1

2

PIONEER UNIVERSITIES:

• University of Exeter

• Arizona State University

• Cranfield University

• Delft University of Technology

• Rochester Institute of Technology

• University of Bradford

• University College London

• University São Paulo

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD 8

THEME A 9

DR ANTHONY ALEXANDER AND DR GERALDINE BRENNAN 10 – UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX, MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY, UK JACK BARRIE, GIRMA ZAWDIE AND ELSA JOÃO – UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE, UK 12 PHD STUDENT DOMENICO CEGLIA, PROF. DR. MÁRCIA DUTRA DE BARCELLOS AND 13 PROF. DR. EUGÊNIO AVILA PEDROZO - UNIVERSITY OF RIO GRANDE DO SUL VALERY CHISTOV - UNIVERSITY OF ALCALÁ, SPAIN 15 DR. EBAN GOODSTEIN - BARD COLLEGE, NEW YORK, USA 17 ELLA JAMSIN – DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, NETHERLANDS 18 CRISTIAN MATTI, CLIONA HOWIE, DAMARIS FERNANDEZ, TIERNAN O’SULLIVAN, JOSE 20 MANUEL CORVILLO, EUSEBIU STAMATE - CLIMATE-KIC, BRUSSELS, BELGIUM AND UTRECHT UNIVERSITY, UTRECHT, NETHERLANDS ALEXANDRA MIDDLETON, JOHN MCKERNAN AND ALVISE FAVOTTO 21 - OULU BUSINESS SCHOOL, FINLAND, ADAM SMITH BUSINESS SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW, UK MARIALE MORENO, FIONA CHARNLEY, RAFFAELLA VILLA, ADRIANA ENCINAS OROPESA 22 - CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY, UK PATRICIA NOBLE GONZALEZ AND MARIAM ZABAKHIDZE – UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX 24 A.R OMETTO, W. AMARAL, D. IRITANI, D.A.A DUPIM - UNIVERSITY OF SAO PAULO, BRASIL, 26 NATIONAL INDUSTRY CONFEDERATION, BRASIL, ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUNDATION LAURA ROCCO AND MONICA VENEZIANI – UNIVERSITY OF BRESCIA, ITALY 27 DR ANDREW RUTGERS 29 PATRICK SCHRÖEDER – INSTITUTE OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, UK 30 AMIR M SHARIF AND IAN FOUWEATHER – UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD - UK 31 VIVIAN S C TUNN, JAN P L SCHOORMANS, ELLIS A VAN DER HENDE, NANCY M P BOCKEN 32 - DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, NETHERLANDS AND LUND UNIVERSITY SWEDEN KEN WEBSTER – ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUNDATION 34

4

THEME B 35

ANA CAROLINA CERTASSINI, ALDO ROBERTO OMETTO, MATEUS CECÍLIO GEROLAMO 36 - UNIVERSITY OF SAO PAULO, BRAZIL FENNA BLOMSMA, DANIELA PIGOSSO AND TIM MCALOONE 38 - TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK, DENMARK STEVEN DAY, DONATO MASI AND JANET GODSELL – WMG, UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK, UK 40 ROBERTA DE ANGELIS – UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, UK 42 NATÁLIA ROHENKOHL DO CANTO, KLAUS G. GRUNERT, MARCIA DUTRA DE BARCELLOS 44 - FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO GRANDE DO SUL, AARHUS UNIVERSITY, DENMARK AND PORTO ALEGRE, RS, BRAZIL PETER HOPKINSON AND WILLIAM S HARVEY – UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, UK 46 VICKY LOFTHOUSE AND SHARON PRENDEVILLE – LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY, UK 48 C. SCHEEL- TECNOLOGICO DE MONTERREY, MEXICO 50 UTHAYASANKAR SIVARAJAH AND JYOTI MISHRA – UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD, UK 53 SUMTER D.X, BAKKER C.A AND BALKENEDE A.R 55 - DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, THE NETHERLANDS EDWIN TAM AND SUSAN SAWYER-BEAULIEU – UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR, CANADA 57 ALISHA TUDLADHAR - UNIVERSITY OF BATH, UK 59

THEME C 62

W.A.N AMARAL, A. OMETTO, J COSTA, R. BURCH AND A. MARSEILLE 63 – ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY, USA AND UNIVERSITY OF SAO PAULO, BRAZIL DIEGO VAZQUEZ-BRUST AND MATTHEW ANDERSON – UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH, UK 64 ANA CAROLINA BERTASSINI, CAMILA DOS SANTOS FERREIRA, DANIEL GUZZO DA COSTA, 66 ALDO ROBERTO OMETTO AND JANAÍNA MASCARENHAS HORNOS DA COSTA – UNIVERSITY SAO PAULO, BRAZIL DR. M.N. BOEVE AND PROF. CH.W. BACKES - UTRECHT UNIVERSITY, THE NETHERLANDS 68 SEVASTI CHATZOPOULOU - ROSKILDE UNIVERSITY, DENMARK 70 PETER DESMOND AND MILCAH ASAMBA 72 PIYUSH DHAWAN – ALEXANDER VON HUMBOLDT FOUNDATION 73 TERESA DOMENECH AND AIDUAN BORRION - UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON, UK 75

5

C.F. FRATINI, S. GEORG AND M.S. JØRGENSEN 76 – ASLBORG UNIVERSITY, COPENHAGEN, DENMARK AND UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE, FIRENZA, ITALY ANTONIA GRAVAGNUOLO, LUIGI FUSCO AND FRANCESCA MEDDA 78 – NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON ELANA HARRISON – UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, UK 79 ANNA PETIT-BOIX AND SINA LEIPOLD - UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG, GERMANY 80 JOSEFINE KOEHLER – AALBORG UNIVERSITY, DENMARK AND COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, NEW YORK 81 SEONAID LAFFERTY – UNIVERSITY OF CUMBRIA 84 MICHAEL LIEDER, FARAZEE M.A. ASIF AND AMIR RASHID 86 - KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN ROSALIND MALCOM – UNIVERSITY OF SURREY, UK 87 FRANCESCA MEDDA – UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON, UK 88 DAVID BENSON AND DAVID MONCIARDINI – UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, UK 89 SUSANA PAIXÃO - COIMBRA HEALTH SCHOOL – PORTUGAL 91 PAUL ROGERS – UNIVERSITY OF LONDON, UK 92 PAUL SCHOSSELET, JEANNOT SCHROEDER AND DOUGLAS MULHAL - LUXEMBOURG 94 IAIN SOUTAR – UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, UK 96 JAMES TAYLOR – UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX - UK 97 MIKE TENNANT, FENNA BLOMSMA AND GERALDINE BRENNAN 99 – IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON, UK, TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK, MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY, UK SHANN TURNBULL AND DARK TIPURIĆ 100 - INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SELF-GOVERNANCE, AUSTRALIA, UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB, CROATIA FABIAN UNTERLASS – AUSTRIAN INSITUTE OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 102 TOBIAS WIDMER, DR BENNY TJAHJONO, PROF MICHAEL BOURLAKIS AND DR EMEL AKTAS 103 - CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY, CRANFIELD SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT, UK YANYAN XUE, ZONGGUO WEN AND HANS TH, A. BRESSERS, 105 - TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY, CHINA, AND TWENTE UNIVERSITY, NETHERLANDS

THEME D 106

DILLI HOBBS, FLAVIE LOWRES, KIRU BALSON, MIRKO FERNETANI, KATHERINE TEBBATT 107 ADAMS, KATHRYN BOURKE, WIM DEBACKER, NEETHIS RAJAGOPALAN, WAI CHUNG LAM, SOFIE DE REGEL – BRE – UK, LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY – UK, VITO – BELIGUM, UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE – NETHERLANDS

6

MARIA ARIZA AND SHOVA THAPA KARKI – UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX, UK 109 MANON EIKELENBOOM, THOMAS B LONG, GJALT DE JONG 111 – UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN, THE NETHERLANDS A. ENCINAS-OROPESA, M. MORENO, F. CHAMLEY, N. SIMMS 113 ALYSIA GARMULEWICZ AND LIZ CORBIN 114 – UNIVERSITY OF SANTIAGO AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON MICKEY HOWARD, STEFFEN BOEHM, DAN EATHERLEY, MATT LOBLEY, NAV MUSTAFEE 115 AND LYDIE S. VAMVAKERIDOU-LYROUDIA – UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, UK TIM HUGHES – UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, UK 117 DR ALISTAIR HUNT – UNIVERSITY OF BATH, UK 118 URSZULA KOZMINSKA – WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY 121 JYOTI MISHRA, UTHAYASANKAR SIVARAJAH AND CHIAT YIN LIM – UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD 123 SATORU MIZUGUCHI 124 RAPHAËLLE STEWART AND MONIA NIERO 126 – TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK AND AALBORG UNIVERSITY, COPENHAGEN

JOHN VAN OORSCHOT AND MICHIEL RITZEN 128 – ZUYD UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES, NETHERLANDS STEFANO PASCUCCI, EMANUELE BLASI, MASSIMILIANO BORRELLO, LUIGI CEMBALO, 130 DOMENICO DENTONI, JESSICA DUNCAN – UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, UNIVERSITY OF TUSCIA, UNIVERSITY OF NAPLSE, WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY AMIR M. SHARIF AND ZAHIR IRANI – UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD, UK 132 BIRGIT GEUEKE, KSENIA GROH, GRETA STIEGER AND JANE MUNCKE 134 - FOOD PACKAGING FORUM FOUNDATION, SWITZERLAND LORA TSVETANOVA, LAURA CARRARESI, MICHAEL WUSTMANS, 136 AND STEFANIE BRÖRING - UNIVERSITY OF BONN, GERMANY SASKIA VAN DEN MUIJSENBERG AND DR. VINCENT BLOK 138 – WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY, NETHERLANDS VAN STAVAREN. D, CUPPEN .E, HEURKENS. E, AND VOS. M 140 – DELFT UNIVERSITY, ARCADIS & ANTHEA GROUP, NETHERLANDS SIMON WRIGHT - UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY 141 DR EMIEL F.M.WUBBEN – WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY, NETHERLANDS 142

7

WORKSHOPS 145

(RE)THINKING CIRCULAR ECONOMY “FROM BELOW” - 146 BY SEBASTIÁN CARENZO AND LUCAS BECERRA ASSESSING CIRCULAR VALUE CHAIN RECONFIGURATIONS: 151 A CASE FROM THE BIO-PLASTICS INDUSTRY - BY HENDRIK CLAUSDEINKEN, NICOLA BLUM, ANASTASIOS NODARAS, CATHARINA R. BENING UNDERSTANDING WOOD CASCADING IN THE CONTEXT OF A CIRCULAR ECONOMY 152 – WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS AND ENABLERS? - MATTEO JARRE, ANNA PETIT-BOIX, SINA LEIPOLD, CARMEN PRIEFER AND ROLF MEYER A BIO-BASED CIRCULAR ECONOMY? – STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES 153 – BY SINA LEIPOLD AND ANNA PETIT-BOIX THE CIRCULAR BUSINESS MODEL OF INDITEX: TOWARDS A MORE SUSTAINABLE 154 FASHION INDUSTRY – BY ANGELES PEREIRA, ADOLFO CARBALLO, XAVIER VENCE AND XOSÉ MIGUEL ALCALDE INNOVATION TO OVERCOME LIMITED RESOURCES: HOW ISRAEL USES 155 AND REUSES WATER ASSETS – BY JEFF DODICK, STEVEN ZECHER AND YAMIT NAFTALI CIRCULAR BUILT ENVIRONMENT, BARRIERS AND ENABLERS – BY DOUG MORWOOD 156 PANELLISTS BIOGRAPHIES 158 – JEFF DODICK, DOUG MORWOOD, YAMIT NATALI, ANGELES PEREIRA, STEVEN ZECHER CIRCULAR ECONOMY BUSINESS MODELS: APPROACH AND KEY 159 FRINDINGS FROM R2Π PROJECT – BY JEFF DODICK AND ANGELES PEREIRA CIRCULAR ECONOMY IN THE GLOBAL SOUTH – PERSPECTIVES 161 FROM DEVELOPMENT STUDIES – BY PATRICK SCHROEDER TO WHAT EXTENT MUST A WHOLE SUPPLY CHAIN COLLABORATE FOR AN 165 END-PRODUCE TO BE CONSIDERED CIRCULAR? – BY SIMON ROBERTS, BIRGIT MARTENS AND ALISON STOWELL ACCELERATING THE REMANUFACTURING AGENDA IN EUROPE – BY RACHEL WAUGH 167

8

Foreword: I am delighted that Exeter University Centre for Circular Economy (ECCE) is hosting with the support of EMF the first International symposium on the contribution of University scholarly activity to Circular Economy (CE) theory and practice. CE is now established as a vital framework for re-thinking systemic economic, environmental and social challenges. It offers opportunities to reshape established practices, enabling the world’s diverse societies and economies to prosper in new ways. To achieve our CE vision, we need the contribution of business, government, civil society organisations to work together in reconfiguring our global ecosystems. There is now a growing body of literature celebrating the benefits and showcasing successful cases of CE. To build on this work, rigorous evidenced-based research is required to evaluate and test the development and implementation of CE activity. To achieve the transition to a CE, we require a richer and more nuanced understanding of the inter-relationships between economic, social and environmental systems at micro, meso and macro levels. The symposium has encouraged a diversity of perspectives to present and to discuss new and current work. Our aim is for the symposium to act as a catalyst to generate new collaborations, identify new lines of research enquiry and create new networks to expand interest amongst HE globally. With over 100 abstracts, from 25 different country and over 30 different Universities, the symposium will provide an excellent foundation to for rigorous development of Circular Economy as a field of enquiry. We warmly welcome our six fellow Global Pioneer Universities who will be chairing sessions throughout the two days and helping to make the event a success. We look forward to future collaboration with you all through our ECCE which will be officially launched in September 2018. Professor David Bruce Allen Pro-Vice Chancellor and Executive Dean University of Exeter Business School

9

THEME A: System change, system-thinking and complex adaptive systems

• Which skills, capabilities and ways of thinking are needed to support systemic innovation and the transition towards a CE?

