The idea of a circular economy (CE) has become prominent in both European and Chinese policy making. Chinese and European perspectives on a CE share a common conceptual basis and exhibit many similar concerns in seeking to enhance resource efficiency. Yet they also differ, and this article explores differences in the focus of CE policy in China and Europe. We present evidence on the differing understandings of the CE concept in Chinese and European policy discourse, drawing on qualitative and quantitative analysis of policy documents, media articles, and academic publications. We show that the Chinese perspective on the CE is broad, incorporating pollution and other issues alongside waste and resource concerns, and it is framed as a response to the environmental challenges created by rapid growth and industrialization. In contrast, Europe's conception of the CE has a narrower environmental scope, focusing more narrowly on waste and resources and opportunities for business. We then examine similarities and differences in the focus of policy activity in the two regions and in the indicators used to measure progress. We show differences in the treatment of issues of scale and place and different priorities across value chains (from design to manufacture, consumption, and waste management). We suggest some reasons for the divergent policy articulation of the CE concept and suggest lessons that each region can learn from the other. Keywords:China circular economy environmental governance European Union indicator industrial ecology Supporting information is linked to this article on the JIE website IntroductionChina and Europe face a number of structural economic challenges. Growth rates remain lower than expected in both regions, whereas environmental and social challenges demand attention. The linear model of production-based on a take, make, and dispose approach, which relies on imports of virgin natural resources and disposal of wastes and emissions-appears Conflict of interest statement: The authors have no conflict to declare.
Last years have seen a surge of Industrial Symbiosis (IS) development in association with ad-hoc widespread policies to encourage more circular and sustainable practices in the manufacturing sector. Developments in Europe, despite having attracted less attention in the literature, have been significant, driven both by public and private initiative. This paper provides an updated overview of IS activity in Europe, with a mapping of key networks, and a study of prevailing typologies of networks, size, geographical distribution and main streams/ resources traded. The analysis is based on a combination of desk research, gathering of primary data from case studies, a survey to IS network facilitators (n=22) and in-depth interviews and focus groups (3) with IS practitioners, policy officers and industry representatives (n=25). The analysis identified pockets of IS activity across all Europe, although varying in nature, resources exchanged and scale and scope of the initiatives. The average size of the mapped networks is approx. 473 members, but the median is approx. 100 members, which indicates high variability of sizes. The geographical scope of the synergies also seems to be dependent upon the following factors: 1) the type of waste stream/by-product; 2) transport costs and 3) market value of secondary materials. Types of waste streams exchanged common to most networks, are chemicals (e.g. chemical base products), biomass and agriculture by-products, wood and wood pellets, plastics, reusable construction materials, equipment, inert waste and water (different qualities including industrial water), residual heat and steam. The paper also discusses key obstacles facing IS development in Europe highlighting: 1) weakness of economic incentives given the low margin of IS projects associated to undeveloped secondary markets; 2) geographical variation of incentives and drivers, given differences in policy frameworks and support mechanisms (e.g. landfill tax levels) and 3) legislative issues that make transport over geographic boundaries extremely complex and administratively burdensome. Finally, the paper concludes with a general discussion of the potential of IS to contribute to the transition to the circular economy (CE) in Europe and identifies some key areas of future research.
The wide adoption of lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles (EVs) will require increased natural resources for the automotive industry. The expected rapid increase in batteries could result in new resource challenges and supply chain risks. To strengthen the resilience and sustainability of automotive supply chains and reduce primary resource requirements, circular economy strategies are needed. Here we illustrate how these strategies can reduce primary raw material extraction i.e. cobalt supplies. Material flow analysis is applied to understand current and future flows of cobalt embedded in EVs batteries across the European Union. A reference scenario is presented and compared with four strategies: technology driven substitution and technology driven reduction of cobalt, new business models to stimulate battery reuse/recycling and policy driven strategy to increase recycling. We find that new technologies provide the most promising strategies to reduce the reliance on cobalt significantly but could result in burden shifting such as an increase in nickel demand. To avoid the latter, technological developments should therefore be combined with an efficient recycling system. We conclude that more ambitious circular economy strategies, at both government and business levels, are urgently needed to address current and future resource challenges across the supply chain successfully.
With the introduction of the Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (2011) and the more recent commitment of The Action Plan towards the Circular Economy (2015), the European Commission (EC) has expressed its fundamental interest to substantially improve the resource efficiency of the European economy and enable the transition towards the Circular Economy (CE). This policy push has meanwhile been complemented by some quite ambitious national programmes for RE and CE and institutional advances but it is not yet bound to targets or mandatory reporting. Against this background, the objective of this paper is to give a comprehensive overview of the current policy frameworks at EU and a selection of MSs and provide insights into the elements shaping policy processes. The analytical framework relies on three essential interconnected components: the policy framework, the economic incentive system and economic side policies which are relevant in the context of RE and CE and actor constellations. The paper does this looking at the interface between EU-MSs. The analysis is based on different empirical surveys in which the policy development is observed and discussed (EEA ) and a comprehensive review of legislative and policy frameworks at the EU and selected MSs, undertaken as part of the project POLFREE (Policy option for a Resource-Efficient Economy) (Domemech et al., 2014, Bahn-Walkowiak et al. 2014. The analysis reveals that policy frameworks for RE/CE are complex and fragmented as competing goals and visions reduce effectiveness of measures. The paper makes recommendations as to how EU and MS policies could improve RE in a coordinated way, but recognizes that achieving such coordination will be challenging in the current political context.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.