposal. In these countries, the collection and recycling of electrical and
electronic waste are predominantly carried out in the informal sector by workers, for
whom, for example, copper and gold from electrical and electronic waste represent
an important source of income.
However, the recovery of precious metals is often carried out using the most
primitive techniques—such as incineration in the open air using cyanide and mer-
cury—and poses considerable risks to people and the environment. The aim here
is to promote the expansion of local structures and the introduction of simple, but
efficient and environmentally compatible techniques for the recovery of metals.
In its partner countries, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Coopera-
tion and Development (BMZ) is working to reduce the negative consequences of
uncontrolled management of electronic waste while at the same time exploiting the
employment and income potential of the recycling of electronic waste.
By further developing recycling systems, resources can be used more efficiently
and secondary raw materials can be tapped. In order to organise and finance the proper
collection and recycling of WEEE, producers and importers must be involved and
technology cooperation must be expanded. At the same time, more must be done in
the industrialised countries to combat the illegal export of electronic waste. The BMZ
promotes international exchange on solutions for electronic waste management.
Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany 145

German Development Cooperation supports the partner countries in setting up

socially and environmentally compatible recycling systems. It advises on the drafting
of laws and regulations on waste and electrical scrap management and supports
authorities in their implementation.
It also promotes dialogue between government and private sector actors (e.g.
manufacturers and importers, collectors and recyclers) in order to establish effec-
tive financing and management systems. Informally, active workers in particular are
actively involved in this process. The aim is to secure their livelihood while at the
same time improving their working conditions. In addition, the BMZ supports the
international exchange of solutions for electric scrap management.

5.4 Waste and Climate Change

Waste that is not disposed of in an environmentally sound manner contributes signifi-

cantly to global climate change. The climate-damaging methane gas escapes in large
quantities from open landfills or illegal waste disposal sites. The irregular incinera-
tion of waste produces exhaust gases that are not only bad for the climate but also
very harmful to health. According to estimates by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC), landfills and wastewater treatment plants are responsible
for around three percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
However, the potential contribution of waste management and recycling to climate
protection is much greater: according to estimates, global greenhouse gas emissions
can be reduced by around 10 to 15% through improved waste management. This
includes, for example, the possibility of producing more energy from waste instead
of fossil fuels. Even though industry is increasingly using recycled materials, large
amounts of energy are saved, and fewer raw materials are consumed. Improvements
in waste transport are also taken into account in the calculations.
Paris Climate Agreement
With the Paris Climate Agreement of December 2015, the global community aims to
limit global warming to a maximum of 2 °C, but if possible below 1.5 °C, compared
to the pre-industrial era. As part of their nationally determined contributions (NDC),
the parties also formulate targets and measures in the field of waste management and
recycling.
German Commitment
German Development Cooperation supports partner countries in making their waste
management more climate-friendly. It provides instruments for calculating green-
house gas emissions in the waste sector and advises on the restructuring of waste
management. In addition, the partner countries are supported in expanding the recy-
cling of recyclable materials and in recycling biowaste. By means of appropriate
financial instruments, Germany promotes the construction of landfills with control
systems to record the climate-damaging landfill gas.
146 M. Nelles et al.

In the field of energy generation from waste (“waste-to-energy”), the German Fed-
eral Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development supports the introduction
of appropriate technologies. It also offers advice on environmental and safety stan-
dards as well as on the necessary institutional and financial requirements. These
include the energetic use of landfill gas, the construction of biogas plants and the
processing of waste into alternative fuels for cement works and waste incineration
plants.

5.5 Waste as a Topic of Agenda 2030

Waste management and environmental services play an important role in Agenda

2030, especially in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) on “Sustainable
Cities and Municipalities” (SDG 11), “Responsible Consumption” (SDG 12) and
“Life under Water” (SDG 14):
– SDG 11.6: “Reduce per capita pollution from cities by 2030, including special
attention to air quality and municipal and other waste treatment” (SDG 11.4).
– SDG 12.4: “By 2020, achieve environmentally sound management of chemicals
and all wastes throughout their life cycle in accordance with agreed international
frameworks and significantly reduce their release into air, water and soil to min-
imise their adverse effects on human health and the environment”.
– SDG 12.5: “Significantly reduce waste generation by 2030 through prevention,
reduction, recycling and reuse”.
– SDG 14.1: “Prevent and significantly reduce by 2025 all types of marine pollution,
in particular from land-based activities and in particular marine waste and nutrient
pollution”.
In addition, the development of a functioning waste and recycling management
system makes a positive contribution to other objectives, such as health (SDG 3),
decent work (SDG 8) and climate protection (SDG 13).

Agenda 2030
On 25 September 2015, the “Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development” was
adopted at a UN summit in New York. It takes the form of a World Future
Treaty and contains 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Agenda 2030
is the first international agreement in which the principle of sustainability is
linked with poverty reduction and economic, ecological and social develop-
ment. The Agenda is intended to help all people worldwide to live in dignity.
It is intended to promote peace and to help all people to live in freedom and
an intact environment. The Agenda is addressed to all states of the world com-
munity. They are equally called upon to stand up for the development goals
Status and Development of the Circular Economy in Germany 147

formulated in it—there is no division into “donors” and “recipients” or into

“first”, “second” and “third world” in the Agenda.

Important Steps for Implementation

The Habitat III Conference on Sustainable Urban Development, held in October 2016
in the Ecuadorian capital Quito, was the first important milestone in the implementa-
tion of these goals in cities. It reaffirmed the goal of sustainable waste management
and recycling.
In June 2017, the UN conference was held in New York on the implementation of
SDG 14 on marine conservation, including the prevention of marine waste. In July
2018, the United Nations High-Level Policy Forum on Sustainable Development
reviewed progress in urban development (SDG 11) and sustainable consumption
and production patterns (SDG 12).

References

Blue Angel—The German Ecolabel. https://www.blauer-engel.de/en.

BMWI (German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology). (2016). Sector Focus Mining
and Raw Materials.
Circular Economy System Diagram. (2018). The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. https://www.
ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/interactive-diagram.
European Commission (EC). (2018). Directive (Eu) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of
the Council. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018L0851&
from=EN.
European Commission (EC). (2019). The European Commission Circular economy package. https://
ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/.
Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln (Cologne Institute for Economic Research). (2010). Study
conducted on behalf of BDE [Federation of the German Waste, Water and Raw Materials Man-
agement Industry].
Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). https://www.bmz.de/de/themen/
abfall/index.html.
Oberösterreichische Zukunftsakademie (Upper Austrian Future Academy). (2013). “Endlichkeit
der Rohstoffe” (“Finiteness of fossil raw materials”).
Statistisches Bundesamt (Destatis), Abfallwirtschaft 2017. http://www.destatis.de/, 2019.
Solid Waste Management in Lao PDR:
A Pathway Toward the Circular
Economy

Vatthanamixay Chansomphou

1 Introduction

Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR) is a land-locked developing country

in Southeast Asia. The total area of the country is 236,800 km2 . The total popula-
tion as of 2017 was 6.8 million (World Bank 2019). Since the last two decades, the
economy of Lao PDR has been growing significantly. Economic growth, population
increase, rapid urbanization, and changing lifestyle are major contributions to grow-
ing environmental problems, especially solid wastes. In Vientiane Capital, wastes
are generated approximately 650 tons per day, and only half of them are collected
1
and disposed of properly in the landfill (VCOMS 2018). The same situation can
be seen in secondary provinces, such as Luang Prabang, Savannakhet, Champassak,
and other provinces across the country.
The problems relating to solid waste management found in Lao PDR are that
majority of people do not separate wastes at source and still get rid of wastes in old
fashion, by burning and dumping inappropriately, as they lack awareness on proper
waste disposal. As such, people have been confronting health risks and environ-
mental impacts caused by inappropriate waste handling. Currently, although half of
generated wastes are collected and disposed of in the landfill, the rests are disposed
of improperly without recycling and composting schemes. Main reason for not using
waste collection service is that the service fee is considered expensive by low-income
families, and the provision of the service does not reach all communities.

1 VCOMS stands for Vientiane City Office for Management and Service.

V. Chansomphou (B)
Faculty of Environmental Sciences, National University of Laos. Dongdok, Xaythany District,
Vientiane, Lao PDR
e-mail: vatthanamixay@hotmail.com

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 149

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_8
150 V. Chansomphou

Currently, waste collection services can be found in many districts and towns
throughout the country, but they simply collect and dispose of solid wastes in the
landfill directly. Official waste segregation scheme does not exist, while some valu-
able wastes are collected and traded among informal waste pickers, scrap traders,
community waste banks, and plastic recycling companies. In order to introduce
proper solid waste management measures, the Lao government has recently cooper-
ated with some international organizations and private sectors that have experiences
with integrated waste management.

2 Situation of Solid Waste Management in Lao PDR

The amount of wastes has been generated at different rates. In Vientiane Capital,
the generation of solid wastes is 0.7 kg/person/day; while in secondary provinces
(such as Luang Prabang, Savannakhet, and Champassak) and smaller provinces,
the generation of wastes is 0.6 kg/person/day and 0.5 kg/person/day, respectively
(VCOMS 2018). Figure 1 reports the significantly increasing trend of solid waste
in Vientiane Capital. It can be seen that the amount of wastes has increased from
40,471 tons in 2007 to 113,746 tons in 2017, or almost three folds in the last decade.
Wastes in Lao PDR can be classified into hazardous and non-hazardous wastes.
Hazardous wastes include infectious wastes, e-wastes, chemical wastes, and so on;
they are mostly from hospital, commercial, and industrial sector. For Vientiane Cap-
ital, infectious wastes are burned in a small incinerator installed in the landfill and
managed by Vientiane City Office for Management and Service (VCOMS). In many
other provinces, they are mostly transferred and disposed of in the landfill. Haz-
ardous wastes are simply collected and disposed of in the landfill by waste collecting
companies. Some wastes are even disposed of by a specific landfill constructed by
waste generators themselves. Non-hazardous wastes include municipal solid wastes
generated by households, commercial sector, and agricultural sector. The munici-
pal solid waste in Lao PDR is broadly classified into nine different types, including

120,000 113,746
94,763 96,812
100,000 87,083 90,388
83,363
80,000 67,621 72,300
63,764 62,832
Ton

60,000
40,471
40,000

20,000

-
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Year

Fig. 1 The trend of solid waste in Vientiane Capital. Source VCOMS (2018)
Solid Waste Management in Lao PDR … 151

Table 1 Composition of solid waste in some provinces in Lao PDR

Waste fraction Vientiane Luang Prabang Savannakhet Champassak
Capital (%) (%) (%) (%)
Food, vegetables 30 51 54 62
Wood, grass, 19 23 16 21
trees, leaf
Paper 6 8 9 4
Plastic 13 9 15 6
Glass 6 6 2 2
Metal 3 1 1 1
Textile 2 1 1 1
Others 21 1 2 3
Total 100 100 100 100
Source GIES (2012)

garbage, paper, textile, plastics, wood, metal, glass, and other. Table 1, shows the
percentage of waste composition in four provinces in Lao PDR.
Recently in Vientiane Capital, the trade of recyclable waste materials (RWM) has
been promoted to reduce amount of solid waste by VCOMS. The players involving in
managing RWMs comprise waste pickers, waste banks, junk shops, waste exporters,
and recycling factories (Fig. 2).
Waste banks can be seen sparsely in some villages and schools. Junk shops and
waste dealers purchase recyclable waste materials from waste pickers, waste banks,
and other sources. They usually sell some recyclable wastes to waste exporters and
sell plastics to plastic recycling factories (Climate and Clean Air Coalition 2016).
This similar pattern of municipal waste management can also be seen in the cities
of major provinces. At the moment, waste banks and mobile traders are not regis-
tered formally with the authorities. In fact, there is no registration system for them.
Therefore, the exact number of waste banks and mobile traders is not known. This

Export
companies
Waste banks and plastic
Junk shops
Recyclable and waste recycling
dealers factories
Mobile pickers

Waste at sources

Non-recyclable Landfill

Fig. 2 Waste Management in Lao PDR. Source Author adapted from various sources
152 V. Chansomphou

informal sector makes up a large part of the micro-level solid waste management,
while the public sector plays an important role in macro management of municipal
solid wastes.
At micro level, households are motivated by waste banks and mobile traders to
classify wastes, such as papers, glasses, plastics, and metals, for selling and donating.
However, this sector is not well incorporated into the macro management. The main
actors in the informal sector’s waste collection are mobile traders. These include
poor Lao citizen from rural areas and migrants from China and Vietnam. Most of
them have the lowest (drop-out from primary school) or no education. The wastes
they collect are mostly those that are required by export companies and recycling
factories, including PET bottles, papers, cardboard, aluminum, copper, metals as
well as electric and electronic items. Waste collection generates income for them
around 40,000–60,000 Kip per day (or approximately $5–$7 per day). Although
they can make a living with this amount of income, it does not ensure their access
to education for their children, proper health care, nor social welfare (Update Lao
Magazine 2018). Especially on health care, the informal waste collectors are exposed
to different types of diseases such as diarrhea, infectious diseases, tuberculosis, lung
cancer, and so on.

3 Legislative Framework Supporting 3Rs and Circular

Economy Initiatives

Although the initiative of waste management was established during 1990s, the
integrated solid waste management has been recently developed in Lao PDR. The
National Assembly approved a draft law regarding national hygiene, health care,
and protection on May 6, 2001. This law defines the main responsibilities for waste
management and provides a framework for more detailed regulations.
In Lao PDR, several government agencies involve in drafting and enacting laws
and regulations relating to waste management. These include Ministry of Public
Works and Transport (MPWT), Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
(MONRE), Ministry of Industry and Commerce, and Ministry of Health. While min-
istries provide legislations as general guides, legislation at provincial level allocates
the responsible agency or committee, defines the specific scope of work, and sets
the fees to be collected from private households, offices, and commercial enterprises
and industries.
Several ministerial guidelines, ministerial decisions, laws, and other legislations
have been enacted are as follows:
• Industrial Waste Discharge Regulation. No. 180/MOIC, 1994.
• Law on Hygiene, Disease Prevention, and Health Promotion, 2001.
• Regulation of Hygiene of Public Places, 2004.
• Decision on Waste Management in Health Care Service, No. 1706/MOH, 2004.
• Decision on Landfill Management. No. 521/MCTPC, 2007.
Solid Waste Management in Lao PDR … 153

• Regulation on Landfill Site Management, 2007.

• Final Draft Regulation on Waste Management in Urban, 2010.
• Draft Guideline on Waste Management in Vientiane Capital, 2010.
• The Environment Protection Law, 2013.
• National Environment Standard amended in 2017.

4 Examples of Best Practice of 3Rs

This section introduces two examples of best practice relating to integrated solid
waste management in Vientiane Capital. They are JICA Grass Root Waste Manage-
ment Project and FES Waste Management Project of National University of Laos.2
Case1: JICA Grass Root Waste Management Project. This project was undertaken
between 2015 and 2018, under the cooperation of Kyoto City of Japan, VCOMS,
and MONRE of Lao PDR.3 The project has four components, including (1) pro-
viding training to authority working in waste management of Vientiane Capital; (2)
studying and improving waste collection system in Vientiane Capital; (3) raising
awareness about waste management for schools and communities; and (4) introduc-
ing a community waste separation and collection scheme for targeted villages in
Vientiane Capital. While other components are commonly seen in many places, the
fourth component is unprecedented. The main objective of the fourth component is
to encourage the participation of the community on waste separation and collection.
This component is an incentive-based waste collection scheme. Four Villages from
four districts were selected as targeted villages. They were selected by taking into
account the population density and the diverse of economic activities (such as high
concentration of households, restaurants, hotels, and so on). Under this scheme, the
households in the targeted villages have to separate valuable wastes such as plastics,
papers, metals, aluminum, and glass from other wastes. Later, every three months,
the Waste Collection Service Unit of VCOMS goes and buys these materials in an
open space of the villages (usually at school’s yard) (Fig. 3).
The fourth component of JICA Grass Root Waste Management Project is con-
sidered as a very successful case for community participation on waste separation
at source. Hence, currently, even though the project ended, the activities have still
been promoted to many other villages in Vientiane Capital (Xayapheng and Xaephan
2018).
Case2: FES Waste Management Project of National University of Laos. The FES
Waste Management Project was established by the Faculty of Environmental Sci-
ences (FES), National University of Laos, in 2017. Although the faculty was estab-
lished since 2004, solid waste management had been an on-and-off activity in the
past. It was not until 2017 when the National University of Laos announced its stand

2 JICAstands for Japan International Cooperation Agency, while FES stands for Faculty of Envi-
ronmental Sciences under National University of Laos.
3 MONRE stands for Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment.
154 V. Chansomphou

Fig. 3 Waste separation of JICA Grass Root Waste Management Project. Source Xayapheng and
Xaephan (2018)

to become the leading university of environmental management that integrated waste

management has become a focus in many faculties, especially in FES and Faculty of
Forestry. FES Waste Management Project has objective to reduce, reuse, and recycle
wastes as much as possible. It has three components, including waste separation
at source, 3Rs, and waste bank. Volunteers, mostly students, are recruited to work
for the project. They have to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of all the three
components. (1) Waste separation at source is an activity which faculty staff and stu-
dents have to comply. Four types of waste bin are provided, including waste bin for
plastics and papers, hazardous waste, food and organic waste, and the bin for other
wastes. (2) 3R practices are advertised at the faculty by waste volunteers. Currently,
the reduction of waste generation can be seen throughout the faculty. Many students
are promoting the use of stainless straw or bamboo straw instead of plastic straw,
the use of stainless bottle for containing drinking water, instead of buying bottled
water, and the use of cotton bag instead of plastic bags for shopping. For generated
wastes, some reusable materials are re-used directly or else are transformed before
usage. Some valuable wastes, such as plastics and papers, are sold to the waste bank,
while food wastes are composted to produce fertilizer, and other organic wastes are
turned into bio-charcoal. Hazardous waste and other types of waste are separated
and transferred to the landfill. (3) Waste bank is a component initially established to
support waste separation at source in the Faculty of Environmental Sciences alone,
but it became popular in a short period of time, and then was expanded to serve
customers outside the faculty. Customers using the service have to register with the
bank at site, get a bank book, and deposit wastes to the bank. Different types of
wastes have different prices. When depositing, wastes are valuated, and their values
are recorded into the bank account. Customers can withdraw money from the bank
when the amount is large enough, but they have to keep the minimum deposit of
ten US dollar in the account. Collected plastics are sold to a plastic recycling com-
pany, while other valuable wastes are sold to waste dealers. This system ensures the
sustainability of waste-to-resource practice.
Solid Waste Management in Lao PDR … 155

5 Future Plan for Solid Waste Management in Lao PDR

Lao PDR still lacks clear policy and legislation for 3Rs promotion and implementa-
tion. In addition, there is no framework to support the adoption of waste-to-resource
scheme. The policy and regulatory framework do not cover the penalties for littering
and open dumping, and they lack mechanisms to promote the segregation of waste
at the source (GGGI 2018). In addition, people’s awareness on solid wastes is still
low. Therefore, implementing 3Rs as a pathway toward circular economy is very
important.
Therefore, national policy frameworks need to be strengthened to ensure that
waste management practice will shift from an end-of-pipe approach to an integrated
resource management approach. In addition, at the local level, the 3Rs need to be
integrated into waste management strategies and action plans for municipalities.
These need to be developed and implemented, especially in Vientiane and other big
cities. A sound solid waste management system is to be established in harmony with
city government and development by 2030 (UNCRD 2016).
To tackle the above issues, the Pollution Control Department, Ministry of Natural
Resource and Environment of Lao PDR set up the vision, strategy, and plan as
follows:
(1) Vision and strategy
– Goal in 2030: A sound solid waste management system is established in
harmony with the city’s environment and development.
– Strategies until 2025: 3Rs are promoted throughout the country.
(2) Plan
– Collecting data relating to types of wastes, amount of wastes, in all province
in Lao PDR.
– Developing strategy on integrated waste management.
– Developing regulations on waste management in industrial sector, commer-
cial sector, and another related sectors.
– Increasing public awareness regarding 3Rs and other solid waste management
practice.
– Promoting and enforcing 3Rs principle in all provinces.

References

Climate and Clean Air Coalition. (2016). Solide waste management city profile: Vientiane capital.
Lao PDR: Climate and Clean Air Coalition.
GIES. (2012). A guide for improving municipal solid waste management and promoting urban
organic waste utilization in Lao PDR. GIES Working Paper No. SCP-2012-01. Institute for
Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Kanagawa, Japan.
156 V. Chansomphou

GGGI. (2018). Solid waste management in Vientiance, Lao PDR: Situation assessment and oppor-
tunities for waste-to-resource. Seoul: Global Green Growth Institute.
UNCRD. (2016). Seventh Regional 3R Forum in Asia and the Pacific: Advancing 3R and Resource
Efficiency for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. UNCRD (p. 46). Adelaide: United
Nation Center for Regional Development.
Update Lao Magazine. (2018). Update Lao Magazine. Vientiane Capital.
VCOMS. (2018). Report of waste management in Vientiane Capital 2017. Vientiane Capital:
VCOMS.
World Bank. (2019). Lao PDR. Retrieved 05 30, 2019, from data.worldbank.org: https://data.
worldbank.org/country/lao-pdr.
Xayapheng, C., & Xaephan, V. (2018). The effectiveness of household waste management of JICA
grass root project in Thatluangkang Village Saysettha District and Anou Village Chanthabouly
District, Vientiane Capital. Vientiane Capital: Faculty of Environmental Sciences, NUoL.
Circular Economy in India

Sadhan Kumar Ghosh

1 Introduction

India is a fastest growing economy with unity in many diversities comprising of 28

states and nine union territories. The population in India as estimated in 2019 is at
1.37 billion based on the most recent UN data and 2011 census data. India is the
second-most populous country. It is the seventh-largest country in the world, hav-
ing total area of 3,287,263 km2 (1,269,219 sq mi) measuring 3214 km (1997 mi)
from north to south and 2933 km (1822 mi) from east to west. A land frontier of
15,200 km (9445 mi) and a coastline of 7516.6 km (4671 mi) exist in India (Annual
Report 2016–17). With USD 2.6 trillion GDP, India has increased the material con-
sumption from 1.18 billion tons in 1970 to 7 billion tons in 2015, a six times growth.
India can become a 5 trillion dollar economy in the next five years as has been said
by the hon’ble Prime Minister on the 73rd independence day of India, 15 August
2019. The resource requirements in India are projected to be nearly 15 billion tons by
2030 and around 25 billion tons by 2050. The material consumption is expected to be
two times in 2030 than the present level, because of increasing population, growing
demands and aspirations, rapid industrialization and urbanization. Economic growth
and industrialization are always coupled with inherent cost on natural environment.
In recent past, India has observed a sharp decline in poverty rate and increased
urbanization simultaneously an enhanced demand for goods and services. All these
factors of increasing consumption lead to pressurized resource reserve and hence
mostly indiscriminate exploitation of natural resources. The results are the threat to
environment sustainability. India is committed to provide for sustained economic

S. K. Ghosh (B)
Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
e-mail: sadhankghosh@gmail.com
International Society of Waste Management, Air and Water (ISWMAW), Kolkata, India

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 157

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_9
158 S. K. Ghosh

growth with sustainable consumption of natural resources safeguarding the environ-

ment as a signatory to UN Sustainable Development Goals. Waste generation is a
subset of material consumption, which when suitably processed could deliver valu-
able secondary resources and when it is reduced deliver resource efficiency. Resource
efficiency has a vital role towards mitigation of land degradation, bio-diversity loss
and top of it is the climate change. India needs to take the path of economic develop-
ment with efficient use of resources and minimum negative impacts on environment
that leads to sustainable development. Here comes the importance of the implementa-
tion of concept of circular economy in India. Circular economy helps in redesign the
products and processes, waste reduction leading to green productivity and resource
productivity reducing associated environmental impacts and process cost, delivering
a more competitive economy, addresses emerging resource security/scarcity issues,
and employment generation. Circular economy drives the ongoing resources utiliza-
tion for as long as possible extracting the maximum value, recover and regenerate
products and materials at the end of each service life; circular economy helps limiting
the extraction of natural resources to maximum possible extent. The conventional,
“take, make and dispose” economic model, popularly known as linear economic
model, is very much exists in India’s manufacturing sector, one of the significant
growth areas. Linear economic model does not support replenishing finite resources.
With finite resources of material, an urgent need evolved for decoupling economic
growth from resources, which can be achieved through the concept of circular econ-
omy.

2 Demography

According to the Census of India of 2001, having the eighth schedule of the Indian
Constitution lists 22 languages, India has 122 major languages and 1599 other lan-
guages. In South Asia, India is bordered by the Bay of Bengal, the Arabian Sea and the
Indian Ocean, and surrounded by the neighbouring countries, namely Bangladesh,
Bhutan, China, Nepal, Myanmar (formerly Burma) and Pakistan. India is the world’s
third-largest economy on PPP basis (~USD 8.7 Trillion) and seventh-largest country
by area with 3,287,590 km2 with 23 official languages, business language predom-
inantly being the English. One in every six people on the planet live in India, and
between the 2001 and 2011 censuses, the country grew by 17.7%, adding 181.5 mil-
lion people. There are 28 states and nine union territories in India. India’s current
yearly growth rate is 1.02%. Nearly 416 people per square kilometre (population den-
sity) live in India, which ranks 31st in the world. The population density in Mumbai
is 21,000 people per square kilometre (54,000/square mile). Towns/cities with pop-
ulations of 1 lakh (100,000) are categorized as Class-I towns or Cities. The 46 cities
with populations of 1 million and above are known as million-plus urban agglom-
erations (UAs) or cities. The three cities with populations of 10 million and above
are known as megacities, the census defined the three as Greater Mumbai UA (18.4
million), Delhi UA (16.3 million) and Kolkata UA (14.1 million). 65.8% of Indian
Circular Economy in India 159

population in the working age group is of 27.6 years, a large potentially produc-
tive workforce. India has second-highest GDP and highest GDP growth rate among
BRICS (Source: Reserve Bank of India, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India). There
are a few demographic advantages in India, like, emergence of middle class: rising
household income, growing consumer market: booming retail sector, large younger
workforce: highly skilled and educated and large English-speaking population with
an urbanization rate of 31% in 2010 to an estimated value of 35% in 2020. All these
demographic conditions are considered to be the advantages towards making India
proceeding to the circular economy model.

3 Materials Consumption

The Indian economic model has been and still today is largely a linear one where
the activities run around “take-make-consume-dispose (t-m-c-d)” economic model,
rather than a circular model. While in many areas, the concepts of circular economy
and 5R have been introducing and in the state of transition from the “take-make-
consume-dispose” situation to a “Closed loop processes” of circular economy. The
linear economic model, t-m-c-d, of materials use in India is not sustainable and,
for many materials, the consumption in the country far exceeds the contents in the
geographical boundaries of the country with 17% of the global population, on 2%
of world’s landmass with 4% of total freshwater resources. On the other hand, a cir-
cular economy model provides opportunities to create growth, well-being, resource
circulation, jobs and local economy while reducing environmental pressures. With
the growth of global economy, integrated collaborative efforts are significant for
ensuring availability and conservation of resources to reconcile increasing demand
with finite supply. India has traditionally been a frugal society eschewing wasteful-
ness, reusing and recycling products, making these last beyond its intended purposes
(TERI 2018). However, it is a challenge to sustain with the advent of consumerism,
growing purchasing power and higher standard of living.
With the continuing current dynamics (8% growth in GDP p.a. until 2030, there-
after 5%), the material consumption in total in 2030 is projected to be 14.2 BT
(billion Tons). This amount consists of biomass amounting to 2.7 BT, fossil fuels 4.2
and 0.8 BT of metals (Fig. 1). This means tripling of demand for primary materials
compared to 2010. India has achieved the self-sufficiency in mineral raw materials
for thermal power generation, iron and steel, different kinds of refractories, ferro-
alloys, aluminium and cement. India has high import dependence for certain critical
materials as Molybdenum (100%), Nickel (100%), Cobalt (100%), Copper (95%),
Oil (70%), etc. The current status of materials extraction and recycling activities are
as follows (National Resource Efficiency Policy 2019),

• Resource extraction of 1580 tons/acre in the country at present is higher than the
world average of 450 tons/acre with the third-largest material demand (year 2010).
• Low material productivity in comparison with the global average.
160 S. K. Ghosh

Fig. 1 India’s past material demand and future projections until 2050 (IGEP 2013 and NITI Aayog
2017)

• 30% of land undergoing degradation.

• Low recycling rate at 20–25% which is similar to many of the countries in the
Asia Pacific (much higher in Australia, S. Korea, and Japan) and significantly
lower than the recycling rates in any developed countries (nearly 70% Europe).
• Responsible for 6.9% of global CO2 emissions.
• Highest water withdrawal globally for agriculture, third-highest CO2 emitter.
• High import dependency of many critical raw materials.

4 National Resource Efficiency Policy (NREP) Considers

the Resources and Materials Used

National Resource Efficiency Authority (NREA) has been proposed as a dedicated

institution in the country for fostering resource efficiency in the NREP, 2019, that
draws its power from Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, to provide for the regula-
tory provisions of this policy. NREP will encircle the biotic and abiotic resources as
well as ecosystem services. These include air, water, forest, land, metals, minerals,
fossil fuels and biomass. The NREP will cover biotic and abiotic resources across
entire lifecycle stages those includes raw material extraction, material processing,
production, use, disposal and end-of-life management of any system or product. The
policy aims to cover all resources both biotic and abiotic, environmental aspects and
all sectors across lifecycle stages, required to achieve sustainable development. The
policy will include biotic and abiotic resources and materials, specific dependent sec-
tors and generated waste (or secondary resources) from these sectors, These include
Circular Economy in India 161

resources and materials, namely metals and metal industry (steel, aluminium, cop-
per, etc.), non-metallic minerals, water, land, air, biomass and fossil fuels; different
sectors, namely plastic, packaging, construction, transportation, electrical and elec-
tronic equipment, agriculture, textile, renewable energy (solar, wind, WtE, etc.) and
food and wastes, namely municipal solid waste, plastic packaging, e-wastes, indus-
trial waste, etc. A set of indicators will track the progress of the resource efficiency.
A few types of indicators, namely established indicators, sector-specific indicators,
recovery and recycling indicators will track the progress with resource efficiency tar-
gets developed by the concerned ministries (and state governments) in consultation
with stakeholders.

5 Basic Acts: Waste Management Legislation

and Resources Circulation

In India, the circular economy has been supported by the legislation and regulations
for quite a long time. Information in Fig. 2 demonstrate the linkage of framework and
key policies across lifecycle stages and different rules, regulations and guidelines
pertaining to resource conservation in different areas of concerns. India does not
have any law directly for circular economy but the concept and its implementation
requirements are embedded in many rules and regulations. Very recently, in the later
part of 2019, the national resource efficiency policy draft has been released. The
concept of sustainable development and environmental protection was embedded to
some extent evolved in India since long back in 1881 through the Factories Act 1881
followed by Factories Act 1934 and the Factories Act 1948 in independent India
with subsequent amendments. The basic environmental plan in Indian legislation
was evolved as the forward action plans after the 1972 Stockholm Conference and
the 42nd amendment in Article 48 part IV & Article 51A(g) in the Constitution of
India. The Constitution of India was amended within five years after the Stockholm
Declaration, for the Protection and Improvement of Environment as constitutional
mandate.
A National Committee on Environmental Planning and Coordination was set up by
the Government of India. Article 48A was added by the Constitution (42nd Amend-
ment) Act, 1976 which stated that “State shall endeavour to protect and improve
the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.” Article
51 ensures that the state shall strive for the promotion and maintenance of just and
honourable relations between nations respect for international law and treaty obli-
gations, as well as settlement of international disputes by arbitration. Article 51 in
the constitution of India 1949 included 51A (g) “to protect and improve the natural
environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for
living creatures”; Article 51-A (g) deals with fundamental duties of the citizens states
and stated, “It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the
162 S. K. Ghosh

Fig. 2 Framework and key policies across lifecycle stages in India focusing SDGs, Resource
conservation Circular Economy and 5R. (Source Developed by Prof. S. K. Ghosh, the author)
Circular Economy in India 163

natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compas-
sion for living creatures.” The protection and improvement of natural environment
is the fundamental duty of the State (Article 48-A) and every citizen (Article 51-A
(g)) (Constitution of India) under the Constitution Act of 1976.
Wildlife Act, 1972, Water Act, 1974, Air Act, 1981 and a few other acts were intro-
duced in India soon after the Stockholm Conference. The right to clean, healthy and
pollution-free environment was included as the fundamental right of life enshrined
in Article 21 of the Indian constitution. “Polluters Pay” under the doctrine of sus-
tainable development and the precautionary principles were explicitly embedded in
the recent environmental legislations including in the National Green Tribunal Act
2010. Figure 1 demonstrates the framework of Indian rules and regulations focusing
Circular Economy, 5R and Resource conservation.
There were many initiatives in India towards resource circulation by the way of
several policies, legislations and schemes which support the circular economy and
5Rs concepts. The very recent initiative in India concerning resource circulation
and circular economy is the release of a draft National Resource Efficiency Policy
(NREP), 2019, on 23.07.2019, by the ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate
Change, Govt. of India charting a Resource Efficient Future for Sustainable Devel-
opment (National Resource Efficiency Policy 2019).
The policy will help in creating facilitative and regulatory environment to main-
stream resource efficiency across all sectors through cross-sectoral collaborations,
development of policy instruments, action plans and efficient implementation and
monitoring frameworks. These rules are the first step for mainstreaming resource
efficiency in India and provide for review after ten years, if needed. The guided
principles of NREP, 2019, are:
(i) reduced primary resource consumption to “sustainable” levels, to achieve the
sustainable development goals and staying within the planetary boundaries,
(ii) higher value creation with less material through resource-efficient and circular
approaches,
(iii) minimization of waste and material security, and
(iv) creation of employment opportunities and business models beneficial to the
cause of environmental protection and restoration.
Scope of the National Resource Efficiency Policy encompasses resources and
materials used across all lifecycle stages of any sector. Resources include both biotic
and abiotic resources as well as ecosystem services that include air, water, forest, land,
metals, minerals, fossil fuels and biomass. The NRE policy covers these resources
(biotic and abiotic) across all the lifecycle stages including raw material extraction,
production and material processing, use and disposal and end-of-life management
of any product or system.
In India, there are specific documents and legislations those give clear pathway
for the transition of the economy to a more circular model, based on the principle
of 5Rs—Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Remanufacturing and Refurbish. The focused and
integrated approach to circular economy is visible in India in a few of the policies,
namely National Resource Efficiency Policy (Draft) (2019), National Electricity
164 S. K. Ghosh

Mobility Mission Plan in consumption stage, the ZED (Zero Effect, Zero Defect)
in manufacturing stage, the various Waste Management Rules of 2016 in disposal
stage and Swachh Bharat Mission. Across various sectors of the economy, these are
further supported for effective technology and finance mechanisms by development
of specific policies.

5.1 Enabling Practices of Circulation of Resources/Products

Based on Circular Economy and 5R—Resource
Conservation and Eco-friendly Disposal Practices

After the notification of the Fly Ash Utilization Policy in 1999, the fly ash utilization
has increased to nearly 60% in India. The notification on fly ash utilization was first
issued in the year 1999 and since then, the fly ash utilization in the country has
increased to almost 60%. Power-generating companies have been given mandate by
the government to provide fly ash at free of cost to the consumers within 300 kms, on
the other hand, the ministry of forest, environment and climate change (MoEF&CC)
revised some of the norms to diversify the application of fly ash across other sectors.
The cement industries operating within a radius of 300 kms of a coal-based thermal
power plant have to use fly ash for cement manufacturing as per Bureau of Indian
Standards (BIS).
The amended Batteries (Management and Handling) Amendment Rules (2010)
include provision for sale of batteries through registered dealers. Rules ensure the
collection, recycling, transportation and sale of batteries will be the responsibility of
the manufacturer, importer, re-conditioner, assembler, dealer, recycler, auctioneer,
bulk consumer and consumer (MoEF & CC 2010). The Government of India in 2016
notified the new Solid Waste Management Rules (SWM), 2016, replacing the earlier
rules 16 years ago in 2000. The new rule explicitly mandates source segregation of
waste for creating opportunities of value addition and promotes recovery, reuse and
recycle reducing the landfill to the minimum extent possible encouraging resource
circulation.
Construction and Demolition Waste Management Rules (2016) is the inclusion of
set of new rules given the responsibility to the waste generators for their storage
and transportation to collection centre as provided by local bodies (ULB) or to
be handed over to authorized processing facilities. E-Waste (Management) Rules
(2016) was introduced by revising the previous rules for properly channelizing e-
waste for formal treatment and resource recovery. The rule introduced extended
producer responsibility (EPR). Plastic Waste Management Rules (2016) will bring
responsibilities in system of collecting back plastic wastes, use of plastic waste for
specific applications for gainful utilization of waste. Hazardous and Other Wastes
(Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules (2016) emphasize the recovery
and reuse of materials from hazardous and other waste materials generated from a
process and ensure sound management of all hazardous and other waste material.
Circular Economy in India 165

5.2 Enabling Resource Efficiency During Product Design

Phase

The sustainable development involves three pillars, namely operational including

environmental aspects, social aspects and economical aspects. Designing and man-
ufacturing environmentally benign products is a key to achieving sustainable con-
sumption and production goal of SDGs. There are some key parameters that act
as determinants in ensuring sustainability of products under the three sustainable
development pillars (Table 1).
National Design Policy (NDP) has been introduced by the Department of Indus-
trial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), India in 2007. NDP promotes a design enabled
Indian industry, brand image for Indian designs and award India Design Mark on
designs based on key criteria, e.g. innovation, originality, aesthetic appeal, ergonomic
features, user-friendliness, safety and eco-friendliness. Science, Technology and
Innovation Policy (2013) were introduced with an objective to enhance sustain-
able and inclusive growth fostering resource-optimized, cost-effective innovations,
across size and technology domains and popularizing innovation through R&D focus-
ing green manufacturing. Bureau of Indian Standards Act (2016) was introduced in
2017 revising the previous act of 1986. The BIS develops standards and certifica-
tion covering a wide range of products, processes, systems across different sectors
of industries for manufacturing and services. BIS recognizes environment-friendly
products through its labelling scheme eco-mark. BIS forms the Indian mirror body of

Table 1 Aspects of
Operational and Social aspects Economic aspects
sustainable development
environmental
aspects
Green productivity Legislation and Green supply
enforcement chain management
Energy Social capital Innovativeness
conservation
Bio-degradable Job opportunity Product life cycle
material
Circular economy Housing and Carbon trading
and 5R concept service
infrastructure
Waste Health and Profitability
minimization education
Carbon footprint Community Return on
participation and investment
benefits
Clean GDP growth
development
mechanism
166 S. K. Ghosh

International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and participates in formulation

of standards in different technical committees of ISO.

5.3 Enabling Resource-Efficient Mining Practices

Significant portion of material requirement, nearly 95%, is met from domestic sources
in India. A small improvement in resource efficiency at the mining stage can lead
to substantial savings in the sector as well for the country’s economy. The National
mineral policy of 2008 focuses the significance of resource conservation, preven-
tion and mitigation of adverse environmental effects, making zero waste mining as
the national goal using modern machinery and equipment to improve efficiency,
productivity and economic viability of mining and strengthening research. Sustain-
able Development Framework for Mining Sector in India (2011) released by the
Ministry of Mines envisions mining to be “financially viable; socially responsi-
ble; environmentally, technically and scientifically sound; with a long-term view of
development; uses mineral resources optimally; and ensures sustainable post-closure
land uses”. Minerals and Mining Development Regulatory Act (MMDR) (2016) sets
guidelines, recommends evaluation and implementation of sustainable development
frameworks for the mining sector empowering the central government to issue direc-
tions to reduce wastes, adoption of waste management practices and promotion of
recycling of materials, mitigation of adverse environmental impacts on groundwa-
ter, air, noise and land, minimize impacts on bio-diversity, flora, fauna and habitat
and to formulate strategies for restoration and reclamation activities for rational use
of land resource. Enhancement of resource efficiency in this mining sector would
mean improved mining practices leading to minimal wastage, beneficiation, better
transportation, as well as fewer environmental and social conflicts.

5.4 Enabling Resource-Efficient Manufacturing

India’s manufacturing sector has emerged as a key economic sector for decades. To
address the renewed commitments of the Government on “Make in India”, “Digital
India” and “Skill India”, the earlier National Manufacturing Policy has been mod-
ified in 2011. Apart from increasing income and employment, the policy aimed at
enhancing global competitiveness of India’s manufacturing sector, increasing domes-
tic value addition and strengthening technological depth that supports environmen-
tal sustainability. National Manufacturing Policy helps in identifying importance of
green manufacturing and provides incentives for acquiring technologies that are eco-
friendly and control consumption resources, namely water, energy, etc. To meet the
growing demand for domestic and export markets, the National Policy on Electronics
was introduced in 2012 aiming at making India a globally competitive electronics
Circular Economy in India 167

manufacturing hub by ministry of electronics and information technology, govern-

ment of India. Its other objective was to streamline the implementation of e-waste
rules as well as the extended producer responsibility. National Manufacturing Com-
petitiveness Programme was launched in 2014 to enhance the competitiveness of
Micro-, Small and Medium Enterprise (MSME) sector which is the backbone of
India’s manufacturing industries (Source: Ministry of Micro-, Small and Medium
Enterprises, 2017). Government of India introduced “Financial Support to MSMEs
in ZED Certification Scheme, 2017” to promote Zero Defect Zero Effect (ZED)
across all manufacturing and service sector industries with a specific emphasis on
the MSMEs.

5.5 Enabling Resource-Efficient Consumption Practices

Resource efficiency in the consumption phase has a lot to offer in terms of material
savings. In recent years, the Government has introduced new policies and as well
modified earlier policies with a larger objective to promote sustainable consumption
and production.
Eco-mark 1991: Eco-mark is one of the labelling schemes in the country intro-
duced by the ten ministries of environment and forest and Bureau of Indian Stan-
dards (BIS), which helps in voluntary participation to identify eco-friendly products
involving significantly reduced environmental impacts all through the supply chain
of extraction, manufacturing, use and disposal considering cradle-to-grave approach.
Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) introduced Star Labelling Program in 2006 to
provide consumers informed choice about purchase decisions thereby saving their
electricity bills. The Star Labelling Program bought substantial energy savings in the
residential and commercial buildings covering room air conditioners (Fixed Speed),
ceiling fans, colour TV, computer, refrigerators, distribution transformers, domes-
tic gas stoves, frost-free refrigerators, general-purpose industrial motor, pumps,
stationary-type water heater, submersible pump set, washing machine, ballast, solid-
state inverter, office automation products, diesel engine driven, diesel generator set,
led lamps, room air conditioners (variable speed), chiller, variable refrigerant flow,
agricultural pump sets, microwave oven, etc., and many others. Biofuel Programme
(2009) was introduced in December 2009 to meet the increasing energy needs of the
country, reduce open burning as well as utilization of biomass, to provide energy
security, National Policy on Biofuels was announced in December 2009. It gave
thrust on research and development on cultivation, processing and production of
biofuels and a blending mandate of 20% ethanol and bio-diesel by 2017.
Specific targets have been assigned for energy consumption in designated indus-
tries that can trade energy-efficient certificates in energy-intensive sectors based on
the efficiency gained by the designated consumers. The Central Electricity Regula-
tory Commission (CERC) introduced Renewable Energy Certification (REC) 2010
program to meet Renewable Purchase Obligation targets by the electricity distribu-
tion companies while incentivizing green energy generation. Electricity Act, 2003,
168 S. K. Ghosh

and the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) have given roadmap to
increase the per cent of renewable energy generation in the total generation capac-
ity. Energy efficiency in energy-intensive industries has been encouraged through
the Perform Achieve Trade (PAT) 2012, a market-based trading scheme that was
introduced under the National Mission on Enhanced Energy Efficiency (NMEEE)
administered by the Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE).
The ministry of petroleum and natural gas, government of India, has been pro-
moting the improvement in fuel quality and enforcing stricter emission norms for
the automobile sector by introducing Auto Fuel Policy 2015 and Vision for 2025.
This has brought a significant change in the auto fuel efficiency and as a whole the
competence in automobile sectors. Adoption of electric vehicles and their manufac-
turing have become one of the flagship programmes in India to enhance national
fuel security, providing affordable and environmentally friendly transportation and
enabling the Indian automotive industry to achieve global manufacturing leadership.
The National Electric Mobility Mission Plan (NEMMP) 2020, providing the vision
and the roadmap for the implementation at faster rate setting an ambitious sales tar-
get to achieve 6–7 millions of hybrid and electric vehicles by 2020. Faster Adoption
and Manufacturing of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles (FAME) India scheme aims to
promote multimodal public electric mobility through an incentive scheme in cities
for the promotion of adoption of electric vehicles.

6 Action Plans for Waste Management in ZED

Adopting circular economy in industries is not just about improving environmen-

tal performance. It improves the resource efficiency thereby conserving materials
in micro-economic and macro-economic considerations. By the implementation of
circular economy model significant savings in resources can be realized. These sav-
ings offer possibility investments elsewhere and give a globally competitive status
for Indian SMEs. ZED (Zero Effect, Zero Defect) in manufacturing facilities is a
tool that helps in implementation of CE in industries. Followings are some of the
action plans the government of India has taken up. These should go beyond the tra-
ditional 3Rs concept and integrate more aspects related to redesigning the products
and re-engineering the processes, e.g. Product Stewardship or extended producer
responsibility (EPR) is crucial in achieving many CE goals.
1. Create awareness by training all employees on value and waste concept of lean
manufacturing.
2. Development of a system and training of people to reduce waste using lean and
six-sigma tools.
3. Detection of waste through value stream mapping and elimination of waste
through structured application.
4. Identify the environment impact of materials used in the products, when they
are disposed of.
Circular Economy in India 169

5. Safe disposal instructions provided on packaging in local languages.

6. Develop instructions for environmentally safe use, storage and disposal after
use and educate the customer about proper disposal.
7. Substitution of negative impact materials with environmentally safe materials.
8. Develop companywide scrap reduction system.
9. Evaluate cost for poor quality due to scrap and try to minimize in the every
sector of the production unit.
10. Identify the root cause of the scrap and make countermeasure.
11. Training of people on prevention of pollution.
12. Mapping of environmental pollutants from processes.
13. Identify opportunities to take measure to conserve natural resources in various
areas of company.
14. Implement techniques for optimal use of natural resources and measure natu-
ral resource usage in all areas of organization by developing natural resource
monitoring system.

7 Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM)—Swachh Survekshan:

Resource Circulation in ULB

World’s biggest ever survey, the Servekshan 2019, impacting nearly 0.43 billion cit-
izens in 4237 cities in India was conducted early 2019 that started in 2016. Swachh
Bharat Mission (SBM), a flagship scheme of the government of India has brought a
significant shift in waste management and sanitation in the country both for urban
and rural areas. Every year, cities and towns across India are awarded with the title
of “Swachh Cities” (Clean Cities) on the basis of their status of open defecation (to
achieve ODF), cleanliness, sanitation and waste management drives as a part of the
Swachh Bharat Abhiyan that was launched in October 2014. The Swachh Survek-
shan–2016 was conducted by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs in January
2016 assessing 73 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) when Mysuru city received the tag of
the cleanest city of India. The 2017 edition was conducted in January–February 2017
covering 434 ULBs. Indore emerged as the cleanest city in 2017 survey. Indore city
received and continued the tag of the cleanest city in 2018 and 2019 consecutively for
three years. Four thousand forty-one (4041) cities were involved in Swachh Servek-
shan 2018 ranking first 500 cities on national level which have more than 0.1 million
population, among which three thousand five hundred forty-one (3541) cities were
included with less than 0.1 million population. Swachh Survekshan has given a big
push in the implementation of new sets of rules on waste management effectively.
170 S. K. Ghosh

8 Solid Waste: Minimizing Resource Consumption

Enhancement of Resource Circulation Based on Circular
Economy and 5Rs

The Government of India has revised five rules pertaining to municipal wastes, plas-
tics wastes, e-wastes, hazardous waste and bio-medical wastes and introduced con-
struction and demolition wastes in the year 2016 and thereafter subsequent amend-
ments based on the concepts of 5Rs and circular economy. All the requirements on
these sets of new rules focused on resource circulation and reduction to the final sink.
The salient features of the Solid Waste Management Rules 2016 released on 8
April 2016 are as follows,
(a) Every household, Event organizers, Street Vendors, RWAs and Market Associa-
tions, Gated Community having more than area 5000 m2 , hotels and restaurants,
etc., are among the waste generators, and bulk waste generators.
(b) The responsibilities of specific officers in state as well as the central level have
been defined.
(c) Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is introduced among the manufactur-
ers/brand owners to facilitate collect back wastes of their products. Manufac-
turers of products like sanitary wastes, etc., shall have to provide pouch for
packaging and disposal for treatment, Industry (cement, power plant, etc.) shall
use RDF within 100 km and the operator of facilities shall follow guidelines
and standards.
(d) EPR has also been introduced in case of plastic products and electrical and
electronic equipment (EEE) for management of plastics waste and e-wastes.
(e) The Construction and Demolition waste (C&DW) management Rules have been
launched in the year 2016 to segregate the generated C&DW at source and trans-
ported separately to the C&DW recycling facility. This will help in enhancing
the calorific value of municipal wastes because of the source separation. India
has installed two C&DW recycling plants at Delhi (1000 tpd) and Gandhina-
gar, Ahmedabad (500 tpd) and several such plants are in the commissioning or
approval stage by the government.
(f) There are four bigger Waste to Energy (WtE) plants (ranging from 700 to 2000
tpd) running at Delhi and Jabalpur. More than 40 WtE plants are at the com-
missioning or approval stage by the government. There are many biomethation
plants ranging from 1 to 100 tpd in the operational or commissioning or approval
stage by the government and private agencies.
(g) Though there are a few landfill sites, the new rules do not encourage landfill
sites of bigger sizes.
(h) Waste Storage: The Solid Waste Management Rules 2016 requires that the
household wastes are segregated in three streams: The wet bio-degradable
wastes in green bin, dry non-bio-degradable wastes in white or blue bins and
the domestic hazardous wastes in black bins.
(i) Waste Transport and Treatment (Fig. 3): The wet bio-degradable wastes are
Circular Economy in India 171

Fig. 3 Sustainable waste management model developed by the author

transported and, if necessary, temporary stores may be carried out at transfer

station on the way to the treatment facilities for further segregation or pre-
processing. The treatment facility needs to have the provision of composting
and/or biomethanation processes of the wet wastes as is possible. The govern-
ment will give a subsidy of nearly 7 USD (INR 1500/-) per ton of compost
produced. The dry non-bio-degradable recyclable wastes have to be separated
in as maximum as possible streams in the material recovery facility (MRF) and
will arrange for recycling. The incinerable wastes out of these dry wastes which
have more than 1500 kcal/kg may be used for waste-to-energy plants and/or
RDF plants to be used for co-processing in cement plants to be used as alterna-
tive fuel and raw materials (AFR) or any other uses, etc., be white or blue bins
and the domestic hazardous wastes in black bins.
(j) Plastics may be treated for mechanical recycling for making recycled granules,
pyrolysis, road making, etc. Bio-medical wastes and hazardous waste manage-
ment have their own system of storing, transport, treatment and disposal systems.
The transboundary movement of wastes is controlled by rules in India.
(k) The responsibilities of all the related stakeholder have been defined with author-
ities and power to take penal actions.

9 Plastics Economy in India

In India, the design, manufacturing, use, recycling and waste disposal of plastic are
the most challenging areas of concern for the circular economy. Plastics, due to its
172 S. K. Ghosh

various advantageous aspects, have become one of the most ubiquitous materials
used throughout the world. The global production on an average has increased by
about 9% per year since 1950. The plastic industry has become a major economic
actor with revenue of about 1722 billion Euros in 2015. Since the 1970s, the issue
of plastics ending up in the oceans harming the marine life forms and ecosystem
has been known and becoming concern for the mankind and the environment. The
impacts associated with exposure of organisms to marine micro- and macro-plastics
have been increasing day by day. Research focus on these issues is also taking
significant shape. However, studies linking the processes in the plastic value chain
to plastics being released to the oceans are only starting to emerge. The GDP growth
in India has been shown in Table 2 which has a strong relation to petrochemical
growth in the country. Among Indian plastics industries, more than 2000 exporters,
30,000 processing units employing more than 4 million people and nearly 85–90%
of the processing units are small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) employing.
India’s plastic exports experienced a growth of 31.6% at $4.59 billion during the
period April–September 2018 as against $3.48 billion in same period during 2017–18.
It registered a faster growth than the overall merchandise export growth from India
(Plexconcil). During H1 2018–19, India reported merchandise exports worth $164.04
billion, up 12.5% from $145.75 billion in H1 2017–18. In the first half of 2019,
trend in plastic exports from India has been very positive with a strong year-on-
year growth vis-a-vis 2017–18 with August 2018 topping $800 million. Average per
capita consumption of plastic in India is 11 kg, whereas the average per capita global
consumption is 28 kg. The estimated annual per capita consumption in India would
be 20 kg by 2022.
India is a major producer and importer of plastics and generator of plastic waste.
The Chinese waste ban recently poses a new challenge for the management of plastic
waste in Asia, but even if the waste that is collected is managed correctly, a large
amount still leaks into the environment as litter. As a result, action on plastics needs
to address not only the effective management of the material once produced but
measures to reduce plastic use as this is needed to reduce waste production and
leakage.

Table 2 GDP growth in India with polymer consumption growth and import duty
Year GDP growth (%) Polymer consumption growth Import duty
(%)
1990–1995 5.0 12.9 50%+
1995–2000 6.5 14.6 40%
2000–2004 5.9 5.8 45–15%
2005–2012 8.7 10.9 12.5–5%
2012–2017, 12th plan 7.2 10.6 7.5–5%
2017–2022, 13th plan 8 10.4 5–0%
Source Plastindia Foundation (2018)
Circular Economy in India 173

There are a number of initiatives for addressing the issues related to pollution
evolved from use of particular types of products of plastics and disposal of plastics
waste generated. The number of organized recycling units in India is nearly 3500
and the number of unorganized recycling units is more than 4000 involving nearly
600,000 manpower directly and more than 10,00,000 manpower in indirect way that
includes waste pickers. The quantity of plastics wastes recycled in India is nearly 5.5
million tons per annum. Plastic waste generated in India in 2017–18 was 660,787.85
tons, whereas plastic waste generation in 60 major cities was 4059 TPD. Plastic
waste generation in Delhi only is nearly 689 TPD. The total quantum of plastic waste
treated is not necessarily equal to the amount of plastic produced in the same year in
the country. There is always difference exists in the quantity of plastic product, in-
use plastic stocks, product lifetimes and annual variations in plastics production and
demand. Hence, the mapping of plastic waste treatment was developed independently
of the production and consumption mapping. Generally in India, the plastic waste
composition is nearly 94% recyclable and 06% non-recyclable (CPCB Report 2018).
Figure 4 demonstrates the percentage of classified plastics waste in the plastics waste
streams. Figure 5 shows the location of plastics recycling centres in 27 cities across
the country. Co-processing of plastic waste (PW) in cement kilns as per CPCB’s
guidelines is being carried out at nearly 180 cement plants. Nearly 38 cement plants
located in several states are presently using plastic waste as alternative fuel and raw
materials (AFR). Automatic feeding mechanism for feeding PW to cement kilns flows
in the path as, (a) PW preprocessed, (b) is burnt destroyed at a higher temperature of
around 1400 °C, (c) PW’s inorganic content gets fixed with the clinker, (d) setting-up
of laboratory for plastics waste analysis and (e) monitoring of emission by cement
industry/SPCBs to get energy and cement as output.

Fig. 4 Percentage of classified plastics waste in the plastic waste streams

174 S. K. Ghosh

Fig. 5 Major plastic recycling clusters spread across India (Source: CPCB Report 2018)

9.1 Issues and Challenges in Plastics Waste Management

Plastic waste littering is a major environmental concern. It makes land infertile, choke
the drains, ingestion by cattle causing death, plastics resource depletion and give ugly
look of a city or town. Followings are some of the concerns of plastic waste littering
and management.
• Absence of proper system of collection and segregation of plastic waste in
cities/towns.
• Accumulation of non-recyclable plastic waste such as multilayered laminated
packaging, thermoset plastic like SMC and FRP.
• Open burning, especially thermoset plastic waste is a major health and environ-
mental issue, as it emits toxic gases.
Circular Economy in India 175

• Impact of leaching on soil, underground water, etc., due to improper dumping of

plastic waste (contain metals and phthalates).
• Running of unregistered plastic manufacturing and recycling units/industries in
residential areas.

9.2 Actions Taken in India Addressing Recirculation

and Reduction of Plastics Wastes

The Circular Economy Action Plan in India developed multipronged strategies for
plastics. Considering the number of problems and their impact on the environment
and the society, a lot more actions have been taken up in India. The report shows
that almost 100% rigid plastics waste and nearly 95% PET bottle waste are recycled,
recycling of imported plastics scrap is continued. In-house plastic scraps are being
utilized in production process and feedstock recycling (mechanical recycling and
Pyrolysis). Energy recovery through co-processing in cement kiln gained popularity
and acceptance in India. Around 1.0 million tons of wastes in 2016–17 co-processed
in cement kiln which is projected to reach up to 1.5 million tons in 2019–20. Use of
plastic waste in bitumen road construction is also practiced in India.
The Plastic Waste Management Rules (2016) enforced a few implementation
strategies as follows for the import, manufacture, stock, distribution, sale and use of
plastic carry bags, sheets, etc.
• India has 7500 km of coastline. A national marine litter action campaign pro-
gramme has been taken up to measure the amount of plastic enters India’s coastal
waters. The nation will pledge to make 100 national monuments litter-free, includ-
ing the Taj Mahal.
• India will eliminate all single-use plastic in the country by 2022. The new initiative
for the same will be started from 2 October 2019.
• Applicable to every waste generator; local body, Gram Panchayat, manufacturer,
importers and producer.
• Minimum thickness of (virgin or recycled) of plastic carry bags, sheets, etc.,
not < 50 µm).
• Minimum thickness criteria not applicable for compostable carry bags (conforming
IS/ISO: 17088 & having CPCB Certificate for marketing/selling).
• Manufacturers of plastic carry bags shall register with state and central pollution
control board (CPCB) and pollution control committee (PCC).
• Manufacturer and seller of compostable carry bags shall obtain a certificate from
CPCB.
• Packing Gutkha, pan masala and tobacco, plastic sachets/pouches are not
permitted.
• Recycled carry bags not to be used for packing/storing/dispensing of food items,
etc.
• Carry bag must print the name, registration number of manufacturer, thickness,
“recycled” mark, etc., as applicable.
176 S. K. Ghosh

• Pricing of carry bags and registration.

• Bought rural areas and plastic importers under its purview.
• Introduced Plastic Waste Management (PWM) fee through pre-registration of the
producers, importers of plastic carry bags/multi-layered plastics (MLPs) and ven-
dors selling the same for establishing the waste management system.
• Retailers/Vendors to provide labelled carry bags, sheet or MLP.
• EPR: All producers work out modalities for waste collection system based on
EPR. The manufacturers are supposed to establish a system for collecting back
the plastic waste generated due to their products.
• Local body shall utilize the amount for development of waste management system.

9.3 Actions Taken in India on Curbing Plastics Use

India was the host country of the World Environment Day 2018. The WED 2018
theme was, “Beat the Plastics Pollution” and announcement on abolish Single-Use-
Plastics by 2022 stopping manufacture, storage, sale and use was made on 5 June
2018. There are many more actions that India taking place, a few of which are noted
below.
• Ban on six single-use plastics products from 2 October 2019: Plastics bags, small
plastics bottles, plastics plates, plastic straws, certain types of sachets of MLP and
plastics cups.
• Value chain for PET recycling already exists and country has enough capacity for
recycling PET.
• Certification by CPCB to compostable carry bag manufacturers and sellers.
• Ban on plastics carry bags less than 50 µm thickness.
• Introduction of campaign against marine litter.
• Pledge to make 100 national monuments litter-free.
• Formation of local eco-groups to curb use of plastics and develop alternative
business propositions.
• Enhanced research projects.
• Stop using single-use plastics in higher educational institutes.

9.4 Plastic Waste Management Technologies Practised

in India

• Eco-friendly recycling of Plastics waste to produce granule (Fig. 6; [Source: https://

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pyz33PEitD0]
• Utilization of Plastic Waste in Road Construction (As per IRC: SP:98-2013)
• Co-processing of Plastic Waste in Cement Kilns
• Plasma Pyrolysis Technology (PPT)
• Conversion of plastic waste into liquid RDF (Oil)
Circular Economy in India 177

Fig. 6 Eco-friendly waste plastics process and machine developed and patented for producing
recycled granules by Prof. S.K. Ghosh, at Jadavpur University, Kolkata

10 E-Waste Management and Policies of Extended

Producer Responsibility (EPR)

Electronic waste (e-waste) mainly includes discarded mobile phones, computer mon-
itors, motherboards, PCB, chargers, compact discs, television sets, headphones,
washing machines, air conditioners, refrigerators and other electrical and electronic
equipment. According to the Global E-Waste Monitor 2017, nearly 2 million tons
of e-waste is generated in India that ranks fifth among e-waste-producing countries,
after the USA, China, Japan and Germany. Around 0.036 tons of e-waste has been
treated in India in the year 2016–17. India’s informal recycling system is very strong
and nearly 95% of the e-waste generated is recycled in the informal sector in very
crude manner impacting the health and environment. United Nations (UN) in World
Economic Forum on 24 January 2019 on e-waste reported that the waste stream
reached 48.5 tons in India in 2018 and is expected to double the amount if noth-
ing changes. It needs immediate attention. The e-waste management rules 2016 and
subsequent amendments in 2018 are in the implementation stage in a very close mon-
itoring system with a number of targets in EPR plans. India has introduced the EPR
for e-wastes in 2018 in true sense. In case the producer has started sale, the EPR target
shall be applicable as per e-waste management (amended) rules 2018 Schedule-III
(A) and these targets applicable from financial year 2018–2019. Once the product
achieves its average life as fixed by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), the
targets of collection shall be revised as per Schedule III (Table 3). Extended Producer
178 S. K. Ghosh

Table 3 EPR target schedule as per e-waste management (amended) rules 2018
Sl. Year E-Waste collection target E-waste collection target
(by weight) (by weight)
(i) 2017–2018 10% of quantity of e-waste
generation as per EPR Plan
of organization
(ii) 2018–2019 20% of quantity of e-waste 5% of sales figure of FY
generation as per EPR Plan 2016–17
of organization
(iii) 2019–2020 30% of quantity of e-waste 5% of sales figure of FY
generation as per EPR Plan 2017–18
of organization
(iv) 2020–2021 40% of quantity of e-waste 10% of sales figure of FY
generation as per EPR Plan 2018–19
of organization
(v) 2021–2022 50% of quantity of e-waste 10% of sales figure of FY
generation as per EPR Plan 2019–20
of organization
(vi) 2022–2023 60% of quantity of e-waste 15% of sales figure of FY
generation as per EPR Plan 2020–21
of organization
(vii) 2023–2014 and onwards 70% of quantity of e-waste 15% of sales figure of FY
generation as per EPR Plan 2021–22
of organization
(viii) 2024–2025 20% of sales figure of FY
2022–23
(ix) 2025 onwards 20% of sales figure of the
year preceding the previous
year

Responsibility targets have been revised that is applicable from 1 October 2017 as
per Schedule III.

11 End-of-Life Vehicles (ELV)

It was realized that the impact of end-of-life vehicles (ELV) has to be minimized on
the environment, which will contribute to the protection, preservation and improve-
ment of the environmental quality and energy conservation. Considering the situa-
tion, it has been realized that the ELV regulation in India cannot be the only solu-
tion towards making automobile recycling an organized sector at this stage. There
are a few more very significant measures to be taken for making auto recycling
an environment-friendly process (AIS-129: Automotive industry standard—ELV,
2015). The significant concerns are, big unorganized group involved in inefficient
Circular Economy in India 179

Fig. 7 Lifecycle stages across value chain and related resource efficiency concerns

dismantling of vehicles, very low efficiency of material recovery, etc. These vehicles
usually end up reaching the unorganized dismantling centres where auto components
are either refurbished or sent for recycling. Efficiency of material recovery is very
low due to inefficient dismantling. Guidelines were issued by the CPCB to regulate
the sector in an environmentally friendly manner, recommending a system of “shared
responsibility”. All the stakeholders, including the government, manufacturers and
recyclers, dealers, insurers, consumers must be involved in the supply chain of the
ELV management. The lifecycle stages (Fig. 7) show across value chain and related
resource efficiency concerns (Source: NREP 2019).
While analysing the pectoral aspects, it has been observed that the respective value
chain highlights enormous potential in augmenting recycling, resource efficiency
and innovative applications. SMEs are the most potential for achieving the resource
efficiency across the value chain of ELV in automotive sector. Nearly 21 million
vehicles are estimated to reach the end-of-life stages by 2030 which is a challenge
to manage the end-of-life vehicles (ELV) in the country.

12 Case Studies

There is a huge number of initiatives of decentralized waste management in the

country all through which help supporting circular economy model. A few of the
initiatives are discussed in brief in this section.
180 S. K. Ghosh

12.1 Initiative in Housing Society in Kolkata, a Metro City

The bulk waste generators have to install its own waste management system as per
the SWM Rules 2016. Bangalore, another big city, is the pioneer in this aspect. The
Diamond City South housing complex in south Kolkata has initiated the project,
“ISWMAW-DCSRA Waste Management Project” (Figs. 8 and 9) to segregate the
wastes in dry and wet wastes at the source by incorporating bin cultures among the
residents (model in Fig. 3).

Fig. 8 ISWMAW-DCSRA waste management project team in training

Fig. 9 3R initiative to implement SWM Rules 2016 at DCS housing complex in Kolkata
Circular Economy in India 181

Customized composter has been installed for composting (WtC Facility) used
flower, garden wastes, green vegetable and fruit wastes, eggshells, etc. The compost
produced from its own plant substituted the chemical fertilizer. The dry wastes are
also segregated in nearly 12 streams to sell the same to the recyclers reducing the
burden of waste disposal to landfill site, generating revenues by recycling and effec-
tively utilizing the resources, an example of circular economy (Fig. 8). The project is
self-sustainable and reduced the burden of nearly 90 tons of waste not going to landfill
but circulating to generate resources reducing the primary resource consumption.

12.2 Municipal Waste Management at Indore—The Cleanest

City in India

The City generates nearly 1100 tons of municipal solid waste a day. The city admin-
istration took three pronged approaches: Bin-free, litter-free and dust-free city. The
city installed nearly 3053 litter bins in all commercial areas, parks and gardens and
in all high footfall areas. For improving the standards of public health and environ-
mental quality, efficient mechanism for collection and transportation of municipal
solid waste has been established. Domestic hazardous waste is stored in separate bin
and taken weekly to TSDFs.
Treatment facilities like compost, biomethanation and bioremediation have been
established and operated regularly (Fig. 10). Composts are sold to the farmers and
other users, whereas the gas generated from biomethanation plants are used for
running public vehicles, namely state-operated buses. The dry waste collected is
separately in three-binned vehicle (Figs. 11 and 12). Plastics are recycled to make
granules and in one small plant to convert into liquid fuel. Dry wastes are separated
in several streams and each of those, e.g. textiles, metals, papers, plastics, glass, etc.,
go to the respective recycling plant.

Fig. 10 Compost plant at Indore

182 S. K. Ghosh

Fig. 11 Author and the

waste handlers at dry waste
collection centre
(MRF-material recovery
facility)

Fig. 12 Dry and wet waste

collection vehicle with two
compartment and additional
third container at rear end

Indore Municipal Corporation encourages home composting providing 50% sub-

sidy. In Indore, nearly 28,000 households are doing home composting and pot com-
posting of household waste has been carried out in all 85 wards with the help of
volunteers. The city has a target of reduction of 150 ton solid waste per day. A 100
tons per day capacity C&D waste plant runs in the city. All the rag pickers taken
into the mainstream formal sectors. Grievance redressing, complaint and feedback
systems have been established through “Mayor Helpline Indore 311” App. The App
also monitors the collection and transportation system of waste in the whole city.
Indore wins the first position in the all India competition called Swachh Survekshan
2017, 2018 and 2019.

13 Sectoral Resource Efficiency Strategies in India

The National Resource Efficiency Policy in India aims to implement resource effi-
ciency across all relevant resources, namely fossil fuels, metals, minerals, air, water,
land, biomass, forests, etc., and across all lifecycle stages including extraction of
raw material, material processing, production, use, end-of-life management. Target
sets for achieving resource efficiency in different fields of applications in the draft
National Resource Efficiency Policy 2019 have been collated in Table 4.
Circular Economy in India 183

Table 4 Target sets for achieving resource efficiency in different fields of applications as per the
National Resource Efficiency Policy 2019
Sl. Proposed Resource Efficiency objectives Targets
1 Recycling rate for vehicles manufactured 75%
before 1990
2 Recycling rate for vehicles manufactured 85%
between 1990 and 2000
3 Recycling rate for vehicles produced after 90%
2000
4 Number of official ELV dismantlers and 20 number by 2020
equal number of PRO across major urban
centres to be established
5 Use of recycled materials in commercial and 25% of the kerb weight by 2030
passenger vehicles
6 Recycling and reuse rate PET plastic 100% by 2025
7 Recycling and reuse rate of other plastic 75% by 2030
packaging materials
8 Ban on disposal of recyclable waste by 2025
(plastics, metals, glass, paper, cardboard and
bio-degradable waste) to landfills
9 Municipalities in Tier 1 and Tier 2 cities to by 2022
start inventorizing of construction and
demolition waste data
10 Recycling rate for C&D waste to reach 50% by 2025 and 75% by 2030
11 Public procurement of materials for civil by 2025, 30% of total procured mat
construction from recycled materials
12 Implementation of targets stated in the Targets as per rules
existing e-waste management rules.
13 Introduce deterrent penalty mechanism for By 2020
violation of e-waste management rules
14 Establishing major authorized E-waste 4 by 2025 and 8 by 2030
dismantling facilities
15 Recovery rate of materials from discarded 85%
PVs
16 Import of steel scrap for recycled steel Zero impost by 2030
production
17 Percentage of recycled steel be produced 100%
from domestic scrap
18 Establish steel manufacturing capacity from 50% by 2030
the Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) route
19 Increase steel recycling rate to 90%
20 Overall utilization of slag Ensure 50% by 2025 and 85% by 2030
(continued)
184 S. K. Ghosh

Table 4 (continued)
Sl. Proposed Resource Efficiency objectives Targets
21 By 2022, introduce quality index-based
pricing mechanism to facilitate continuous
and smooth scrap supply to recyclers
22 Domestic scrap to fulfil 50% of the total By 2030
aluminium scrap requirement
23 Increase domestic scrap recycling rate to 50% by 2025 and 90% by 2030
24 Increase rate of utilization of dross 40% by 2025 and 80% by 2030

14 Conclusion

India has a great potential for the implementation of circular economy. It has taken lots
of initiatives specifically the policy decisions as well as implementation strategies for
creating a resource circulation society with the evidence of hundreds best practices.
Very recent release of draft policy on national resource efficiency in 2019 will open
a new horizon for the CE implementation. In next ten years, India will have a new
dimension in the worlds of circular economy.

Acknowledgements All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in

accordance with ethical standards of the institutional research committee and informed consent
was obtained from all individual participants in the study carried out by International Society of
Waste Management, Air and Water (ISWMAW). Authors appreciate International Society of Waste
Management, Air and Water Authority for generous support towards the successful completion of
the study.