• At which scale (i.e. micro, meso or macro) are circularity transitions and transformations most effective and how are they linked?

• Theoretical and practical underpinnings of circular economics • Changing relationships between materials, resources information, data, and finance • Modelling complex adaptive systems for CE • The theory and practice of education and learning in the transition to a CE

10

Linking the Circular Economy field with value modelling in the Operations Management, Supply Chain Management, and Industrial Ecology literature.

Authors: Dr Anthony Alexander - University of Sussex, School of Business, Management & Economics Dr Geraldine Brennan - Middlesex University Business School, UK, Conference theme: What CE practices have existed in the past, how might they be evaluated and what can we learn from these. Abstract: The research consists of a systematic, interdisciplinary literature review (Tranfield, Denyer, & Smart, 2003) covering precursor concepts analogous to and supportive of the concept of the circular economy (CE) from the fields of operations and supply chain management (OSCM), and the economics of industrial ecology (EIE). These fields provide useful theoretical and procedural depth that can help with the implementation of CE, including modelling of economic, material and environmental factors. Examples of sector implementation illustrating the findings are also included. OSCM is also a core part of MBA, MSc and BSc programmes in business schools, so summarising some of this in-depth and technical research literature can help establish accessible aspects of the topic to help introduce practical tools for CE into post-graduate curricula, informing the workforce of tomorrow. There is more than twenty years of academic research in OSCM addressing questions of environmental, social and economic impacts of firm-level operations and inter-firm level supply networks (Lamming & Hampson, 1996; J Sarkis, 1998). This covers a range of approaches from advanced analytic modelling (Seuring, 2013) to organisational theory (Joseph Sarkis, Zhu, & Lai, 2011) and socio-political theory, including on the barriers to implementation, (Touboulic & Walker, 2015). There has been extensive study in the field of reverse logistics (Kannan, Murugesan, Senthil, & Noorul Haq, 2009; Kocabasoglu, Prahinski, & Klassen, 2007; Ramezani, Bashiri, & Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, 2013) and closed-loop supply chains (Georgiadis & Vlachos, 2004; Guide, Jayaraman, & Linton, 2003; Quariguasi Frota Neto, Walther, Bloemhof, van Nunen, & Spengler, 2010; Savaskan, Bhattacharya, & Van Wassenhove, 2004; Vlachos, Georgiadis, & Iakovou, 2007). Additional areas of relevance covered by OSCM literature include waste management (Bing, 2013; Linton, Yeomans, & Yoogalingam, 2002), design for environment (Sheng & Worhach, 1997; Sroufe, Curkovic, Montabon, & Melnyk, 2000) and life cycle analysis (Chung & Wee, 2008; Matos & Hall, 2007). OSCM literature provides an opportunity to learn key techniques, processes and concepts to help advance the study and practice around CE. Extending the level of analysis up to a larger scale, the field of industrial ecology, and a particular application into business and management scholarship of the economics of industrial ecology (EIE) (Linton et al., 2002; Socolow, Andrews, Berkhout, & Thomas, 1997; Van den Bergh & Janssen, 2004) provide an additional important perspective, showing sector-scale viability and constraints. Successful examples from the construction and automotive sectors (and a contrasting example in FMCG plastics) illustrate these EIE models, assisting understanding of effective implementation of CE practice. Summarising and synthesising relevant contributions from the OSCM and EIE literature can therefore assist theoretical foundations, practice implementation and policy recommendations around CE. Current findings of the review will be included in the extended abstract. References Bing, X. (2013). Multimodal network design for sustainable household plastic recycling. International Journal of

Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43, 452-477.

11

Chung, C.-J., & Wee, H.-M. (2008). Green-component life-cycle value on design and reverse manufacturing in semi-closed supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 113(2), 528-545.

Georgiadis, P., & Vlachos, D. (2004). The effect of environmental parameters on product recovery. European Journal of Operational Research, 157(2), 449-464.

Guide, V. D. R., Jayaraman, V., & Linton, J. D. (2003). Building contingency planning for closed-loop supply chains with product recovery. Journal of Operations Management, 21(3), 259-279.

Kannan, G., Murugesan, P., Senthil, P., & Noorul Haq, A. (2009). Multicriteria group decision making for the third party reverse logistics service provider in the supply chain model using fuzzy TOPSIS for transportation services. International Journal of Services Technology and Management, 11(2), 162-181.

Kocabasoglu, C., Prahinski, C., & Klassen, R. (2007). Linking forward and reverse supply chain investments: The role of business uncertainty. Journal of Operations Management, 25(6), 1141-1160.

Lamming, R., & Hampson, J. (1996). The environment as a supply chain management issue. British journal of management, 7(s1), S45-S62.

Linton, J. D., Yeomans, J. S., & Yoogalingam, R. (2002). Supply planning for industrial ecology and remanufacturing under uncertainty: a numerical study of leaded-waste recovery from television disposal. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(11), 1185-1196.

Matos, S., & Hall, J. (2007). Integrating sustainable development in the supply chain: the case of life cycle assessment in oil and gas and agricultural biotechnology. Journal of Operations Management, 25(6), 1083-1102.

Quariguasi Frota Neto, J., Walther, G., Bloemhof, J., van Nunen, J. A. E. E., & Spengler, T. (2010). From closed-loop to sustainable supply chains: the WEEE case. International Journal of Production Research, 48(15), 4463-4481.

Ramezani, M., Bashiri, M., & Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R. (2013). A new multi-objective stochastic model for a forward/reverse logistic network design with responsiveness and quality level. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37(1), 328-344.

Sarkis, J. (1998). Evaluating environmentally conscious business practices. European Journal of Operational Research(107), 159-174.

Sarkis, J., Zhu, Q., & Lai, K.-h. (2011). An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain management literature. International Journal of Production Economics, 130(1), 1-15.

Savaskan, R. C., Bhattacharya, S., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2004). Closed-loop supply chain models with product remanufacturing. Management Science, 50(2), 239-252.

Seuring, S. (2013). A review of modeling approaches for sustainable supply chain management. Decision Support Systems, 54(4), 1513-1520.

Sheng, P., & Worhach, P. (1997). A process chaining approach toward product design for environment. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 1(4), 35-55.

Socolow, R., Andrews, C., Berkhout, F., & Thomas, V. (Eds.). (1997). Industrial ecology and global change (Vol. 5): Cambridge University Press.

Sroufe, R., Curkovic, S., Montabon, F., & Melnyk, S. A. (2000). The new product design process and design for environment:“Crossing the chasm”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 20(2), 267-291.

Touboulic, A., & Walker, H. (2015). Theories in sustainable supply chain management: a structured literature review. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 45(1/2), 16-42.

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British journal of management, 14(3), 207-222.

Van den Bergh, J. C., & Janssen, M. (2004). Economics of industrial ecology: Materials, structural change, and spatial scales: MIT Press.

Vlachos, D., Georgiadis, P., & Iakovou, E. (2007). A system dynamics model for dynamic capacity planning of remanufacturing in closed-loop supply chains. Computers & Operations Research, 34(2), 367-394.

12

Building the inner loops: A comparative study on the role of system intermediaries in nurturing niche circular innovation

Authors: Jack Barrie, Girma Zawdie and Elsa João - University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK Keywords: Circular Economy; Strategic Niche Management; Triple Helix; Innovation Policy; Industrial Biotechnology; Remanufacturing Abstract: The rate of transition to a circular economy will be significantly influenced by how quickly circular niche innovations become widely adopted. Hence, this paper measures and evaluates the effectiveness of employing triple helix-based system intermediaries as a policy tool for nurturing niche innovation networks in-line with the circular economy transition. This paper evaluates the Scottish Governments innovative use of triple helix-based system intermediaries as niche network managers for two circular economy oriented national niche innovation networks – industrial biotechnology and remanufacturing. Evaluation was achieved through a complete social network analysis of both networks. Through unique access to every network member from each network, the authors were able to collect an extensive dataset on 6 types of inter-organization relations related to innovation. The impact of the triple helix-based system intermediaries on the structural characteristics of their network was then empirically measured and compared. This allowed for the most comprehensive empirical study to date on the complex dynamics within niche innovation networks and the role of system intermediaries in nurturing such networks. The results of the analysis demonstrated the profound effect that the introduction of a triple helix-based system intermediary had on building the networks, facilitating shared learning and promoting shared expectations. However, the inherent differences between the industrial biotechnology niche, which required the establishment of entirely new value chains, and remanufacturing niche which requires the adjustment to well established value chains, meant the services demanded of the niche manager varied for each. As such this paper offers important learning for circular economy policy makers.

13

Epistemic thinking for corporate sustainability: a complex paradoxical framework Extended abstract

Authors: Phd Student Domenico Ceglia, Prof. Dr. Márcia Dutra de Barcellos and Prof. Dr. Eugênio Avila Pedrozo - Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul – School of Management, Brazil Corporate challenges both internally and externally the sustainability tensions (Hahn, Pinkse, Preuss, & Figge, 2015). Various approaches as trade-off, win-win and integration have contributed to enrich the subject, but the Paradox Theory had concurred to deal with contradictory tensions related to sustainability (Van der Byl & Slawinski, 2015). Due to opportunities and challenges posed by complexity in the organizational practices, theoretical insights could grapple with increasingly complex environment (Smith, Erez, Jarvenpaa, Lewis, & Tracey, 2017). In this original work, we propose an general of complexity as depicted by France philosopher Edgar Morin instead of restricted of complexity as depicted by Santa Fé Institute of United States where the Complex Adaptive System is the main trend (Malaina, 2015). We opt for this choice because the Social Sciences are open systems and therefore no preconceived model can be imposed to understand the complex environment (Malaina, 2015; Morin, 2005). Our study is grounded on a different epistemic thinking, far different from the paradigm depicted by Kuhn (1969), since we are not focused on scientific discoveries, but rather on the discovery of social tensions (Farjoun, 2010). Tensions are socially constructed (Lewis, 2000), thus no preconceived model could be used to understand them (Astley, 1985). Paradoxical tensions in corporate sustainability are gaining insights and have been studied considering short versus long time (Bansal, 2002; Bansal & DesJardine, 2014; Brundtland, 1987), personal and organizational agendas (Hahn et al. 2015), organizational and societal levels (Zadek, 2004), and between the core of corporate business and social issues (Iivonen, 2017). However, these studies focused on the contradictions between two opposing forces based on time, organizational level, and strategy isolating the complex interrelated forces between economic, social and environment through an integrated view (Hahn, Pinkse, et al., 2015). We argument that the tensions not only happens between two poles, but on three poles also according a trialectical relationships as appointed by Smith et al. (2017) and Farjoun (2010). We defend our argument showing as evolving process between organizational change, organizational level, and context according a tetragram logic (Morin, 1977) and a trinity logic between eco-socio-environmental issue unfold the trialectical relationship between sustainability organizational practices within the corporate. The objective is to understand, epistemologically, how the paradoxical tensions emerge in corporate sustainability. We structure our study by analysing the challenges and opportunities by corporate sustainability, debating and ontologically introducing the trinity logic into the sustainability paradox tensions. To do it, we add the thinking of complexity to corporate sustainability using the tetragram logic (order/disorder/interaction/organization). This logic serves to understand as sustainability practices interacted between them within organizational level (individual/organization/systemic), context (space and time), and organizational change. We present the complexity principles as systemic, hologram, reintroduction, recursive, auto-eco-organization, dialogic, and retroactive as corollary to tetragram logic to analysis in depth the emergence of paradoxical tensions within the corporate sustainability (Morin, 1977, 2002, 2008). We conclude by showing an epistemological framework that can depict paradoxical tensions and proposing insights to manage these tensions into a strategic view for corporate sustainability. References: Astley, W. G. (1985). Administrative Science as Socially Constructed Truth. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 30(4), 497–513. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392694 Bansal, P. (2002). The corporate challenges of sustainable development. Academy of Management

