How to handle the policy conflict between resource circulation and hazardous substances in the use of waste?

Abstract

A circular economy creates a policy conflict between increased resource circulation and decreased dispersal of hazardous substances. On the basis of three case studies in the EU, we have therefore identified various regulatory questions that can be posed to address the occurrence of hazardous substances in the use of waste. For each of these questions, we have proposed two possible responses influencing the design of the regulation and analyzed their consequences both from a circularity and from a toxicity perspective.Currently, the regulations focus on reducing the dispersal of hazardous substances rather than stimulating resource circulation. The allowable contamination levels in the waste are typically regulated in relation to its mass rather than its content of valuable resources. The regulation of hazards in waste can be further developed in two general ways, by emphasizing either the risk of exposure to hazards or the total content of hazards. A risk approach is beneficial for short-term circularity and waste producers. A hazard approach is beneficial for long-term circularity and waste users. In order to improve the balancing of the policy conflict in question, values, underlying assumptions, and the effects of hazardous substances and resource circulation need to be better understood.

Drivers and Barriers for a Circular Economy (CE) Implementation in Poland—A Case Study of Raw Materials Recovery Sector

“…Products from waste must meet specific requirements in order to be placed on the market (depending on the specific requirements of a given sector/product) [35]. More and more companies and scientists deal with the development of products that meet certain quality requirements [55][56][57][58][59], which in the context of potential commercialization may lead to an increase in the recognition of Polish solutions and products on European and world markets. There are also many concerns about the waste that has been in contact with people infected with coronavirus (including municipal and medical waste).…”

Circular Agreements—Exploring the Role of Agreements and Deals as a Political Tool for a Circular Economy

“…For example, those who generate waste want to get rid of it as simply and cheaply as possible. While the potential customers, on the other hand, search for products with as high quality and purity as possible [3]. At the same time, the circular value chains are characterised by high asymmetry in both costs and benefits [14].…”

“…However, what these agreements have in common is that the conditions under which a material shall be circulated are stated through negotiation. Thereby, the circular agreements can consider the peculiar complexity of waste [3], for example, the presence of hazardous substances. A closer analysis of these agreements can uncover what the agreements can address in relation to a circular economy, and what they cannot solve.…”

“…The use of bottom ash as well as sewage sludge would be unfeasible without supportive instruments such as landfill bans and taxes [3]. Therefore, accommodating policy instruments that regulate customers' and producers' alternative outlets and markets is necessary for the agreements to succeed.…”

“…Instead, the hope-and thus circular economy research-focuses on business models that shall realise the untapped potential of waste [2]. These models are designed primarily based on the needs and challenges of producers, rather than users and customers [3]. There is thus a need to focus more on the practicalities of the circular economy where the challenges and needs of all actors are included.…”