References

AIS-129: ELV. (2015). Guidelines for environmentally sound management of end-of-life vehicles
(ELVs).
Annual Report. (2016–17). Ministry of Home Affairs (PDF). Retrieved 7 March 2018. https://en.
wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_India.
Asase, M., Yanful, E. K., Mensah, M., Stanford, J., & Amponsah, S. (2015). Comparison of munic-
ipal solid waste management systems in Canada and Ghana: a case study of the cities of London,
Ontario, and Kumasi, Ghana. Waste Management, 29,(10), 2779–2786. 2009. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.wasman.2009.06.019
Baldé, C. P., Forti V., Gray, V., Kuehr, R., Stegmann, P. (2017). The Global E-waste Monitor – 2017,
United Nations University (UNU), International Telecommunication Union (ITU) & International
Solid Waste Association (ISWA), Bonn/Geneva/Vienna. Electronic Version: 978-92-808-9054-9.
Binafeigha, T. R., & Enwin, A. (2017). The state of solid waste management in Port Harcourt
City, Nigeria. American Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 5(4), 160–166. Science
and Education Publishing. Available online at https://doi.org/10.12691/ajcea-5-4-4. http://pubs.
sciepub.com/ajcea/5/4/4
Burntley, S. J. (2007). A review of municipal solid waste composition in the United Kingdom.
Journal of Waste Management, 27, 1274–1285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2006.06.018
Circular Economy in India 185

Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, s. 2, for “Sovereign Democratic Republic”

(w.e.f. 3-1-1977). https://www.india.gov.in/sites/upload_files/npi/files/coi_part_full.pdf.
Construction and Demolition Waste Management. (2016). http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.
in/content/426955/construction-and-demolition-waste-management-rules-2016/.
CPCB Report. (2018). Annual Report 2017-18. Central pollution control board ministry of envi-
ronment, forest & climate change. http://www.cpcb.nic.in.
E-Waste Management Rules. (2016). http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/content/426933/e-
waste-management-rules-2016/.
IGEP (Indo-German Environment Programme). (2013). India’s future needs for resources: dimen-
sions, challenges and possible solutions. New Delhi: GIZ. http://www.igep.in/live/hrdpmp/
hrdpmaster/igep/content/e48745/e50194/e58089/ResourceEfficiency_Report_Final.pdf.
Joshi, R., & Ahmed, S. (2016). Status and challenges of municipal solid waste management in India:
A review. Cogent Environmental Science, 2, 1139434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311843.2016.
1139434
Mitlin, D., & Satterthwaite, D. (1996). Sustainable development and cities. in: C. PUGH (Ed.)
Sustainability: The environment and urbanization, 23±61. London: Earth scan Publications.
National Resource Efficiency Policy. (2019) (Draft). Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate
Change Government of India.
NITI Aayog Report. (2017-18). https://niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2019-04/Annual-Report-
English.pdf.
Plastics Waste Management Rules (2016), http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/content/
426634/plastic-waste-management-rules-2016/
Plastindia Foundation. (2018). https://www.speindia.org/pam2016/SPE%20PAM%202016%
20PRESENTATIONS%20UPLOAD/Rajeev%20Chitalia%20-%20Plastindia%202018%
20Next%20is%20Here%20-%20Plastindia%20Foundation.pdf.
Plexconcil. (2018). 64th Annual Report of Plastic Export Promotion Council, 2018-19. https://
plexconcil.co.in/images/pdf/64TH_ANNUAL_REPORTS-Plexconcil.pdf
(2006, April) Quality and Reliability Engineering International. 22(3),335–367.
Solid Waste Management Rules. (2016). http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/content/
427824/solid-waste-management-rules-2016/.
Circular Economy—Situation in Israel

Shira Daskal and Ofira Ayalon

Abstract Circular economy (CE) is still in its infancy in Israel. In the past years,
the Israeli Ministry of Environmental Protection (IMoEP) and the Israeli Ministry of
Economy and Industry (IMoE&I) have started consolidating numerous plans toward
achieving CE. Yet the main activities in this field in the past three decades were
related to waste management and recycling, in an effort for closing the municipal
solid waste (MSW) loop as a significant key factor in achieving a CE. The mea-
sures that were taken have been mainly reflected in regulation and legislation con-
ducted by the IMoEP for increasing the overall recycling rates in Israel. The case of
Israel, however, illustrates that even when there is an extensive regulation including
laws, economic penalties, and financial incentives such as landfill levy, this does not
guarantee achievements or improvements in MSW treatment and promote CE. The
development of suitable infrastructure to enable achievement of the desired results
is necessary. This chapter presents the main steps taken to promote recycling and
additional plans consolidated for achieving CE in Israel.

Keywords Circular economy · Regulation · Legislation · Waste management ·

Recycling · Green growth

List of Acronyms

BAT Best Available Technology/Technique

CBS Central Bureau of Statistics
CE Circular Economy
EPR Extended Producer Responsibility
IMoE&I Israeli Ministry of Economy and Industry
IMoEP Israeli Ministry of Environmental Protection
MBT Mechanical Biological Treatment

S. Daskal (B) · O. Ayalon

The Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Management, University of Haifa,
Haifa, Israel
e-mail: shira.das@gmail.com

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 187

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_10
188 S. Daskal and O. Ayalon

MSW Municipal Solid Waste

NIMBY Not In My Back Yard
OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
RDF Refuse Derived Fuel
SCP Sustainable Consumption and Production
WTE Waste to Energy

1 Introduction

According to the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), Israel’s population is

expected to grow from 8.7 million in 2017 (CBS 2017) to 11 million by 2030, whereas
the global population will reach 8.5 billion people (UN 2015). This growth will create
unprecedented pressure on natural resources—by 2030, the need for food, energy,
and water will increase between 35 and 50% (OECD 2014) and thus communities
that consume natural resources and do not allow nature to renew are unsustainable
in the long term. The population growth rate in Israel is one of the highest and the
State of Israel is one of the more dense countries among OECD countries (Tal 2002),
which imposes even greater challenges.
Being the residual end-of-life component of consumption products, MSW is a
key factor in achieving a sustainable industry that lays the foundation for the circular
economy; thus, MSW is a matter of great concern and recycling is considered a key
solution in the circular economy for a reusable cycle to maintain the value of materials
(Daskal et al. 2019; Haas et al. 2015; Lieder and Rashid 2016). At the beginning of the
90s, the Israeli Ministry of Environmental Protection (IMoEP) started progressing a
national plan for the prevention of MSW dumping in unregulated dumps (Nissim et al.
2005). In the past two decades, the IMoEP has declared a “recycling revolution” that
includes a comprehensive program for transitioning from landfilling to turning MSW
into a resource via recycling. The initial goal set by the MoPE in 1998 was to increase
MSW recycling and recovery rates to 25% by 2007 (IMoEP 1998). Beginning in
2006, further steps were taken, as detailed in the following sections.

2 Management of Resource Consumption and Utilization

The IMoEP is responsible, inter alia, for the prevention of overexploitation of ecosys-
tems and natural resources. This includes treatment of solid waste and raising aware-
ness for recycling (IMoEP 2019). However, in the past decades, in the context of
resources and materials management, the IMoEP has focused mainly on waste man-
agement and recycling rather than consolidating a broader strategic approach of CE.
In this respect, the main goal set by the IMoEP was and still is to reduce waste
landfilling to preserve land reserves and reduce the negative effects of waste on the
Circular Economy—Situation in Israel 189

environment and increase recycling (to reduce the usage of raw materials). However,
very little has been done in the field of reduction at source for example (IMoEP
2018), and only recently, the IMoEP has started preparing such a plan.
Another Israeli Governmental Ministry that has been operating in recent years to
achieve CE in Israel is the IMoE&I. The IMoE&I took part in consolidating a num-
ber of plans seeking to achieve a CE, and in June 2018, it stated that the Industrial
Administration (formerly Environment and Sustainable Development Administra-
tion) is formulating a national program for streamlining resources and a circular
economy in the industry (IMoE&I 2018). The following subsections present the
main activities of the IMoEP and the IMoE&I in this field.

2.1 Green Growth for Israel

In 2011, the IMoE&I and the IMoEP published a joint paper presenting “Indices of
Green Growth” in Israel (IMoE&I 2011). In 2013, an additional joint paper called
“Green Growth for Israel” was published, presenting key insights and six major
levers of change (IMoEP 2013). The levers of change are detailed in Table 1.

2.2 Sustainable Consumption and Production Roadmap

for Israel 2015–2020

The IMoEP acknowledged the challenge of achieving economic growth and develop-
ment in the face of the limited carrying capacity and the need to develop Sustainable
Consumption and Production (SCP) strategies. In 2015, the IMoEP consolidated an
SCP roadmap that was divided into three chapters, according to their relative con-
sumption versus production emphasis. The structure of the SCP roadmap is presented
in Table 2 (IMoEP 2015a, b).
At the time of writing this paper, we do not have information regarding the status
of the actual implementation of the road map and the plans that it included.

2.3 Formulating a National Program for Streamlining

Resources and a Circular Economy in Industry

A national program for streamlining resources and a circular economy in the industry
was developed (IMoE&I 2018) and was approved by the government (Decision No.
3768). The goal of the program is to motivate the industry toward more efficient
use of resources and the handling of environmental problems by new technological
means, from the early design, design and production stages, and thereby turning
Table 1 Toward green growth-major levers of change
190

Lever No. Description

Lever 1—Integrated In order to move toward improvements in environmental performance while at the same time increasing economic growth, the many
pollution, prevention different environmental licensing processes which exist today should be unified into a single framework of integrated green
and control licensing. The integrated licensing process will motivate an integrated vision, source reduction, and green innovation so as to
gradually implement advanced environmental standards and techniques in industrial plants and businesses. The licenses and permits
will provide businesses with both a longer planning horizon and stability by providing them with certainty concerning timetables
and criteria. In addition, a hierarchy of operation will be established between central government and local government, and each
facility will deal with only one licensing entity. These processes will be carried out providing the appropriate regulatory capabilities
for central and local government, and while implementing the principle of public transparency throughout the environmental
licensing procedures. In order to support these processes, the possibility of establishing a system for the review of techniques and
technologies developed in Israel but not included in the European Union’s reference documents (BREFs) will be examined in order
to recognize them as best available techniques (BAT) which can be implemented in industrial plants and businesses for the purpose
of compliance with the law
Lever 2—Green To help industry and the private sector comply with regulatory requirements and incorporate environmental efficiency and clean
growth and production processes, numerous gaps in knowledge in these fields must be bridged. Therefore, the establishment of a knowledge
production center center on green growth and green production is a central component of the National Green Growth Plan. Such a center will serve
industrial plants and businesses, for which environmental licensing is obligatory, or those interested in promoting sustainable
conduct. It will concentrate the existing knowledge on environmental efficiency, green growth tools, and the support measures for
their implementation and will make such information accessible to plants and businesses. The center will promote cooperative
projects on sustainable conduct and will encourage industrial plants and businesses to invest in innovative green techniques and
technologies, to transition to environmental-friendly production, and to reduce expenses
Lever 3—Green The consumption of products and services has major environmental impact. This impact is a function of the scope and
consumption characteristics of the products we buy, the manner in which we use them, and their post-use treatment. To spearhead a change in the
consumption patterns of all consumers in the market so as to reduce their negative impact on the environment, a variety of policy
tools which influence the purchasing decisions and the patterns of use of products and services should be adopted, including:
developing a knowledge infrastructure to analyze the life cycle of products and services, promoting the green label, promoting
energy-efficient products (ex. taxing energy-inefficient products, granting tax breaks on green label products, and establishing clear
guidelines for advertising environmental claims on products)
(continued)
S. Daskal and O. Ayalon
Table 1 (continued)
Lever No. Description
Lever 4—Green As a complementary step to incentivizing green consumers, the government should serve as an example in integrating green public
procurement procurement in its agencies. By transforming the process of public procurement into a greener process, major improvements in the
environmental-economic performance of central and local government can be achieved—leading to direct savings of about a billion
shekels to taxpayers. Such a change requires an assessment of the cost of a product throughout its life cycle (purchase, use, and
disposal) and not only at the time of purchase. In a significant number of cases, green procurement is economically worthwhile in
the long range but requires financial incentives in the short term. Such assistance should be granted to government ministries and
local authorities in order to incentivize the initial investment. At the same time, the government should take steps to increase
awareness of the subject
Lever 5—Green Israeli environmental innovation in the field of clean tech will contribute to the environmental performance of companies in Israel
track to innovation and worldwide and to the growth of the economy. To encourage environmental innovation in Israel, obstacles to the establishment of
Circular Economy—Situation in Israel

beta sites should be removed by such means as enabling regulations for these facilities, development of an accreditation system for
local best available techniques (BATs), and provision of economic incentives for their implementation. A dedicated academic
research center on resource and waste management should be established to advance basic academic research in this field while
decreasing the “brain drain” in Israel and contributing to the return of experts to Israel and to the establishment of a scientific
community in this field
Lever 6—Green The transition to a green economy will impact many employees in the economy and will require the development of new skills.
employment Therefore, the new knowledge should be incorporated in both the academic and the professional training systems on the basis of
forecasted future demands in the labor market. To do this, the creation of new study tracks in the required fields should be promoted.
At the same time, adaptations of existing study and training tracks should be encouraged, along with the establishment of a system
of professional retraining and support for workers at risk of dismissal due to the anticipated occupational changes
Source IMoEP (2013)
191
192 S. Daskal and O. Ayalon

Table 2 Structure of the SCP roadmap for Israel 2015–2020

Sustainable production Sustainable consumption
• Sustainable development strategies in • Green public procurement
government companies – Servicizing and innovation in
• Promoting best practices for small and procurement
medium – Green public procurement in housing
• Enterprises (SMEs) – Green public procurement in transport
• Supporting social-environmental businesses – Green public procurement in local
• Resource efficiency Knowledge Center authorities
• Promoting green investments • Lifestyle labs
• Behavioral economics
Connecting the Dots: Between Sustainable Production and Sustainable Consumption
• Sustainable materials management strategy
• Circular economy: The case of household food waste
• Sustainable urbanism
• Environmental standards and labeling
• Prevention of greenwash and promotion of reliable environmental claims
Source IMoPE (2015a)

environmental requirements into opportunities rather than burdens on the industry.

As part of the formulation of the plan, the most effective tools that have been tested
worldwide will be mapped and evaluated and will draw up a detailed plan of the
relevant targets, budgets, timetables, and partners (IMoE&I 2018).
The program objectives:
• Promoting the efficient use of resources, reducing the use of natural resources, and
reducing the environmental impacts of the industry by changing business models
and methods of production.
• Making the Israeli industry a global pioneer in the development, implementation,
and export of solutions and technologies for optimizing resources.
• Removing regulatory barriers to a circular and efficient economy.

2.4 Industrial Symbiosis Program

At the beginning of 2019, the IMoE&I started running a pilot project in which
four companies will compete for the recycling of industrial materials. The plan will
save companies the costs of transporting and disposing of industrial waste. In the
framework of the program, the same waste will start production machines in other
plants or will serve as a raw material in the various production processes. The IMoE&I
declared that at the end of the pilot period, the program will be operated as a national
project for a period of five years (IMoE&I 2018).
Circular Economy—Situation in Israel 193

3 Legislation

A legislative framework related to circular economy is still lacking in Israel. The main
legislation with regards to circular economy principles, which relates to resource and
material management, mainly deals with waste management and recycling. There-
fore, in this chapter, we review the legislation in this field.

3.1 The Landfill Levy

The landfill levy was first approved in 2007 as a mean of internalizing the external
costs of land filling, such as land consumption, air pollution, water pollution, and
other environmental ills that result from the landfilling of waste. The IMoEP imposed
this levy out of the perception that the low cost of landfilling was the main obstacle to
increasing the recycling and recovery rates of MSW, and that an increase in the landfill
levy would help achieve the goal of decreasing MSW land filling. The funds collected
in a cleaning fund were intended for the construction of MSW treatment facilities,
which would serve as an alternative to land filling. The levy was gradually increased
during the first five years of implementation in order to allow the local authorities
time to adjust to the rising costs. The current levy is 126 NIS (31e) including 17%
VAT (IMoEP 2017). However, this infrastructure was never constructed and recycling
rates have not increased. (State Comptroller 2016).

3.2 Separation of Waste at Source

In 2010, the IMoEP launched a financial support program for local authorities, aimed
at the establishment of infrastructure for the separation of waste at source into at
least two streams: clean biodegradable (organic/wet), and all the remainder (dry).
Separating the biodegradable organic waste, which makes up about 34% of Israel’s
MSW (Shachaf Environmental Planning 2014), allows for maximum use of the waste
and reduces the environmental degradation caused by land filling. Broitman et al.
(2012) have contradicted this approach of separation of the biodegradable organic
waste at households, mainly because the demand for compost in Israel is very low,
and, in addition, the infrastructure required to handle two waste streams separated
at the source is lacking (State Comptroller 2016). In 2011, separation at source of
packages took effect in the framework of the Packaging Law as detailed in Sect. 2.3.
194 S. Daskal and O. Ayalon

3.3 Extended Producer Responsibility

The introduction of an extended producer responsibility (EPR) system in 2011 was

an important component of the IMoEP recycling revolution, as the EPR system states
that producers are legally responsible for the entire life cycle of the products they
manufacture, as well as the product’s packaging. The Packaging Law, enacted in 2011
(IMoEP 2011) as part of this new system, was intended to urge local authorities, which
were previously responsible for the treatment of packaging waste, to sign contracts
with the producers’ association, transferring the responsibility to them. In addition,
another goal of the law was to incentivize producers to reduce the environmental
impact of their packaging in the first place.
Table 3 summarizes the waste recycling legislation in Israel between 1984 and
2016.

4 Example of Best Practices—a Breakthrough in Closing

the MSW Loop

A major breakthrough was achieved with the establishment of two advanced MSW
treatment facilities, a mechanical biological treatment (MBT) plant located near the
city of Jerusalem and a refuse-derived fuel (RDF) plant located near the city of Tel
Aviv. Both plants, the MBT plant and the RDF plant, together receive about 3000
tons of MSW per day, which is about one-sixth of the MSW generated in Israel. With
an average recovery rate of 50% each, the two plants are expected to contribute to
the reduction of landfilling in Israel by approximately 8%.

5 Future Plans and Targets

In 2017, the IMoEP presented a new waste management strategy for Israel, named
the MSW 2030 strategic plan. The top target of this plan is to minimize landfilling
and promote recycling and recovery. The policy document outlines the ministry’s
plan for an integrated waste management strategy, based on striking the right bal-
ance between materials recycling and energy recovery, in addition to the only form
of energy recovery in Israel, RDF that is used in the Nesher cement factory and
produced in the Hiriya recycling park since 2016. The IMoEP’s Waste-to-Energy
(WTE) policy guidelines was adopted by the National Planning and Building Board,
Israel’s top planning body, in January 2018 (IMoEP 2018). The implementation of
this plan involves various challenges including the “Not In My Back Yard” (NIMBY)
phenomena (Daskal et al. 2019).
Circular Economy—Situation in Israel 195

Table 3 Waste and recycling legislation in Israel, 1984–2016

Purpose Legislation Year
Prohibits littering or the disposal of Maintenance of Cleanliness Law 1984
waste, building debris, and vehicle
scrap in the public domain
Provides the principles and the legal Collection and Disposal of Waste for 1993
framework for recycling in Israel. It Recycling
authorizes local authorities and obliges
them, when required by the Minister of
Environmental Protection, to allocate
sites for recycling centers and to install
recycling facilities and containers
These regulations require local The obligation of Waste Disposal for 1998
authorities to reduce their waste for Recycling-Regulations
disposal by means of recycling, in
accordance with graduated recycling
targets as per the following timetable:
at least 10% by December 1998; 15%
by December 2000; 25% by December
2007
Required manufacturers, importers, Deposit on Beverage Containers 1999
and retailers to collect a deposit on
beverage containers larger than 0.1 L
and smaller than 1.5 L, with the
exception of bags or paper containers.
A recycling corporation was
established under the law to institute a
refund, bottle collection, and recycling
system, which was required to comply
with graduated targets for collecting
empty beverage containers
In effect since July 1, 2007; requires Amendment to Maintenance of 2007
landfill operators to pay a levy for Cleanliness Law, 2007: Landfill Levy
every ton of waste landfilled. The aim
is to internalize the full and real costs
of waste treatment and disposal
Aims to reduce the environmental Tire Disposal and Recycling 2007
nuisance caused by improper tire
disposal in Israel, while promoting tire
recycling. The law makes tire
producers and importers responsible
for the disposal and recycling of used
tires at graduated rates each year, with
recycling totally replacing disposal
after July 2013
This law imposes direct responsibility Packaging Law 2011
on manufacturers and importers in
Israel to collect and recycle the
packaging waste of their products
(continued)
196 S. Daskal and O. Ayalon

Table 3 (continued)
Purpose Legislation Year
Environmental treatment of electrical Electrical and Electronic Equipment 2012
and electronic equipment and of and Batteries Law
batteries and accumulators, in order to
encourage the reuse of electrical and
electronic equipment, reduce the
quantity of waste created from
electrical and electronic equipment and
from batteries and accumulators,
prevent the burial of such waste, and
mitigate the negative environmental
and health effects of electrical and
electronic equipment, of batteries and
accumulators, and of the waste from
these products
Reducing the use of carrying bags to The Law for the Reduction of the Use 2016
reduce the amount of waste generated of Disposable Carrying Bags
by their use and the negative
environmental effects of this waste,
inter alia by restricting the distribution
of disposable bags by dealers without
payment and by imposing a duty to sell
them

6 Summary and Discussion

Table 4 below summarizes the legislation supporting CE as presented and discussed

in this chapter.
Between the years 2005 and 2016 about 80% of the MSW in Israel has been land-
filled and recycling rates have not increased, despite the regulation. The challenging
complexity of recycling even applies much more strongly since China announced it
would no longer absorb plastic and paper from outside its country. Nowadays, the
IMoEP is changing its approach toward the treatment of MSW, including new con-
sideration of WTE for the generation of energy from MSW, which IMoEP had totally
rejected within the frame of its regulation in the past (Knesset 2017). WTE technolo-
gies have been in use for decades and the use of these technologies is increasing in
the world. In Europe, many waste treatment systems combine recycling and energy
production from MSW as a solution to reduce the volume of MSW sent to landfills.
A common method for MSW treatment in many countries is the burning of waste and
the production of the energy inherent in it in dedicated combustion facilities, which
are often located in industrial areas close to energy-consuming plants. The waste
brought to the fire includes, inter alia, paper and plastic products, glass and metal
that are burned in many cases without further sorting. The heat emitted during the
combustion process is used to produce steam that is transferred to industrial plants
for use in energy production processes. The availability of advanced technologies
Circular Economy—Situation in Israel 197

Table 4 Status of implementation of circular economy (CE) concept

Legislation Significant area Reduction in Reduction in Increase in
supporting CE where CE consumption Landfill recycling
implemented
• Collection and Recycling NA 97–80% 3–20% between
Disposal of between the the beginning of
Waste for beginning of the the 90s–2003
Recycling, 90s–2003 Nissim et al.
1993 Nissim et al. (2005)
• The obligation (2005) No change in
of Waste No change in recycling rate
Disposal for recycling rate 2005–2015
Recycling- 2005–2015 Daskal et al.
Regulations, Daskal et al. (2018)
1998 (2018)
• Deposit on
Beverage
Containers,
1999
• Amendment
to
Maintenance
of Cleanliness
Law, Landfill
Levy, 2007
• Tire Disposal
and
Recycling,
2007
• Packaging
Law, 2011
• Electrical and
Electronic
Equipment
and Batteries
Law, 2012
• The Law for
the Reduction
of the Use of
Disposable
Carrying
Bags, 2016

enables the minimization of emissions from these facilities (Sabbas et al. 2003) and
the remnants of the fire can be used in various industries such as the cement industry,
so that in practice this process leads to zero or close to zero landfilling (Lin 2005).
The efficiency of energy production from waste depends, among other things, on
the size of the population serving the facility (the amount of waste collected in the
facility), the regular supply of waste to it, and the quality of the waste (Consonni
et al. 2005).
198 S. Daskal and O. Ayalon

The conventional concept of circular economy does not recognize WTE as an

implementation of circular economy (Winans et al. 2017); however, in WTE pro-
cesses, most waste is converted to energy, thus saving environmental costs (due to
transportation, pollution, land use, etc.) and preserving natural resources such as
coal, oil, and gas.
Despite significant and developing legislation in the waste management sector,
the State of Israel has not managed to reduce, at the source, the amount of waste
being produced nor to reduce the rate of waste being landfilled. In recent years,
Israel started formulating plans for achieving CE; however, it is still far from being
implemented in its broad holistic sense.

7 Conclusions

Closing the MSW loop is a significant key factor in achieving a circular economy.
The case of Israel illustrates that even when there is an extensive regulation including
laws, economic penalties, and financial incentives such as landfill levy, this does not
guarantee achievements or improvements in MSW treatment. The key to success is
first and foremost developing a suitable infrastructure that will enable achievement
of the desired results. The description of the situation in Israel is also relevant to
other countries, particularly, countries that face strict regulations on the one hand but
lack of appropriate infrastructure on the other hand. In recent years, Israel started
formulating plans for achieving CE; however, CE is still far from being implemented
in Israel in its broad holistic sense.

References

Broitman, D., Ayalon, O., & Kan, I. (2012). One size fits all? An assessment tool for solid waste
management at local and national levels. Waste Management, 32(10), 1979–1988.
CBS. (2017). Population & Demography (in Hebrew). Available at: http://www.cbs.gov.il/reader/?
MIval=cw_usr_view_SHTML&ID=705.
Consonni, S., Giugliano, M., & Grosso, M. (2005). Alternative strategies for energy recovery from
municipal solid waste: Part A: Mass and energy balances. Waste Management, 25(2), 123–135.
Daskal, S., Ayalon, O., & Shechter, M. (2018). The state of municipal solid waste management in
Israel. Waste Management and Research, 36(6), 527–534.
Daskal, S., Ayalon, O., & Shechter, M. (2019). Closing the loop: The challenges of regulation in
municipal solid waste management. Detritus, 05, 3–10.
Haas, W., Krausmann, F., Wiedenhofer, D., & Heinz, M. (2015). How circular is the global econ-
omy?: An assessment of material flows, waste production, and recycling in the European Union
and the world in 2005. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 19(5), 765–777.
IMoE&I. (2011). Indices of Green Growth in Israel (in Hebrew). Available at: http://www.sviva.gov.
il/InfoServices/ReservoirInfo/DocLib2/Publications/P0601-P0700/p0620.pdf. Accessed June
16, 2019.
Circular Economy—Situation in Israel 199

IMoE&I. (2018). Formulation of a national program for streamlining resources and a circular
economy in the industry (in Hebrew). Available at: https://www.gov.il/he/Departments/news/
resources-streamlining. Accessed June 16, 2019.
IMoEP. (1998). Regulations for Collection and Removal of Waste for Recycling (in Hebrew). Avail-
able at: http://www.sviva.gov.il/InfoServices/ReservoirInfo/DocLib/%D7%A4%D7%A1%D7%
95%D7%9C%D7%AA/psolet10.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2019.
IMoEP. (2011). Packaging treatment law-2011 (in Hebrew). Available at: http://www.sviva.gov.il/
subjectsenv/waste/beverage/documents/containers%20law.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2019.
IMoEP. (2013). Green Growth for Israel (in Hebrew and English). Available at: http://www.sviva.
gov.il/InfoServices/ReservoirInfo/DocLib2/Publications/P0701-P0800/P0720.pdf. Accessed
June 16, 2019.
IMoEP. (2015a). Sustainable Consumption and Production Roadmap for Israel. Avail-
able at: https://www.oneplanetnetwork.org/sites/default/files/sustainable_consumption_and_
production_roadmap_for_israel_2015_-_2020.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2019.
IMoEP. (2015b). Circular Economy, Material and Resource Management. Available
at: http://www.sviva.gov.il/English/env_topics/InternationalCooperation/OnTheIntlFront/
Documents/CircularEconomy,MaterialandResourceManagement-PresentationtoEU-
IsraelEnvironmentSubcmte-June2015.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2019.
IMoEP. (2017). The waste disposal price list is updated to January 2017, (in Hebrew). Available at:
http://www.sviva.gov.il/subjectsEnv/Waste/Laws/Pages/Landfill-Levy.aspx. Accessed June 16,
2019.
IMoEP. (2018). Israel Environment Bulletin. Available at: http://www.sviva.gov.il/english/
resourcesandservices/publications/bulletin/documents/bulletin-vol44-march2018.pdf. Accessed
June 16, 2019.
IMoEP. (2019). Ministry of Environmental Protection. Available at: https://www.gov.il/en/
departments/ministry_of_environmental_protection. Accessed June 16, 2019.
Knesset. (2017). Minutes of the meeting of the Interior and Environmental Protection Com-
mittee, 15 February, 2017 (in Hebrew). Available at: http://main.knesset.gov.il/Activity/
committees/InternalAffairs/Pages/CommitteeAgenda.aspx?tab=3&ItemID=2012288. Accessed
June 16, 2019.
Lieder, M., & Rashid, A. (2016). Towards circular economy implementation: a comprehensive
review in context of manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 115, 36–51.
Lin, K. L. (2005). The influence of municipal solid waste incinerator fly ash slag blended in cement
pastes. Cement and Concrete Research, 35(5), 979–986.
Nissim, I., Shohat, T., & Inbar, Y. (2005). From dumping to sanitary landfills: Solid waste manage-
ment in Israel. Waste Management, 25, 323–327.
OECD. (2014). Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe. Europen Com-
mission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/circular-economy-
communication.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2019.
Sabbas, T., Polettini, A., Pomi, R., Astrup, T., Hjelmar, O., Mostbauer, P., … & Heuss-Assbichler, S.
(2003). Management of municipal solid waste incineration residues. Waste management, 23(1),
61–88.
Shachaf Environmental Planning. (2014). The national survey of the composition of waste,
final report for the IMoEP (in Hebrew). Available at: http://www.sviva.gov.il/InfoServices/
ReservoirInfo/DocLib2/Publications/P0701-P0800/P0749.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2019.
State Comptroller. (2016). Separation at source of household waste in local authorities
(in Hebrew). Available at: http://www.mevaker.gov.il/he/Reports/Report_554/08a04796-1b27-
43d7-ba1d-d891ddf71c97/108-project.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2019.
Tal, A. (2002). Pollution in a promised land: An environmental history of Israel. University of
California Press.
200 S. Daskal and O. Ayalon

UN. (2015). Population 2030—Demographic challenges and opportunities for sustainable devel-
opment planning. Available at: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/
pdf/trends/Population2030.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2019.
Winans, K., Kendall, A., & Deng, H. (2017). The history and current applications of the circular
economy concept. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68, 825–833.
Circular Economy in Italy

Francesco Di Maria

Abstract Italy is located in the south-west part of Europe with a population of about
60.6 million of inhabitants and a gross domestic product of about 1,934,798 M US$
in 2017. Italy operates in the wider legal framework of the European Union (EU)
legislation that is internationally recognized as one of the most advanced approaches
in the sectors of environmental protection, sustainable development and waste man-
agement. The broad concept of sustainability entails, among the others, also the
preservation of the environment quality and of the resources of the earth for the
future generations. In this context takes places the concept of circular economy (CE)
based on the circular use of resources. An important sector in which circular use
of resource was successfully implemented since 1991 was the waste management.
The directive 91/156/EEC (CD 1991) formally introduced in the legal framework of
waste management the concept of the waste management hierarchy establishing the
priority goals to be pursued with a hierarchic order in waste management (Fig. 1):
Prevention, Reuse, Recycling, Recovery and Disposal. From the hierarchy was also
extrapolated the 3R concept based on Reuse, Recycle and Recover. The same direc-
tive introduced also the concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR) that is
another fundamental pillar for enhancing the recycling of waste. These basic con-
cepts during the years were updated and improved but never replaced or repealed
by the successive directives. Legal and economic support resulted key factors for a
successful implementation of CE even if it is necessary to size these activities in each
specific market. Large differences were detected in the sector of the municipal solid
waste compared to the ones generated by industrial and commercial sectors. Long-
term efforts which aimed to the implementation of the legal framework in the sector
lead in about 8 years to a reduction of the amount of waste disposed of about 33%.
Furthermore, latest data available shows that this positive trend is still increasing.
Socio-economic indicators showed that there is a general decrease of waste gener-
ated and that the paradigm between the increase of GDP and families’ expenditures
and waste generation is starting to be capsized. Different results were detected for
the waste generated in industrial and commerce sectors. Even if the high level of

F. Di Maria (B)
LAR5 Laboratory, Dipartimento di Ingegneria, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
e-mail: francesco.dimaria@unipg.it

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 201

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_11
202 F. Di Maria

recycling that in the 2014 was of about 85%, their effective prevention seems not to
be successfully pursued yet.

1 Introduction

Italy is located in the south-west part of Europe with a population of about 60.6 mil-
lion of inhabitants and a gross domestic product of about 1,934,798 M US$ in 2017.
Italy operates in the wider legal framework of the European Union (EU) legis-
lation that is internationally recognized as one of the most advanced approaches in
the sectors of environmental protection, sustainable development and waste manage-
ment.
The broad concept of sustainability entails, among the others, also the preser-
vation of the environment quality and of the resources of the earth for the future
generations. In this context takes places the concept of circular economy (CE) based
on the circular use of resources. An important sector in which circular use of resource
was successfully implemented since 1991 was the waste management. The direc-
tive 91/156/EEC (CD 1991) formally introduced in the legal framework of waste
management the concept of the waste management hierarchy establishing the pri-
ority goals to be pursued with a hierarchic order in waste management (Fig. 1):
Prevention, Reuse, Recycling, Recovery and Disposal. From the hierarchy was also
extrapolated the 3R concept based on Reuse, Recycle and Recover. The same direc-
tive introduced also the concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR) that is
another fundamental pillar for enhancing the recycling of waste. These basic con-
cepts during the years were updated and improved but never replaced or repealed by
the successive directives. Figures 2 and 3 reported the municipal solid waste (MSW)
management for the EU member states for the years 2006 and 2014, respectively
(ISRPA 2009, 2017a). These figures indicated clearly the successful implementation

Fig. 1 Waste hierarchy

Circular Economy in Italy 203

Fig. 2 Municipal solid waste management in the member states of the European Union for the year
2006

Fig. 3 Municipal solid waste management in the member states of the European Union 28 for the
year 2014 (NSM = New State Members)
204 F. Di Maria

Fig. 4 Special waste management in the member states of the European Union 28 for the year
2014 (NSM = New State Members)

of the legal goals with a significant decrease of the MSW disposed of and a cor-
responded increase of those recycled including the composting and the anaerobic
digestion of the organic fraction. By the way, according to legal definition, MSW
are those generated strictly by households and similar activities and represent only
a limited amount (i.e. 250 Mtonne for EU and about 29 Mtonnes for Italy) of the
whole waste generated (i.e. about 15%). In fact, waste generated by other activities
(e.g. industry, agriculture and commerce) legally defined as special waste by the EU
legislation (ISRPA, 2017b) in the EU were about 2,502 Mtonnes (2014), whereas in
Italy, this figure was of about 160 Mtonnes (2014). Figure 4 reports the management
of these special wastes in the different member states of the EU.
Of course the waste management sector is relevant in the implementation of
circular economy as it determines the put in practice of the waste hierarchy (Fig. 1).
By the way, other actions need to be taken for a full implementation of CE involving
different actors and activities necessary and strategic for the achievement of this goal.
Key drivers for CE are represented by economic actors as business and consumers,
local, regional and national authorities and also over national authorities as EU. All
these actors have to operate for the implementation of the right regulatory framework
related to each single market and indicate to all the actor which is the way forward.
Above these, other relevant activities are necessary to be pursued as the implemen-
tation and promotion of the United Nations Agenda for Sustainable Development
(UNRIC 2018) and the G7 alliance for resource efficiency (EC 2015b). International
cooperation is also another key factor for CE implementation.
Circular Economy in Italy 205

2 Legislation

Currently, in EU and Italy, it is possible to find several legislations related to the

implementation of CE concept in specific sectors since more than 20 years. By the
way, the first coordinated and specifically dedicated document for the implementation
of CE in the EU is represented by the communication of the EC COM(2015) 614
final (EC 2015a). By this communication, the EC launches an EU action plan for the
implementation of CE.
This action plan is an integrated approach involving legislative, economic and
research aspects supporting the CE implementation in each step of the value chain
starting from production to consumption, repair, remanufacturing, waste manage-
ment and secondary raw materials feed back into the economy. Action will be also
taken on fertilizers and water reuse.
Implementation of CE starts from the first phase of the value chain that is the
design and production of goods. Design is the first step for promoting repair, reuse,
upgrade and recycling of products. Increasing the lifespan of goods is another impor-
tant aspect of CE. More incentives for eco-design will be hence implemented. By
the way, even if efficient eco-design is performed, no adequately efficient production
systems can lead to the generation of a high amount of waste. Production system and
waste generated differ a lot by industrial sectors. The European Commission will
elaborate specific best reference documents (BREFs) for supporting legal authorities
in releasing permission for industrial installation for promoting innovative and best
practice which able to increase the production efficiency including the remanufactur-
ing of secondary raw materials and recycling. Concept based on industrial symbiosis
will be also promoted. Reject of materials and energy from one production process
can be used as inputs from another production process minimizing the waste of
materials and energy. For the implementation of this concept, an improvement of the
extended producer responsibility will be also pursued.
Consumers play a crucial role in successful implementation of CE, but there is a
need of correct information, affordable prices and regulatory framework. Information
about the eco-friendly level of products is fundamental for driving the consumers in
the choice of more sustainable products. Eco-label, energy performances and similar
labelling systems are already put in practice but not always so clear or useful for the
goal. National and local authorities will also promote economic supporting schemes
for more eco-friendly products by different supporting scheme as tax reduction or
similar. Guidance for product repair and availability of spare parts is also another
important aspect to be promoted for increasing the lifespan of products. Green public
procurements represent also another important aspect for driving purchase towards
CE implementation.
As already stated, waste management plays a central role in the implementation
of CE since it determines how the hierarchy is put into or practice. All wastes have
to be considered from household to industrial, including mining and construction
and demolition. The European Commission is committed to establish long-term
recycling targets and to reduce landfilling. Particular care will be also focused on
206 F. Di Maria

how the wastes are managed that is an essential point for returning high valuable and
recyclable materials.
Waste management is also crucial for secondary raw materials’ reuse. Secondary
raw materials replace raw materials pursuing two objectives—prevention of resource
depletion and security of supply. Two main obstacles, nowadays, hamper the sec-
ondary raw materials’ exploitation—uncertainty about their quality and market
demand. About the first aspect, the European Commission will elaborate common
quality standards in particular for organic fertilizer generable from organic waste. In
the second case, appositely legislation will be implemented together with adequate
economic support. Another import issue is also represented by wastewater reuse.
About this aspect, the European Commission will implement legislation together
with minimum quality standards. Furthermore, the COM(2015) also targeted five
priority areas characterized by specificities of their products or value chain, their
environmental footprint or dependency of material from outside. These areas are
represented by:
(1) Plastics. Plastic materials are widely used in different products from packag-
ing to vehicles. Currently in the EU, about 25% is recycled and about 50% is
landfilled. Improper plastic management causes also ocean pollution with very
high environmental burden. The European Commission will implement more
ambitious targets for plastic recycling, reduce marine litter and avoid hazardous
substances in plastics production.
(2) Food waste. Food production, distribution storage and use generate high impact.
This resulted in increase of edible food disposal. Furthermore, food waste takes
place at all the level of the value chain from production, to final users (e.g. restau-
rants, canteen, home) making very difficult its quantification. The European
Commission will elaborate uniform calculation methodologies for addressing
these amounts. Data marking is also another issue to be addressed as the ‘best
before’ that usually did not indicated the expiry date. Wrong interpretation of
this also causes a large generation of food waste.
(3) Critical raw materials. These are represented by high value and vulnerable
supply distribution materials. These are often present in electronic waste. Recy-
cling rate will be hence improved, and the commission will promote this activity.
(4) Construction and demolition waste. This represents one of the largest amounts
of waste generated in the EU. A lot of recyclables in such waste still continue to
be disposed. Quality standard and selective demolition procedures are among
main criticisms for their recycling. Green public procurement is also another
important aspect to implement for increasing construction and demolition waste.
(5) Biomass and bio-based products. Biomass can play an important role in replac-
ing fossil and mineral resources for the production of fuels, energy and chem-
icals. It is in any case mandatory to analyse with attention the sustainability of
the supply chain with particular attention to the environmental impact. Wood
packaging recycling will be also increased. Research funding for supporting
EU bio-based economy is also a fundamental factor for a full implementation
of CE.
Circular Economy in Italy 207

Finally, the COM(2015) 614 (EC 2015a) indicates also a timetable for the planning
of the actions to be taken forward per each main from 2015 to 2018.
Furthermore, the European Commission proposed other two documents related
also to emending the 2020 targets reported in the WFD (2008). They consist in an
overall recycling of waste within 2030 of 65% (EC 2015c) and in an increase of
recycling rates of specific waste materials (EC 2015d): plastics up to 65%; metals
up to 85%; wood up to 75%; glass up to 85%; paper and cardboard up to 85% EC
(2018) (Table 1).

3 Research Models

In the following are reported some of the most meaningful recent research projects
involving different aspects related to the implementation of circular economy.
Of particular interest are those concerning the production and the consumption
aspects.
For the production aspect:
LIFE M3P—Material Match Making Platform for promoting the use of industrial
waste in local networks
The Life M3P project will study and implement an online platform to promote
exchanging of industrial waste among the companies of manufacturing districts. The
Life M3P project will last three years (October 2016–September 2019), and it runs
in Italy—Lombardy, Belgium—Flanders, Greece—Western Macedonia, Spain—
Asturias.
The final objective is to demonstrate and apply experimentally a model of terri-
torial management of industrial waste in order to promote the Industrial Symbiosis.
Through the proposed model, the project wants to boost the overall efficiency of
industrial processes in the target areas by increasing the use of industrial waste and
reducing landfill, storage and transport.
Implementing and using the online platform will allow to address the lack of
information about the industrial waste produced in a local area, through a systematic
approach oriented to the life cycle of products and to the material chain needed to
make them.
In particular, the partnership—coming from Italy, Belgium, Spain and Greece—
aims to strengthen local networks for the improvement of the industrial waste, foster-
ing their use in other local businesses and reducing the needs for treatment, storage,
transport and the consequent environmental impact.
The M3P project wants to support industrial companies in their continuous
improvement in order to reduce processing waste and to replace raw materials with
others resources less critical for environment and supply.
In fact, the study of a model of local collaboration on materials will allow com-
panies to act consciously as ‘geographical area’, and it will provide to small- and
medium-sized companies useful operational tools for the materials efficiency. The
208 F. Di Maria

Table 1 List of regulation in the sector of waste management in the EU and in Italy
Year Number Title Main targets
European
1975 75/442/EEC Council directive on waste Definition of waste and of
disposal
Promotion of recycling,
reuse and energy recovery
1991 91/153/EEC Council Directive 18 March Introduction of the waste
1991 amending Directive hierarchy
75/442/EEC on waste
1994 94/62/EC European Parliament and Recycling target from
Council Directive of 20 50–65%
December 1994 on
packaging and packaging
waste
2008 2008/98/EC Directive of the European Recycling target 2020: 50%
Parliament and of the of waste and 70% of
Council of 19 November construction and demolition
2008 on waste and repealing waste
certain Directives
2015 COM(2015) 614 final Closing the loop—An EU Priority areas for CE
action plan for the Circular implementation.
Economy Timetable of action to be
taken
2015 COM(2015) 595 final Proposal for a Directive of Waste recycling target 2030
the European Parliament 65%
and of the Council
amending Directive
2008/98/EC on waste
2015 COM(2015) 596 final Proposal for a Directive of Specific waste materials
the European Parliament recycling targets 2030:
and of the Council plastics 65%; metals 85%;
amending Directive wood 75%; glass, paper and
94/62/EC on packaging and cardboard 85%
packaging waste
2018 COM(2018) 28 final Communication from the List of EU action for
Commission to the implementing the strategy
European Parliament, The
Council, The European
Economic and Social
Committee and the
Committee of the Regions A
European Strategy for
Plastics in a Circular
Economy
(continued)
Circular Economy in Italy 209

Table 1 (continued)
Year Number Title Main targets
Italian
1982 DPR n.915 Implementation of EU Waste classification
directives 75/442/EEC,
76/403/EEC, 78/3149/EEC
on different waste
1997 D.Lgs. n. 22 Implementation of EU Target on separated
directives 91/156/EEC, collection; 15% 1999; 25%
91/689/EEC, 94/62/EC on 2001; 35% 2003
different waste
2004 L. n. 308/2004 Delega al Governo per il Ferrous by-products from
riordino, il coordinamento e steel industry not a waste
l’integrazione della
legislazione in materia
ambientale e misure di
diretta applicazione
2006 D.Lgs. n. 152/2006 Norme in materia Target on separated
ambientale collection: 35% 2006; 45%
2008; 65% 2012
2010 D.Lgs. n.205/2010 Disposizioni di attuazione Target on reuse and
della Direttiva 2008/98/CE recycling: MSW and
del Parlamento europeo e packaging 50% 2020; C&D
del Consiglio del 19 70% 2020
novembre 2008 relativa ai
rifiuti e che abroga alcune
direttive—Implementation
of Directive 2008/98/EC
2015 L. n.221/2015 Disposizioni in materia Economic support for
ambientale per promuovere separated collection
misure di green economy e
per il contenimento dell’uso
eccessivo di risorse
naturali.—Green economy
and prevetnion of natural
resource depletion
2016 L. n.166/2016 Disposizioni concernenti la Economic incentives for
donazione e la distribuzione retailers;
di prodotti alimentari e Social cooperation
farmaceutici a fini di
solidarieta’ sociale e per la
limitazione degli
sprechi.—Food waste
prevention
210 F. Di Maria

Life M3P project will also allow to search for new applications of waste, based
on creative features and useful to product managers, process engineers, designers,
looking for innovative solutions or replacements for their products.
The expected result is twofold:
• Create awareness of locally available resources (waste or by-products), in order
to reduce the need for handling, as well as the treatment and final disposal;
• Strengthen the synergies with the other European industrial areas in order to get a
better overall waste recovery.
LIFE ECO-PULPLAST —Local circular ECOnomy by an innovative approach for
recycling paper industry PULper waste into new PLASTic pallets
The overall objective of the LIFE ECO-PULPLAST project is to progressively reduce
to zero the amount of paper mills’ pulper waste sent to landfill and incinerators. In
order to reach this goal, the technical and economic feasibility of an innovative
technology to recycle pulper waste into new plastic compounds and products will be
demonstrated during the project lifetime, with the realization and testing of a demon-
stration production line especially designed for the characteristics and peculiarities
of pulper waste. The main idea behind this project is to realize plastic euro-pallets
to be reused by the same paper district that generates the material waste in the first
place and creating local circular economy, which is one main goals of the European
environmental strategy for the next decades. Thanks to the local products manufac-
turing and reuse, the project also aims at reducing the environmental impact due to
the current transportation of pulper waste to incinerators and landfills and the related
disposal’s impacts.
In addition, by replacing common wooden euro-pallets, that require a high con-
sumption of raw natural materials, with reusable plastic pallets from recovered waste
materials, the project addresses the European strategy towards an efficient use of
resources. More specifically, the project aims at demonstrating that pulper waste can
be used as main input material in the new compounds, by using a simple and low
energy consuming mechanical process that does not require a washing phase or the
removal of the residual fibres from the plastic materials and not even a selection
phase of the different polymers composing the pulper waste-mixed plastics. A fur-
ther objective of the LIFE ECO-PULPLAST project concerns the working method.
The project, in fact, is promoted in synergy by different entities: industrial and tech-
nological partners working side by side with environmental organizations, all aiming
at a common goal (Fig. 5).
For the consumption aspects:
LIFE PROMISE Product Main Impacts Sustainability through Eco-communication
The main objective of the PROMISE project was to reduce the negative environ-
mental impact of products in Italy, particularly household products and agri-food
products. A communication strategy would be designed and implemented covering
information campaigns that target producers, retailers, consumers and public author-
ities. Communication actions would be tested to assess their effectiveness in achiev-
ing lifestyle or behaviour changes that help create environmental benefits. Different
Circular Economy in Italy 211

Fig. 5 Pallet produced from pulp waste plastic by the LIFE ECO-PULPLAST project

approaches to disseminating information would be piloted and evaluated in terms of

the reduction of environmental impact throughout product lifecycles. Results from
local level actions would help develop a communication model at national level that
supports the EU’s SCP/SIP Action Plan. The communication strategy represents a
‘means’ to achieve a variety of tangible results, including green public procurement
in public authorities and wider uptake of initiatives such as eco-branding and EMAS.
The PROMISE project targeted the environmental impacts of products (EIPRO)
that represent a problem across all EU member states and are strictly related to the
lifestyles of EU citizens. The project implemented four communication campaigns
to increase the awareness of the different actors that can reduce the environmental
impacts associated with the products, their production, distribution, use and end of
life.
The objective of increasing awareness on sustainability was met by disseminating
good practice in sustainable production and consumption. The project involved all
those who have a strategic role to play in this process: consumers, retailers, companies
and public sector.
In line with the European and national policies, PROMISE carried out a mea-
sure to improve the understanding of all policy-makers on consumer choices and
sustainability.
Specifically, it increased awareness of green choices among:
• Producers that can use clean technologies and introduce certification of process
and products;
• Local authorities, which have a didactic role to play, and are themselves final
consumers;
• Citizens, particularly those multipliers of information and knowledge, such as
young people, educators and representatives’ cultural and environmental associa-
tions;
• Retailers, who are able to influence consumers’ choices through the provision of
products and the distribution of information.
The project also helped locate information gaps on green products by producers,
distributors, consumers and local authorities, as well as identify and recognize a
‘green product’ without ambiguity, through the dissemination of knowledge of the
EU labels. Through the use of different media, it promoted the professional growth
212 F. Di Maria

of manufacturers, retailers and local authorities. Moreover, it applied plans of com-

munication aimed at promoting changes of behaviours of all actors of the lifecycle of
the product manufacturers, distributors, consumers and local authorities. This fore-
saw the overcoming of information barriers, the need to incentivize dialogue and
understanding among the various actors in the market and the promotion of clear and
easy to understand information for all the subjects involved.
At a low estimate, the project involved:
• 600,000 consumers through the dedicate awareness campaign (conferences,
forum, web site, brochures, boards, media news/reportage, video). The benefi-
ciary estimates that some 2,500,000 of consumers have been reached;
• 300 local bodies through the awareness campaign (seminars, brochures, confer-
ences and web site). At the end of the project, all the local bodies (provinces,
municipalities, national and regional parks) of the three regions had been involved;
• 200 companies through the awareness campaign; and
• 300 dealers through the awareness campaign. Some 8,000 Coop retailers nation-
wide have been reached by the campaign.
A report on the efficiency of the communication showed that:
• GPP increased by 15.8% in those public authorities involved in the awareness
campaign;
• Green products increased by 19.5% in Coop stores;
• Sales figures of green products increased by 21.1% in the Coop stores;
• Four eco-design initiatives were adopted by producers; and
• Three companies adopted cleaner techniques, including the installation of photo-
voltaic panels in their production sites.
Finally, the project provided the Commission’s consultation ‘Stakeholders Con-
sultation on Delivering more Sustainable Consumption and Production’ of March
2012 with a position paper. It was presented by the Liguria region and included
the guiding principles on how communication on SCP should be implemented in
an effective way. It featured the requisites and rules based on ISO 14020 standards,
to be provided to the national authority for the drawing up of the Italian National
Communication Plan on SCP.
LIFE12 ENV/IT/000393 PREFER PRoduct Environmental Footprint Enhanced by
Regions
The LIFE PREFER project aims to demonstrate the effectiveness of the Euro-
pean methodology for environmental footprint in different sectors using the cluster
approach, in order to overcome the typical drawbacks affecting SMEs (lack of human
and financial resources). It will develop and strengthen this approach based on shared
resources. The project will provide an opportunity for innovative environmental gov-
ernance on the possibility to facilitate knowledge-sharing and experience exchange
among participants and encourage the application of the PEF methodology. At the
cluster level, a set of instruments, tools and resources will be shared with local SMEs
in order to support them in the application of the PEF methodology and to achieve
Circular Economy in Italy 213

improvements in environmental performance. The effectiveness and uniqueness of

the project lie in using the clustering methodology in an innovative way—i.e. to
define and implement a policy and governance approach aimed at increasing the
uptake PEF among SMEs.
PRoduct Environmental Footprint Enhanced by Regions is a project co-
financed by the European Commission’s LIFE Plus Programme. PREFER (LIFE12
ENV/IT/000393) started in October 2013 and finished in December 2016. The project
coordinator was the Institute of Management of Sant’Anna School cooperating with
five partners: CENTROCOT, Consorzio dell’Asti, ERVET, Patto dell’Agro and Lom-
bardy Region. PREFER project aimed at fully implementing the European Product
Environmental Footprint (PEF) methodology on eight different products. The Euro-
pean Commission adopted the PEF by the Recommendations 2013/179/EU. The
project involved eight Italian clusters placed in Campania, Emilia Romagna, Lom-
bardy, Piedmont and Tuscany. The project budget is 1.541.845 e with a Life Plus
contribution of 50%. The project results concern the PEF implementation. The part-
ners tested the methodology on 13 products representing 8 Italian clusters (Paper
district of Lucca, Tuscany fashion district, Lombardy textile district, Wine district of
Asti, Agricultural and Food District of Nocera Gragnano, Northern Italy industrial
tomato cluster, Shoes district of San Mauro Pascoli, Lombardy wood district). The
pilot companies attending the project were 38, 32 SMEs and 6 large enterprises.
Eight PEFCRs were developed and shared with three European cluster organiza-
tions in Spain and Romania. A project survey (94 respondents) identified the main
needs and barriers to PEF adoption. Based on survey results, partners designed five
technical tools to support SMEs in the PEF implementation. The PREFER training
initiatives involved 350 organizations.
LIFE PRISCA Pilot project for scale reuse starting from bulky waste stream
The main objective of the PRISCA project was to reduce the flow of bulky waste
sent to landfill. The project also aimed to increase the recovery and reuse of bulky
waste. Its specific aims were to contribute to the effective implementation of the EU
Thematic Strategy on waste and natural resources, focusing its efforts on the national
priorities; to set up two demonstration reuse centres, in Vicenza (northern Italy) and
San Benedetto del Tronto (central Italy); and to reduce the flow of bulky waste going
to landfill, with a target of reusing 60% of that waste.
PRISCA—Pilot project for scale reuse starting from bulky waste stream—is a
project financed by the European Commission through the Life Plus Environment
2011 programme, that aims to demonstrate the feasibility of two reuse centres, one
in Vicenza and one in San Benedetto del Tronto, where reusable goods from solid
urban waste flows are sent for preparation for reuse operations to enter a second life,
instead of being disposed to landfill.
The PRISCA project contributed to improvements in waste management generally
and, in particular, to the implementation of the waste prevention objectives of the EU
Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC). The project established two waste reuse
centres, in Vicenza and San Benedetto del Tronto, which reduced the flow of waste
214 F. Di Maria

and goods going to landfill by reusing more than 60% of the incoming material at
both sites.
In both the demonstration sites, performance monitoring systems were imple-
mented. These consisted of traceability tools that provide useful information and
verified the project’s target in terms of intercepted waste flows and management
efficiency of the overall process from interception to marketing. Dedicated software
was used for the optical reading of characters on labels, to replace the manual input
of codes, which made the process of traceability for intercepted goods both easier
and faster. The project team created a testing and repair laboratory and published a
technical manual.
The project’s dissemination activities, aiming to replicate the model in other areas,
included 20 regional seminars, targeted at local operators and public administrations,
2 national workshops, 3 national conferences and a final International event. Inten-
sive networking activities were also organized with other LIFE projects. Awareness-
raising activities were aimed at citizens living near the two waste reuse sites, focusing
on citizen involvement in waste management and sustainable consumption behaviour.
The environmental impacts of the PRISCA model were evaluated with Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA) tools. Environmental benefits were generated by the reduction of
quantities of waste and goods destined for disposal by landfill or incineration, through
their diversion into reuse activities that extended their life cycle as second-hand
goods. This life cycle extension brings relative saving in resources, and subsequent
savings in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. During the start-up phase in Vicenza,
a total of 244 tonnes (2014), and in San Benedetto del Tronto a total of 5 tonnes
(during 5 months in 2015), were diverted from the waste flows. LCA evaluations of
the global GHG savings connected to the activity of the reuse centres during this
start-up phase were for 236 tonnes CO2 eq. in Vicenza and 36 tonnes CO2 eq. in
San Benedetto del Tronto.
In addition to helping implement the Waste Framework Directive, the PRISCA
project also contributes to the implementation of the Thematic Strategy on the sus-
tainable use of natural resources COM (2005) 670 final (EC 2005a); COM(2003)
302 (EC 2003) on Integrated Product Policy; the Sustainable Consumption and Pro-
duction (SCP) and Sustainable Industrial Policy (SIP) Action Plan COM(2008) 397
final (EC 2008); and the Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of
Waste COM(2005) 666 final (EC 2005b) and its follow-up Report on the Strategy
COM(2011) 13 final (EC 2011), which stressed that waste prevention was a priority
to be urgently implemented. Waste production prevention is also an important objec-
tive in the Communication Towards a circular economy: a zero waste programme
for Europe COM (2014) 398 final (EC 2014).
The PRISCA model developed an economically sustainable supply chain that
supports waste prevention activities in the long term. The project integrated the
second-hand product sector and the reuse supply chain through its solid urban waste
management system, to increase the interception of reusable items. PRISCA intro-
duced an ‘industrial approach’, to promote standardization of manufacturing pro-
cesses, in a field not always well-organized as far as supply, workflow management
and final retail are concerned.
Circular Economy in Italy 215

Management tools that enable optimal traceability and the logistic organization
of the reuse centres allow reuse operators to increase and widen their market and to
better cope with market demand. The demonstration activities in the two project areas,
involving a multi-disciplinary team of coordinating and five associate beneficiaries,
showed the importance of cooperation among stakeholders at waste reuse centres.
In terms of social benefits, the PRISCA model helped create new jobs at the two
reuse centres and, as the activity is likely to become a structural support to local
waste management systems, this result can be acknowledged as a long-term benefit.
During the project, all the job positions created in Vicenza for implementing the
Prisca model were made permanent, increasing the staff of Cooperativa Insieme.
Furthermore, in San Benedetto del Tronto, which was a greenfield, implementation
generated four permanent part-time positions and the opportunity to hire four dis-
advantaged people via the municipal administration. In addition, the introduction
of standardized procedures and equipment, along with workers’ training activities,
enabled improvements to be noted in conditions, as well as in health and safety, in
the workplace.

4 Case Studies

In Italy, the implementation of circular use of resource is monitored also by a public

web site www.economiacircolare.com CDCA, ECODOM (2018). In this web site,
there is reported an atlas (Fig. 6) indicating the geographical position of the compa-
nies and the short description of the circular use of resources implemented in their
production cycle. The industrial sectors involved are very broad ranging from the

Fig. 6 Atlas of circular economy implementation

216 F. Di Maria

Fig. 7 Econyl project scheme

agriculture, the textile, the building, the ICT, the waste management, furniture and
others.
Among these of interest are the best practices introduced by the following two
companies.
Acquafil
Acquafil is a company operating in the textile sector producing a wire for carpet and
for dresses. Starting from this business, they implemented the Econyl project (Fig. 7)
aimed to generate an high-quality nylon wire from waste containing nylon.
This activity consists of three main steps:
(1) Nylon waste collection including residues from production, industrial plastics
components, moquette, carpet and fish nets;
(2) Waste pre-treatment for removing impurities;
(3) Waste depolymerization for producing high-quality nylon;
(4) Polymerization;
(5) Transformation in new nylon wire;
(6) Back to market.

Lucart

Lucart is a company producing hygienic paper that in 2013 started the natural project
for a total recycling of the multilayer beverage packaging. This project was imple-
mented in collaboration with Tetra Pak and recovery all the component of these kinds
Circular Economy in Italy 217

of packaging. From the paper of the external part of the multilayer container, Lucart
produces the Fiberpack tissue. From the polyethylene and aluminium components
produce AL. Pe is a homogeneous material used for producing different components
as pallet, urban furniture and other products completely recyclable.

5 Discussion and Analysis

In a successful implementation of circular use of the resource, the generation of

waste will be significantly decreased and at least eliminated. This requires a com-
plex action involving economic systems, technologies, product design, consumers’
attitude and also legal and economic supports. One of the main drivers for waste gen-
eration is represented by the increase in GDP and families’ expenditure. In general,
the higher is the GDP, the higher is the amount of product and services delivered
by a given economy; higher is the families’ expenditures, higher is the amount of
product purchased. This, in a traditional approach leaded to a direct proportionality
between these two socio-economic indicators and the waste generation (Fig. 8). For
Italy, starting from the year 2015, macro-data concerning socio-economic and waste
generation indicators showed that this paradigm is starting to be capsized. It is hence
possible to have an economic grow at which do not correspond a directly proportional
increase of the MSW generated (Figs. 8 and 9).
This is an important result concerning the pursuing of waste prevention according
to the implementation of the hierarchy (Fig. 1).

Fig. 8 GDP, families’ expenditures and MSW generation normalized to the levels of 2010
218 F. Di Maria

Fig. 9 MSW/GDP and MSW/families’ expenditure ratios with respect to 2010 from 2011 to 2016

Concerning the implementation of the other levels of the hierarchy, preparation

for reuse and recycling, a fundamental instrument for its increase was represented
by the separated collection. Based on the results reported in Fig. 10, it is possible
to detect a quite parallel increase of the amount of waste collected separately and

Fig. 10 Percentages of separated collection and recycling for the period 2010–2016
Circular Economy in Italy 219

the amount of waste recycled, indicating the relevance of the collection phase. But
starting from the 2015, it was observed that for continuing to pursue the same trend
in the increase of previous periods for the waste recycling rates, the efforts in the
separated collection of waste have to increase to a higher extent compared to the
previous years. In fact, the two curves that were practically parallel since the 2010
from the 2015 started to be divergent with the one indicating the waste separation
percentage increasing more than the one of the recycling.
This fact opens the floor to a critical discussion about the causes of this tend and
on the convenience of pursuing to higher values the separated collection based on
the current status of the art (e.g. waste quality, collection systems, recycling markets,
legal support). In fact, there are two main opposite effects concerning the separated
collection and the recycling. On the one hand, the extended producer responsibility
imposes to the producers of packaging to provide their collection. But on the other
hand, not all the materials collected separately have an effective recycling pathway.
This last aspect is a consequence of different causes among which the absence of
adequate recycling markets for such materials; the absence of specific regulation able
to provide the necessary support for the recycling; the absence of adequate economic
support for promoting specific recycling pathways; the decreased quality of materials
collected separately. All this indicates the complexity of the action to be pursued for
a successful implementation of the circular use of resources.
Meanwhile for the MSW, there are a lot of signals indicating that the efforts
concerning the implementation of the hierarchy (Fig. 1) and consequently of the
circular use of resources are starting to give positive results, the signals arising
from the management of special waste indicate that there is no evidence of similar
trend (Fig. 11). The linkage between GDP and special waste production still remain
characterized by a direct proportionality. This is of course partially due to the quality
of these wastes but also to the difficulty in the implementation of efficient approaches
in specific sectors as the one of construction and demolition waste representing
more than 41% of the whole special waste produced. Another 27% of these wastes
are represented by those arising from remediation and reclamation of contaminated
soils, and finally, about 20% are those generated by the manufacture sector. All
this indicates that further efforts have to be pursued in this sector for an effective
implementation of CE.

Fig. 11 Percentages of separated collection and recycling for the period 2010–2016
220 F. Di Maria

6 Conclusion

Implementation of circular use of resources is a complex activity involving different

aspects among which the most relevant are represented by adequate legislation and
economic support for promoting specific activities in each specific market.
Industrial sectors as the plastic, the paper, the metals and the glass have, nowadays,
achieved high levels of recycling of waste materials even if more ambitious target are
going to be implemented. But the final goal of a circular use of resources is related
to avoid the production of waste. Waste represents a symptom of a ‘hilliness’ that
is located somewhere else in the economic systems and along the values chain of
products.
It is important to identify and remove these obstacles hampering the avoidance
of the waste generation phase and implement an effective circular use of resources.
By the current state of the art, represented by the quality of the products generated,
the materials used for their production, the industrial processes, the economic con-
venience and the legal support some positive signals concerning waste prevention
have been detected for the household wastes. For those generated by the industrial
and commercial sectors, there is no evidence of the avoidance of waste generation,
indicating that more efforts resulted necessary.

References

CD. (1991). Council Directive 91/156/EEC. 1991. Council Directive of 18 March 1991 amending
Directive 75/442/EEC on waste. Official Journal of the European Communities 26.3.91 N. L78/32.
CDCA, ECODOM. (2018). L’atlante dell’economia circolare. Available at: http://www.
economiacircolare.com/latlante/. Accessed 15.07.2018.
EC. (2003). COM(2003) 302 final. Communication from the commission to the council and
the European Parliament Integrated product policy. Brussels 18.06.2003. Available at: https://
eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52003DC0302&from=it. Accessed
07.09.2018.
EC. (2005a). COM(2005) 670 final. communication from the commission to the council, the
European Parliament, The European Economic and Social Committee and The Commit-
tee of the Regions thematic strategy on the sustainable use of natural resources. Brussels
21.12.2005. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2005:
0670:FIN:EN:PDF. Accessed 07.09.2018.
EC. (2005b). COM(2005) 666 final. Communication from the commission to the council, the
European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions taking sustainable use of resources forward: A thematic strategy on the prevention and
recycling of waste. Brussels 21.12.2005. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/
TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52005DC0666&from=EN. Accessed 07.09.2018.
EC. (2008). COM(2008) 397 final. Communication from the commission to the European Par-
liament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions on the sustainable consumption and production and sustainable industrial policy
action plan. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:
0397:FIN:EN:PDF. Accessed 07.09.2018.
Circular Economy in Italy 221

EC. (2011). COM(2011) 13 final. Report from the Commission to the European Parlia-
ment, the council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions on the thematic strategy on the prevention and recycling of waste. Brussels
19.1.2011. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:
0013:FIN:EN:PDF. Accessed 07.09.2018.
EC. (2014). COM (2014) 398 final. Communication from the Commission to the European Par-
liament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe. Brussels 2.7.2014.
Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2014/EN/1-2014-398-EN-F1-1.Pdf.
Accessed 07.09.2018.
EC. (2015a). COM(2015) 614 final. Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee
of the Regions Closing the loop—An EU action plan for the Circular Economy. Brussels
2.12.2015. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:8a8ef5e8-99a0-11e5-
b3b7-01aa75ed71a1.0012.02/DOC_1&format=PDF. Accessed 27.08.2018.
EC. (2015b). G7 Alliance for Resource Efficiency. European Commission, Environment, Eco-
Innovation. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/events/g7-alliance-resource-
efficiency_en. Accessed 28.08.2018.
EC. (2015c). COM(2015) 595 final. Proposal for a Directive of the European Par-
liament and of the Council amending Directive 2008/98/EC on waste. Brussels
2.12.2015. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:c2b5929d-999e-
11e5-b3b7-01aa75ed71a1.0018.02/DOC_1&format=PDF. Accessed 30.08.2018.
EC. (2015d). COM(2015) 596 final. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and
of the Council amending Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste. Brus-
sel 2.12.2015. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:b68494d2-999f-
11e5-b3b7-01aa75ed71a1.0019.02/DOC_1&format=PDF. Accessed 30.08.2018.
EC. (2018). COM(2018) 28 final. Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Com-
mittee of the Regions a European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy. Brussels
16.1.2018. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:2df5d1d2-fac7-11e7-
b8f5-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&format=PDF. Accessed 27.08.2018.
ISPRA. (2009). Rapporto Rifiuti Urbani. Edizione 2009. ISPRA, Rapporti 108/2010. ISBN 978-
88-448-0430-5.
ISPRA. (2017a). Rapporto Rifiuti Urbani. Edizione 2017. ISPRA, Rapporti 272/2017. ISBN 978-
88-448-0852-5.
ISPRA. (2017b). Rapporto Rifiuti Speciali. Edizione 2017. ISPRA, Rapporti 264/2017. ISBN 978-
88-448-0828-0.
UNRIC. (2018). Sustainable development goals. United Nations. Available at: https://www.unric.
org/en/unric-library/30089-unric-library-backgrounder-sustainable-development-goals-in-local-
languages?format=pdf. Accessed 28.08.2018.
Circular Economy in Kenya

Michael K. Koech and Kaburu J. Munene

1 Introduction

A circular economy is a system based on economic and industrial concepts that advo-
cates reusing of products and raw materials so as to maximize the restorative capacity
of natural resources. The circular economy attempts to minimize value destruction
in the overall system and to maximize value creation in each link in the system.
The main benefit of this kind of economy is the reduction of environmental pressure
through minimizing emissions of harmful products such as carbon dioxide, nitrogen
oxides, and methane among others thus resulting into a cleaner world without rising
temperatures and other corresponding negative consequences. The earth is currently
facing severe environmental challenges as vital ecosystems such as forests, wood-
lands, grasslands, and wetlands are facing extreme depletion due to unsustainable
human activities. It is estimated that almost half of the world’s rivers have been
depleted thus accelerating the impacts of global warming. Environmental degrada-
tion has led to migration of more than 50 million people from their homes to urban
areas where majority reside in urban informal settlements. The planet will continue
to face the ever-increasing challenges unless countries shift to more sustainable ways
of living and development. Countries and global community must adopt and imple-
ment circular economy strategies that seek to reduce environmental damages while
maximizing on sustainable development.
In Kenya, many people especially those residing in urban informal settlements
and rural areas have started to practice circular economy activities such as the estab-
lishment of biogas digesters and reusing of plastic bottles. The country has also
banned the use of plastic bags thus creating opportunities for its citizens to reuse and
recycle materials such as sisal woolen bags. The establishment of biogas digesters

M. K. Koech (B) · K. J. Munene

School of Environmental Studies, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya
e-mail: mi.koech@yahoo.com

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 223

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_12
224 M. K. Koech and K. J. Munene

in Kenyan rural areas and slums has led to generation of power to light up home-
steads and also made cooking easier and safer. Biogas establishment in many parts of
Kenya has led to sustainable management of solid waste and municipal wastewater.
Recycling and reusing of solid waste from households and municipal wastewater in
Kenya has helped the country improve sanitation conditions of most slums. In 2017,
the Kenyan government in collaboration with Africa Development Bank (AFDB)
under Sustainable Energy Fund for Africa (SEFA) came into an agreement to estab-
lish 100 megawatts (MW) waste to energy electricity plant in Dandora dumpsite.
Dandora dumpsite is the largest dumpsite in the country that receives waste from
most part of Nairobi City County. Asticom Kenya Limited has already been granted
permits by the Kenyan government to undertake the task of building this 100 MW
municipal waste to energy (WTE) plant. The WTE project in Kenya will have sig-
nificant benefits to the health, socio-economic, and environmental dimensions of
the country. According to AFDB, the project will be receiving an approximate of
1,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste from Kibera slums.
In 2018, Kenyan Association of Manufacturers introduced a plastic bottle recy-
cling initiative to mark the celebrations of World Environment Day. The plastic bottle
initiative by KAM led to the establishment of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) recy-
cling company known as PETCO Kenya that will ensure sustainable management of
plastic materials through recycling and reusing in the country. All private manufac-
tures in the country will be represented in PETCO thus ensuring that the initiative
gains popularity across the country. PETCO Kenya aims to achieve recovery and
recycling of PET materials at a rate of 25 pc in 2018 and 70 pc by 2030, (Rutten
2018). Recycling and reusing of plastic bottles in Kenya has led to emergence of
business initiatives. Urban dwellers in Kenya especially those living in informal set-
tlements are reusing plastic bottles to set up small kitchen gardens. Crops such as
onions, broccoli, cabbage, kales, bullet chilies, garlic, and ginger are planted in large
plastic bottles filled with soil and manure from domestic animals mostly cows and
donkeys. According to Kumar, a Nairobi resident in Parklands, they buy 10 L plastic
bottles from companies within the city at Kshs 50 each in order to set up a kitchen
garden of about 1,000 plastic bottles (Kilonzo 2014).
Kenya has also implemented the use of renewable energy as a means of promoting
circular economy concepts. Kenya Electricity Generating Company (KENGEN) has
already set up three plants to generate geothermal resource in the country. These
geothermal plants include Olkaria I which generates 195 MW, Olkaria II generating
105 MW, and Olkaria IV which generates 140. Geothermal electricity will help to
reduce the country relying on Hydroelectric Power (HEP), (Ochieng 2017). Private
investors across the country have also invested in small-scale solar and wind electric-
ity generation plants. World Bank-funded rural electrification program commonly
referred to as Last Mile Main Grid Connectivity in Kenya seeks to establish the
largest solar power in East and Central Africa in Garissa on 85 ha piece of land.
Kenya investment in renewable energy is one of the strategies to reduce its carbon
emissions by 64,190 tonnes per year. In order to ensure success in promotion of
Circular Economy in Kenya 225

circular economy concepts, the country has set up organizations like Kenya National
Cleaner Production Center (KNCPC), Kenya Nuclear Electricity Board (KNEB),
and National Environment Management Authority (NEMA).