Executive, 16(2), 122–131. Bansal, P., & DesJardine, M. R. (2014). Business sustainability: It is about time. Strategic

Organization, 12(1), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127013520265 Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and

14

Development (Vol. 4). https://doi.org/10.1080/07488008808408783 Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management

Review, 35(2), 202–225. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2010.48463331 Hahn, T., Figge, F., Aragon-Correa, J. a., & Sharma, S. (2015). Advancing Research on Corporate

Sustainability: Off to Pastures New or Back to the Roots? Business & Society, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650315576152

Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2015). Tensions in Corporate Sustainability: Towards an Integrative Framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(2), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2047-5

Iivonen, K. (2017). Defensive Responses to Strategic Sustainability Paradoxes: Have Your Coke and Drink It Too! Journal of Business Ethics, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3580-9

Kuhn, T. S. (1969). La struttura delle rivoluzioni scientifiche (2nd ed.). Torino: Giulio Einaudi editore s.p.a.

Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring Paradox: Toward a More Comprehensive Guide. Academic of Management Review, 25(4), 760–776.

Malaina, A. (2015). Two complexities: The need to link complex thinking and complex adaptive systems science. Emergence: Complexity & Organization, (March).

Morin, E. (1977). O Método 1: A Natureza da Natureza. (F. L. de Castro, Ed.) (2a). du Seuil. Morin, E. (2002). O Método 2: A Vida da Vida (2a). Porto Alegre: Sulina. Morin, E. (2005). Abordagens em epistemologia : Bachelard , Morin e a epistemologia da

complexidade. Transinformação, 17(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-37862005000200001

Morin, E. (2008). O Método 3: O Conhecimento do conhecimento (4a). Porto Alegre: Sulina. Smith, W. K., Erez, M., Jarvenpaa, S., Lewis, M. W., & Tracey, P. (2017). Adding Complexity to

Theories of Paradox, Tensions, and Dualities of Innovation and Change: Introduction to Organization Studies Special Issue on Paradox, Tensions, and Dualities of Innovation and Change. Organization Studies, 38(3–4), 303–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617693560

Van der Byl, C. A., & Slawinski, N. (2015). Embracing Tensions in Corporate Sustainability: A Review of Research From Win-Wins and Trade-Offs to Paradoxes and Beyond. Organization & Environment, 28(1), 54–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575047

Zadek, S. (2004). The Path to Corporate Responsibility. In Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance (Vol. 82, pp. 159–172). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_13

15

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF OPEN INNOVATION PLATFORMS IN CIRCULAR ECONOMY.

Author: Valery Chistov - University of Alcalá, Spain Abstract: The main objective of this research is to assess the performance of digital Open Innovation platforms that are designed to promote Circular Economy and Eco-innovation. Adopters of Circular Economy (CE), “Ecopreneurs” and “Eco-innovators” traditionally face many challenges and limitations: the lack of ideas, human capital, expertise, knowledge, experience, and financial capital. We believe, that the potential solution for these struggles lays in adopting more collaborative approaches, including “Open Business Models”, Co-creation and “Open Innovation” strategies. The concept of Open Innovation (OI) was coined by Henry Chesbrough from Hass School of Business in 2003 and argues that to survive in today’s highly competitive economy, companies need to harness ideas and talents from a very broad scope of sources and stakeholders, including employees, customers, and even competitors (Chesbrough, 2003). It rapidly developed into a new field of research in Innovation and Knowledge Management (Huizingh, 2010) and today many multinational companies, as well as SMEs use it as an important part of their innovation management strategy (Grimaldi et al., 2013). In practice, many companies have already used OI approaches to promote CE. Mostly it happens in the form of challenges. Rabobank, British Water, IDEO, H&M, Cisco, ING are among the first adopters. However, the academic research on this topic in virtually non-existent. As it is in general scarce on the use of OI by Ecopreneurs and Eco-Innovators. So far, it discusses the possible benefits to solve environmental problems (Montresor et al., 2016), implementation case studies of Green Open Innovation in various industries, including hospitality (Saez-Martinez et al., 2016), telecommunication (Collins, 2010), smart cities (Valdez et al., 2018), biotech (van Lancker at al., 2016). According to EC-Europa website (“Open Innovation Ideal,” 2013), OI is an ideal feat for Eco-innovative SME’s. It happens, because OI naturally answers the major challenges and complexities of Eco-innovation. The major benefits of participating and developing new technologies through flexible networks include: quick internationalization of new green technologies, sharing the risks and awards for developing new technologies, getting a wide-range of feedback, thus quickly improving the new technology and alleviating the burden of innovation investments (Montresor et al., 2016). R&D cooperation strategies (De Marchi, 2012), strategic alliances and joint ventures were proved to increase innovative capacity of an eco-innovative firms (Montresor et al., 2016), and contribute to the gain of competitive advantage (Chen et al., 2016). In practice, OI can take many forms: partnerships, challenges, business incubators and accelerators etc. In this research, we take a closer look at digital OI platforms that facilitate the interaction between several companies to foster Circular Economy and help to “crowdsource” or “crowdfund” green start-ups. We have analyzed the most reputed platforms, including Fundly, Indiegogo and Kickstarter, as well as more specialized platforms: Causes, Divvy, Greenfunder, and many others. Our first results showed, that most of these platforms are not functional and host a very little number of projects, that are mostly underfunded. References: Chen, H., Chen, S., Lan, Y. (2016). Attaining a sustainable competitive advantage in the smart grid industry of China using suitable open innovation intermediaries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, pp. 1083-1091. Chesbrough, H. W. (2003a). The era of Open Innovation. MITSloan Management Review, 44 (3), pp. 35-41. De Marchi, V. (2012). Environmental innovation and R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. Research Policy 41, pp. 614-623.

16

Grimaldi, M., Quinto, I. and Rippa, P. (2013), Enabling Open Innovation in Small and Medium Enterprises: A Dynamic Capabilities Approach. Knowledge and Process Management, 20, pp. 199–210 Huizingh, E.K.R.E. (2010). Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives. Technovation, 31 (1), pp. 2-9. Montresor, S., Vezzani, A. (2016). Intangible investments and innovation propensity: Evidence from the Innobarometer 2013. Industry and Innovation, 23(4), pp. 331-352. Open Innovation Ideal for Eco-Innovation. (2013, July 8th). Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/about-eco-innovation/policies-matters/eu/20130708_open-innovation-ideal-for-eco-innovation_en Saez-Martinez, F., Lefebvre, G., Hernandez, J., Clark, J. (2016). Drivers of sustainable cleaner production and sustainable energy options. Journal of Cleaner production, 138(1), pp. 1-7. Van Lancker, J., Wauters, E., Van Huylenbroeck, G. (2016). Managing innovation in the bioeconomy: An open innovation perspective. Biomass and Bioenergy, 90, pp. 60-69. Valdez, A.M., Cook, M., Langendahl, P.A., Roby, H., Potter, S. (2018). Prototyping sustainable mobility practices: user-generated data in the smart city. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(2), pp. 144-157.

17

Circular Economy in the Context of an MBA in Sustainability

Author: Dr. Eban Goodstein - Director, MBA in Sustainability, Bard College, NY, USA Abstract: This presentation focuses on the circular economy as a core organizing framework for a sustainability-based MBA. Sustainability-trained MBA’s should be able to lead circular economy transitions, either as entrepreneurs or intrapreneurs. Beyond a shared and compelling metaphor, how much course work in these programs should be practically focused on knowledge and skills to equip graduates to drive a transition to circular economy practices? Is leading a circular economy strategy different then leading a sustainability strategy? [Bocken et al (2016)] What added context is needed for generic business skills of supply chain sourcing, customer engagement and change management to support circular economy transitions? [Boelie et al (2004)] How can the critical role of experiential learning be expanded? [Shriberg and McDonald (2013)] These questions will be informed through a survey of the past and present Directors of sustainability-focused MBA programs. References: Bocken, Nancy MP, Ingrid de Pauw, Conny Bakker, and Bram van der Grinten. 2016. "Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy." Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering 33 (5):308-320. Elzen, Boelie, Frank W Geels, and Kenneth Green. 2004. System innovation and the transition to sustainability: theory, evidence and policy: Edward Elgar Publishing Shriberg, Michael and Lindsey MacDonald (2013) Sustainability Leadership Programs: Emerging Goals, Methods & Best Practices, Journal of Sustainability Education Vol. 5, May.

18

The tipping points paradigm in circular economy transitions

Author: Ella Jamsin - Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands Abstract: Initiatives to catalyse a transition towards a circular economy are multiplying throughout business, policy and non-profit. These projects regularly make reference to the metaphor of a “tipping point” (e.g. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013; Circle Economy, 2017), representing a sudden, non-linear, change from one regime to another, as popularised by Malcom Gladwell in the eponymous book (Gladwell, 2000). With its promise of achieving large-scale effects with comparatively minimal efforts, the idea is highly seductive. Yet research on tipping points, which has a rich history notably in ecology and social sciences (Grodzins, 1958, van Nes et al, 2016, Milkoreit et al, 2018), suggests a more nuanced view. Three characteristics of tipping points are often neglected in popular use of the term.

1) Tipping points are typically preceded by a period of stagnation, during which it is very difficult to estimate how close the system is to a tipping point. Techniques to detect early warning signals of such a transition exist, but their field of application is very limited (Scheffer et al, 2012).

2) While many complex systems change through a tipping point, more linear dynamics of change are possible too, depending on the conditions of the system. Tipping points occur in the presence of strong reinforcing feedback loops, which can also be seen as high costs of deviating from the norm (e.g. social pressure in a community). When such costs are lower, transitions take place more gradually (Scheffer et al, 2003).

3) Reaching a tipping point is not always the most desirable mode of transformation. For example, in the case of pressing environmental issues, such as climate change or biodiversity loss, societal change is needed urgently. In such cases, the phase of stagnation that precedes a tipping point may give rise to irreversible costs (Scheffer et al., 2003).

These distinctions between the popular use of the concept and its scientific meaning have implications on how to best catalyse societal change towards a circular economy. First, the focus on small, short-term interventions that trigger large effects is only relevant if the system is close to a tipping point. If it is still far away or if the system is more prone to a gradual transition, a longer-term approach will be needed. Moreover, the actors of this transition may influence whether the change must take place through a tipping point or follow a more linear curve by affecting the strength of reinforcing feedback loops in society. For example, activities that are highly visible by peers trigger greater social pressure. This may help to accelerate a change of collective behaviour or, on the opposite, further strengthen an existing one, in both cases reinforcing tipping point dynamics. On the other hand, some policy instruments, such as public procurement, help to lower the barriers for the deployment of new products and business models, therefore reducing the cost of deviating from the norm and creating the conditions for a more gradual change. Further research is needed to assess to what extent existing initiatives rely on a tipping point metaphor beyond the simple use of the term and to develop practical guidance on how to take the dynamics of change into account in the shaping of new initiatives. Such research could ultimately increase the effectiveness of the efforts made towards a circular economy.

