<\/p>\n
The Industrial Circular Economy<\/strong><\/u><\/p>\n Definitions abound<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. Here I like to quote from Wijkman and Sk\u00e5nberg\u2019s (2016) reference to an early definition by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation [reference to the biological and agricultural part of what I have termed \u2019a real circular economy\u2019 is discussed elsewhere]:<\/p>\n \u00ab<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The first report of the foundation \u2013 Towards a Circular Economy<\/u>, I – was presented in early 2012 and backed up by a group of leading multinationals (..) The report makes a strong pitch for a circular economy and defines the objectives as follows:<\/p>\n \u201cA circular economy is an industrial system that is restorative by intention and design<\/u>. In a circular economy, products are designed for ease of reuse, disassembly and remanufacturing \u2013 or recycling \u2013 with the understanding that it is the reuse of vast amounts of material reclaimed from end-of-life products, rather than the extraction of new resources, that is the foundation of economic growth.<\/u><\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n Moreover, the circular economy shifts towards the use of renewable energy, eliminates the use of toxic chemicals, which impair reuse, and aims for the elimination of waste through the superior and innovative design of materials, products, systems, and, within this, business models<\/u>.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n (..) The calculations in the report were based on the assumption that products and the components involved would only be recycled\/reused once. The objective in the future would rather be to add several cycles to a product and its main components<\/u>. That ought to be made much easier through new technology developments \u2013 such as more intelligent design and through the \u201dInternet of Things<\/u>\u201d, which, among other things, would help keep track of materials and components and make upgrading much easier.<\/em><\/p>\n Hence the main business case to explore would be to preserve the embedded labour, energy and material value in finished products as long as possible.<\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00bb<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Anders Wijkman and Kristian Sk\u00e5nberg (2016\/2017 [this edition published in 2017])): <\/p>\n The \u2018Decoupling\u2019 Term<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n According to Wijkman and Sk\u00e5nberg (2016):<\/p>\n \u00ab<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n We are in urgent need of decoupling<\/strong>, or put in other words, a transition to an inclusive and circular economy<\/u> (..) Decoupling refers to the ability of an economy to grow without corresponding increases in energy and resource use (source limits) and in environmental pressure (sink limits).\u00a0<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n A decoupled economy should ideally not negatively affect soil fertility and biodiversity, not diminish resource stocks and not lead to increased toxicity of land, water and air.<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n While relative decoupling<\/strong> of economic growth from resource use has been happening over the\u00a0<\/em>past decades, the gains made so far have been rapidly eaten up by a combination of economic\u00a0<\/em>growth and the so-called rebound effect, i.e. that the resources freed up by increased efficiency are used up very soon through increased consumption <\/em>(..) To obtain \u201cabsolute decoupling<\/strong>\u201d concerning both energy and materials (..) specific policy measures will be needed..<\/p>\n [It is also referred to the European Commission which in 2014 stated that] the aim now is a much broader scope, aiming to \u00abpromote the circular economy across the whole value chain<\/strong><\/span>.\u00bb [As noted by Stahel (2019:51), in the linear industrial economy, \u2018manufacturers optimize their supply chain [only] up to the point of sale\u2019 ]\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00bb<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Anders Wijkman and Kristian Sk\u00e5nberg (2016\/2017 [this edition published in 2017]):The Circular Economy and Benefits for Society. Jobs and Climate Clear Winners in an Economy Based on Renewable Energy and Resource Efficiency. A study pertaining to Finland, France, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. Published by Club of Rome. [emphasize and text in brackets added]<\/span><\/p>\n Wijkman and Sk\u00e5nberg 2016 also identifies three routes to decoupling<\/u><\/strong> that should be pursued simultaneously:<\/p>\n *<\/span><\/strong> \u00abEnergy efficiency encompasses all changes that result in a reduction in the energy used for a given energy service or level of activity<\/strong> (..) The reduction in energy consumption is usually associated with technological changes, but not always since it can also result from better organization and management or improved economic conditions in the sector (\u201cnontechnical factors\u201d)<\/em><\/p>\n (..) Avoiding unnecessary consumption is certainly a matter of individual behavior, but it is also often a matter of appropriate equipment: thermal regulation of room temperature and automatic deactivation of lights in unoccupied hotel rooms serve as good examples of how equipment can reduce the influence of individual behavior.\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/span>https:\/\/www.sciencedirect.com\/topics\/earth-and-planetary-sciences\/energy-efficiency<\/strong><\/span><\/a><\/strong><\/span> [emphasize added]<\/span><\/p>\n #<\/span><\/strong> According to Stahel (2019:51):<\/p>\n \u00abAs a longer use life of goods is equivalent to fewer sales, resulting in smaller production volumes, a lower economy of scale and higher unit costs, this option is poison to most producers\u2019 balance sheets. A shorter service-life of objects is inherently more interesting to manufacturers in today\u2019s policy framework,<\/u>\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n (Walter R. Stahel 2019: Circular Economy-A users guide, emphasize added)<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a4 <\/strong><\/span>As an alternative to today\u2019s business models, Stahel promotes a \u2018Performance Economy\u2019 where services (\u2018results\u2019) are sold instead of the goods themselves and with the producer retaining ownership and liability, even beyond the life of the original product: \u00abSince responsibility for the materials used in a product remains with the manufacturing company, strong incentives are created to earn revenue on what has already been produced for as long as possible<\/strong>.\u00bb <\/em><\/p>\n (Wijkman and Sk\u00e5nberg, ibid., emphasize added)<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Let’s start with Sharon Ede (2016):<\/p>\n \u00ab<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n UN Sustainable Development Goal 8 calls for<\/p>\n [But is that possible?] Materials can keep circulating through being designed for disassembly and remanufacturing, or kept in use longer through being designed for durability, but if the \u2018circle\u2019 or total demand for materials and energy keeps expanding, we have not solved our civilisation\u2019s challenge<\/strong> [and this can not be solved with] the current development paradigm which dominates both economics and politics globally, that of continuous economic growth into the indefinite future. <\/em><\/p>\n Historically, countries have sustained this growth by appropriating carrying capacity (resources, ecological services, waste sinks) from elsewhere on the planet <\/strong>through economic or military power, with waste (particularly CO2<\/sub>) being emitted into the global commons. However this model of dependence on \u2018ghost acreage\u2019 ignores one simple reality \u2013 globally, not everyone can be a net importer of biocapacity..Globally, we are liquidating natural capital and calling it economic growth. It is like ripping off parts of a house to use as firewood in order to keep warm.\u00a0 <\/strong>[This is why we need to look at entire supply\/value chains. As noted by the economist Kate Raworth: \u2018Cities must take on global responsibility for their [own] supply chains\u2019<\/em>].<\/p>\n \u00bb<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Sharon Ede (December 2016): The Real Circular Economy<\/a><\/strong><\/span> [emphasise, bullets and text in brackets added]<\/span>\u00a0<\/span> <\/em><\/p>\n De Decker (2018) puts forward three main points of criticism:<\/p>\n \u201c<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n
\nThe Circular Economy and Benefits for Society. Jobs and Climate Clear Winners in an Economy Based on Renewable Energy and Resource Efficiency. A study pertaining to Finland, France, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. Published by Club of Rome. [emphasize added]<\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Criticism leveled at the conventional circular economy<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n