2 Legislative framework supporting Circular Economy

in Kenya

In Kenya, there are several legislation and legal frameworks to enhance sustainable
implementation of circular economy strategies. CE legislations in Kenya include par-
liament Acts, bills, by-laws, and legal publications in most governmental parastatals
and lead agencies. The new Kenyan constitution 2010 mainly Chapter 5 Part 2 on land
and environment mainly states all the obligations of its citizens to ensure sustainable
exploitation of natural resources and sustainable management and protection of the
environment. Chapter 5 Part 2 of the constitution environment and natural resources
is helping the country achieve green growth and sustainable development which
is a key step toward implementation of a circular economy. The circular economy
concepts in Kenya started to gain recognition since the development and implementa-
tion of Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) of 1999. EMCA
1999 is a legal framework law on environmental management and conservation in
Kenya. EMCA 1999 has led to the establishment of the following institutions to help
the country achieve environmental sustainability; National Environment Manage-
ment Authority (NEMA), Public Complaints Committee (PCC), National Environ-
ment Tribunal (NET), National Environment Action Plan Committees (NEAP), and
County Environment Committees.
The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) was established as
the principal instrument of government charged with the implementation of all poli-
cies relating to the environment and to exercise general supervision and coordination
over all matters relating to the environment. In consultation with the lead agencies,
NEMA is empowered to develop regulations, prescribe measures and standards,
and issue guidelines for the management and conservation of natural resources and
the environment. EMCA 1999 also led to the formulation and adoption of Envi-
ronmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Environmental Audit (EA) and monitoring,
environmental restoration orders, conservation orders, and easements. The incorpo-
ration of EIA and EA in development concerns in the country has helped to promote
cleaner production and sustainable development which is a major step toward real-
izing achievement of circular economy. All development projects in the country are
required by law to undertake EIA to ensure all the potential impacts are identified
and sustainable mitigation measures are developed. Regular monitoring of ongoing
development projects in the country is also carried out to ensure that all developers
and projects comply with the set of environmental regulations.
In June 10 2008, the then President Mwai Kibaki launched Vision 2030, a long-
term blueprint toward the achievement of sustainable development in the country by
226 M. K. Koech and K. J. Munene

2030. Vision 2030 has also played a key role toward the promotion of CE in the coun-
try. The blueprint advocates for adoption of industrial ecology, cleaner production
principles, and other sustainable practices to ensure that the country achieves a green
growth that reduces environmental harm while at the same time maximizing on the
economic gains. The country is also a signatory to several regional conventions such
as the Africa Vision 2063, Bamako Convention, Convention of the African Energy
Commission, and the Revised African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources. The country has also adopted international sustainable develop-
ment goals (SDG) to guide sustainable implementation of developmental issues that
promote circular economy.

3 Research Models

In 2016, the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources in collaboration with

UNDP developed a circular economy research model on solid waste management
in urban areas. The Research model adopted is known as Low Emission Capacity
Building (LECB) Program under funding from the European Commission (EC), the
German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and
Nuclear Safety (BMUB), and the Australian Government. LECB’s main aim is to
ensure partnership among the public sector, private sector, industries, and relevant
national and international organizations in order to ensure development of low emis-
sion approaches. National counterparts are supported to strengthen technical and
institutional capacities to identify and formulate Nationally Appropriate Mitigation
Actions (NAMAs) and Low Emission Development Strategies (LEDS) in the public
and private sectors, and to strengthen the underlying greenhouse gas inventory man-
agement and Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) systems. The LECB
Program runs through 2016 and is active in 25 countries: Argentina, Bhutan, Chile,
China, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Ecuador,
Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova, Morocco,
Peru, Philippines, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Vietnam, and
Zambia. LECB program is being implemented in the country through NAMAs. The
NAMAs circular Economy Municipal Solid Waste Management Approach for urban
areas aims to transform Nairobi’s waste sector from a disposal-driven one to one of
recycling and composting.
NAMAs circular Economy Municipal Solid Waste Management Approach will
have the following benefits to the country; affordable waste collection services to all
income areas, increase in the amount of waste collected and recycle, improved health
at household levels, reduction in GHG emissions, direct and indirect job creation,
and increase in the application of compost to improve agricultural soil fertility. The
NAMA circular economy model seeks to propose that 90% of all the waste collected
in Kenya must be recycled thus making the country among the highest ranking
globally in terms of recycling. In comparison, developed nations like Italy and USA
have recycling rates of 36 and 34.5%, respectively. NAMA model states that waste
Circular Economy in Kenya 227

from households and companies in Kenya will be collected by waste collection

companies. Waste collection companies will then transport the waste into a central
waste recycling point instead of disposing it at Dandora dumpsite. At the central
waste recycling point, sorting out of the waste into different fractions will be carried
out. 30% of the recyclable materials recovered at the central recycling point will
be sold to recycling industries while 60% of the total waste that is mainly organic
will be transported to composting plants for manure manufacturing. The remaining
percent of the waste will be disposed with a small research pilot activity undertaken
to generate energy through cement kiln method.
The figure below shows the operational flow of the circular economy approach of
the NAMA. Revenues come from three sources:
• Waste collection fees (earned by collectors)
• Sales of recyclable materials and tipping fees (earned by recycling points)
• Sales of compost (by composting businesses)
• Sales of new products (by recycling industries).

Source Nema (2016)

4 Case Studies of CE Implementation

4.1 Safi Organics

Safi Organics is a rice processing company based in Mwea Kenya. The company was
founded in 2015 and boosts of annual turnover of 42,000 USD. The company is an
eco-inclusive enterprise that aims at reversing the declining agricultural production
while creating job opportunities for the youth in Kenya. Rice farmers in Mwea face
the challenges of disposing off rice husk which they burn thus polluting the air
around the area. Safi Organics has developed technologies to collect the rice husk
and transform it into organic fertilizer. Waste rice husk is collected from farmers and
228 M. K. Koech and K. J. Munene

processed into biochar, the biochar is then stored, processed, and a local enzyme is
added to enable microbial growth. The fertiliser and soil treatments are sold back
to the farmers directly or through agents. Safi Organics has created a local circular
economy that enables farmers to exploit the value of their waste in an environmentally
friendly manner, as well as gain access to cheaper fertilisers and soils treatments.
Safi Organics also employs a number of local youths, providing them with an income
stream and access to valuable training and experience. Safi Organics is collaborating
with Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO) to increase
opportunities in organic farming among rice farmers in Mwea. Safi Organics’ main
environmental objective is to reverse declining soil fertility and reduce the burden of
chemical fertiliser on the local environment. Safi Organics contributes to enhanced
soil conditions by encouraging local farmers to use rice husks for soil maintenance.
Prior to their involvement with Safi Organics, local farmers were unaware of this
sustainable, local alternative to chemical fertilisers.

4.2 EcoPost Limited

EcoPost is a social enterprise that addresses the challenges of urban waste manage-
ment especially plastic pollution, youth unemployment, deforestation, and impacts
of climate change in Kenya. EcoPost is involved in recycling plastic waste in order
to manufacture eco-friendly plastic products such as outdoor furniture and fencing
materials. The enterprise is making huge contributions toward minimizing plastic
pollution in informal settlements. The enterprise aims to recycle 20.9 million kgs in
the next 10 years. EcoPost Limited is working closely with Safaricom Foundation,
Ministry of Youth Affairs, Enablis East Africa, and BiD Network from Netherlands
to ensure it achieves and its objectives.

4.3 Sanergy Kenya

Sanergy Kenya is an organization that aims at improving the sanitation condition of

most urban slums such as Mukuru in Nairobi. Urban slums in Kenya are faced by
challenges such as high population that exacerbates the poor sanitation conditions
in these informal settlements. An approximate of 8 million slum dwellers in Kenya
are forced to use unsanitary options such as “flying toilets” that involves mainly
defecating in available plastic bags that are later disposed on the streets. The ban of
plastic bags is likely to make the conditions worse as most slum dwellers may start
to defecate in the open. Sanergy Kenya is now providing Fresh Life Toilets that are
designed to be used 80–100 per day. The waste from the toilets is collected regularly
in sealed cartridges and taken to a central processing facility. In the central processing
facility, the waste is stored in special bio-digesters where it breaks down and releases
Circular Economy in Kenya 229

methane that is used as a fuel in biogas generating plants in the slum. The bio-
digesters also help in removing disease-causing pathogens thus making the leftover
matter safe to use as fertilizer. According to Sanergy Kenya, one tonne of human
waste produces about 0.6 m3 of biogas. Sanergy has already collected 2,700 metric
tonnes of waste from Mukuru slums. Once the Sanergy’s biogas plant is completed,
it will generate 250 kW of electricity that will help to light up the slums and also sell
to the national grid. Poo-to-power initiatives are already at work in some Kenyan
slums as well as several schools, but projects such as Sanergy’s with bigger funding
and wider aspirations hope to bring the benefits to more of the population.

4.4 Coca-Cola Kenya

Coca-Cola Company has launched a global plan “World Without Waste” that will
help in recycling of plastic waste. The company aims to reshape its packaging and
a new global goal that aims at recycling almost 100% of its packaging by 2030.
The companies “World Without waste” initiative will be guided mainly by the three
R’s scheme: Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. The company has reduced its dependence
on fossil fuels by introducing the Plant Bottle Packaging, which is the first fully
recyclable polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic bottle made with up to 30%
plant-based material. Together with partners, the company has invested in two bottle-
to-bottle recycling facilities at Extrupet and MPact, to create recycled PET for use in
the beverage industry. 45,000 tonnes of PET bottles are diverted from landfills each
year to be reused in the beverage industry. Coca-Cola, together also with its bottling
partners and other members of the PET value chain, has helped to set up a recycling
company, PETCO, which in 2016, achieved a recovery and recycling rate of 58% of
post-consumer PET bottles—one of the highest rates in the world.

4.5 TakaTaka Solutions

TakaTaka Solutions is a small-scale waste recycling enterprise that mainly operates

with Nairobi City County. The enterprise claims that it is capable of recycling up to
95% of the waste it collects. Waste collected by TakaTaka Solutions is separated into
two fractions mainly organic and inorganic at the initial stage. Organic waste which
accounts for a high amount of an approximate 60% is then transported to the enter-
prise’s central facility for production of compost. The compost produced is popularly
known as the TakaTaka Solution Biobooster. Recyclable materials from the waste
collected such as plastic containers, cardboards, and metals are then sold to recycling
industries across Nairobi. TakaTaka Solutions is also involved in manufacturing of
wine glasses and tumblers from recycled glass bottles.
230 M. K. Koech and K. J. Munene

5 Discussion and Analysis

There is a strong relationship between CE and environmental sustainability as they

both aim at improvement of the social, economic, health, and environmental dimen-
sions in a society. Humanity must learn to sustainable utilize the available resources to
improve their well-being while at the same time learn how to modify waste generated
to create more products. In Kenya, the number of industrial plants engaging them-
selves in Resource Efficient Cleaner Production (RECP), the 3Rs programs—reduce,
reuse, and recycle, and Industrial Ecology (IE) is on the rise. Some technologies in
RECP, 3Rs, and IE, are very expensive to adopt especially among the small-scale
manufacturing industries thus the government should offer monetary support. The
process of “greening” the Special Economic Zones (SEZs) has greatly helped Kenya
attract green Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs). In Kenya, over the years, there has
been an emerging international consensus that the country is exploiting its natural
resources in an unsustainable manner. This has led to implementation of interven-
tions such as Industrial Ecology, EIA, EA, and cleaner production strategies in order
to reduce pressure on the existing ecological resources. In the past, manufacturing
industries in Athi River SEZ have been operating in a linear approach where they
extract raw materials from the environment to produce products and then dumping
the waste in landfills. The adoption of a circular economy in the country coupled
with Resource Efficient Cleaner Production (RECP) and industrial symbiosis will
improve resource security of the SEZs, reduce associated ecological impacts asso-
ciated with waste disposal, and offer new opportunities for economic growth and
wealth creation. The adoption of CE in Kenya is likely to encounter barriers such
as inadequate awareness of the benefits of adopting CE concepts and strategies. The
policy makers in the country also are likely to encounter challenges inaccurate pro-
duction and manufacturing data that can be relied upon to make informed decisions.
The over reliance on out-dated production regulations that do not prioritize CE
concepts and efficient harnessing of ecological resources, limited research in CE
should serve as learning points for policy makers in Kenya to improve the country’s
production and manufacturing sector. Adoption of a circular economy requires an
incentive approach as demonstrated in European and Asian countries. An incentive
approach will allow manufacturing industries to seal loopholes in use of raw materials
and energy use so as to minimize disposing large amounts of wastes in landfills. Kenya
aims to achieve a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate of 10% by 2030. The
country aims to promote Foreign Direct Investment (FDIs) through implementation
of several flagship projects over the Vision 2030 period. In the first Medium Term
Plan (MTP) of Vision 2030 (2008–2012), the countries implemented the following
flagship projects: creation of Small Scale Enterprise (SMEs) parks, development
of SEZs, creation of industrial parks, industrial and manufacturing zoning, inputs
cost reduction, value addition and market access development, and development of
livestock Disease Free Zones (LDFZ) for production of premium quality beef and
other livestock products. The implementation of these flagship projects during the
first Medium Term Plan was slow as some of the projects were never realized. During
Circular Economy in Kenya 231

the first MTP (2008–2012), five SMEs industrial parks were to be developed in
Eldoret, Kisumu, Nakuru, Mombasa, and Nairobi, but they have not been established
since.

5.1 Current Status of Waste Management in Kenya

In Kenya, there is increased urbanization coupled with rapid growth of human popu-
lation mostly in the urban areas. Increased trends of urbanization and rapid population
growth have led to increased rate of waste generation and challenges in waste flow.
Despite existence of regulations and policies that guides on waste management, weak
implementation, and unsustainable individual practices have led to accumulation of
waste in most urban centers in Kenya. Poor waste management has led to outbreak
of waterborne disease and dengue fever especially in Mombasa and parts of North
Eastern counties. The plates below show examples of poor waste management in
Kenya.

Illegal waste dumping on the streets

232 M. K. Koech and K. J. Munene

Uncontrolled open dumpsite

In Kenya, most urban centers have inefficient waste collection and disposal sys-
tems. The table below shows a summary of waste generation, collection, and recovery
status in major towns.

Name of town Estimated waste Waste collected waste recovery Uncollected waste
generated
(tons/day)
Nairobi 2400 80% 45% 20%
Nakuru 250 45% 18% 37%
Kisumu 400 20% Unknown Unknown
Thika 140 60% 30% 40%
Mombasa 2200 65% 40% 35%
Eldoret 600 55% 15% 45%

Source Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (2010)

Waste is mainly transported in Kenya using open trucks, donkey carts, handcarts,
and buckets that lead to massive pollution and contamination of the environmental
resources.
Circular Economy in Kenya 233

5.2 Type of Waste and Management Method in Kenya

Type of waste Disposal method

Organic (vegetable and fruit remains) Fed to animals, disposed to landfills or dumpsite
Food remains Fed to animals, taken to dumpsite
Debris from construction Deposited in open dumpsite, recycled
Plastics Reused, recycled, dropped on the environment, taken
to dumpsite
Sludge Discharged to water bodies–rivers, streams
Bio-medical Burying, burning
Sawdust Reused in toilets, fuel
Old fabrics Recycled

Source Kilonzo (2014)

5.3 The Preferred State of Waste Management in Kenya:

Integrated Solid Waste Management
Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) hierarchy is an integrated approach
that aims at protection and conservation of the environment through implementa-
tion of various approaches of sustainable waste management. ISWM establishes the
preferred order of solid waste management alternatives as follows: waste reduction,
reuse, recycling, resource recovery, incineration, and landfilling. The figures below
represent ISWM Hierarchy.

Source KIPPRA (2013)

234 M. K. Koech and K. J. Munene

Source KIPPRA (2013)

ISWM plan targets to transform waste collected into different fractions. The pos-
sible future scenarios for solid waste management in Nairobi city are illustrated in
the figures below for business as usual under ISWM targets.

Source Muthoni (2014)

Circular Economy in Kenya 235

Source Muthoni (2014)

The following table summarizes an estimate of waste volumes in 2009 and pre-
dictions with and without the ISWM plan for 2015 and 2020 (Table 1).

Table 1 Status quo and possible futures for solid waste volumes in Nairobi
Quantities in tons/day
Year 2009 2015 2020
Best Worst ISWM BAU ISWM BAU
Total generated 3000 3200 3500 4400 4000 5400
Organic Fraction valorised at source 2% 1% 10% 2% 25% 2%
Organic Fraction otherwise valorised 1% 1% 4% 2% 5% 2%
Of rottirg/scavenged/illegal 35% 40% 21% 36% 5% 36%
Organic Fraction to official dump 13% 9% 15% 10% 15% 10%
Recyclables recovered 8% 3% 10% 6% 20% 6%
Recyclables to official dump 9% 8% 13% 10% 15% 10%
Recyclables burnt or illegally dumped 21% 27% 15% 22% 3% 22%
Residual waste to official dump 5% 3% 8% 5% 10% 5%
Residual burnt of illegally dumped 6% 8% 4% 7% 2% 7%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Total to dump 30% 18% 36% 25% 40% 25%
Total valorised 8% 5% 24% 10% 50% 10%
Total illegal 62% 77% 40% 65% 10% 65%
OF—Organic Fraction; BAU—Business As Usual
236 M. K. Koech and K. J. Munene

It is estimated that Nairobi City County receives at least 50% of waste collection
services while half of Nairobi residents do not completely receive waste collection
services. This equates to an approximate of about 1560 tonnes that remain uncol-
lected per day. Based on April 2009 CCN records, average CCN collection levels at
present are approximately 430 tons/day out of an average of 567 tons/day received
at Dandora in 2009. Weighbridge records at the Dandora dumpsite over the period
2006—end 2008 indicated an average 830 tons/day were disposed there prior to
2009. In Nairobi, there is an active and well-documented material recovery and recy-
cling sectors operating thus creating employment opportunities, especially among
the youth. Material recovery and recycling sector accounts for a large amount of the
generated but remains limited to about 300 tonnes per day that can be broken down
as follows: 100 t/day of paper (~18% of paper waste), 100 t/day of plastic (~20%
of plastic waste), 62 tonnes per day of metal (Most Valuable Metal is recovered),
and 2.4 tonnes of organics are composted (<1% of organic waste). It is unknown
how much organic waste is recovered for livestock feeding. Recycled glass volumes
appear to be on the decline at approximately 50 tonnes per day.

6 Impact of CE on GDP

In any given economy, an emergence of a business opportunity is greatly consid-

ered as a chance to accelerate the economic growth. Circular economy is presenting
numerous opportunities to the Kenyan economy through improvement of its produc-
tion and consumption patterns, cost savings, and creation of employment and room
for technological advancement through innovation. Economic growth is the ability of
economy to produce products and services for society and measured in terms of Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) and Gross National Product (GNP) indicators. According
to …, it is estimated that the Kenyan economy will achieve a double digit growth by
shifting from linear economy to circular economy. The country’s transition to GE will
bring about huge benefits such as industrial innovation, changes in production and
manufacturing processes, and other industrial technological advancement. Industrial
technological advancement may ring up to 3% of economic productivity per year in
the country. The circular economy will lead to less exploitation of natural resources
and increase opportunities in waste recycling and reusing. Recycling and reusing
waste will increase household savings and minimize the expense due to availability
to transform waste into more desirable products thus boosting the GDP.
In the near future, it is estimated that unemployment in developing nations will
significantly decrease. Studies reveal that the implementation of circular economy
strategies by developing nations will result in creation of several job opportunities.
Implementation of circular economy concepts by developing nations will also change
the production and consumption patterns of both small- and large-scale enterprise
through the adoption of new technologies of production and resource conserva-
tion. Adoption of sustainable production and consumption patterns by manufactur-
ing industries will lead to creation of high-quality products thus also raising their
Circular Economy in Kenya 237

consumption levels through creation of new markets. Foreign investors and interna-
tional financial lending institutions will be attracted to invest in developing countries
that have adopted circular economy concepts thus boosting their economic growth.
According to Ellen MacArthur Foundation, industries with fast-moving consumer
goods, the net material cost savings might be about 700 billion dollars globally. Inno-
vations by replacing usual, one-way goods with those, that are “circular by design”
and creating the logistical facilities for circular network systems can give extra pos-
sibilities for economies and companies to use new ideas at their businesses and, thus,
generate new channels of revenues. The advantages may include such aspects as
higher labor and energy effectiveness, better technological development, redesigned
materials, and bigger profits opportunities. Besides economical and business oppor-
tunities, the circular economy gives the possibility to improve the environment. The
circular economy promises to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 48% by 2030 and
by 83% by 2050 in Europe and also reduces 7.4 million tonnes of greenhouse gas
emissions by not letting organic waste permeate into landfills.
A circular economy development path could result in a reduction of primary
material consumption (measured by car and construction materials, real estate land,
synthetic fertiliser, pesticides, agricultural water use, fuels, and non-renewable elec-
tricity) by 32% by 2030 and 53% by 2050, compared with today (SUN Institute
2015). In addition, primary material consumption could be reduced by 32% by 2030
and by 53% by 2050 compared with today’s indexes. Primary materials may include
construction materials, pesticides, fuel, real estate land, and others. Moreover, we
have to take into consideration the land degradation and that it costs billions of dol-
lars annually. By moving more biological materials with composting, the circular
economy will make the necessity for replenishment with additional nutrients much
more less. Organic waste, which is used systematically, can help regenerate the soil
and reduce the use of chemical fertilizers to 2–7 times comparing with today. The
households could reduce the costs by 16% by 2030, as circular economy is con-
trolling the externalities, which involve pollution of water and air, climate change,
land use, and the release of toxic substances, (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015).
Circular Economy Opportunities in Business Profitability is one of the main goals
of the companies.
The circular economy could help individual businesses achieve the lower rates
of input costs in their production and open the new profit streams. There are some
ways on how to do it: Beer production demands input costs as water, grains, yeast,
and energy. Usually, the used materials are thrown away, but what if the company
starts to sell the used brewer’s grains. It can help to gain USD 1.90 per hectoliter of
beer which was produced, which leads to capturing the millions as a profit. Another
example could be the reduction of costs of mobile phones remanufacturing. Remanu-
facturing expenses can be less in 50%. In this case, the mobile industry needs to offer
the motivation to return the phones and to improve the reverse cycle. The high-end
washing machines could be leased to consumers instead of selling it. Then wash-
ing machines will be affordable for most households; customers would save about
third per wash cycle, and the producers would earn a third more in profits, but gain-
ing money for leasing. The circular economy concept is also applicable to clothes
238 M. K. Koech and K. J. Munene

industry. Clothes manufacturers can collect worn pieces of clothes to produce new
items, which reduce the costs of input. Such concept is already used by many compa-
nies. The circular economy can give companies the opportunity to be independent of
changeable raw material prices, as the transition to circular path involves the usage
of more remanufactured materials and less virgin, which eliminates the raw material
price dependency and makes the enterprise more stable. Besides this, producers will
be less dependent from natural disasters or geopolitical situations, as decentralized
providers offer alternative sources of materials. Consequently, manufacturers are
confident in their supplies, and there is a lower risk of bankruptcy, (Timmermans
2015).
The green economy will also create the demand for new business services. With the
new system of doing economy, there would be needed such services as collection and
reverse logistics organizations, that would support products to enter the new system,
sales platforms, that will improve the utilization of the goods, remanufacturing,
and repairing companies, and that would give the new life to products. Customers
will be engaged in new ways. The circular economy gives the solutions to firms
how to interact with clients on the longer terms. As the life-time of the products
is increased, there will be more touch points with the customers, which will bring
the better satisfaction both to clients and companies, (Ellen MacArthur Foundation
2015). Further, the circular business models will be studied and discussed, which
will help to get the full understanding of circular economy adoption for the company
level.

7 Conclusions

Currently, across the globe, the concept of circular economy is gaining recognition
and several countries have developed policies to ensure its successful implementa-
tion. Many countries are aiming to replace the “end-of-life” concept with circular
economy which is a more sustainable means of development. The circular economy
aims at encouraging reusing, recycling, and recovering of materials in the produc-
tion process assumed to be waste and then use them as raw materials to create new
products, by-products, and services. The circular economy will help to reduce envi-
ronmental pollution and damage by ensuring sustainable management of waste. The
circular economy operates at micro-levels of raw materials extraction and production
with the objective of enhancing the accomplishment sustainable development. The
circular economy will help to improve environmental quality while simultaneously
enhancing economic prosperity and social equity to the current and future gener-
ations. Government, policy makers, business leaders, and consumers must realize
that in order to ensure there is continued wealth creation and economic growth, new
industrial models that depend less on primary energy and inputs must be adopted. The
circular economy concepts must act as drivers of the twenty-first century industrial
revolution by promoting innovations and industrial technological advancements.
Circular Economy in Kenya 239

References

C. (2018, June 06). Kenyan manufacturers launch plastic bottle recycling initiative—Capital
Business. Retrieved from https://www.capitalfm.co.ke/business/2018/06/kenyan-manufacturers-
launch-plastic-bottle-recycling-initiative/.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2015). Towards the Circular Economy: Accelerating the scale-
up. Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_ENV_TowardsCircularEconomy_
Report_2014.pdf.
Kilonzo, E. (2014, June 14). Our small kitchen garden where we harvest in plenty.
Retrieved from https://www.nation.co.ke/business/seedsofgold/small-kitchen-garden-harvest-
plenty–/2301238-2348570-7odm07/index.html.
Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA). (2013). Kenya Economic Report
2013. Available from www.kippra.org/downloads/KenyaEconomicReport2013.pdf.
Matienzo, M. (n.d.). Thinking beyond coffee—A research essay on circular economy.
Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/31010612/Thinking_Beyond_Coffee_-_A_Research_
Essay_on_Circular_Economy.
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources. (2010). National Sustainable Waste Management
Policy: Waste Generation, Collection and Recovery in Kenya. National Sustainable Waste Man-
agement Policy: Waste Generation, Collection and Recovery in Kenya (pp. 1–41).
Muthoni, P. (2014). Stakeholder’s involvement in municipal solid waste management: A case study
for Nairobi City County–Kenya. Master’s Thesis, University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Available
from https://jyx.jyu.fi/dspace/handle/123456789/44288.
NEMA. (2016). A Circular Economy Solid Waste Management Approach for Urban Areas in
Kenya.
Ochieng, A. (2017, May 16). Kenya to build East & Central Africa’s largest solar-power plant
in Garissa. Retrieved from http://cleanleap.com/kenya-build-east-central-africa’s-largest-solar-
power-plant-garissa.
Plastic bags and the circular economy in Kenya. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://kenyacic.org/news/
plastic-bags-and-circular-economy-kenya
Roy, D. (n.d.). Kenya to build 10 MW waste-to-energy electricity plant. Retrieved from http://www.
africanreview.com/energy-a-power/power-generation/kenya-to-build-10mw-waste-to-energy-
electricity-plant.
Rutten, G. (2018, March 12). In Kenya, the circular economy modernizes small-scale farming.
Retrieved from https://www.greenbiz.com/article/kenya-circular-economy-modernizes-small-
scale-farming.
Timmermans, F. 2015. First Vice-President Timmermans’ and Vice-President Katainen’s opening
remarks at the presentation of the Circular Economy package. 2 December 2015. Transcript pub-
lished by the European Commission, Brussels https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-
15-5614_en.htm. Accessed 17 April 2017.
Circular Economy in Malaysia

P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

Abstract Circular economy is a concept that aims to improve resource efficiency

by minimizing resource consumption and waste generation. The implementation of
circular economy can be conducted at three levels: in single enterprise or group of
enterprises, in a group of collocated firms and at the city or municipal level. Currently,
implementation of circular economy in Malaysia is at firm level. There is a lack of
legal framework on the implementation of circular economy in Malaysia. However,
there are certain sections and regulations in Environmental Quality Act 1974, Solid
Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 and in Environmental Quality
(Scheduled Waste) Regulation 2005, respectively, that promote resource circulation.
Nationwide initiatives taken to promote circular economy are inclusion of integra-
tion of sustainable production and consumption, reduction of 40% of greenhouse
gas emissions intensity from GDP compared to 2005 level and 22% of recycling of
MSW, in Eleventh Malaysian Plan. Additionally, SWCorp has launched SWCorp
Strategic Plan to promote sustainable solid waste management services, and CIDB
has initiated CITP that has a target of incorporating 20% of recycled construction
and demolition waste (tonnage) by year 2020 from baseline of 2016. Also, there are
guidelines on coprocessing and proposals on establishment of industrial ecology by
DOE. A few case studies show implementation of circular economy in manufac-
turing industries. The benefits of these implementations were reduction in energy
and resource consumption, reduction in waste generation, protection of environment
and human health, cost savings by reusing or recycling waste and additional profit
gains by selling waste to potential buyers. Several opportunities of sustainable waste
management and resource circulation have been highlighted in this chapter such as
manufacturing of bioproducts and butanol from biomass to coprocessing between
ELVs and construction industry. To successfully implement circular economy, top-
down and bottom-up approach is required, and currently, Malaysia does not have
explicit top-down and bottom-up approaches.

P. Agamuthu (B) · S. B. Mehran

University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
e-mail: profagamuthu@gmail.com

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 241

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_13
242 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

1 Introduction

Circular economy (CE) or the closed-loop economy is a concept that aims to improve
resource efficiency by slowing, closing and narrowing material and energy loops to
minimize overall resource and energy input and as well as waste generation (Ghis-
ellini et al. 2016). It is suggested that circular economy can be implemented at
three levels: in single enterprise or a group of enterprises, in a group of collocated
firms and at city or municipal level. At the first level, resource and energy efficiency
are achieved by implementation of cleaner production in a single enterprise or in
a group of enterprises. To implement CE at the second level, the establishment of
eco-industrial parks or industrial symbiosis is required by collocating a group of
firms, e.g. Kalundborg, Denmark. The outcome is the enhancement of collective
energy and resource efficiency by sharing a certain stream of energy and resources.
Third level, so far mainly found in China, requires whole municipal area or city that
engages in recycling and interconnected processes with the help of economic and
administrative incentives (Mathews and Tan 2011).
Conceptually, circular economy is currently being promoted by European Union
and other nations such as Germany, France, Canada, China and Japan (Korhonen
et al. 2018). In Asia, China and Japan are the two countries that have institutional-
ized circular economy. In 2008, China enacted the legislation on circular economy
which came into effect the following year, 2009. Unlike most countries in the world,
circular economy is not incorporated in environmental policy in China, but it is
rather in the national development and economic policy. In the world, China is the
first country to incorporate circular economy in the national strategy of economic and
social development; whereas, Japan, USA and Germany, have incorporated circular
economy in environmental and waste management policies (Ghisellini et al. 2016).
China is the only country at present, where the top-down approach (through insti-
tutionalization) is being complimented by a bottom-up approach (private initiatives
taken at firm levels) to implement circular economy.
Circular economy in Malaysia is still an unofficial long-term goal as the legal
framework is lacking. But there have been sporadic practices of cleaner produc-
tion at firm levels in Malaysia. Legal framework for waste management, in the
light of circular economy, is still in its early stages as only in 2007, and Solid
Waste Management (SWM) Act was introduced in Malaysia (Fauziah and Aga-
muthu 2012). In this SWM Act, main emphasis has been given on segregation at
source and recycling in municipal solid waste. On the contrary, the practice of 3R
and/or decoupling of resource consumption from economic development is not part
of the legislation on hazardous waste in Malaysia. However, there are proposals
and programs for initiation of industrial ecology and eco-waste parks in government
agencies like Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia and Malaysian Invest-
ment Development Authority (MIDA), respectively. There have also been practices
of waste exchange and reuse of hazardous waste in Malaysia, but it is not widely
practised among industries. DOE Malaysia has also been promoting coprocessing,
especially in cement manufacturing plants since May 2015. All nine cement plants
Circular Economy in Malaysia 243

in Malaysia are practicing coprocessing at present. Yet, no clear pattern of reduction

in the generation of hazardous waste from industries was observed in the last seven
years.
The terminology used for waste exchange by DOE is coprocessing. Coprocessing
is defined as waste utilization as raw material or as energy source or both in a
manufacturing process. Therefore, the practice of waste exchange in this chapter
will be mentioned as coprocessing. Lastly, hazardous waste is referred as scheduled
waste in Malaysia. Hence, the hazardous waste will also be described as scheduled
waste from here on.
In this chapter, environmental legislations and national plan are explained that
may promote circular economy indirectly. Then, research models proposed by DOE
and Ministry of Automotive Association are discussed, followed by case studies of
implementation of circular economy at enterprise level. Afterwards, the practice of
coprocessing and factors promoting and inhibiting the successful implementation of
circular economy are discussed. At the end, the benefits of implementation of circular
economy are listed, followed by international collaborations for implementation of
circular economy.

2 Legislations

The environmental protection law in Malaysia was introduced in 1974 as Environ-

mental Quality Act (EQA) 1974 (Department of Environment 2018a). Until now, a
total of 31 regulations and orders on environmental protection have been ratified since
1974. The initial environmental legislations were focused on protecting environment
from pollution originating from palm oil and rubber industry. Then, scheduled waste
started to become a major problem, and in 1989 regulation on scheduled waste
was enacted. However, after full amendment on 1989 scheduled waste regulation,
updated regulations on scheduled waste were passed as legislation in 2005 (Isa 2012).
Then in 2007, a second act was introduced on solid waste management pertaining to
municipal solid waste. Interestingly, even though Malaysia has several legislations
on protecting the environment from pollution, one can contravene it after acquiring
a licence. A list of legislations on environmental protection and resource circulation
is shown in Fig. 1.
Unlike other Asian countries, i.e. China, Japan and Malaysia do not have any
legislation specifically on circular economy. Nevertheless, there are some sections
in two environmental acts and in Scheduled Waste Regulation that promote 3R
(reduce/reuse, recycle, recover) and can establish the foundation for implementation
of circular economy (Table 1). The regulation 7 in Environmental Quality (Sched-
uled Waste) Regulation 2005 is especially being administered by DOE to promote
reuse and recycling of scheduled waste generated from industries. Kualiti Alam is
the only licenced scheduled waste management company in peninsula Malaysia that
treats and disposes off hazardous waste. But the special management of scheduled
waste in this regulation refers to waste management by the unlicenced facilities,
244 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

Fig. 1 Malaysian legislations related to environmental protection and resource circulation

Table 1 Regulations and sections of Malaysian environmental law that promote resource
circulation
Legislations Regulation/section/subsection Description
Environmental Quality Act Section 21 (Power to specify Minister may set the limits on
1974 conditions of emission, the emission, discharge or
discharge, etc.) deposit of pollution,
hazardous material or waste
Section 30A (Power to Minister may prescribe a
control use of substance and substance to be reduced,
product and to state recycled, reused or a product
environmental labelling) to contain a minimum
percentage of recycled
substance
Section 51 (Regulations) Minister may make
regulations that are in
accordance to Environmental
Quality Act 1974
Environmental Quality Regulation 7 (Application Waste generator can apply for
(Scheduled Waste) for special management of their scheduled waste treated,
Regulation 2005 scheduled wastes) disposed of or recovered in
premises or facilities other
than prescribed premises or
facilities
Solid Waste and Public Section 101 (Reduction, Minister may require
Cleansing Management Act reuse and recycling of reduction, reuse and recycling
2007 controlled solid waste) of controlled solid waste
Section 102 (Take back Minister may introduce
system and deposit refund extended producer
system) responsibility
Source Department of Environment (2018a, b)
Circular Economy in Malaysia 245

including the industry itself. Under this regulation, industries have more control over
the management of their waste as they can opt for reuse and recycling of sched-
uled waste, instead of sending it to prescribed facility for final disposal. A detailed
discussion on the special management of scheduled waste is elucidated in the dis-
cussion and analysis section. Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act,
2007 is directed towards the management of municipal solid waste, construction and
demolition waste, agricultural waste, etc. There are sections in the Solid Waste Act
that promote resource circulation by implementation of 3R and promote extended
producer responsibility. Lastly, Environmental Quality Act 1974 also presents the
legal binding of protecting environment from the release or generation of pollutants
and waste, respectively. Moreover, section 30A in EQA 1974 also gives the power
to the Minister to prescribe the practice of 3R (reduce, reuse and recycle) and/or
reduce the consumption of raw material by using the recycled material. Neverthe-
less, section 30A cannot be enforced until the Minister, after consultation, approves
such practices. Hence, no binding legislations related to circular economy have been
introduced into the Malaysian environmental law.
Malaysia launched its latest national plan, Eleventh Malaysian Plan, from year
2016 to 2020. In this national plan, a great emphasis has been given on the adaptation
of sustainable consumption and production. The national target of MSW recycling
is 22% by the end of Eleventh Malaysian Plan. To completely implement sustain-
able consumption and production, dependency on unrenewable energy sources must
decrease while at the same time dependency on renewable energy sources must
increase. Malaysia regards wind, geothermal and ocean energy sources as the poten-
tial sources. Hence, current national plan aims at research and development on renew-
able energy sources. The national target of installation of renewable energy capacity
is 2080 MW, and consequently, aims at 40% reduction in GHGs emission inten-
sity from gross domestic product (GDP) in comparison with 2005 level. Under the
umbrella of Eleventh Malaysian Plan, sustainable consumption and production will
be achieved by following the strategies that focus on renewable energy and holistic
waste management. Before the introduction of current national plan, waste manage-
ment had been implemented independently by several agencies such as Department
of Environment for scheduled waste, Solid Waste Management and Cleansing Cor-
poration (SWCorp) for municipal solid waste, construction and demolition waste and
others. Since the target is to formulate a holistic approach towards waste manage-
ment including all types of wastes: agriculture, solid, sewage, construction, mining,
radioactive and scheduled waste; it is suggested that these agencies would be work-
ing together on a shared platform for the successful enforcement of holistic waste
management. Moreover, investments on “waste as resource” are planned to increase
so that waste could be recycled, reused, reclaimed instead of current method of dis-
posal at landfills (Eleventh Malaysian Plan 2018). It is worth noting that Malaysia has
recycling target for MSW only. There are no targets or goals for other types of waste,
especially related to hazardous or non-hazardous waste generated from industries.
However, the consensus among government agencies is that the larger goal of waste
management is to move towards zero waste nation. So, the recycling target for MSW
is only the beginning.
246 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

In 2009, at the 15th Conference of Parties in Copenhagen, Denmark, Malaysia,

voluntarily agreed upon reduction in the emission intensity of GDP by up to 40%
by 2020 from 2005 level, and this has been added in the Eleventh Malaysian Plan.
Furthermore, the goal of sustainable production and consumption is also aligned with
12th Sustainable Development Goal “Responsible Consumption and Production” as
it was incorporated in the national plan. Another international treaty that Malaysia
enacted is Basel Convention. There are three main objectives of Basel Convention.
Firstly, it aims to reduce hazardous waste generation, in terms of quantity and quality
of the hazardousness. Secondly, Basel Convention intends to reduce the movement
of hazardous waste internationally, which thus leads to its third objective which
is to dispose the hazardous wastes in proximity to the source of the generation of
hazardous wastes. Malaysia incorporated Basel Convention in their Scheduled Waste
Regulation 2005 to stop the transboundary movement (Isa 2012).
Solid Waste Cooperation (SWCorp) launched the SWCorp Strategic Plan
2014–2020 for the promotion of sustainable solid waste management services in
accordance with government’s effort for it. This plan is part of the planning of
SWCorp to strengthen the solid waste management services and aims towards a
clean nation by 2020 through implementation of several strategies. These strategies
cover a broad range of aspects relating to public awareness (including awareness on
waste to wealth and waste to energy), change in behaviour, sustainability, improving
solid waste management facilities and technologies, enforcement of existing legisla-
tions and policies, research and development (Mohr and Manaf 2017). This plan also
realizes the fact that sustainable solid waste management will only be possible by
implementation of circular economy; therefore, all the strategies must work towards
the long-term goal of zero waste nation.
When it comes to construction and demolition waste in Malaysia, although there
are no legal requirements in practicing resource circulation, a program titled “Con-
struction Industry Transformation Program (CITP)” was initiated by Construction
Industry Development Board (CIDB). Under CITP, sustainable development is aimed
through several initiatives. The initiative related to resource circulation is “Reduce
irresponsible waste during construction”, and the target is to utilize 20% of recycled
construction and demolition waste (tonnage) by year 2020 from the baseline of 2016
(CITP 2018).
In conclusion, Malaysia is currently lacking an official top-down approach to
implement circular economy or resource circulation, unlike China and Japan. Despite
the absence of direct legislations on circular economy, the need for resource circu-
lation and sustainable waste management has been realized among the government
agencies. Therefore, several initiatives have been taken, and targets have been set
until year 2020. Nevertheless, in the absence of explicit regulatory framework on
circular economy, becoming a zero waste nation would be nearly impossible for
Malaysia.
Circular Economy in Malaysia 247

3 Research Models

The research models described in this section are based on the proposal of the
Department of Environment (DOE) on industrial ecology and the proposal of the
Malaysian Automotive Association on processing of End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs).
These research models do not represent the basis of CE implementation for all sec-
tors. But, they do provide the realization among Malaysian authorities on potential
opportunities in waste to wealth and waste to energy alternatives.
DOE released guidelines on coprocessing of scheduled waste in cement industry
on 25 May 2015. A list of scheduled wastes that can be used as raw material or additive
is given in the guidelines. Due to Malaysia’s heavy reliance on coal-fired power plants,
the fly ash and bottom ash are seen as potential raw material. Based on the category
of scheduled waste, fly ash and bottom ash, in addition to dross, slag and clinker,
are generally the highest amount of waste generated in Malaysia annually. In 2016,
44.2% of total scheduled waste generated was ash/dross/slag/clinker. Moreover, the
second highest amount of scheduled waste generated in Malaysia is gypsum (20.2%),
followed by heavy metal sludge (13.61%). Therefore, there is a huge potential for
coprocessing in cement industry. The list of scheduled wastes required as alternative
raw material or additive is given in Table 2. In the guidelines, a criterion is given
for selecting the scheduled waste as raw material alternative, additive or fuel source.
Depending on the demand, scheduled wastes can be added to different stages of
cement manufacturing process (Fig. 2).
Furthermore, DOE is also promoting industrial ecology and a proposal of estab-
lishment of industrial ecology of two types of waste, namely abandoned vehicle and
bleached earth are discussed here. In bleached earth management, bleaching earth
factory, palm oil mill and acetylene manufacturing plant are proposed to exchange the
waste (Fig. 3). Bleached earth from bleaching earth factory will be utilized by palm
oil mill, and spent bleached earth will be transferred to soil conditioner; whereas,
residue gypsum waste will be available for coprocessing as well for soil conditioner.
Calcium hydroxide from acetylene manufacturing plant will be utilized by bleaching
earth factory in neutralization process.

Table 2 List of scheduled waste generated in Malaysia and its potential use in cement industry
Type of scheduled waste Potential usage
Castoff copper slag Alternative raw material
Spent pot linings
Castoff garnets
Sludges containing one or more metals: lead, chromium, nickel,
copper, zinc, aluminium, tin, cadmium, vanadium and beryllium
Fluoride containing sludges
Fly ash from coal-based power plant Cement additive
Gypsum from power plant
Gypsum from chemical plant
248 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

Fig. 2 Processes where scheduled waste can be utilized in cement manufacturing process

Fig. 3 DOE proposal of industrial ecology for bleached earth plant

In the proposal for abandoned car management, steel manufacturing industry and
energy recovery facility are the main facilities that will utilize potential resources
from metal recovery and energy recovery from shredded automotive residue (Fig. 4).
First abandoned cars will undergo shredding, then plastic and metal will be sepa-
rated. At this stage, iron will be utilized by steel manufacturing plant, and plastic
will be transferred to plastic recovery recycle facility. Shredded automotive residue

Fig. 4 DOE proposal of industrial ecology for abandoned vehicles

Circular Economy in Malaysia 249

Fig. 5 Proposal of ELVs management (Wong et al. 2018)

will be used for energy recovery. On the other hand, electric arc furnace dust from
steel manufacturing plant and ash from energy recovery plant will be available for
coprocessing to the requisite industry.
Lastly, a more in-depth proposal was presented by the Malaysian Automotive
Association for processing End-of-Life Vehicles (ELV) that is also in line with the
proposal of industrial ecology by DOE (Fig. 5). In the proposal of Malaysian Auto-
motive Association, deregistration of vehicles ought to be performed before the dis-
mantling of ELVs. The next step is to acquire the Certificate of Destruction (COD)
and to pay depending on the value of fixed scrap imposed by ELV collectors. After
the necessary paperwork, under the monitoring of local government (Environmen-
tal and Waste Disposals), the procedures starting from disassembling to discarding
will be performed by involving parties, such as corporations of vehicle dismantling,
parts remanufacturing companies, recycling firms, shredding companies and waste
disposing organizations. This is where the implementation of industrial ecology will
take place by the participation of several parties, and waste will be incorporated
as resource and/or energy resource in several processes depending on the relevant
industries. The components of ELVs after dismantling will be reused (that are usable)
by vendors and remanufacturers, and ELVs after shredding will be processed and
recycled in form of new products (Wong et al. 2018).
250 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

The industrial eco park of ELVs management also has the potential of creating
industrial symbiosis with construction industries. The proposed concept outlining
the ELV processing from automotive to the construction industry revealed the fol-
lowing opportunities of waste exchange. Since ELV processes involve dismantling
and shredding, the following materials can be utilized by construction industry after
dismantling stage; seats, carpet, plastics and tyres, all of which can be recycled.
Whereas, the second stage of ELV processes is shredding. There are two types of
shredding processes that are employed, i.e. light and heavy shredding. Depending
on the type of shredding carried out, coprocessing can be achieved by following
activities: production of raw materials from smelting and refining, creating smelted
products from aluminium scraps and recycling (non-metallic residue treatment). The
end products of coprocessing will be insulation materials, flooring materials, con-
crete blocks, foundation, roof tiles, aluminium cladding, composite panels, structural
glazing, container buildings, partition walls, windows and interior furniture (Wong
et al. 2018).

4 Case Studies

The case studies demonstrated here are based on the implementation of closed-loop
initiatives or cleaner production at the enterprise level. However, the implementation
of closed-loop initiatives at each enterprise level has resulted in industrial cascade
of waste transfer. Hence, instead of sending waste to landfill for final disposal, the
waste was sent to respective companies for utilization of waste as resource.

4.1 Oleochemical Processing Plant

As evident in the Eleventh Malaysian Plan, there is a growing realization of sustain-

able development by balancing the economic and industrial growth in conjunction
with environmental preservation and protection, as well as efficient utilization of
energy sources. The expansion of oleochemical industries in Malaysia has been con-
tributed by several factors such as the availability of raw materials (palm oil), the
fluctuations in petroleum prices, regular animal diseases (which made tallow-based
fats unreliable) and the high demand for downstream products such as fatty acids,
fatty alcohols and glycerine. Therefore, the expansion of industry has resulted in
manufacturing of additional products, i.e. soap noodles, esters, fatty alcohols, oleic
acid, etc. Consequently, the expansion of oleochemical industry and the production of
downstream products have led to complex waste generation. Wastes generated from
oleochemical industry are filter cake, biological sludge, steam condensate, spent
nickel catalyst, glycerine pitch, fatty acids residue, wastewater and flue gas.
Circular Economy in Malaysia 251

Fig. 6 Processes involved in oleochemical processing plant (Agamuthu 2001)

An example of complex waste generated from oleochemical industry is given here

and is based on the source (Agamuthu 2001). The Palm-Oleo Sdn. Bhd. plant pro-
cessed 364 metric tons of oil daily and in result produced a total of 20 metric tonnes
of waste. There were multiple waste streams due to the extensive manufacturing pro-
cesses (Fig. 6). The oil pre-treatment process generated 2.2 tonnes of spent bleaching
earth daily, and after the pre-treatment the oil would go through fat splitting process.
Fatty acids from fat splitting process then went through four different processes
separately such as lipofractionation, distillation, hydrogenation and fractionation.
While residue fatty acid was generated from distillation and fractionation process,
0.17 tonnes spent nickel catalyst was generated from hydrogenation process. Flaking
and beading process also resulted in the generation of fatty acid waste. A total of
14.2 tonnes of residue fatty acid was generated from the above-mentioned processes.
The pre-treatment of sweetwater generated 0.78 tonnes of filter cake waste. From
crude glycerine distillation and bleaching plant, 0.49 tonnes of glycerine pitch and
1.3 tonnes of spent activated carbon were generated, respectively. Wastewater was
also produced from all the processes, and a total of 0.62 tonnes of wastewater sludge
was generated from the treatment of wastewater. The only scheduled waste generated
from manufacturing processes was spent nickel catalyst.
From the oil pre-treatment process, spent bleaching earth was treated by oil extrac-
tion process using hexane to remove the oil from the earth material. After the analysis,
252 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

the ratio of 1:3 (wt:vol) of spent earth to hexane was found to be optimum ratio for oil
extraction. Whereas, from distillation and fractionation process, residue fatty acids
were recycled back in fat splitting plant to produce sweetwater and split residue
fatty acids. While glycerine was manufactured from sweetwater, split residue fatty
acids went through hydrogenation and distillation processes to produce 80% of fatty
acids and 20% of fatty acid pitch that were sold. Research on methods of managing
spent nickel catalyst waste revealed the possibility of reuse of spent nickel catalyst.
Therefore, spent nickel catalyst was reused back in the hydrogenation process by
taking 15 kg of spent nickel and 5 kg of virgin nickel. Lastly, spent activated car-
bon was reused for treated wastewater bleaching process. Due to reuse, recycling
and reclaiming, the demand for virgin raw materials by the production plant and the
quantity of total waste generated were reduced. It also resulted in total savings of
RM 1 million a year. After the findings of waste audit and research, the execution of
cleaner production led to the practice of 4R (reduce, reuse, recycle, reclaim).

4.2 Acetylene Plant

This Malaysian case study is a good example of industrial cascade and is based on the
source (Agamuthu 2001). An acetylene production plant at Sitt Tatt Industrial Gases
that produced 2400 m3 of acetylene from 900 kg of calcium carbide and 6000 L
of water daily (Fig. 7). The by-product of acetylene production was generation of
carbide sludge which was in slurry form with pH of 12–13. DOE limit of pH is
6–9 and anything below or above this range is considered scheduled waste. So,
approximately 3800–4200 tonnes of scheduled waste in the form of carbide sludge
were being generated annually. Before the implementation of closed-loop initiative,

Fig. 7 Mass balance of acetylene manufacturing plant at Sitt Tatt Industrial Gases before the
implementation of closed-loop initiative
Circular Economy in Malaysia 253

ponding system was used for sludge treatment. After the treatment, the sludge was
sent for final disposal at landfill. However, the treatment of sludge in ponding system
turned out to be inefficient as it required greater space for expansion and was an
environmental hazard due to potential health hazard to acetylene plant workers. The
situation used to get worse in rainy days as sludge would overflow and pollute the
surrounding monsoon drains resulting in odour problems.
For reducing waste generation, vacuum filtration was deployed to extract water
from the sludge; whereas, flocculation technology was implemented to render carbide
slurry as resource for potential buyers. Therefore, by investing RM 1 million in car-
bide sludge waste treatment and recovery facility, acetylene manufacturing company
could save a total of RM 500,000 per year by recycling water and avoiding landfill
charges (RM 300,000 by recycling water and RM 200,000 by avoiding landfilling).
Moreover, medical expenses were also avoided by 20% (RM 31,000 per year) due to
the elimination of health hazards by termination of ponding system for carbide sludge
treatment. The treated carbide sludge was sold at RM 1,200 per tonne to another cos-
metic manufacturing company that required basic material for neutralization. Hence,
it resulted in the income of RM 1 million annually. Therefore, total waste generation
was minimized by adopting cleaner technology and cascading waste between two
manufacturing industries. Moreover, the implementation of cleaner technology also
reduced the intake of freshwater for manufacturing processes.

4.3 Tex Cycle Sdn. Bhd.

Tex Cycle Sdn. Bhd. comes under the Tex Cycle Technology Berhad which is an
investment firm for several other companies as well. Tex Cycle Sdn. Bhd. is an ISO
14001 certified company that recycles and recovers scheduled waste in Malaysia.
It collects contaminated used rags, wipes, gloves and containers/drums, etc., from
various companies. Moreover, Tex Cycle also converts damaged materials into safe
recyclable products that are suitable for reuse. It has over 1000 customers from all
over Malaysia. The following case study is based on the source (Tex Cycle, n.d.).
Scheduled waste is transported from waste generator to Tex Cycle; then the sched-
uled waste is weighed and sorted out depending on the type. Afterwards, in the
recycling section, contaminated rags/wipes/gloves are washed in industrial washing
machines and dried. Then, they are sent to the finishing section where they are folded
and packed. From the finishing section, washed materials such as rags, wipes, gloves
are either sent back to respective companies for reusing, or sent to recyclers (cleaned
rubber material is sent to rubber recyclers) or converted into new coproducts. On the
other hand, contaminated containers/drums are washed in the triple rinse washing
system and after drying are either sent back to respective companies or to respective
recyclers. At the end of the cleaning processes, two types of waste are generated:
damaged materials and wastewater. The complete cycle of recycling is shown in
Fig. 8.
254 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

Fig. 8 Flow diagram of processes related to recycling of scheduled waste at Tex Cycle Sdn. Bhd.

Raw wastewater is treated on-site. The main steps in wastewater treatment are
electro-coagulation, ozone diffusion (applied in two separated steps) and treatment
with UV light, activated carbon as well as reverse osmosis process (Fig. 9). Hence,
wastewater is recycled and is reused for the washing step again. Whereas, damaged
materials (rags/wipes, etc.) after washing are converted into coproducts such as shoe
covers, chemical spillage soak-ups, wipes and floor mats.
The annual savings from reducing freshwater intake by recycling wastewater are
RM 63,000. Energy input is also reduced by using solar energy in heating water
for washing and for sludge treatment (lime is also added to sludge to reduce the
drying time). Additionally, coproducts like Tex Cycle (TC) sorbent bags, wipes are
also rented by industries. Their durability is higher than other wipes, hence they last
longer. Besides, waste materials are received and additional profit is also gained by
Tex Cycle by selling these coproducts to other recyclers.

4.4 Building Construction at University Technology Petronas

Usually, the management of construction and demolition (C&D) waste in Malaysia

involves illegal dumping at roadsides; whereas, a minimal quantity of C&D waste
is disposed at landfill. Furthermore, the composition of C&D waste generated in
Malaysia is shown in Fig. 10. Pertaining to C&D waste, a three-storey office build-
Circular Economy in Malaysia 255

Fig. 9 Wastewater treatment at Tex Cycle Sdn. Bhd

256 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

ing was being constructed in the campus of University Technology Petronas that is
located in Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia.
This case study, based on the source (Umar et al. 2016), concerns a construction
site comprised of 21,225 m2 . The methods taken to reduce operational waste genera-
tion were just-in-time approach, site assessment and adequate and secured storage of
materials. The construction material was ordered only when it was required; there-
fore, waste generation from storage of materials for long period of time was avoided.
Continuous supervision and assessment of construction site throughout construction
further reduced the waste generated as construction activities were supervised. An
appropriate and secure storage site was selected on-site to store glass, plasterboards,
etc. During construction, recovery of timber offcuts for creating jack studs, nog-
gins and blocking was executed by place makers; whereas, supplier took drainage,
plumbing and polystyrene offcuts (resulting from sheathing). Polystyrene offcuts
were utilized for recycling.
In addition to the measures taken to avoid waste generation during construction
activities, C&D waste generated was recycled and reused (Table 3). Three types
of waste were generated from construction of three-storey building, namely timber
(74 truck load), metal scraps (5 truck load) and domestic waste (28 truck load).
Timber and metal scraps were reused. Hence, 73% of C&D waste was recycled or
reused. Assortment of antiseptic wood waste was performed, followed by shredding
into woodchips. The potential utilization of these woodchips can be in the form
of producing compost and animal bedding, or manufacturing of particleboard, or
application as biofilter medium. This is quite an achievement in itself as the general
practice of C&W waste management is either illegal dumping or disposal at landfill.

Concrete and
Aggregate, 65.8

Soil, 27

Wood, 5
PlasƟc and Packaging
Materials, 0.05
Roofing Materials , Brick and Blocks,
0.2 Metal Products, 1 1.6

Fig. 10 Composition of construction and demolition waste in Malaysia (Begum et al. 2007)
Circular Economy in Malaysia 257

Table 3 Management of
Type of construction and demolition Measure taken
construction and demolition
waste generated
waste generated from
construction site at UTP, During construction
Perak, Malaysia (Umar et al. Timber offcuts Reclaimed
2016)
Plumbing and drainage offcuts Taken back by supplier
Polystyrene offcuts Recycled
At the end of construction
Timber Recycled/reused
Metal scraps Recycled/reused
Domestic waste Disposed at landfill

5 Discussion and Analysis

There are several reports released by government authorities that provide the latest
data on environmental performance. For instance, pollution inventory data including
scheduled waste generation is given in Environmental Quality Reports. Based on
the Environmental Quality Reports of the last eight years (2009–2016), it is evident
that scheduled waste in Malaysia has been managed by several methods such as by
prescribed activities that include final disposal in secure landfill or incineration, by
recovery and by special management. As mentioned in the legislation section above,
under regulation 7 of Environmental Quality (Scheduled Waste) Regulation 2005,
Department of Environment Malaysia has been promoting the special management
of scheduled waste. The special management referred to is directing the scheduled
waste towards unlicenced facilities especially for recycling and reuse. Moreover,
special management of scheduled waste by unprescribed facilities also practises
the treatment of hazardous waste to render it unhazardous and eventually disposed
at sanitary landfill. The management of scheduled waste by prescribed facilities is
strikingly less compared to other waste management options (Fig. 11).
Since 2010, approximately 50% of scheduled waste generated has been approved
contingently for handling under special management. Whereas, the second most
practiced approach is recovery of waste at local and foreign facilities. In 2016, 28%
of scheduled waste generated was reused after going through special management.
The amount of scheduled waste reused has been approximately above 20% for the
last seven years (2010–2016), except for year 2010 when it was 19.7% (Fig. 12).
Majority of the scheduled waste that is reused is fly ash and bottom ash generated by
industry and coal-fired power plant. While fly ash and bottom ash have been utilized
by cement manufacturing industries in Malaysia, other scheduled waste such as heavy
metal sludge, mineral sludge, gypsum, spent mixed oil, glue, contaminated active
carbon and petroleum by-products are reused back by the respective companies that
generate these scheduled wastes. On the other hand, the amount of scheduled waste
recovered at local and foreign facilities has been variable for the last eight years
(2009–2016). The highest amount of waste sent for recovery was 40.4% in 2009,
258 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

Annual Amount of Scheduled 3500000

On-site
3000000 Treatment &
2500000 Storage
Waste (MT)

Recovery at
2000000 local & foreign
1500000 faciliƟes
Special
1000000 Management
500000
Prescribed
0 FaciliƟes
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Years

Fig. 11 Management of scheduled waste generated in Malaysia annually from 2009 to 2016 (Envi-
ronmental Quality Report)

35
Scheduled Waste Reuse Percentage

30 30
30 28 28
27
25
25
20
20

15

10

0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Year

Fig. 12 Total percentage of scheduled waste reused under special management (Environmental
Quality Report)

and the lowest amount of waste sent for recovery was 15.5% in 2015 (Fig. 13).
In 2010, out of 1,206,568.31 metric tonnes of scheduled waste managed under the
special waste management, 50.34% was reused as raw material in industries and the
rest (49.64%) was emplaced at approved sanitary landfill. It is evident that even in
the absence of legislations for circular economy.
Eleventh Malaysian Plan, another government document, reported the success of
Tenth Malaysian Plan in implementation of 3R (reuse, reduce and recycle) program as
domestic recycling rate increased from 5.0 to 10.5% in just two years (2010–2012).
It was the result of intensified efforts in achieving the recycling targets of Tenth
Malaysian plan. Consequently in 2013, National Biomass Strategy 2020 was initi-
ated to abet waste to wealth initiatives by assessing the opportunities for developing
new industries in Malaysia that will yield high-value products (exportable) from agri-
cultural biomass waste. Currently, power is generated using palm oil biomass pellets.
Another outcome of the Tenth Malaysian plan was reduction in GHGs emission due
Circular Economy in Malaysia 259

45
Scheduled Waste Sent for Recovery 40
40
35 31
28 29
30 26
Percentage

25 21
19
20 16
15
10
5
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Years

Fig. 13 Total percentage of scheduled waste recovered (Environmental Quality Report)

to waste management initiatives taken. Since 2013, GHGs emission of 33.1 million t
CO2 eq and 4 million t CO2 eq were avoided by energy recovery from empty palm
oil fruit bunches and by activities involving paper recycling, respectively (Eleventh
Malaysian Plan 2018).
As highlighted in the Tenth Malaysian Plan, Malaysia generates the plethora of
biomass. There have been many studies by Malaysian scholars that propose sus-
tainable utilization of biomass waste for producing bioproducts to achieve circular
green economy. While palm oil industry continues to contribute to the gross national
income in Malaysia, a single tonne of crude palm oil results in nine tonnes of biomass.
Currently, local industries are focused on the production that attract subsidies, i.e.
bioenergy, feed-in-tariff, biogas, etc. Similarly, prevailing exploitation of biomass
also yields biofertilizer, pellets, dried long fibre and biogas. Thus, coproduction
from biomass is envisioned for bio-based products, polymers, pharmaceutical and
food ingredients, fine, specialty and platform chemicals, as well as bioenergy and
biofuel for sustainable production. Additionally, it will also reduce the dependency
on fossil fuel. The recovery of recyclable, high-value chemical such as levulinic acid,
electricity, metal, biofertilizer and fuel from urban or municipal solid waste could be
achieved due to prominent innovative biorefinery configurations from establishment
of integrated processes. Extracting only 5 wt% of levulinic acid from waste feedstock
increases the profitability by 1.5-fold, thus eradicating the requirement for subsidies
such as gate fees paid by local authority to waste processor (Sadhukhana et al. 2018).
Another source of biomass waste generation in Malaysia is organic food waste.
The daily generation of food waste in Malaysia is 15,000 tonnes, out of which
3000 tonnes are appropriate for consumption (Malaysians waste 2016). Such a quan-
tity corresponds to 1.5 million bags of 10 kg rice, which would be appropriate for
feeding 7.5 million people every day (The Bigger Battle, n.d.). This food waste not
only diminishes the chances of human consumption but also increases the pressure
on food production. If the current rate of food consumption and generation of food
waste is continued, then at least 70% of global food production needs to increase by
2050 (How to Feed, n.d.). Generally, the global trend has been such that the food
260 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

suppliers are the developing countries and consumers are the developed countries.
Therefore, to meet the expected demand of global population, projected to proliferate
by 34% in 2050, an investment of $83 billion in agriculture of emergent nations is
required yearly for the 32 years. Hence, policy making is the focal point for funding
resource-efficient technologies for the economy of developing nations (Sadhukhan
et al. 2018).
The transport sector in Malaysia contributes the most to global warming potential
(GWP). Yet, biofuel blending can reduce the impacts of transport sector on GWP.
While there is still time for conventionalizing the electric vehicle, provisional sup-
port for the research and development of biofuel could deaccelerate GWP impact of
transport sector. It can be achieved by crude palm oil (CPO) upgradation for manu-
facturing the drop-in biofuel in compliance with the Roundtable of Sustainable Palm
Oil (RSPO) standard and by modification of subsisting fermentation to get butanol.
The efficiency of butanol is higher than bioethanol and could be utilized 100% in
predominant engine, in addition to integration of gas clean-up technology in preva-
lent AD system for the production of compressed natural gas (CNG). However, the
ultimate emphasis must be on resource recovery from waste (RRfW), carbon diox-
ide reduction (CDR) and carbon capture and reuse (CCR) integrated biorefineries
for additional extraction of resources such that absolute recovery or reclamation is
achieved from waste (Sadhukhan et al. 2018).
Unlike European Union and Japan, Malaysia also does not have regulatory frame-
work for ELVs. However, a new proposal of procedural outline is unveiled for local
ELV recycling establishments as discussed earlier in the chapter. It is hoped that
the framework will provide an alternative in acquiring raw materials in an envi-
ronmentally sound manner and will increase resource circulation. Therefore, the
findings of the research can be used to develop a platform for coprocessing between
ELV recycling industry and construction manufacturing industry. Further research
on reusability and recyclability of product could offer many prospects for circular
economy in construction (Wong et al. 2018). A similar initiative has been proposed
by DOE for establishing industrial ecology around ELVs.
A significant contribution to the national economy and the development of neces-
sary infrastructure has been made by construction industry in Malaysia. Regrettably,
this important industry also produces one of the single largest waste streams in the
country. Segregation at source or practice of 3R, as well as disposal of C&D waste in
landfills is not widely practised by majority of the contractors. Additionally, correct
handling, storing and transportation of construction wastes are also the responsibil-
ities of the contractor. Yet, significant amount of C&D waste is generated due to
inadequate knowledge or experience of contractor, excessive purchasing of mate-
rials beyond requirement, inapt storage (resulting in damages to raw material) and
reworking. Absence of regulations and guidelines for construction industry and sub-
sequent enforcement contribute to the construction of waste generation (Ikau et al.
2016). At present, collection rate of C&D waste is 15%, whereas the remaining 85%
is left uncollected (Aiming for Zero 2015). On the other hand, a total of 851 illegal
dumpsites in Malaysia were identified by the roadside in 2015 (Mah et al. 2018).
However, despite the mismanagement of C&D waste, the current practice of disposal
Circular Economy in Malaysia 261

at open dumps or in landfills is not a sustainable mean of handling increasing C&D

waste (Fauziah and Agamuthu 2003) As mentioned earlier, a five-year plan named
CITP initiated by Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) targets 20%
recycling of construction waste and to also reduce the generation of irresponsible
waste because construction waste can be resold or recycled. For instance, bricks,
doors, lighting fixtures and stairway banisters can be resold; whereas, glass can be
recycled into fibreglass or used in place of sand for paving and asphalt can be reused
by turning it back into aggregate (Aiming for Zero 2015). Therefore, the only way
to sustainable management of construction waste in Malaysia is the implementation
of circular economy in construction industry via closed-loop initiatives, industrial
symbiosis or cascading.
Malaysian Investment Development Authority (MIDA) launched an incentive for
establishment of Waste Eco Park (WEP) in 2016. Conceptually, Waste Eco Park
encourages industries to recycle and/or recover waste, besides treatment activities
and targets sustainable waste management by encouraging corporations to invest
in facilities and infrastructure that will manage waste holistically as proposed in the
Eleventh Malaysian Plan. The functioning of Waste Eco Park will involve WEP devel-
opers: the party who will be responsible for the necessary infrastructure establishment
and will be main stakeholder for ensuring holistic waste management inside Waste
Eco Park, WEP managers; designated by WEP developer who will assure efficacious
coordination, execution and operation of Waste Eco Park and WEP operators; who
will partake in holistic waste management and realize national target of reduction in
waste disposal, by promoting recovery and increasing recycling of waste, in addition
to sustenance of waste management ecosystem (MIDA 2018). Unfortunately, WEP
has not been established till date.
It is evident that Malaysian waste management authorities have realized that land-
filling is not the long-term solution for sustainable waste management. Even though,
developing nations are currently reaping the economic benefits of linear economy, it
is also clear that linear economy approach will not last long as natural resources are
finite and remediation costs of environmental damage will continue to increase to a
point that it will surpass the economic gains. Therefore, the longevity of economic
development cannot be sustained without resource circulation by implementation of
circular economy. Malaysian authorities have acknowledged the need of sustainable
production and consumption by incorporating it in the Eleventh Malaysian Plan and
by launching initiatives to promote 3R in the waste management. However, Malaysia
is being hindered by the lack of direct regulatory framework on circular economy
and consequently the lack of eventual enforcement of legislations. If there is one
thing to be learnt from China’s successful administration of circular economy, it is
the process of reaching towards the goal of circular economy and the most signifi-
cant top-down and bottom-up approach. Top-down approach is warranted by legal
schemes. In China, these regulatory requirements were set by Circular Economy
Promotion Law, by Circular Economy Pilot Demonstrations program and the Eco-
industrial Park program founded by various government agencies. On the other hand,
bottom-up approach is taken by individual enterprises, industries that take part in eco-
industrial enterprises to embrace the idea of circular economy. This acceptance of
262 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

circular economy idea happens when these ideas make financial sense to enterprises
due to changing dynamics of market triggered by high prices of energy and resources
and deregulation of market entry. Since 1970s, Chinese industries have been adopt-
ing bottom-up approach (Mathews and Tan 2011). Malaysia does not have explicit
top-down and bottom-up approaches till date. But, there are attempts to implement
resource circulation in Malaysia in the form of promotion of regulation 7 of Envi-
ronmental Quality (Scheduled Waste) Regulation 2005 by DOE, or the programs
initiated by SWCorp, CIDB and MIDA, respectively. There are also tax incentives
on green technology that can encourage resource circulation. Despite the absence of
specific regulations on circular economy, it can be said that there has been uncoor-
dinated implementation of top-down approach by several government authorities as
well as bottom-up approaches by individual enterprises as shown in the case studies.