19

References: Circle Economy, 2017. Policy Levers for a Low-Carbon Economy. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013. Towards the Circular Economy, Economic and business rationale

for an accelerate transition. Gladwell, M., 2000. The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. Little, Brown. Grodzins, M., 1957. Metropolitan segregation. Sci. Am. 197 33–41 Milkoreit, M., Hodbod, J., Baggio, J., Benessaiah, K., Calderón-Contreras, R., Donges, J.F., Mathias,

J.D., Rocha, J.C., Schoon, M. and Werners, S.E., 2018. Defining tipping points for social-ecological systems scholarship—an interdisciplinary literature review. Environmental Research Letters, 13(3), 033005

Scheffer, M., Westley, F., and Brock, W., 2003. Slow Response of Societies to New Problems-Causes and Costs, Ecosystems 6(5), 493

Scheffer, M. et al., 2012. Anticipating Critical Transitions, Science, 338(6105), 344 van Nes, E.H., Arani, B.M., Staal, A., van der Bolt, B., Flores, B.M., Bathiany, S. and Scheffer, M.,

2016. What Do You Mean ‘Tipping Point’? Trends in ecology & evolution, 31(12), 902

20

Mapping perspectives on sustainability transitions towards circular economy models from a practitioner’s perspective

Authors: Cristian Matti - Climate-KIC, Brussels, Belgium, Cliona Howie - Climate-KIC, San Sebastian, Spain & University of Cantabria, San Sebastian, Spain, Damaris Fernandez - EIT Raw Materials, Ireland & University of Cantabria, San Sebastian, Spain Tiernan O’Sullivan – EIT Raw Materials, Dublin, Ireland & Trinity College Dublin, Ireland Jose Manuel Corvillo – University of Valencia, Spain Eusebiu Stamate – Climate-KIC, Brussels, Belgium Keywords: System change, system-thinking and complex adaptive systems Abstract: The concept of sustainability transitions towards a circular economy can be understood in different ways, and requires interpretation regarding the definition of goals, the timeframe of changes, the question of which actors have agency, and the perception of responsibility. These ambiguities may generate different understandings of what is meant by a circular economy and sustainability transitions. While a circular economy can be defined as a close-loop process with specific practical limits for optimisation and implementation which generally have clear economic and regulatory drivers, transition management literature indicates that no transition is ever planned and coordinated from the outset. More specifically, transformative processes could be enabled through the alignment of different factors rather than be “managed” per se; rather than being directed from above, they come about through the aligning of key enabling factors. The presence of a shared vision or common understanding of what transition consists of is critical. In this respect, the generation of shared visions of what transition consists of by using multi-stakeholder collaborative processes, in which practictioners’ perspectives are recorded and analysed, is one of the key recommendation for supporting the transition process

In this paper, we explore a sustainable transition approach to a circular economy with a focus on the practitioners’ perspective. Our study seeks to define and integrate conflicting arguments and explanations that practitioners’ may express regarding socio- technical elements in the transition process, such as investment flows in new infrastructure, cross-sector collaboration and policy incentives. We also intend to define and integrate the narratives regarding transition pathways based on the logic of value creation and emerging circular business models. Our study addresses the lack of alignment between the perspective of practitioners and the key messages of the overall narrative embedded in the current European agenda on Circular Economy. We argue that a different form of messaging and engagement which is more reflexive and inclusive can be applied to overcome this critical limitation, and to facilitate local actions towards pathway creation in emergent environmentally sustainable sectors.

This paper demonstrates the effect of such inclusive approaches for enabling the transitions to circular economy model. We carried out an empirical research based in a triangulation of different sources (i.e. policy documents, reports, participatory processes). The main empirical material examined is a series of multi stakeholder participatory processes run in 2016-2017 in Brussels, Helsinki and Valencia. The codified results of the participatory process are analysed with methodological techniques for content analysis. These are then compared with key messages identified in main policy and industry documents addressing the concept of a circular economy. By defining and mapping these arguments, we can identify main areas of divergence between the perspective of practitioners and the perspective of policy makers.

As we currently see, blending socio-technical aspects is a pressing requirement in the policy framework to facilitate transformative change. In light of this, we investigate the potential of practitioners’ perspectives to influence and shape the pull-and-push.

21

Circular economy: a new paradigm or just sustainability rebranded Authors: Alexandra Middleton - Department of Accounting and Finance, Oulu Business School, University of Oulu, Finland John McKernan and Alvise Favotto - Adam Smith Business School, University of Glasgow, Scotland, UK Keywords: Circular economy, sustainability, technocentrism, ecocentrism Abstract: Circular economy (CE) has been pioneered by Ellen McArthur Foundation and supported by the EU. Multinationals have stepped aboard circular economy. However, very little is known about the theoretical underpinning of the circular economy. The term itself is used by over 20 organizations and NGO, is understood differently and not always unambiguously. The circular economy concept has deep-rooted origins and cannot be traced back to one single date or author. Its practical applications to modern economic systems and industrial processes, however, have gained momentum since the late 1970s. CE is believed to solve the problem of limited resources of the planet; it treats every waste from companies' operation as a resource. CE introduces new business models and expands the concept of ownership (co-owning, co-sharing, etc.). Being closely linked to “cradle-to-cradle” concept, circular economy still has to find its theoretical position. Murrey et al. (2017) explore the concept of circular economy and its application in a global context. In this paper, we address circular economy from the theoretical point of view. Is it a new fad or a fundamentally new approach to doing business and consumption? For theoretical discussion, we use the concepts of technocentrism vs ecocentrism. Technocentrism (Bailey & Wilson 2009) assumes that saving environment is achieved through technology and innovation, while the followers of ecocentrism appeal to ecology paradigm, going to the roots and indigenous knowledge. We use publically available materials on CE and the reports from the companies that adopted CE thinking. We use a sample of pioneering CE firms as listed on Ellen McArthur website as a part of CE100 program. The Circular Economy 100 brings together members from across the economy to provide unique opportunities for multi-stakeholder collaboration. Member groups include corporates, governments and cities, academic institutions, emerging innovators, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and affiliates, 50 firms in total. We study how these pioneering firms address the circular economy in their annual reports. One may see that though 12 countries are represented the list is heavily dominated by the US firms (20 firms), followed by the UK (8 firms), the Netherlands (6 firms) and France (6 firms). Altogether 27 firms (57%) do not mention CE in their annual reports, while 17 firms (34%) mention CE very briefly, sometimes just stating that they participate in CE100 initiative. Out of 50 firms, only six firms have comprehensive elaborations on CE in their annual reports. Out of 50 firms that are supposed to be the leaders and pioneers in the CE 88% of firms do not address the whole concept of CE in their annual reports. Our paper contributes to the literature on sustainability by placing CE in a theoretical context

22

Implementing a Circular Curriculum: A reflection on challenges and progress in postgraduate education

Authors: Mariale Moreno and Fiona Charnley - Centre for Creative Competitive Design, School of Water, Energy and Environment. Cranfield University, UK Raffaella Villa and Adriana Encinas Oropesa - Water Science Institute, School of Water, Energy and Environment. Cranfield University, UK The move towards cleaner economic growth through the realisation of a Circular Economy (CE) has been globally acknowledged as one of the greatest industrial opportunities of our time and, by one estimate, could enable growth at four times the rate of GDP (HM Government, 2017). As we move towards a low carbon, more resource-efficient future, whole new industries will be created, and existing industries transformed, setting the foundations for future professions and prosperity. To achieve this vision, a new educational approach and curriculum is required to equip a generation of experts and leaders with the technical skills, personal capability and entrepreneurial mind-set to catalyse the transition towards a CE and address the mismatch between the labour market and the demands of a more resource-efficient economy (Morgan and Mitchell, 2015). This paper adopts an action-based approach (McKernan, 2008) to reflect upon the development and delivery of CE curricula within Cranfield University over the last four years. Cranfield is a post-graduate university in the UK with a strong track record in educating leaders in science, technology, engineering and management. In 2014 Cranfield set an ambitious vision to integrate CE education into curricula across all four schools of the university. This activity has included the development of a pan-university masters course in ‘Technology, Innovation and Management for a Circular Economy’, a series of six master classes covering the topics of Circularity in Practice, Biological Systems, Renewable Energy Systems, Circular Design, Circular Materials Innovation and Circular Entrepreneurship, the introduction of CE focused modules to existing masters programmes and over 50 industrially led CE student projects. The action-based approach has enabled iterative evaluation of progress and a reflection upon the challenges facing the delivery of a pan-university CE curriculum. These challenges are summarised as:

i) Framework: the creation of a new CE curriculum required a holistic approach to content development and delivery,

ii) Common Understanding: securing early motivation of colleagues and ‘buy-in’ at all levels is essential to achieve true multi-disciplinary working across academic fields and inter-departmental boundaries,

iii) Skills Match: it is important to align the industrial need for skills and competencies with expertise that the university is able to deliver,

iv) One size doesn’t fit all: targeting a diverse market including existing managers, future leaders, technologists and engineers, consultants and entrepreneurs requires a diversity of educational offerings,

v) Innovation in content and delivery: a CE curriculum has to reflect the rapidly changing landscape of information, knowledge and learning as well as change in motivations and lifestyles of the learner. Moving away from traditional ‘chalk and talk’ can present a significant barrier to progress.

The transition towards a CE has become a priority aspiration for governments and organisations across the globe. Educating a future generation capable of realising this ambition requires universities to work together, with each other and industry, to overcome significant challenges to ‘business as usual’ such as those mentioned above. References:

23

HM Government, 2017. The Clean Growth Strategy. Leading the way to a low carbon future. Accessed 15 March 2018 from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/clean-growth-strategy Morgan J. and Mitchell P. 2015. Opportunities to tackle Britian’s labour market challenges through growth in the circular economy. WRAP and Green Alliance. Accessed 15 March 2018 from: http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/employment-and-circular-economy McKernan, J. (2008). Curriculum and Imagination: Process Theory, Pedagogy and Action Research. London: Routledge.

24

What is the role of knowledge co-creation in transitioning to a CE? Lessons learned from an International CE Mapping initiative

Authors: Patricia Noble Gonzalez and Mariam Zabakhidze - MA Globalisation, Business and Development, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. Abstract The Circular Economy (CE) has been gaining significant momentum from major business leaders, to national governments, to academics (Lewandowski, 2015; Ghisellini, Cialani and, Ulgiati, 2015), yet only 9.1% of the world economy is ‘circular’ creating an urgent need to close the circularity loops (Circle Economy, 2018). It is argued that these challenges are catalysed by a 64% increase in population growth coupled with a 120% growth in material usage, and a 225% increase in real GDP (Lacy and Rutqvist, 2015) creating the need to shape meaningful experiences to transition to a CE. In order to achieve a circular future, many aspects of the CE need to be address and actioned. One of the stepping stones of this is the importance of knowledge cocreation (Kok, Wurpel and Ten Wolde, 2013). Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004a, 2004b, 2004c) define “Cocreation as the process by which products, services and experiences are developed jointly by companies and their stakeholders, opening up a whole new world of value”. Factors contributing to building the block of co-creation is underpinned by the process of bringing together multiple stakeholders in order to enable dialogue, to share best practices and lessons learnt to produce profound knowledge. It is evident that no single stakeholder has the understanding of all aspects of these complexities, let alone viable solutions (Gardien, Rincker and Deckers, 2016). Through a systematic review a clear gap in the literature is commonly found in the area of systems thinking, skills and capabilities that are needed to foster the process of knowledge co-creation, ultimately driving transition towards a CE (Fusion, 2011, MacArthur Foundation 2015). Currently existing gaps identified in closing the loops stem from the fragmented knowledge regarding CE initiatives established across different countries/sectors. This emphasises the importance to further investigate and support knowledge co-creation in the context of CE initiatives. In order to contribute to the literature of CE knowledge co-creation, the analysis of empirical data derived from the International Circular Economy Mapping initiative (Circular Economy Club, 2018) on 65 cities was used in conjunction with desk research. By looking at different sectors, stakeholders, CE strategies and organisations, the current opportunities and limitations of knowledge can be identified. The main findings suggest that the circular thinking is currently more focused at closing final material life cycles, rather than being integrated in other areas such as the design process or organisational models. Furthermore, more grass root organisations and SMEs/start-ups are prone to launch circular initiatives as opposed to other types of organisations. Lastly, the analysis of the data showed that more diversification in terms of CE strategies is needed to go beyond closing final loops. These lessons learnt are reinforcing the urgency of knowledge co-creation from a multi-dimensional perspective on the way to transitioning to a CE.

25

References: Circle Economy (2018). The Circularity Gap Report. [online] Available at: https://www.circle-economy.com/the-circularity-gap-report-our-world-is-only-9-circular/ Circular Economy Club. (2018). CIRCULAR ECONOMY MAPPING WEEK, BY CEC - Circular Economy Club. [online] Available at: https://www.circulareconomyclub.com/circular-economy-mapping-week/ Ellen MacArthur Foundation, (2015b). Growth Within: A Circular Economy Vision for a Competitive Europe. Isle of Wight: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Fusion, (2011). How to shift towards the circular economy from a small and medium business perspective: A guide for policy makers. University of Kent. Gardien, P., Rincker, M. and Deckers, E. (2016). Designing for the Knowledge Economy: Accelerating Breakthrough Innovation Through Co-creation. The Design Journal, 19(2), pp.283-299. Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C. and Ulgiati, S. (2015). A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of cleaner production, 1(22). John Davis, Catherine Ann Docherty & Kate Dowling (2016) Design Thinking and Innovation: Synthesising Concepts of Knowledge Co-creation in Spaces of Professional Development, The Design Journal, 19:1, 117-139, DOI: 10.1080/14606925.2016.1109205 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2016.1109205 Kok, L.; Wurpel, G.; Ten Wolde, (2013) E. Unleashing the Power of the Circular Economy; IMSA Amsterdam: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Lacy, P. and Rutqvist, J. (2015). Waste to Wealth The Circular Economy Advantage. Lewandowski, M. (2016). Designing the Business Models for Circular Economy Towards the Conceptual Framework. Sustainability. Paul Gardien, Maarten Rincker & Eva Deckers (2016) Designing for the Knowledge Economy: Accelerating Breakthrough Innovation Through Co-creation, The Design Journal, 19:2, 283-299, DOI: 10.1080/14606925.2016.1130957 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2016.1130957 Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004a). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5–14. Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004b). Co-creating unique value with customers. Strategy& Leadership, 32(3), 4–9. Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004c). The future of competition: Co-creating unique value with customers. Boston: Harvard Business Press

26

The collaboration of University of Sao Paulo and National Industry Confederation for Circular Economy Innovation in Brazil: from cases to systemic changes

Authors: A.R Ometto, W. Amaral, D, Iritani, D.A.A Dupim – University of São Paulo, Brasil S.F Monforte – National Industry Confederation, Brasil M. Schnitger – Ellen MacArthur Foundation

Abstract: Despite being ranked as the 8th world's largest economies (International Monetary Fund, 2017) the Brazilian economy, which competes internationally, presents great opportunities and challenges in order to incorporate circular solutions. Therefore, innovations at different scales will provide the means for a circular economy transition and this paper presents the systemic innovation deployed by University of Sao Paulo (USP) with industries, agribusiness and services sectors. This process has integrated the National Industry Confederation (CNI), which encompass all Brazilian industries in the bioenergy; food production; mining; fibbers production; textiles; fashion magazines; electronics; plastics; health; manufacturing; chemicals and build constructions sectors. In the process, 16 cases were identified with the support of Ellen MacArthur Foundation and classified concerning the four building blocks of circular economy: circular business model, circular design, reverse cycles and enablers and system conditions. We also explored the main challenges and opportunities in each case. The results show that circular economy have been included in both companies and associations from small to big scale, and there are some disruptive cases, mostly on start-ups and small companies, such as a start-up that mix its services offering circular design cups made from cassava instead of traditional plastic fibbers. There are also big players starting their journey towards a circular economy, especially on textile sectors: ranging from a cradle-to-cradle design on t-shirts to the development of apparels from recycled cotton reducing 220t of textile waste. Also, we identified some associations that are promoting circular economy initiatives: the Brazilian Association on Electronics Industry implementing a shared infrastructure and management system for reverse logistics; a industry state federation supporting industrial symbiosis between facilities; and the National Association of Vehicles Parts Remanufactured. In general, the Brazilian cases show succeed organizations that are collaborating and including circular economy into their business models, although challenges from the Public Policies still remains. Concluding, it was identified several opportunities in all economic sectors in Brazil, especially in the inter sectors, which can boost the economy and add value to products and services. Also, Brazilian features, such as high social and biological diversity; renewable energy; creativity; collaborative behaviour and integrated value chains of all economic sectors are some of the basis factor for spreading circular economy principles and systemic innovation processes across the country. Acknowledgements: The authors wish to thank all the National Industry Confederation and Ellen MacArthur Foundation staffs, professors of University of São Paulo, and business involved in the case studies. References: International Monetary Fund, 2017. World Economic Outlook Database October 2017 [WWW Document]. Int. Monet. Fund. URL http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2017/02/weodata/index.aspx (accessed 5.14.18).

27

The Circular Innovation in the Cooperatives’ Ecology. An exploratory case study: a network of Cooperatives in Italy

Authors: Laura Rocco - Ph.D. Student in “Business and Law” - University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy Prof. Monica Veneziani - Professor of Accounting – University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy Keywords: Circular Economy; Cooperatives; Network; Ecology; Niche. Abstract: The Circular Economy (CE) is a way of thinking business as a “synergistic relationship between ecological and economic systems” (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2012); the research focuses on the management of this relationship between the organization’s imprint and its environment at micro level. From the CE literature (Murray et al., 2017) it emerges that there is a lack of research on the social dimension of the CE and the paper aims to fill this gap studying the transition from linear to circular economy in a particular “ecology” (Abbott, 2005): the Cooperatives world. The study focuses on a network of cooperatives in Italy that employ disadvantaged subjects, who are not expected to find and maintain a workplace without a professional support. These Cooperatives operate in different sectors: in the waste sector by delivering services such as waste collection and disposal, in housing (i.e. photovoltaic), in the sector of public facilities (i.e. public space cleaning), in transport and in the food storage. In this ecology the social dimension is a crucial aspect of the organization’s environment to be considered in the CE transition. The research questions are the following.

• What are the reasons and requirements for a transition towards a CE for a Cooperative? • What are the social and cultural dimensions of the CE in a Cooperative? • What are the effects of that transition on the network of Cooperatives?

The niche construction theory (Laland and O’Brien, 2011) is applied to understand the process throughout the cooperatives in the network, towards a CE innovation, modify their ecological and economic system and how that alters the relationships in their network and outside it, creating or not a niche of “circular Cooperatives”. The case study analysis is chosen to analyse in depth why and how the process of transition took place at empirical level: the reasons (and the tools supporting these reasons, if any); the resources involved, both human and capital; the objectives, investments and related financing of the operation; the timing and the results achieved or to be achieved. Moreover, to understand the social and cultural dimensions, the project will analyse the effects deriving from the adoption of the circular model on the training of human resources, on their engagement in the transition, on the change in the Cooperative's culture and in its control systems. Finally, the research will focus on the relationships between the different Cooperatives among the network during the transition to CE (ex-ante and ex-post analysis). The case study is undergoing. The communication of this best practice and the analysis of the actual benefits obtained by this network could be a “real” call for CE transition in the Cooperative’s world, despite the risk of a new “fashion” as for the sustainability discourse in firms (Cho et al., 2015). The purpose is to design an assessment framework model that could be used as reference for other Cooperatives with same characteristics that would adopt a CE approach.

28

References Abbott, A. (2005). Linked ecologies: states and universities as environments for professions. Sociological Theory, 23, 245-274. Ellen MacArthur Foundation website: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/interactive-diagram/efficiency-vs-effectiveness, 2012. Laland, K. N., O’Brien, M. J. (2011). Niche Construction Theory: an introduction. Biol. Theory, Vol. 6, 191–202. Murray, A., Skene, K., Haynes, K. (2017). The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context. J Bus Ethics, 140, 369–380. DOI 10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2. Cho, C., Laine, M., Roberts, R. W. (2015). Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability Reporting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 40, 78–94.

29

An econometric perspective on the circular economy: Evaluating the Current Circular Economy based on US Economic Census Data.

Author: Dr. Andrew Rutgers, MBA Abstract: An aim of the Circular Economy (CE) is to reduce virgin resource extraction and waste by encouraging longer use of products through loops such as reuse, resale, sharing, recycling and other methods. Understanding the current CE, and creating metrics to quantify and observe trends is important to guide the transition to a more circular, and sustainable economy. Previous work has focused on material flows analysis or a product-up market perspective while this paper presents an alternative top-down econometric analysis using US Economic Census data. The current revenues of selected industries are analyzed for relationships to both product characteristics such as lifetime, and economic indicators such as average income. A new metric, Loop Revenue Ratio (LRR), is proposed to quantify the relative intensity of circular loops. This approach uses the NAICS industry categories and allocates the revenues reported to the census in them to appropriate industries (such as homes or cars) and CE loops (retail/new, rental, maintenance or resale) allowing the relative revenue to be assessed. It is used to demonstrate a method of predicting CE market size from product characteristics. There is, as expected, an increase in CE loop revenue with increasing product lifespan and price. For example the percentage of industry revenue in maintenance increases 0.211% for every $1000 of average product value and 1.32% for every year of average product age in service. The relative sizes of CE loops are also compared to economic indicators on a state-by-state basis. A significant negative correlation (-140LRR/Gini; R2=0.37) between maintenance LRR and Gini coefficient is observed implying more unequal states spend proportionally less on maintenance. A similar positive correlation in rental is observed (83LRR/Gini; R2=0.37) implying more equal states spend less on rental. The same census data set is examined for average job characteristics in each CE loop. Jobs in selected circular industries are shown to be generally lower paid than average, but employing more people per unit of revenue than retail; supporting the argument that greater CE could increase employment.

30

Understanding the circular economy as an autopoietic system Author: Patrick Schröeder, Research Fellow – Institute of Development Studies, UK Abstract: The circular economy concept is grounded in the study of feedback-rich, non-linear systems, particularly living systems. According to the definition by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, the circular economy aims to be both regenerative and restorative by design. This paper aims to make a contribution to the theoretical development of the circular economy by applying the concept of autopoiesis (from Greek αὐτo- (auto-), meaning 'self', and ποίησις (poiesis), meaning 'creation, production'), which is currently still missing from the theoretical circular economy discourse. The concept of autopoiesis has originally been developed by the Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela and refers to a system capable of reproducing and maintaining itself (an example is a plant which produces new cells with its own cells, or a self-replicating machine). According to Maturana and Varela, autopoiesis is the fundamental characteristic of living systems. In contrast to allopoietic systems (Greek: allos = other; poiein = to produce), where the elements are produced by something outside the system, autopoietic systems replenish their own environment and thus can become self-sustaining. We can therefore conceptualise the linear “take-make-dispose” economy as an allopoietic system which depends on constant external inputs, which necessarily depletes its environment. The question this paper aims to answer is: How can a regenerative and restorative circular economy be designed as an autopoietic system to become self-sustainable in the context of planetary boundaries? To answer this question, the paper will look at key characteristics of autopoeitic systems. The concept of autopoiesis has its origin in biology, but has subsequently been used in the fields such as sociology, communication studies, and in the field of organisational studies, explaining organisations as autonomous systems. The paper will draw on insights and applications of the concept of autopoiesis from these disciplines, which are relevant for the circular economy. In particular the use of autopoieisis in the social systems theory of Niklas Luhman is relevant for conceptualising circular economy. A central element within his theory of autopoiesis is the concept of ‘structural coupling’ which refers to the relation between systems (e.g. consumption and production systems) and their environments (e.g. the natural resource base, communities, and policy frameworks). A system is said to be structurally coupled to its environment (or other systems in its environment) if its structures are in some way or other adjusted to the structures of the environment. Another key element is ‘reproduction’, referring to the use of an element (e.g. materials, information, labour) in the network of elements, which takes place when distinct and autonomous individuals or agents are interacting and communicating in a specific environment. According to Luhmann, social systems use ‘communications’ as their particular mode of autopoietic reproduction. Their elements are communications which are recursively produced and reproduced by a network of communications and which cannot exist outside of such a network. The relevance of communications in the circular economy will be explored on various levels, including digital information technologies, social media and economic policy discourse. The paper concludes that for the circular economy to be self-sustainable in the context of the Earth’s planetary boundaries, it would need to be organised and designed to be autopoietic. In terms of transformations, we can conceptualise the shift from the linear economy to a circular economy as a shift from an allopoietic to an autopoietic system. Improved understanding of the system functions of ‘structural coupling’, ‘reproduction’ and ‘communications’ will be useful to advance the transformation to a circular economic system.