6 The Benefits of Circular Economy

As circular economy is not implemented at national or municipal level in Malaysia,

the benefits of circular economy are only confined to the enterprises that are practicing
circular economy at enterprises. Due to the implementation of circular economy at
firm level, the impact on GDP is not significant.
Based on the case studies described in this chapter, the following benefits were
availed:
1. Reduction in resource consumption
2. Reduction in waste generation
3. Economic benefit
4. Reduction in energy consumption
5. Environmental Protection.
Table 4 gives the summary of benefits attained from the implementation of closed-
loop initiatives at respective firms in case studies. The benefits of circular economy
are interrelated. For instance, the reduction in resource consumption was achieved
by recycling and reusing wastes, including wastewater, as raw material in the manu-
facturing processes. It led to total reduction in waste generation as well, since waste
was being incorporated in the manufacturing processes instead of disposal at land-
fill. Both reduction in resource consumption and reduction in waste generation not
only saved expenditures of acquiring raw material and landfilling, respectively, but
in some cases also generated extra revenue by selling waste to potential buyers or
producing coproducts from waste. Circular economy will not be completely zero
waste until energy source is also renewable. Therefore, as shown in Tex Cycle Sdn.
Bhd., using solar energy reduced the intake of electricity from local electric grid.
Lastly, by adopting circular economy, environment is also protected from pollution
of waste, especially scheduled waste, i.e. spent nickel or highly basic carbide sludge
and by avoiding extraneous extracting of raw material from the environment.
Circular Economy in Malaysia 263

Table 4 Summary of benefits of implementation of circular economy

Benefits Oleochemical Acetylene Tex Cycle Sdn. Construction
plant manufacturing Bhd. site at UTP
plant
Reduction in Reuse of earth Water is Reusing water C&D waste was
resource material, fatty recycled within and producing recycled and
consumption acid residue and plant. Carbide coproducts from reused resulting
spent nickel sludge is used as damaged in reduction in
resource in materials consumption of
cosmetic wood and metal
manufacturing resources
company
Reduction in Waste Neither Waste 73% of waste
waste generation is wastewater is generation is generation was
generation only reduced to produced nor only reduced to reduced
sludge carbide sludge sludge
Economic Annual savings Annual savings Annual savings Not given
benefit of RM 1 million of RM 500,000 of RM 63,000
and annual
income of RM
1 million
Environmental Yes Yes Yes Yes
protection

7 Collaboration with Other Countries

In 1996, under the Danish Cooperation for Environment and Development

(DANCED), several projects introduced the implementation of circular economy at
firm level or cleaner production in Malaysia for the first time. Standards and Industrial
Research Institute of Malaysia (SIRIM) under the Ministry of Science, Technology
and Innovation (MOSTI) employed a technical cooperation programme between the
Government of Malaysia and the Government of Denmark. These projects were pro-
moting cleaner production through environmental and energy audits, demonstration
sites and the dissemination of information via two platforms, namely Cleaner Tech-
nology Extension Services (CTES) and the Cleaner Technology Information Service
(CTIS) (Yusup et al. 2015).
Although still in the planning stage, a concept of industrial symbiosis in rubber
manufacturing industries was developed in 2008. This industrial symbiosis is a col-
laboration between Malaysia and Thailand to form a rubber city in Kedah, Malaysia
(Kedah Rubber City, n.d.). Potential industrial symbiosis is proposed in a study by
Sharib and Halog (2017) as shown in Table 5. Therefore, implementation of cir-
cular economy at municipal level in Malaysia is at planning stages that is being
collaborated with Thailand.
In order to achieve the commitment of reducing carbon footprint, Malaysia is
planning to utilize biodiesel blends in its transportation sector. To accomplish this
264 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

Table 5 Proposal of industrial symbiosis in rubber city, Kedah, Malaysia (adopted from Sharib
and Halog 2017)
Waste Waste generator Annual quantity Potential usage Industrial
of waste symbiosis
Ammonia Rubber block 9,880 kg Ammonia waste Conversion into
Nitrogen process fertilizer
Total solid waste 70,720 kg Rubber crumb Cement concrete
filler or polymer indus-
asphalt try/polymer
asphalt binder
Rubber waste Tyre production 988 kg Rubber crumb Cement concrete
industry or
polymer asphalt
binder
Wastewater 2,198,716 kg Recycle water Feed-in cooling
from cooling water system
system
Rejected glove Glove 530,660 pieces Rubber latex Incorporation
pieces manufacturer converted into into rubber filler
powder form
Sludge or rubber 6727.80 kg Rubber waste Incorporated
traps latex into carpet into carpet
backing backing
Methane Wastewater Not available Methane Feed-in natural
integrated recovery gas used for
facilities glove
manufacturing
Treated effluent Biofertilizer Fertilizer
company
Biomass wastes Cogeneration Not available Production of Feed-in
and residues electricity heat and electricity
electricity generation for
the industries in
Rubber City

target, Malaysia had collaborated with Japan for the implementation of biofuels in
Malaysian transport sector. A collaborating initiative between Malaysia and Japan
was validated in April 2010 for environment and energy. Moreover in 2008, Yanmar, a
private Japanese firm, made an investment in a Malaysian research facility specialized
in biodiesel, for carrying out research and analytical work for biodiesel fuel that had
started industrial cooperation in biofuels between Japan and Malaysia (Lim and Lee
et al. 2012). At present, Malaysia’s intention of 10% biodiesel blend by 1 January
2017 had been delayed. Therefore, Malaysia is blending 7% of biodiesel. The delay
has been due to the lack of subsidy support and the high price of feedstock compared
to low prices of petroleum prices. On the other hand, the Eleventh Malaysia Plan aims
at 15% biodiesel blend in transport sector by 2020 (Biofuels Annual 2017). In order to
Circular Economy in Malaysia 265

implement circular economy sustainably, dependence on renewable energy sources

need to increase gradually to a point of complete phasing out of non-renewable energy
sources. Thus, Government of Malaysia must continue promotion of biodiesel blends.

8 Conclusion

Malaysia does not have a legal framework on the implementation of circular economy
like other nations, i.e. China, Japan and Germany. However, there are certain sections
in Environmental Quality Act 1974, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management
Act 2007 and regulation 7 in Environmental Quality (Scheduled Waste) Regulation
2005 that promote the practice of resource circulation. Malaysia incorporated sus-
tainable production and consumption in the Eleventh Malaysian Plan and aims to
take holistic approach towards national waste management. Under the umbrella of the
Eleventh Malaysian Plan, Malaysia targets to reduce 40% of GHGs emission inten-
sity from GDP compared to 2005 level and reach 22% of recycling of MSW with
a long-term goal of becoming zero waste nation. Additionally, SWCorp launched
SWCorp Strategic Plan from 2014 to 2020 to promote sustainable solid waste man-
agement services, and CIDB initiated CITP that has a target of incorporating 20% of
recycled construction and demolition waste (tonnage) by year 2020 from the baseline
of 2016.
DOE has released guidelines on coprocessing of scheduled waste in cement manu-
facturing industry. Apart from coprocessing in cement manufacturing industry where
waste exchange is being practised in all nine plants, research models on industrial
ecology are at proposal stages only as they have not been implemented. Furthermore,
DOE has also put forward proposals on industrial ecology involving bleaching earth
factory and abandoned car management. Lastly, Malaysian Automotive Association
presented the proposal on the processing of End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) that can
lead to coprocessing with construction industry. DOE is also promoting coprocess-
ing under the regulation 7 of Environmental Quality (Scheduled Waste) Regulation
2005 where scheduled waste undergoing “special management” is reused and recy-
cled. Moreover, recovery from scheduled waste is also practised at local and foreign
facilities.
Several opportunities of sustainable waste management and resource circulation
have been highlighted by the research findings.
i. The generation of biomass in Malaysia is extremely high; therefore, it is pro-
posed that in addition to waste to energy approach applied to biomass, bio-
products can also be produced. It is envisioned that coproduction of bio-based
products from biomass will be carried out resulting in outputs such as fine, spe-
cialty and platform chemicals, food and pharmaceutical ingredients, polymers,
together with biofuel and bioenergy.
ii. Biofuel production and its usage in national transport sector can help decouple
the economic development from GWP. The recommended routes for production
266 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

of biofuel are crude palm oil (CPO) upgradation for yielding drop-in biofuel,
in compliance with the Roundtable of Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) standard,
reconstructing current fermentation to attain butanol. The efficiency of butanol
is higher than bioethanol and can be used completely in predominant engine.
Moreover, by incorporating gas clean-up technology in existing AD system,
CNG could also be produced.
iii. A processing framework of ELVs is proposed that will provide substitute for
acquiring raw materials in an environmentally sound manner, hence will increase
resource circulation. The findings of the research can be used to develop a
platform for coprocessing between ELV recycling industry and construction
manufacturing industry.
Establishment of Waste Eco Park program by MIDA promotes recycling and
recovery of waste, in addition to treatment activities and aims to achieve sustain-
able waste management by encouraging investments in facilities and infrastructure
towards said goals that are also aligned with the Eleventh Malaysian Plan.
In order to successfully implement the circular economy, top-down and bottom-up
approach is required. While, Malaysia does not have explicit top-down and bottom-
up approaches till date, there have been attempts to implement resource circulation in
Malaysia as top-down approach in form of promoting regulation 7 of Environmental
Quality (Scheduled Waste) Regulation 2005, by DOE, or the programs initiated by
SWCorp, CIDB and MIDA. There are also tax incentives on green technology that
eventually improves resource circulation.
The case studies presented manifest the practice of circular economy at enterprise
level that imply the willingness of some firms to take part in bottom-up approach. The
benefits of implementation of circular economy at enterprise level are reduction in
resource consumption, reduction in generation of waste, protection of environment
and human health, reduction in energy consumption, cost savings by reusing or
recycling the waste and additional profit gain by selling waste to potential industries.
International collaboration in the implementation of circular economy started
with cooperation with Denmark in 1996 where cleaner production was employed in
several companies. Malaysia’s collaboration with Japan in biodiesel blends started
in 2008, and Malaysia aims to blend 15% of biodiesel by 2020. Lastly, rubber city in
Kedah, Malaysia, is at planning stage where Malaysia will cooperate with Thailand
to implement industrial symbiosis.

References

Agamuthu, P. (2001). Solid waste: Principles and management. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Institute
of Biological Sciences, University of Malaya.
Aiming for Zero Construction Waste by 2030—Metro News: The Star Online. (2015). Retrieved
from https://www.thestar.com.my/metro/community/2015/11/20/aiming-for-zero-construction-
waste-by-2030-seminar-looks-at-adopting-sustainable-practices-in-a-bid/. Accessed on August
20, 2018.
Circular Economy in Malaysia 267

Begum, R. A., Siwar, C., Pereira, J. J., & Jaafar, A. H. (2007). Implementation of waste management
and minimisation in the Construction Industry of Malaysia. Resources, Conservation C.-S. and
Recycling, 51, 190–202.
Biofuel Annual 2017—GAIN Report. (2017). Retrieved from https://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%
20GAIN%20Publications/Biofuels%20Annual_Kuala%20Lumpur_Malaysia_10-24-2017.pdf.
Accessed on September 10, 2018.
CITP KPIs for sustainable development. (2018). Retrieved from http://www.cidb.gov.my/index.
php/en/focus-areas/sustainable-construction/citp-kpis-for-sustainable-development. Accessed
on August 2, 2018.
Department of Environment (2018a) Acts. Retrieved from https://www.doe.gov.my/portalv1/en/
tentang-jas/perundangan/akta-kaedah-peraturan-arahan-2/akta. Accessed on August 2, 2018.
Department of Environment (2018b) Regulations. Retrieved from https://www.doe.gov.my/
portalv1/en/tentang-jas/perundangan/akta-kaedah-peraturan-arahan-2/peraturan. Accessed on
August 2, 2018.
Eleventh Malaysian Plan, 2016–2020. (2018). Retrieved from http://epu.gov.my/en/rmk/eleventh-
malaysia-plan-2016-2020. Accessed on August 2, 2018.
Environmental Quality Report—Enviro Knowledge Center. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://enviro.
doe.gov.my/ekmc/. Accessed on July 27, 2018.
Fauziah, S. H., & Agamuthu, P. (2003). Municipal solid waste management: a comparative study on
selected landfill in Selangor. In Proceedings of Environment 2003 Environmental Management
and Sustainable Development for Better Future Growth. Penang, Malaysia: USM Publisher.
Fauziah, S. H., & Agamuthu, P. (2012). Municipal solid waste management in Malaysia: Strategies
in reducing the dependency on landfills. In International Seminar and Workshop on Landfill Oper-
ation and Management in Tropical Country, 27–28th August 2012, Bandar Acheh (pp. 13–19).
Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). A review on circular economy: The expected
transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 114, 11–32.
How to Feed the World in 2050. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/
wsfs/docs/expert_paper/How_to_Feed_the_World_in_2050.pdf. Accessed on August 25, 2018.
Ikau, R., Joseph, C., & Tawie, R. (2016). Factors influencing waste generation in the Construction
Industry in Malaysia. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 234, 11–18.
Isa, H. (2012). Implementation of Basel Convention in Malaysia. Retrieved from https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/293820586_Implementation_of_Basel_Convention_in_Malaysia/
related. Accessed on August 20, 2018.
Keddah Rubber City—Northern Corridor Economic Region. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://58.27.59.
207/v3/?page_id=8851. Accessed on September 4, 2018.
Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., & Seppala, J. (2018). Circular economy: The concept and its limita-
tions. Ecological Economics, 143, 37–46.
Lim, S., & Lee, K. T. (2012). Implementation of biofuels in Malaysian transportation sector towards
sustainable development: A case study of international cooperation between Malaysia and Japan.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16, 1790–1800.
Mah, C. M., Fujiwara, T., & Ho, C. S. (2018). Life cycle assessment and life cycle costing toward
eco-efficiency concrete waste management in Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172,
3415–3427.
Malaysians waste 15,000 tonnes of food waste daily—Nation. (2016). Retrieved from https://
www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2016/05/24/malaysians-waste-15000-tonnes-of-food-daily/.
Accessed on August 25, 2018.
Mathews, J. A., & Tan, H. (2011). Progress toward a circular economy in China. The drivers (and
Inhibitors) of eco-industrial initiative. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 15, 435–457.
MIDA—Malaysian Investment Development Authority—Tax Incentive for Green Industry.
(2018). Retrieved from http://www.mida.gov.my/home/tax-incentives-for-green-industry/posts/.
Accessed on August 7, 2018.
268 P. Agamuthu and S. B. Mehran

Mohr, Y., & Manaf, L. B. (2017). Solid waste management transformation and future challenges
of source separation and recycling practice in Malaysia. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
116, 1–14.
Sadhukhana, J., Martinez-Hernandez, E., Murphya, R. J., Ngc, D. K. S., Hassimd, M. H., Nga,
K.S., et al. (2018). Role of bioenergy, biorefinery and bioeconomy in sustainable development:
Strategic pathways for Malaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 1966–1987.
Sharib, S., & Halog, A. (2017). Enhancing value chains by applying industrial symbiosis concept
to the Rubber City in Kedah, Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 1095–1108.
The Bigger battle against food wastage. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.theheatmalaysia.com/
Main/The-bigger-battle-against-food-wastage. Accessed on August 25, 2018.
Tex Cycle. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.texcycle.com.my/texcyclesdnbhd/index.html.
Accessed on September 6, 2018.
Umar, U. A., Shafiq, N., Malakahmad, A., Nuruddin, M. F., Khamidi, M. F., & Salihi, I. U. (2016).
Impact of construction waste minimization at construction site: case study. Jurnal Teknologi, 78,
33–40.
Wong, Y. C., Al-Obaidi, K. M., & Mahyuddin, N. (2018). Recycling of end-of-life vehicles (ELVs)
for building products: Concept of processing framework from automotive to construction indus-
tries in Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 190, 285–302.
Yusup, M. Z., Wan Mahmood, W. H., Salleh, S. R., & Rahman, M. N. A. (2015). The implementation
of cleaner production practices from Malaysian manufacturers’ perspectives. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 108, 659–672.
An Overview of Circular Economy
in Mauritius

P. Kowlesser

Abstract Solid waste management remains an ever-increasing issue in small island

development states like Mauritius, with landfilling being the main disposal option
as opposed to more sustainable solutions like recycling and resource recovery. This
article provided an overview of circular economy, the initiatives taken towards pro-
motion of recycling and the challenges faced by the recycling industry in Mauritius.
While some recycling is carried out on the island, this is still in its infancy stage due
to several obstacles faced by the recycling industry such as lack of financial incen-
tives, lack of critical mass of recyclables and poor quality of recyclables. However,
based on the several forthcoming projects to boost circular economy in Mauritius, it
is expected that the solid waste management system is called for a major overhaul
in the future, with major focus on recycling and resource recovery.

Keywords Solid waste management · Circular economy · Recycling · Small

island developing state · Composting · Landfilling

1 Introduction

Mauritius is a small island developing state of surface area 1865 km2 , located to the
east of Madagascar in the Indian Ocean. Over the years, the island has experienced
continuous development having diversified its economy. Coupled with economic
growth, the population of Mauritius has also increased and reached 1.22 million in
2018 (Statistics Mauritius 2019). Besides, the level of human development index
has also significantly increased owing to a higher standard of living. The downside
of all these developments is that solid wastes generation has continuously increased
over the years. Over the past 10 years, solid wastes generation has been increasing
at an average annual rate of 3.1%, reaching over 540,000 tons in 2018. With over
95% of the solid wastes generated on the island landfilled, this does not represent a
sustainable approach, albeit that the landfill is a sanitary site.

P. Kowlesser (B)
SWM Division, Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, Réduit, Mauritius
e-mail: pkowlesser@hotmail.com

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 269

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_14
270 P. Kowlesser

The issue of solid waste generation and management is not limited to small island
developing states like Mauritius but also extends to developed economies. Well aware
of the negative impacts of improper waste management and coupled with the deple-
tion of non-renewable resources, the concept of circular economy has been gaining
increasing attention worldwide over the years (Ghisellini et al. 2016). Circular econ-
omy is closely linked with United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)
12 on ‘Responsible Consumption and Production’ (United Nations 2019). Specifi-
cally, target 12.5 ‘By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention,
reduction, recycling and reuse’ (United Nations 2019) ensures that circular economy
is maximised, as established in the waste management hierarchy. Several attempts
and initiatives have been taken over the years to have a more diverse solid waste man-
agement system in Mauritius prioritising reduce, reuse and recycling over landfilling
in line with the waste management hierarchy and the concept of circular economy.
This article provides an overview of the measures taken in Mauritius to achieve cir-
cular economy over a linear approach and also outlines the forthcoming solid waste
management projects aiming at resource recovery and recycling.

2 Reduce, Reuse and Recycling Initiatives in Mauritius

Reduce, reuse and recycling (3Rs) are the most preferred options in the solid waste
management hierarchy. Several initiatives have been taken to promote the 3Rs in
Mauritius through either policy decisions, provision of incentives or promulgation
of specific regulations, as further detailed.

2.1 Deposit-Refund Scheme on Glass Bottles

The deposit-refund scheme is established on 700-ml and 330-ml glass bottles. The
deposit is USD 0.35 for 700-ml glass bottles and USD 0.17 for 330-ml glass bottles.
This system ensures that the glass bottles are returned to the retail outlets following
which, they are routed to the beverage manufacturers for rinsing and disinfecting
purposes prior to refilling. Through the deposit-refund mechanism, most glass bottles
are reused instead of disposed at the landfill.

2.2 Home Composting Scheme

The home composting scheme was established under the Maurice-Ile-Durable pro-
gramme in 2013 and consisted of the provision of home compost bins to households
to encourage source segregation of wastes and promote the practice of compost pro-
duction and usage. Another objective of this scheme was to reduce the amount of
An Overview of Circular Economy in Mauritius 271

wastes going to the landfill. From 2013 to 2016, 30,326 bins were distributed to
households by the local authorities across the island. For the national budget for
financial year 2018/2019, another 10,000 home composters were earmarked to be
distributed to households. Considering that a household in Mauritius has an average
of four persons and the waste generation rate is estimated at 1.22 kg/capita/day, the
provision of one compost bin per household helps divert at least 0.9 tons of solid
wastes away from the landfill annually (considering that 50% of the municipal solid
wastes in Mauritius consists of organic matter).

2.3 Incentives on Exportation/Recycling of PET Bottles

In 2015, the Mauritian Government came forward with an incentive on PET bottles.
This comprised a provision of USD 0.14 for each kg of waste PET bottles/flakes
exported or recycled but was applicable only if an exporter/recycler processed at
least 1 ton of PET bottles/flakes in a calendar year. In line with the Government
initiative of 2015, the incentive of USD 0.14/kg PET bottles was increased to USD
0.42/kg PET bottles providing that the recycling was carried out in Mauritius. These
two incentives were introduced to boost the recycling/exportation of PET bottles.

2.4 Excise Duty on Non-biodegradable Plastic Food

Containers

More recently, since May 2019, the Mauritian Government introduced an excise
duty of USD 0.056 for each non-biodegradable plastic food container purchased.
The objective of this measure is to promote responsible consumption and produc-
tion, thereby reducing the generation of single-use non-biodegradable plastic food
containers such as polystyrene takeaways, plastic plates, bowls, cups and trays.

2.5 Legislative Frameworks

2.5.1 Environment Protection (Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET)

Bottle Permit) Regulations 2001

In 2001, Government promulgated the Environment Protection (Polyethylene

Terephthalate (PET) bottle Permit) Regulations 2001 to ensure the environmentally
sound management of PET bottles. These Regulations were based on the concept of
extended producer responsibility, implying that the producers of PET bottles had to
272 P. Kowlesser

pay for the waste and pollution they create. Under these Regulations, no responsi-
ble person is allowed to bottle or cause to be bottled any beverage in a PET bottle
unless he has a permit. The conditions imposed under this permit are that the permit
holder needs to submit an annual return on the quantity of PET bottles produced
and collected for recycling/exportation. As a consequence of these Regulations and
for practical reasons, the Beverage Bottling Companies, grouped under the Bottler’s
Association, ensured the collection of post-consumer PET bottles by sub-contracting
Polypet Recyclers Ltd. to collect post-consumer PET bottles across the country. These
Regulations thus prompted the collection of PET bottles across the island, with the
outcome being that 40–45% of PET bottles marketed in Mauritius are now being
collected. The major PET exporter in Mauritius namely Polypet Recyclers Ltd. sorts
the PET bottles by colour, removes the caps and labels and then shred the PET bot-
tles into flakes which are then exported to a company in South Africa. On average,
Polypet Recyclers Ltd. exports 1,000 tons of PET flakes on an annual basis.

2.5.2 Local Government (Registration of Recycler and Exporter)

Regulations 2013

The Local Government (Registration of Recycler and Exporter) Regulations were

promulgated in 2013 in view to regulate the recyclers and exporters involved in the
recycling industry. These Regulations also enabled the establishment of a database
of recyclers and exporters in Mauritius and the amount of waste materials recycled
locally or exported for recycling. As at current date, there are more than 30 registered
recyclers/exporters involved in the recycling/exportation of paper/carton, e-wastes,
glass, photographic and printing wastes, plastics, textile wastes, used batteries, waste
oil, used tyres and timber/wood.

2.5.3 Environment Protection (Banning of Plastic Bags) Regulations

2015

In view to reduce the generation of plastic bags which have been causing signif-
icant environmental nuisances in Mauritius, the Environment Protection (Banning
of Plastic Bags) Regulations were promulgated in 2015. These Regulations restrict
the importation, manufacture, sale or supply of plastic bags, with the exception of
those exempted under the first schedule of the Regulations. With these Regulations
in place, there has been a major shift from the use of non-biodegradable plastic bags
to biodegradable ones.
An Overview of Circular Economy in Mauritius 273

Table 1 List of registered recyclers in Mauritius

Companies Materials recycled Amount recycled annually
(tons)
BEM Enterprises Ltd. E-wastes 163.5
Photographic and printing
wastes
RVE Ltd. E-wastes Not available
Mauritius Glass Gallery Glass 70
Surfrider Co. Ltd. Plastics (PET, LDPE, HDPE) 380
Phillipe Polybags Plastics (PP, HDPE, LDPE) 30
Manufacturer Ltd.
Recycling Industries Textile wastes 300
(Mauritius) Ltd.
Virgin Oil Company Mineral used oil 4,415
(Mauritius) Ltd.
Ecofuel Ltd. Mineral used oil 484
Compagnie Mauricienne de Used tyres 139.5
Commerce Ltee
Pallet World Ltd. Wood/timber 1,824

3 Overview of the Recycling Industry in Mauritius

As aforementioned, there are currently more than 30 registered recyclers/exporters

contributing to recycling and resource recovery in Mauritius. With regard to local
recycling, there are ten registered recycling industries as summarised in Table 1.

4 Best Practices of Circular Economy in Mauritius

One of the best practices of circular economy in Mauritius is the implementation of

the project ‘Enhancement of resource productivity and environmental performance
of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise in six African countries through the con-
cept of Industrial Symbiosis’ under the SWITCH Africa Green (SAG) Programme.
Under this project, waste is considered as a resource which can be valourised; for
instance, waste from one firm can be an input/raw material for another firm. Through
this project, a considerable amount of wastes from hotels, textile industries, sugar
factories and food manufacturing industries have been diverted away from the land-
fill and used as raw/secondary materials in other industries. For instance, 86 tons
of broken wafers from a biscuit manufacturing industry have been used as animal
feed; 42 tons of textile wastes from a hotel have been sent to a sugar manufacturing
industry for use as boiler fuel while 141 tons of used toners from a printing house
have been diverted to a cartridge manufacturer.
274 P. Kowlesser

5 Challenges Faced by the Recycling Industry

Despite the several initiatives taken by the Mauritian Government to boost the recy-
cling industry, recycling is still in its infancy stage in Mauritius. Based on previous
meetings with local registered recyclers/exporters, some of the challenges faced by
the recycling industry in Mauritius are:

5.1 High Cost of Investments

High costs of investments for new equipment are one of the reasons often raised by
local recyclers for not being able to increase their recycling capacities. Consequently,
while it is often argued that the availability of recyclable materials is not an issue,
the recyclers cannot increase their processing capacity to accept a greater amount
of recyclable materials as they do not have the financial means to invest in large
equipment.

5.2 Lack of Financial Incentives

In line with the aforementioned challenge, the local recyclers often complain about
a lack of financial incentives to boost the recycling industry. This includes incentives
on importation of new equipment, loan facilities or grants.

5.3 Critical Mass of Recyclables

As opposed to Sect. 5.1, some recyclers also complain of a lack of recyclables to

make their recycling process economically feasible. They often report that huge
transportation costs for collection of a small amount of recyclables do not make the
recycling business lucrative. With the setting-up of a material recovery facility, the
amount of recyclables will undoubtedly increase and the critical mass will then be
achieved to make the recycling process more viable.

5.4 Low Quality of Recyclables

Another challenge faced by the recycling industry is the low quality of recyclables
available due to contamination with other wastes, particular organics. With Mauri-
tius not currently adopting waste segregation at source, all the wastes are collected
An Overview of Circular Economy in Mauritius 275

comingled and this considerably reduces the quality of the recyclables. However,
this challenge must be alleviated with the setting-up of a material recovery facility
and the implementation of source segregation of wastes.

6 Future Plans to Promote Circular Economy

6.1 Setting-up of a Material Recovery Facility

A new strategy and action plan has been developed for solid waste management in
Mauritius with focus on resource recovery and recycling. As part of the strategy docu-
ment, a feasibility study on the setting-up of a material recovery facility consisting of a
compost plant, a sorting unit and a civic amenity centre is currently being carried out.
Following this feasibility study and the setting-up of the material recovery facility,
the waste management system in the western part of the island will undergo consid-
erable change. Waste segregation at source will be privileged through the provision
of two bins (one for wet wastes—organics and one for dry wastes—recyclables).
The wet wastes will be directed to the composting plant while the recyclables will be
sent to the sorting unit for subsequent separation into paper, glass, plastics, etc. The
sorted recyclables will then be sent to registered recyclers/exporters in Mauritius. As
for the civic amenity centre, this will allow local citizens to deposit their household
hazardous wastes and bulky wastes. Through the setting-up and operation of the
material recovery facility, it will thus be ensured that target 12.5 of SDG 12 is thus
achieved, in line with the concept of circular economy.

6.2 Setting-up of a Scrapyard Facility for End-of-Life

Vehicles

End-of-life vehicles are becoming a major issue in Mauritius and these are often
dumped illegally on bare lands and roadsides thereby posing a potential threat to
human health through the onset of vector-borne diseases. Besides, these end-of-life
vehicles also represent a major eyesore and impact on the status of Mauritius as a
touristic destination. To tackle this issue, the Mauritian Government has recently
launched a bidding exercise to procure of the consultancy service for carrying out
a feasibility study for the setting-up and operation of a scrapyard facility for end-
of-life vehicles in Mauritius. Following the feasibility study and the setting-up and
operation of the scrapyard facility, end-of-life vehicles will thus be de-polluted and
dismantled in an environmentally sound manner and the dismantled components will
then be subjected to recycling.
276 P. Kowlesser

6.3 Setting-up of Sites for Temporary Storage

of Construction and Demolition Wastes

Construction and demolition (C&D) wastes represent a major issue in Mauritius, with
a significant being illegally dumped at different locations on the island, including
river beds, thus causing flooding and environmental nuisances. With construction
and renovation works expected to continue in the future, the generation of C&D
wastes is anticipated to further increase. Since these wastes take relatively large
spaces in the landfill, disposal is thus not a sustainable solution. Furthermore, natural
resources such as rocks (for making aggregates) are getting depleted and alternatives
need to be sought. To alleviate both these problems, it was thus decided by the
Mauritian Government to install sites for the temporary storage of C&D wastes.
Upon generation, the C&D wastes components will have to be segregated at source
and then stored at the temporary sites prior to being collected by stone crushing
plants for recycling into aggregates, by individuals for reuse for backfilling purposes
or by recyclers for conversion into new products. Through this C&D wastes storage
system, the recycling of the components of C&D wastes will be boosted, thereby
being in line with SDG 12 (Target 12.5). As at current date, the bidding documents
are being prepared for the setting-up of a C&D waste storage site.

6.4 Setting-up of an E-Waste Management System

Around 8,000–9,000 tons are estimated to be generated in Mauritius on a yearly basis

and need to be managed in an environmentally safe and sound manner. In this con-
text, a comprehensive e-waste management system is currently being set up by the
Mauritian Government. The system will be based on the extended producer respon-
sibility wherein importers, local manufacturers and assemblers of selected e-goods
will have to take responsibility for the resulting e-wastes. An advanced recycling
fee will be charged on the selected e-goods to fund the collection, dismantling and
recycling of e-wastes that will be collected. Pending the coming into operation of
this e-waste management system, a national household e-waste collection campaign
was carried out in 2015 and a second one is currently being carried out. Through
these campaigns, it is thus being ensured that e-wastes are managed in a sustainable
manner, promoting recycling and the concept of circular economy.

7 New Budgetary Measures

As announced in the budget for financial year 2019/2020, several measures have
been proposed with the aim of promoting resource recovery, recycling and a circular
economy approach in Mauritius. These measures are as follows:
An Overview of Circular Economy in Mauritius 277

• Used tyres
To promote the recycling of used tyres, an amount of USD 59.5 will be refunded for
each ton of used tyres recycled locally or exported for recycling.
• Financial incentive on PET bottles
The incentive on PET bottles recycling has been increased from USD 0.14 for each
kg of waste PET bottles/flakes exported or recycled to USD 0.42 for each kg of PET
bottles exported for recycling.
• Tipping fee for recycling of wastes
In a further attempt to increase resource recovery and recycling, the Mauritian Gov-
ernment has indicated that a tipping fee of USD 8.5 will be provided for each ton of
wastes taken from transfer stations to be recycled.

8 Conclusions

This article evaluated the current status of recycling and resource recovery in Mauri-
tius while also outlining the challenges faced by the recycling industry in Mauritius.
While some recycling is practised on the island, circular economy is still in its infancy
stage due to several obstacles faced by the local recyclers. Nevertheless, it is expected
that with the implementation of the forthcoming projects such as scrapyard facility,
C&D wastes storage sites, material recovery facility and e-waste management sys-
tem and recycling will receive a major boost in Mauritius. Notwithstanding this fact,
some support from the Mauritian Government will be needed to further promote
recycling on the island via financial incentives, loan and grant schemes for recyclers.

Acknowledgements The author would like to express his sincere gratitude to Dr. Bundhoo M. A.
Zumar for his valuable inputs during the write-up of this article.

References

Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). A review on circular economy: The expected
transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 114, 11–32.
Statistics Mauritius. (2019). Population and vital statistics Republic of Mauritius year 2018. Min-
istry of Finance and Economic Development.
United Nations. (2019). Sustainable development goal 12. Available from: https://
sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg12. Accessed June 6, 2019.
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective

Saheed A. Aremu, David O. Olukanni, Olubunmi A. Mokuolu,

Olumuyiwa A. Lasode, Michael A. Ahove and Olasunkanmi M. Ojowuro

1 Introduction

Nigeria is a lower middle-income country and is ranked as the largest economy in

Africa with a gross domestic product of 444.92 billion (www.imf.org). The country
is located on the western coast of Africa, has an area of 923, 763 km2 and is bounded
by Benin Republic in the west, Niger Republic in the north, Cameroun in the east
and Gulf of Guinea in the south. Nigeria got independence from the UK on the 1st
of October 1960 and later became a Republic in 1963. The country has maintained
its lead in Africa as the most populous country from a population of approximately
31 million in 1953 (Grolier Incorporated 1962) to the present population of about
197 million. Nigeria emerged from various forms of socio-economic developments
since independence and now has 36 states and the nation’s Federal Capital Territory
(FCT), Abuja. Each state and the FCT are further divided into 774 local government
areas which are administrative subdivisions.

S. A. Aremu · O. A. Mokuolu
Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, University of Ilorin, Ilorin,
Nigeria
D. O. Olukanni (B)
Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Covenant University, Canaanland, Nigeria
e-mail: david.olukanni@covenantuniversity.edu.ng
O. A. Lasode
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria
M. A. Ahove
Center for Environmental Studies and Sustainable Development, Lagos State University, Ojo,
Nigeria
O. M. Ojowuro
Lagos State Waste Water Management Agency, Ikeja, Lagos, Nigeria

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 279

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_15
280 S. A. Aremu et al.

In recent years, Nigeria has made significant progress in socio-economic devel-

opment after getting out of recession in 2017. Population and socio-economic devel-
opment are key indices that dictate the quantity and quality of solid wastes. Hence,
based on population and per capita generation rate of 0.49 kg/capita/day (Nnaji
2015), the output of solid wastes is over 35 million tons per annum. Specifically,
solid waste is multidimensional in context when viewed as a nuisance or resource
with multiplier effects on various aspects of human life and the environment. The
incessant indiscriminate disposal of municipal solid waste is increasing and is linked
to poor governance, population growth, poor standards of living, and low level of
environmental awareness and poor management of environmental understanding.
The inability of government agencies to manage these enormous quantities of
wastes has led to an increase in the associated societal, economic and environmental
burdens of solid wastes. Several strategies have over the years been developed involv-
ing the active participation of households, public, private, non-governmental and
community-based organizations, and Federal, State and Local Government Agen-
cies. The specific goals of several actors involved in solid waste management in
Nigeria are to protect public health, maintain and sustain the quality of the environ-
ment, to furnish economic returns and act as source of livelihood and to conserve
materials and probably generate some forms of energy.
However, these strategies are faced with several challenges which are responsible
for the present low levels of collection service, moderate level of resource recovery
and underdeveloped disposal method (Aremu and Sule 2010). The challenges are
altogether related to traditional, financial, political, social, institutional, regulatory
and technical conditions of the country.
Nigeria has a curtailed institutional, legislative and national strategic plan for the
management of solid wastes. Solid waste management operational schemes vary
from city to city in Nigeria. However, municipal solid waste management system in
Nigeria has traditionally been under strong grass-roots control where local govern-
ments are responsible for its management. This responsibility in most instances is
transferred to State Governments or its agencies, in addition to performance of key
oversight functions while the Federal Government provides guidelines and infras-
tructure. The commonly practised linear economy promotes increasingly use of fossil
fuels and relies on continual economic growth and generates waste. The traditional
linear economy of manufacture, use and dispose is prominent in Nigeria on a macro-
level, perhaps partly because of the weak legislative framework for sanitation and
management of solid wastes. No legislation exists for the minimization/control of
solid waste generation; hence, industries and households engage in subjective forms
of solid waste reduction and reuse while recycling activity is majorly by the private
sector. The inherent huge amounts of solid wastes generated create severe health and
environmental challenges to linear economies like Nigeria. Private sector participa-
tion in municipal solid waste management in Nigeria like other developing countries
is mostly for economic gains. Generally, open dumps at the outskirts of the city where
the nuisance level to humans is minimal are used as disposal sites. On the other hand,
when there are avenues to capture the energy embedded in these wastes, it could be
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 281

a sustainable way of producing electricity, heat and fuel to meet basic needs (Aremu
and Ganiyu 2019).
According to World Economic Forum (2018), circular economy aims to design out
waste from a take–make–use–dispose model to a reduce–reuse–recycle model. In the
circular economy, maximum value is extracted from materials or items considered
as “wastes” as much as possible, thereby attaining a “zero” waste society. In contrast
to the traditional linear economy, it is a cyclical regenerative approach in which
reduction, reuse and recycle of wastes dominate the polity. The circular economy is
gaining global acceptance and Nigerians, like other developing countries, practise
circularity in certain aspects of life. These aspects include microlevel involvement in
household waste reduction and reuse strategies, and informal markets involving waste
scavengers, merchants and recyclers. That notwithstanding, widespread impact on
the society is not felt. Moreover, there is no legislation yet in Nigeria to kick-start the
operation of a structured circular economy system despite the fact that the country
is well-positioned to take advantage of this concept. Therefore, there is the need
for Nigeria to move into a more circular economy by mainstreaming its principles
and practices into local, state and national road maps for sustainable transition from
linear to circular economy.

2 The Legislative Framework and Government Support

Towards Implementing 5R’s and Circular Economy
Initiatives in Nigeria

The increasing complexity and quantity of wastes produced in Nigeria has been
of increasing concern. Industrial and technological developments have taken a new
turn as against what was in the past, together with global trade, which has resulted in
enormous economic growth that has enhanced human welfare. However, this devel-
opment path is rooted in exponentially increasing resource usage, causing increase
in solid waste generation.
The circular economy in Nigeria is a change in response to the need for an eco-
logical economy that requires human activities that are consistent with the 5 R’s
principles: reduce, repair, reuse, recycle and recover (Ying and Li-Jun 2012; NPSW
2018).
The Nigerian concerns for circular economy result from various factors including
lack of a legislative framework to control the incidence of unsound waste manage-
ment practices and inadequacy of existing infrastructure to adequately manage the
amount and types of waste generated, amongst other factors. The core problem of
solid waste management in the country is attributable to the non-implementation of
existing laws and legislations, need for the upgrade of obsolete legal instruments,
inadequate budgetary provisions and funding mechanisms, and poor monitoring and
evaluation mechanisms as to guide the environmentally safe and sound practices in
solid waste management. Solid waste management programmes have been operated
282 S. A. Aremu et al.

without a national policy and this has attracted criticisms from various stakeholder
groups on solid waste management in the country.
The Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEnv) with support from the United
Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), other technical partners
and critical stakeholders in the public and private sectors developed the National
Solid Waste Management Policy as a statement of intent to be implemented as a
procedure or protocol in the management of solid waste in Nigeria.
Nigeria operates a three-tier of Government—the Executive, Judiciary and Leg-
islature.
The Executive approves/enforces laws made by the Legislative arm of Govern-
ment. To achieve this mandate, it has several Federal ministries, Department and
Agencies to cover all aspects of human endeavours.
The National Assembly represents the Legislature whose primary function is to
make laws. It consists of two Chambers—the Upper and Lower Chambers. The
Upper Chamber (Senate) is comprised of 109 Senators while the Lower Chamber
(House of Representatives) consists of 360 Representatives. The primary function of
the judiciary is to interpret laws. The highest appellate court supreme court is headed
by the Chief Justice of Nigeria.
The Federal Government of Nigeria is charged with establishing institutional and
legal frameworks for solid waste management. The Nigerian policy on solid waste
management encompasses the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary at the Federal,
State and Local Government. The policy outlines the key sources of solid waste in
Nigeria so that segregation, collection, transportation, storage, treatment and disposal
of waste are carried out in a manner that provides protection for the environment and
human health and in compliance with legal requirements.
The institutional framework within the Legislature responsible for policy and reg-
ulatory matters on solid waste and the environment in general is the Senate Commit-
tee on the Environment and Ecology and the House Committee on the Environment
at the Federal level. Both committees play important roles that enact appropriate
legislation that will:
(a) Foster successful implementation of the “Policy Guidelines” and “Action Plans”
for a sustainable and effective management of solid waste within all the territory
of Nigeria.
(b) Ensure the inclusion of solid waste management (SWM) in the National Devel-
opment agenda of the country.
(c) Regulate the design, establishment and performance standards for landfills and
all solid waste management technologies to be utilized within the country.
(d) Prevent the indiscriminate disposal of solid wastes into and onto land.
(e) Prevent the indiscriminate disposal of solid wastes into water bodies.
(f) Ensure that appropriate assessment is carried out on SWM facilities before the
commencement of operation and at defined time periods throughout the life of
the facility.
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 283

(g) Incorporate applicable principles and domesticate appropriate international con-

ventions, protocols and treaties into solid waste management laws and manage-
ment practices within the country.
(h) Focus strongly on environmental and solid waste data procurement, storage and
management.
(i) Review old laws and regulations and adopt new regulations that will make SWM
programmes achievable.
(j) Review and reform existing national/state legislations and regulations relating
to SWM in order to create a legislative framework which gives legal effect to
this Policy and facilitates a comprehensive, integrated and sustainable approach
to SWM.
(k) Ensure SWM programme evaluation and long-term priorities settings are made
and achievable.
The State and Local Government legislatures at their individual levels of gover-
nance shall have the right to introduce more stringent legislation in their areas of
jurisdiction, but at all times standards must not be lower than that stipulated at the
Federal level. The State and Local Government legislatures shall reserve the right to
add, delete or change solid waste management taxes and fees to enforce scale-up of
waste management activities. Legislative discretion is, however, required to ensure
the burden of solid waste taxes and is not too high as to become a disincentive to
effective and sustainable SWM.
In terms of solid waste management in Nigeria, the Judiciary is responsible for
the interpretation of principles, protocols, rules and legislations, and the trial of solid
waste management legislation defaulters. Basically, the judiciary shall:
(a) Have jurisdiction and power over all solid waste matters specified under any
environmental protection law, regulations or sanitation and waste management
laws of the country (Federal, State and Local Government levels).
(b) Provide mechanisms for the resolution of solid waste jurisdiction and manage-
ment concerns between different tiers of government, public institutions, private
agencies and individuals.
(c) Establish specialized tribunals for solid waste management issues, as undertaken
in other areas of national life such as with trade or labour disputes.
(d) Provide public access to solid waste management dispute resolution and remedy.
(e) Provide solid waste management dispute resolution mechanisms, public interest
litigation protocols, class action legal processes and the ability to represent and
protect the interest of future generations.
(f) Be guided on environmental sentencing information.
284 S. A. Aremu et al.

3 Compliance and Enforcement

The compliance and enforcement of the National Solid Waste Management Policy
enacted in 2018 to follow the Federal Government of Nigeria 5R’s hierarchy for solid
waste management (reduce, repair, reuse, recycle, recover) shall include:
(a) Protection of environmental standards.
(b) Enforcement of regulations and legislation.
(c) Compliance with international treaties and standards.

4 Sanctions

1. The Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEnv) in conjunction with the State

Ministry of Environment (SMEnv) shall develop guidelines for various categories
of offences, non-compliance and associated sanctions and penalties.
2. Major offences of high impact shall be documented in national plan of action.
3. Relevant laws on solid waste management stipulating service standards and oper-
ations shall be enacted and adequately disseminated.
4. The FMEnv/SMEnv/NESREA/States Waste Management Authorities shall
impose penalties, taxes, fines and charges for non-compliance to solid waste
management standards and regulations.

The existing documents in Nigeria which contain some form of regulations related
to solid waste management are:
i. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
ii. National Policy on Environment, revised
iii. Federal Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1992
iv. Environmental Impact Assessment Act of 1992
v. National Environmental (Sanitation and Wastes Control) Regulations, S.I No.
28 of 2009
vi. National Environmental Protection (Pollution Abatement in Industries and
Facilities Generating Wastes) Regulations S.I.9 of 1991
vii. National Environmental Protection Management of Solid and Hazardous
Waste Regulations S.I.15 of 1991
viii. The National Guidelines and Standards for Environmental Pollution Control
in Nigeria
ix. The National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency
Act, 2007 (NESREA Act)
x. The National Environmental (Electrical/Electronic Sector) Regulations 2011,
as gazette in Federal Government Gazette No. 5, Vol. 98. In the gazette, the
3R’s of waste management was expanded to 5R’s, namely reduce, repair,
reuse, recycle and recover
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 285

xi. The National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency Act 2005 (NOSDRA
Act)
xii. Environmental Guidelines and Standards for the Petroleum Industry in Nige-
ria
xiii. National Environmental (Base Metal, Iron and Steel Manufactur-
ing/Recycling Industries Sector) Regulations, 2011
xiv. National Policy on Municipal and Agricultural Waste Management, 2012
(Draft)IO
xv. National Environmental (Pulp and Paper, Wood and wood Products sector)
Regulations, S.I 34 of 2013
xvi. National Environmental (Motor Vehicle and Miscellaneous Assembly Sector)
Regulations, S.I 35 of 2013
xvii. Merchant Shipping Act, 2007
xviii. Merchant Sea Dumping Regulations, 2013
xix. Nigerian Maritime and Safety Administration (NIMASA) Act, 2007.

5 Institutional Arrangements for Solid Waste Management

in Nigeria

The institutions responsible for solid waste management in Nigeria are:

(i) Senate Committee on Environment and Ecology
(ii) House Committee on Environment and Habitat
(iii) Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEnv)
(iv) National Environmental Standards, Regulation and Enforcement Agency
(NESREA)
(v) Environmental Health Officers Registration Council (EHORCON)
(vi) Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA)
(vii) National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA)
(viii) Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR)
(ix) Abuja Environmental Protection Board (AEPB)
(x) States Ministries of Environment (SMEnv)
(xi) States Environmental Protection Boards, Agencies, Commissions, etc.
(xii) Local Governments’ Authorities (Departments’ of Environment and Health,
Works, etc.)
(xiii) Waste/Refuse Management Authorities
(xiv) Private sector—formal and informal (“Scavengers”) in Solid Waste Manage-
ment.
286 S. A. Aremu et al.

6 Future Plans and Targets in the Country or Any

Localized Targets

The main problems are related to collection, transportation and disposal, with one-
third to half of the solid waste generated in the developing countries remaining
uncollected (Sujauddin et al. 2008; Thanh et al. 2011; Wilson et al. 2012; Olukanni
et al. 2016; Olukanni and Oresanya 2018). Due to the myriad of challenges related
to solid waste management in Nigeria, the idea in the minds of governments, institu-
tions and all stakeholders in waste management sector now is the concept of circu-
lar economy. The concept recognizes that population growth and traditional (linear)
processes, where majority of products are eventually disposed of after use, are unsus-
tainable. The actual performance of the public sector in Nigeria has left much to be
desired, and many government-owned enterprises are not responsive to the changing
requirements of the growing and dynamic economy because they do not have the
required tools for effective service delivery (Olukanni and Nwafor 2019). Relying
on PPP without providing the necessary legal and institutional framework will not
produce the desired results in effective waste management. As Nigeria is faced with
the pressure to provide critical services to its population, the way forward is to deliver
the needed infrastructure to carry out the essential services by using the resources
effectively and produce maximum benefits for the citizenry.
The development of material supply chain management through the combination
of waste hierarchy thinking should now be in place, and there is a need for sustainable
energy solutions. As a result of the scarcity of raw materials necessary for techno-
logical innovation, encouragement of progressive development of circular economy
models should be of utmost priority and modalities should be set to put this in place,
with increasing awareness of social, financial and economic barriers.
Furthermore, the practice of collecting, transfer, treating and disposal of solid
waste (integrated solid waste management) has become a necessity. It has become
a common knowledge that most wastes have a recovery value; that is, they can be
recycled and reused, which ultimately reduces the pressure of consumption of fresh
materials in the production line. Especifically, material recovery is a strategy low-
income earners use as a survival strategy. Figures 1 and 2 show scavenging activities
are dumpsites while Figs. 3 and 4 show salvaged materials. The idea is to first sort
out plastics, paper and other combustibles after which the solid wastes are set ablaze
so as to be able to retrieve the incombustibles like iron and aluminium.
The scavengers sell the salvaged materials to middlemen who, in turn, sell to
recycling industries. Table 1 shows the prices of some salvaged materials. The prices
are varying from N30 to N55.
Material recovery facilities (MRF) are provided in some places to recover valuable
resources from wastes by Local Authorities or recyclers. A case in point is the
waste to wealth initiative set-up by the government of some states such as Lagos,
Ogun, Oyo, Ekiti and Osun (Olukanni and Aremu 2017), and some universities are
currently driving different initiatives. These projects are geared towards effective
waste management processes to reduce, reuse and recycle waste materials.
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 287

Fig. 1 Scavenging activities

at a dumpsite before burning
(to retrieve combustibles)

Fig. 2 Scavenging activities

at a dumpsite after burning
(to retrieve incombustible)

Fig. 3 Salvaged metals

288 S. A. Aremu et al.

Fig. 4 Salvaged plastics

Table 1 Prices of some salvaged materials

Recyclable waste materials Average percentage of each Prices of recyclables in
item in the waste stream (%) Naira/kg
Pet bottles 12.69 N 55
Paper 3.79 N5
Plastic food packs 11.92 N 30
Nylon 9.07 N 30
Tin cans 4.41 N 35
Tetra packs 5.72 N 35
Food waste 52.40 Compostable
Total 100.00

Polyethylene Terephthalate Ethylene (PETE) bottle waste (plastic waste) gener-

ation is getting beyond levels that communities and cities are comfortable with, and
the uncontrollable effect is becoming alarming even as it gets through to the water
bodies. Promoting healthier lifestyles and commitment to build a sustainable and
friendly environment is the way forward. Evidence from pilot project tagged “Waste
to Wealth” (W2 W) initiative, which commenced in 2015 at Covenant University in
Nigeria, shows that materials and valuable resource can be harnessed and converted
to useful products. The idea of driving this scalable project is to:
(i) promote excellence in plastic waste reduction management by enhancing envi-
ronmental sustainability and sustainable strategies;
(ii) create and implement innovative strategies that engage relevant stakeholders
to reduce plastic use;
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 289

(iii) provide students at all levels with direct experience in environmental manage-
ment through environmental stewardship, academic internship, paid positions
and volunteer opportunities; and
(iv) Carry out research on the reuse of the plastic waste as partial substitutes for
other construction materials and other engineering infrastructures.
Figure 5 shows an accumulation of sorted plastics ready for recycling. The accu-
mulated plastics were derived from scavengers who source for plastics from house-
holds, commercial centres and dumpsites. Figure 6 shows a small-scale metal recy-
cling facility in Lagos, Nigeria. Cans are melted in open pits for export to Japan and
India.

Fig. 5 An accumulation of sorted plastics ready for recycling

Fig. 6 A small-scale metal recycling facility in Lagos, Nigeria

290 S. A. Aremu et al.

7 The Challenges

Circular economy is relevant for adoption essentially because of its sustainable devel-
opment concept, promotes zero waste of materials, resource efficiency and especially
low energy utilization, thus providing several advantages to the society and nature.
Nigeria has mostly remained locked into the linear economy model despite various
circular economy advances made globally (Ogunmakinde 2016).
Nigeria, like many African countries, does not have large-scale recyclable collec-
tion from source, less than 12% of waste is formally recycled from dumpsites in an
unsafe and hazardous condition. The poor waste disposal methods lead to clogged
drains, flooding and other environmental problems.

8 Municipal Waste Management

Over 35 million tonnes of municipal solid waste are produced yearly in Nigeria,
including food waste, textiles and plastics.
Tires: an estimated 90% of tires are imported used from abroad and therefore are
disposed off regularly, requiring a better solution than landfilling.
Biomass: Agriculture is the dominant sector in rural areas (70% of the workforce),
generating a massive quantity of residue, impacting the ecosystem.

9 E-Wastes

Dell, HP and a host of electronics manufacturers have created an alliance that will
purchase electronic waste from consumers for recycling purpose. Currently, Hinckley
a company established by in 1989 by HP developed a sustainable business model
on e-waste and the first and leading registered electronic waste recycler in Nigeria.
The developed recycling facility can share the metals but important elements such
as gold, copper, mercury are not extracted due to lack of equipment.

10 Plastic Waste

According to Weblers, eight (8) million tons of plastics make their way into the ocean
annually, 100,000 tons of PET bottles are produced in Nigeria annually and 91% of
plastics are not recycled. Lagos currently generates about 730,000 tons of plastic
waste annually with just 5% recycled. The World Bank projects that plastic usage in
Lagos is set to grow at 9.6% annually leading to about 1.9 million tons by 2025.
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 291

Extended producer responsibility gradually been practised in Nigeria. For exam-

ple, the food and beverages industry have formed a recycling alliance under Coca-
Cola to collect all plastics and packaging materials which are thereafter recycled.
This model is based on polluter pays principle, where the manufacturers of packaging
materials are now responsible for managing of used plastic.

11 Research and Opportunities

Circular economy is a concept that has been increasingly gaining ground in global
conversations over the past few years. A few cities and companies have already
started executing this concept as new business models and technologies emerge, the
opportunities for agriculture, manufacturing and waste management can be harnessed
to improve livelihoods and reduce poverty.

12 Private Sector Practices in Nigeria

Sunray Ventures developed “Green Compass Recycling” to introduce the princi-

ples of Circular economy to Africa, with a focus on electronic and electrical waste.
According to Sunray Ventures, e-waste generated in Nigeria is growing by 8% per
annum as 80% of electronic goods imported into Africa are second-hand. In pro-
viding solutions for Nigeria, the Sunray Ventures Founder shared that a GC plant
covering 7,000 hectares of land will be developed in Lagos, while discussions are
on-going with six (6) states in the country on effective waste management measures
and service.
Lagos Deep Ocean Logistics Base (LADOL) suggested that “Local Content Pol-
icy” in sectors like the oil and gas companies have to be challenged to adopt best
business practices. Investment in skills, training and jobs is critical to driving a
sustainable circular economy in the country, for instance, through its “Upskilling
Academy—World Class Campus” which set a target of training 2,000 Nigerians
annually by 2022.
Lafarge Africa Plc in 2018 outlined initiatives driven by the company to support
the circular economy. The “Geocycle Nigeria” by Lafarge initiative according to
Lafarge is a global network that specializes in co-processing and alternative raw
materials with cement mineral content. They also mentioned that the “RoadCem”
innovative product which is ideal for sustainable road construction, reduces the need
to repair bad roads and a soil-stabilizing cementitious binder and calcium hydroxide
enabling plasticity and enhanced strength.
292 S. A. Aremu et al.

13 Research Supporting Circular Economy in Nigeria

Nigeria committed itself to move towards zero waste at the United Nations (Anukam
2011). There is dearth of research works targeted directly at circular economy in
Nigeria. However, many works have reported studies related to various aspects of
the circular economy (3R’s) such as reduce, reuse/repair and recycle or the 5R’s such
as refuse, reduce, reuse/repair, recycle and recovery/repurpose/rot. These research
works, looking into the various components (either 3R or 5R), support the attainment
of circular economy in Nigeria and help in her bid to achieve sustainable development.
Ogunmakinde (2016) developed a circular economy-based waste management
framework for Nigeria and assessed its adaptability to the management of construc-
tion wastes. Ezeohaa and Ugwuishiwu (2011) conducted a literature review to inves-
tigate the potential of abattoir wastes to befoul the environment, or cause hazards
to human health, and harm to living resources and ecological systems. The paper
proposes some research considerations on the pollution potential of abattoir wastes
in Nigeria and developed optimized abattoir waste management strategies that would
ensure reduction in environmental pollution.
There are many researches in Nigeria which reported studies related to the conver-
sion of solid waste to energy products through torrefaction, pyrolysis and gasification.
Few researches reported the upgrading of solid waste through densification tech-
niques such as briquette, pelletization and cubing while others studied how to deter-
mine the optimum location of waste to energy facilities in Nigeria. Lasode et al.
(2015) evaluated the amount of wood waste available for energy generation in Ilorin,
Nigeria through the assessment of twenty potential energy facility sites. They used
the single facility location with rectilinear distance model to determine an optimum
location for an energy generating facility based on the impact of four major con-
straining factors: the net amount of waste available, transportation cost, social effect
and environmental effect. The most feasible location away from the optimum loca-
tion was chosen through the construction of a contour, which is within the Industrial
zone of Ilorin, Nigeria.

14 Special Learning

The circular economy concept is gathering momentum, but significant effort is

required to move the level of an idea to action. There is an increasing understanding
of what the circular economy offers. Hence, important strategies must be put in place
to address some of the most pressing environmental, economic and social challenges
of the twenty-first century, while also providing positive economic benefits. There
are a lot for Nigeria and her populace to learn from the developed economies on
the policies and strategies to adapt to achieve the desired goal. There is need for the
government to action to her commitment to zero waste through sound policy frame-
works that will address the emerging challenges of attainment of set objectives. The
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 293

problems militating against effective waste management in Nigeria has attained an

emergency status. A circular economy task force may be required to address specific
barriers to the attainment of the goals under the auspices of the National Environ-
mental Standard and Enforcement Agency (NESREA) as was created at the G20
Summit in Germany on July 2017 (World Economic Forum 2018). Efforts must be
geared towards bringing the private and public sector into collaborations to scale
impact around circular economy initiatives.

15 Factors Affecting the Implementation of Circular

Economy in Nigeria

The problems militating against municipal waste management in Nigeria are numer-
ous and diverse, and these problems are related to economical, technological, psy-
chological and political aspects.
(a) Poor Funding
This is one of the major problems constraining the waste management sector. Inca-
pability of purchasing new waste collection trucks, limited staffs, poor vehicle main-
tenance, unsubsidized waste storage containers, inability to purchase equipment
amongst others are all attributed to a shortage of capital. Actualizing waste man-
agement projects require consistent funding to achieve answers to strategies yet to
be implemented.
(b) Poor Legislation and Implementation of Policy
The constitutional strength of municipal waste management policy is weak and inef-
fective. Also, the implementation of this policy is not monitored. The policy is not
well structured and definitely tends to be weak. There are instances in which due
process is obstructed and sanctioned penalty is not expended on certain municipali-
ties and individuals. Policies are yet to be aimed at the 3R’s of waste management—
reduce, reuse and recycle. Government policies on waste are not revisited, reaffirmed,
restructured and upgraded in a comprehensive tune and form.
(c) Limited Infrastructures and Professionals
Limited solid waste infrastructures are one of the major contributing indexes of poor
waste management system in Nigeria. The environmental protection agencies and
waste management personals are not experts and exposed to workshops and trainings
that meet international standards on technology use, information management and
knowledge management. Most of the state environmental protection agencies lack
adequately trained personals.
(d) Level of Awareness in Nigeria
Populace awareness on sustainable waste management is still very poor, and effort by
the agencies to increase awareness is still very low. Municipal members are not well
294 S. A. Aremu et al.

informed on the adverse effects of indiscriminate and improper disposal of waste

and also the benefits of such act.
(e) Recovering and Recycling
Access to possible recyclable material possesses great difficulty due to poorly lim-
ited recycling programmes. The informal recycling programmes involve scavengers’
effort search of recyclable items. Presently, the informal sector renders the service of
retrieving and recycling of materials in Nigeria. The introduction of an advance for-
mal recycling programme presents positive and accelerating outcomes for municipal
waste management sector.
(f) Disposal
The landfill disposal technique of waste materials with a dearth of treatment processes
and open dumping possesses increasing public health hazards to human lives, animals
and plants. However, the emission of poisonous gases such as methane and carbon
dioxide cause alteration of weather, leading to climate change.

16 Drive for Circular Economy

A. Cultural belief wastes are viewed as invaluable and useless materials rather
than wealth. Wastes are not seen as valuable materials that can be recycled for
actual use, material recovery and energy recovery. The value of waste to people
enhances the actualization of the process involved in the management of waste.
The conception of waste as worthless is inherently linked with societal organized
cultural systems of where things belong. However, consumer’s activities are
largely a function of common societal cultural values and norms.
B. Communication channels: the dearth of an effective communication channels
affects the knowledge acquisition of municipalities in the management of waste.
Communication channels such as mass media and posters are often adopted in
the transfer of new information rather than the face to face which involves one
on one practical interaction process.
C. Collaboration with International Solid Waste Management Organiza-
tion/Agencies: the existence of limited collaboration with International Solid
Waste Management organizations impedes rapid sustainable development within
the waste sector. Interaction with International waste agencies is rarely a focus
area for waste management.
D. Centralized Waste Collection Containers: in Nigeria, centralized municipal stor-
age containers are not in place. This presents the municipalities with placement
challenges of sorted and recycled materials of different categories. The need for
centralized municipal collection points is not viewed as a means to a solution for
recycling and material recovery. Thus, such agenda is not included in platform
for waste management. The available funds are not directed to meet the purchase
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 295

of the waste storage containers for managing waste management. Purchase of

municipal storage containers for different collection point is indeed necessary.
E. Packaging and Product Producer Involvement: the involvement of packaging
producer in the management of waste is limited. Producers’ interests are mainly
in the production of content packages rather than the management of these
packages. Due to the low level of material and energy recovery, material cost is
not maximized and this directly affects the cost of packaging production. With
the increasing effect of improper waste management, the manufacturing sector
interest lies mainly on profitability rather than waste reduction.
F. Personnel morale field workers in charge of waste collection and transporta-
tion often have low morale. Their performance is determined with the extent of
stigmatization encountered on the job, poor remuneration and stagnant promo-
tion. Field staffs are not also encouraged by the consumer’s manner of habitual
waste storage.

17 Proposed Knowledge Management Solutions

The presentation of knowledge management solutions in the management of munic-

ipal waste in this context is not only in terms of technology centred approach but
rather a people centred approach. With respect to municipal waste management, the
people-centred approach focuses on individuals that fall within the municipal waste
management chains. This includes municipal waste generators, packaging firms or
producers and waste management companies while the technology centre approach
focuses on the use of ICT’s as knowledge and information repository in the manage-
ment of municipal waste.
People should be orientated knowledgeable to conceive waste as being a valuable
resource for material and energy recovery and also on the environmental conse-
quences of waste dumps on drainage channels, streams, pathways and roadsides.
The more interaction with international waste agencies is required to close up
existing gaps between developed and developing countries and to ensure efficient
municipal waste management. This interaction would open doors to new coping
strategies of managing waste effectively in Nigeria, amongst which is knowledge
The need for information flow between waste generators, producers and waste man-
agement companies is vital in bridging the knowledge gaps.
The communication and exchange of knowledge are facilitated between waste
generators and producers of recyclable packages such as plastic, tins and cartons
provided comprehensive descriptive logos or labels are inscribed with expressions
in English and three major languages on such containers have been recyclables. The
recovery process of these recyclables from consumers will be possibly not challeng-
ing if certain incentives are attached to the return of such items. These incentives are
consumer-generated incentives that are derived at the point of purchase as the cost of
296 S. A. Aremu et al.

the actual containers is already added to the purchasing cost of the items. The trans-
fer of information and knowledge to municipalities should be undertaken by waste
management (social workers) companies through effective communication channels
involving face-to-face communication. Aside other means of communication, the
face-to-face channel of communication should be employed by the municipal waste
management companies to interact with and orientate members of the municipalities
on disposal habits, sorting and storing of waste in an environmental friendly manner.
The importance and benefits attached to waste separation, proper storage, collection
and effective waste management needs to also be communicated. The eye contact
and interaction between the sender and receiver help to achieve the desired goal
to a large extent. Efficient management of waste is promoted if municipal storage
containers are available at subsidizing price. The storage containers should be of
different colours indicating the various categories of municipal waste for a particular
storage container. In bridging the knowledge gap existing between packaging and
product manufacturers; and waste management companies, the need to deliberate
and share knowledge on what ought to and can be reuse and recycled to produce the
actual container or alternative containers and energy is paramount. A cohesive collab-
oration between the packaging manufacturer and waste companies will enhance the
prerequisite knowledge and information transferred to communities. Hence, some
level of participation is required of them in order speed up actualization process.

References

Anukam, L. C. (2011). Statement on the round table on moving towards zero waste and sound
management of chemicals, The 19th session of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development
(High-level Segment), Federal Republic of Nigeria. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.
un.org/content/documents/425nigeria.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2019.
Aremu, A. S., & Sule, B. F. (2010). Policies, practices and challenges of municipal solid waste man-
agement in Nigeria. Environmental Issues, 3(1), 1–10. Published by the Department of Geography
and Environmental Management, University of Ilorin, Nigeria.
Aremu, A. S., & Ganiyu, H. O. (2019). Waste to energy: Developing countries’ perspective. In S.
Ghosh (Ed.), Waste management and resource efficiency (pp. 167–176). Singapore: Springer.
Ezeohaa, S. L., & Ugwuishiwu, B. O. (2011). Status of abattoir wastes research in Nigeria. Nigerian
Journal of Technology, 30(2), 143–148.
Grolier Incorporated. (1962). The American peoples Encyclopedia. New York, NY: Spencer Press
Inc.
https://www.imf.org World Economic Outlook. (April, 2019). Assessed June 7, 2019.
https://www.worldbank.org. Nigeria overview. Assessed June 8, 2019.
Lasode, O. A., Balogun, A. O., Aremu, S. A., Akande, K. A., Ali, M. C., & Garuba, A. O. (2015).
Optimum location analysis for wood waste-to-energy plant in Ilorin, Nigeria. Journal of Solid
Waste Technology and Management, 41(1), 50–59.
National Policy on Solid Waste Management. (2018). Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Nnaji, C. C. (2015). Status of municipal solid waste generation and disposal in Nigeria. Management
of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 26(1), 53–71.
Ogunmakinde, O. E. (2016). Developing a circular economy-based construction waste manage-
ment framework for Nigeria, Poster Presentation at the Conference of the Faculty of Engi-
neering and Built Environment (FEBE), University of Newcastle, Australia (FEBE). Available
Circular Economy: Nigeria Perspective 297

at: https://Www.Researchgate.Net/Publication/318337956_developing_a_circular_economy-
based_construction_waste_management_framework_for_nigeria/references. Accessed June 14,
2019.
Olukanni, D. O., Adeleke, J. O., & Aremu, D. O. (2016). A review of local factors affecting solid
waste collection in Nigeria. Pollution, 2(3), 339–356.
Olukanni, D. O., & Aremu, O. D. (2017). Provisional evaluation of composting as priority option
for sustainable waste management in South-West Nigeria. Pollution, 3(3), 417–428.
Olukanni, D. O. & Oresanya, O. O. (2018). Progression in waste management processes in Lagos
State, Nigeria. Journal of Engineering Research in Africa (JERA), 35, 11–23.
Olukanni, D. O., & Nwafor, C. O. (2019). Public-private sector involvement in providing efficient
solid waste management services in Nigeria. Recycling, 4(19), 1–9.
Sujauddin, M., Huda, S. M., & Hogue, A. T. (2008). Household solid waste characteristics and
management in Chittagong, Bangladesh. Waste Management, 28, 1688–1695.
Thanh, N. P., Matsui, Y., & Fujiwara, T. (2011). Assessment of plastic waste generation and its
potential recycling of household solid waste in Can Tho City. Vietnam. Environmental Monitoring,
175, 23–25.
Waste Management World. (2019). https://waste-management-world.com/a/the-future-of-the-
circular-economy. Site accessed on 10/06/2019.
Wilson, D. C., Rodic, L., Scheinberg, A., Velis, C. A., & Alabaster, G. (2012). Comparative analysis
of solid waste management in 20 cities. Waste Management Research, 30, 237–254.
World Economic Forum. (2018). Platform for accelerating the circular economy. Avail-
able online at: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_PACE_Platform_for_Accelerating_the_
Circular_Economy.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2019.
Ying, J., & Li-Jun, Z. (2012). Study on green supply chain management based on circular economy.
Physics Procedia, 25, 1682–1688.
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway

Kåre Helge Karstensen, Christian John Engelsen and Palash Kumar Saha

1 Introduction

Circular economy is a principle of economic activity that aims to ensure that resources
remain in the economy for as long as possible. This may be achieved by reducing
raw material consumption, waste generation, emissions and energy consumption.
The waste and recycling industry represent the largest part of the circular economy
today, and it is estimated that more than 600 million tons of wastes can be recycled
or reused in Europe (EC 2015).
The European Waste Framework Directive (WFD 2008) issued by the European
Commission lays out common recycling targets and strategies for the EU Member
States. The objective is to achieve a level playing field and improved resource effi-
ciency in waste management. Six Member States landfilled less than 3% of their
municipal waste in 2011, while 18 States landfilled over 50%, with some exceeding
90% (EC 2015).
Circular economy has a significant growth potential in Europe and in Norway. On
average, recycled materials only meet less than 12% of the EU demand for materials
(EC 2019). EU alone may save 600 billion US dollars annually after 2025 if industrial
companies are able to turn their business around a circular economy (MacArthur and
McKinsey 2015). In addition, such a transformation can create more than two million
jobs by 2030, according to the EU Commission.
Norway is not a member of the European Union but have access to trade and
other forms of relationship through a European Economic Area Agreement, which
also means that Norway needs to comply with various EU directives, as the WFD.
The waste hierarchy, i.e. prevention, recycling, material recycling, energy utilization
and final processing in order of priority, constitutes the framework for the regulatory
development in the EU and Norway.

K. H. Karstensen (B) · C. J. Engelsen · P. K. Saha

Foundation for Scientific and Industrial Research (SINTEF), P.O. Box 124, 0314 Oslo, Norway
e-mail: khk@sintef.no

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 299

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_16
300 K. H. Karstensen et al.

In Norway, the total material recycling level in 2017 was around 45%, which
indicates a huge potential for circular economy initiatives (SSB 2019). Norwegian
recycling companies must have access to international markets, on the same basis as
other importers and exporters of raw materials. Harmonized and open waste markets,
across national borders, strengthen the willingness to invest in the industry. Further-
more, a level playing field is crucial for the ability to invest in profitable, innovative
and resource-efficient waste and recycling facilities.
Norway has a mixed economy with state and private ownership in, for exam-
ple, the petroleum sector (Equinor), hydroelectric energy production (Statkraft) and
aluminium production (Norsk Hydro). This provides a sound basis for growth in
Norwegian circular economy which involves both private industry and the govern-
ment.

2 Minimizing Resource Consumption and Rationalizing

Resource Utilization Based on 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse
and Recycle)

The linear economy of “take-make-dispose” is not sustainable in the long run, given
the volatile resource prices, supply disruptions, economic losses and environmen-
tal strain. A circular economy is a regenerative system in which resource input and
waste, emission and energy leakage are minimized through long-lasting design, main-
tenance, repair, reuse, remanufacturing, refurbishing, recycling and upcycling. The
aim is to keep the value and utility of products, materials and components as high as
possible for as long as possible. A circular economy will contribute to reduce future
resource scarcity, help reduce climate impact, provide opportunities for innovative
services and deliver new levels of economic efficiency and resource productivity.
The total generation of all non-hazardous and hazardous waste in Norway was
11.7 million tons in 2017. Around 21% of the waste was placed at landfills which
indicate that there is still a significant potential to contribute to the circular economy.
In particular, about the inorganic waste types like concrete, masonry, various types
of slag, fly ash and dust which constitute 50% of the landfilled materials. However,
for other waste streams, for example municipal solid waste, organic hazardous waste
and EE waste, a sound waste management system is implemented for high recovery
rates.
Innovation in the waste sector in Norway is guided by the waste hierarchy and
the circular economy principles. Valorization of these waste streams is possible due
to ambitious policy, well-functioning waste management systems, innovative tech-
nology and good communication between the different stakeholders in the region.
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway 301

3 Legislative Framework and Government Support

Towards Implementing 3Rs and Circular Economy
Initiatives

3.1 Government Strategy

In 2015, the Norwegian government appointed an Expert Committee to propose a

national strategy to promote “green competitiveness” towards 2030 and the low-
emission-society in 2050 (Regjeringen 2015). Norway and the EU are prioritiz-
ing a circular economy agenda to deliver the next generation of jobs, growth and
investment. Research funds, innovation support, consumer demands and legislative
requirements will provide opportunities for those businesses using resources more
productively.
The Norwegian government presented a White Paper to Parliament on waste
policies in a circular economy with an emphasis on increasing reuse and recycling
on 21 June 2017. The White Paper also outlines Norway’s strategy to strengthen
international commitment to combat marine litter through cooperation in the Nordic
region, the EU, other regional fora and through the UN (NMCE 2017).
Long-term goals on waste reduction in different industries are also in the pipeline.
Recently, an agreement with the food industry was established aiming to reduce
food waste by 50% by 2030. The Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment
announced that a similar type of collaboration will be established with the textile
industry.
Norway has a tradition of using national policy targets combined with regula-
tions, economic incentives, information and extended producer responsibility (EPR)
schemes. Agreements between the branch/trade and the government on producer
responsibility have promoted efficient waste management and product optimiza-
tion for packaging, waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) and PCB-
containing glazing units, and taxes/fees have encouraged recycling and established
a market for waste. At the regional level, counties are free to set their own targets
and develop local/regional plans. This has been important for optimal and adapted
resource efficiency in Norway (EEA 2016).

3.2 Extended Producer Responsibilities

The fundamental idea behind EPR is to place a responsibility for the post-consumer
phase of certain goods on the producers. According to OECD, EPR is a policy
approach under which producers are given a significant responsibility—financial
and/or physical—for the treatment or disposal of post-consumer products. Assign-
ing such responsibility could in principle provide incentives to prevent wastes at
302 K. H. Karstensen et al.

the source, promote product design for the environment and support the achieve-
ment of public recycling and materials management goals. In Norway, the EPR is
implemented for products that contain dangerous substances and materials that are
important to recycle (NMCE 2004):
• Electrical and electronic (EE) products
• Batteries
• Packaging
• Vehicles
• Tyres
• Double-glazed glass containing PCB.

3.2.1 Electrical and Electronic Products

Electrical and electronic products may contain health and environmental harmful
substances. The collection, sorting and treatment of the waste derived from these
products are regulated in the directive of waste electrical and electronic equipment
(WEEE) (Directive 2012/19/EU), which is implemented in Norway.
All producers and importers in Norway are required to be a member of a compli-
ance scheme for WEEE. An environmental fee is added to the price of goods coming
out on the market. The amount of the fee is determined by the costs associated with
collection and recycling of the product. In order to follow up producers and importers
of EE products and resourced companies, the Norwegian Environment Agency has
established the EE register. The EE register has an overview of all manufacturers
and importers of EE products and informs them of what duties the waste regulations
impose on them.
All municipal recycling stations are obliged to receive EE waste from con-
sumers—completely free of charge. The same applies to retailers selling the same
type of product that the consumer wishes to discard, regardless of brand. Therefore,
municipalities and retailers must also be affiliated with an approved compliance
scheme for handling the EE waste.