31

Making sense of complexity: Development of the “human-sphere” within the Circular Economy through Systems

Archetypes

Authors: Amir M Sharif and Ian Fouweather – School of Management, Faculty of Management and Law, University of Bradford Keywords: Circular Economy, Systems Thinking, Systems Archetype, Human-sphere Abstract: Linear and circular economic systems focus primarily upon the dynamics of production and consumption of goods and services, whilst tending to ignore the human / people element directly or explicitly. Within a Circular Economy (CE) context, the linkages between loops, cascades and flows add complexity through their interconnections. Given that a fundamental pillar of the CE is that of a systems-based perspective on the regenerative nature of technical and biological cycles, there is an opportunity to utilise Systems Archetypes (SA) to understand, make sense of and learn the interactions between actors and balancing and reinforcing elements of circularity in this vein. Mapping systems archetypes to the CE representation will provide an opportunity to visualise and address how actors and groups make and are impacted by the causality of actions, decisions, attitudes and “behaviours over time”. Such an approach will allow comparison of different levels of the CE as it impacts the human-sphere, as popularised through systems models derived by the likes of Meadows, Klein, Senge and others, in terms of models such as Limits to Growth and Tragedy of the Commons. Taken in the context of circularity and the Circular Economy (CE), the antithesis of the field has also been based upon a systems thinking approach to behavioural change across the linear economic system, seeking to bring together technological / biological aspects in terms of degenerative / regenerative, efficiency / effectiveness stocks, flows, loops and cascades. Whilst the CE literature, applications and experiences have matured and deepened these aspects with regards to production-consumption and cradle-to-cradle cycles (typically in construction, clothing or environmental products), there is a paucity of research and application in terms of the human and socio-economic context, hence the so-called “human-sphere” of connected social systems. The authors seek to extend the debate and application of CE concepts by developing a novel perspective on how systems archetypes may inform our understanding of circularity. This will be achieved via a four-step research approach. Firstly, examining and mapping existing SA patterns to the inner and outer loops of the CE representation. Secondly, employing the use of complimentary techniques from the systems thinking, soft OR and AI literatures (such as Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping, Morphological Analysis, Forecasting / Backcasting, and Agent Based Modelling as well as other emerging social science techniques such as Qualitative Comparative Analysis, QCA) in order to generate and refine explanations of archetype behaviour across the CE. Thirdly, to test scenarios and loop behaviours using a variety of CE use cases where human behavioural inputs are significant (food supply chains, humanitarian operations). Fourthly and in the spirit of CE, a continuous improvement loop from step 3 back into step 2 to constantly maintain and update such representations and explanations in order to link with emerging problem and solution areas (for example ethical / toxic leadership, diversity, gender and equality within organisations, impact of disruptive technologies across value chains, policy-making at local and central government level, urban/rural and sustainable development, conflict, peace and negotiation and achievement of UN SDGs).

32

Non-Personal Design: Lowering Acceptance Barriers of Product-Service Systems

Authors: Vivian S C Tunn, Jan P L Schoormans, Ellis A van den Hende – Delft University of Technology, Netherlands Nancy M P Bocken – Delft University of Technology, Netherlands and Lund University, Sweden Keywords: Product-service system (PSS), Non-personal design, Sustainable consumption, Consumer acceptance, Design for Sustainability, Circular Economy Abstract: Sustainability challenges such as climate change and resource scarcity have gained attention in recent years and are fueled by overconsumption (Evans and Cooper, 2010). The Circular Economy aims to overcome these sustainability challenges by cycling products and materials. Access-based product service systems (PSS) have been widely suggested as a step towards a Circular Economy; however, their adoption by consumers has been slow so far (e.g. Tukker, 2015). In this paper we introduce non-personal design as an approach to lower barriers for consumer acceptance of access-based product service systems PSS.

Building on Thornquist’s (2017) concept of unemotional design, we define non-personal as design that leads to utility-based consumer-product relationships and are acceptable for a large potential customer base. This stands in stark contrast to recent developments in product design that largely focused on personalizing products for specific consumer segments and creating emotional involvement to increase sales. However, a product in a PSS is used by different consumers successively and needs to be acceptable for all of them. For example, if many consumers participate in car sharing this could reduce the number of cars as well as the annual millage per person (Meijkamp, 1998). Wide consumer acceptance is essential to achieve sustainability gains through access-based SPSS by increasing product utilization and decreasing idle times. In literature a number of barriers for consumer adoption of SPSS have been identified. These barriers include for example uncertainty of consumers regarding PSS offerings and the provider (e.g. Rexfelt and Hiort af Ornäs, 2009), concern of experience being tainted by actions of previous consumer (Gullstrand Edbring et al., 2016), and the lack of ownership (Tukker, 2015). We explore the novel concept of non-personal design, identify barriers to consumer adoption of access-based SPSS in literature, and discuss how applying non-personal design could help overcome these. Subsequently, we present preliminary finds from consumer studies exploring the effects of non-personal products in access-based PSS. The findings of this study suggest that non-personal design can support the adoption of access-based SPSS by reducing barriers for consumers and thereby support the transition to a circular economy. References: Evans, S. and Cooper, T., 2010. Consumer influences on product life-spans. In: Cooper, T., Longer

lasting products: Alternatives to the throwaway society, pp. 319-346. Gullstrand Edbring, E., Lehner, M., Mont, O., 2016. Exploring consumer attitudes to alternative

models of consumption: motivations and barriers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 123, pp. 5-15. Meijkamp, R., 1998. Changing consumer behaviour through eco-efficient services: an empirical study

of car sharing in the Netherlands. Business Strategy and the Environment, 7, pp. 234-244. Rexfelt, O. and Hiort af Ornäs, V., 2009. Consumer acceptance of product-service systems: designing

for relative advantages and uncertainty reductions. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 20(5), pp. 674-699.

33

Thornquist, C., 2017. Unemotional Design: An Alternative Approach to Sustainable Design. Design Issues, 33(4), 83-91.

Tukker, A., 2015. Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy–a review. Journal of cleaner production, 97, pp.76-91.

34

Let me tell you a story… about the circular economy. ‘Pipework’ or ‘forest’ or… Why the choice of metaphor and graphic representation matters more than we sometimes think.

Author: Ken Webster - Head of Innovation, Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Cowes, IOW, UK Key words: Circular economy, cognitive science, metaphor and representation, materials flows, economic frameworks Abstract: If Lakoff and Johnson are right (1) that abstract concepts are largely metaphorical, it follows that since an economy is a bundle of abstract but related concepts they are also accessed through metaphor. In a circular economy the dominant metaphor appears to be one simplified loops which represent flows, much like a pipework. This would be consistent with basic circular flow of income and expenditure notions first popularised by Paul Samuelson, an engineer by training, and therefore imagining a materials flow in this way is an easily transferable concept.(2) However the argument here is that it was and is inadequate and partial and derived from an era of mechanistic science long superceded by the science of real world systems, which are overwhelmingly complex and non-linear. This paper explores the numerous and wideranging pitfalls of using misleading metaphors as well as underscoring the potential of a more complete understanding from adopting metaphors which reveal multiscale interdependent relationships as the key to understanding what a circular economy is and how to deploy it.(3) This recontextualisation, using the more appropriate metaphors around dynamic open loop systems avoids unproductive large scale + efficient vs local + informal [‘either/ or’] dualities by recognising both as contingent to an effective rather than just efficient economy(4). It leads to an affirmation of the notion that effective requires efficient but is the larger guiding principle in these systems. A recommendation is the use of available digital techniques to display these more dynamic and multiscale relationships as a way of superceding unproductive ‘pipework’ schemas. References: (1) Philosophy In The Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought, Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (2) Economics, An Introductory Analysis, Samuelson, P. (3) 4.5 Misconceptions about the Circular Economy. Webster, K. http://circulatenews.org/2017/10/4-5-misconceptions-circular-economy/ (4) Options for Managing a Systemic Bank Crisis Lietaer, B. Ulanowicz R and Goerner, S. https://journals.openedition.org/sapiens/747

35

THEME B: CE innovation, product design and new business models and strategies

• What are the best examples in disruptive technology and business models that can create and advance the CE?

• What are the challenges and best practices in design for CE? What methodologies are needed and missing?

• Embedding regenerative and restorative criteria into circular design and business model innovation

• How does CE foster profitability and broader socio-economic development? • Implications for implementing CE for economic development in developing countries • Relationship between CE and the UN SDGs? • Which organisational structures are more suited to implement circular strategies? • Which theories at the individual, organisational and institutional levels explain the

emergence of circular corporate strategies? • How can CE be integrated into existing measurement and reporting protocols/frameworks?

36

Change management in the transition of the linear model for the circular model

Authors: Ana Carolina Bertassini, Aldo Roberto Ometto, Mateus Cecílio Gerolamo - University of Sao Paulo, Brazil Keywords: Circular Economy. Change Management. Disruptive. Systemic. Abstract: The business is being affected by a series of profound changes in the 21st century, some economic, some recent, but many of them crises within society itself (WEBSTER, 2015). Therefore, one lives in a system that does not support itself with scarce resources, and the belief that production and consumption in large quantities no longer makes sense (ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUDATION, 2013). The Circular Economy (CE), like other contemporary movements, presents proposals adhering to the needs of the modern world (LINDER, SARASINI, LOON, 2017). The CE shows itself as a new economic model capable of minimizing or even solving the environmental, social and economic problems generated by the linear model of production and consumption (MAY, LUSTOSA, VINHA, 2010). The transition to a circular model will require changes in mindset and breakdown of paradigms on the part of organizations and, especially, of their leaders, who must operate in a new management logic (MCKINSEY, 2013). The change management as a concept set of principles and practices coupled with its entire management process will be increasingly relevant to assist organizations in the transition to CE. The transition to the circular model comes loaded with the need for profound changes in the way we do business, in value view mode (both by the company and by customers) and to the other stakeholders involved in a business. Therefore, the aim of this article is evaluate how the CE interferes in the change management of the organizations. To detect what are the critical factors in the change management a case in the literature was analyzed. So, this article is characterized as a theoretical contribution that identified the relation between CE and Change Management. Through the analysis of the case, it can be seen that the recurrent factors are, the necessity of disruptive leadership and systemic vision to operate in a new form of management (COUTO, 2002, MARTIN, 2014, VALCOU, 2015). The resistance to change can appear at any stage of the transition to the circular model (QUINN, 2015). The need for continuous learning is a recurring factor and requires attention, since the organization and its constituents only consider moving to the circular model if it is always progressing in terms of theoretical and practical knowledge (ARGYRIS, 1991, ANDERSEN, 2016). Organizational culture is a major factor, since companies with a well-established organizational culture around their vision tend to win over their employees to work together for common goals more quickly and effectively (AIMAN-SMITH, 2004, GATTORNA, 2006, CHRISTENSEN, 2007, BERSIN, 2015). Finally, organizational alignment is essential for all those involved in moving to the circular model to follow in the same direction, with the same objectives and expend the same efforts in pursuit of these objectives (BUONO, KERBER, 2010).

The change management is the key piece for the transition to the circular model to occur consistently. Not all companies know how to deal with the drivers of change, and having a leader who knows how to walk steadily and effectively among these factors and the challenges these factors bring is the most important.

37

References: ANDERSEN, E. Learning to Learn. Harvard Business Review, March: 2016. AIMAN-SMITH, L. What do we know about developing and sustaining a culture of innovation. The Journal of Marketing, v. 57, n. 1, p. 23-27, 2004. ARGYRIS, C. Teaching Smart People How to Learn. Harvard Business Review, May-June: 1991. BERSIN, Josh. Culture: Why it is the Hottest Topic in Business Today. Forbes. Com, March, v. 15, 2015 BUONO, Anthony F.; KERBER, Kenneth W. Creating a sustainable approach to change: Building organizational change capacity. SAM Advanced Management Journal, v. 75, n. 2, p. 4, 2010. CHRISTENSEN, Clayton M. et al. Finding the right job for your product. MIT Sloan Management Review, v. 48, n. 3, p. 38, 2007. COUTO, D.L. The Anxiety of Learning. Harvard Business Review, March: 2002. ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUDATION.Towards the circular economy – economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. J. Ind. Ecol, 2013. GATTORNA, John. Supply chains are the business. Supply Chain Management Review, v. 10, n. 6, 2006. LINDER, Marcus; SARASINI, Steven; LOON, Patricia. A Metric for Quantifying Product-Level Circularity. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2017. MARTIN, R.L. Why Smart People Struggle with Strategy. Harvard Business Review, June: 2014 MAY, Peter; LUSTOSA, Maria Cecília; VINHA, Valé. Economia do meio ambiente. Elsevier Brasil, 2010. MCKINSEY, Q. mapping the benefits of a circular economy. McKinsey&Company. 2017. Disponível em: http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/mapping-the-benefits-of-a-circular-economy?cid=other-eml-alt-mkq-mck-oth-1706&hlkid=1947a538d802408cbcf18c9c187e5ed0&hctky=1289273&hdpid=3e1aad42-b778-4dbe-afe0-2588573695bb Acesso em: 08 de agosto de 2017. QUINN, Robert E. Moments of greatness. Harvard Business Review, v. 83, n. 7/8, p. 74-83, 2005. VALCOU, M. 4 Ways to Become a Better Learner. Harvard Business Review, December: 2015. WEBSTER, Ken. The Circular Economy: A wealth of flows. Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing, 2015.