3.2.2 Batteries

The battery directive (Directive 2006/66/EC) has the objective of improving the
environmental performance of batteries by regulating the use of certain substances
in the manufacture of batteries (lead, mercury, cadmium, etc.) and setting standards
for the waste management of these batteries. The interpretation and implementation
of this directive in Norway has put the responsibility of a safe and sound management
of waste batteries on the battery producer. This means that the entity that puts the
battery product on the market is considered as a producer. The producer may transfer
the EPR tasks to an authorized third party (compliance organization).
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway 303

Table 1 New recycling

Material Recycling Recycling Recycling
targets of packaging waste
fraction target 2025 target 2030 Norway
laid down by EU (Directive
(%) (%) 2016a (%)
(EU) 2018/852) and the
recycling level in Norway in All 65 70 50
2016 packaging
waste
Plastic 50 55 45
Wood 25 30 4
Ferrous 70 80 Not given
metal
Aluminium 50 60 Not given
Metal total Not given Not given 83
Glass 70 75 90
Paper and 75 85 80
cardboard
a SOE Norway (2019)

3.2.3 Packaging and Packaging Waste

In 2017, the Norwegian waste regulation (NMCE 2004) was revised, and the producer
responsibility for packaging was added. This implies that all entities that annually
import or produce more than 1,000 kg of packaging wastes must finance collection,
segregation and material recycling.
The financing is conducted by membership of a compliance organization autho-
rized by the Norwegian Environment Agency. In the directive amendment (Direc-
tive (EU) 2018/852) to directive on packaging and packaging waste (Directive
1994/62/EC), new material recycling targets for packaging waste are provided; see
Table 1. The recycling level in Norway is also shown in the same table, and it can be
seen that the Norwegian level is roughly close to the EU target for 2030. Recycling
of wood is an exception, as around 96% is energy-recovered in Norway.

3.2.4 Vehicles

Manufacturers and importers are responsible for the collection and recycling of
discarded vehicles in Norway, so-called full producer responsibility. According to the
directive on end-of-life vehicles (Directive 2000/53EC), the reuse and recovery for
all end-of-life vehicles, by 2015, should have been minimum of 95% by an average
weight per vehicle and year. Within this target, the reuse and recycling shall be a
minimum of 85%. The same target is also implemented in the Norwegian waste
regulations (NMCE 2004).
Around 140,000 car wrecks are collected in Norway annually. This represents
95% of the total scrapped cars. The recycling of car wrecks is mainly about the
304 K. H. Karstensen et al.

recycling of parts, material recycling of metal and other materials such as plastic and
glass, as well as energy recovery. The rest goes to final disposal.
The company Autoretur AS has been responsible for collecting and recovering
discarded vehicles. The company has good geographical coverage in Norway. The
recycling and reuse level of car wrecks was 87.7% in 2018 (Autoretur 2019).

3.2.5 Tyres

The tyre industry is responsible for the collection and recycling of car tyres. Con-
sumers have the right to deliver discarded tyres for free at the tyre dealers. Between
45,000 and 50,000 tonnes of car tyres are collected, which make up about 4 million
discarded tyres a year.
It is prohibited to place tyres on a landfill, and Norsk Dekkretur AS is responsible
for collecting, storing and processing discarded car tyres. In 2018, the 60,411 tonnes
of used tyres were collected in Norway (Norsk Dekkretur 2019).
The following treatment and disposal methods were used: co-processing in cement
industry (75%), material recycling (20%), reuse (2%) and the rest fraction of water,
metals and residual waste (3%). Hence, none of the collected tyres were placed on a
landfill.

3.2.6 Double-Glazed Glass Containing PCB

Manufacturers are obliged to ensure that any waste holder can deliver PCB-
containing insulating glass for proper handling against a consideration that does
not exceed the normal price for the delivery of insulating glass panes without PCBs
to ordinary waste recycling plant. The manufacturer must cover the additional costs
beyond this. The Norwegian Environment Agency determines for three years at a
time what is considered the maximum normal price for the delivery of insulating
glass routes without PCB.
The Norwegian company Ruteretur AS was established in 2002, after an agree-
ment was signed between the Ministry of the Environment and the owners of Rutere-
tur. The company is a non-profit company that collects discarded PCB glass panes
throughout the country and ensures that these are handled safely. Ruteretur is owned
by the industry itself, via branch organizations in the building and construction indus-
try.
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway 305

4 Future Plans and Targets in the Country/a Particular

State/Localized Initiatives

4.1 Circular Bio-economy

Around 651,000 tonnes of waste were processed at biogas and composting plants
in 2017, and 56% was used for biogas production (SSB 2019). This is a significant
increase in the last 5 years. Some of the reasons may be the prohibition to dispose
biodegradable waste in landfill from 2009.
Biogas is a common term for the gases methane (CH4 ) and carbon dioxide (CO2 )
that occur when organic materials (e.g. food waste) decompose. If the waste decom-
poses without access to oxygen, it is left with about 60% CH4 and 40% CO2 . These
gasses are suitable for different purposes and are today mainly used for transport and
food production.
Around 350 buses were running on biomethane in 2016. Given that they run a
total of 70,000 km each year, this alone gives a climate gain of more than 30,000
tonnes of CO2 . Unlike diesel, biomethane also releases very little soot particles and
does not impact the local air quality with particles that are harmful to the lungs. It
is, therefore, ideally suited for high-traffic roads located in densely built-up areas.
In addition, one can utilize CO2 from the biogas in greenhouses. Plants need CO2
and sunlight to grow (i.e. photosynthesis). If the carbon dioxide in the greenhouse is
made from food waste, it is an excellent example of how we can use the resources we
already have around us to form circular value chains, rather than resorting to fossil
sources.
In addition to the biogases produced from the waste, the “left-over” is biofertilizer
which has similar properties like other manure. Biofertilizer can be used in organic
farming. It adds important nutrients to the soil and thus reduces the need for fertilizers.
In addition, carbon is stored in the soil. If the biogas plants are utilized fully in
Norway, they can produce 600,000 tonnes of liquid biofertilizer directly to agriculture
or as input goods in commercial fertilizer, compost, garden soil or growth soil. When
biofertilizer is used for new food production, this is in practice circular economy,
i.e. the resources in the waste (nutrients) are used over and over again. In addition,
soil is supplied with carbon that prevents erosion and depletion. Biogas is, therefore,
an important instrument in order for Norway to be able to achieve the EU’s goal of
material recycling.
306 K. H. Karstensen et al.

4.2 Norway’s Programme to Combat Marine Litter

and Microplastics

Approximately 80% of the litter that ends up in our oceans comes from land-based
sources. The problem is in the oceans, but important solutions are on land. Improve-
ments in waste management should, therefore, be a key priority. Sixteen of the top
20 producers are middle-income countries (majorly in Asia), where fast economic
growth is occurring, but waste management infrastructure is lacking. Assuming no
waste management infrastructure improvements, the cumulative quantity of plastic
waste available to enter the marine environment from land is predicted to double by
2025 (Jambeck et al. 2015).
Norway has established a programme to combat marine litter and microplastics
in developing countries. The impact of the assistance programme will be to “Pre-
vent and significantly reduce marine litter and microplastics from sources in partner
countries”. Activities to be supported by this programme are to be implemented
exclusively in countries that are major sources of marine litter, as, for example, in
Asia. Norway wants to enhance international cooperation to prevent marine littering
within the framework of the UN Environment Assembly.
The government has allocated around 35 million USD in 2018. Norway has also
taken the initiative to make improved waste management and prevention of marine
litter focus areas of the World Bank’s fund PROBLUE. Combatting marine plastic
pollution is a long-term commitment; Norway intends to spend 200 million USD
to assist developing countries combatting marine litter and microplastics over the
next four-year period (State Secretary Jens Frølich Holte’s addresses at the seminar
Stepping Up to Stop Marine Plastic Pollution in Washington, DC, USA).
The Norwegian Government also intends to reduce emissions of microplastics
from key land-based sources in Norway and strengthen the clean-up efforts of plastics
from along the Norwegian coastline. It has recently been decided to establish a
National Centre in Lofoten/Vesterålen that will hold a central role in the clean-up
effort. A grant scheme will also be introduced for local authorities that want to
implement measures to reduce marine litter and microplastics as local authorities are
key players in carrying out measures against marine litter and microplastics.

5 Examples of Research Projects

5.1 OPTOCE

International action is a key to tackle the most significant sources of plastics litter in
the oceans, i.e. insufficient waste management infrastructure in developing countries
and emerging economies. The project “Ocean Plastic Turned into an Opportunity
in Circular Economy (OPTOCE)” aims to demonstrate the feasibility of using pub-
lic–private partnerships to collect wastes from polluted hot spots, major river basins
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway 307

and beachfront areas and to treat the wastes in local industries (https://optoce.no).
Pilot demonstrations will be conducted where non-recyclable plastic wastes will be
energy-recovered in local energy-intensive industry, constituting a win-win concept
and a fundamental pillar in circular economy. Such practice will increase the treat-
ment capacity for wastes significantly, reduce the need for landfilling and incinera-
tion, reduce the consumption of non-renewable fossil fuels and virgin raw materials
in energy-intensive industries, and finally reduce the release of greenhouse gases.
Recyclable fractions will be sent to recyclers.
Lessons learned will be shared through a regional multi-stakeholder forum
enabling awareness raising, capacity building and efficient replication across the
continent. The forum will bring together relevant stakeholders to demonstrate cost-
efficient and sustainable solutions to urgent local problems with global impacts. Ini-
tial partner countries are China, India, Thailand, Vietnam and Myanmar, but the final
selection will be subject to their baseline situation and their willingness to engage in
the project with own resources. Other countries might be considered. Opportunities
and challenges linked to plastics are increasingly global, and addressing them will
significantly contribute to achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. SIN-
TEF has been implementing several waste recovery projects in Asia the last twenty
years.

5.2 SFI Circular

The project, SFI Circular, aims to create new business opportunities that increase
value creation and competitiveness in the Norwegian industry (SINTEF 2018). At
SFI Circular’s core are the academic partners SINTEF, NTNU and Nord University
together with industrial enterprises in Norway committed to making a transition to
a circular economy. SFI Circular will focus on identifying, evaluating and imple-
menting innovative opportunities for value creation from adapting circular economy
principles within and across different sectors. SFI Circular creates value by pooling
resources from many industries and sectors.

5.3 PlastiCircle

The project, under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation
programme, aims to develop and implement a holistic process to increase recycling
rates of packaging waste in Europe including improvement of the plastic packaging
waste chain from a circular economy approach (http://plasticircle.eu).
The target is to increase collection of plastic waste by 10%, and thus, the imple-
mentation of PlastiCircle approach in Europe has the potential to increase col-
lected plastic by 860,000 tonnes, create 500–1,400 new companies and generate
12,000–33,000 new jobs. There are multiple partners in the project from Norway,
308 K. H. Karstensen et al.

Spain, UK, Italy, Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia, Belgium and Germany. SINTEF
is the only partner from Norway, and its main contribution will be the integration
and validation of the results on collection, transport, sorting and recycling. SINTEF
also contributes to transport optimization, recycling and life cost analyses.

5.4 Construction, Demolition and Surplus Material Projects

The WFD includes a target for recovery of construction and demolition waste (C&D
waste). Within 2020, the preparing for reuse, recycling and other material recovery
of non-hazardous construction and demolition waste (excluding naturally occurring
material) shall be increased to a minimum of 70% by weight.
The target was added during the final negotiations of the Directive text, and instruc-
tions for verifying compliance were established in 2011 (Arm et al. 2017). Norway
has implemented the WFD and must comply with this target through the partnership
of the European Economic Area. The directive is intended to be an overall key driver
for circular-driven economy for C&D waste.
Although most of the C&D waste material recovery in Norway is by unbound use
like road constructions and backfilling operations, there are ongoing initiatives that
focus on recycling the waste entirely into new building products (e.g. concrete and
paving blocks). Some of the ongoing circular economy-based C&D waste initiatives
are mentioned below:
• Recycled aggregates from excavation materials are used in road construction and
concrete production (RESGRAM) 2016–2020. The overall objective for the treat-
ment and recycling plant is to convert more than 90% of the incoming excavation
materials into commercial products, supported by Research Council of Norway
(RCN 2016a, b).
• Use of local materials (Kortreist Stein) 2016–2019. The main objective of the
project is to develop new technological solutions and tools, smart business models
and good regulation processes to be able to utilize rock materials from infrastruc-
ture projects and local quarries in a superior and sustainable manner, supported
by Research Council of Norway (RCN 2016a, b).
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway 309

5.5 SINTEF Priority Programme on Circular Economy

SINTEF group priority programme on circular economy is a holistic approach

through the focus on circular economy (SINTEF 2019). SINTEF combines tech-
nological expertise with economic and environmental expertise to provide our cus-
tomers with multidisciplinary solutions. Important topics are development of opti-
mization models combining technological possibilities with economic and environ-
mental effects, development of innovative business models and new forms of coop-
eration as well as developing the materials and technology of tomorrow.

5.6 Lessons Learned

A study of the 15 companies in Norway concluded that collaboration is essential

for how businesses transition to, and operate, circular business models. Moreover,
Norwegian industry’s characteristics of trust and reciprocity generate favourable con-
ditions for close collaborations. Collaborating in clusters and industrial parks fur-
ther enhances the strategic benefits, as it is proposed to facilitate for specialization,
knowledge-sharing, relation-specific investments and utilization of complementari-
ties (Zagragja and Rydningen 2016).
Deloitte has studied the circular economy practices of the 50 largest Norwegian
companies and compared them with the global pioneers. Some of the important
findings of a study by Deloitte on Norwegian circular economy benchmark (2018)
are the following:
• Successful innovators that look beyond product performance and CE principles
can provide valuable input as a source of innovation.
• Circular economy allows economic growth while optimizing the use of resources
and transformed patterns of production and consumption chains.
• Norwegian firms innovate primarily within the network, process and product per-
formance and focus the least on channel for distribution.
• Compared to the global benchmark, there is untapped potential for Norwegian
companies to leverage opportunities related to the circular economy business
development; consumer goods industry in Norway outperforms the global players.
Integrated waste treatment practice is a win-win concept and a fundamental pil-
lar in circular economy; waste and discharges in one industry are used as inputs
and resources in other industries. This waste management practice will increase the
treatment capacity for wastes significantly, reduce the need for landfilling and incin-
eration, and reduce the consumption of coal and raw materials in energy-intensive
industries, like cement manufacturing, and finally reduce the release of greenhouse
gases.
The winners of tomorrow will be the companies that are able to create more value
out of less resources. This demands an innovative mindset, a long-term perspective,
new business models and willingness to collaborate.
310 K. H. Karstensen et al.

5.7 National Recycling Initiatives Contributing to a Circular

Economy

5.7.1 Waste Sorting and Treatment for Household Wastes Generated

in Oslo

The Oslo Energy Recycling Agency’s (EGE) main task is to sort household waste
from the municipality of Oslo, produce district heating and make biogas and biofer-
tilizer (Oslo Municipality 2017).
The lifecycle-based waste management system in Oslo plays an important role
in helping the city to reach the climate goals like material for recycling of 50%
by 2018, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 95% by 2030 and achieve climate
neutrality by 2050. An important contribution is EGE’s two optical sorting plants
at Haraldrud and Klemetsrud, where source-separated household waste is sorted, as
shown in Fig. 1. Expanded source separation of food waste and plastic packaging
helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve local air quality. It also aids in
the recovery of valuable resources found in waste products.
Waste sorting is done with the aid of a fully automated optical sorting process
for source-separated household waste, separated into bags with specific colours. The
optical sorting plants are equipped with cameras that can identify the colours of the
bags with about 98% accuracy.
The three lines at Haraldrud and Klemetsrud can sort 150,000 tonnes of household
waste per year; the Haraldrud sorting plant is currently the world’s largest, as per

Fig. 1 Optical sorting of waste at Haraldrud

Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway 311

June 2017. The various stages of the sorting process are briefly described in the
following.
Households in Oslo city sort their waste into three categories: food is sorted in
green bags; plastic packaging in blue bags and residual waste in regular shopping
bags. This type of waste separation is an addition to existing systems for sorting
paper and cardboard, glass, metal and hazardous waste. A major advantage of this
system is that the bags can all be placed into the same bin and transported in the
same vehicle to the waste management plant.
• Pre-sorting: During the first sorting stage, larger unwanted elements and loose
waste are sifted through a robotic pre-sorting process at the plant, where only
blue, green and common plastic bags are allowed through. Unwanted waste of all
sizes is removed and sent off for incineration, while the rest of the bags continue
to the next step in the sorting process.
• Preparation for optical detection: When the robotic pre-sorting stage is complete,
household wastes in the bags are distributed onto three conveyer belts equipped
with robotic arms. The robotic arms rearrange the bags into a line, getting them
ready for optical reading and sorting. The distance between the bags makes it
easier for the optical cameras to read the colour and prevent the bags from being
on top of each other.
• Optical sorting: When the bags arrive for optical reading, the cameras detect the
colour of the bags with 98% accuracy. There are two sensors that detect green
bags, one sensor that detects blue bags, and one sensor that detects both. Blue
and green bags are removed with the aid of robotic arms, while those bags that
are neither blue nor green continue further for recycling. The blue and green bags
are transferred onto separate belts, where the colour codes are detected a second
time through what is known as negative sorting. This process discards bags and
elements which are neither blue nor green, but which may have been removed in
error in the previous stage. The bags are then sent to separate containers. These
optical sorters have a 98% detection rate.
• Blower: The blue bags undergo yet another quality control. To weed out the blue
bags that contain waste other than pure plastic packaging, a blower or negative
sorter has been installed on the blue belts. Lightweight bags can pass, but bags that
are too heavy (more than about 600 g) are sent off for recycling. These are bags
that contain waste other than plastic. The blue bags which are light and accepted
by the blower continue to the compactor container. Plastic waste in the blue bags
is sent to treatment plants in Germany and Sweden, where it is sorted into 5–7
categories. The plastic is melted into granules and then used as raw material in
making new plastic products.
• The energy of the residual waste is recovered in Haraldrud and Klemetsrud waste-
to-energy plants. The recovered energy is utilized for district heating and electricity
production.
312 K. H. Karstensen et al.

5.7.2 Advanced Plastic Sorting Facility for Household Waste

Romerike Waste Processing IKS (ROAF) works with the collection, sorting, recy-
cling and recycling of waste. ROAF owns and operates the most modern household
waste sorting plant in Europe and have an extensive responsibility to manage the
resources in the waste in a responsible manner. They work continuously to reduce
the ecological footprint of our operations and consider the environment in every-
thing we do. The household wastes from 200,000 citizens in the suburbs of Oslo are
collected. The sorting facility commenced operation in 2014, built at a budget of 25
million euros. The sorted materials are then sent to recycling.
ROAF has developed one of the most advanced sorting facilities in the world
utilizing near-infrared (NIR) technology to sort out five different plastic qualities,
metals and even paper from the residual waste stream. ROAF also administers several
closed landfills as well as a landfill on the same site as the sorting facility. This list
of equipment includes conveyors, NIR machines, drum screens, vibrating screens,
shredder, bag openers, ballistic separator, Eddy current separator, magnetic separa-
tors, wind sifter and star screen. Dry, clean plastic can be recycled as many as ten
times, and one kilo of recycled plastic saves the environment for two kilos of oil,
which would otherwise have been used in the production of new products. It is more
energy demanding to produce new plastic, than to reuse what already exists.
The advanced plastic sorting facility has resulted in the need for only two waste
bins inside each household for the residual waste, i.e. one bin for food waste and one
bin for other non-recyclable residual waste including plastics. This makes it easier for
the consumers to focus on the household segregation (metal, paper, glass in addition
to food and residual waste). The ROAF facility is sorting out around 2,500 tonnes
per year for plastic material recycling.

5.7.3 Co-processing of Wastes in Norway

Co-processing is defined as use of a waste in an industrial process as an input material,

additionally or in substitution of standard (primary, natural) input materials. Co-
processing implies that there is a substitution effect together with the use of the
waste, i.e. that the waste substitutes a fuel, a raw material, an auxiliary material or
any combination of these in the process. Co-processing is widely used in the cement
production. The co-processed wastes in cement industry substitute very often both the
fuel and raw materials. In the cement clinker production, material temperature of up
to 1,450 °C is needed to ensure the sintering reactions. Furthermore, the clinker needs
to be burned in the excess of 2–4% oxygen. Hence, the cement kiln has many inherent
features, which makes it ideal for hazardous and non-hazardous waste treatment (e.g.
high temperatures, long residence time, surplus oxygen, dry scrubbing of the exit
gas by alkaline raw material).
In Norway, two cement kilns are operated by Norcem AS. Both plants practise
installed co-processing. It is emphasized that a dedicated incinerator for hazardous
waste has never been built in Norway. A political decision was taken in the early
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway 313

1990s to use the Norcem cement plants to destroy the organic hazardous liquid wastes.
These plants substitute today approximately 70% of its coal need with waste-derived
fuel, both hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. This strategy increases the waste
treatment capacity significantly, reduces the need for landfilling and incineration,
reduces the coal and raw material consumption in the cement industry and contributes
to reduce greenhouse gases. The waste-derived fuel in the Norcem Brevik cement
plant is from the following sources; 20% from municipal solid waste, 21% hazardous
wastes, 9% from anode carbon, 5% from animal meal and 2% from waste oil.
The use of alternative fuels replacing fossil fuel is one of the key factors for the
cement industry in western Europe in becoming sustainable. In addition to higher
competitiveness, the use of more alternative fuels will also contribute to lower direct
CO2 -emissions due to the use of biomass-based fuels and indirectly by avoiding
landfilling and incineration of other waste types. The Brevik plant is a modern
cement manufacturing process using the latest BAT/BEP technology, i.e. dry process
with pre-heating and pre-calcination, advanced exit gas quenching and cleaning, and
online exit gas monitoring.

5.7.4 Carbon Capture Projects in Norway

The Norwegian Government has initiated a full-scale carbon capture and storage
(CCS) project in Norway. There are two capture projects that are part of the pre-
engineering project: Fortum Oslo Varme waste-to-energy plant in Oslo (i.e. Klemet-
srud plant) and Norcem cement plant in Brevik (Fortum 2019). Both facilities plan to
capture around 400,000 tons of CO2 . This amount is equivalent to removing 60,000
cars from the road for a year.
The CO2 will be transported by ship from the capture plant to an onshore facility
on Norway’s west coast for temporary storage. The CO2 will then be transported via
a pipeline to a subsea reservoir in the North Sea for storage. Equinor, with its partners
Shell and Total, are responsible for the planning of the storage facility. The storage
concept study will be completed during the course of 2019 followed by an advanced
planning study. Once these studies are completed for all stages of the CCS chain, the
basis for an investment decision will be in place. The projects are considered to be
pioneering at an international level.
The Klemetsrud plant is a large source of emissions with annual emissions of more
than 400,000 tons of CO2 . By capturing the emitted greenhouse gas, and subsequently
storing it, it will be possible to reduce the fossil CO2 emissions by around 12% per
year. In 2016, Aker Solutions set up a test facility for carbon capture at Klemetsrud
incineration plant. The pilot project lasted five months and captured successfully
90% of the carbon from the waste incineration. If approved, the carbon capture
technology can be spread to Norway’s 17 waste incineration plants, and even to the
approximately 450 others in Europe. The Norwegian Parliament is expected to make
an investment decision for the project in 2020/2021. The project will then be able to
commence operations in 2023/2024.
314 K. H. Karstensen et al.

Norcem and Heidelberg Cement Northern Europe have a vision of zero emissions
of CO2 from concrete products as seen over its lifecycle in 2030. To achieve this
vision, it is necessary to capture CO2 from cement production. In 2013, Norcem
started a capture project to test different technologies in the plant in Brevik. The
projected was finalized in 2017 which included a feasibility study for use of the
amine technology from Aker Solutions. Furthermore, funding was assigned in the
Norwegian state budget for 2018 for the last stage (FEED study) before the final
construction. The aim of the ongoing FEED study is a detailed review of the project
to provide a basis for an investment decision. The study will be ready by the end of
2019. After a third-party review, the Norwegian Government will submit a proposal
to the Parliament to realize the project. If a decision to invest is made, the project will
then enter a three-year construction phase. The cement clinker plant with full-scale
carbon capture may thus be in operation in 2024.

6 Concluding Remarks

A circular economy is a regenerative system in which resource input and waste, emis-
sion and energy leakage are minimized through long-lasting design, maintenance,
repair, reuse, remanufacturing, refurbishing, recycling and upcycling. An ultimate
result of circular economy is that the term “waste” should disappear from our vocab-
ulary. Hence, waste materials play a key role in the implementation of initiatives that
contribute to circular economy.
The legislative framework for circular economy in Norway is based on the Euro-
pean directives that need to be implemented through the European Economic Area
agreement between EU and Norway. The directives and the Norwegian legislation
impose an increasing responsibility on the producer of consuming products, i.e.
extended producer responsibility. This has been implemented for a number of large
product groups (e.g. electrical and electronic equipment) which results in large waste
streams. The producer responsibility is to a large extent successful and contributes
to a safe and sound waste management which results in increased reuse, material
recycling and energy recovery.
Many national and international circular economy projects are initiated in Nor-
way. They are developed from the common sustainability perspective which focuses
on the circular economy in particular. The R&D projects have different funding
instruments and comprise research on different smart materials, design solutions,
separation processes, carbon capture, legislative enablers, economic models, social
factors, etc.
The focus on ocean plastic is high in Norway, and a strategy is decided by the
government. This is also reflected in newly started projects that focus on reducing
plastic and microplastic to enter the oceans (e.g. OPTOCE). Furthermore, the ongoing
initiatives also have high international collaboration which is decisive to implement
Circular Economy Initiatives in Norway 315

circular economy on a global scale. Furthermore, the governmental participation in

the further development is important as both political and economic incentives are
some of the cornerstones in circular economy.

References

Arm, M., Wik, O., Engelsen, C. J., Erlandsson, M., Hjelmar, O., & Wahlström, M. (2017). How does
the European recovery target for construction & demolition waste affect resource management?
Waste Biomass Valor, 8, 1491–1504.
Autoretur. (2019). Annual report on Environment 2018 (in Norwegian).
Deloitte. (2018). Norwegian circular economy benchmark 2017, March 2018.
EC (European Commission). (2015). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the
Council, amending Directive 2008/98/EC on waste. European Commission 2015/0275 (COD).
EC (European Commission). (2019). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the on the
implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan, European Commission, COM (2019) 190
final.
EEA (European Environment Agency). (2016). More from less—Material resource efficiency in
Europe 2015 overview of policies, instruments and targets in 32 countries. Country profile of
Norway. European Environment Agency May 2016.
Fortum. (2019). A full-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) project initiated in Norway. www.
fortum.com/media/2018/11/full-scale-carbon-capture-and-storage-ccs-project-initiated-norway.
Green Visits (Oslo region), Wastes in the circular economy. http://www.greenvisits.no/waste-in-
the-circular-economy/.
MacArthur and McKinsey. (2015). Growth within: A circular economy vision for a competitive
Europe. In S. Gurewitsch (Ed.), Report prepared by Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey
Center for Business and Environment. 2engage.
NMCE (Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment). (2004). Regulations on waste (FOR-
2004-06-01-930) (in Norwegian).
NMCE (Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment). (2017). Waste as resource—Waste
policy and circular economy. Norwegian White Paper 45 (Meld. St. 45, 2016–2017, Melding til
Stortinget) (in Norwegian).
Norsk Dekkretur. (2019). Annual report 2018—Collection and treatment of discarded tyres, www.
dekkretur.no/. Accessed 9/7-2019 (in Norwegian).
Oslo Municipality. (2017). Fact sheet: Optical sorting of household wastes. City of Oslo, Waste-
to-Energy Agency, https://www.oslo.kommune.no/.
RCN (Research Council of Norway). (2016a). Recycled aggregates from excavation materials used
in road construction and concrete production (RESGRAM). RCN project number 256506/O20.
RCN (Research Council of Norway). (2016b). Use of local materials (Kortreist stein). RCN project
number 256541/O20.
SINTEF. (2018). SFI Circular—Value creation in a green economy. www.sintef.no/en/projects/sfi-
circular-value-creation-in-a-green-economy.
SINTEF. (2019). Circular economy research. www.sintef.no/en/circular-economy.
SOE Norway (State of The Environment Norway). (2019). Packaging waste (in Norwegian). www.
miljostatus.miljodirektoratet.no. Accessed 9/7-2019.
SSB (Statistics Norway). (2019). Most of the biological waste are used for biogas production. www.
ssb.no (in Norwegian).
316 K. H. Karstensen et al.

WFD (Waste Framework Directive). (2008). Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives. OJ L 312,
22.11.2008.
Zagragja, A., & Rydningen, J. K. (2016). Circular economy in Norway—A qualitative study of how
collaboration across firms, industries and sectors act as an enabler of a circular economy in
Norway. Norwegian School of Economics (NHH), Bergen, Spring 2016.
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid
Waste (MSW) in Korea

Seung-Whee Rhee

1 Introduction of Waste Management in Korea

1.1 Regulation for Waste Management

Korean economy is characterized by the service-centered industrial structure and

heavy industries are regarded as main source of economic growth. Rapid industrial-
ization in Korea had been achieved by high rate of economic growth by export-driven
heavy industry. In 2016, gross domestic product (GDP) of Korea is U$29,730 per
capita which is 27th in the world (International Monetary Fund 2016). This economic
growth results in an aggravated environmental load. In particular, it had a significant
impact on the environment in the area of the most industrial complexes. Municipal
solid waste is slightly increased due to increased income and consumption while
commercial wastes are rapidly increased in its volume due to increased business
activities and expansion of economy (Min et al. 2013). Recently, the amount of con-
struction and demolition waste as a commercial waste is dramatically increased due
to a lot of reconstruction projects implemented throughout all the nation.
An efficient waste management system was designed by regulations in Korea. To
manage the waste, the regulations were implemented such as Waste Management
Act, Act on the Promotion of Saving and Recycling of Resources, Act on Promotion
of Purchase of Green Products, Construction Waste Recycling Promotion Act, and
Act on Resource Circulation of Electrical. The purpose of major waste regulation
was shown (Table 1).

S.-W. Rhee (B)

Department of Environmental Engineering, Kyonggi University, Suwon, Korea (Republic of)
e-mail: swrhee@kyonggi.ac.kr

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 317

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_17
318 S.-W. Rhee

Table 1 Purpose of major waste regulation

Regulation Purpose
Waste management act (Enact 1986; Korea The purpose of this act is to promote the
legislation research institute 2016) efficient use of national resources by
facilitating the proper environment-friendly
disposal and recycling of construction waste
generated during construction works, etc., so
as to contribute to the development of the
national economy and the advancement of
public interests
Resource circulation basic act (Enact 2018; The purpose on the resource circulation basic
Ministry of Environment, Korea 2016) act is (1) efficient use of resources and
suppression of waste generation, (2) promote
recycling and proper disposal of generated
waste and reduce consumption of natural
resources and energy, and (3) it defines the
basic requirements for preserving the
environment and creating a sustainable
resource circulation society
Act on the promotion of saving and recycling The purpose of this act is to contribute to the
of resources (Enact 1992; Korea Legislation preservation of the environment and sound
Research Institute 2016) development of the national economy by
facilitating the use of recycled resources by
means of controlling the generation of wastes
and facilitating recycling
Act on promotion of purchase of green The purpose of this act is to prevent waste of
products (Enact 2004; Korea Legislation resources and environmental pollution and
Research Institute 2016) contribute to the sustainable development of
the national economy by encouraging
purchase of green products
Construction waste recycling promotion act The purpose of this act is to promote the
(Enact 2003; Korea legislation research efficient use of national resources by
institute 2016) facilitating the proper environment-friendly
disposal and recycling of construction waste
generated during construction works, etc., so
as to contribute to the development of the
national economy and the advancement of
public interests
Act on resource circulation of electrical and The purpose of this Act is to establish a
electronic equipment and vehicle (Enact 2007; resource recycling system for the efficient use
Korea Legislation Research Institute 2016) of resources and contribute to environmental
conservation and the sound growth of the
national economy by placing restrictions on
the use of hazardous substances, encouraging
manufacturers to produce products readily
recyclable, and facilitating the optimum
recycling of wastes thereof to ensure that
recycling of electrical and electronic
equipment, as well as vehicles, can be
promoted appropriately
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid … 319

1.2 Current Status for Wastes

(1) Definition and Classification of Wastes

Under the Waste Management Act in Korea, the term “wastes” means such
materials as garbage, burnt refuse, sludge, waste oil, waste acid, waste alkali,
and carcasses of animals, which have become no longer useful for human life
or business activities. In Korea, wastes are divided into household wastes and
commercial wastes by source and volume of generation as shown in Fig. 1.
Commercial wastes also are classified by construction waste, general waste, and
controlled waste. Controlled waste means the commercial wastes specifically
enumerated by Presidential Decree as hazardous substances such as waste oil
and waste acid, which may contaminate environments or medical refuse, which
may cause harm to human bodies (Min et al. 2013).
Management of waste in Korea is operated by a dual system. The local govern-
ment has responsibility for the management of municipal solid waste (MSW),
and the discharger in industrial sectors has responsibility for the management
of commercial waste. And Ministry of Environment has the responsibility of
inspection and supervision for all wastes.
(2) Current Status of Waste Generation
Total waste generation has been steadily increased from 2004, and an average
annual increase is 3.2% for the past ten years (2005–2016). Total waste gener-
ation in 2016 was 429,139 t per day. Waste is generally composed of municipal
wastes (12.5%) and commercial wastes (87.5%). Municipal wastes were antic-
ipated to steadily rise due to an increase in population and economic growth.

Among materials which became of no use for human life, any wastes
Household waste
other than commercial wastes

Waste

Construction wastes discharged in excess of 5 tons are included in

Commercial waste
the commercial wastes

Any wastes generated from places of business with discharging

facilities installed and managed in accordance with the Clean Air
General
Conservation Act, the Water Quality and Ecosystem Conservation
waste
Act, or the Noise and Vibration Control Act or other places of
business which discharge more than 300kg of wastes a day

Waste oil and waste acid, which may cause damage to the
environment, or wastes produced by health and medical institutes,
Controlled
animal hospitals, research and inspection agencies that may cause
waste
damage to the human body, such as an extirpated parts of human
bodies and the corpses of laboratory animals.

Fig. 1 Classification of waste in Korea

320 S.-W. Rhee

But, several policies for controlling waste generation (e.g., regulations on dis-
posable goods and a volume-based rate system) have led to a gradual reduc-
tion in the generation amount of waste. The generation of MSW is similar to
1.03 kg/cap./day in 2004 to 1.01 kg/cap./day in 2016 (Ministry of Environment
2016). Commercial wastes have increased by an annual average of 3.7% over the
past ten years (2006–2015) because of a rise in industrial activities, the expan-
sion of economic activities, and energy-intensive industrial/economic structures
(Korea Energy Agency 2016). Among commercial wastes, construction wastes
are 52.7%, which accounts for the largest portion of commercial waste gen-
erated. This ratio indicates that construction waste dramatically increased as
a result of a rise in construction and reconstruction (Ministry of Environment
2016) (Table 2).
(3) Current Status of Waste Treatment
In order to manage the municipal solid waste effectively, it is important to
reduce waste generation and recycle waste as much as possible. In the case of
municipal solid wastes, the implementation of the “volume-based rate system”
has promoted waste separation at the sources and significantly increased recy-
cling, and then the rate of generation of MSW has gradually been decreased.
The recycling rate has shown a steady increase in 2016 because Korea gov-
ernment has been focusing on establishing EPR system to improve recycling
rate, expanding recycling facilities suitable to regional conditions developing
advanced technologies and encouraging the use of recycled products. Since the
recycling of construction waste is very high, recycling rate of commercial waste

Table 2 Trends in waste generation (Ministry of Environment, Korea 2017) (unit 1000 t/day)
Year Municipal Commercial wastes Total MSW
wastes General Construction Controlled Subtotal (kg/cap./day)
waste wastes wastes
2004 50.0 105.0 158.5 8.2 271.7 321.7 1.03
2005 48.4 112.4 134.9 8.6 255.9 304.3 0.99
2006 48.8 101.1 169.0 10.0 280.1 328.9 0.99
2007 50.3 114.8 172.0 9.5 296.3 346.6 1.02
2008 52.1 130.8 176.4 9.6 316.8 368.9 1.04
2009 50.9 123.6 183.4 9.1 316.1 367.0 1.02
2010 49.2 137.9 178.1 9.5 325.5 374.7 0.96
2011 48.9 138.0 186.4 10.0 334.4 383.3 0.95
2012 49.0 146.4 18.6 12.5 345.5 394.5 0.95
2013 48.7 148.4 183.5 12.4 344.4 393.1 0.94
2014 49.9 153.2 185.4 13.2 351.8 401.7 0.95
2015 51.2 155.3 198.2 13.4 366.9 418.2 0.97
2016 53.8 161.1 199.4 13.7 374.2 429.1 1.01
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid … 321

Table 3 Status in municipal solid waste treatment (Ministry of Environment, Korea 2017)
(unit ton/day)
Year Landfilling Incineration Recycling Total
2004 18,195 7224 24,588 50,007
2005 13,402 7753 27,243 49,398
2006 12,601 8321 27,922 48,844
2007 11,882 9348 29,116 50,346
2008 10,585 10,349 31,138 52,072
2009 9471 10,309 31,126 50,906
2010 8797 10,609 29,753 49,159
2011 8391 11,604 28,939 48,934
2012 7778 12,261 28,951 48,990
2013 7613 12,331 28,784 48,728
2014 7813 12,648 29,454 49,915
2015 7719 13,176 30,352 51,247
2016 7909 13,610 32,253 53,772

is increased. In Korea, zero landfill disposal policy is activated in several cities

because it is so difficult to find new landfill site (Ministry of Environment 2011).
The recycling rate of commercial wastes has been increased for the past ten
years. Among commercial waste, the recycling rate of general wastes has been
increased by year. In the case of construction waste, their recycling rates are very
high at 98.1% because they are mostly single material that can be recycled with
ease. However, the reporting system for the management of a construction waste
without considering the secondary waste may be overestimated the recycling of
construction waste. Since construction waste mainly consists of incombustible
materials, the incineration rate is too low as 0.4%, and landfilling is only 1.5%.
The recycling of commercial waste may be significantly increased from 2018
because waste disposal charge system, in which a kind of charge for wastes
landfilled or incinerated is applied, be activated in January 2018 by Resource
Circulation Basic Act (Tables 3 and 4).

2 Resources Circulation Basic Act

2.1 Introduction

In 2015, Republic of Korea imported 94.8% of primary energy due to minimal natural
energy and resource. In 2016, Korea’ oil consumption was ranked the eighth-largest
consumer (2763 k barrel/day) on the world, and imports of oil in Korea were ranked
 322

Table 4 Status in commercial waste treatment (Ministry of Environment, Korea 2017) (unit ton/day)
Year General wastes Construction wastes
L.Fa Inc.a Recycling Others Total L.F Inc. Recycling Others Total
2004 13,616 7044 73,189 11,139 105,108 10,976 2949 134 557 7 148,489
2005 16,604 7326 76,957 11,532 112,419 3491 871 130 451 93 134,096
2006 8897 7709 74,761 9732 101,099 3935 1179 163,871 – 168,985
2007 22,503 7478 76,740 8,086 114,807 3169 1131 167,705 – 172,005
2008 24,285 6937 92,615 6940 130,777 2914 1423 172,110 – 176,447
2009 27,531 6926 82,155 6992 123,604 2792 1283 179,276 – 183,351
2010 23,309 7983 99,627 6956 137,875 2200 919 175,001 – 178,120
2011 23,037 8307 100,750 5867 137,961 2598 987 182,832 – 186,417
2012 21,802 9570 111,974 3044 146,390 4118 1017 181,494 – 186,629
2013 24,629 9339 111,867 2608 148,443 3362 1247 178,929 – 183,538
2014 24,606 8797 118,363 1423 153,189 2956 976 181,450 – 185,382
2015 23,578 9669 121,397 661 155,305 3210 1059 193,365 – 198,260
2016 24,065 128,185 128,185 92 162,129 3058 738 195,648 – 199,444
a L.F: Landfilling, Inc.: Incineration
S.-W. Rhee
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid … 323

the sixth-largest importer (2763 k barrel/day) on the world (Korea National Oil
Corporation 2016). Also, 90% of the mineral resources used in Korea were imported
due to poor natural resources (Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy 2016; Park
2015). Further construction of landfills is difficult in a country where waste generation
per unit area is the fourth largest among OECD countries. Approximately, 56% of
the landfill and incineration waste can be recycled (Ministry of Environment, Korea
2017). So, it is necessary to reduce the consumption of natural resources and energy
by promoting proper disposal of generated waste (Hahm 2016; Hoon 2009).

2.2 Purpose

The purpose of Act on fundamentals on resource is as follows:

(1) Efficient use of resources and suppression of waste generation. (2) Promote
recycling and proper disposal of generated waste and reduce consumption of natural
resources and energy. (3) It defines the basic requirements for preserving the envi-
ronment and creating a sustainable resource circulation society (Korea Legislation
Research Institute 2016).

2.3 Fundamental Principles

(1) Waste generation reduced by efficient use of resources.

(2) When waste is expected to generation, the waste is considered the convenience
and hazardous of circulation use and disposal.
(3) The generated waste should be circulation use and disposal of based on the
following (a–d) in a technically and economically feasible range.
(a) The all or part of waste should be reused as much as possible.
(b) The all or part of waste that cannot be reused should be recycled as much as
possible.
(c) The all or part of waste that cannot be reused and recycled should be recovered
energy as much as possible.
(d) The waste that cannot be reused and recycled following (a–c) dispose of waste
by reduction of impact on human and environment.

2.4 Major Content of the Act

The major contents of Resources Circulation Basic Act consist of construction of

infrastructure for resource circulation, means for promoting resource circulation, and
supporting the resource circulation industry.
324 S.-W. Rhee

(1) Construction of infrastructure for resource circulation

The content of the Act includes basic principles of resource circulation and
the responsibilities of each subject (state, local government, business, citizen,
etc.). The state should promote the resource circulation culture so that the cit-
izen’s understanding of the resource circulation society can be enhanced and
the resource circulation culture widely spread throughout society. In order to
promote international cooperation for the transition to a resource circulation
society, the state shall take necessary measures such as provision of informa-
tion and technical and economic support.
(2) Means for promoting resource circulation
The Minister of Environment and the provincial governor should introduce
the performance management system of resource circulation as a means of
promoting resource circulation, set annual target of resource circulation, and
verify their performance to expand demand for recycling resources. Also, the
Minister of Environment may impose and collect fees of waste disposal when
the waste is disposed of by incineration or landfill, although the waste can be
recycled.
(3) Supporting the resource circulation industry
The Minister of Environment may exclude from the waste by recognizing envi-
ronmentally and economically viable materials as circulatable resources. Rec-
ognized circulatable resources are excluded from the regulation of waste because
they are not waste. In order to foster the resource circulation industry, the state
and the local government can provide financial and technical support for the
petty resource circulation facilities. In addition, the Minister of Environment
may operate an information center that manages and provides information such
as technology to promote the use of waste and circulatable resources.

3 Circular Economy of Municipal Solid Waste

3.1 Paradigm Shift of Waste Policy for Circular Economy

in Korea

In the meantime, the policy of waste management was mainly aimed at building
a comfortable living environment by the method of cradle to grave. Due to climate
change, raw materials and energy depletion, however, the policy direction is changed
that wastes are recycled as much as possible by the method of cradle to cradle. If
recycling is impossible, incineration or landfill can be used finally. The paradigm
changes of waste policy from “cradle to grave” to “cradle to cradle” are shown in
Table 5. The waste policy, based on the principle of resource circulation, is aimed at
minimizing landfill and incineration of waste and maximizing recycling by refraining
from a single use and disposal of wastes to create a resource circulation society in
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid … 325

Table 5 Paradigm shift of waste policy for circular economy in Korea (Ministry of Environment,
Korea 2015)
Category Previous waste policy Current waste policy
Motivation Worsened environmental Climate change, raw material,
pollution due to waste and energy exhaustion
Objective Create clean living conditions Construct a resource
circulation society
Implementation strategy Reduction Efficient production and
recycling → treatment consumption → material
recycling → energy
harvesting → advancing
treatment
Main tasks Volume-based waste fee Resource recyclability
system, EPR, and building the evaluation, recycled product
treatment facilities quality certification, waste to
energy, and merger of
treatment district
Concept Waste Resource (circulation)
Economical support means – Performance management
system, waste disposal fee
system, and economical
support for the resource
circulation industry

which wastes and an emitted energy are recirculated within the economic activity
areas for as much as possible (Ministry of Environment, Korea 2017).

3.2 Build the Means to Promoting the Recycling for Circular

Economy

(1) Recognition system of circulation resources

Among the waste, substances and goods that do not adversely affect the envi-
ronment and human health can be recognized as “circulation resources” by
recognition system. The overview of recognition system of circulation resources
was shown in Fig. 2. If the waste meets the recognition standard through strict
screening by government, it can be feely circulated and used as a resource that
is not subject to regulation such as collection, transportation, storage, treatment,
and use under the Waste Control Act. The recognition standard as circulation
resources are as follows: (1) Not harmful to the environment and human health
and (2) Possibility of trade (highly economical). The first detailed standards are
solid waste (water content less than 85%), non-mixed wastes by other types of
waste or foreign substances, and wastes that can be used as raw materials with-
326 S.-W. Rhee

Fig. 2 Overview of the

recognition system of
circulation resources
(Ministry of Environment,
Korea 2017)

out further processing, etc. The second detailed standards are recyclability, the
possibility of continuous payment, and sufficient market demand, etc. Wastes
excluded from circulation resources are food waste, sludge, animal residues,
liquids (water content over 85%) or gaseous wastes, and hazardous wastes, etc.
(2) Performance Management System
The performance management system of the resource circulation is a system
that establishes resource circulation goals and evaluates and manages their per-
formance in consultation with major industries (1500 businesses in 18 industries
such as electric power generations and steel industries) that discharge a large
amount of waste. The performance management system of the resource circu-
lation is managing the performance targets in order to improve the system of
circulation use in industries. Companies that have outstanding outcomes for the
resource circulation can be provided some incentives such as a financial aid and
a technical support from related government agencies. Even if the performance
was not satisfied, it could be worked as effective measures through technical
diagnosis and industrial needs (Ministry of Environment, Korea 2017). Through
the performance management system of resource circulation, it may be expected
to reduce waste generation at workplace and to substitute circulated resources
for natural resources.
(3) Waste Disposal Fee System
The generation amount of household waste except hazardous waste in Korea is
404,812 ton/day in 2015. Recycling rate (85.2%) for household waste is much
higher than landfill (8.7%) and incineration rate (5.9%). Since landfill and incin-
eration costs are very low compared to recycling costs in Korea, approximately
56% of recyclable wastes have been landfilled and incinerated (Ministry of
Environment, Korea 2017). In order to improve recycling rate and to solve the
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid … 327

Fig. 3 Concept of waste disposal fee (Choi et al. 2017)

problem of losing recyclable resources by landfill and incineration, the waste

disposal fee will be applied in Korea from 2018. The concept of the system of the
waste disposal fee was shown in Fig. 3. As shown in Fig. 3, recycling rate was
not promoted because the cost of recycling is much higher than that of landfill
and incineration. In order to increase recycling rate, the target rate of recycling
can be induced by public opinion, social position, and economical level. The
gap between recycling cost and incineration or landfill cost is the basic guide-
line to decide incineration or landfill fee. As the same method, landfill fee can
be decided by comparing the treatment cost. By introducing the waste disposal
fee for landfill and incineration, the waste amount of landfill and incineration
naturally will be decreased, and recycling will be increased eventually.
It may be desirable that waste amount of landfill will be decreased, and the life
of landfill facilities will be extended as long as possible. However, the certain
amount of waste should be treated by incineration facilities because of sustaining
an overall efficiency in incineration facilities.
(4) Economical Support the Resource Circulation Industry
In order to foster the resource circulation industry, the government and the local
authority can provide financial and technical supports for the petty resource
circulation facilities. The targets to support businesses for the development
of resource circulation society are the installation and operation of facilities,
research and technology development, and recycling business using circulation
resources. Since costs required for supporting on businesses are secured from
waste disposal fee, the disposal fees of landfill and incineration of waste are used
for the development of the resource circulation industry. In order to designate
circulation resources of high quality, the Ministry of Environment, Korea, will
provide a label certification for circulation resource (Lee and Kang 2016). Also,
it is necessary to activate the transaction of circulating resources to foster the
resource circulation industry.
In order to expand the information exchange between the consumer and the sup-
plier and to facilitate the transaction on the circulation resource, the information
328 S.-W. Rhee

center for circulation resource will be operated by the Ministry of Environment.

In order to provide recycling technology and information as well as distribu-
tion of waste resources, the information center for circulation resource will be
established.

By renovating the information center for circulation resources, resources exchange

for wastes and used goods can be traded by an online trading market. The major
contents of the information center for circulation resource are shown in Fig. 3. In order
to search company and transaction effectively, the information center for circulation
resource provides various functions such as Geographic Information System (GIS)
of waste recycling company, bidding and trading function of circulation resource,
waste estimating function, and resource distribution function.
If the transaction of circulating resources is activated through the financial and
technical support of the resource circulation industry, it will have the following
advantages:
1. The economic effect due to the increase in the recycling rate of waste may be
about U$ 3.2billion and about 10,443 employment hiring effects (Ministry of
Environment, Korea 2017).
2. Improve profit structure, foster recycling market, and enhance competitiveness
of related industry through the increase waste transactions and the reduction of
processing costs.
3. Establishing the guideline for a resource circulation society that can respond
effectively to oil prices and raw material prices through the formation of resource
circulation network between suppliers and consumers of used goods and waste
resources (Table 6).

Table 6 Major content of the information center for circulation resource

Type Major content
Flow resource operation – Matching with best flow service provider
Providing resource circulation information – How to recycle the waste and providing price
information
– Recycling technology policy trends
– Environmental regulation information
Online bidding service – Estimation on service
– Online bidding without fees
Circulation resource activation campaign – Activate circulation resource information center
– Expansion of resource circulation culture
through campaign
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid … 329

3.3 Circular Economy Flows in EPR System

As the world faced increasing environmental crises including waste treatment and
diminishing natural resources and energy supplies, most advanced countries tried to
shift waste management policy from waste disposal system to a resource circulation
system. In 2000s, producer’s responsibility was strengthened to improve recycling
policy goals and implementation plans by increasing collection and recycling their
waste products by Act on the Promotion of Saving and Recycling of Resources. In
Korea, extended producer responsibility (EPR) was introduced from 2003 to place
responsibility of recycling on producers determining structures and materials and
to make upgrade in the reduction, reuse, and recycling of waste by encouraging
manufacturers to consider the environment through the overall processes of product
design, manufacturing, distribution, consumption, and disposal (Korea Environment
Cooperate 2016).
The EPR system is basically applied to existing items such as cotton pack, glass
bottles, and tires under the waste deposit system, and packaging materials such as
paper packaging, metal cans, and plastic packaging were subjected to EPR system.
In 2004, film-type packaging materials and fluorescent lamps were added, and man-
ganese batteries, alkaline manganese batteries, and Ni-MH batteries were added in
2008. Now, the target items in EPR system are four types of package such as metal
can, glass bottle, carton pack, synthetic resin packaging materials and seven types of
product such as tire, fluorescent lamps, batteries, lubricants, buoys for aquaculture,
bale silage file, cultivating laver plate.
From the viewpoint of circular economy, material and money flows in EPR system
are shown in Fig. 4. For the recycling of wastes from products or packaging materials
on the manufacturer of the products, in EPR system, producers and importers of
products or packaging materials should recycle an obligation rate of wastes from
products or packaging materials which was decided by the consultation between
government and producer’s association. The obligation rate was publicly disclosed
every year and was assessed in consideration of the annual quantity shipped, the
quantity separated and collected, and recycling results, etc. When producers and
importers do not satisfy with the obligation rate, they should be subjected to recycling
fine which was imposed within a scope of 130% of the actual recycling expenses.
Producers and importers that exceed their obligation rate can accumulate (“bank”)
their results for up to two years. In Korea, most producers and importers have paid
recycling deposit to the association, which remitted recycling expenses to recycling
companies to fulfill the obligation rate of its members.
Since the Resources Circulation Basic Act has been implemented in 2018, the
flow of money in the recycling of waste in the EPR system has changed. Residues
(secondary waste) remaining after recycling are finally disposed of by landfill or
incineration. Since the government in Korea implements a waste disposal fee system
for landfilling and incineration of waste by the Act, the fare must be paid for final
disposal. The government can provide economical support to the recycling facility
330 S.-W. Rhee

Fig. 4 Circular economy flows in EPR system (Rhee et al. 2018)

using the money from the waste disposal fee. Finally, recycling is promoted, and a
resource circulation system is established through the circular economy.
On the other hand, E-wastes and waste vehicles are not managed by EPR system
but are managed by Eco-Assurance System (Eco-AS) in Korea. For the implementa-
tion of resource circulation, the management of E-waste in Eco-AS is implemented
in two means depending on the role of the subjects related discharging E-waste: pre-
vention and post management. As a privative means, manufacturers and importers
must comply with the standards for hazardous materials in products and improve
materials and structure of the products to facilitate recycling. The post management
is a means to promote the recycling of E-wastes and waste vehicles similar to the EPR
system. This is a system that encompasses EU RoHS, WEEE, and ELV directive. In
Eco-AS, the circular economy flows for E-waste are similar to that of EPR ( Fig. 4),
with additional privative means.
Circular Economy of Municipal Solid … 331

4 Summary

In Korea, the amount of waste generated has also increased in proportion to economic
growth, and new policy measures for waste management have become necessary.
In the meantime, the policy of waste management was mainly aimed at building
a comfortable living environment by the method of cradle to grave. Due to climate
change, raw materials and energy depletion, however, the policy direction is changed
that wastes are recycled as much as possible by the method of cradle to cradle. The
current waste policy is aimed at minimizing landfill and incineration of waste and
maximizing recycling by refraining from a single use and disposal of wastes to create
a resource circulation society in which wastes and an emitted energy are recirculated
within the economic activity areas for as much as possible. In accordance with the
changes in the waste management paradigm, the Resources Circulation Basic Act was
enacted from 2018. In order to implement the resources circulation of waste, measures
of economic support for waste recycling are needed. The Resources Circulation Basic
Act consists of infrastructure for resource circulation, means for promoting resource
circulation, and supporting the resource circulation industry to expand the recycling
industry. Since the government in Korea implements a waste disposal fee system
for landfilling and incineration of waste by the Act, the fare must be paid for final
disposal. The government can provide economical support to the recycling facility
using the money from the waste disposal fee. Finally, recycling is promoted, and a
resource circulation system is established through the circular economy.

References

Choi, H. J., Choi, Y., Lee, S. Y. & Rhee, S. W. (2017). Comparison of domestic and international
waste disposal fees for the Resource Circulation Basic Act. Korea Society of Waste Management,
87.
Hahm, T. S. (2016). The tasks of waste legislation system and Framework Act on Resource Circu-
lation. Kyung Hee Journal, 51(4), 339–365.
Hoon, J. (2009). The comprehensive waste management laws and the need for the enactment of the
basic resource circulation laws. Korean Environmental Law Association, 31(2), 115–143.
International Monetary Fund. (2016). Gross Domestic Product. http://www.imf.org/. Access date
November 25, 2016.
Korea Energy Agency. (2016). 2016 Korea Energy Handbook.
Korea Environment Cooperate (KECO). (2016). Extended producer responsibility system.
http://www.keco.or.kr/kr/business/resource/contentsid/1563/index.do. Access date November
28, 2016.
Korea Legislation Research Institute. (2016). Waste Management Act (2015). https://elaw.klri.re.
kr/kor_service/lawView.do?hseq=46237&lang=ENG. Access date November 28, 2016.
Korea Legislation Research Institute. (2016). Act on the promotion of saving and recycling
of resources (2015). http://elaw.klri.re.kr/kor_service/lawView.do?hseq=33581&lang=ENG.
Access date November 29, 2016.
Korea Legislation Research Institute. (2016). Act on promotion of purchase of green prod-
ucts (2014). http://elaw.klri.re.kr/kor_service/lawView.do?hseq=31683&lang=ENG. Access date
November 29, 2016.
332 S.-W. Rhee

Korea Legislation Research Institute. (2016). Construction waste recycling promotion act (2015).
http://elaw.klri.re.kr/kor_service/lawView.do?hseq=37131&lang=ENG. Access date November
29, 2016.
Korea Legislation Research Institute. (2016). Act on resource circulation of electrical and
electronic equipment and vehicle (2016). http://elaw.klri.re.kr/kor_service/lawView.do?hseq=
37412&lang=ENG. Access date November 28, 2016.
Korea National Oil Corporation. (2016). Oil supply and demand status in Korea. https://www.knoc.
co.kr/sub03/sub03_1_1.jsp. Access date November 27, 2016.
Lee, I. S., & Kang, H. Y. (2016). A review on the direction of the framework act on resource
circulation for establishing a resource circulation society. Journal of Korean Institute of Resources
Recycling, 25(6), 82–91.
Min, D.-K. & Rhee, S.-W. Management of municipal solid waste (MSW) in Korea In A. Pariatamby,
M. Tanaka (Eds.), Municipal solid waste management in Asia and the Pacific Islands, pp. 173–194.
Berlin: Springer.
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2009). 1st basic plan for resource circulation (2011–2015).
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2015). 2015 White Paper of Environment 2015, p. 436.
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2016). Resources circulation basic act. http://www.law.go.
kr/lsSc.do?menuId=0&p1=&subMenu=1&nwYn=1&section=&tabNo=&query=%EC%9E%
90%EC%9B%90%EC%88%9C%ED%99%98%EA%B8%B0%EB%B3%B8%EB%B2%95#
undefined. Access date November 30, 2016.
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2017). National waste generation and treatment status 2016.
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2017). What is a resource circulation society?”, https://www.me.
go.kr/issue/resource/. Access date January 25, 2017.
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2017). Policy direction of resource circulation. http://eng.me.go.
kr/eng/web/index.do?menuId=364. Access date: May 25, 2017.
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2017). Transition to a resource circulation society, Choice for
future generations. Environmental Policy Briefs 5, 19–31.
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2017). Explanation on recognition system of circulation resources
(draft).
Ministry of Environment, Korea. (2017). Information center for circulation resource. https://www.
re.or.kr/common/viewIntroPage.do. Access date May 24, 2017.
Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. (2017). Trends of import and export in 2016 and prospects
of imports and export in 2017. http://www.motie.go.kr/motie/ne/presse/press2/bbs/bbsView.do?
bbs_seq_n=158958&bbs_cd_n=81&currentPage=1&search_key_n=title_v&cate_n=&dept_v=
&search_val_v=%EC%88%98%EC%B6%9C%EC%9E%85. Accessed August 18, 2017.
Park, J. H. (2015). Frequently looking energy statistics. Korea Energy Economics Institute.
Rhee, S. W., Choi, H. J. & Choi, Y. (2018). Resources circulation of E-waste in Korea (Republic
of). In The 13th International Conference on Waste Management and Technology (ICWMT 13),
Beijing.
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia
and Region

Milan Pavlović, Miroslav Vulić and Aleksandar Pavlović

Abstract The presented paper shows the current importance of the CE (circu-
lar economy) to the sustainable development of the Republic of Serbia. Fol-
lowing the European Commission’s decision back from 2015 regarding the
transformation of the linear economy into the circular economy, several laws
were introduced in Serbia and are in the process of implementation, with
the goal to stimulate investments in the CE Waste Management. The amend-
ments to the Waste Management Law also give significant contribution to
the CE development. The Ministry of Environmental Protection has signed
an cooperation agreement with the National Alliance for Local Economic
Development (NALED) regarding sustainable development of the CE in Serbia.
International cooperations with institutions such as GIZ, OSCE, etc., are as well
of significant importance to the CE development. This paper provides a numerous
examples of good CE practice in Serbia. Serbian Chamber of Commerce, through
cooperation with the Permanent Conference of Cities and Municipalities (SCTM),
gives their contribution to the development of CE by supporting various activities in
the economic field and the green jobs openings. In the future development, period is
expected that CE should significantly increase GDP.

Keywords Serbia · Circular economy · Recycling · Resources · Sustainable

development

M. Pavlović (B) · A. Pavlović

Faculty of Management, Union University, Belgrade, Republic of Serbia
e-mail: milanpavlovic50@gmail.com
A. Pavlović
e-mail: alpa226@yahoo.com
M. Vulić
Faculty of Economics and Engineering Management, University Business Academy, Novi Sad,
Republic of Serbia
e-mail: miroslavvulic@live.com

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 333

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_18
334 M. Pavlović et al.

1 Introduction

In order to stimulate economic growth and social progress, while preserving a healthy
and clean environment, the European Union introduced a significant new legal frame-
work at the end of 2015 and committed enormous resources to modernize the econ-
omy, strengthen its stability and competitiveness and create new jobs. Circular eco-
nomics is the antithesis of the so-called linear economic model, which involves the
uncontrolled exploitation of natural resources and flow of materials from the factory
through the user to the landfill. The circular economy is changing business models,
habits and ways of thinking, both for manufacturers and consumers, as the new eco-
design of a product extends its lifespan through repair, re-modeling and recycling.
All processes take place using renewable energy. New habits among consumers in
Serbia will shift the focus from manufactured products to services, while the role of
buying products will be taken over by renting them.1

2 How Resource Consumption Is Minimized, and Resource

Utilization Is Rationalized Based on 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse
and Recycle) and Circular Economy in the Areas of

(a) Municipal waste management

Serbia has adopted a National Waste Management Strategy, which is a basic
document that provides the conditions for rational and sustainable waste man-
agement at the Republic level, in line with the European waste management
policy. The strategy envisages the creation of multi-municipal regions and the
construction of regional landfills for trans-stops and recycling stations. In order
to address the problems arising from inadequate waste management at each
municipality level, it is necessary to introduce a Local Environmental Action
Plan (LEAP). This document covers the process of involving both regional
and local community representatives, and it leads to the definition of specific
measures to be taken and finances that must be invested in environmental pro-
tection and restoration. LEAP refers to its name at the level of local communities
(municipalities and cities). The goal of LEAP is to be realistic and achievable
-
within a certain time interval and within a certain budget (Ðurdević et al. 2011).
(b) E-waste
The Ministry of Environmental Protection has signed an agreement to cooper-
ate with the National Alliance for Local Economic Development (NALED), the
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), home appli-
ances maker Gorenje and drinks firm Coca-Cola HBC Srbija on a project to
improve the management of electrical and electronic waste in Serbia, according
to a statement from the ministry.

1 Upravljanje otpadom i otpadnim vodama u opštinama, (GIZ) – Project IMPACT.

Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 335

The project is aimed at creating a level playing field on the market and ensuring
the state secures a comprehensive fee collection. CEO of Gorenje in Serbia,
which shoulders a EUR 3 million annual environmental fee burden and faces
unfair competition from companies that do not pay this levy, according to
reports. The goal is to create a single electronic register of producers and
importers and reform the fee collection system through changes to procedures, as
well as to improve the waste collection system in municipalities, according to a
statement from NALED (National Alliance for Local Economic Development).
Of more than 11,000 producers and importers of products which after use
become special waste streams—such as home appliances and IT equipment—
only 49% filed annual reports to the authorities on quantities sold in 2017,
NALED said, noting that these reports serve to collect environmental protection
fees.
Companies that fail to pay the levy represent unfair competition given that the
fee accounts for up to more than 10% of the retail price of a product.2
Today, there are a large number of smaller e-waste collectors in Serbia that
forward it to the largest collectors for further distribution, export or processing
at the national level.
(c) Plastics wastes
Raising the purchase price for plastic packaging in Serbia would bring positive
changes to the recycling system. In addition to reducing plastic waste in the
environment, such a move would bring the possibility of additional income to
the poorest and marginal sections of society, such as the Roma population. The
Roma population, whose existence in most cases depends on the collection
of raw materials through urban checkpoints, plays a crucial role for informal
recyclers in society. They provide an excellent example of a circular and
sustainable economy in practice, which reflects positively on the environment
and the economy in the context of resource reuse.3 In order to process plastic
waste, the Republic of Croatia has significantly higher purchase prices than
in Serbia, including processing capacities, so that a large part of the collected
plastic waste (especially PET packaging) ends up being exported to Croatia
where it is processed.
Another solution to the problem of recycling in Serbia would be the direct
employment of informal raw material collectors. Such a move would give
marginalized groups social rights, but also integration into a society where
individuals are currently invisible. It is estimated that around 50,000 people in
Serbia are involved in informal collection of raw materials, while a quarter are
under eighteen. Of that figure, 90% are Roma.
However, in order to begin to address the issue of plastic waste in Serbia, it is
necessary, with political will, to change the institutional framework that will
enable these positive changes. Those changes will bring benefits not only to the
environment but also to the people who are an integral part of it (see Footnote 3).

2 https://balkangreenenergynews.com/project-launched-improve-e-waste-management-serbia/.
3 https://www.masina.rs/?p=6778.
336 M. Pavlović et al.

(d) Hazardous wastes

Proper management of hazardous waste remains a challenge as data on the
actual treatment of that type of waste is lacking. To begin with, introducing
hazardous waste registers and identifying capacities and barriers to hazardous
waste management systems in Serbia will improve record keeping and trace-
ability. These registers will gradually be expanded to other types of waste, as
is already the case in several EU Member States.4
(e) In industries
The new model of economic development over the next decade necessitates two
interconnected twists: the first turn is of a structural character with a focus on
industrial growth, investment and export, and the second turn is aimed at accel-
erating the reform processes of European integration (Mihajlov et al. 2014 ).
In an effort to achieve industrial development in different sectors, Serbia faces
the threat of generating large quantities of by-products. Large industrial plants
are considered to be the most important waste generators.
According to the Environmental Report of the Republic of Serbia for 2014, the
amount of generated industrial waste in 2014 was about 6.12 million tons of
waste. Of these, 5.9 million tons were non-hazardous waste, and approximately
210 thousand tons were hazardous waste. The largest producers of industrial
waste are thermal power facilities, while fly ash from coal was generated in the
amount of 4.1 million tons, accounting for 60% of the total amount of waste
produced during 2014.5 Of the total amount of waste produced, 1,579,213 t
(26%) reported the treatment, while 4,545,768 t (74%) remained at the sites
where the waste was produced. Table 1 shows the treatment of waste produced
in 2014, based on the Environmental Report of the Republic of Serbia for 2014
(Luković 2016).

Table 1 Manner of industrial waste treatment in 2014a

Waste Waste Amount of Amount of Amount of Exported
character produced waste handed waste waste amount of
(2014) over for handed over handed over waste (2014)
temporary for disposal for treatment
storage to (2014) (2014)
another
company
(2014)
Dangerous 209,877 168,811 6538 30,215 1769
Non- 5,915,105 5.038 204,883 591,158 10,778
dangerous
a Izveštaj o stanju životne sredine Republike Srbije za 2014. godinu, Ministarstvo poljoprivrede i
zaštite životne sredine, Agencija za zaštitu životne sredine, 2015

4 Stevanović Čarapina, H.
5 Izveštaj o stanju životne sredine Republike Srbije za 2014. godinu, Ministarstvo poljoprivrede i
zaštite životne sredine, Agencija za zaštitu životne sredine, 2015.
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 337

Table 2 Number of registered vehicles with average number of ELV in the last 3 years in the Serbia
Year Number of registered passenger cars Average number of ELV (5.35% of the
number of registered cars)
2016 1,824,628 97,618
2017 1,968,787 105,330
2018 1,999,771 106,988

(f) Research
Table 2 shows number of registered vehicles with average number of ELV in
the last three years in the Serbia.
We observe the average vehicle, Zastava—Fiat brand which is the most repre-
sented in Serbia. Beside ecological contributions, for the circular economy in
Serbia, the most important is quantity of ferromagnetic materials that contains
in Zastava—Fiat vehicles and that is 68%.6 Total weight of the Zastava—Fiat
vehicle is 835 kg (Milivojević et al. 2009), and the volume of ferromagnetic
materials and accordingly is 567.8 kg (0.5678 t).
For the circular economy in 2018, according to the mentioned data if the recy-
cling at the level of 100%, Serbia would have 60,747.8 tons of ferromagnetic
resource materials. This amount is very important for sustainable development,
since Serbia does not have its own resources of ferromagnetic ore. Significant
contribution is also in the reuse of used parts from the recycling process ELV. In
addition to the obtained ferromagnetic materials, ELV recycling in comparison
with the production of ferromagnetic materials from the source materials saves
energy consumed in the production of same by 70–80%, and that is another
significant contribution of the circular economy to the development of Serbia.
There are many sustainable development models of ELV management, based on
recycling, material reduction, reuse and expansion of the economic capacities
of centers for ELV treatment, which could help with mentioned problem.

3 What Are the Legislative Framework and Government

Supports Toward Implementing 3Rs and Circular
Economy Initiatives

At the end of 2015, the European Commission (EC) adopted a new legal frame-
work encouraging the transition of the economy into a circular economy through
investments, modernizing and empowering Europe’s economy, increasing its com-
petitiveness and securing sustainable economic growth in the future. The circular
economy is another economic model that seeks to extend the product’s life and

6 Cirkularna ekonomija kao šansa za razvoj Srbije, Organizacija za evropsku bezbednost i saradnju

(OEBS), Misija u Srbiji.

338 M. Pavlović et al.

return all waste material into the production process. This achieves the efficient use
of resources, the reduction of environmental pollution, with the financial savings
and the creation of new business opportunities to make waste from one industry a
resource for another industry. This package of European regulations aims to con-
tribute to reducing the generation, and improve the quality of waste management,
saving energy and reducing the consumption of resources by 2030.
The Republic of Serbia has been following the processes of adopting and intro-
ducing a circular economy in the European Union (EU) and has responded swiftly
by adopting EC recommendations on circular economy. One of the important devel-
opment documents for the realization of a new vision of development is the National
Sustainable Development Strategy for the Republic of Serbia, which was adopted in
2008 and covers the period until 2017. The strategy provides guidance for further
action in the field of sustainable development, in accordance with key documents
adopted by the United Nations in 2012 at the RIO + 20 conference. According to
the adopted document, states are invited to take opportunities for sustainable growth
and new alternative strategies through the green economy.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Environmental Protection recognized the need
for amending the law and, in cooperation with the Serbian Chamber of Commerce,
the Permanent Conference of Cities and Municipalities (SCTM), business associa-
tions, civil society organizations (CSOs), proposed amendments to laws in the field of
environmental protection, including amendments to the Law on Waste Management.
On February 2016, such changes opened the space for the introduction of a circular
economy and the creation of green jobs. The strategic concept for economic growth
and GDP growth is the efficient use of resources and renewable energy, as well as
the employing of comparative benefits of the natural environment. By introducing a
new institutional structure, it creates a foundation that can support a “third” invest-
ment cycle in which green infrastructure is a growth driver and includes wastewater
management, waste management and renewable sources of energy.
The first step toward a circular economy in the new legislative framework is
measures that support the principle of waste management hierarchy, and in particular
prevention of waste generation.
Namely, the amendments to the law stipulate a number of measures within the
strategic documents, as well as a number of stand-alone measures that represent
a significant support for the prevention of waste generation. These are measures
concerning the design, production and consumption of products. The aim of these
measures is to influence the reduction of waste generation at an early stage of product
production by extending the life of the product, reducing the hazardous substances
in it, as well as by facilitating the “easy return” of the product to the life cycle after it
becomes waste 3Rs. The prevention principle is one of the most important pillars of
circular economy and sustainable development as well as support for the 3Rs model
(Fig. 1).
Amendments to the law also introduce a new priority in the waste management
hierarchy: so-called preparing for reuse. This priority is supported by amendments
to the law through a series of stand-alone measures that the responsible authority is
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 339

Fig. 1 Principle of waste management hierarchy (see Footnote 6)

obliged to take in order to address the introduction and strengthening of the product
reparation system.
Also, the new legal solutions introduce a number of stand-alone measures related
to the improvement of the volume, as well as the quality of recycling, through the
establishment of a separate waste collection system, as well as a number of mea-
sures that are or should be further elaborated with strategic documents related to
reducing the disposal of biodegradable waste at landfill, encouraging composting
and anaerobic digestion.
A novelty in the legislative framework is the introduction of the notion of “by-
products” and “end of status waste,” which mean the return of materials to production,
that is, the return of waste to the life cycle (circular economy).
Amendments to the law elaborate in detail the procedure by which a substance
is obtained in a manufacturing process, and where the purpose of that process was
not to obtain that substance, is entered in the register and obtained the status of by-
products. The law, therefore, prescribes the procedures and conditions under which
a substance receives the status of a substance that can be used as a raw material. The
law provides for a number of conditions for obtaining the status of “by-product”:
that the substance was created as part of the production process, but that the target
production process is not the emergence of that substance, that its further use is
possible without processing, that the use of that substance is certain and allowed,
which means that it does not endanger human health and the environment. Mandatory
documentation has been prescribed and submitted with the request. The burden of
proof of fulfillment of all prescribed conditions rests with the owner of the substance.
Once all the requirements have been met, the register is entered. The by-products
340 M. Pavlović et al.

registry is a new type of registry prescribed by the most recent amendments to the law.
Throughout the process of proving the status of by-products, the law also provides
for the application of European Union guidelines.
Legislative solutions also elaborate the conditions and procedure by which a waste,
after carrying out a reuse operation, can be registered and received a “end of waste”
label, meaning that it can be recycled back into its life cycle and used as raw material.
The law also stipulates conditions for gaining the end of waste status. The conditions
for gaining the end of waste status imply that the item or substance is usually used
for special purposes, that there is a market and demand for such substance or items,
that the material or item meets the technical requirements for special purposes and
the conditions prescribed by the standards for those products, and that their use does
not lead to adverse effects on human health and the environment.
The amendments further differentiate and elaborate two procedures for evaluating
compliance with technical requirements and product standards, namely: the proce-
dure carried out by the owner of that waste, on the basis of which the self-declaring
claim is made, and the procedure conducted by the ministry responsible for envi-
ronmental protection, based on which a Declaration of Conformity of Products is
issued, all in accordance with the Law on Technical Requirements for Products.
In terms of the circular economy, the by-product can in some way be said to be
a step closer to the circular economy than the end of waste status, since from the
by-product with less investment is obtained raw material. Obtaining end-of-waste
status, on the other hand, involves undertaking reuse operations to bring the waste
back into its life cycle.
The obligations of local self-government contained in the amendments to the law
relating to the selection and separate collection of waste also represent a prerequisite
for further strengthening of important components of the circular economy principles
(see Footnote 6).

4 Example of Best Practices

Below is a description of several manufacturing activities in Serbia that are examples

of good practice, which we hope will serve as an incentive to start activities in other
industries.
Tire recycling
Tackling waste tires and/or tires, respectively, are both environmentally friendly,
energy-efficient and economically viable. The physical properties of the tires used
are of great value because they are non-toxic and their shape, and weight and elasticity
make them usable for processing into a large variety of products, whether as granules
or dust.
Eco-recycling Ltd. Sirig7 is one of two waste tire recycling factories in Serbia
and has the highest percentage of waste recycling with modern technology. Over

7 http://www.eco-recycling.rs.
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 341

82,000 tons of recycled waste tires and other types of rubber waste have been treated
at the plant since 2009. The installed capacity is 45,000 tons of waste tires per year.
This is the only plant in Europe to recycle large dump tires from the mine (up to 3.5 m
in diameter and up to 2.6 t in weight). In the process of tire recycling, the percentage
of rubber granulate is highest—60%, steel wire 35% and the rest is canvas—5%. The
recycling process at this factory is 100% environmentally friendly, i.e., there is no
damaging impact to the environment. The recycling process creates no further waste
substance, it is all usable, and it is of utmost importance that there are no associated
environmental pollutions—into the air, water or land. Research has shown that the
mechanical recycling process is far more favorable to the environment and the nature
than incineration for energy purposes. It is through recycling into a rubber granulate
which enters the reuse cycle that we achieve conservation of natural resources. 127.8
kilojoules (kJ) of energy is required to produce 1 kg of new rubber, while only 2.32 kJ
of energy is required to produce 1 kg of rubber granulate.
Elements of the mechanical tire recycling process are: collection, sorting, tearing
of steel cables, cutting to the permitted dimension, mechanical recycling process,
primary cutting (shredding), granulation (multiple stages), sieving and packing stor-
age. This company uses logistics in collecting tires at 36 locations in Serbia from
small waste generators (individuals, tire repair shops, agricultural goods) and large
generators (landfills, industry, rubber, mining, transportation, tire distributors). The
treatment of waste tires gives the material used for the production of new rubber
products in the following industries and fields: construction (roof insulation, sound
barriers in construction, waterproof membranes, rubber tubes), traffic (addition of
asphalt to increase brake safety, vibration, noise reduction, construction of traffic
infrastructure/signaling and parts for new cars, railroad crossings), sports and recre-
ation (grounds for sports fields and playgrounds), households (production of house-
hold rubber parts, protective rubber coverings and horticultural items) and agriculture
(barn lining and for equestrian sport) (Fig. 2).
In Serbia, there are several small companies that make finished products from
recycled rubber, most of which are floor coverings for industry, public buildings,
construction and agriculture (see Footnote 6).
Recycling multilayer packaging for beverage and liquid food packaging
In Serbia, there are two significant plants for the production of multilayer packaging
for the packaging of liquid food and beverages: Tetrapack in Gornji Milanovac and
Elopak in Zemun. Serbia is the leading consumer of packaging in the region with
about 12,000 tons of this type of packaging used annually (Fig. 3).
The problem with collecting multilayer packaging for packaging liquid food and
beverages is that, until recently, this type of packaging waste was completely unin-
teresting to the collector, and the only way to dispose of this type of packaging was
to dispose of it in landfill or incinerate it in cement plants where it was used as an
alternative fuel. Exports for recycling were economically very expensive because the
closest facilities were located in the Czech Republic, Germany and the Netherlands,
which increased the costs on the annual level.
342 M. Pavlović et al.

Fig. 2 Examples of new rubber products obtained after treatment of waste tires (see Footnote 6)

Fig. 3 Multilayer packaging for packaging liquid food and beverages (see Footnote 6)

Multilayer carton packaging for the packaging of liquid food and beverages is
a material consisting of three components whose average content in the tetrapack
is: paper 74%, polyethylene 22% and aluminum 4% . All materials used in the
manufacture of multilayer packaging for the packaging of liquid food and beverages
are of a very high quality because they are intended for packaging food, so that after
utilizing the substance that was packaged in this type of packaging, it retains all
its high properties and quality. Accordingly, it is in the general interest that, once
this type of packaging becomes packaging waste, all the materials that make up its
component are maximally utilized by returning to industrial production instead of
being dumped. This also reduces the greenhouse effect, which causes this type of
waste by releasing methane into the air. In addition to this practical benefit, there
is a legal obligation to reduce bio-waste at landfills, under the European Landfill
Directive, which obliges to reduce the total amount of bio-waste at landfills.
Due to the high representation of paper, recycled paper fibers are used to produce
a variety of paper products. Currently, through processing at Swiss papier d.o.o. in
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 343

Rača, they receive towels paper and one-sided smooth paper for product packaging
and bag production and is a classic example of biomass.8,9,10 .
Multilayer layer carton recycling—production of waterproof eco boards
Waterproof eco panels are construction material consisting of pressed pieces of recy-
cled tetrapack. They meet the extremely high requirements for the consistency of
design, homogeneity and minimal modification of properties, providing excellent
capabilities for modern construction and a variety of other applications. In EU coun-
tries, a total of 30% of all packaging placed on the market is recycled. The first place
in the recycling of multilayer cardboard packaging holds Germany, with a recy-
cling percentage of 68%. In Serbia, 12,000 tons of multiple cardboard packaging
are generated annually. The process of recycling multiply cardboard packaging is
similar to the process of recycling paper—the collected packaging is inserted into
a pulp machine (large mixer) into which water is added. Tetrapack contains 75%
paper, 20% polyethylene (plastic) and 5% aluminum. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has proven that paper recycling leads to a 35% reduction in water
pollution and 74% less air pollution than in paper production.
The panels made at the factory “Feplo” Ltd., Cacak, are waterproof, and their
production is completely environmentally friendly because no adhesives, additives
or formaldehydes are used. The raw material used is waste tetrapack, which has so
far been deposited at landfills, so the product is 100% environmentally friendly. Up
to 20 kg of Tetrapack is required to make a 2.5-square-foot Feplo board, so using it,
the company takes care of and protects the environment. 250 tons of waste tetrapack
are installed monthly in the production of eco boards.11
Plastic recycling
Company “Brzan plast,”12 deals with the processing of waste raw materials from PET
packaging and packaging plastic. The company organizes collection, purchase, pro-
cessing (cutting, washing, drying, production of recycled granulate) and production
of new products for the needs of economy, agriculture and population. Organized
collection through the purchase of old plastic films reduces the pollution caused
by inadequate disposal, as well as the burning of worn-out films, which currently
account for over 5% of all landfill waste. The company produces construction foil
and bags of different thicknesses and sizes from recycled granulates, which save up
to 50% in the relative foil made of granules.
In order to improve production technology in Brzan plast, a mobile diesel baler
press was constructed for the first phase of plastic waste processing. A PET grinder
mill was also constructed and manufactured, which won the first innovation award at
the International Utility Equipment Fair. By design, the mill has advanced features
and is significantly cheaper than mills for these purposes in the EU countries. The

8 https://www.tetrapak.com/rs/about/tetra-pak-fabrika-u-gornjem-milanovcu.
9 www.elopak.com.
10 http://www.swissqualitypaper.com/.
11 http://www.feplo.rs/index.html.
12 http://www.brzanplast.com/.
344 M. Pavlović et al.

company has also developed recycling lines for PET, polyethylene and tetrapack (see
Footnote 6).
Heating with the coffee weed briquette
The coffee weed is a silver membrane that is separated from the fruit of the coffee
during the production process and is a by-product of the roasting process. The results
of the study show that the coffee weed has exceptional thermal power and is a classic
example of biomass.
This research prompted the representatives of Strauss Adriatic d.o.o. Šimanovci
to establish cooperation with the Innovation Center of the Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering in the design of a boiler room for the heating on briquette from coffee
weeds. Given that 140 tons of coffee weed briquette produced annually is enough
for about three months of heating, the boiler room is designed to burn other forms of
biomass. From 1 November 2011, Strauss Adriatic d.o.o. Šimanovci applies a unique
biomass heating system, more specifically with the coffee weed briquette. Thanks
to the savings that this heating system brings, the investment pays off in less than a
year and a half. This kind of heating can be said to be unique, because there is no
information that coffee weed is used in a similar way in the region, and beyond.
The most important effect of this type of heating is the reduced emission of carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere, i.e., greenhouse effect gases (see Footnote 6).13
Ash processing
In the Republic of Serbia, over 6 million tons of ash are produced annually, and
a large amount is used in the construction industry, more precisely, in the cement
industry. Today in the world, ashes are used for three purposes: in cement production,
in construction and in infrastructure, and as a clean development mechanism (CDM)
mechanism.
Depending on the quality, the production of classic Portland cement uses 10–15%
of fly ash, which is mostly obtained from small thermal power plants (e.g., Svilajnac),
for good ash handling, i.e., proper storage and disposal. Large thermal power plants
will only in future be of interest to manufacturers of Portland cement due to the steady
growth of production. For this reason, you will notice that in Serbia, the consumption
of ash for the production of cement is negligible, and it amounts to about 5% of the
production of ash. The use of ash from thermal power plants is very widespread in
the production of various types of cement, which are of great importance, especially
in the protection of buildings from erosion-causing acid rain, as they extend their
usage life.
On June 25, 2015, the Government of the Republic of Serbia adopted the Decree
on technical and other requirements for ash as construction material intended for
use in the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation and maintenance of public-
purpose infrastructure, especially in the construction of transport infrastructure. The
regulation lays down the conditions for the use of ash as a building material in Serbia,
instead of stone, sand or gravel. Such practices have been taking place in the US and
EU for over 50 years (see Footnote 6).

13 http://www.doncafe.rs/.
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 345

5 Future Plans and Targets in the Country or Any

Localized Targets

Serbia is in a transition period of market liberalization and is recognized by the

United Nations (UN) as a country with a transition economy. An essential feature of
a transition economy is the enlargement and popularization of domestic production
and service delivery.
Serbian manufacturers will be obliged in the coming period to comply with EU
rules and standards in order to market their production capacity in this large market.
Currently, Serbia follows a linear model of production, and a very poorly organized
waste treatment system is estimated, which is estimated at 5–7%, the share of primary
energy from renewable sources (about 21%), as well as a very low level of awareness
of sustainable development and the circular economy, which is characterized by and
the absence of an educational body to deal with the circular economy and legislation.
This structure does not support the development of new systems that would foster a
transition to a circular economy.
In such a situation, Serbia faces two paths:
The first road is of a reactive nature, where Serbia would continue to commercial-
ize a product that follows a linear model, respecting only a minimum of conditions
(primarily environmental regulations) to market and enlarge markets for product
services. In this model, it is actually necessary to raise the economy to a level that
satisfies larger markets in terms of capacity and quality. This would improve the
economy, and thus improve the competence of the entire Serbian supply. It defines
world trends that will dominate the longer period of development of the society in the
world (minimum until 2050) and which include, among other things, the continuation
of the urbanization of society, the inaccessibility and scarcity of natural resources
and water, the strengthening of bargaining power of customers and the growth rate
of the sharing economy.
The second path is of a proactive nature, where the Serbian economy would, with
additional investments, move away from the linear pattern and free the economic
entities and society from obligations that would result from the investments neces-
sary for the adaptation of the system in the later phase. The Serbian economy must
go through the development of world social and market trends, and this is a new
opportunity to reduce the time gap between the technological and economic backlog
(estimated at 15–40 years) by introducing the latest systems. At present, the imple-
mentation of the circular economy is nominally more expensive, but the benefits can
be expected much earlier, since Serbia would join the pioneers in introducing the
concept and creating a circular market and would drastically reduce the necessary
transition costs foreseen in the future. In addition, the EU has large funds of profes-
sional and financial assistance, which it is ready to place in the development of the
circular economy. Such a path would read briefly as follows:
Serbia is investing resources in the establishment of the circular market starting in
2017, by increasing the institutional capacity to support such development, raising
the social capacity to accept it, changing the economic system to a more qualitative,
346 M. Pavlović et al.

circular economy, and by 2035, this way of doing business will become the dominant
business paradigm in Serbia which approximates all world trends. Partial education
reform is affecting the creation of a new profile of workers who will be more educated
in the CE field, while the market becomes vocationally independent. By investing in
renewable energy, the state and the market become more independent from fossil fuel
imports. The creation of a modern services market (rather than a product) becomes
evident. Such a market is growing rapidly in the world, and it is predicted that the
transition to such a market will provide the creation of products of service, which
have from 2 to 10 times higher market value. In doing so, Serbia is moving away
from the process industry, and using this model is moving toward a service type of
economy.
The proposed solution that is promoted by the world’s largest research and gov-
ernment apparatus is circular economy (see Footnote 6).

5.1 Situation in Serbia and Potential Opportunities

for Circular Economy Development

The Serbian economy is coming out of recession and is focusing more on stimulating
entrepreneurship, and, with GDP rising, the unemployment rate is slowly declining.
It is important to note that there is still a noticeable shortage of vocationally edu-
cated workers in Serbia, and a lack of jobs for classically educated staff is evident.
This information may lead to the conclusion that profilers are created in the Serbian
education system, which does not meet the current business trends, and despite the
high unemployment rate, the market is dependent on imports. The growth of total
investments has been a positive trend in the last five years; however, there is gener-
ally no strategic commitment to improving modern systems. For example, there is
no infrastructure to create an enabling environment that promotes green technology
investment, waste management or investment in renewable energy (RES) genera-
tion systems. Although Serbia is fairly energy independent (only 27.6% of energy is
imported), we cannot come to the conclusion that we are generating enough energy
within the country’s borders, as industrial activity is still very weak. Increasing indus-
trial activity or potential has led to an increase in energy use; considering that Serbian
entrepreneurs are not currently overly concerned with energy efficiency, it is quite
expected that there will be a gradual increase in energy needs. On the other hand, only
25–30% of renewable resources are used for energy generation, while the energy use
profile shows a low percentage of energy use from RES (about 21%), which leaves
much room for improvement of business in that market, which has two visible ben-
efits: increasing energy independence states and increasing energy capacity while
ensuring cleaner production. In particular, close to 40% of hydro capacity is unused,
while biomass potential exceeds 80% of unused capacity. Water and biomass pro-
duction are defined as national priorities, whose share in RES generation needs to
be increased.
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 347

The growth of industrial production as well as entrepreneurial activity was

recorded. The growth development of a predominantly process industry is the
declared goal of an industry development strategy until 2020 and, as such, enables
the enhancement and revitalization of traditional business systems. However, this
impedes to some extent the introduction of state-of-the-art technical and technolog-
ical systems that would allow a faster transition to the eccentric economy.
Finally, activities from the end of 2015 and the beginning of 2016, which improve
the institutional framework for regulating waste management, environmental pro-
tection and generation, are showing positive developments. In addition, through the
IMPACT project, through a joint initiative of the German Organization for Interna-
tional Cooperation (GIZ), the OSCE Mission to Serbia, the Ministry of Agriculture
of the Environmental Protection and the Serbian Chamber of Commerce, a series of
roundtables was held, in which five cities across Serbia (Sremska Mitrovica, Subot-
ica, Kragujevac, Nis and Novi Pazar) gathered stakeholders to raise their capacities
and raise awareness of the importance of applying the circular economy in Serbia.
These overall actions will gradually be animated and then strengthened institutional
and social capacities for the transition to CE.
At the same time, following the recommendations of the European Commission,
an initiative has been launched at the national level to consider the strategic impor-
tance of the transition of the Serbian economy to this model by the Serbian Chamber
of Commerce, the Ministry of Agriculture and the Environment and the Ministry of
the Economy of the Republic of Serbia, and with the support of Deutsche Gesellschaft
für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH “Municipal Waste and Waste Water
Management—IMPACT” (see Footnote 1).
It can be concluded that the capacity to implement the new business philosophy
is slowly increasing; however, structural obstacles and an outdated strategic national
commitment have somewhat curbed the circular economy, which is in line with
contemporary European and world aspirations for future.
Table 3 presents an overview of the indicators and activities that need to be imple-
mented in order to accelerate the transition to a circular economy in the Republic of
Serbia (see Footnote 6).
As we can see from Table 3, development policies in Serbia have not yet rec-
ognized the circular economy as an opportunity for future development. What is
recognized in the research is that a strategic orientation in this direction is necessary
in order for the policies at the state level to influence the change of opinion of the
local government. An enabling environment in the form of creating a new institu-
tional framework, measures and policies would create a conductive environment for
the introduction of the new concept CE and thus enable companies and the wider
community to benefit as easily as possible from the modernization of the economy.
On the other hand, it is necessary to meet the adequate demand for this kind of sys-
tem of products and services, and counterbalance in the form of willingness of local
communities to accept and demand such products and services is equally necessary.
It is important that the whole process is accompanied by both formal and informal
dual education, as well as the correct informing of the public about the details,
348 M. Pavlović et al.

Table 3 Derived indicators of the situation and activities toward achieving the circular economy
in Serbia (Veselinov 2016)
Current Development
Type of development
status activities
Laws and approximation to the EU
Law enforcement related to sustainable development and environmental
protection
Regulations for RES generation
Definition of "sustainable development" in legislation
Definition of the term "circular economy" in legislation
National strategic commitment to green economy
National strategic commitment to sustainable development
Incentive activities for RES development
Incentive activities for the development of waste management
Incentive activities for the development of the circular economy
Encouraging activities for the development of green entrepreneurship
More effective implementation of RES, CE and waste management laws
Creating stimulating circumstances for the development of eco-design and
clean production
Waste management infrastructure
Renewable energy generation capacities
Introducing Circular Economy into the Education Program
Energy efficiency in the economy
Total treated waste (industrial and domestic)
Level of social and business awareness of the concept of circular economy
Collaboration with international organizations to enhance capacity to
implement circular economy
Number of civil society organizations engaged in CE promotion
State bodies responsible for the development, implementation, and
monitoring of CE
Innovation and innovation investment for CE

Legend Dashes represent the state of | arrows represent activities

On a scale of 1–4: Red (1)—very bad | Orange (2)—the shift is minimal, almost impossible to
record | Yellow (3)—shift visible but weak | Green (4)—Shift visible

importance and urgency of responding to the benefits of the newly introduced changes
(see Footnote 6).

6 Research Supporting and Any Special Learning

and International Collaboration, Etc.

Within GIZ IMPACT project and in cooperation with the OSCE—Mission to Ser-
bia, Serbian Chamber of Commerce, and the Ministry in charge of environmental
protection affairs, a series of round table sessions was launched throughout Serbia
with the aim to promote circular economy, sustainable development and new legal
solutions in the area of waste management.
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 349

Thanks to the support of the OSCE Mission to Serbia, in the previous period,
a significant step ahead was made in strengthening of the civil society, especially
in the area of environmental protection; in their capacity of promoters of advocacy
and promotion of circular economy, civil society organizations provide a significant
contribution to efforts aimed at familiarizing citizens with the concept of sustainable
economic growth in an interesting manner.
Aarhus centers, as important CSOs (Civil Society Organizations), have capacities
which institutions and organizations may engage in their efforts to make information
in this area more easily accessible. The new manner of production and utilization
of products calls for innovative technologies, which open up new possibilities for
cooperation between educational institutions and the civil sector. The main principles
of circular economy comprise all elements needed for strong economic and social
progress with preservation of the environment. Based on the precious experiences
of SCOs in awareness raising, these organizations are recommended as leaders in
advocating for necessary changes.14
The level of circular economy of the surrounding countries depends on EU mem-
bership. Countries in the EU member states follow the European legislation already
defined above, while countries such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Northern Mace-
donia and Montenegro have both a legislatively and operationally lower level of
implementation of the circular economy in social and economic development than
Serbia.

7 Any Special Mention May also Be Added

7.1 Advantages and Applications of Circular Economy

in Serbia

The introduction of a circular economy would have many positive effects, including
the following:
1. Production standardization with the introduction of ISO standards (14001, 9001,
OSHAS18000, 30000, 30001 …), but also with the introduction of other “sus-
tainable” and “environmental” standards and certificates;
2. The transition from the classic process and processing industry to the innovative
industry with a far higher value of final products;
3. The transition from a manufacturing to a service economy, which also promises
a higher market value;

14 CircularEconomy—Closing the loop, Organizacija za evropsku bezbednost i saradnju (OEBS),

Misija u Srbiji.
350 M. Pavlović et al.

4. Raising social awareness on issues of future development of society, such as

sustainable development, active democratization of society through public influ-
ence on decision making, social inclusion, reduction of consumerism and greater
appreciation of domestic, local products and services;
5. Establishing stronger links with international companies moving to sustainable
business and implementing the circular economy, in addition:

a. introduction of best available technologies (BAT),

b. introduction of know-how from foreign markets,
c. facilitating the transition to the common labor market through the employ-
ment of foreign experts and education of local experts.

6. Establishing links with global development partners and networks of organiza-

tions, such as the UN and the EU, with:

a. facilitated access to project financing, with the aim of modernizing produc-

tion and markets,
b. introduction of modern understandings of market organization that enable
greater adaptability of Serbian overall economic supply,
c. a step toward the modernization of society,
d. greater involvement of civil society,
e. strengthening and enhancing relations with countries promoting CE through
mutual projects.
7. Introducing the concept of sustainable development as a turning point for open-
ing new markets, including:

a. Waste management
b. Renewable energy sources
c. Reverse logistics
d. Service activities
e. Knowledge economy
f. High state infrastructure projects
g. Projects of industrial symbiosis and establishment of eco-industrial parks
h. Organized systems for overhaul, repair and re-production
Circular Economy in Republic of Serbia and Region 351

i. Waste and pollution treatment

j. Increase in employment rate
k. New technologies
l. Green innovation
m. CE-based green entrepreneurship.
8. Promoting the modern strategy and direction of Serbia, which improves its
rating for investments from major global funds, especially EU development
funds;
9. Capacity building in Serbia in order to become a center of knowledge and
experience about CE in the region of South East Europe;
10. Entering the market of modern energy trade and a potential pioneering position
to create the so-called smart grids;
11. Education of experts in the latest forms of business and social activity;
12. Reduction of adverse environmental effects, conservation of natural resources
(including minerals, metals, other materials, water and air) and biodiversity.
13. Modernization of industrial plants, which, with proper coordination, would
be supported by large investors in new technologies; creating conditions for
“cleaner production”;
14. Improvement of waste tax and levy models (plastics, cardboard and paper,
metals, glass, etc.) in industry and households (including household and bio-
waste), which would increase the eco-fund to further develop green innovation;
15. Energy independence;
16. High vocational independence (through education empowerment);
17. Significant savings on modernization of the economy (through savings of mate-
rials, energy, water, treatment of pollution, circulation of the same substance);
18. Reducing the technological gap relative to developed countries;
19. Opening up new markets abroad for the placement of products and services
(value and knowledge export);
20. Creating a knowledge economy and facilitating a green economy i
21. Sustainable development of society (see Footnote 6).

Acknowledgements The research is conducted under the Project TR 35,033 financed by the Min-
istry of Education, Science and Technological development of the Republic of Serbia.

References
-
Ðurdević, -
J., Rajković, D., & Ðurdević, S. (2011). Waste management in Serbia through action
„Očistimo Srbiju“, Quality Festival (pp. 315–320). Faculty of Engineering University of Kragu-
jevac, Kragujevac, Republic of Serbia.
Mihajlov, A., Stevanović Čarapina, H., Staudenmann, J., Tadić, M., Stokić, D., Tsutsumi, R., et al.
(2014). Potreba ozelenjavanja ekonomije u Srbiji. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities,
LIMES plus, 17–24.
352 M. Pavlović et al.

Luković, A. (2016). Development of an eco-industrial network-based model for managing indus-

trial waste flow (Doctoral dissertation). Faculty of Occupational Safety, University of Niš, Niš,
Republic of Serbia.
Milivojević, J., Grubor, S., & Milovanović-Kanjevac, K. (2009). Vehicles at the end of life cycle as
a renewable source of high quality material. In Quality festival (pp. 28–32). Kragujevac, Serbia:
University of Kragujevac.
Veselinov, M. (2016). Master istraživanje Budućnost cirkularne ekonomije u Srbiji, Grac.
Circular Economy for Sustainable
Resource Management: The Case
of Packaging Waste Sector in Thailand

Siwaporn Tangwanichagapong, Mohanakrishnan Logan

and Chettiyappan Visvanathan

Abstract The status of circular economy (CE) in Thailand is reviewed in this

chapter. The current CE practices and policy instruments used towards sustainable
resource management in Thailand are presented as well. CE indicators for Thailand
are extensively studied and summarized in the paper. Based on the review, it is estab-
lished that the existing policies and programs on CE are focused more towards 3R
concepts and less on other sub-sects of CE such as products-as-services, next life
sales, product transformation, collaborative consumption, etc. Currently, CE indica-
tors are primarily based on 3R concepts, whereas it is recommended that the other
sub-sects of CE should also be taken into consideration to measure the actual CE
progress. Employing packaging waste in Thailand as a case study, the current cir-
cular economy practice and key barriers to CE implementation were assessed to
propose appropriate policy measures for sustainable waste and resources manage-
ment. There has been an increase in packaging waste in the municipal solid waste
(MSW) stream, of which plastic poses a key challenge in the urban waste stream. The
current flow of packaging waste is predominated by recycling as downcycling. Most
packaging waste remaining at landfills is one-time-use packaging. According to the
comprehensive assessment, consumers had positive attitudes towards 3R practices
and were conscious of waste problems. Economic incentives and regulatory instru-
ments in line with a new waste management policy framework are recommended to
overcome the barriers hindering CE implementation. Packaging waste management
policy framework and policy measures are established through this study.

Keywords Circular economy · 3R · Sustainable resource management · Municipal

solid waste · Packaging waste · Indicators · Barriers · Policy

S. Tangwanichagapong · M. Logan · C. Visvanathan (B)

Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Change, School of Environment, Resources and
Development, Asian Institute of Technology, Khlong Nueng, Thailand
e-mail: visu@ait.ac.th

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 353

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_19
354 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

1 Status of Circular Economy in Thailand

Consideration on circular economy (CE) is vital for Thailand in order to ensure

the sustainable consumption and production since the resource utilization and waste
generation is continuing to increase in the country. Actions are being taken to pro-
mote the initiatives on CE including 3R, cleaner production, eco designing, industry
symbiosis, etc., by the Thai Government. Recycling in Thailand has been become
significant in municipal solid waste (MSW) management practice after 1990s as
an alternative to the open dumping and landfilling practices, emerging as the second
most common method of MSW management. Though these dispersed initiatives help
to effectively manage the waste, the CE concept has a potential to aggregate them
and increase its efficiency in micro, meso, and macro level. After several decades
of initiating number of waste management strategies, steps to introduce CE as a
sustainability concept have been taken. For example, the Ministry of Industry has
proposed a “circular economy framework” in 2018 as a part of the government’s
S-curve policy. The Ministry has also developed circular economy roadmap in col-
laboration with the private companies and United Nations Industrial Development
Organization. Under the S-curve policy, the circular economy will be applied to the
targeted industries and this model will include framework, regulation, and initia-
tives for all companies. The Thailand S-curve policy (Thailand 4.0 Policy) will be
effective for growth of 10 S-curve industries (viz., Next-Generation Automotive,
Intelligent Electronics, Advance Agriculture and Biotechnology, Food Processing,
Tourism, Digital, Robotics and Automation, Aviation and Logistics, Biofuels and
Biochemicals, and Healthcare) in terms of widening investment and opportunities.
Thailand is stepping towards the sustainability achievements in near future through
CE implementation.

2 3R to Minimize the Resource Consumption in Thailand

Several national policies, plans, regulations, projects, and programs have been devel-
oped to enhance the implementation of 3R that in-turn supports circular economy
in Thailand. The national-level initiatives to support 3R practices are summarized in
Fig. 1.
The Government has been encouraging cooperation among various stakeholders
to promote the 3Rs principles as illustrated in Fig. 2. It has identified the importance
of the community participation in 3R practices, hence, there are programs introduced
such as composting and recycling waste bank. The community is empowered through
capacity building, guidelines, and instructions. Steps are taken to initiate recycling-
oriented society ensuring the collaboration of central government, local administra-
tion as well as private stakeholders. The in-house segregation, reuse, and recycling are
well focused by the Thai government. In addition, the central government facilitates
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 355

1. Policies • Green Industry Policy

• Government Green Procurement Policy
• Government's smart city policy
• National Policy and Plan on 3R and E-wastes management

2. Plans • National integrated waste management and 3R strategic plan

• National master plan on the Cleaner Production and Cleaner
Technology
• Strategic Plan on E-wastes
• Strategic Plan on Packaging and Packaging Waste
Management
• Action Plan for Thailand Zero Wastes
• The National 3R Strategy Plan
• National Environmental Basic Plan
• National Solid Waste Management Master Plan
• Pollution Management Plan
• Roadmap on waste and hazardous waste management

3. Law and • Law for Promotion of 3R (draft)

regulations • Municipal Solid Waste Act (draft)
• Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Act (draft)
• Law for Promotion of Source Separation

4. Projects and • Zero Waste Project

programs • Clean and Green City Project
• Green Junkshop program
• Pollution Prevention Program
• Green Industry (GI) Project
• Take – back program for end back program for end -of -life
products
• Thailand green purchasing network
• Industrial Waste Exchange Program (industry symbiosis)
• Thai Green Label Schemes
• One community one Recycling Program
• Recycling waste bank
• Eco industrial town project

Fig. 1 Initiatives to implement 3R in Thailand (Country Report 2017; PCD 2018a)

the local governments to maintain environmental-friendly waste management sys-

tem through technical and financial support. Promotion of public–private partnership
programs, promotion of waste recycling business, introduction of deposit-refund sys-
tems, and take-back programs also contribute to 3R implementation in the country.
Over 200 communities implement the 3Rs and several municipalities have reduced
waste up to 30–50% through 3R practices (PCD 2018b).
The Pollution Control Department has currently developed National 3Rs Strategy
in collaboration with UNEP Regional Resource Centre for Asia and the Pacific
356 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

Step 2: Reuse

Treatment and
Production
Raw material Consumption Waste disposal
distribution

Step 1: Reduce Step 3: Recycle

End products (recyclable material, heat, electricity and biogas)

Fig. 2 National 3Rs principle (Piyapanpong 2018)

under Advance Waste Management in Asia and the Pacific (Wangwongwatana 2018).
Though solid waste recovery is around 22%, the recycling of e-waste is not well
implemented. The government plans to ban imports of electronic and plastic waste in
future and promote e-waste management by extending the producers’ responsibility.
The vision on solid waste management is broad and clear in Thailand where it is
aimed to increase the percentage of properly disposed and recycled waste up to 75%
by 2021 from the current 49% (Pollution Report 2015). The following Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6
and Table 1 from Thailand provide evidences for the potential of resource recovery
through recycling and reuse allowing minimization of virgin resource use.

Box 1: Reducing Metal Waste Through 3R Activities at a Semiconductor

Manufacturing Site by Toshiba Semiconductor (Thailand) Co., Ltd.
(Toshiba 2018)
Toshiba Group is working to reduce waste generation by minimizing the vol-
ume of waste generated per unit activity, which indicates business process

Fig. 3 Waste recovery by Quantity of waste

type of material in 2016 by (MT)
amount (Wangwongwatana 16000
2018) Waste generation
14000
12000 Waste recovery from MSW
10000 Industrial waste exchange
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 357

Waste
recovery (%)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Fig. 4 Waste recovery by type of material in 2016 by percentage (Wangwongwatana 2018)

Fig. 5 Historical trend of waste disposal and utilization in Thailand (PCD 2018c)

Fig. 6 Municipal solid waste re-utilization (PCD 2018c)

358 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

Table 1 Potential for recyclability and reusability of municipal solid waste, industry waste, and
resource recovery facilities (Pollution Report 2015)
Category End of life use Recycle rate Resource recovery
facilities/infrastructures in cities
Glass Reuse/recycle – –
Paper Recycle >70% (high) Every major cities
Plastic Recycle >70% (high) Every major cities
Steel/metal Recycle (50–60%) (average) Every major cities
Aluminium Recycle – –
Rubber Recycle/reuse –
Construction waste Recycle <50% (low) Few major cities
E-waste Recycle <50% (low) –

efficiency improvement, as well as by reducing the total volume of waste to a

level below the Earth’s environmental capacity. Toshiba Semiconductor (Thai-
land) Co., Ltd., has been established in 2013 which manufactures small-signal
devices and optical devices. By implanting 3R strategies, the company is able
to firstly reduce the generated waste by 22.95 tonnes/year by replacing con-
ventional lead frames with high density type frames resulting in increase of
material utilization efficiency up to 242%. Secondly, the generated waste has
been reduced by 1.45 tonnes/year by making the shape of the mould resin
smaller, which has resulted 466% material utilization efficiency eventually.
The company also has promoted recycling of electronic parts, including
spray cans and batteries, to achieve its goal of reducing the final disposal
amount to zero to meet Thailand’s administrative standard. As a result, the
company has achieved “Zero Waste to Landfill Achievement Award 2015”. In
2013, Toshiba Thailand Co., Ltd. has carried out a pilot project to collect and
recycle end of life electric and electronic devices in order to respond to future
recycling legislation and in its marketing strategy.

3 Existing Indicators for Assessment of CE in Thailand

(Pollution Report 2015; UNPAN 2004; National Statistic
Office 2018)

There are a number of indicators in national and institutional level that are available
in Thailand. Based on the review of current status of Circular Economy status in
Thailand, few of them are presented in Table 2.
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 359

Table 2 Existing indicators for CE assessment

S. No. CE indicator Unit
1. Total municipal waste Tonnes per municipality (or) Tonnes per capita
generated, collected,
transported and disposed
2. Municipal solid waste Tonnes per year
utilization
3. Composting plants to treat Capacity per year
organic waste
4. Biogas plants to treat Capacity per year
organic fraction of
municipal solid waste
5. Material recycling facility Capacity per year
for waste processing
6. Incinerators for waste Capacity per year
treatment
7. Open or Sanitary Landfill Capacity per year
for waste disposal
8. Budget for solid waste Million Baht
management (under the
Provincial Environmental
Quality Management
Action Plan)
9. Village units with No. per region
mechanism for reporting
waste processing and
disposal
10. Eco-label products placed % increase per year
in market
11. Hazardous waste Tonnes per year
generation by industries
12. Operational waste Capacity per year
management facility in
industry
13. Waste utilization by Tonnes per year
industries Ex: Co-fuel in
cement kilns
14. Hazardous waste shipped Tonnes per year
overseas for management
15. Waste to renewable energy MW per year
generation
360 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

4 Possible Indicators to Measure CE in Thailand

The study recommends possible indicators for measuring the CE in future in Thai-
land. These indicators consider the aspects of urban infrastructure for Municipal
Solid Waste Management in ‘smart city’ context. Notably, the proposed indicators
consider other sub-sectors of CE other than 3R aspects such as products-as-services,
next life sales, product transformation, collaborative consumption etc. The study rec-
ommends a holistic approach for measuring CE especially in Thailand, as presented
in Table 3.

5 Policy Instruments Used Towards Sustainable Resource

Management in Thailand

Regarding the Natural Resources and Environmental Policy, the government aims to
enhance waste disposal systems and improve disposal capacity of local administrative
authorities. National waste management policies also include promoting the private
sector’s role in research and development for recycling, minimizing waste generation
by promoting the 3Rs hierarchy, promotion of source reduction and separation, waste
recovery for composting, and producing biogas. In terms of waste management facil-
ities, the plan includes establishment of such infrastructure. Currently, the country’s
waste management framework is based on the waste to energy concept. Each focal
area (e.g. landfill, incineration) were covered by a number of laws/acts, regulations,
standards, and technical guidelines of the National Solid Waste Management Policy.
However, existing policies and laws lack regulations that cover the entire system of
waste management and also lack economic instruments to encourage stakeholder
participation and contributions. (Amrehn 2013; WMS 2018; Piyapanpong 2018;
Wangwongwatana 2018; Country Report 2017; Kamuang and Siriratpiriya 2017).
In terms of policy instruments to promote sustainable resource management in
Thailand, the four types of instruments are mainly used. These policy instruments
support the resource management particularly for implementing 3R strategies in the
country, and it is summarized in Fig. 7.

6 Current CE Practices in Thailand

6.1 Promotion of Green Public Procurement

Green Public Procurement (GPP) been initiated in Thailand in 2005 by Pollution

Control Department of the Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment. The
Royal Thai Government has obtained the approval of the Cabinet Resolution in 2008
for the first Green Public Procurement Promotion Plan 2008–2011 and in 2012 for
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 361

Table 3 Possible indicators for measurement of CE

S. No. Category CE indicator Unit
1. Social Public private partnerships for No. per year
CE implementation
Programs to promote CE in No. per year
schools/religious activities
Purchase of recycled products in Baht per year
households and industries
Self-help women groups that No. per region
promote CE activities
Level of awareness of citizen on Qualitative indicator
CE
NGOs and private sectors that No. per region (or) No. per 1000
promote CE through community persons
campaigns, workshops and
conferences
2. Financial Savings through innovation by Baht per year
producers as part of CE activities
Revenue to government through Baht per year
penalties, taxation etc., during
enforcement of regulation
promoting Circular Economy
Circular subscription (sharing % waste reduction each year
high quality products)
E.g. Baby clothes
Financial incentives to promote Baht per year
community in Circular Economy
Increase in income to % increase each year
rag-pickers and waste dealers
through CE activities
Expenditure incurred by a Baht per year
manufacturer to fulfil ‘Extended
producers responsibility’
Savings through installation of kWh/year (or) Baht per year
energy efficient appliances in
households and industries
Budget spent by Baht per year (or) % each year
local/provincial/national
government for CE
implementation
Retail shops providing repair No. per region (or) No. per 1000
services/recycling facilities persons
Expenditures on Research and Baht per year
Development to achieve Circular
Economy
(continued)
362 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

Table 3 (continued)
S. No. Category CE indicator Unit
Subsidies to industries to Baht per year
promote CE activities
3. Technological New business models such as No. per 1000 persons
Uber, Ola, Grab etc.
Reverse Vending Machine No. per 1000 persons
installed
Environmental related media No. per year (or) Baht per year
advertisement
E-waste collection centres No. per 1000 persons (or) No.
per region
Promotion of public transport % increase in users each year
utilisation
Active Mobile apps that promote No. per region
Circular Economy
Improving awareness, attitude No. of views about CE in each
and perception about CE region
through social media
4. Political Laws, regulations, amendments No. per year
etc., for CE implementation
Political will: Policies, No. per year (or) Baht per year
programmes etc., to encourage
CE activities
Green public procurement by % of GDP
the country
5. Environmental Provision of bins for material No. of sets per 1000 persons
segregation
New investment in renewable Baht per year
energy
Production of Bio-based Tonnes per year
products
Consumption of Bio fuels by the Tonnes per year
entire population
Construction or up gradation as No. per region
Green Building
No. of industries declare No. per region
environmental stewardship
No. of industries that are part of No. per region
Industrial Symbiosis
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 363

Regulatory instruments Economic instruments

Laws and o Master law for promotion of waste Taxes o Used Lead-acid Battery Recycling
Regulations reduction, reuse and recycling from up- o A new feed in tariff system for driving
ygjy stream reduction, reuse and recycling production of energy from waste
from up-stream processes to final o Tax incentives from Board of Investment
disposal o Energy Conservation Tax
o Law for Promotion of 3R (draft) Incentives o Incentives for promotion for cleaner
o Municipal Solid Waste Act (draft) technology and production
o Waste Electrical and Electronic o Incentives for the 3Rs operation
Equipment Act (draft)
o Law for Promotion of Source Buy-back o Community buy-back programs
Separation programs o Packaging wastes take-back program
o Solid Waste Management Act Waste to o Waste to energy programs
o WEEE Regulation wealth o Incineration plant (Phuket)
Bans o Government is planning to impose a programs o Landfill gas recovery project in Samut
ban for imports of electronic and prakarn province
plastic waste. o Energy and fertilizer plant in Rayong
o Waste bank program
Guidelines o Regulations and guidelines for o Composting program
Municipal Solid Waste Management o WEEE can do project
Government o Notification of Ministry of Industry for Green o Private waste buying (Wongpanit)
notifications Industrial Waste Disposal Business o Recycling industries
o WEEE Can Do project

SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Voluntary instruments Information-based instruments

Industry o Industrial Waste exchange program Community o Community-based waste

initiatives o ESR for solid waste management based waste management program in Rayong
(waste Management Siam) management o Participatory civil state concept
programs
Public o Fluorescent lamp partnership Capacity o Capacity building on the 3Rs,
private program building and Eco designing, cleaner
partnership o Public Private Partnership for solid trainings production, waste segregation, etc.
waste management o Public and private sector trainings
o Build-Operate-Transfer model Green o Green labeling Guidelines/manuals
Community o Community 3Rs activities Labeling
participation Waste bank program
Campaigns o Waste specific containers
EPR o Extended Producer Responsibility for o Zero Baht Shop
WEEE
Reporting/ o Information reporting system to DIW
Corporative o Green purchasing network Sharing of o National 3R conferences
programs information o E waste inventory
o 3Rs database and information
Campaigns o Tod Pha Pa Recyclable Waste technology
management campaign o State of pollution Report
o GPP online reporting
Awarding o Zero Waste to Landfill Achievement
Award
R&D o Acedemia involvement in R&D

Fig. 7 Policy instruments related to sustainable resource management

the second Green Public Procurement Promotion Plan 2013–2016. With the second
GPP promotion Plan, it has planned to implement GPP more widely from central to
local authorities and public organizations. Under the first Promotion Plan, the GPP
criteria of 14 products and 3 services of high common usages have been announced,
whereas under the second Promotion Plan it has been expanded up to 17 products
and 5 services. The 11th National Economic and Social Development Plan and the
Environmental Quality Management Plan 2012–2016 have integrated the GPP into
the sustainable consumption and production plan. The selection of Green Goods
364 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

Circular Economy • Product-life extension (through TGL

and other labels)
• Eco-design (through TGL and other
Distribution labels)
• Long-life goods (Though TGL and
other labels)
• Reusability (through TGL and other
Consumption GPP labels)
Design/manufact Policy • Renting service system (through GPP
criteria)
• Waste and pollution prevention
(through TGL, GPP criteria, CF label)
Reuse /repair • Industrial Symbiosis (through Green
Industry label)
Recycle/recovery

Fig. 8 GPP in promoting circular economy in Thailand

and Services under GPP in Thailand refers to the ecological schemes including Thai
Green Label (TGL), Green Leaf label and Green Hotel, Green Industry label, Green
Cart Label and Carbon Footprint (CF) label (UNEP 2018).
GPP as presented in Fig. 8 is based on the life cycle consideration of the goods and
services procured by the government. Resource extraction, manufacturing, use, and
disposal phase of the products or/and services need to be environmentally friendly
to become prioritized in GPP of Thailand. Thus, GPP confirms less waste and pol-
lution generation, recyclability, reusability or material recovery, and high resource
efficiency, keeping the material in value chain for long period of time closing the
energy and material loops. There is a greater possibility to expand the facilities for
recycling, repairing, and material recovery as these practices are well recognized
by the public procurement process. For example, in GPP, products with less envi-
ronmental impacts; use of renewable resources, recycle content, less energy, less or
no toxic substances, less material, use of clean technology, less packaging, and less
environmental impacts during the use phase, provide collection system after end of
life and durability are given consideration; which support circular economy in Thai-
land (Bunyagidj 2009). Photocopier rental service is one of the good examples for
the CE business model which through GPP promotes paper recycling (Tippamongkol
2014). Recycled plastic use is one of the considerations as well.

6.2 Environmental, Green Label, and Green Certification

The Green Label is an environmental certification awarded to specific products with

minimum detrimental impact on the environment in comparison to other alternative
products. The scheme has been initiated in 1993 by the Thailand Business Council
for Sustainable Development (TBCSD) and was formally launched in 1994 by the
Thailand Environment Institute (TEI) in collaboration with the Thai Industrial Stan-
dards Institute (TISI). Thai Green Label covers around 124 products and services
including products made from recycled plastics, air conditioners, computers, paper,
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 365

and photocopier. The Thai Green Label and Green cart label consider the environ-
mental concerns in whole life cycle which assist in closing energy and material loops
(TEI 2018). Other than the TGL, Thailand enjoys the benefits of other environmental
labels including Green Cart Label, Carbon Footprint Label, Carbon Reduction Label,
Energy Label, Green Leaf Label, and Green Cart Label as shown in Fig. 9.
Thailand’s Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (TGO) in cooperation
with the Thai Environment Institute (TEI) established “Carbon Reduction Label”
scheme by using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach. Carbon Footprint Label
informs the quantity of GHG emissions from each production unit throughout the
whole life cycle (cradle-to-grave) of a product. Carbon Footprint Label provides an
alternative to consumers to contribute towards reducing GHG emissions by purchas-
ing low emission products and services (Supappunt 2011). 233 products from 68 com-
panies have been certified under Carbon Footprint Label in Thailand in 2011 (Envi-
ronnet 2018). Since the material consumption is a cause for carbon emission, it can
be reduced by closing the energy and material loops keeping the material long term
in the value chain. Thus, the Carbon Footprint Label allows the industries to confirm
their actions towards material recycling, reusing, and reducing.

Box 2: Siam Cement Group; “SCG Eco Value” in Promoting Circular

Economy (SCG 2008, 2018)
Siam Cement Group of Thailand is one of the companies which promote CE
and has obtained the first self-declared environmental labelling called “SCG
eco value” label since 2009. The label criteria are in accordance with the ISO
14021 standard and the label is a Type II environmental label according to the
ISO classification. The criteria concern about the product life cycle includ-
ing product design, reduction in raw material, energy and water consumption
during production and use, the use of renewable materials and energy, recy-
clability, waste reduction, and emission of greenhouse gases. In 2013, SCG
has 82 “SCG eco value” products and services certified contributing to 26% of
revenue from sales, while the target SCG eco value sales volume is one-third of
revenue from sales in 2015. SCG paper is environmental-friendly corrugated
paper that reduces the use of pulp for at least 8%. It considers about three main
areas:

Thai Green Carbon Carbon Energy Green Green

SCG eco Reduction Footprint
Label value label Leaf label cart label
Label label

Fig. 9 Environmental labels supporting the circular economy in Thailand

366 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

Green Process considers as the environmentally friendly approach in paper-

making. It starts from growing trees which will be used for making paper
pulp, to the responsible use of water in the production process. Wastes or by-
products from the production process are treated using internationally accepted
standards.
Green Product involves the initiative to create public awareness on the
responsible use of paper and the benefits of using environmentally friendly
paper. The company educates the public that used paper can be recycled in
order to reduce wastes, minimize the impact on the environment, and maximize
the use of natural resources.
Green Mind is the key to achieve the entire green process. SCG paper has
successfully implemented a new culture of paper use within the organization
by implanting a new value and guideline for responsible paper usage. This
is built on the belief that the organizational culture should be shared with the
general public in order to encourage consumers to do their part by taking action
in using recycled paper and maximizing paper usage.

6.3 Public 3R Campaign in Collaboration

with the Private Sector

Thailand recognizes and encourages the community participation in 3R practices for

sustainable consumption patterns, business opportunities, and to identify the facilities
for safe disposal of the waste. The community participation in 3R is promoted by the
private sector as well as the government sector of the country. The following case
study elicits the cooperation of private sector to support community to manage waste
creating a better opportunity to have an economic benefit.

Box 3: Public–Private Partnership for Sustainable Plastic and Waste

Management (SCG 2018)
Thailand is the sixth biggest contributor of ocean plastic waste in the world
which generates around 1.03 MT per year. 3% of these end up as ocean plastic.
Plastic generation in Thailand is around 12% of total waste which is higher than
the amount in China (11%). The government, private and community-level ini-
tiatives are being implemented in Thailand to address plastic waste generation.
The Plastic Industry Club under the Federation of Thai Industries and Business
Council for Sustainable Development in collaboration with private and civil
society has initiated “Public–Private Partnership for Sustainable Plastic and
Waste Management”. The partnership involves SCG chemicals Co., Ltd., Dow
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 367

Thailand Group, IRPC PCL, PPT Global Chemical PCL, Siam Piwat Co., Ltd.,
and Thai Plastic Industries Association.
The partnership has declared its intention to reduce waste and promote sus-
tainable plastic and waste management adopting CE for at least five years col-
laboratively with the partners. The initiative aims to mobilize actions to reduce
plastic in Thai ocean to less than 50% by 2027. The initiative will help promote
the standard of recycling business, support entrepreneurs to develop innovation
and technology for sustainable plastic management using 3Rs (reduce, reuse,
recycle) principle, educate consumers and the public about the proper disposal
of waste and waste management and encourage behavioural changes, pilot a
clean city model in Khlong Toei District and in Rayong Province, develop
Thailand Plastic Material Flow Database to measure the project’s success and
serve as an internationally accepted plastic database for Thailand.

6.4 Voluntary 3R Initiatives By Producers

In Thailand, there are number of 3R initiatives which have been initiated in different
levels involving different stakeholders. Some of these initiatives are mandatory such
as standards, law, and regulations, yet some are voluntary. Though some of the
voluntary initiatives are less efficient than mandatory actions, there are number of
success stories are available in the global as well as regional levels. Some of the
voluntary 3R initiatives have been started by the public sector, private sector, or
by the communities itself. In Thailand, take-back programs, waste bank program,
extended producer responsibility for WEEE and public–private partnership are some
of the examples for such initiatives which promote 3R.

7 Packaging Waste Management Practices in Thailand

Packaging is defined as “all products made of any materials of any nature to be

used for the containment, protection, handling, delivery, and presentation of goods,
from raw materials to processed goods, from the producer to the consumers”. The
definition of waste is given as “any substance or object which the holder disposes of
or is required to dispose of”. Thailand Packaging Association (TPA) estimated that
the amount of all packaging materials has tended to increase, and particularly plastic
packaging which has increased at a rapid rate given its flexible characteristics.
Packaging waste comprised 22.5% (by wet weight) of total MSW, and of this
plastic was the major type of packaging found in the waste stream (15.8%), followed
by glass (3.5%) and paper (3.2%). Over the last decade, plastic has increased from
368 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

15.8 to 29.3% due to the increased amount of packaging waste (increasing from 22.5
to 35.2%). The proportion of paper and glass packaging has reduced and can be
explained by the current trend of substituting plastic packaging for paper and glass.
Waste audit was carried out at institutional level and food waste was found to
represent the highest proportion of total waste (58%). Packaging waste accounted
for about 37.1% by wet weight, which constitutes around one-third of total waste.
Plastic packaging presents the largest proportion in the waste stream (25%), plastic
bags and Styrofoam were also included as plastic packaging. Lesser waste compo-
nents included glass bottles (6.5%), paper packaging (e.g. beverage cartons, paper
cups, folding boxes) (4%), and metal (e.g. coffee cans made of steel, beer can made
of aluminium) (1.6%) that has the lowest proportion compared to other packaging
materials (1.6%). The overall composition indicates that single-use packaging make
up 57% of total packaging waste. It is clear that consumers generate a large amount
of single-use packaging that ends up in landfill simply because these materials are not
reusable and not sellable. These types of packaging materials adopt a linear approach
(i.e. take-make-waste). Comparison of composition of packaging waste in 2005 and
2015 is presented in Fig. 10.
According to existing law, packaging waste by definition refers to general solid
waste generated by households as regulated and structured in the Enhancement and
Conservation of National Environmental Quality Act of 1992, the Public Health Act
of 1992, and the Cleanliness and Orderliness of the Country Act of 1992. Local
government is the main responsible authorities for managing (collecting, transport-
ing, and disposal) municipal solid waste that includes all packaging waste within
their administrative area. There are no rules, regulations or law enforcement for con-
trolling the generation of packaging waste and managing the entire waste stream
of packaging. Producers and importers are not subjected to take any responsibility
for their post-consumer packaging products. Therefore, packaging waste is often
thrown away and mixed with general household waste and consequently ends up in
final disposal.

Composition
(% by wet wt)
100
77.6
75 64.0

50
29.4
25 15.8
3.5 3.2 3.2 1.8
0
Plastic packaging Glass Paper Other waste type
packaging packaging (food, non-
packaging)
2005 2015

Fig. 10 Packaging waste in MSW in 2005 and 2015 (% by wet weight)

Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 369

Currently, there are inadequate waste collection services in the country. About
57% of local administration organizations that provide waste collection and disposal
services diverted only 7.88 million tonnes or 53% of total volume waste collected to
controlled waste disposal facilities, e.g. to incinerators with air pollution control or
engineered landfill. Waste was delivered to 466 waste disposal sites managed by both
the public and private sectors. In contrast, about 47% of the total volume of waste
collected or 6.93 million tonnes was disposed of through open dumping. For the
remaining 43% of local authorities that do not provide waste transport services, they
disposed of 6.53 million tonnes per year, which accounts for a total of 13.5 million
tonnes per year that was disposed of inappropriately. Since 2008, the volume of waste
has trended upwards but the capacity of LGAs to collect and properly manage waste
remains limited. There is a lack of regulations and ineffective policy implementation
to control waste generation, as well as long-term planning and cooperative planning
among stakeholders to reduce waste upstream.
The national target of waste management was announced in the Environment and
Pollution Control Plan 2012–2016. The rates of safe disposal and waste utilization are
the only two waste management indicators used as planning instruments at national
level. The target is set as follows:
• Rate of safe disposal—should not be less than 50% of total waste generated.
• Rate of waste utilization—this should not be less than 30% of total waste generated.
The review of waste management practices and policies indicated a lack of proac-
tive and innovative measures in response to linear consumption and production pat-
terns. Business as usual is no longer the right way to achieve sustainable waste and
resource management; it requires changes in policy and upstream management as
well as consumption behaviour. Detailed flow of post-consumer packaging materials
by informal and formal sectors is presented in Fig. 11.
Employing packaging waste in Thailand as a case study, the main objective of this
report is to assess the current circular economy practice, and to analyze and identify
key barriers to CE implementation and to propose appropriate policy measures to
enhance sustainable waste and resources management. The research engaged three
main key stakeholder groups: producers, consumers, and the public sector. A set of
CE indicators was adopted from previous studies that proposed relevant CE indi-
cators. Barriers identified in this study are based on responses from stakeholders in
the packaging waste management sector. A mixed-method approach was adopted
for consumer behaviour analysis using questionnaire-based surveys. Waste compo-
sitional analysis, field observations, and key informant interviews were conducted to
investigate the characteristics of material flows. Subsequently, in-depth interviews
using semi-structured interview questions were carried out to gather data on atti-
tudes and opinions towards CE development from key informants which were then
qualitatively analyzed.
 370

Office (Public Education

Industrial sector and Private) institution
6% 6% 1%
Small waste
buyer
7% Food shop & Household,
restaurant CRBs, SCBs
12% 50%
Itinerant buyers
18%

Fig. 11 Detailed flow of post-consumer packaging materials by informal and formal sectors
S. Tangwanichagapong et al.
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 371

8 Overview of Packaging Waste Situation

Packaging waste management and disposal have generally been performed in an

unsystematic manner, with no waste separation practiced at public waste drop-offs
due to limited awareness and the lack of waste segregation culture and environmental
knowledge. Waste collection and separation systems are insufficient to support proper
waste separation schemes. Therefore, packaging waste is unsegregated and mixed
with other types of waste in the MSW stream, even though much of the packaging
could be recycled.
Most post-consumer packaging that can be recycled is collected and sorted for
recycling by waste pickers, scavengers, and itinerant buyers (known as the informal
sector). They play a major role in PCP collection for recycling systems in Thailand.
The government reported that about 6567 tonnes per day of recyclable materials were
traded through junk shops. Of these, 47.06% was from household, community, and
school recyclable banks and municipal collection; 17.36% from itinerant buyers;
11.41% from local food shops and restaurants; 6.46% from smaller waste buyer
shops; 5.45% from the industrial sector; 3.15% from the private sector and office
buildings; 2.35% from government offices; 0.9% from education institutions; the rest
from other sources. Collected recyclables were then transported to the following sites:
Secondary waste buyer shop (40.33%), Recycling factory (22.13%), Larger waste
buyer shops within the same area (20.26%) or outside the area (6.48%), Entrepreneurs
(8.14%), and Others (2.66%).
Several practices and initiatives relevant to post-consumer packaging recovery
and utilization are already in place, which are mainly driven by value and demand
of PCP materials by retailers and business operator/production sectors:
• Deposit-refund system—glass containers for beverages.
• Outsourcing a third party company to collect back their brand-packaging product.
• Collection for recycling by large product distribution centres across the regions.
According to current packaging waste management practices, it is clear that they
are mainly based on a voluntary approach, driven by the value of PCP for recy-
cling as raw materials. There have been few policy efforts from government or city
authorities in supporting and enhancing the circular flow of waste and resources.
Conventional management practices with expected immediate solutions gain more
popularity among city decision makers. Most waste is therefore handled in a reactive
manner through open dumping. Upstream or demand-side management of packag-
ing waste and resources was overlooked. A new paradigm for waste management
supported by policy backup is required to deal with upstream issues in order to move
up the waste management hierarchy and prevent waste entering downstream.
372 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

9 Indicators for CE Assessment

Based on the framework and selection of methods in the literature (ADB 2008;
IGES 2013) and relevant indicators, Table 4 presents a summary of applied CE
indicators that have been used for assessment. Indicators proposed were used to
assess and evaluate how close Thailand is to implementing CE with regard to the
performance of packaging waste management practices by all stakeholders. A list of
relevant indicators (consisting of both qualitative and quantitative measures) for CE
assessment in packaging waste management sectors in the context of a country with
an economy in transition was adopted.

10 Analysis of Policy Instruments

It is clear that the policy approach applied in developed countries is mainly focused
on the reduction of resources/materials used, which aims to reduce the generation of
upstream waste (primarily by manufacturers, producers). Regulatory and economic
instruments are used to enforce and provide incentives for the production sector.
On the other hand, existing policy instruments used in Thailand and other devel-
oping countries are only planning instruments (particularly at national level). There
have been no regulatory or economic measures to address waste issues, nor effec-
tive measures to control overconsumption that lead to increased use of resources
and waste generation. Waste management initiatives taken are only top-down guide-
lines planned at the national level. Figure 12 presents policy instruments used in
most developed countries. In contrast, in developing cities, the main focus of policy
action has been on resource recycling rather than controlling the use of upstream
resources (prevalent in developed countries). It is believed that recycling has clear
benefits and generates income and job creation for the poor and unemployed. In
this regard, developing countries tend to put greater emphasis on waste recycling as
part of the solution and overlook the causes of problems emerging from consump-
tion behaviour. The approach used for waste and resource management relies on
recycling (downstream) rather than reduce and reuse. Needless to say, introduction
of policy instruments to enhance resource use should be modified to fit into local
circumstances. Therefore, barriers and difficulties associated with implementation
of CE for packaging in developing countries must be identified to find appropriate
policy instruments.
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 373

Table 4 Selected CE indicators

Indicator
Consumption – Waste generation rate
– Packaging waste composition in MSW
stream
– Degree of awareness and participation in
3R waste program
– High/low consumption (purchasing
behaviour/waste avoidance)
– Opinion and attitude towards waste and
resource use
– Knowledge related to 3R
– Perception towards recycled packages
– Characteristics of waste flow
Production – Existence of company’s tools/mechanisms
to recirculate packaging material flow
– Company agreement on waste reduction
with collaborative partner/availability and
increasing number of green business
partnerships
– Opinion on designing for reuse or using
recycled materials
– 3R activities through industrial symbiosis
– Quantity of packaging materials through
industrial waste exchange program
– Quantity of recycled material in production
process
– Reduction of virgin material used in
production process
Public authority/policy and management – Reduction policy for certain types of
sector packaging waste
– Key waste regulation (key rules/regulations
and incentives)
– Type and accessibility to recycling
bins/performance of collection system
– Policy target on waste reduction rate
– Number of NGOs and think tanks that are
active in 3R
– Attitude and perception of officers/decision
makers
– Collaboration with NGOs and think tanks
that are active in 3R
– Government support for closed-loop
recycling, R&D on product design for reuse
and recycling
 374

Reduce
• Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) or Take
Back Responsibility in EU Reduce
• Directive and legal standard for controlling the use • Green public procurement policy
of packaging at manufacturer level to control the • Green procurement policy in company
use of packaging, e.g. excess packaging, control Developed countries • MNCs and design for reduce the use of
method and materials used (German, EU country packaging (e.g. Unilever, Nestle)
members, Korea,and Japan) • Green labelling
• Regulations banning the sale of bottled water in
cities (Australia) Reduce Reuse
• Ban of using Petroleum based plastic bags (Italy) Deposit –Refund- System (retailers)
• Ban on drink vending machine (Japan)
• Tax for producers, depend on weight and type of
materials used in packaging (EU) Reuse
• Tap water promotion and encourage drinking
water directly from the tap (USA and Japan) Recycle
• Packaging waste reduction agreement to reduce • Voluntary initiatives through
the use of disposable bags by participating Recycle CSR program undertaken by business/industrial
companies and department stores in UK leader e.g., promoting recycling activities locally
• Agreement to reduce the use of disposable bags • Industrial waste-exchange program
by participating companies (e.g. Tesco, Marks & • Community recyclable banks
Spencer in UK) through user charges and rebate • School recyclable banks
points applied by business sector. • Initiatives taken by the Federation of Thai
Industry, TIPMSE (Thailand Institute of
Thailand Packaging and Recycling Management for
Sustainable Environment) was officially
established to promote 3R for packaging, various
recycling initiatives were carried out;
Reuse Development of Saleng- operated recycling
• Deposit Refund System centers, project for empowerment of recycle
• Tax for disposable tableware management in education institute, community,
• Tax for consumer for the use of plastic shopping bags. Recycle
• Volume-based fee /Pay as you thrown municipal level and housing estate across the
• Applying a levy on non-biodegradable plastic shopping country etc.
bags and a charge system for plastic bags • Applying a levy on non-biodegradable plastic
• Local government recycling initiatives;
• Promotion on proper packaging& developing refillable • Shopping bags and a charge system for plastic
promotion of waste separation for recycling at
containers through R&D household level

Fig. 12 Summary of policy instruments used for waste and resources management
S. Tangwanichagapong et al.
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 375

11 Assessment of Consumer Behaviour

Nearly half of the respondents consume and buy food from shops, food kiosks or
markets using one-time-use packaging (e.g. plastic bags, plastic food trays, and plas-
tic Styrofoam) that mostly end up in final landfill. Only 6% used reusable materials
or bring their own tableware. A total of 93% of respondents take plastic bags from
a shop even if they buy less. Institutional respondents appeared to have less concern
about 3R practices and waste issues than the municipal group who interacted more
with local government waste management practices and had more waste manage-
ment choices, e.g. by generating a reasonable income through selling PCP waste at
competitive prices to different tiers of junk shop, CRBs, etc. The latter group strongly
believed in the positive role of recycling and waste separation practices for better
waste management.

11.1 Environmental Consciousness

Most respondents reuse plastic bags from shops mainly for carrying other goods
or for use as garbage bags (42.9%), whereas 39.7% answered that they sometimes
reuse, and a minority of around 8.4–9% said they rarely or never reused plastic bags.
37.4% of respondents never implemented any waste reduction effort, respectively,
whereas 31.8% sometimes took personal containers to a shop, respectively. About
65% (at institutional level) and 38% (at municipal level) stated that they never attempt
to reduce waste by taking their own container to buy food or beverages. Economic
incentives would be an important factor for encouraging waste reduction at insti-
tutional level, whereas municipal respondents stated that disposable packaging was
most convenient and that they did not have choices to avoid packaging waste that
was convenient.

11.2 Knowledge on Waste Management Hierarchy

The first priority in the waste hierarchy is accorded to “reduction of waste” followed
by “reuse” and “recycling”. Findings indicated that consumers were in a dilemma in
prioritizing the 3R’s based on the waste hierarchy due to the lack of understanding
about its importance.
376 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

11.3 Waste Disposal Behaviour

There are four alternatives to dispose of recyclable packaging waste: (a) to discard
and mix with general waste; (b) self-segregate recyclable waste at source and offer to
house cleaners or informal sector; (c) segregate and sell waste to earn money; (d) take
segregated materials to waste separation facilities. At the institutional level, the latter
was available, whereas at the municipal level these disposal options were available
only in public areas such as large shopping centres, some commercial establishments
or in other municipal areas. Discarding unseparated waste into a single bin was the
primary and common disposal method. Meanwhile, methods of waste disposal are
different at municipal and institutional levels. People opined that “inadequate waste
separation facilities” was the main hindrance to their practice of waste separation. It
is suggested enforcement of policy should come after creating an environment for
practicing 3R. People were demotivated to practice 3R because they did not trust in
an operational and waste collection system that dumps all types of waste and mixed
them together downstream. People opined that the specific type of waste sorting will
reduce confusion about what is “wet” and “dry” waste.

Box 4: Features of Packaging Material Flow: A Case at the Institutional

Level
Waste generation at the AIT campus is around 427 tonnes per year. Most waste
generated is disposed of at general waste bins and then collected by waste
collectors and deposited at the transfer station on campus, before being taken
by Tha-Khlong Municipal truck to final disposal. Recyclables and saleable
materials are mainly segregated by households and waste collectors who sell
their own segregated materials through Cash for Trash program activities and
other waste dealer shops. Also, some recyclables were separated at waste sep-
aration facilities provided in the institution under waste separation initiatives
on campus.
It was estimated that a total of 158.8 tonnes per year of packaging waste was
produced on campus. An estimated total of 19.9 tonnes per year is recycled
through campus waste collectors, accounting for 12.5% of total packaging
waste. About 1.52 tonnes per year (1%) were processed through the Cash
for Trash program and 1.28 tonnes per year (0.8%) through the Packaging
Waste Separation project. The Cash for Trash program and Packaging Waste
Separation project are campus initiatives that aim to reduce the amount of
waste. It is clear that waste separation facilities have an impact by increasing
the recycling rate, to almost 2%, which created jobs and generated extra income
for waste collectors. The collected packaging that can be recycled amounted
to 14.3% of total packaging waste, but the majority of packaging material was
processed through the linear approach (take–make–use–dispose); about 85.7%
of packaging that becomes waste was sent to final landfill.
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 377

An explanation for the low recycling rate of packaging material was the
increase in one-time-use packaging that has emerged from current unsustain-
able production and consumption patterns reflecting changes in purchasing
and consumption lifestyle. Considering the percentage by wet weight of pack-
aging that can be recycled and packaging that cannot be recycled, about 34%
was recyclable while 66% was non-recyclable. The conventional approaches to
waste management, as well as voluntary measures, have limited effectiveness
in enhancing CE flow. The informal sector is a significant player in waste col-
lection for recycling and substantially enhances the recycling rate. However,
the majority of waste is handled in a straight line, not in a circular model of
material flow. Based on these results, communication and active participation
from consumers in 3R practice are prerequisites.

12 Analyses of Barriers in Relation to CE Practice

12.1 Consumer Perspectives

The most significant factor was relevant to consumer behaviour and their awareness,
particularly the lack of recycling culture in the locality, and a non-environmental
attitude prevailing. People were discouraged to segregate waste mainly because “it is
time consuming”. Convenience and fast service using readily ‘throw away’ packaging
are the first requirements that correspond with current consumer lifestyle. Meanwhile,
“waste reduction and separation, environmental cleanliness, and issues relevant to
reducing environmental burdens are not perceived as being a high priority in present-
day lifestyles”. Cluster of barriers from consumer perspective is depicted in Fig. 13.
Management barriers raised by respondents included limited access and distance
to waste separation bins and lack of sufficient processing and separation facilities.
A key suggestion raised by respondents included encouraging source separation by
demonstrating systematic food waste and recyclable waste collection on a specific
day in the week; this could ensure the impact of separation practices along with proper
policy implementation. Management and technical issues were raised as the most
significant barrier (43.4%), followed by information and knowledge (34.7%), while
awareness (17.3%) appeared to less important compared to the municipal group.
Awareness and consumer behavioural barriers act as the most significant factors at
the municipal level. However, management was the common barrier cited by respon-
dents from both groups, including a lack of proper waste separation facilities and
appropriate distance to recycling bins. Furthermore, capacity and inadequate pro-
cesses of local government to perform proper waste collection were also concerning
factors. Information and communication about the classification of waste, and lack
 Management Consumer
378

Low initiative to take

barrier 3R campaign
awareness Not aware of waste
The existing waste separation practice/No
3.73 interest
Distances to recycle 3.93 collection system does
bins (inconvenient) 3.76 not support waste
separation scheme
3.69
Not aware of resource
The lack of working A non-environment 4.15
3.62 The lack of sufficient 3.69 constraint issue and waste
group on the particular attitude prevailing
3.9 separation facility impact
waste issue 3.51 3.59
Initiatives lacking the Lack of support from 4.19
technical ability municipality The lack of recycling
culture in locality

Information & Difficulties in the

Communication classification of waste/No
idea how to separate

3.15
The process and benefits of
how to participate in waste 3.69 Limited knowledge on waste
3.19
recycling are not well recycling
communicated

3.64
Lack or inconsistent
information and
communication about 3R

Fig. 13 Cluster of barriers in relation to CE: consumer

S. Tangwanichagapong et al.
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 379

of or inconsistent information about waste reduction, reuse, and recycling were cited
as other important factors at the institutional level.