38

Developing Circular Value Chains – Towards a Systematized Approach for Developing Collaboration and Co-creation Efforts

Authors: Fenna Blomsma,, Daniela Pigosso, Tim McAloone - Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Denmark Abstract: The implementation of circular economy (CE) practices is likely to require collaborations where existing partners work together in new ways, new partnerships are established, or new entities with new roles are created. What seems certain is that no company can implement a CE by itself (Kraaijenhagen et al 2016). However, the question of how to transition from ‘take-make-use-dispose’ systems to circular value chains is not yet well understood, as CE is still an emerging field (Blomsma and Brennan 2017, Korhonen et al 2017). In order to support the transition to CE, this research aims to contribute to the consolidation of the emerging insights on the development of circular value chains, whilst offering companies’ pragmatic support in reorienting their value chains towards greater circularity. The approach followed in this work was grounded in the definition of CE by Kirchherr et al 2017, who define CE as an economic system that replaces “the ‘end-of-life’ concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling and recovering materials in production/distribution and consumption processes” and which operates in a manner that is aligned with sustainable development. In the first stage of the work, a two-step literature review was conducted with the aim to develop a framework and assemble a tool kit to support businesses with the design of circular value chains, as well as with collaborative efforts that may be required to achieve their realisation. To facilitate the synthesis of the emerging circular economy literature, the sustainable value chain literature was consulted for the identification of the main themes relevant to the development of such chains. These themes were used as a guiding framework in the second stage of the literature review, where relevant insights were extracted from the CE literature. This is to be followed by an action research stage where the framework and tool kit are used in a business environment, which will allow for its validation and further development. See Figure 01 for on overview of the project approach. Three main themes that drive sustainable value chain development were uncovered in the first step of the literature review. First, the creation of sustainable value chains may require the involvement of different types of stakeholders, ranging from supply chain participants such as customers or suppliers, to supply chain influencers such as legislative bodies, NGOs and other influencers (e.g. Franco 2017, Kortmann and Piller 2016, Li et al 2016). Second, stakeholders may be involved at different stages of the innovation life cycle. That is: they may be involved at an early stage, or later on (e.g. Romero et al 2009). The third theme concerns the capacity in which a stakeholder should be involved. Roles can range from being a mere informant to supply chain partner, and from diffusion partner to co-creator of new systems, depending on characteristics such as competitive relationship, power difference, as well as willingness and capacity to engage (e.g. Cruz et al 2008, Hawkins and Little 2011, Muller et al 2012). These themes were assumed to be the main considerations in developing circular value chains also. This presentation shares circular economy specific insights related to these themes from the second step of the literature review, progress on the assembly of the tool kit, as well as ongoing preparations for the action research stage and sector specific adaptations that are made to tailor the approach to the participating companies. This research is carried out in the context of the CIRCit1 project.

1 See: www.circitnord.com, or the abstract titled: How is the Nordic Industry transitioning towards a Circular Economy?

39

Figure 01: An overview of how CIRCit is developing a systematised approach to circular value chain development, and the expected progression made in summer 2018.

References: Barin Cruz, L. & Boehe, D.M., 2008. CSR in the global marketplace. Management Decision, 46(8),

pp.1187–1209. Blomsma, F. & Brennan, G., 2017. The Emergence of Circular Economy: A New Framing Around

Prolonging Resource Productivity. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3). Franco, M.A., 2017. Circular economy at the micro level: A dynamic view of incumbents’ struggles

and challenges in the textile industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, pp.833–845. Hawkins, D. & Little, B., 2011. Embedding collaboration through standards – part 2: the key aspects

of BS 11000. Industrial and Commercial Training, 43(4), pp.239–246. Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. & Hekkert, M., 2017. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of

114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127(October), pp.221–232. Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A. & Seppälä, J., 2018. Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations.

Ecological Economics, 143, pp.37–46. Kortmann, S. & Piller, F., 2016. Open Business Models and Closed-Loop Value Chains: Redefininf

the Firm-Consumer Relationship. California Management Review, 58(3), pp.88–109. Kraaijenhagen, C., Oppen, C. van & Bocken, N., 2016. Circular Business - Collaborate and Circulate

C. Bernasco & L. Goodchild-van Hilten, eds., Circular Collaboration. Li, Y. et al., 2016. Business innovation and government regulation for the promotion of electric vehicle

use: lessons from Shenzhen, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 134, pp.371–383. Muller, C., Vermeulen, W.J. V & Glasbergen, P., 2012. Pushing or Sharing as Value-driven Strategies

for Societal Change in Global Supply Chains: Two Case Studies in the British-South African Fresh Fruit Supply Chain. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21(2), pp.127–140.

Romero, D. et al., 2009. Towards a novel living Lab Model for sustainable innovation in the construction industry. 2009 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE), pp.1–9.

40

Buying the unknown: the role of consumer trust in providers of result-oriented product-service systems

Authors: Steven Day, Donato Masi and Janet Godsell – WMG, University of Warwick, UK Keywords: Product-service systems, consumers, trust Purpose: While a variety of strategies and technologies exist to slow and close resource flows, these are only sporadically employed as market pressures by producers make high quantity/ short lifecycle products more profitable in many cases (Cook et al., 2006). Literature on product-service systems (PSSs) posits that were ownership rights and responsibilities of physical goods used to create and deliver value to a consumer to remain with the producer, designing and maintaining goods would be incentivised, which is assumed to improve environmental performance (Tukker, 2015).

However, despite early optimism about PSSs (compare Mont, 2002), a raft of factors inhibiting consumer acceptance has since been proposed by scholars to explain why more ambitious result-oriented PSSs engendering ownership-less consumption are rare in practice. Based on a systematic review, this study discusses the role of one critical factor of PSS acceptance by consumers, which is trust. Methodology: This study utilises a systematic literature review methodology (Denyer & Tranfield, 2009) using search strings focused on consumer PSSs articles from 2000 to 2017 in Web of Science Core Collection, EBSCO Business Complete, SCOPUS, ProQuest, and EmeraldInsight, with subsequent quality appraisal and screening phases (Figure 1). Inclusion criteria focused on factors motivating or inhibiting uptake of PSS by consumers, while exclusion criteria focused on removing studies on industrial PSS, studies on organizational or operational challenges for PSS delivery, or pure design methodologies.

Figure 1 – Article selection process. Findings: The findings of this study reveal that the complexity and diversity of ownership-less result-oriented PSSs conceptualised by research and practice create new sources of risk and uncertainty for consumers (e.g. Armstrong et al., 2015; Catulli & Reed, 2017), which is compounded by low objective and subjective product knowledge due to the novelty of these products. While consumers are accustomed to meeting needs through the purchase and consumption of physical goods and thus possess relevant product evaluation heuristics, consumers are aware that such heuristics are inadequate for evaluating multi-faceted service and good bundles targeting the same need. Uncertainty about the freedom to exercise preferred use-regimes with rented or leased items, the condition of pre-used items, associated transaction costs, and others are examples of emerging concerns (Tukker, 2015).

This study posits that given the complexity and number of these concerns from both the physical

Articles from search

strings in databases

n = 2356

Removal of duplicates

Rejected

(n = 1603)

n = 753

Title and abstract

screening on subject

matter

Rejected (n = 318)

n = 565

Full text screening on subject

matter

Rejected (n = 152)

n = 95 Quality

appraisal (Scimago Q1/Q2)

Rejected (n = 188)

n = 247

41

good and service component of PSSs, companies will struggle to address them comprehensively (Rexfelt & Ornäs, 2009). Instead, it is argued that consumer trust is required to fill in the gaps until consumer product knowledge and product evaluation heuristics are more mature (compare Wang & Hazen, 2016) – trust in a provider’s benevolence and ability to conduct transactions according to the consumer’s expectation is proposed to be critical. Contribution: While companies may be able to alleviate concerns about some risk sources of result-oriented PSSs, it is argued that uptake of such PSSs by consumers will to a large degree depend on a more general trust in the provider as the sources are too manifold to be alleviated through product communication. This finding diverges from the more mechanistic view of the majority of work on PSSs, which argues that PSS uptake depends on the specifics of the PSS and its business model configuration – this secondary level of product attributes will not be considered by consumers if the sheer otherness and uncertainty of result-oriented PSSs is not disarmed by a trusted brand. References: Armstrong, C. M., Niinimäki, K., Kujala, S., Karell, E. and Lang, C. (2015), “Sustainable product-

service systems for clothing: exploring consumer perceptions of consumption alternatives in Finland”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 97, 30-39.

Catulli, M. and Reed, N. (2017), “A Personal Construct Psychology Based Investigation Into A Product Service System For Renting Pushchairs To Consumers”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 26, No. 5, 656-671.

Cook, M. B., Bhamra, T. A., & Lemon, M. (2006), “The transfer and application of Product Service Systems: from academia to UK manufacturing firms”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14, No. 17, 1455-1465.

Denyer, D. and Tranfield, D. (2009), “Producing a systematic review”, in Buchanan, D. A. and Bryman, A. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of Organizational Research Methods, SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA, 671–689.

Mont. O. K. (2002), “Clarifying the concept of product-service system”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 10, No. 3, 237-245.

Rexfelt, O., & Hiort af Ornäs, V. (2009), “Consumer acceptance of product-service systems: designing for relative advantages and uncertainty reductions”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 20, No. 5, 674-699.

Tukker, A. (2015), “Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy – a review”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 97, 76-91.

Wang, Y., & Hazen, B. T. (2016), “Consumer product knowledge and intention to purchase remanufactured products”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 181, 460-469.

42

Circular Business Models: Towards a Systematic Conceptualisation Author: Roberta De Angelis - Postdoctoral Research Fellow, University of Exeter Business School, UK If a sustainable industrial metabolism is to be attained, given finite resources, the involvement of business is vital. Yet until recently the discussion regarding a cyclical pattern of materials use has remained mainly (though not exclusively) academic, with more attention given to what needs to be done and very little on how it will be achieved. For instance, the field of Industrial Ecology, which has been in the vanguard in advancing the case for economic systems that decouple economic growth from consumption of finite natural resources, has been almost silent on the necessary socio-economic dimensions for the required transformation (Blomsma & Brennan, 2017; Sharpe & Agarwal, 2014; Wells, 2013). From 2012 onwards, the idea has reached more domains of our society under ‘the circular economy’ terminology (Jabbour et al., 2017; Schroeder et al., 2018), which gives significant attention to firms agency through business model innovation (EMF, 2015; Hopkinson et al., 2016; Jones & Comfort, 2017; Lonca et al., 2018).

Practitioners’ literature (e.g. EMF & McKinsey, 2012, 2013; EMF et al., 2015) goes little further than sketching the possible form of business models for a circular economy (CE hereafter). By contrast, the academic community is trying to advance the concept of the circular business model (CBM hereafter), finding modes of categorisation and understanding of the processes through which they emerge and are implemented (e.g. Bocken et al., 2016; Roome & Louche, 2016; Weetman, 2017). Academic engagement with the concept of the CBM is still limited though (Kirchherr et al., 2017; Lewandowski, 2016; Merli et al., 2018). Therefore, the aim of this article is to contribute to the emerging CE literature by offering a systematic conceptualisation of the CBM. A literature review based on bibliometric research method (Zupic & Cater, 2015) is used to analyse academic, practitioner and grey literature on CBMs to identify the state of the art of current research on the topic.

Results show, as is often the case with a new concept, that there is a need for more clarity in the lexicon in use since there is little consistency in the terminology concerning CBMs. Multiple and divergent constructs (e.g. CBMs elements/categories, strategies, canvases, frameworks, archetypes) are developing nearly without a common ground explicating first what a CBM exactly is, with potential negative consequences for theory building and practical implementation. The conceptualisation of the CBM, almost absent in the literature to date, is presented drawing on both academic and practitioners’ literature on business models and the CE, which to date have rather developed in silos with little cross fertilisation. By offering conceptual clarity on CBMs, this article establishes some basis for theory building in the academic literature. In addition, as business model innovation is a crucial constituent of a CE, this author’s hope is that with this work business leaders will come away with a clearer understanding of the nature and the scope of CBMs, and with some guidance for making sense of an emerging model that holds huge potentials for the future prosperity of our market-based economy and of corporations within it. References: Blomsma, F., & Brennan., G. (2017). The emergence of circular economy: A new framing around

prolonging resource productivity. Journal of Industrial Ecology, DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12603. Bocken, N., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C., & van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product design and business

model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 33, 308-320.