12.2 Producer Perspectives

Management barriers, consumer awareness, and behaviour, as well as difficulty in

communicating with consumers, were cited as major challenges. Management barri-
ers refer to responsible management practices and processes by government author-
ities to facilitate the flow of packaging materials, particularly when PCP reaches
the downstream level. Barriers to the CE transformation of the packaging sector are
connected to the lack of proper waste separation infrastructure, and inadequate pro-
cesses to cover the entire system of waste management. Recyclables contaminated
with food waste or prohibited substances from other waste types are not accepted
for remanufacturing or recycling in an upcycling flow, and this significantly reduces
resource recovery in the system. The lack of a waste reverse logistics system was
another factor stemming from management issues. This barrier was associated with
limited infrastructure to support efficient collection after use and an efficient system
to return post-consumer packages. Furthermore, when the reverse logistics of waste
in the country is still underdeveloped, recycling or investing in recycling activities
will increase the cost of production. Encountered barriers from producer perspective
are presented in Fig. 14.
Consumer awareness and behaviour were raised as other critical issues. Manu-
facturers that initiated packaging reduction by minimizing volume and weight, as
well as carrying out product concentration to minimized packages, have learned that

Fig. 14 Encountered barriers in CE: producer perspectives

380 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

consumers do not yet favour green/eco-friendly packaging, which has demotivated

their efforts to expand green production. One example is of a company that consid-
ered the use of bioplastics instead of petroleum-based disposables, where use of the
former was generally not accepted by clients and production chains mainly because
of product perception and associated cost. Environmental criteria are not part of pur-
chasing decisions compared to consumers in developed economies. Moreover, the
lack of waste separation negatively affects the quality and quantity of post-consumer
packaging and its utility for recycling. This creates significant loss of raw materials
for remanufacturing in closed-loop recycling.

12.3 Decision Maker Perspectives

The lack of legal and regulatory support for CE practices and implementation, and
weakness of policy coherence to improve cross-cycle management, and lack of cross-
sector integration of waste and resources were cited as critical barriers. Due to the lack
of decision-making information and environmental criteria, decision makers of local
government authorities adopt conventional approaches rather than innovative, long-
term, and sustainable solutions. It is recommended that decision-making criteria are
established for local government budget allocations for waste and resource manage-
ment, especially for local implementing bodies who decide on the most preferable
sustainable plan and policy option, e.g. the following CE practices and the waste
hierarchy. This should promote a paradigm shift away from the business-as-usual
conventional approach. Encountered barriers from decision maker perspective are
presented in Fig. 15.

Fig. 15 Encountered barriers in CE: decision maker perspectives

Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 381

Secondly, inadequate waste and resource management processes and lack of man-
agement capacity were clustered into the management barrier. These include unsys-
tematic waste collection and final disposal practices at local level, and lack of facilities
and infrastructure and knowhow for making use of PCP in material cycle loops. In
addition, the lack of management capacity of city authorities is another important
factor limiting the effective implementation of CE.
Lastly, information and data gaps were pointed out as an important factor. Barriers
mentioned in this category include lack of systematic baselines and environmental
reporting, as well as research studies to support decision-making. Currently, informa-
tion and reliable data are missing or incomplete. Environmental reporting should be
carried out and information should be pertinent, addressing trends and critical anal-
yses for policy makers with monitoring reports of previous relevant waste programs.
Good communication and information sharing is useful for planning and designing
of CE initiatives, including to form CE-relevant policy, planning, and programs.

13 Recurring Common Factors

13.1 Management Barriers

Based on stakeholder perceptions, management is the most common and significant

hurdle to CE implementation which obstructs sustainable resource and recycling
flow. Inadequate waste management infrastructure, waste separation facilities, and
waste collection systems disrupt waste separation practice. Overcoming management
barriers will therefore reduce negative impacts and improve recycling and recovery
rates. From the perspective of manufacturers, the government sector has failed to
facilitate waste flow in a circular model due to a lack of management capacity to fos-
ter appropriate policy implementation and also implementation gaps at operational
level. The lack of incentive measures to engage people to practice 3R was another
issue most frequently cited, and clustered into the management barrier by producers.
However, management barriers gravitated more towards the lack of a holistic process
in addressing waste and resource issues: these included fragmented decision-making
and planning; low initiative to practice 3R; incoherent practices between waste col-
lection and final waste treatment methods; and the lack of management capacity to
manage collected waste which relied on construction (business-as-usual approach in
transporting waste from source to landfill).
382 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

13.2 Information and Communication

The significant barrier for implementing CE initiatives and progress towards circular
economy policy development was the lack of mutual understanding, in specific the
following:
• Lack of environmental reporting among decision makers.
• Lack of action research studies about the use of recycled PCP.
• Poor environmental information and weak communication.
• Poor consumer awareness and behaviour.
• Lack of waste logistics systems.

13.3 Emerging Factors

Emerging factors hindering CE implementation in Thailand includes socioeconomic

development that affect the evolution of policy, implementation of CE from insti-
tutional level to broader scale (city/national level), product design and recycling;
discrepancies in international regulations; and difficulties in making the business
case for adopting CE under the current economic situation. Barriers associated with
the early stages of 3R policy implementation, include management of basic infras-
tructure, downstream management processes, and consumer behaviour. In addition
to barriers mentioned by stakeholders, the author of this paper observed the following
emerging barriers from this study. Firstly, lack of CE indicators, including both pol-
icy and performance management indicators regarding waste and resource sectors. It
is recommended that environmental reporting based on proposed indicators can help
make informed decision-making processes. Secondly, lack of political will among
organization leaders in each sector, where CE practices were often seen as low pri-
ority and leaders lack the long term and holistic perspective of addressing waste and
resource challenges; this acted as one factor that influenced operational practices at
lower tiers. In most cases, the current solution is characterized by a lack of short-
and long-term vision and upstream management. Lastly, there is no integration of
the informal sector into formal PCP waste collection, e.g. resource recovery or lack
of think tanks with responsibility for waste and resource logistics according to CE
flow.

14 Overcoming Barriers for Sustainable Waste

and Resource Management

Overcoming such barriers requires a mix of policy instruments that support CE flow
and enhance ongoing activities and practices. Table 5 presents a series of policy rec-
ommendations for better CE practices at both the supply side (manufacturer, retailer)
and demand side (consumer). Based on research findings, a policy framework for
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 383

Table 5 Recommended policy measures to address barriers

Policy inter- Economic/fiscal instruments Legal and regulatory Social-psychological
vention/CE instruments instruments
domain
Consumer Consumer behaviour and Management barriers
awareness as a barriers • Provision of proper waste
• Change from flat rate waste separation facilities
of PCP waste collection fee • Improve access to waste
to variable rate separation facilities
• Introduce price for using Lack of waste logistics barrier
unnecessary packaging, e.g. • Set up resource management
charge for unnecessary hubs and responsible bodies
plastic bag/containers) in each region, incorporating
• Encourage retailers and the informal sector collection
commercial sector to for improving reverse
provide incentives through logistics to recapture value
fiscal instruments targeted at of PCP waste
their customers, and then to
apply a charge on disposable
packaging to retailers who
provide plastic bags to their
customers as a long-term
measure
Government Management barrier Management barriers Information and
• Provide extra budget or • Issue common standard of communication barriers
prize for LGAs who initiate waste separation practice for • Develop and use CE
innovative CE practice in stakeholders indicators as basis for
collaboration with • Set up national and local monitoring the existing
stakeholders (fiscal targets for PCP waste situation of waste and
incentive) reduction, waste, and waste material flow
to landfill • Set up requirements and
• Establish technical standards guide local implementing
for effective waste collection bodies to develop
and disposal by LGAs environmental reporting
• Revise or amend existing • Initiate and support R&D in
law and regulations to upcycling
increase stakeholder technology/innovative
participation in recycling packaging
and enhance the circular • Organize national and local
flow of PCP waste and resource
management workshops
Consumer behaviour and
awareness, and information
and communication barriers
• Carry out proactive
packaging waste reduction
campaigns and
awareness-raising activities
• Provide environmental
education for schools,
colleges and higher
education institutions
• Make agreements between
government and local
retailers, commercial sector,
and department stores in
reducing packaging waste
(continued)
384 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

Table 5 (continued)
Policy inter- Economic/fiscal instruments Legal and regulatory Social-psychological
vention/CE instruments instruments
domain
Producers Management barrier Management barrier Consumer behaviour and
and retailers • Establish a fee proportional • Regulate specific standard to awareness, and management
to weight and volume of control excessive packaging barriers
packaging • Set up a mandatory rate for • Establish packaging waste
closed-loop recycling, reduction agreement
upcycling, and downcycling between government
by PCP type entities, and/or academic
institutions, universities
• Promotion in the use of
reusable food and beverage
containers

sustainable waste and resource management is proposed in Fig. 16. This framework
recommends a series of mixed policy instruments including regulatory measures,
incentives and financial instruments, information and communication measures, and
policy intervention at both national and local levels.

15 Conclusion

Circular economy has gained much attention in the current development agenda
in many countries. At global and regional levels, it is regarded as a new paradigm
towards sustainable development. The current CE practices and policy instruments
used towards sustainable resource management in Thailand are also presented. CE
indicators for Thailand are extensively studied and summarized in the paper. Based
on the review, it is established that the existing policies and programs on CE are
focused more towards 3R concepts over the other sub-sects of CE such as products-
as-services, next life sales, product transformation, and collaborative consumption.
Likewise, CE indicators are arrived primarily based on 3R concepts at present. There-
fore, it is recommended that the other sub-sects of CE should also be taken into
consideration for arriving at the CE indicators.
Current CE practice is assessed and packaging material flow are examined in order
to establish potential opportunities for enhancing CE practice for sustainable resource
and waste management. Based on each of stakeholder groups, the result shows that
consumers show positive attitudes towards roles of CE practices for better manage-
ment of resource waste, however, the degree of awareness and knowledge does not
have positive impacts on consumer behaviour unless regulatory and economic mea-
sures are applied. Producers have started initiatives as part of CE practices that are
carried out on a voluntary basis. The roles of the government sector in encouraging
purchasing of green products and greener production are also weak. Although there
are waste reduction initiatives at the country level, they do not include participation
 Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource …

Fig. 16 Proposed policy framework and instruments—holistic waste management based on an expanded waste management hierarchy
385
386 S. Tangwanichagapong et al.

of local and household levels; only government entities were engaged in these waste
reduction initiatives.
The results of PCP material flow analysis indicate that recycling is the most active
cycle and there are great opportunities to ascent the waste management hierarchy
to move towards better CE resource flow. To overcome the challenges and barriers,
environmental education is needed to prompt consumers to adopt new consumption
patterns that favour CE. Economic and regulatory instruments are required for better
CE implementation in resource management sector.

References

ADB. (2008). Toward resource-efficient economies in Asia and the Pacific. Japan: Asian Develop-
ment Bank.
Amrehn, J. (2013). Technologies and management of municipal solid waste in Thailand: Status quo
and current developments. Retrieved at https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/Day%202.9_
King%20.
Bunyagidj. (2009). The success story of Thai green public procurement project and opportu-
nity of socially responsible investment in Thailand. Retrieved at https://www.slideshare.net/
guest3b0c1d17/cb-apo-2009.
Country Report. (2017). Country 3R progress report (draft). Eighth Regional 3R Forum in Asia and
the Pacific “achieving clean water, clean land and clean air through 3R and resource efficiency—
A 21st century vision for Asia-pacific communities, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India, 9–12 April
2018.
Environnet. (2018). Carbon labelling. Retrieved at http://www.environnet.in.th/en/archives/1503.
IGES. (2013). The 3Rs and sustainable resource circulation – progress in Asia and research activ-
ities in IGES. http://www.uncrd.or.jp/content/documents/Hanoi%203R%20ForumPS4_IGES.
pdf.
Kamuang, T. & Siriratpiriya, O. (2017). The Kingdom of Thailand. Country Chapter; State of the
3Rs in Asia and the Pacific.
National Statistic Office. (2018). Environment and energy. Retrieved at http://web.nso.go.th/.
PCD. (2005). Municipal solid waste character observation and analysis in all municipalities
project, Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved at http://infofile.pcd.go.th/waste/Reportwaste.pdf?CFID=
8235539&CFTOKEN=60317797.
PCD. (2018a). The Pollution Control Department’s roll on pollution management. Retrieved
at http://wepa-db.net/3rd/en/meeting/20161130/PDF/14%20Thailand_Country%20updates_
WEPA-present%20Hanoi-Thailand-Revised.pdf.
PCD. (2018b). 3Rs initiatives in Thailand. Pollution Control Department. Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment. Retrieved at https://www.env.go.jp/recycle/3r/en/s_officials/02_02/
14.pdf.
PCD. (2018c). Pollution control department. Ministry of natural resources and environment.
Retrieved at http://www.pcd.go.th.
Piyapanpong, S. (2018). Thailand’s 3Rs strategy. Pollution Control Department Pollution Control
Department Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. Retrieved at http://www.uncrd.or.
jp/content/documents/Session4_Piyapanpong.pdf.
Pollution Report. (2015). Thailand state of pollution report. Pollution Control Department Ministry
of Natural Resources and Environment. ISBN. 978-616-316-327-1.
SCG. (2008). SCG paper goes green for sustainability and profitability. Retrieved at https://www.
scg.com/en/08news_release/01_news/detail.php?ContentId = 1925.
Circular Economy for Sustainable Resource … 387

SCG. (2018). SCG eco value; sustainable development. Retrieved at https://www.scg.com/en/

05sustainability_development/eco-value.html.
Supappunt, P. (2011). Carbon footprint label in Thailand. Retrieved at http://www.neaspec.org/
sites/default/files/Carbon%20Footprint%20Label%20in%20Thailand_Phakamon.pdf.
TEI. (2018). Criteria for carbon reduction label certification. Retrieved at http://www.tei.or.th/
carbonreductionlabel/rule-e.html.
Tippamongkol, J. (2014). Green public procurement in Thailand. Regional workshop on sustainable
public procurement and harmonization of eco-labelling. Retrieved at http://www.thai-german-
cooperation.info/userfiles/20140521_02_SPP_thailand.pdf.
Toshiba. (2018). Environment. Retrieved at https://www.toshiba.co.jp/env/en/.
UNEP. (2018). A review of green public procurement practices in Thailand. Strengthening the
capacities and improving the knowledge on green public procurement and ecolabelling in the
ASEAN + 3 region. Retrieved at http://www.oneplanetnetwork.org/sites/default/files/review_of_
green_public_procurement_practices_in_thailand.pdf.
UNPAN. (2004). Co environmental indicators of Thailand. Retrieved at http://unpan1.un.org/
intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan015287.pdf.
Wangwongwatana, S. (2018). 3Rs and waste management in Thailand. Retrieved at http://www.
uncrd.or.jp/content/documents/RT1_04_Thailand_rev.pdf.
WMS. (2018). Corporate social responsibility. Retrieved at http://wms-thailand.com/index.php/
en/csr.
Developing the Circular Economy
in the European Union

Andrew Farmer

Abstract The European Union has adopted legislation and other supporting policies
across a range of areas to facilitate the development of a Circular Economy. Building
on earlier initiatives on waste management and resource efficiency, the policies coa-
lesced in the 2015 Circular Economy Action Plan. This sets out a series of actions
covering several issues, with a particular focus on resource efficiency, improved
waste management and support for innovation. EU waste law has been revised pro-
moting increased recycling, and most recently to tackling the growing problem of
single-use plastics. However, while there are actions to support waste prevention,
there are not legal targets on this issue. There are still challenges for joined-up action
to deliver a Circular Economy. This includes addressing the nature of consumption
by citizens, as well as technical issues such as how secondary materials meet objec-
tives in chemicals and product legislation. A further challenge is the wide diversity
of waste and materials management across the EU, such as very different recycling
rates between countries. Delivering a Circular Economy means leaders needing to
push with innovation and laggards needing help to achieve basic waste and material
objectives.

Keywords Circular Economy · European Union · Resource efficiency · Plastics ·

Extended producer responsibility · Recycling · Waste

1 Introduction

Many of the chapters in this book explore the Circular Economy from a national
perspective. This chapter, by contrast, explores the Circular Economy for a regional
grouping of countries—the European Union (EU). The EU has some characteristics
found in nation states in other parts of the world, but other characteristics that are
unique.

A. Farmer (B)
Head of Natural Resources and Circular Economy Programme, Institute for European
Environmental Policy, London, UK
e-mail: afarmer@ieep.eu

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 389

S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_20
390 A. Farmer

From the perspective of non-EU countries, examining progress towards a Circular

Economy by the EU is important and interesting for different reasons. These include:
• Several actions to promote a Circular Economy concern issues such as product
quality and, through this, there are consequences for international trade. The EU
is a single internal market for trade and trade policy with non-EU countries is
the competence of the EU, rather than its Member States. The size of the EU
economy means that decisions affecting what is allowed within its internal market
have consequences for manufacturers of products in non-EU countries wishing to
export to the EU market.
• The EU is the source of much law (and other policies, including financing) directly
and indirectly related to the Circular Economy. In many areas, this is more impor-
tant that laws and policies at the national level in the EU. Lessons learned from
the success (or otherwise) of EU law and supporting policies are useful in other
contexts.
• There are also many issues in delivering the Circular Economy which are best
decided and implemented at national or local level. Understanding how such divi-
sion of roles from EU to national to local have been determined in the EU may
have useful lessons for other countries.
The EU economic model has been and, largely, still is, a linear one—a take—
make–consume–dispose economic model—rather than a circular model where the
utility of products, components and materials retains their value (EMF 2015a). The
linear economic model of material use in the EU is not sustainable, and for many
materials, the consumption in the EU far exceeds planetary boundaries (Steffen
et al. 2015). In contrast, a Circular Economy “provides opportunities to create well-
being, growth and jobs, while reducing environmental pressures” (EEA 2016a). EEA
(2016a) described the key characteristics and enabling factors of a Circular Economy,
summarised in Tables 1 and 2. It will be seen that different EU policies variously
attempt to contribute to delivering one or more key characteristics and/or provide
one or more of the enabling factors.
In 2001, the European Commission estimated that between 6 and 12% of all
material consumption was avoided due to waste prevention, eco-design and recy-
cling policies and activities, and it estimated that existing technology could increase
this to 10–17% (EC 2011b). For many industries, a Circular Economy would save
significant costs, e.g. 12–23% of current material input costs for those manufac-
turing complex durable goods (EMF 2012), as well as significant savings for food,
beverages, textiles and packaging businesses. One study estimated cost savings of
various Circular Economy policies to businesses in the EU of e245–604 billion per
year (AMEC Environment and Infrastructure and Bio Intelligence Service 2014).
Changing waste management practices could create 178,000 new direct jobs by 2030
(EC 2015). Another study (James et al. 2016) estimated that adoption of resource
efficiency practices by business in the EU could create 1.2-3 million jobs, gener-
ate e114–324 billion in gross value added and reduce non-fossil fuel raw material
demand by 70–184 Mt. There is, therefore, potential to deliver an economy which is
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 391

Table 1 Key characteristics of a Circular Economy (derived from EEA 2016a)

Key characteristic Examples
Less input and use of natural resources • Minimised and optimised exploitation of
raw materials, while delivering more value
from fewer materials
• Reduced import dependence on natural
resources
• Efficient use of all natural resources
• Minimised overall energy and water use
Increased share of renewable and recyclable • Non-renewable resources replaced with
resources and energy renewable ones within sustainable levels of
supply
• Increased share of recyclable and recycled
materials that can replace the use of virgin
materials
• Closure of material loops
• Sustainably sourced raw materials
Reduced emissions • Reduced emissions throughout the full
material cycle through the use of less raw
material and sustainable sourcing
• Less pollution through clean material cycles
• Fewer material losses/residuals
• Build up of waste minimised
• Incineration and landfill limited to a
minimum
• Dissipative losses of valuable resources
minimised
Keeping the value of products, components • Extended product lifetime keeping the value
and materials in the economy of products in use
• Reuse of components
• Value of materials preserved in the economy
through high-quality recycling

more circular, and this would have significant economic, social and environmental
benefits.
Before exploring EU policy on the Circular Economy, it is necessary to consider
the constitution and legal structure of the EU. For non-EU observers, the legal and
practical workings of the EU may seem confusing. Under the EU Treaty, competence
for different issues is vested at EU or Member State level or both. For example, trade
policy is the competence of the EU level, but most health policy is determined at
Member State level. All EU legislation is proposed by the European Commission,
but is amended and adopted by representatives of the Member States (by ministers in
the Council and by elected Members of the European Parliament). With regard to leg-
islation affecting the Circular Economy, two types of law are particularly important
to highlight:
• Directives: these are the most common and set binding obligations on Member
States. They may set a target to be achieved (e.g. recycling) or a process to be
392 A. Farmer

Table 2 Enabling factors of a Circular Economy (derived from EEA 2016a)

Enabling factors Examples
Eco-design • Products designed for a longer life, enabling
upgrading, reuse, refurbishment and
remanufacture
• Product design based on the sustainable and
minimal use of resources and enabling
high-quality recycling of materials at the end of a
product’s life
• Substitution of hazardous substances in products
and processes, enabling cleaner material cycles
Repair, refurbishment and remanufacture • Repair, refurbishment and remanufacture given
priority, enabling reuse of products and
components
Recycling • High-quality recycling of as much waste as
possible, avoiding downcycling
• Use of recycled materials as secondary raw
materials
• Well-functioning markets for secondary raw
materials
• Avoidance of mixing and contaminating materials
• Cascading use of materials where high-quality
recycling is not possible
Economic incentives and finance • Shifting taxes from labour to natural resources
and pollution
• Phasing out environmentally harmful subsidies
• Internalisation of environmental costs
• Deposit systems
• Extended producer responsibility
• Finance mechanisms supporting Circular
Economy approaches
Business models • Focus on offering product–service systems rather
than product ownership
• Collaborative consumption
• Collaboration and transparency along the value
chain
• Industrial symbiosis
Eco-innovation • Technological innovation
• Social innovation
• Organisational innovation
Governance, skills and knowledge • Awareness raising about changing lifestyles and
priorities in consumption patterns
• Participation, stakeholder interaction and
exchange of experience
• Education
• Data, monitoring and indicators
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 393

undertaken (e.g. to prepare waste management plans). However, directives must

be “transposed” into Member State law before they become effective. This means
that they may be adapted to Member State circumstances (e.g. taking account of
administrative structures).
• Regulations: these are “directly applicable” on the entities to which they apply—
they do not require transposition into Member State legislation. An important
example relevant to the Circular Economy is most EU chemicals legislation—
important regarding the placing of secondary raw materials on the market that
may contain some contaminants.
In all cases, EU law needs to be applied to be effective. This can be a significant
challenge in some cases. Member States can be slow to meet legal obligations in
directives—such as meeting waste management targets, so hampering delivering of
the building blocks of a Circular Economy. Measures put in place can also trigger
non-implementation behaviours, also seen with waste law—from ad hoc illegal waste
dumping to organised crime on waste and on secondary raw materials.
This chapter focuses on EU policies aiming to deliver a Circular Economy. It is
not possible in the space available to explore the challenges of implementing each
and every policy at Member State level. However, it is important to keep in mind
that adoption of an obligation in EU law does not mean that an objective has been
achieved—it is only the first step in a process and that many policies (and many
steps) are being taken to move the EU towards a more Circular Economy.
This chapter begins by exploring the early development of policies relating to
resource efficiency. It then proceeds to explore the current policies on the Circular
Economy which have evolved from these earlier policies. It continues by exploring
the particular issue of plastics as a case where the action is being taken, but where
the challenge is enormous. The chapter concludes with some final remarks on the
future challenge in delivering the Circular Economy.

2 Developing CE Policy

Circular Economy policy in the EU today is the result of an evolution of policies

relating to waste management, product policy and resource efficiency developed over
many years. This section explores these policies, as understanding these is necessary
to understand how current Circular Economy policy is structured. This section will
focus on the evolution of strategic policy thinking on resource efficiency as the basis
for later Circular Economy Policy. However, alongside these strategic developments,
it is very important to highlight actions on specific policies which each contribute
to delivering resource efficiency and are important elements within later Circular
Economy policy. These include:
• EU waste management policies that establish targets for recycling, limitations on
landfill, requirements to plan waste management, etc., and these include:
394 A. Farmer

– The Waste Framework Directive.

– The Landfill Directive.
– The Waste Shipment Regulation.
• Making products more resource-efficient, such as promoting recycling and reduc-
ing hazardous substances through better design, producer responsibility in the EU
internal market:
– End-of-Life Vehicles Directive.
– Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive.
– Batteries and Waste Batteries Directive.
– Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive.
– Directive on the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (ROHS).
– Energy Using Products Directive.
• Actions on improving the awareness of consumers to make better purchasing
choices regarding resource efficiency.
– Regulation on an EU Eco-labelling of specific products.
– Directive on the labelling of household appliances for energy and other resource
use.
• Supporting eco-innovation to deliver a resource-efficient economy:
– Environmental Technology Action Plan (ETAP)—technology platforms to fos-
ter eco-innovation through funding and the sharing of ideas.
– Greening Public Procurement (GPP) Initiative—public procurement can be a
major driver to support resource-efficient products and practices.
– Research, Development and Funding through the range of EU financing mech-
anisms from Regional Funds to research funding.
EU environmental policy is framed around Environment Action Programmes,
which usually set the guiding principles for policy development for the forthcom-
ing ten years. Under the Sixth Environment Action Programme (covering the period
2002–2012), the European Commission was to develop “Thematic Strategies” (i.e.
strategic policies) for waste and also for natural resources. To support this devel-
opment, initial ideas were set out in 2003 Communication “Towards a Thematic
Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources” (EC 2003). In 2005, the
European Commission then published the Thematic Strategy on Sustainable Use of
Natural Resources alongside the Thematic Strategy on Waste Prevention and Recy-
cling (EC 2005). This was the first initiative at EU level taking an overall approach
to tackling the environmental aspects of resource use.
The objective of the Natural Resources Thematic Strategy was to “reduce the
negative environmental impacts generated by the use of natural resources in a grow-
ing economy”, aiming to reduce “the environmental impact of resource use while at
the same time improving resource productivity overall across the EU economy” and
“More value—Less impact—Better alternatives”. This Thematic Strategy empha-
sised a whole life cycle approach. However, while it set out these broad conceptual
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 395

objectives, it did not set out specific detailed objectives. It stated that the aim was to
stay “below the threshold of overexploitation” for renewable resources, but did not
define objectives for non-renewable resources. In particular, it focused on resource
use causing fewer impacts, rather than determining fully sustainable consumption
patterns and taking actions to achieve these. In particular, the early discussion had
suggested that the Thematic Strategy should include quantitative targets “for resource
efficiency and the diminished use of resources”, but these were not included as it was
argued that the state of knowledge at the time was not sufficient.
The next major EU policy initiative relevant to resource efficiency was the 2008
Raw Materials Initiative (EC 2008). The aim of the initiative was to develop strategic
thinking on the EU’s dependence on critical raw materials. It was established around
three areas:
• fair access to non-energy raw materials from international markets;
• fostering sustainable supply of raw materials from EU sources; and
• boosting resource efficiency through increased recycling and lower resource con-
sumption.
To achieve these objectives, the following steps were identified:
• defining critical raw materials;
• launching EU strategic raw materials diplomacy with major industrialised and
resource-rich countries;
• addressing access to, and sustainable management of, raw materials in trade agree-
ments;
• promoting sustainable access to raw materials in the field of development policy
through budget support and cooperation strategies;
• improving the regulatory framework related to access to land;
• increasing the EU knowledge base by encouraging better networking between
national geological surveys; and
• promoting innovative exploration and extraction technologies, recycling, materials
substitution and resource efficiency.
To take forward the objectives and actions of the 2008 Raw Materials Initiative, the
European Commission published a 2011 Communication on “tackling the challenges
in commodity markets and on raw materials” (EC 2011e). This progressed policy in
raw materials to some extent, increasing the emphasis on the recycling of materials (a
step towards a Circular Economy—although the term is not used). It also recognised
that one of the problems in delivering resource efficiency in the EU was lack of proper
implementation of waste legislation which is the foundation of the better management
of materials. The 2011 Communication also explored wider policy issues in more
detail, such as the role of EU trade policy and development policy.
In 2011, the European Commission also published “A resource-efficient Europe—
Flagship Initiative of the Europe 2020 Strategy” (EC 2011a). It is important to stress
that this initiative was produced under the Europe 2020 Strategy rather than sim-
ply under the processes begun with the 6th Environment Action Programme. The
Europe 2020 Strategy was the EU’s overall strategy for jobs and economic growth.
396 A. Farmer

Thus, resource efficiency was embedded as an objective necessary for future sus-
tainable economic development (not just as an environmental policy), providing new
economic opportunities, improved productivity, reduced costs and increased com-
petitiveness.
The Flagship Initiative identified three conditions to deliver an economy that is
resource-efficient and low-carbon:
• coordinated action, with political visibility and support, in a range of policy areas;
• urgent action (given long investment lead-in times); and
• empowering consumers to consume in a resource-efficient way, to drive continuous
innovation and ensure that efficiency gains are not lost.
While the Flagship Initiative was a clear step forward from the 2005 Thematic
Strategy (such as identifying the need to address some consumption issues and in
providing a wider overview of relevant policies), it did not identify specific actions
many policy areas should take to deliver resource efficiency other than those policy
actions that had already been announced.
The next step was later in 2011 with the publication by the European Commission
of the “Roadmap to a resource-efficient Europe” (EC 2011d). Accompanying this
was background analysis and a review on the implementation of the 2005 Thematic
Strategy (EC 2011c). The Roadmap reiterated the emphasis of the Flagship Initiative
that transforming the EU economy to be resource-efficient was necessary for future
economic development and environmental sustainability. It set out:
• A general vision for 2050;
• intermediate milestones for 2020; and
• specific policy actions for three themes.
For 2050, the Roadmap stated that resources should be managed sustainably and
that natural capital and ecosystem services should be properly valued. While this
was fine to the extent stated, the Roadmap did not describe what the economy of
2050 would look like for resources to be managed sustainably. The milestones for
2020 also tended to set out objectives already established in EU policy and, there-
fore, little additional idea for what 2050 should look like. In discussing economic
transformation, the Roadmap identified that action was needed on strengthening
green public procurement, increased life cycle thinking on products, support to busi-
nesses on improving resource efficiency, full implementation of EU waste law and
reviewing waste targets, stimulating demand for recycled materials and supporting
recycling facilities, boosting research and innovation spending, phasing out environ-
mentally harmful subsidies by 2020, and achieving a “major shift” from taxation of
labour towards environmental taxation, and adapting prices to reflect the real costs
of resource use. Many of these policy ideas had already been flagged in previous
policy statements.
The ideas concerning resource efficiency came together in the development of the
EU’s Seventh Environment Action Programme (7th EAP) (EU 2013). This estab-
lished the objective to turn the EU into a resource-efficient, green and competitive
low-carbon economy. It emphasised the need for more effective waste management
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 397

policies and their better implementation, but also that achieving resource efficiency is
not possible through “environmental” policies alone. Therefore, the 7th EAP stressed
the need to integrate resource efficiency objectives and policy into many different
policy areas. It stated “Some existing policy instruments relating to production and
consumption are limited in scope. There is a need for a framework that gives appro-
priate signals to producers and consumers to promote resource efficiency and the
Circular Economy. Measures will be taken to further improve the environmental
performance of goods and services on the Union market over their whole life cycle
including measures to increase the supply of environmentally sustainable products
and stimulate a significant shift in consumer demand for such products”.
Further, the 7th EAP stated that “innovation to improve resource efficiency is
required throughout the economy to improve competitiveness in the context of ris-
ing resource prices, scarcity, raw material supply constraints and dependency on
imports”. Innovation in the design phase is important in this regard as the 7th EAP
noted that 80% of all environmental impacts of a product during its life cycle originate
in its design phase. The innovation of design will contribute to product durability,
reparability, reusability, recyclability, recycled content and product lifespan.
The 7th EAP, therefore, brought together the different elements of resource effi-
ciency policy that had evolved since the adoption of the 6th EAP. This created the
basis for the formulation of policies explicitly framed around the concept of a Circular
Economy.

3 Circular Economy Policy in the EU Today

Current EU Circular Economy Policy is based on the Circular Economy Action Plan
(CEAP), adopted by the European Commission in December 2015 (EC 2015). It aims
to “stimulate Europe’s transition towards a Circular Economy which will boost global
competitiveness, foster sustainable economic growth and generate new jobs” and it
sets out a series of actions to start to deliver this. These actions cover several issues,
but there is a particular focus on resource efficiency, improved waste management
and support for innovation—all of which are themes strongly highlighted in earlier
policy development. Measures developed as a result of the Action Plan have included
the Circular Economy Monitoring Framework (EC 2018c) (see below) and revision
of existing waste legislation.
However, while policy development on the Circular Economy has progressed,
it is important to consider how well the EU is doing in relation to core material
flows with waste generation and recycling. As a key contribution to the Circular
Economy, the EU has made some progress in reducing waste production (seeking to
decouple waste generation from economic growth) and in improving recycling rates,
but there are areas where problems remain. The European Environment Agency
(EEA 2018b) found that overall municipal solid waste generation in EEA countries
declined between 2004 and 2012 by only 2%. This demonstrates the challenge facing
household consumption issues (and upstream to manufacturers, etc.). However, if
398 A. Farmer

Table 3 Recycling rates for

Date Municipal waste Packaging waste
municipal solid waste and for
packaging rates in the EU 2004 30.6
between 2004 and 2014 2005 31.9 54.6
(Source EEA 2016b)
2006 32.9 57
2007 35.1 59.2
2008 36.7 60.5
2009 37.7 62.4
2010 38.5 63.3
2011 39.8 63.5
2012 41.7 64.4
2013 42.4 65.2
2014 43.6

mineral wastes are excluded, about half of the total waste in the EU-28 and Norway
is produced by the manufacturing and service sectors. These have shown better
performance than municipal waste overall. Waste generation from manufacturing
in the EU-28 and Norway declined by 25% between 2004 and 2012 (the economic
value of the sector increased by 7%), and for the service sector, the decline was
23% (with an increase in economic output of 13%). EEA (2018b) considered that
the improvements might be due to several reasons: “efficiency improvements in
production processes and management, changes in the structure of the manufacturing
sector, increase in activities in services sector and a shift towards less-intensive waste
generating activities”.
It is also important to consider the variation across Europe. Table 3 shows the
recycling rates for municipal solid waste and for packaging rates between 2004 and
2014. While there have been improvements, the rate of change is relatively slow.
Some Member States, such as Sweden, have very high rates, while others, such as
in southeast Europe, still have low rates (EEA 2019a).
One action in the Circular Economy Action Plan, therefore, was to revise EU waste
law to drive improved waste management as this is clearly an issue that needs address-
ing. The revised waste legislation entered into force in 2018 (Directive 2018/851/EU).
This contains a number of actions supporting the delivery of the Circular Economy
(Fig. 1), including setting obligatory targets for Member States for a number of waste
management issues.
However, while these are important legislative additions, there are no obligatory
targets for waste prevention or reuse, although both need to be included within wider
waste management planning. Having said this, the directive does require Member
States to take measures to achieve this and that such measures should, at least, include
(Article 9):
(a) promote and support sustainable production and consumption models;
 Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union

Fig. 1 Scope of revised EU waste law in 2018 contributing to delivering the Circular Economy
399
400 A. Farmer

(b) encourage the design, manufacturing and use of products that are resource-
efficient, durable (life span and the absence of planned obsolescence), reparable,
reusable and upgradable;
(c) target products containing critical raw materials to prevent the materials from
becoming waste;
(d) encourage the reuse of products and the setting up of systems promoting repair
and reuse, in particular for electrical and electronic equipment, textiles and
furniture, as well as packaging and construction materials and products;
(e) encourage the availability of spare parts, instruction manuals, technical infor-
mation, or other instruments, equipment or software enabling the repair and
reuse of products without compromising their quality and safety;
(f) reduce the waste generation in processes related to industrial production, extrac-
tion of minerals, manufacturing, construction and demolition;
(g) reduce the generation of food waste in primary production, in processing and
manufacturing, in retail and other distribution of food, in restaurants and food
services as well as in households;
(h) encourage food donation and other redistribution for human consumption, pri-
oritising human use over animal feed and the reprocessing into non-food prod-
ucts;
(i) promote the reduction of the content of hazardous substances in materials and
products, without prejudice to legal requirements in chemicals legislation;
(j) reduce the generation of waste, in particular waste that is not suitable for prepar-
ing for reuse or recycling;
(k) identify products that are the main sources of littering and take appropriate
measures to prevent and reduce this;
(l) aim to halt the generation of marine litter as a contribution towards the SDG
goal to prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds; and
(m) develop and support information campaigns to raise awareness about waste
prevention and littering.
The European Commission is also planning further revision of current EU waste
law. This includes a review of the Waste Shipment Regulation by the end of 2020.
This Regulation implements the Basel Convention for the EU, but does more than
this. A specific objective of the review is to see how to make it more coherent with
Circular Economy objectives. A particular challenge is the movement of waste and of
secondary raw materials within the EU. Although the EU has an internal market, such
movement is hampered by different aspects of the implementation of EU waste law in
different Member States. For example, there are different approaches to determining
End-of-Waste status—so determining when materials can re-enter the market (Make
it Work and IMPEL 2019). As a result, secondary raw materials accepted in one
Member State may not be accepted in a neighbouring Member State. This hampers
the market in such materials and increases the perception of risk by business. Various
actions can be taken to address this at Member State level, but the ongoing review
of waste law at EU level is an important element of this (Make it Work and IMPEL
2019).
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 401

A report on the implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan was pub-
lished in 2017 (EC 2017a, b, c). It noted that actions had been taken on several areas:
food waste, eco-design, organic fertilisers, guarantees for consumer goods, and inno-
vation and investments. However, the report did not quantify progress in the Circular
Economy itself or examine whether the actions taken had been effective. Indeed, in
some areas, progress has been slow, e.g. on eco-design.
In 2018, a further major policy initiative was adopted—the Circular Economy
Package. This package included the EU Strategy for Plastics in the Circular Economy
(EC 2018a), explored in detail below.
It also included a proposal for the Circular Economy Monitoring Framework (EC
2018c). This is focused around ten indicators across four issues: “production and con-
sumption”, “waste management”, “secondary raw materials” and “competitiveness
and innovation”, providing data at a national level, building on national monitoring
systems. It builds on earlier EU monitoring, i.e. the EU Resource Efficiency Score-
board and the Raw Materials Scoreboards (Pardo and Schweitzer 2018). The data
show that while there are improvements in many Member States with respect to
waste management (e.g. quantities and types of waste going to landfill), progress on
true circularity of materials is more limited (only 11% of materials were reused).
An important element of the Circular Economy Package was a Communication
on the interface between chemicals, product and waste legislation. The presence
of contaminants in secondary raw materials affects their ability (and desirability)
to be utilised by businesses and individuals. The material may be circulating in
the economy, but are contaminants conflicting with objectives to reduce toxicity
in the environment? Under EU law, chemicals legislation regulates the presence
of chemicals in products, etc., and, therefore, a review of how chemicals law and
Circular Economy policy interact is important—including the information needs to
understand what substances are where and the consequences for their presence in
secondary raw materials.
A key policy element in the delivery of management of waste and materials in
products is extended producer responsibility (EPR). This has been an important part
of EU policy on different product types—packaging, vehicles and electronic goods.
EU law typically requires Member States to ensure EPR schemes are established at
a national level and one or more producer responsibility organisations (PROs) may
be established through fees levied on manufacturers to support this. It is useful to
examine vehicles, electronic goods and packaging as examples.
To support the circularity of materials in vehicles, the EU adopted the End-of-
Life Vehicles (ELV) Directive in 2000 (Directive 2000/53/EC). This required that
by 2006 Member States should reach ELV targets of 80% reuse/recycling and 85%
reuse/recovery. For 2015, the targets increased to 85% reuse/recycling and 95% for
reuse/recovery. To achieve this, Member States had to introduce new legislation,
ensure manufacturers took responsibility for take-back of old vehicles and ensure
facilities, and systems were developed to support this. The last report on the imple-
mentation of the Directive (EC 2017c) found good achievement of the targets. Some
Member States were slow to start, but by January 2013, nine had already reached
the 2015 targets of 95% for reuse/recovery and 17 Member States had reached those
402 A. Farmer

of 85% for reuse/recycling per vehicle. Others were close to achieving the target,
although the Commission noted that “the reuse and recovery target of 95% is chal-
lenging for several Member States”.
Member States had adopted measures encouraging vehicle manufacturers to limit
the use of hazardous substances in vehicles in order to facilitate dismantling, reuse
and recovery. They had also taken measures to ensure economic operators had set up
systems for collecting ELVs and that owners could deliver old vehicles to facilities
at no cost to themselves. The Commission noted that the achievement of the high
recycling targets was due to:
• the development of new post-shredding technologies;
• the substantial reduction in heavy metals used in new cars;
• the implementation of coding standards to facilitate dismantling and better use
and reuse and recovery of components and materials; and
• more and improved treatment facilities.
While this is a strongly positive outcome for this waste stream and an important
element in the Circular Economy, it is important to note that there were 3.5–4.5
million vehicles per year with “unknown whereabouts”. In other words, they may be
illegally dismantled or exported. Thus, ensuring compliance with the legislation is
still a challenge and is important to ensure full circularity of these materials.
The first Directive on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) was
adopted in 2002 (Directive 2002/96/EC). This support the creation of collection
schemes for consumers. The Directive was revised in 2012 (Directive 2012/19/EU),
with additional provisions. Further, in 2017 the European Commission adopted the
“WEEE Package” including common methodologies for calculating the weight of
WEEE and reports on whether the scope and targets in the Directive should be
changed. The use of EPR is central to the implementation of the Directive.
Eurostat (2019) has highlighted the increasing challenge of dealing with WEEE.
For example, between 2015 and 2016, the amount of electrical and electronic equip-
ment put on the EU market increased by 2.9% from 9.8 million tonnes to 10.1 million
tonnes. Larger appliances from households formed 55.6% (2.5 million tonnes) of the
WEEE in 2016, followed by IT and telecommunications equipment (14.8%) and con-
sumer equipment and photovoltaic panels (13.5%). However, the amount of WEEE
collected varies significantly across the EU from 1.6 kg per inhabitant in Romania
to 16.5 kg per inhabitant in Sweden in 2016.
The WEEE Directive requires that “from 2016, the minimum collection rate shall
be 45% calculated on the basis of the total weight of WEEE collected” and “from
2019, the minimum collection rate to be achieved annually shall be 65% of the
average weight of EEE placed on the market in the three preceding years in the
Member State concerned, or alternatively 85% of WEEE generated on the territory of
that Member State” (with lower rates allowed for some eastern European countries).
However, Leroy (2019) has shown that for many Member States, there is a major
gap between current collection rates and the target. One major concern is that two-
thirds of WEEE are not reported and, therefore, cannot be accounted for in the
statistics. He emphasised that improved tracking and, in particular, enforcement is
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 403

necessary for WEEE not to leak from the economy. This is important for protection
of the environment from toxic substances in WEEE, but, in particular, to deliver a
Circular Economy for those materials. EPR and the PROs its supports can contribute
to improving the situation, but compliance requires action by national authorities as
the drivers for illegal activity are significant.
EPR is also an important part of the management of packaging waste in the EU.
Following early packaging legislation, the first comprehensive EU law was adopted
in 1994—Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste. Watkins et al.
(2017) reviewed the use of EPR in packaging in the EU Member States. They found
a diversity of EPR schemes, including fee modulation for producers in some countries
based on the level of recyclability of plastic in the packaging. Key strengths identified
in the study included:
• EPR schemes support the creation of better waste management systems, such as
recycling facilities and the money raised reduces the costs to public budgets.
• The schemes have led to increased recycling and, as a result, development of tech-
nologies to support this and development of markets for secondary raw materials.
However, when considering EPR schemes for packaging across the EU as a whole,
Watkins et al. (2017) found several weaknesses, including:
• Diversity of approaches leading to different rates of implementation, performance
and data gathering.
• Lack of monitoring and control in some instances.
• Problems of free-riders.
• There is limited evidence of an impact on the eco-design of packaging.
Finally, it is important to note that other EU policy initiatives are also supporting
the objectives of the Circular Economy, including:
• The Working Plan under the Eco-design Directive (EC 2016) aims to extend prod-
uct lifespan and the reusability of products and components and recyclability of
materials.
• The renewed Industrial Strategy of the EU states that its objective is to build
industry based on Circular Economy principles (EC 2017a).
• The EU has made available funding through several instruments to support Circular
Economy objectives, including those of the European Investment Bank, European
Fund for Strategic Investments, Regional Funds and research funding (Pardo and
Schweitzer 2018).
• Taking initiatives with third countries, including a 2018 Memorandum of Under-
standing on the Circular Economy with China and organises Circular Economy
Missions such as in Japan, India and Indonesia (Pardo and Schweitzer 2018).
Current EU policy on the Circular Economy is, therefore, taking place along a
series of strands under the overall policy umbrella. The following sections look at one
aspect in more detail—that of plastics—where the interacting themes and policies
of the Circular Economy (such as the nature of consumption, waste management
challenges and use of EPR) all come together.
404 A. Farmer

4 Focus on Plastics

Plastics are a particularly urgent challenge for the Circular Economy. The EU is a
major producer and importer of plastics and generator of plastic waste. European
marine waters are impacted by marine litter. The Chinese waste ban poses a new
challenge for the management of plastic waste, but even if the waste that is collected
is managed correctly, a large amount still leaks into the environment as litter. As a
result, action on plastics needs to address not only the effective management of the
material once produced, but measures to reduce plastic use as this is needed to reduce
waste production and leakage.
The 2015 Circular Economy Action Plan highlighted the need to tackle the prob-
lem of plastics. One of the first actions taken was to use revise existing EU law on
packaging and packaging waste (Directive 94/62/EC) to introduce additional mea-
sures regarding plastics (adopted as Directive 2018/852/EU). This introduced an
objective for Member States to recycle 50% of plastic packaging by weight by 2025
and 55% by 2030.
Another action of the Circular Economy Action Plan was to produce a strategy
for plastics. In January 2018, the European Commission published the European
Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy (EC 2018a). The Strategy aims to be the
foundation for a “new plastics economy”, with a focus on design and production for
reuse, repair and recycling with more sustainable materials and less plastic pollution.
The Strategy sets the following objectives:
• Promotion of alternatives to disposable plastics;
• adoption of legislation on single-use plastics (see below);
• all plastics packaging in the EU to be reusable or recyclable in a cost-effective
manner by 2030;
• recycling of over 50% of plastics waste generated in Europe by 2030;
• sorting and recycling capacity to increase by four times and improved separate
collection by 2030;
• demand for recycled plastics to increase by four times, supported by an established
market;
• greater use of innovative materials and alternative (i.e. non-fossil fuel) feedstocks
for plastics production, where they are demonstrably more sustainable;
• increased use of circular solutions to promote plastic waste prevention, such as
reverse logistics for packaging and alternatives to disposable plastics;
• a significant decrease in the leakage of plastics into the environment; and
• a leading role for the EU in the global context of dealing with plastic waste and
pollution.
The European Commission provided a list of measures to implement the Strategy
(EC 2018b) (Fig. 2).
Following on the commitment in the Plastics Strategy, the European Commission
published a proposal for legislation (a directive) on single-use plastics in May 2018
and, in this regard, the EU is following the action on plastics by several of its Member
 Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union

Fig. 2 Measures to be taken to implement the EU Plastics Strategy

405
406 A. Farmer

States and countries around the world (UN Environment 2018). This proposal moved
relatively quickly through the legislative adoption within the Council and European
Parliament. The measures contained in the new directive include:
• An EU-wide ban of single-use plastic cotton buds, straws, plates and cutlery (with
exemptions until 2023), beverage stirrers, balloon sticks, oxo-degradable plastics
and expanded polystyrene food containers and cups;
• an obligation for Member States to adopt measures to achieve a 25% reduction of
the consumption of food containers and cups for beverages;
• an obligation for Member States to reduce post-consumption waste from tobacco
product filters containing plastic by 50% by 2025 and 80% by 2030;
• introduction of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes that include the
cost of clean-up and awareness-raising measures;
• harmonised standards and an EPR scheme for fishing gear;
• a 50% collection target and a 15% recycling target for fishing gear by 2025;
• targets for separate collection of plastic bottles (2025–77%; 2029–90%);
• an obligation to separately collect 90% of beverage containers and ensure they are
produced from 35% recycled content by 2025;
• an obligation to prevent the use of hazardous chemicals in the composition of
sanitary items; and
• an obligation to label products to inform consumers about the presence of chemi-
cals of concern in certain single-use plastic products.
Watkins and Schweitzer (2018) critically examined the legislation on single-use
plastics. They noted that while it is important to have such objectives, “many EU
countries already lead globally on recycling”. As a result, while a 90% collection
target for single-use plastics looks tough, some EU Member States already exceed
this target. Watkins and Schweitzer (2018) noted that Germany already recycled
93.5% of its PET bottles in 2015 and France is aiming to collect 100% of recyclable
plastic waste by 2025 (République Française 2018) and to achieve 100% recycling
of plastic by the same date.
The target under the revised waste legislation is to recycle 55% of plastic pack-
aging by 2030. Watkins and Schweitzer (2018) argue that this is low compared to
the targets for most other materials and lower than the overall target of 60% for
municipal waste.
However, recycling targets are only one part of tackling plastics. Further up the
waste hierarchy are measured to prevent plastic waste—these may include bans on
certain types of products (so stopping the waste stream arising) or general targets
for waste prevention. Watkins and Schweitzer (2018) note that higher recycling
rates are hampered by the diversity of polymers, additives and materials found in
plastic waste, the chemical limits on mechanically recycling polymer chains and
the information gaps which exist between products and waste management. For
plastics existing mechanical recycling processes also often require the input of virgin
materials. Furthermore, plastics are generally recycled in open loops into lower-
value products (downcycling) such as fibres for textiles. This is not true circularity
as the material eventually must be disposed of. To address this challenge will require
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 407

innovation and research, although prevention in the first place is more desirable.
EU waste law includes objectives for waste prevention and for reuse as it promotes
the waste hierarchy in Member States’ waste planning. However, the law does not
include binding targets for Member States.
Bans are another policy approach included in the new directive on single-use
plastics. Bans can be used where there are clear problems with certain products (e.g.
littering), where recycling may be a problem and where the function can be readily
substituted by a non-plastic alternative (or a multi-use plastic alternative). Several
Member States have already introduced bans, such as plastic bags in many shops in
Malta, cotton buds to be banned in Italy in 2019 and in France in 2020 and plastic
cups and plates in France from 2020. Bans can also apply to the use of particular
types of plastics in products, as seen by the banning of the use of plastic microbeads
in products in a number of Member States. In 2018, the European Chemicals Agency
published a note on the potential scope of an EU-level restriction on certain uses of
microplastics (ECHA 2018).
Another approach to bans is through Green Public Procurement—this does not
ban a particular product on the market, but due to the purchasing power of public
institutions this can have a significant impact on the use of plastics and can drive
investment by producers in alternatives. An example is a commitment that the UK
central government offices are to be made single-use plastic-free (HM Government
2018).
To support the implementation of the Strategy and the new directive, improved
information is needed. Therefore, within the Circular Economy Monitoring Frame-
work described earlier, there are several indicators relevant to plastics: plastic pack-
aging recycling rates, secondary raw materials’ share of overall materials demand,
and the volume of imports and exports of selected recyclable raw materials.
A new development in EU policy is seen with plastics in that the proposals for the
EU’s budget for 2021–2027 include a proposed plastics-related “tax”. The proposal
is for a contribution from each Member State to the EU budget based on the amount of
non-recycled plastic packaging waste in each country, at a rate of e0.80 per kg. This
would raise up to e7 billion in revenues from 2021 to 2027 (European Council 2018).
Taxes and charges for plastics are found at Member State level, but the introduction
of taxes for environmental purposes at EU level is unusual.
Taking forward action on plastics requires more than EU-level law and support-
ing policy. The European Environment Agency (EEA 2019b) explored actions taken
across 27 EU Member States (not Cyprus), plus Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and
Turkey to tackle plastic waste, finding 173 waste prevention measures either imple-
mented or planned. It found:
• In nearly half of the countries, plastic waste has been declared a priority waste;
• 105 of the measures identified concern the production phase of plastic and 69
measures concern the consumption phase. A few measures were mandatory (e.g.
plastic bag charges), but most were voluntary measures or information measures,
such as to consumers;
• 37 of the measures were market-based instruments, most being plastic bag charges;
408 A. Farmer

• only nine countries had adopted explicit waste prevention targets in their prevention
programmes; and
• there are examples of bans of some plastic products/uses.
The different types of action that are possible at a national level are large. Make it
Work and IMPEL (2019) identified five types of routes to achieving more sustainable
production and use of plastics, with examples of actions being undertaken for each
of these.
Less use of plastics:
• Plastic-free shopping: Gram is a Swedish packaging-free grocery store. The chal-
lenges it faces are mainly related to the market conditions and the competition
with conventional retail. The solutions to these challenges are found in addressing
consumer behaviour and in setting the right prices.
• Rather than leaving waste behind for the municipality to clean-up, in Amsterdam
event organisers have to take at least five measures to make their events more
sustainable as a condition to the event permit that is required for larger events.
Measures either increase reuse or reduce use and littering of plastics.
• The OneLess campaign in London has sought to reduce the use of single-use
plastic bottles. Shops, stations and attractions have introduced alternatives such as
water fountains. Events such as the London Marathon are taking action to reduce
their use of plastic.
More reuse of plastics:
• A UK scheme which incentivises consumers to bring back their used appliances
for recycling.
• A French start-up scheme (Reconcile) providing reusable lunch boxes at a popular
high-end lunch restaurant. Each has a deposit that is refunded when they are
returned.
Reducing littering and extraction of litter from the environment:
• Research in Germany is trialling different alternatives for fishing nets, to reduce
littering of seas and beaches.
• Several examples of ghost nets being collected from seas and beaches and recycled
into yarn for new products.
Recycling:
• Several companies specialise in producing nylon yarn from waste such as fishing
nets for the production of stockings and carpets.
• A new chemical technology has been developed in the Netherlands to break down
products from polyethylene (clothing, plastic bottles) into monomers and rebuild
PET polymer from these for use in new products.
Addressing the presence of substances of very high concern (SVHC):
• The Swedish government is conducting a survey to look into the health and envi-
ronmental performance of different alternatives for the use of plastics, such as in
artificial grass.
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 409

• The national waste programme of the Netherlands contains a SVHC decision tree,
which helps to structure the decision-making process of the regulator, in those
cases where a certain SVHC in a waste flow poses an environmental risk when it
is transformed into a product and put onto the market.

5 Conclusions and Looking to the Future

The EU has made important steps forward in the last decade to support a more
Circular Economy in the EU. It has recognised that there is no “magic bullet” to
achieve this, but that action is required across a wide range of policy areas. Progress
in some areas is, however, better than others. Much greater action is, for example,
required in policy areas such as eco-design and in environmental tax reform (mostly
at Member State level), as well as enhancing supporting policies such as funding.
Critically, the EU and most Member States do not have targets to reduce waste
production, which is a key starting point. There are some examples in some countries,
but overall while EU law requires action to be taken on waste reduction, the lack of
a target is likely to mean that positive action is fragmented. The revised EU Waste
Framework Directive does state that the European Commission should consider such
targets by 2024, but this is some time in the future and it would be years before such
a target would prove effective.
Linked to this, however, are the information challenges for a Circular Economy—
how to measure waste prevention, material flows, the quality of secondary raw mate-
rials, etc. This is not just a matter of tracking policy implementation, but about the
confidence of businesses and consumers for specific materials and products in the
economy. Improved tracking, traceability and overall data reliability are essential to
an effective Circular Economy.
There are also further links with other policy areas to explore. There is consid-
erable emphasis currently on the bioeconomy, such as promoted by the European
Commission (EC 2012). Much of this concerns bioenergy as a climate mitigating
tool. However, biomaterials may also substitute existing materials, e.g. bioplastics.
The two policy areas do, as noted by EEA (2018a), have similar objectives and areas
of intervention, including food waste, biomass and bio-based products. The EEA
argues that the policy agendas would benefit from stronger links.
Ultimately, the circularity of materials in the economy, while an important aim,
does not itself address the over-consumption that takes place in the EU. It makes the
EU more sustainable, rather than sustainable in absolute terms. Increasing circular-
ity aids living within planetary boundaries, but further actions will be required to
meet this boundary. Pantzar et al. (2018) noted that Europe needs to address what it
consumes and that “This will require concerted efforts throughout society, including
more conscious decisions by individuals, ambitious commitments by companies and
incentives and legal intervention by policymakers”. They argue that “The focus of
410 A. Farmer

EU-level intervention to date partly reflects the fact that demand-side policy mea-
sures often fall under the legal competence of Member States, and partly that many
of the potential policy options for addressing consumption have not been seen as
politically viable”. A key problem, they argue is that modern western society is built
on a growth-based and linear economic model which largely fails to internalise exter-
nal costs of production and end of life. As a result, it “encourages short-term and
highly wasteful consumption patterns where a decrease in consumption is inherently
considered negative”.
Clearly, actions being taken to support the Circular Economy go some way to
address some of this short-termism, but more radical action will be required to meet
a truly sustainable Europe.

References

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure and Bio Intelligence Service. (2014). The opportunities to
business of improving resource efficiency—Final report on behalf of the European Commis-
sion, Contract Ref. 070307/2011/610181/ETU/F.1, Northwich. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/
enveco/resource_efficiency/pdf/report_opportunities.pdf.
EC. (2003). Towards a thematic strategy on the sustainable use of natural resources.
(COM(2003)572). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2003:0572:
FIN:EN:PDF.
EC. (2005). Thematic strategy on sustainable use of natural resources alongside the thematic strat-
egy on waste prevention and recycling. (COM(2005)670). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/
LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2005:0670:FIN:EN:PDF.
EC. (2008). Raw materials initiative—Meeting our critical needs for growth and jobs
in Europe. (COM(2008)699). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:
2008:0699:FIN:EN:PDF.
EC. (2011a). A resource-efficient Europe—Flagship initiative of the Europe 2020 Strategy.
(COM(2011)21). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0021:
FIN:EN:PDF.
EC. (2011b). Analysis associated with the roadmap to a resource efficient Europe, Part II, accom-
panying the document ‘Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe’. (SEC(2011)1067). http://ec.
europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/working_paper_part2.pdf.
EC. (2011c). On the progress of the thematic strategy on the sustainable use of natural resources.
(SEC(2011)1068). http://edz.bib.uni-mannheim.de/edz/pdf/sek/2011/sek-2011-1068-en.pdf.
EC. (2011d). Roadmap to a resource-efficient Europe. (COM(2011)571). http://www.europarl.
europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com(2011)0571_/com_com(2011)0571_
en.pdf.
EC. (2011e). Tackling the challenges in commodity markets and on raw materials. (COM(2011)25).
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com(2011)0025_/
com_com(2011)0025_en.pdf.
EC. (2012). Innovating for sustainable growth: A bioeconomy for Europe. (COM(2012)60). https://
eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0060:FIN:EN:PDF.
EC. (2015). An EU action plan for the circular economy. (COM(2015)614). https://eur-lex.
europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:8a8ef5e8-99a0-11e5-b3b7-01aa75ed71a1.0012.02/DOC_
1&format=PDF.
EC. (2016). Ecodesign working plan 2016–2019. (COM(2016)773). https://ec.europa.eu/energy/
sites/ener/files/documents/com_2016_773.en_.pdf.
Developing the Circular Economy in the European Union 411

EC. (2017a). Investing in a smart, innovative and sustainable industry—A renewed EU Industrial
Policy Strategy. (COM(2017)579). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:c8b9aac5-
9861-11e7-b92d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&format=PDF.
EC. (2017b). Report on the implementation of the circular economy action plan. (COM(2017)33).
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/implementation_report.pdf.
EC. (2017c). Report on the implementation of directive 2000/53/EC on end-of-life vehicles for
the periods 2008–2011 and 2011–2014. COM(2017). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/elv/
pdf/elv_eur_lex_europa.pdf.
EC. (2018a). A European strategy for plastics in a circular economy. (COM/2018/28). http://ec.
europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/plastics-strategy.pdf.
EC. (2018b). Annexes to a European strategy for plastics in the circular economy. (COM(2018)28)
Annexes 1–3.
EC. (2018c). Communication on a monitoring framework for the circular economy.
(COM(2018)29). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/monitoring-
framework.pdf.
EEA. (2016a). Circular economy in Europe: Developing the knowledge base. European Envi-
ronment Agency, Copenhagen. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/circular-economy-in-
europe.
EEA. (2016b) Recycling rates in Europe by waste stream. https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-
maps/daviz/recycling-rates-by-waste-streams-1#tab-chart_2.
EEA. (2018a). The circular economy and the bioeconomy: Partners in sustainability. European
Environment Agency, Copenhagen. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/circular-economy-
and-bioeconomy.
EEA. (2018b). Waste generation. https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/waste-
generation-1/assessment.
EEA. (2019a). Municipal waste recycled and composted in each European country. https://www.
eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/municipal-waste-recycled-and-composted-3#tab-chart_3.
EEA. (2019b). Preventing plastic waste in Europe EEA report no 02/2019. European Environ-
ment Agency, Copenhagen. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/preventing-plastic-waste-in-
europe.
EMF. (2012). Towards the circular economy—economic and business rationale for an accel-
erated transition, Volume 1, Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Isle of Wight. https://www.
ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation-
Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf.
EMF. (2015a). Concept. What is a circular economy? A framework for an economy that is restora-
tive and regenerative by design. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/
concept.
EMF. (2015b). Delivering the circular economy—A toolkit for policymakers. Ellen MacArthur Foun-
dation, Isle of Wight. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/
EllenMacArthurFoundation_PolicymakerToolkit.pdf.
EU. (2013). Decision no 1386/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 Novem-
ber 2013 on a General Union Environment Action Programme to 2020 ‘Living well, within
the limits of our planet’. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:
32013D1386&from=EN.
ECHA. (2018). Note on substance identification and the potential scope of a restriction on uses
of ‘microplastics’. European Chemicals Agency, Helsinki. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/
10162/13641/note_on_substance_identification_potential_scope_en.pdf/6f26697e-70b5-9ebe-
6b59-2e11085de791.
European Council. (2018). Proposal for a council decision on the system of own resources of
the European Union (COM/2018/325 final—2018/0135 (CNS). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?qid=1527242435118&uri=CELEX%3A52018PC0325.
Eurostat. (2019). Waste statistics—electrical and electronic equipment. https://ec.europa.eu/
eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Waste_statistics_electrical_and_electronic_equipment.
412 A. Farmer

HM Government. (2018). A green future: Our 25 year plan to improve the environ-
ment. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_
data/file/693158/25-year-environment-plan.pdf.
James, K., Mitchell, P., & Mueller, D. (2016). Extrapolating resource efficient business
models across Europe. REBus Project. http://www.rebus.eu.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/
Extrapolating-resource-efficient-business-models-across-Europe.pdf.
Leroy, P. (2019). Bridging the distance to target. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium
on Electronic Waste and End of Life Vehicles (pp. 16–24), Jeju, South Korea, 19–22 May 2019.
Make it Work and IMPEL. (2019). Make it Work and IMPEL Guidance—Making the circular econ-
omy work. IMPEL, Brussels. http://minisites.ieep.eu/work-areas/environmental-governance/
better-regulation/make-it-work/events/2019/02/rome-making-the-circular-economy-work-
connecting-policy-law-and-practice-march-2019.
Pantzar, M., Strube, R., Gionfra, S., & Modee, K. (2018). Sustainable consumption—Pol-
icy approaches for systems change. Paper for the Think 2030 Conference on Science-
Policy Solutions for a More Sustainable Europe. https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/attachments/
6ba62504-96f4-463a-b077-b37cb739043a/Think%202030%20Sustainable%20consumption.
pdf?v=63710011359.
Pardo, R., & Schweitzer, J. P. (2018). A long-term strategy for a European circular economy—
Setting the course for success. Paper for the Think 2030 Conference on Science-Policy Solutions
for a More Sustainable Europe. https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/attachments/f99f1ac9-83a0-47e0-
a0a2-74f3ce528ad8/Think%202030%20Circular%20Economy.pdf.
République Française. (2018). Feuille de route économie circulaire: 50 mésures pout une
économie 100% circulaire. https://www.ecologique-solidaire.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/Feuille-
de-route-Economie-circulaire-50-mesures-pour-economie-100-circulaire.pdf.
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R.,
et al. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science,
347(6223), 1259855. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/347/6223/1259855.
UN Environment. (2018). Single use plastics—A road map to sustainability. https://wedocs.unep.
org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/25496/singleUsePlastic_sustainability.pdf?sequence=1&
isAllowed=y.
Watkins, E., Gionfra, G., Schweitzer, J. P., Pantzar, M., Janssens, C., & ten Brink, P. (2017).
EPR in the EU plastics strategy and the circular economy: A focus on plastic packag-
ing. Institute for European Environmental Policy, Brussels. https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/
attachments/9665f5ea-4f6d-43d4-8193-454e1ce8ddfe/EPR%20and%20plastics%20report%
20IEEP%2019%20Dec%202017%20final%20rev.pdf?v=63680919827.
Watkins, E., & Schweitzer, J. P. (2018). Moving towards a circular economy for plastics in the EU by
2030. Paper for the Think 2030 Conference on Science-Policy Solutions for a More Sustainable
Europe. https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/attachments/4e8d42a2-c8a8-4d40-bae0-c3429b10fe4d/
Think%202030%20Circular%20economy%20for%20plastics.pdf?v=63710011292.
Status of Plastics Waste in Circular
Economy in the USA

Serpil Guran, Ronald L. Mersky and Sannidhya K. Ghosh

Abstract Circular economy, an economic system where waste is utilized as an

economic input, is currently the subject of much interest. Methods to incorporate
all wastes into circular economy have not been developed. This paper discusses
the current status and options for including plastics wastes in circular economy in
the USA. Utilizing some plastics wastes as fuel is the most feasible path to doing
so at present. Completely closed-loop circular economy for plastics would require
fundamental changes in how plastics-based products are designed and manufactured.

Keywords Circular economy · Recycling · Plastics waste

1 Introduction

The term circular economy has become popular in recent years (Kok et al. 2013),
but the concept is not new. The basic definition of circular economy is simply an
economic system based on what is traditionally defined as waste being redefined as
an economic input, as opposed to a linear economy (Fig. 1) in which materials are
extracted, used, and disposed of (Hoomweg and Kennedy 2013). Some definitions of
circular economy also include reduction of nonrecoverable pollutants and increased
durability of products (lengthening of the circle) (Lahti et al. 2018). Circular economy
can therefore in practice be considered essentially synonymous with the term zero
waste economy.
Waste is something that is considered to be of negative value and therefore is
designated for removal, by its owner (Michelini et al. 2017). Historically, waste

S. Guran (B)
The EcoComplex, Rutgers University, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New
Brunswick, USA
e-mail: sg795@njaes.rutgers.edu
R. L. Mersky
Department of Civil Engineering, Widener University, Chester, USA
S. K. Ghosh
Structural Engineering and Structural Mechanics, Department of Civil, Environmental and
Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, USA
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 413
S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_21
414 S. Guran et al.

Fig. 1 Linear economy resource management approach

management has been performed for the purposes of sanitation, health, and esthetics
(Michelini et al. 2017). As such, waste was managed by disposal, except in cases
where the waste was economically and functionally competitive with virgin mate-
rials. More recently, secondary (waste) materials use (more popularly referred to
as recycling—a term that, like circular economy, indicates the cyclic nature of the
process) has been encouraged or mandated for perceived environmental benefits,
rather than only free-market reasons. Circular economy is an expansion of encour-
aged or mandated recycling—it is an economy requiring a cyclical materials system.
To achieve such implies not just materials recovery, but also that the cyclical use of
materials be incorporated in all aspects of the economy—including product design,
manufacture, and use.
Plastics materials are an increasingly large quantity and percentage in the US
waste stream. From Table 1, it is noted that total plastics in the USA MSW increased
from 390,000 US tons in 1960 to 34,500,000 in 2015—an increase of almost 90
times (2015 data are the most recent published by the US EPA). From Table 2, it is
seen that at the same time, period plastics increased from 0.4% to 13.1% of the USA
MSW. No other single waste material has had nearly that rate of growth.
A significant reason for this quantity and percentage increase is substitution of
plastics (a newer material) for older materials (glass, metals, and paper) in existing
products. Tables 1 and 2 indicate a slowing of plastics wastes’ quantity and percentage
increases (as plastics become mature materials) but the increase still continues.
Given the large, and still increasing, portion of plastics in the USA MSW, it is
critical for the USA economy to incorporate plastics wastes into production of new
products if a circular economy is to be achieved.

2 Governmental Involvement in MSW

Nationwide US waste management laws began in 1965 with the “Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act” (Fig. 2). This was followed by the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) of 1976. The RCRA program, implemented by the US EPA and its
partner states, tribes, and local governments, protects communities and the environ-
ment from the improper management of solid and hazardous waste, cleans land and
water, conserves resources, and empowers citizens by delivering information and
opportunities that enable communities to participate in decision-making processes.
Table 1 Materials generateda in the municipal waste stream, 1960–2015 (thousands of tons) (5)
Paper and paperboard 29,990 44,310 55,160 72,730 87,740 84,840 71,310 68,610 68,050
Glass 6720 12,740 15,130 13,100 12,770 12,540 11,520 11,480 11,470
Metals
Ferrous 10,300 12,360 12,620 12,640 14,150 15,210 16,920 17,880 18,170
Aluminum 340 800 1730 2810 3190 3330 3510 3530 3610
Other nonferrous 180 670 1160 1100 1600 1860 2020 2230 2220
Total metals 10,820 13,830 15,510 16,550 18,940 20,400 22,450 23,640 24,000
Plastics 390 2900 6830 17,130 25,550 29,380 31,400 33,390 34,500
Rubber and leather 1840 2970 4200 5790 6670 7290 7750 8210 8480
Textiles 1760 2040 2530 5810 9480 11,510 13,220 15,240 16,030
Wood 3030 3720 7010 12,210 13,570 14,790 15,710 16,120 16,300
Otherb 70 770 2520 3190 4000 4290 4710 5120 5160
Status of Plastics Waste in Circular Economy in the USA

Total materials in products 54,620 83,280 108,890 146,510 178,720 185,040 178,070 181,810 183,990
Other wastes
Food 12,200 12,800 13,000 23,860 30,700 32,930 35,740 38,670 39,730
Yard trimmings 20,000 23,200 27,500 35,000 30,530 32,070 33,400 34,500 34,720
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes 1300 1780 2250 2900 3500 3690 3840 3970 3990
Total other wastes 33,500 37,780 42,750 61,760 64,730 68,690 72,980 77,140 78,440
Total MSW generated—weight 88,120 121,060 151,640 208,270 243,450 253,730 251,050 258,950 262,430
a Generation before materials recycling, composting, combustion with energy recovery, or landfilling. Does not include construction and demolition debris,
industrial process wastes or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding
b Includes electrolytes in batteries and fluff pulp, feces and urine in disposable diapers
415
 416

Table 2 Materials Generateda in the Municipal Waste Stream, 1960 to 2015 (percent of total generation) (5)
Paper and paperboard 34.0% 36.6% 36.4% 34.9% 36.0% 33.4% 28.4% 26.5% 25.9%
Glass 7.6% 10.5% 10.0% 6.3% 5.2% 4.9% 4.6% 4.4% 4.4%
Metals
Ferrous 11.7% 10.2% 8.3% 6.1% 5.8% 6.0% 6.7% 6.9% 6.9%
Aluminum 0.4% 0.7% 1.1% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4%
Other nonferrous 0.2% 0.6% 0.8% 0.5% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8%
Total metals 12.3% 11.4% 10.2% 7.9% 7.8% 8.0% 8.9% 9.1% 9.1%
Plastics 0.4% 2.4% 4.5% 8.2% 10.5% 11.6% 12.5% 12.9% 13.1%
Rubber and leather 2.1% 2.5% 2.8% 2.8% 2.7% 2.9% 3.1% 3.2% 3.2%
Textiles 2.0% 1.7% 1.7% 2.8% 3.9% 4.5% 5.3% 5.9% 6.1%
Wood 3.4% 3.1% 4.6% 5.9% 5.6% 5.8% 6.3% 6.2% 6.2%
Otherb 0.1% 0.6% 1.7% 1.5% 1.6% 1.7% 1.9% 2.0% 2.1%
Total materials in products 62.0% 68.8% 71.8% 70.3% 73.4% 72.9% 70.9% 70.2% 70.1%
Other wastes
Food 13.8% 10.6% 8.6% 11.5% 12.6% 13.0% 14.2% 14.9% 15.1%
Yard trimmings 22.7% 19.2% 18.1% 16.8% 12.5% 12.6% 13.3% 13.3% 13.3%
Miscellaneous Inorganic wastes 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.4% 1.4% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5%
Total other wastes 38.0% 31.2% 28.2% 29.7% 26.6% 27.1% 29.1% 29.8% 29.9%
Total MSW generated—% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
a Generation before materials recycling, composting, combustion with energy recovery or landfilling. Does not include construction and demolition debris,
industrial process wastes or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding
b Includes electrolytes in batteries and fluff pulp, feces and urine in disposable diapers
S. Guran et al.
Status of Plastics Waste in Circular Economy in the USA 417

Fig. 2 The evolution of significant RCRA legislation Adapted from RCRA’s Critical Mission and
the Path Forward, 2014 (USEPA 2014)

RCRA also serves as a legislative basis for EPA’s Sustainable Materials Manage-
ment (SMM) program, which is a systemic approach for promoting using and reusing
materials over their life cycle. The program has four primary goals: to decrease the
disposal rate; reduce environmental impacts; increase socioeconomic benefits; and
increase the capacity of communities to adopt SMM practices. The SMM program
set three strategic priorities as follows:
– The built environment
– Sustainable food management
– Sustainable packaging.

3 Plastics Recycling

Table 3 shows the US recycling rates for MSW component materials, 1960–2015. It
is notable that plastics wastes have the lowest recycling rates of all MSW categories
except food (which, as a wet waste, has only recently been subject to significant
organized source separation in the USA).
There are multiple reasons to explain the low plastics recycling rate, including:
Collection/transport/separation
• some plastics (i.e., EPS) are of very low density, making transport per weight
expensive and energy inefficient.
• plastics are often strongly attached to other plastics or nonplastic materials (i.e.,
multi-polymer packaging, appliances) making separation into pure polymers
expensive if not feasibly impossible.
• some plastics waste (i.e., agricultural) are produced in remote areas.
• contamination (most likely the result of single-stream recycling practices).
Technological

• Thermoset plastics cannot be remelted and reformed, significantly limiting their

input into new products.
• Depolymerization is not yet commercialized.
Table 3 Materials recycled and composteda in municipal solid waste, 1960–2015 (percent of generation of each material)
418

Percent of generation of each material

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 2014 2015
Paper and paperboard 16.9% 15.3% 21.3% 27.8% 42.8% 49.5% 62.5% 64.7% 66.6%
Glass 1.5% 1.3% 5.0% 20.1% 22.6% 20.7% 27.2% 26.0% 26.4%
Metals
Ferrous 0.5% 1.2% 2.9% 17.6% 33.1% 33.0% 34.3% 33.4% 33.4%
Aluminum Neg. 1.3% 17.9% 35.9% 27.0% 20.7% 19.4% 20.1% 18.6%
Other nonferrous Neg. 47.8% 46.6% 66.4% 66.3% 68.8% 71.3% 69.5% 67.6%
Total metals 0.5% 3.5% 7.9% 24.0% 34.8% 34.3% 35.3% 34.8% 34.3%
Plastics Neg. Neg. 0.3% 2.2% 5.8% 6.1% 8.0% 9.6% 9.1%
Rubber and leather 17.9% 8.4% 3.1% 6.4% 12.3% 14.4% 18.6% 17.5% 17.8%
Textiles 2.8% 2.9% 6.3% 11.4% 13.9% 15.9% 15.5% 14.8% 15.3%
Wood Neg. Neg. Neg. 1.1% 10.1% 12.4% 14.5% 15.9% 16.3%
Otherb Neg. 39.0% 19.8% 21.3% 24.5% 28.2% 29.1% 28.7% 27.7%
Total materials in products 10.3% 9.6% 13.3% 19.8% 29.7% 32.0% 36.6% 36.6% 36.8%
Other wastes
Foodc Neg. Neg. Neg. Neg. 2.2% 2.1% 2.7% 5.0% 5.3%
Yard trimmings Neg. Neg. Neg. 12.0% 51.7% 61.9% 57.5% 61.1% 61.3%
Miscellaneous Inorganic wastes Neg. Neg. Neg. Neg. Neg. Neg. Neg. Neg. Neg.
Total other wastes Neg. Neg. Neg. 6.8% 25.4% 29.9% 27.6% 29.8% 29.8%
Total MSW recycled and composted—% 6.4% 6.6% 9.6% 16.0% 28.5% 31.4% 34.0% 34.6% 34.7%
a Recycling and composting of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap. Details may not add to totals due to rounding
b Collection of electrolytes in batteries; probably not recycled. Neg = Less than 5000 tons or 0.05%
c Includes collection of other MSW organics for composting
S. Guran et al.
Status of Plastics Waste in Circular Economy in the USA 419

4 Legislative and Industrial Initiatives

Most USA governmental actions aimed at managing plastics wastes have occurred
at the local level. Some municipal governments have banned or restricted the use of
specific plastics products that are perceived as being particularly problematic (single-
use bags, straws). Such actions may reduce plastics wastes but do not provide for
reintroduction of wastes into circular economy.
Some states have taken actions. California, for example, has passed a regula-
tion requiring that some disposable food service items be reusable, recyclable, or
compostable by 2021 (Rajbanshi 2019; California Legislative Information 2018).
However the regulation is limited to certain items at certain state facilities, so its
scope is not broad. Also, rather than causing plastics items to be reintroduced into
circular economy, the result could instead be substitution for non-plastics items.
At the federal level, legislation has been proposed to introduce extended producer
responsibility to manufacturers of plastics packaging (Product Stewardship Institute
2019). However the proposal also calls for bans or disincentives for some plastic
products and container deposits. Also it is unclear if this will become law and, if so,
in what form.
Overall, there is not significant law to encourage plastics in circular economy.
The plastics industry has been willing for decades to find uses for some plastics
collected in recycling programs. However the overall USA plastics recycling rate, as
of 2015, is 9.1% (USEPA 2019) (although some specific products have much higher
rates). This indicates that industry has not yet found much circular economy pathway
for plastics.

5 Options for Plastics in Circular Economy

There is currently not any indication that the mentioned obstacles will be overcome
in the near future. Therefore, it appears that, if the USA is to move toward a circular
economy (Fig. 3), fundamental changes in plastics wastes are needed. This would
include replacing some current polymers in products, redesign of many products, and
elimination of some products. This runs contrary to usual free-market economics and
would have many secondary consequences. It is not feasible.
For plastics in the USA, utilizing some plastics wastes as fuel appears to be the
most feasible current method for plastics to be a part of movement toward circular
economy.
The USA can transform current stalled inefficient plastics recycling operations
and create innovative solutions. Creating an effective infrastructure is a key to achieve
transformation and the solutions can be listed as follows (Bara and Leonard 2018):
– Producing plastics from nonfossil feedstocks
– Displacing fossil energy by renewable energy during the production and distribu-
tion of plastics
420 S. Guran et al.

Fig. 3 Closing the loop for circular economy

– Market transformation through technological innovation: Researching and devel-

oping new production processes to achieve longevity, reusability, and reduce the
waste
– Considering plastic waste as a resource
– Developing new sustainable business models
– Market-based incentives
– Development of new institutional infrastructure
– Supportive regulations
– Collaboration between researchers, businesses, consumers, and decision makers
– A systems approach to identify the opportunities and creating an ecosystem that
strategies and policies can impact each other efficiently.

References

Bara, R., & Leonard, S. A. (2018). Plastics and the circular economy. A STAP document.
California Legislative Information. (2018). https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/
billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB1335.
Hoomweg, D., Bhada-Tata. P., & Kennedy, C. (2013). Waste production must peak this century.
Nature, 502, 615–617.
Status of Plastics Waste in Circular Economy in the USA 421

Kok, L., Wurpel, G., & Ten Wolde, A. (2013). Unleashing the power of circular economy. Amster-
dam, Netherlands: IMSA and Circle Economy.
Lahti, T., Wincent, J., & Parida, N. (2018). A definition and theoretical review of circular economy,
value creation, and sustainable business models: Where are we now and where should research
move in the future? Sustainability, 10, 2799–2817. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082799.
Michelini, G., Moraes, R. N., Cunha, R. N., Costa, J. M. H., & Ometto, A. R. (2017). From linear to
circular economy: PSS conducting the transition. Procedia CIRP, 2–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
procir.2017.03.012.
Product Stewardship Institute. (19 July, 2019). Waste Advantage Magazine. https://
wasteadvantagemag.com/extended-producer-responsibility-epr-proposal-for-packaging-hits-
the-national-stage/.
Rajbanshi, R. (19 July, 2019). Upcoming California law could set stage for recycling defini-
tion debate. Waste Dive.. https://www.wastedive.com/news/upcoming-california-law-could-set-
stage-for-recycling-definition-debate/559078/.
USEPA. (2014). Protecting communities-restoring land-conserving resources: RCRA’s Critical
Mission & The Path Forward. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/
rcras_critical_mission_and_the_path_forward.pdf.
USEPA. (2018). Advancing sustainable materials management: 2015 fact sheet-assessing trends in
material generation, recycling, composting, combustion with energy recovery and landfilling in
the United States.
USEPA. (2019). Plastics: Material-Specific Data. https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-
materials-waste-and-recycling/plastics-material-specific-data.
Circular Economy in Vietnam

Huynh Trung Hai, Nguyen Duc Quang, Nguyen Trung Thang

and Nguyen Hoang Nam

Abstract The chapter presents the situation of waste generation and waste manage-
ment in Vietnam, a middle-income country that has the fastest growth economies
within the last 30 years. Along with the development, the country is now faced with
the increase of waste in many types, especially the domestic waste, while the infras-
tructure for waste management is still inadequate. Vietnam has not any specific term
on circular economy; nevertheless, the necessary of circle the natural resources has
been emphasized in many momentous legislation documents and also found in many
actual sub-models for recycle and reuse of waste. In fact, the volume of recycled
materials in Vietnam is still small comparing to the input of the economy, and still
far from its target on reducing the landfill rate of collected waste. Because of that,
in the near future, Vietnam is still focused on 3R policy to build a proper infras-
tructure before applying the circular economy concept and frame for the sustainable
development of the country.

Keywords Vietnam · Circular economy · Recycling · Waste management

1 Introduction

Vietnam is located in Southeast Asia region with an area of 330,000 km2 . The coun-
try’s population continues to increase from 86.95 million in 2010 to 94.67 million in
2018 (General Statistics Office of Viet Nam 2018). Since 1986, Vietnam’s economy
has experienced impressive growth with average rate GDP 6.63% per year in the
period of 1986–2017, and GDP growth rate in 2018 was the highest in ten years, at
7.08% (Fig. 1). This has brought Vietnam into the world’s fastest growth economies
and transformed Vietnam from poor to a middle-income country. At the end of 2018,
the size of the economy has increased by over 17.4 times, from US$ 14 billion in

H. T. Hai (B) · N. D. Quang

School of Environmental Science and Technology, Hanoi University of Sciences and Technology,
Hanoi, Vietnam
e-mail: hai.huynhtrung@hust.edu.vn
N. T. Thang · N. H. Nam
Institute of Strategy and Policy on Natural Resources and Environment, Hanoi, Vietnam
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 423
S. K. Ghosh (ed.), Circular Economy: Global Perspective,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1052-6_22
424 H. T. Hai et al.

Fig. 1 Vietnam GDP growth 2011–2018. Source Adapted from GSO (2018)

1985 to US$ 224 billion in 2018, ranking 44th in the world by nominal GDP and 34th
by purchasing power parity. This economic growth is due to strong industrialization
of the country in the last 30 years since the adoption of renovation policy.
Vietnam is also experiencing rapid urbanization. In 2018, there have been 828
urban areas/cities in the country, including 02 municipalities, 19 grade I, 24 grade II,
46 grade III, 85 grade IV, 652 grade V cities; and the urbanization rate reached 38.4%
(increased 0.9% in comparison with that in 2017) (MOC 2019). Urban population
has increased from 26.5 million people (accounted for 30%) to about 33.8 million
people in 2018 (accounted for 36%) (Fig. 2).
Rapid population growth, industrialization, and urbanization have led to a sig-
nificant increase in waste generation, especially in urban solid waste in Vietnam.

Fig. 2 Vietnam population 2010–2018. Source Adapted from General Statistics Office of Vietnam
(2018)
Circular Economy in Vietnam 425

Besides, with increasing middle-income population and fast development of elec-

tronics and information communication technology (ICT) such as mobile phone, air
conditioner, and other products (Table 1), while consumption pattern is still unsus-
tainable, the country has also faced emerging issues such as e-waste, marine plastic
debris, construction waste.
Waste generation in Vietnam is increasing. The volume of generated household
solid waste in 2018 is about 25.5 million tons, in which urban household waste
is about 38,000 tons/day and rural household waste is 32,000 tons/day (Ministry
of Natural Resources and Environment 2018). The organic material accounts for
50–60% of the household waste (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
2015). It is forecast that the household waste increases by 10–16% per year (Ministry
of Natural Resources and Environment 2017).
With regard to waste management, although regulated by the law, generally, house-
hold waste has not been separated at source. The collection rate of municipal solid
waste (MSW) is quite high in urban area, 85–85.5%, but still low in a rural area—just
40–55% (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 2018). Waste recycling is
still low, estimated as about 8–12% of the total generated MSW (Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment 2011). Recycling activities are usually implemented by
informal sector, carried out in households in craft villages with rudimentary technolo-
gies, and causing environmental pollution. Regarding treatment and disposal, nearly
75% of MSW, is still landfilled, mainly in unhygienic dumping sites. Incineration
has been implemented in rural area nationwide without energy recovery (Ministry
of Natural Resources and Environment 2018). There are few projects on waste-to-
energy treatment with waste incineration for electricity generation in Hanoi, Quang
Binh, Binh Duong, and Can Tho.
Besides the household waste, hazardous waste (HW), plastic, e-waste, and con-
struction and demolition (C&D) waste are also emerging in Vietnam.

Hazardous waste (HW)

Domestic HW in urban areas includes batteries, accumulators, tube lights, which

have not been collected and treated separately but discharged with domestic solid
waste to landfills. The rate of HWs in domestic waste brought to landfill is about
0.02–0.82% of total MSW (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 2016).
Medical HW accounts for about 20% of medical solid waste, mainly pathological
and infectious waste. The medical HW of 40% hospitals and health facilities is
incinerated in 2017 (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 2017). There
are still hospitals which do not have specialized incinerators and treat the HWs in
manual incinerators or discharge directly to ordinary landfills.
Industrial HW is mostly generated from light industries, chemicals, and metal-
lurgy and has been estimated to account for about 15–20% of total industrial solid
waste (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 2017). In 2016, the amount
of industrial HWs generated nationwide was about 874,588 tons (Government Party
Committee 2018). In addition, HW is also imported under scraps such as metal scraps,
plastic, rubber tires, automobile and vessel cover with impurities, lead batteries, and
 426

Table 1 Quantity of some manufactured electronic products in Vietnam (2006–2016)

Products 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Printer (Thous. pieces) – – 8955.9 9,420.5 23,519.2 15,467.9 15,721.7 29,629.4 27,465.8 25,820.1 25,847.6
Telephone (Thous. pieces) – – 3,210.9 9,120.9 9,405.7 11,047.8 9,680.5 5,531.2 5439.5 5868.1 5654.4
Mobile phone (Mill. pieces) – – 0.0 6.4 37.5 79.6 109.4 132.0 181.4 235.6 193.0
Assembled television set (Thous. 2445.6 2927.5 3106.7 3005.9 2800.3 3099.2 2600.4 3112.3 3425.9 5512.4 10,838.6
pieces)
Digital camera (Thous. pieces) – – 3750.7 3158.7 3273.0 1468.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 – –
Batteries (1.5 V) (Mill. pieces) 277.3 342.8 330.4 393.2 397.0 415.1 443.9 423.9 457.9 474.0 508.7
Household fridge and freezer 793.4 946.1 1000.8 1306.8 1540.9 1507.1 1632.2 1734.9 1521.5 1610.4 1600.5
(Thous. pieces)
Household washing machine 339.8 414.5 532.2 491.4 467.4 656.1 851.3 930.9 916.4 1284.8 2040.1
(Thous. pieces)
Household electric fan (Thous. 1809.6 2930.7 2914.7 5561.0 7174.1 7045.8 5905.0 5336.4 5524.4 6694.0 6770.5
pieces)
Air conditioner (Thous. pieces) 189.0 284.5 313.1 325.2 343.7 355.3 393.4 414.1 286.6 534.3 613.5
Source General Statistic Office (2018)
H. T. Hai et al.
Circular Economy in Vietnam 427

used electronic products (such as computer monitors, electronic circuit boards). The
number of illegal import of HWs has been recorded over the years: In 2011, 17 cases
with 573 tons of HWs were detected and 30 cases with 3868 tons in 2012 and 13
cases with 323 tons were detected until July in 2013 (Ministry of Natural Resources
and Environment 2015).
The amount of industrial HWs has been collected and treated increasing year
by year, 165,624 tons in 2012, 186,657 tons in 2013 (increased 12.7% compared
to 2012), 320,275 tons in 2014 (up 93.4% compared to 2012), nearly 400,000 tons
in 2015 (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 2015), and 752,181 tons
in 2016 (reaching the collection and treatment rate of 90%) (Government Party
Committee 2018). By March 2018, there are 114 HW treatment facilities licensed
by MONRE nationwide (Government Party Committee 2018). Most HW treatment
facilities are private enterprises (accounting for 97%). The collection, transportation,
and treatment of HWs in remote areas still face many difficulties, especially for the
owners of HWs generation with a small amount (<0.6 tons/year) because it is hard
to find the treatment facilities for signing treatment contracts.
Plastic Waste
Globally, 322 million ton of plastic were produced in 2015 (Plastic Europe 2017), and
the production and consumption of plastic products made up nearly five million tons
in 2015 in Vietnam. In 1990, plastic consumption per capita only was 3.8 kg/year;
however, it increased fast to 41 kg/year in 2015 (Vietnam Plastic Association).
There is no official statistics of plastic waste; however, Vietnam has been reported
to be the fourth in top five countries in marine plastic waste generation and discharged
around 0.28–0.73 tons marine plastic debris annually (Jambeck et al. 2015). Accord-
ing to a World Bank study, lower middle-income countries including Vietnam have
the percentage of plastic waste of 12% (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012) of total
municipal solid waste (MSW). MONRE also estimated that plastic waste accounts
for about 8–16% of the total going into a landfill (MONRE 2011). It is estimated
that the number of plastic bags used is over 30 billion bags per year, and only a small
proportion of about 17% of the bags are regularly reused; the rest becomes waste
after a single use (MONRE 2012). Two big cities, Hanoi City and Ho Chi Minh
City, generate averagely about 80 tons of plastic waste and bags per day. Plastic bags
account for 7–8% the waste generated in Hanoi and about 10% in Ho Chi Minh City
(Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 2017).
Plastic bags are taxed in Vietnam (50,000 VND/kg) according to the Law on
Environmental Tax. However, environmentally friendly plastic bags are exempted
from the tax. Till 2018, there are 43 products of 38 companies that have been certified
by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE). In Vietnam,
plastic waste has not been treated separately but usually landfilled together with
MSW.
E-waste
In Vietnam, e-waste comes from four main sources: households; offices; industry; and
used electronic equipment imported from abroad. Vietnam has no official statistics of
428 H. T. Hai et al.

Fig. 3 Increase of electronic equipment waste in Vietnam. Source Nguyen et al. (2009)

e-waste but only estimated data in several researches. According to an international

study, Vietnam created 116 thousand tons e-waste with 1.3 kg/inhabitant compared
with 16 million tons, which represented 3.7 kg/inhabitant in Asia and 41.8 million
ton in the world in 2014 (Baldé et al. 2015). This number is increased to 141,000 tons
in 2016 (Baldé et al. 2017). Nguyen et al. (2009) also estimated over 110 thousand
tons of e-waste generated in Vietnam in 2014, and the amount tends to increase in
the coming years (Fig. 3).
Potential for resource recovery from e-waste is high because iron and steel con-
stitute about 50% of the e-waste, followed by 21% of plastic, 13% of nonferrous
metals, and others (UNEP 2007).
E-waste is classified and managed as HW in Vietnam and the extended producer
responsibility (EPR) mechanism has been applied since 2016. However, there is
still a large gap between regulations and implementation. It is hard to operate the
taking-back system when currently informal sector plays a main role in e-waste
treatment. Instead, e-waste is usually collected and separated by private collectors
and then sold to maintenance/refurbishing shops and dismantling facilities. Valuable
parts and materials are sold to private maintenance system and will be used to repair
other damaged. Most valuable materials such as iron, copper, aluminum, and plastic
are recycled with outdated technology, rudimentary equipment, and causing serious
environmental pollution (MONRE 2011).
Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW)
CDW is composed mainly of sand, broken bricks, glass, concrete, and metal and
accounts for about 10–15% of urban solid waste. In municipalities include Hanoi
Circular Economy in Vietnam 429

and Ho Chi Minh City, construction solid waste accounts for 25% of urban solid
waste (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 2017). In other provinces,
CDW accounts for 12–13% of urban solid waste (Ministry of Natural Resources
and Environment 2017). The management of CDW has not been paid attention to,
in many places, the CDW owners (or collecting and transporting facilities) dump
solid waste to roads, vacant areas and drainage canals, polluting the environment,
landscape, clogging the drainage system. CDW often buried together with domestic
solid waste.

2 Resource Consumption and Utilization in Vietnam

2.1 Legislation on Circular Economy

Together with the development of economy and living standard, the natural resource
consumption is also increasing tremendously and leads to the need for utilization of
a limited resource to serve a new emerging economy in Vietnam.
Up to the present, even the circular economy term is not referred in any leg-
islation; nevertheless, the Vietnamese Government has made the great effort for
the minimization and utilization of resources consumption in many fields of the
economy.
In term of legislation, the National Plan on Environment and Development for
the period 1991–2000 (issued by the Decision No. 187-CT dated June 12, 1991)
is considered as first strategic foundation for sustainable development in Vietnam,
though it did not refer directly to the minimization of resources consumption and
utilization of natural resources. Nevertheless, under the deployment of this plan, the
first Environmental Protection Law (No. 29-L/CTN dated 27 December 27, 1993,
of the National Assembly Chairman), in the Article 1, has declared that: “Environ-
mental protection stipulated in this law are activities to keep the environment clean,
clean, improve the environment, ensure ecological balance, prevent, and overcome
bad consequences of people and natural disasters to the environment, exploitation,
and use reasonably economically the natural resources.” This oriented idea has
been repeated in many following legislation documents such as the Directive No.
36/1998/CT-TW of the Political Bureau (dated June 25, 1998) and the Resolution
No. 41/NQ-TW (dated November 15, 2004) on Environmental Protection in the
period of accelerating industrialization and modernization of the country, the Envi-
ronmental Protection Law 2005 (No. 52/2005/QH11 dated November 29, 2005).
Among these documents, the Resolution No. 41/NQ-TW, which legalized by Deci-
sion No. 34/2005/QÐ-TTg dated February 22, 2005, by Prime Minister highlights
environmental protection policy in combination with socioeconomic development is
the first legislation that is referred to the term “waste reuse and recycle” (without
reduce). In the Environmental Protection Law 2005, in Article 3, the term “reduce,
reuse and recycle of waste,” or 3R, is first time denoted, and 7 years after, it is the
430 H. T. Hai et al.

first time “solid waste reuse and recycle” is considered as an indicator for monitoring
and assessing results of environmental protection to 2020 (on the National Strategy
on Environment Protection to 2020, with Visions to 2030, which was approved by
the Prime Minister in his Decision 1216/QÐ-TTg on September 05, 2012).
In case of MSW, landfill is still dominated treatment method in Vietnam despite
many efforts of the Government to promote 3R initiative. Although it is known as the
most useful and cost-effective treatment, composting is taken a very small proportion
(Luong et al. 2013). In 2006, under the funding and aids from JICA (~3 million USD),
Hanoi is the first city in Vietnam has been deployed a 3R project which is based on
the segregation at source of municipal solid waste. The objective of this 3-year
project is to establish a harmonious 3R system, to encourage people to segregate
their waste at home to improve the MSW management and disposal capacity in
Hanoi. These kinds of MSW are recommended to classify organic waste, recyclable
wastes, and non-biodegradable wastes. The project ended with an acceptable result,
especially the changing of social awareness on waste classification. 80–90% waste
is sorted, helps reducing 30–40% of the amount of waste to landfill, saving disposal
costs, reducing environmental pollution, and even producing organic fertilizer from
segregated organic waste, bringing economic efficiency. Nevertheless, after 10 years,
it is not found any applicable to maintain and extend the result, mostly because
lacking a proper infrastructure to deal with the sorted waste flows, as well as lacking
sustainability in policy.

2.2 Situation on Resource Consumption and Utilization

In fact, as in many developing countries, Vietnam has been conducted 3R model for
a long time, especially in agriculture field. Starting from the utilization of cultivation
and breeding wastes, it was extended into different types of closed farm that now
have been developed all over the countries. In the case of industry, the recycling
of metals, paper, and plastic has been conducted from 1960s, mostly for providing
the materials for production industry, which was still limited even in term of scale,
capacity, and sources. The recycling activities were boomed in 1990s, just after the
beginning of Doi Moi process, when the government untied the private sector for eco-
nomic activities, with the development of “craft villages,” the term referred to “one
or more residential areas of villages or other similar residential points in a commune
or town that have rural professions producing one or more different types of product”
(Circular No. 116/2006/TT-BNN dated December 18, 2006, providing guidance on
implementation of some articles of the Government’s Decree No. 66/2006/ND-CP
dated July 7, 2006, on development of rural professions). Up to 2014, there were 5096
craft villages nationwide, of which 1748 villages were officially recognized, attract-
ing about 11 million workers, the average income of village workers is 2–3 times
higher than that of agricultural workers (Ministry Agriculture and Rural Develop-
ment. Research topics of socioeconomic efficiency in the development of craft villages
nationwide. Survey of craft villages of MARD, 2014). Among these craft villages,
Circular Economy in Vietnam 431

there are about 100 recycling craft villages, with 80% is metal recycling villages,
the others are paper and plastic recycling. The properties of these recycling villages
are: (1) not regulated by any specific laws and regulations; (2) informal sector that
uses rudimentary, simple and backward technologies that do not meet technical and
environmental protection requirement; (3) low quality and production efficiency;
and (4) dealing mostly with the domestic scrap, which is normally polluted and not
well-sorted.
In other side, waste and scraps are important input sources for the industry. In
several industry branches such as steel and paper production, it is accounted up to 50%
of the required demand. Especially in case of paper industry, nearly 70% production
is from scrap, while 60% steel facilities are used scrap as major input source (electric
arc furnace—EAF). All the paper facilities in Vietnam are now attached with scrap
reproduction line. Nevertheless, only a part of domestic scrap (waste) is used, due
to their low quality and small collected volume (that have been done by the private
sector). For steel production, Vietnam is needed about 20 million tons of steel ingot,
while only produces 11.4 million tons of steel ingot (billet and slab) in 2017 (Khai
2018). To serve the material requirement of EAF facilities, it is needed over 9 million
tons of scrap steel in 2017, in which the imported scrap accounted for more than 50%
as seen in Table 2 (4.7 million tons). This number in 2013 was only 5.6 million ton
of scrap, in which, 2.3 million ton is imported.
The domestic paper industry is produced about 3 million tons out of 4.5 million
tons demand for pulp and paper, including 3.5 million tons of packaging paper in
2017 as seen in Table 3. According to Ministry of Industry and Trade (Ministry of
Industry and Trade 2018), about 70% material input is paper scrap (mostly to server
the packaging production). Out of 2 million tons of scrap, only 40% comes from
domestic sources, and the rest is imported.
In case of plastic industry, the demand material for plastic production is estimated
at about 5 million tons of plastic in 2018 and will reach 10 million tons on 2023
according to the Vietnam Plastic Association (Vietnam Plastic Association 2018).
Nevertheless, the domestic supply is only 780 thousand tons of virgin plastic pellets
(up to May 2018) and about 400 thousand ton of recycled plastic pellet, and the rest
is based on the imported pellet and scrap (which is predicted to reach 3 million ton
on 2023).

Table 2 Demand of billet, steel scrap, and imported steel scrap of Vietnam (Mill. ton)
Demand 2015 2016 2017 6 first months 2018 (estimated data)
Billet 5.6 7.8 11.4 6.2
Billet from BOF 1.4 2.3 4 2.7
Billet from EAF 4.2 5.4 7.5 3.5
Scrap demand for EAF 5 6.5 9 4
Domestic supply scrap 1.7 2.5 4.3 1.5
Imported scrap 3.3 4 4.7 2.5
Source MOIT (2018)
432 H. T. Hai et al.

Table 3 Consumption demand, scrap, and imported paper scrap of Vietnam (1000 ton)
Demand 2017 2018
Total product demand 4265 4942
– Packaging paper 3179 3818
Total production 2801 3764
– Packaging paper 2219 3046
Domestic supply scrap – 1682
Imported scrap 1400 2068
Source Vietnam Pulp and Paper Association VPPA, 2019, can be obtained from: http://vppa.vn/thi-
truong-giay-nam-2018-va-du-bao-nam-2019/

The imported scrap of steel, paper, and plastic is summarized in Table 4, showing
the fact that instead of the utilization of the domestic resources (including wastes),
Vietnam is still depended on the imported scrap and waste, despite its efforts on
management of domestic waste and scrap.
Besides, fly ash and slag from thermo power plants are also can be reused in high
amount by the construction material production industry, such as mineral additives for
cement production, concrete additives, concrete and light concrete mixer, autoclaved
aerated concrete mixer, unburned brick, construction backfill material. According to
the Decision 452/QD-TTg of the Prime Minister, up to 2020, 56 million ton of fly
ash and slag will be reused as:
– 14 million ton for mineral additives for cement production;
– 8 million ton for mixer in clinker production (replace clay);
– 7 million ton for brick production;
– 2 million ton for mineral additives in concrete production and unburned brick;
– 25 million ton for construction backfill material.

Table 4 Imported turnover of scrap

Type of HS code 2016 2017 6 first months 2018
scraps Volume Venue Volume Venue Volume Venue
(thou- (million (thou- (million (thou- (million
sand USD) sand USD) sand USD)
ton) ton) ton)
Plastic 3915 245.8 43.5 385 70.9 277.7 63.3
scrap
Paper 4707 641.3 126.5 1438.5 340.6 1062.3 209.8
scrap
Steel 7204 3895.5 870.7 4727.8 1396.6 3480a 1.220a
scrap
a8first months of 2018
Source Estimated from General Statistic Office and General Department of Customs’s data)
Circular Economy in Vietnam 433

Besides, it is needed to count 19 million tons of gypsum (flue gas desulfurization

gypsum from thermo power plants and phosphor gypsum from chemical and fertilizer
plant), which can be reused in cement and gypsum production, as well as backfill
material for construction.
Recycling rate of organic waste from MSW and other common materials such as
paper, plastic, glass and iron, copper, lead, aluminum is accounted for about 8–12%
of collected urban MSW (MONRE 2011). Since there is not any clear and official
statistic to estimate the reuse and recycling rate, based on the above data, the recycling
rate can be estimated less than 10% of domestic and industrial waste, in average. It is
not considered the recycling and reuse waste from agriculture and other productive
sectors. The number is still far compared to the target of the National Strategy on
Integrated Solid Waste Management to 2025 to reduce the landfill rate under 30% of
collected waste.

3 Legislative Framework and Government Supports

Toward Implementing 3Rs and Circular Economy
Initiatives

As discussed elsewhere, the issues of natural resource depletion, pollution, and cli-
mate change risk have raised the need for a change in the development model of
Vietnam, where a transition from a linear economy to circular economy could be
sensible. Therefore, some legislative framework to support the transition has been
forming gradually in the country.

3.1 Documents of the Communist Party

Resolutions, directives, and documents of Congress of the Communist Party of Viet-

nam (CPV) are known to play top roles in orienting and guiding the socioeconomic
development of the country. Accordingly, the State Government would establish
national strategies, action programs, or action plans to specify and implement the
orientation. Some key documents related to are discussed in chronological order to
highlight the development of Vietnam’s orientation toward circular economy over
time.

– Directive No. 36/1998/CT-TW by the CPV in 1998

This directive was the first document to address the need of clean technologies
“to consume less raw materials, reduce energy leakages and waste” in industrial
production (Communist Party of Vietnam, Political Bureau 1998), which were partly
aligned with today’s concepts of circular economy.
434 H. T. Hai et al.

– Resolution No. 41-NQ/TW by the CPV in 2004

This resolution set the first basis for reduce, reuse, and recycle (3Rs), cleaner pro-
duction, extended producer responsibility (EPR) and renewable energy in Vietnam
by stating the following task.
Encouraging the thrifty use of natural resources and energy; producing and using clean
energy, renewable energy, products and product packaging that are not harmful or less harm-
ful to the environment; Recycle and use recycled products. To step by step apply measures to
force producers and importers to recollect and manage the used products that they produced
and/or imported. (Communist Party of Vietnam, Political Bureau 2004)

Accordingly, in 2005, the State Government established an Action Program with

12 main tasks and 16 actions for ministries to implement Resolution No. 41-NQ/TW
(Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam 2005). Noticeably in there,
Task 6 directed that “Promote the formulation and replication of cleaner production
models, forming and developing environment industry, creating markets, promoting
environmental service enterprises, developing environmental economy”; and Task
10 is to “Exploiting and using natural resources economically and efficiently, issu-
ing and implementing policies to encourage thrifty consumption, use of renewable
energy, clean energy, limit exploitation, and use of fossil fuels.” Following the gov-
ernment’s action program, many Provincial People’s Committees (PPCs) in Vietnam
also established their action plans to implement the tasks at a provincial level.

– Directive No. 29/CT-TW by the CPV in 2009

This directive was to affirm the continuous implementation of the tasks set by Res-
olution No. 41-NQ/TW in the new period of development (Communist Party of
Vietnam, Secretariat Committee 2009). In addition, it also emphasized the need to
enhance the production and use of environmentally friendly products. This was later
followed up by Resolution No. 06/NQ-CP of the State Government, which assigned
the National Action Program on Sustainable Production and Consumption to the
Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT) for implementation (Government of Viet-
nam 2012d).

– Socioeconomic Development Strategy period 2011–2020 by the CPV in 2011

The Socioeconomic Development Strategy was established in the Document of the

Eleventh Party Congress. It set an overall objective of “fast and sustainable devel-
opment” for the country (Communist Party of Vietnam, The 11th Central Executive
Committee 2011). The strategy continued to emphasize the principle of “Managing,
exploiting and using resources effectively” and “Developing environmentally friendly
and green economy; conducting sustainable production and consumption; gradually
develop clean energy, clean production, clean consumption.” In addition, it set some
detailed environmental targets, such as 95% of solid waste, 85% of hazardous waste,
and 100% of medical waste from cities were treated. However, there was not any
target for recycling.
Circular Economy in Vietnam 435

– Resolution 24-NQ/TW by the CPV in 2013

The resolution emphasized the principle of efficient exploitation and use of natural
resources, enhancing the use of renewable energy, new materials and promoting recy-
cling. Most importantly, it set a task of “transformation of economic growth model
associated with restructuring the economy toward green growth and sustainable
development” (Communist Party of Vietnam, 11th Central Executive Committee,
7th Congress 2013). This indicated that the party had recognized the need, and it
desired for a transformation of the economy. This was the second time in the history
that such desire for an economic transform was expressed in a document of CPV. The
first time was seen during the renovation “Doi Moi” in 1986 (Van Arkadie 2003),
which was the biggest milestone of Vietnam’s economy, resulting in unprecedented
rapid growth for a decade later (Nguyen 2014, p. 10).
Accordingly, the State Government established an Action Program of nine main
tasks in 2014 to implement Resolution 24-NQ/TW (Government of Vietnam 2014b).
In there, Task 3 directed that “Continue establishing and improving policies to
encourage, support and promote the use of energy-saving technologies and equip-
ment, water-saving, exploitation and use of renewable energy and new materials, and
recycling in production and service activities”, and Task 9 addressed to “promote
the consumption of recycled products and environmentally friendly products.”

3.2 Legislation and Policies Related to Circular Economy

With the orientation of CPV’s documents, the National Assembly and State Govern-
ment issued plenty of legislation and policies that supported circular economy The
system of legal documents in Vietnam is summarized in Table 5.
Firstly, some key laws associated with circular economy are as follows:

– Law on Environmental Protection in 2005 and in 2014

Since 2005, the Law on Environment Protection had stated to encourage the devel-
opment of clean energy, renewable energy, environmentally friendly products, and
reduce, reuse, recycle (The National Assembly of Socialist Republic of Vietnam
2005). In 2014, the amended law specified the commitment in 8 Articles. In addi-
tion, it even set the first move for green public procurement in Article 44:
Head of state budget-funded institutions shall bear their responsibility for preferring eco-
friendly products and services that have been recognized as ecolabels under legal regulations.
– Clause 2, Article 44 of the Law on Environment Protection 2014 (The National Assembly
of Socialist Republic of Vietnam 2014)

Accordingly, many follow-up legal documents were issued to clarify and imple-
ment the commitment of the law. For instance, Decree 19/2015/ND-CP was estab-
lished to further specify the list of businesses and activities that could get preferential
policies and supports from the government (Government of Vietnam 2015); Circular
436 H. T. Hai et al.

Table 5 Vietnam’s system of legal documents

Authority Legal documents
National Assembly Constitution, law, resolution
Standing Committee of the National Ordinance, resolution
Assembly
President of State Government Order, decision
State Government Resolution, decree
Prime Minister Decision, directive
Ministers and head of ministry-level bodies Decision, directive, circular, joint circular
(issued collectively by different ministries or
by a ministry and a political and social
organization)
Justice Council of the Supreme People’s Court Resolution
Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Decision, directive
Court/Head of the Supreme People’s
Prosecutor
People’s Council Resolution
People’s Committee Decision, directive
Source Adapted from Nguyen (2014) and Gardner (2019)

No. 128/2016/TT-BTC was issued in 2016 to clarify the export duty exemption and
reduction for environment-friendly products and products from recycling and waste
treatment (Government of Vietnam, The Ministry of Finance 2016) (Table 6).
– Mineral Law in 2010, Law on Water Resources in 2012, and Land Law in 2013
All of the three laws emphasized a principle that resources must be exploited and
used in a thrift, safe and effective manner, ensuring integrated, multi-purpose, fair and
reasonable use, harmony of benefits and equality in interests and obligations among
organizations and individuals (The National Assembly, The National Assembly of
Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 2010; 2012, 2013).
In addition, the State Government issued plenty of strategies (which were
approved by Prime Minister’s decisions) that supported one or more aspects of cir-
cular economy as follows:
– Sustainable Development Strategy of Vietnam period 2011–2020 included a task
to build a system of integrated solid waste management, in which solid wastes
are classified at source, collected, reused, recycled, and thoroughly treated with
appropriate advanced technologies (Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of
Vietnam 2012a). However, up to date, only Ho Chi Minh City established Decision
44/2018/QD-UBND to regulate the municipal solid waste classification in the city
(Ho Chi Minh City People’s Committee 2018) (Table 6).
– National Strategy on Environment Protection by 2020, with a vision toward
2030 detailed plenty of measures to enhance cleaner production and reduce,
reuse, recycle (3R) (Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam 2012b).
Table 6 Summary of key legislation and policies related to circular economy in Vietnam
Life cycle stages Key legislation and policies
All stages – Law on Environmental Protection in 2014 stated to encourage the development of clean energy, renewable energy,
environmentally friendly products and reduce, reuse, recycle
– National Strategy on Environment Protection by 2020, with a vision toward 2030 detailed plenty of measures to enhance the
reduce, reuse, and recycle (3R) and cleaner production
– National Green Growth Strategy addressed the task of promoting 3R, improving energy efficiency, sustainable production,
sustainable consumption and lifestyle
– National Action Plan on Sustainable Production and Consumption up to 2020, with a vision to 2030 set six comprehensive tasks
Circular Economy in Vietnam

and detailed goals for the period of 2016–2020 and 2021–2030

– Decision No. 1469/QD-TTg approved the Master Plan on development of Vietnam’s construction material industry through 2020,
with a vision toward 2030 and set the tasks of improving resource and energy efficiency, reuse and recycle of construction material
Resource extraction – Mineral Law in 2010, Law on Water Resources in 2012 and Land Law in 2013
and production – Strategy on Cleaner Production in Industry to 2020 set 4 tasks and 4 measures to develop the model of cleaner production in
industry
– Decision 403/QD-TTg approved adjusted master plan for Vietnam’s coal to improve the effectiveness and thriftiness of
exploitation, processing and use of coal
Distribution and – Circular No. 128/2016/TT-BTC clarified the export duty exemption and reduction for environment-friendly products and products
consumption made from recycling and waste treatment
– Decision 16/2015/QD-TTg regulated recollection and treatment of discarded products (including e-wastes, some hazardous
waste, and end-of-life vehicles)
– Resolution No. 579/2018/UBTVQH14 (on environmental tax) set a tax of VND 50.000 per kilogram of plastic bag
(continued)
437
Table 6 (continued)
438

Life cycle stages Key legislation and policies

Waste collection and All waste management:
management (i.e., – Sustainable Development Strategy of Vietnam period 2011–2020 included a task to build a system of integrated solid waste
MSW, e-waste, management
plastic wastes, – Decree 38/2015/ND-CP regulated management of wastes and discarded materials (including municipal solid wastes, industrial
hazardous wastes) wastes, biochemical wastes, some hazardous wastes, and imported plastic wastes/scraps)
– Decree 19/2015/ND-CP provided a list of environmental protection activities (including waste management) that would be
supported and prioritized by the government; and Circular No. 212/2015/TT-BTC provided detailed guidelines for the tax
incentives for environmental protection activities (including waste management)
MSW management:
– National Strategy for General Management of Solid Waste to 2025, with a vision toward 2050 addressed plenty of measures to
improve the classification, collection, reduce, reuse, and recycle of MSW
– Decision 44/2018/QD-UBND of Ho Chi Minh City People’s Committee in 2018 regulated the MSW classification in the city
Hazardous waste management:
– Circular 36/2015/TT-BTNMT provided a list of hazardous wastes and regulated the hazardous waste management
– Circular 58/2015/TTLT-BYT-BTNMT detailed regulations on medical waste management for recycling purposes
– Circular 08/2017/TT-BXD detailed regulations on reusing and recycling of construction solid waste
H. T. Hai et al.
Circular Economy in Vietnam 439

The measures included improving institution and legal system for 3R, reduc-
ing the production and use of bags, and packaging that are difficult to decom-
pose, waste-recycling capacity building programs, supporting the establishment
of recycling businesses, forming concentrated recycling industrial zones, technol-
ogy exchanges, market development of recycled products, financial supports for
recycling products, enhancing producer responsibility. This strategy was then fol-
lowed by a plan for implementation (Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of
Vietnam 2014a), Decision 50/2013/QD-TTg and Decision 16/2015/QD-TTg that
regulated the recollection and treatment of discarded products (Government of
Vietnam 2013; 2015) (Table 6).
– National Green Growth Strategy also addressed the task of promoting 3R, improv-
ing energy efficiency, sustainable production, and sustainable lifestyle and con-
sumption (Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam 2012c). Notice-
ably, this was the first strategy to recommend an establishment of Recycling Law.
– Strategy on Cleaner Production in Industry to 2020 set four tasks and four measures
to develop the model of cleaner production in the industry (Government of Vietnam
2009).
– National Strategy for General Management of Solid Waste to 2025, with a vision
toward 2050 addressed plenty of measures to improve the classification, collection,
reduce, reuse, and recycle of solid waste (Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister
of Vietnam 2018). In addition, the strategy also set numerous targets, i.e., by 2025,
replacing all normal plastic bags by eco-friendly plastic bags at commercial centers
and supermarkets, 80% of sub-products from agriculture must be collected, reused,
recycled into environmentally friendly raw materials and products.
– National Action Plan on Sustainable Production and Consumption up to 2020,
with a vision to 2030 set six comprehensive tasks and detailed goals for the period
of 2016–2020 and 2021–2030. The tasks included not only 3R, energy-saving,
and effective use but also changes in supply chains.
Accordingly, the ministries and local governments issued decisions and circulars
to implementing the strategies and action plans. Some key legislation and policies
are summarized in Table 6.
As can be seen in Table 3, the government has set plenty of legislation and policies
related to some aspects of circular economy. However, the current focus is waste col-
lection and management, where some guiding Circulars of Ministries and Decisions
of People’s Committee have been in issued.
The “upstream” of materials and products’ life cycles (e.g., thrifty resource extrac-
tion, better designing in production) has not been addressed by such guidance. Even
with the “downstream” distribution and consumption, to date, Decision 16/2015/QD-
TTg has not been followed up by any guiding circular. Thus, the implementation of
the decision on managing e-wastes, hazardous waste, and end-of-life vehicles is
relatively limited.
In addition, the current legislation and polices are fairly broad, and there is a
lack of specific regulation for particular issues or materials. For instance, there is no
440 H. T. Hai et al.

specific regulation for plastic waste management. Therefore, some plastic waste is,
in fact, regulated in MSW management.
In conclusion, although the term “Circular Economy” has not been officially used
in any CPV’s document or legislation and policies, many aspects of circular econ-
omy have been addressed and supported. They include consuming less raw materials;
reducing energy leakages, enhancing the use of renewable energy, limiting the use
of fossil fuels; reducing the use of plastic and promoting the use of environmentally
friendly products; encouraging reduce, reuse, and recycle (3R); promoting sustain-
able production and consumption, especially green supply chain and green public
procurement. These indicate that the Communist Party of Vietnam and the State
Government have great desire for the transition and have actually initiated it toward
circular economy. However, some detailed legislation and policies are needed to
foster the implementation. In addition, circular economy is not only about waste
management but most importantly, it is about restoration and regeneration (Ellen
MacArthur Foundation 2012). Thus, resource efficiency and redesign require more
attention from policymakers.

4 Example of Best Practices

4.1 Agro and Poultry

Garden–Fishery–Husbandry model (or VAC, in Vietnamese) is a closed farm model

that is combined in a farm the cultivation in garden, aquaculture activities in pond
and animal breeding. The waste of an activity can be used as the nurture for other
activities within the farm. The VAC model can be considered as a high biologi-
cal intensification model, creating an overall farming system, effectively utilizing
resources on land, water, and energy to help achieve high economic efficiency with
low investment, while contributing to minimizing environmental pollution. Other
similar models are also developed such as Forestry–Garden–Fishery–Husbandry,
Garden–Fishery–Husbandry–Field, gradually demonstrating outstanding economic
efficiency in the agricultural sector. Nevertheless, such kind of model is still on the
progress and faced with many serious issues such as lack of water resources, lack
of experience, and much depending on type and price of farm’s output (Vu and Son
2013).

4.2 The Use of Fly Ash and Slag from Thermo Power Plant

The ash reprocessing and reuse technology in Vietnam now have a strong develop-
ment from 1990s, especially after 2005 (Doan and Thang 2010):
Circular Economy in Vietnam 441

– Early in the 90s, on March 25th, 1993, the first enrichment factory has been
constructed to process the fly ash of Pha Lai Thermal Power Plant, with the capacity
of 80,000 tons/year. First 1.200 ton of enrichment ash was transported to Hoang
Thach Cement Factory and successfully put it into production. After that, Ministry
of Construction has been decided to allow the Pha Lai Plant’s ash to be used as an
additive for cement production in Hoang Thach, Bim Son, and Hai Phong Plants.
– From 1997–2005: The enriched ash and slag have been started to use in large size
concrete production for the construction of hydropower dam such as Bai Thuong
dam (Thanh Hoa), Tan Giang dam (Ninh Thuan), Long Song dam (Binh Thuan).
– From 2005–present: The dissemination of ash reprocessing factory in a larger
scale.
Enrichment ash and slag with burning loss rate below 11% can be used for mixing
ash into the cement with an average rate quantity between 10 and 20%. Therefore,
cement producers also have huge demand for fly ash and slag. For cost reduction
and improvement production quality (especially with the large block size concrete,
waterproof or anti-heat possibility of concrete), enrichment slag can be mixed with
cement with a rate ranged from 20 to 40% (Thang and Quy 2011). Due to that
account, the fly ash and slag quantity are needed as additive for cement industry can
be increased in the following year.
In general, up to now, many enrichment factories have used the ash and slag
reprocessing method to recover coal as a burning agent and produce the various
cement and concrete additives with high quality and low cost. The ash reprocessing
and reuse technology development were available and conformable with the gov-
ernment’s policy and can minimize the environmental pollution impact toward the
sustainable development.

4.3 Composting

Composting is an useful form for recycling of organic waste that could help to
increase the recycling rate. Municipal solid waste in Vietnam has a high potential
for composting since it contains 50–60 of food waste and other biodegradable waste
(Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 2015).
The centralized composting facilities have been operating in Vietnam over the
last two decades. In 2011, MONRE reported that about 10 composting facilities
with capacity of about 200 ton/day, and 1 composting facility with a capacity of
600 ton/day is in operation. At that time, these plants have not operated enough
designed capacity due to the consumption of organic fertilizer and many difficulties
in production such as energy consumption, technical problem, impact to environment
and more important, the quality of fertilizer that cannot compete with the other kinds.
The mixed MSW must be mechanically sort in the facility, and this makes the compost
product less purifies and reduces the market of the products. Most of MSW go to
composting plant is not in situ separated; thus, the residue after compost process is
442 H. T. Hai et al.

remained high even in product and coproduct. Hoornweg et al. (2000) also noted
for the fail of some Asian countries when relying on mixed municipal waste as their
main feedstock due to this.
Possibly thanks to the deployment of the National Strategy for integrated solid
waste management, the proportion of MSW composting increases. It is reported that
as of November 2016, Vietnam has about 35 centralized solid waste treatment plants
with composting line, concentrated in urban areas were invested and put into opera-
tion. Total capacity of processing is increase to 7500 tons/day (the average capacity
is from 100 to 200 tons/day) with major processing technologies are composting
production (25 facilities) and combine with other technology such as combustion or
combination (Ministry of Construction and JICA 2017).

4.4 Seraphin Technology

Seraphin technology, similar to some other technologies that are recommended in

Vietnam such as ASC technology and MBT-CD-08 technology, is composed of five
main technology groups, which can be combined into a closed technological chain
system or can work separately as shown in Fig. 4.
The unsorted MSW will be put on the sorting line to sort waste into four main
groups including metals, polymer waste (plastic, rubber, leather), biodegradation
waste (food waste, garden waste, etc.), and non-biodegradation waste. The sorting
line is semi-autooperation together with manual sorting. Metals will be continuously

Fig. 4 Seraphin technology and its coproducts

Circular Economy in Vietnam 443

sorted into ferrous and nonferrous metals and then bring to a metal recycling plant.
The polymer waste will be sorted into different kinds and then transfer to pellet pro-
duction, plastic production, and RDF production depending on each kind of material.
The biodegradation waste is composted into compost, and the non-biodegradation
wastes will be brought to the pressure curing workshop, where they are made into
construction product.
This technology can handle most of the components in MSW and is feasible and
proper to the composition of MSW in Vietnam.

4.5 Co-processing Technology in Cement Kilns

Co-treatment of hazardous waste in cement kilns requires modern cement production

technology as dry technology, pre-baked rotary kiln. Besides, the application of
hazardous waste treatment requires careful study of the process of discharging waste
into the kiln so as not to affect the cement production process as well as ensuring
the efficiency of the production process. Because of that, up to now, the technology
is applied in only two cement production facilities in Vietnam, INSEE Ecocycle,
formerly known as Holcim Cement Company (Kien Giang), with the capacity of
HW treatment is about 242 thousand ton/year and Thanh Cong Group Joint Stock
Company (Hai Duong) with the capacity of 190.000 ton HW/year. Figure 5 shown
the volume of waste and hazardous waste has been treated in INSEE, and the ratio
of waste and HW can be treated in the cement kiln.

Fig. 5 Waste and hazardous waste co-processing treatment in INSEE Ecocycle Vietnam
444 H. T. Hai et al.

The technology of HW co-treatment in cement kilns has many great advantages

such as can operate at high temperatures, resulting in high destruction efficiency, han-
dling many types of hazardous waste in large quantities, including waste containing
halogen. Especially, it gets great economic efficiency due to saving natural resources
including mineral and fossil fuels. In addition, the types of HW treated in cement
kilns are also more thoroughly treated, no generating secondary slag ash because the
secondary ash has come into the final product. It is needed to consider that these two
companies have the largest capacity compared to other hazardous waste treatment
plants, 432 thousand tons of hazardous waste/year on a total of 1,300,000 tons of all
licensed HW treatment facilities.

5 Future Plans and Targets

In Vietnam, socioeconomic and sector development strategies and master plans are
issued for every 10 years while plans are developed for 5 years and every year. The
country has just finished many strategies and master plans for the period 2011–2020
and is now preparing strategies/plans for 2021–2030.
As analyzed by Ellen MacArthur Foundation, circular economy comprises of
three core principles: (i) conservation and development of natural capital; (ii) opti-
mization of natural resources use by circulating products, materials, and components;
(iii) foster system effectiveness by designing and revealing out externalities (Ellen
MacArthur Foundation 2017). Thus, circular economy promotes cycles in all stages
of product life cycle including exploitation of raw materials, manufacturing, logistics
and distribution of products, consumption, and disposal of products.
In that aspect, strategies, and plans related to CE in Vietnam are as follows:
– Socioeconomic Development Strategy for 2011–2020 (SEDS)
– National Strategy for Sustainable Development 2011–2020 (NSSD)
– National Strategy on Environmental Protection to 2020, vision to 2030 (NSEP)
– National Strategy on Integrated Solid Waste Management to 2025
– Revised National Strategy on Integrated Solid Waste Management to 2025
– National Strategy on Climate Change (NSCC)
– National Strategy on Green Growth (NSGG)
– Strategy for Clean Technology Use to 2020, vision 2030 (SCTU)
– National Energy Development Strategy to 2020, with 2050 vision (NEDS)
– Vietnam Strategy for Renewable Energy to 2030 (VNSRE)
– Strategy on Cleaner Production in Industry to 2020 (SCPI)
– National Action Program on Sustainable Consumption and Production (NAPSCP).
Regarding promoting cleaner production and GHG reduction, a number of tar-
gets on the improvement of energy consumption, development of renewable energy,
cleaner production have been set by different strategies and plans (Table 7). It is
observed that, there are lack of specific targets on efficient use of resources, such as
water, land, and mineral (e.g., domestic material consumption—DMC). Although
Circular Economy in Vietnam 445

Table 7 Targets for cleaner production and GHG reduction

No Indicators Targets, % Source
To 2020 To 2030
I Targets for cleaner production and energy recovery
1 Rate of high 60–70 100 SCTU NAPSCP
energy-consuming
and polluting
industries implement
road map for
renovation toward
clean technology
2 Percentage of new 100 – SCTU
business and
manufacture
facilities apply clean
technology
3 Rate of production 50 – SCPI
facilities apply
cleaner production
technologies
4 Reduction of the 8–13 – SCPI
intensity of energy,
raw material, fuel per
unit of product
5 Share of green 42–45 – NSGG
industry and waste
recycling in GDP
6 Level of reduction in 2,5–3/year – NSGG
energy consumption
for producing an unit
of GDP
7 Share of renewable 5 – NSED
energy in total
energy consumption
8 Rate of livestock 10 50 VNSRE
waste utilized for
biogas
9 Rate of municipal 30 70 VNSRE
solid waste treated
with energy recovery
II Targets for GHG reduction
1 Reduction rate of – 8 NDC
GHG compared with
business as usual
(BAU) scenario
(continued)
446 H. T. Hai et al.

Table 7 (continued)
No Indicators Targets, % Source
To 2020 To 2030
2 Average level of Reduced by 10–20 Reduced by 1–2 per NSGG
GHGs emissions from 2010 year by
reduction
3 Reduction of GHG 5 25 NSGG
emission in the
energy sector
compared with the
BAU
Source Adapted from different government documents

objectives for resource efficiency have been addressed in a number of policy docu-
ments such as Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam (2012b), Govern-
ment of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam (2012a), Party Resolution 24-NQ/TW
(2013), specific targets for each type of resource (water, land, mineral) have not been
clearly set for any specific milestone. There is a very general target of reduction
of intensity of energy, raw material, fuel per unit of product to reach 8–13% by
2020 (Table 7). The reason is difficulties in measurement and monitoring of these
indicators.
With regard to 3R and waste management, initially, the National Strategy on
Integrated Solid Waste Management to 2025 issued in 2009 set a number of targets.
Many of these targets were very ambitious, such as a collection of municipal solid
waste (MSW) and especially recycling targets (85% in 2020 and 90% in 2025),
collection rate in rural area. (Table 8). Recognizing this issue of feasibility of the
strategy, in 2018, the Prime Minister has issued a Decision 491/QD-TTg to revise
this strategy and a number of targets. According to the revised strategy, collection
rate for MSW and rural household waste have slightly reduced to 90% and 80%,
respectively, by 2025. A significant change is the inclusion of the target for waste
diversion rate from landfilling to reach 70% by 2025.
Besides, the Vietnam Strategy of Renewable Energy to 2030 has also set targets for
energy recovery from waste. Specifically, there are two targets: (i) Rate of livestock
waste utilized for biogas (10% by 2020 and 50% by 2030) and (ii) Rate of municipal
solid waste treated with energy recovery (30% by 2020 and 70% by 2030) (Table 7).
In general, targets for 3R and waste management in Vietnam are quite comprehen-
sive and cover most aspects. However, some there still lack some important targets
such as recycling rate of waste, rate of retrieval, and treatment of discarded products
under the EPR mechanism. In the coming years, Vietnam must build up a system of
database on waste management so that the targets can be monitored sufficiently and
adjusted toward feasibility.
Circular Economy in Vietnam 447

Table 8 Targets on 3R and waste management

No Target Targetsa , % Revised and new targets to
To 2020 To 2025 2025b

1 Rate of municipal waste 90 100 90%

collection
2 Recycling rate of municipal 85 90 –
waste
3 Collection rate of construction 80 90 90%
and demolition (C&D) waste in
urban area
4 Recycling rate of construction 50 60 60%
and demolition (C&D) waste in
urban area
5 Reduction rate of plastics bags 65 85 100%
in supermarket compared with
2010
6 Rate of municipalities 80 100
implementing waste at source
segregation and recycling
facilities
7 Collection rate of 90 100 100%
non-hazardous industrial waste
8 Reuse and recycling rate of 75 –
non-hazardous industrial waste
9 Collection rate of solid waste 70 90 80%
from households in rural area
10 Collection of solid waste from 80 100
craft villages
11 Rate of electronic and electrical – – 100%
producers established and
pronounced collection points
for extended producer
responsibility (EPR)
mechanism.
12 Rate of waste disposed by – – <30%
direct landfilling
13 Rate of landfilled residue after – – ≤20%
treatment in a newly
constructed waste treatment
facility
14 Percentage of slags from – – 80%
thermal power plants, chemical,
fertilizer plants recycled, reused
and treated as raw materials for
production and construction
(continued)
448 H. T. Hai et al.

Table 8 (continued)
No Target Targetsa , % Revised and new targets to
To 2020 To 2025 2025b

15 Rate of livestock waste – – 80%

collected, reused, recycled for
composting, biogas
16 Rate of agricultural residue – – 80%
from agricultural production
collected, reused, and recycled
Source a—National Strategy of Integrated Solid Waste Management to 2025, vision to 2050 (Prime
Minister Decision 2149/QD-TTg); b—Revised National Strategy of Integrated Solid Waste Man-
agement to 2025, vision to 2050 (Prime Minister Decision 491/QD-TTg)

6 Research Supporting and International Collaboration

In term of international supporting and collaboration, Vietnam has received many

supports from international governments and organizations in the field of environ-
mental protection. In 1990s, the international collaboration mostly developed under
bilateral collaboration projects between Vietnam and some developed countries such
as Canada (Vietnam Canada Environment project, from 1995 to 2006), Sweden
(under SIDA Environment Fund, from 1997 and The Strengthening Environmental
Management Program—SEMA, 1997–2003), Holland, Denmark (DANIDA, from
1993), Switzerland and Japan, as well as international organization such as UNIDO,
UNEP, UNDP, WB. Most of projects are focused on improving institutional capacity
under aids and nonrefundable aids form. From 2000s, the collaboration was extended
to many other bilateral partners and multilateral partners. The form of collaboration
was switched from aids to partnership and joint project, especially when Vietnam is
classified as lower middle-income country in 2010. These projects are covered most
areas of environmental management such as environmental impact assessment, pol-
lution control, treatment of residual chemical pollution, biodiversity conservation,
and climate change, which are emerged issues in Vietnam. Nevertheless, the support-
ing and collaboration in 3R policy and natural resources utilization are still limited
and just focused on small actual field, such as the 3R project in Hanoi 2006–2009
that is funded by JICA. The main reason Vietnam does not have suitable framework
(legislation and human resource) for the change of natural resource consumption in
macrolevel.

7 Conclusion

The 3R strategy is admired as an important factor for an effective production and

consumption platform of a sustainable development society. The application of 3R
is considered as a future fundamental way to deal with the limitation of human
Circular Economy in Vietnam 449

development, especially how to utilize the natural resource for current and future
development, while keep reducing waste generation and preventing the pollution.
In the 3R strategy, the content of recycle and reuse is considered to be of special
importance, when they allow an important flow of wastes to come back production
cycle.
From resource utilization perspective, in a material circulation society (or closed
economy), 3R, in general and recycle, in particular, not only aims to treat or reduce the
amount of waste generated, but also to create new industries that are corresponding
to the type of wastes and development needs, thereby bringing waste back into the
production process.
Vietnam, as a developing country, has been facing serious problems in the use of
natural resources and environmental pollution. Because of that, 3R is considered as
one of the decisive approaches to effectively protect the environment, contributes to
socioeconomic development in a sustainable way, and is one of the essential tools to
ensure the major objectives of the development.
Nevertheless, in Vietnam, the term circular economy is still absent in any legis-
lation document. Even in the case of waste recycle and reuse, it is first to consider
because of the benefit rather than a harmonized approach that can make the devel-
opment sustainably. Thus, in Vietnam, it is easy to see an example in waste recycle,
reuse; nevertheless, it is very difficult to force these activities in the form of circular
economy. In other words, Vietnam does not have any real example that can show
the continuous and sustainable cycle of substances. Instead of material cycle, it can
be seen much of small loop that cannot join together to form the base of circular
economy.
The most important issue now for Vietnam is to build a foundation for a circular
economy. This foundation should base on the construction of a unification policy that
can integrate different efforts on economic and social development, environmental
protection and saving natural resources into one direction. This issue is, surely, needed
the support from other countries, to top-down planning of the whole economy of
Vietnam, instead of trying to solve waste and environmental problems separately
with the development of economy.

References

Baldé, C., Forti, V., Gray, V., Kuehr, R., & Stegmann, P. (2017). The global e-waste monitor—2017.
United Nations University (UNU), International Telecommunication Union (ITU) & International
Solid Waste Association (ISWA), Bonn/Geneva/Vienna.
Baldé, C. P., Wang, F., Kuehr, R., & Huisman, J. (2015). ‘The global e-waste monitor-2014 (p. 22).
Bonn, Germany: United Nations University, IAS—SCYCLE.
Communist Party of Vietnam, 11th Central Executive Committee, 7th Congress. (2013). Reso-
lution No. 24-NQ/TW: Proactive response to climate change, improvement of natural resource
management and environmental protection (dated 3 June, 2013), Hanoi.
450 H. T. Hai et al.

Communist Party of Vietnam, Political Bureau. (1998). Directive No. 36/1998/CT-TW: Strength-
ening environmental protection in the period of industrialization and modernization (dated 25
June, 1998), Hanoi.
Communist Party of Vietnam, Political Bureau. (2004). Resolution No. 41-NQ/TW: Environmental
protection in the period of industrialization and modernization (dated 15 November, 2004), Hanoi.
Communist Party of Vietnam, Secretariat Committee. (2009). Directive No. 29-CT/TW: Continuing
the implementation of Resolution No. 41-NQ/TW (dated 21 January, 2009), Hanoi.
Communist Party of Vietnam, The 11th Central Executive Committee. (2011). Socio-economic
Development Strategy 2011–2020 (dated 16 February, 2011). Document of XI Congress of the
Party, Hanoi.
Doan, H.D., Thang, K.C., et al. (2010). Recycling and reuse ash from coal fire power plants in
Vietnam. In: Proceedings of Third National Conference on Mineral Enrichment, The Publishing
House of Natural Science and Technology.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2017). Inforgraphic: Circular economy system diagram. Retrieved
from https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/infographic.
Gardner, R. (2019, June 26). Southeast Asian legal research Guide: introduction to Vietnam & its
legal system. Australia: The University of Melbourne. Retrieved from https://unimelb.libguides.
com/c.php?g=402982&p=5862045.
General Statistics Office of Viet Nam. (2018). Retrieved 25th February 2019 from https://www.gso.
gov.vn/default.aspx?tabid=714.
Government of Vietnam. (2012d). Resolution No. 06/NQ-CP: Issuing the Government’s action
program 2011–2016 (dated 7 March 2012), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam. (2014b). Resolution No. 08/NQ-CP: Issuing action program of the Govern-
ment to implement Resolution No. 24-NQ/TW on Proactive response to climate change, improve-
ment of natural resource management and environmental protection (dated 23 January, 2014),
Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam. (2015). Decree 19/2015/ND-CP: Detailing the implementation of a num-
ber of articles of the law on environmental protection (dated 14 February 2015), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2005). Decision No. 34/2005/QD-TTG: Issu-
ing action program of the government to implement Resolution No. 41-NQ/TW on environmental
protection in the period of industrialization and modernization (dated 22 February 2005), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2009). Decision No. 1419/QÐ-TTg: Approval
of the strategy on cleaner production in industry to 2020 (07 September 2009), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2012a). Decision No. 432/QD-TTg: Approval
of sustainable development strategy of Vietnam period 2011–2020 (dated 12 April, 2012), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2012b). Decision No. 1216/QD-TTg:
Approval of national environmental protection strategy by 2020, with a vision toward 2030 (dated
05 September 2012), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2012c). Decision No. 1393/QD-TTg:
Approval of the national green growth strategy (25 September 2012), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2013). Decision 50/2013/QD-TTg: On pre-
scribing retrieval and disposal of discarded products (dated 9 August 2013), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2014a). Decision No. 166/QD-TTg: Issuing
the plan for implementation of national environmental protection strategy by 2020, with a vision
toward 2030 (dated 21 January 2014), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2017). Decision 452/QD-TTg of the Prime
Minister approving the project on promoting the handling and use of ash, slag and gypsum
of thermal power, chemical and fertilizer plants as secondary material source for construction
materials and in construction works (12 April 2017), Hanoi.
Government of Vietnam, Prime Minister of Vietnam. (2018). Decision No. 491/QÐ-TTg: Approving
adjustments to national strategy on integrated solid waste management to 2025 with a vision
towards 2050 (07 May 2018), Hanoi.
Circular Economy in Vietnam 451

Government of Vietnam, The Ministry of Finance. (2016). Circular No. 128/2016/TT-BTC: On

export duty exemption and reduction for environment-friendly products and products from recy-
cling and waste treatment prescribed in the Government’s Decree No. 19/2015/ND-CP of Febru-
ary 14, 2015, detailing a number of articles of the law on environmental protection (dated 9
August, 2016), Hanoi.
Government Party Committee. (2018). Report on assessment of 5 years implementing resolution
24-NQ/TW on proactive response to climate change, strengthening resource management and
environmental protection.
Ho Chi Minh City People’s Committee (2018). Decision 44/2018/QD-UBND of the People’s Com-
mittee on regulation the municipal solid waste sorting in the city (dated 14 November 2018), Ho
Chi Minh City.
Hoornweg, D., & Bhada-Tata, P. (2012). What a waste: A global review of solid waste management
[Urban development series; knowledge papers No. 15]. The World Bank, Washington DC.
Hoornweg, D., Thomas, L., & Otten, L. (2000). Composting and its applicability in developing
countries. Working Paper Series 8, Published for the Urban Development Division. The World
Bank, Washinton DC.
Jambeck, J. R., Andrady, A., Geyer, R., Narayan, R., Perryman, M., Siegler, T., et al. (2015). Plastic
waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science, 347, 768–771.
Khai, C. D. (2018). Review of Vietnam Steel Industry in 2017, and outlook for 2018. On the 2018
Southeast Asia Iron and Steel Institute Conference: ASEAN Steel Industry—Next Leap of Trans-
formation.
Luong, N. D., Giang, H. M., Thanh, B. X., & Nguyen The Hung. (2013). Challenges for municipal
solid waste management practices in Vietnam. Waste Technology, 1(1), 17–21.
Ministry of Agriculture. (December 18, 2006) Circular No. 116/2006/TT-BNN providing guidance
on implementation of some articles of the Government’s Decree No. 66/2006/ND-CP dated July
7, 2006 on development of rural professions.
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. (2014). Research topics of socio-economic effi-
ciency in the development of craft villages nationwide. Survey of craft villages of MARD.
Ministry of Construction and JICA. (2017, September). Overview of Vietnam solid waste, project
on capacity building on integrated municipal solid waste management in Vietnam.
Ministry of Industry and Trade. (2018, August 13). Official letter No. 6340/BCT-XNK of the Minister
to providing information on scrap import and use as production material.
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (2011). National state of environment report
2011—Solid waste. Vietnam Publishing House of Natural Resources, Environment and Cartog-
raphy.
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (2015). National state of environment report
2011–2015 (pp. 54). Vietnam Publishing House of Natural Resources, Environment and Cartog-
raphy.
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (2016). National state of environment report 2016-
Urban environment (pp. 92). Vietnam Publishing House of Natural Resources, Environment and
Cartography.
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (2017). National state of environment report
2017—Waste management. Vietnam Publishing House of Natural Resources, Environment and
Cartography.
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (2018). Report on solid waste management in Viet
Nam. Workshop with Ministry of Environment of Japan.
MONRE. (2011). National state of environment report 2011-solid waste (pp. 20). Vietnam Publish-
ing House of Natural Resources, Environment and Cartography.
MONRE. (2012). Master Program of Strengthening control of environmental pollution caused by
using non-biodegradable plastic bag in daily life up to 2020.
Nguyen, N. H. (2014). Some economics of climate change adaptation in Vietnam (Ph.D. Thesis,
Faculty of Business, Economics and Law, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia). Retrieved
from http://arrow.latrobe.edu.au:8080/vital/access/manager/Repository/latrobe:37965.
452 H. T. Hai et al.

Vu, N. D., Son, N. H. (2013). Summary assessment of combined agroforestry models orientated for
stable development along the corridor of Ho Chi Minh road, A Luoi district, Thua Thien—Hue.
Journal of Science. 47, 67–75. ISSN 1859-3100. (HCMC University of Education).
Plastic Europe. (2017). Plastic—the fact (pp. 16).
Nguyen, D. Q., Yamasue, E., Okumura, H., & Ishihara, K. N. (2009). Use and disposal of large
home electronic appliances in Vietnam. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management,
11(4), 358–366.
Thang, K. C., & Quy, N. Ð. (2011, October) Current state and perspective of coal fire power plant’
ash reuse and recycling in Viê.t Nam. In: Proceedings of Conference on Gypsum Recovery (held
by Vietnam Association for Building Materials), Hanoi.
The National Assembly of Socialist Republic of Vietnam. (2005). Law on environmental protection.
Hanoi.
The National Assembly of Socialist Republic of Vietnam. (2010). Mineral law. Hanoi.
The National Assembly of Socialist Republic of Vietnam. (2012). Land on water resources. Hanoi.
The National Assembly of Socialist Republic of Vietnam. (2013). Land law. Hanoi.
The National Assembly of Socialist Republic of Vietnam. (2014). Law on environmental protection.
Hanoi.
UNEP. (2007). E-waste: Volume I, Inventory Assessment Manual, 2007 (pp. 30).
Van Arkadie, B. (2003). Viet Nam: A transition tiger? Canberra, Australia: ANU E Press.
Vietnam Plastic Asscociation (2017). Overview of Vietnam Plastic Industry 2010–2015. Retrieved
from http://vpas.vn/gioi-thieu/tong-quan-nganh.html.
Vietnam Plastic Association. (2018, August 8). Official letter No. 39/CV-HHNVN of the Vietnam
Plastic Association to Prime Minister and other related Ministries and offices on the Situation
and Solution suggestion for imported plastic scrap issue. HCMC.