EMF (Ellen MacArthur Foundation). (2015). Towards a circular economy. Business rationale for an accelerated transition. Retrieved November 2016 from https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/publications/towards-a-circular-economy- business-rationale-for-an-accelerated-transition

43

EMF, & McKinsey. (2012). Towards the circular economy: Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Retrieved 2013 May from http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/business/reports

EMF, & McKinsey. (2013). Towards the circular economy: Opportunities for the consumer goods sector. Retrieved 2013 November from http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/business/reports

EMF, McKinsey, & SUN. (2015). Growth within: A circular economy vision for a competitive Europe. Retrieved 2015 July from http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/business/reports

Hopkinson, P., Zils, M., & Hawkins, P. (2016). Challenges and capabilities for scaling up circular economy business models. A change management perspective. In Ellen MacArthur Foundation (Eds.) A new dynamic 2 effective systems in a circular economy. Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing (pp. 157-176).

Jabbour, C., Jabbour, A., Sarkis, J., & Filho, M. (2017). Unlocking the circular economy through new business models based on large-scale data: An integrative framework and research agenda. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.010

Jones, P., & Comfort, D. (2017). Towards the circular economy: A commentary on corporate approaches and challenges. Journal of Public Affairs, 17, 1-5.

Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 127, 221-232.

Lewandowski, M. (2016). Designing the business models for circular economy. Towards the conceptual framework. Sustainability, 8, 1-28.

Lonca, G., Muggéo, R., Imbeault-Tétreault, H., Bernard, S., & Margni, M. (2018). Does material circularity rhyme with environmental efficiency? Case studies on used tires. Journal of Cleaner Production. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.108.

Merli, R., Preziosi, M., & Acampora, A. (2018). How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production. DOI: 10.1016/ j.jclepro.2017.12.112.

Roome, N., & Louche, C. (2016). Journeying toward business models for sustainability: A

conceptual model found inside the black box of organisational transformation. Organization & Environment 29, 11-35.

Schroeder, P., Anggraeni ,K., & Weber, U. (2018). The relevance of circular economy practices to the sustainable development goals. Journal of Industrial Ecology. DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12732

Sharpe, S., & Agarwal, R. (2014). Strengthening industrial ecology's links with business studies: Insights and potential contributions from the innovation and business models literature. Resources, 3, 362-382.

Weetman, C. (2017). A circular economy handbook for business and supply chains: repair, remake, redesign, rethink. London: KoganPage

Wells, P. (2013). Business models for sustainability. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Zupic, I., & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational

Research Methods, 18, 429-472.

44

How are the consumers being addressed on Circular Economy studies? An analysis of the literature.

Authors: Natália Rohenkohl do Canto - PhD candidate - Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Post-Graduatte Programme in Management (PPGA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. Klaus G. Grunert, Dr.oec.habil. Prof. - Aarhus University, Department of Management Aarhus, Denmark. Marcia Dutra de Barcellos, Prof. Dr. - Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Post-Graduatte Programme in Management (PPGA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil and Aarhus University (AU), Department of Management, Aarhus, Denmark.

Abstract: Circular Economy (CE) is a topic that has gained interest in the academic and practical arena. However, there are theoretical and practical issues that need to be addressed to develop the subject further. One of the most cited gaps in previous reviews (Ghisellini, Cialani, & Ulgiati, 2016; Kirchherr, Reike, & Hekkert, 2017; Merli, Preziosi, & Acampora, 2018) refers to the study of consumers, which are fundamental to the CE concept, but underexplored in the literature. The present study directs its focus to these needs, presenting the following research question: how have the consumers been studied on the CE subject? To answer this question, the main goal is to review the existing literature on consumers and CE, in order to verify the sectors, methodological approaches and theories being investigated.

To accomplish the goal, the consumer studies listed on Merli, Preziosi, and Acampora’s (2018) systematic review are analyzed, complemented by some recent consumer studies. Results indicate that consumers’ studies have been mostly conducted in Europe, followed by China and USA. This point to the need of investigating consumers in other regions, as for example the Latin America, since there are differences in countries’ mentalities that need to be addressed when circular economy models are proposed (Lakatos, Dan, Cioca, Bacali, & Ciobanu, 2016).

Besides general studies on the attitude towards CE or CE products (mainly conducted in China), the main sectors being explored refer to electrical and electronic equipments and the agri-food sector. On agri-food, researches are mainly related to food waste on consumers’ level; on electronics and automobiles, the attitudes towards reusing or buying remanufactured products/parts are explored. This results points to the opportunity of investigating consumers’ behavior in other sectors, as the garment.

Regarding the methodologies employed for studying consumers, most studies applied surveys, sometimes within case studies or combined with other data collection methods. There were also found different case studies and qualitative approaches with varied collection data methods. Experiments were the least used methodology.

About the theories in the selected studies, most studies did not explicit a specific background theory, which points to a need of future studies making this a priority, in order to have a theory-based field. The theories presented in few studies were: Practice Theory, Cue Etilization Theory, EKB model, Theory of Risk Categorization, Prospect Theory, Push–Pull–Mooring (PPM) Theory, Random Utility Theory (RUM), Theory of Perceived Risk, Theory of Perceived Benefit, Theory of Individual Differences, Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), and Theory of Socio-Technical Transitions to Sustainability.

Following to the presentation of these results, the paper concludes by debating how consumer behavior theories could be used to study the on the CE topic and proposing possibilities of future studies regarding CE and consumers.

45

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. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007 Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127(April), 221–232. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005 Lakatos, E. S., Dan, V., Cioca, L. I., Bacali, L., & Ciobanu, A. M. (2016). How supportive are Romanian consumers of the circular economy concept: A survey. Sustainability (Switzerland), 8(8). http://doi.org/10.3390/su8080789 Merli, R., Preziosi, M., & Acampora, A. (2018). How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 178, 703–722. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.112

46

Reputation, leadership and the circular economy Authors: Peter Hopkinson and William S. Harvey - University of Exeter Business School, UK Abstract: Despite the growth in popularity, the circular economy (CE) is poorly understood outside a relatively narrow group of academic, corporate and government circles. We argue that in order for there to be a step change in understanding and behaviour across society requires careful reputation management and leadership. For many stakeholders, the core CE principles and concepts needs clarifying and simplifying before individuals and organisations buy-in to its benefits. The CE movement can learn from the reputation literature. For example, there is an established literature on how organisations can build and manage their reputations among different groups (Rindova et al., 2007; Lange et al., 2011) and on how different forms of reputation impact on labour mobility decisions (Harvey and Groutsis, 2015; Harvey et al., 2018). However, there has been little work exploring how stakeholders perceive key organisational issues such as CE. This is vital because if people do not understand or accept CE as important and legitimate then this will undermine the transition. This can create stickiness (Schultz et al., 2001) which means that the reputation is difficult to change in the minds of stakeholders and can also lead to dissonance between perceptions among internal and external stakeholders (Dutton and Dukerich, 1991; Gioia et al., 2000). Importantly, CE is not exclusive to a single organisation and can be described as a reputation commons challenge that faces multiple organisations, all of whom are perceived by a broad group of stakeholders. These organisations can face reputation contagion threats from the actions or attention of a single organisation (Barnett and King, 2008). This literature has important implications for CE because rather than organisations just comparing their current and future actions to their past, they can look better and worse in relation to their competitors. This necessitates effective leadership (Trevino et al., 2000). Leaders across different sectors are able to frame the debate, influence positive thinking and behavioural change in relation to CE. Often internal and external stakeholders have little information to judge organisations, particularly in contexts of information asymmetry when organisations have more information than other groups. In such contexts, reputation is used as a proxy for how stakeholders perceive and interact with organisations. The willingness of individuals to engage with CE requires inspirational cross-boundary leadership across all facets of society, including but not limited to organisations, government, schools, universities, communities and households. If a clear and compelling vision and evidence of the value of investing in CE is not provided, or becomes blurred, then the reputation of the concept will be compromised, which will impact on the transition itself and therefore limit potential positive outcomes across all facets of business and society. Drawing on examples from a range of global organisations such as Danone, Philips and leading groups such as the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, we argue that the success and scaling of the CE and transition depends on how effectively it is perceived (reputation) as well as communicated and implemented (leadership). References: Barnett, M.L. and King, A.A. (2008). Good fences make good neighbors: a longitudinal analysis of an industry self-regulatory institution. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6): 1150-1170. Dutton, J. E. and Dukerich, J. M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 517-554. Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M. and Corley, K. G. (2000). Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 63-81. Harvey, W.S. and Groutsis, D. (2015). Reputation and talent mobility in the Asia Pacific. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 53(1), 22-40.

47

Harvey, W. S., Groutsis, D. and van den Broek, D. (2018). Intermediaries and destination reputations: explaining flows of skilled migration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(4), 644-662. Lange, D., Lee, P.M. and Dai, Y. (2011). Organizational reputation: A review. Journal of Management, 37(1): 153-185. Rindova, V. P., Petkova, A. P., & Kotha, S. (2007). Standing out: How new firms in emerging markets build reputation. Strategic Organization, 5(1), 31-70. Schultz, M., Mouritsen, J. and Gabrielsen, G. (2001). Sticky reputation: Analyzing a ranking system. Corporate Reputation Review, 4(1): 21-41. Trevino, L.K., Hartman, L.P. and Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4), 128-142.

48

User centric circular solutions and the implications for design Authors: Vicky Lofthouse and Sharon Prendeville - Loughborough Design School and Institute of Design Innovation, Loughborough University, UK Within circular economy literature and practice the dominant focus is on business-to-business models1. This means that barring a few notable exceptions 2–5 there are few business-to-consumer examples. There are many reasons why this sector warrants further exploration, such as opportunities for innovation, changing regulatory landscape and the need to address societal overconsumption. Yet, the complexity of users6 and the globalised nature of consumer goods, means that this is challenging. As such this is an important and under researched area to investigate. Currently technological approaches (e.g. 'biocycle', 'technocycle') and solutions (e.g. renewable energies, product sensors) that emphasise codified innovation management frameworks on production are dominant 7,8. This technocentric framing is reminiscent of the early days of ‘ecodesign’, which also focused on (material and energy) resource efficiency with limited reflection on the social. However, within the field of ecodesign9 and the broader field of innovation the need to consider people is well-established9 and thus focusing on the duality of human and technological aspects of innovation is necessary. Design places human experiences at the core of its practices10 and this is acknowledged as an important starting point for meaningful innovation11. It is at this intersection with people that design is predominantly oriented. Designers are recognised as having the skills to understand the user, influence values, attitudes and perceived user needs6, which some suggest means that designers are well positioned to consider culturally dominant value systems12. Addressing a culture of consumerism where products are ‘prematurely aged’13 requires changes in consumer behaviours and culture14 suggesting there is value in drawing on design skills for the development of solutions for the circular economy. However, up to now, within the circular economy discussion design tends to be considered solely as a means for facilitating product life-extension (through durable design, modular upgrades, repair, design for maintenance etc.). The authors argue that there is a need for a more profound consideration of people in both the research activity and practical implementation of the circular economy. A much greater understanding of users’ wants, desires and values is required, and these lessons need to be incorporated from the outset into research agendas, theories, frameworks and business models. A widespread move to the circular economy has the potential to have dramatic implications for design education and practice. For example, an increased focus on servitisation (inherent in the circular economy literature) will require a greater understanding of how to create high-end services15 that users will want to engage with. Designing for multiple use life cycles is more complex than for traditional business models and requires ‘different configurations’ for multiple sets of users16. Additionally, where the strategy of product longevity is pursued, designers will need to be aware of ‘user mobility’17 (where users may move between demographic brackets over the lifetime of a product, for example from ‘Student life’ to ‘Career climbers’ to ‘Successful suburbs’18) and learn how to create a single product or service which responds to shifting demographic profiles across the product/service lifetime. We believe that changing the way that the circular economy is framed so that it is more inclusive of people and their behaviours would open up a broader and more nuanced debate on the role of design within a multitude of possible circular economy futures. References 1. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Case studies [Internet]. Ellen MacArthur Foundation website. 2017 [cited

2017 Nov 15]. Available from: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies 2. Islabikes. Imagine project [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Jun 20]. Available from:

www.islabikes.co.uk/imagineproject 3. HP. HP Instant Ink [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2011 Jul 20]. Available from:

https://instantink.hpconnected.com/uk/en?jumpID=ps_rjhkn2ac8q 4. Nudie jeans. Nudie Jeans [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Dec 1]. Available from: www.nudiejeans.com 5. Open Desk. Furniture designed for inspiring work places [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Jun 20]. Available

from: www.opendesk.cc

49

6. Vezzoli CA, Manzini E. Design for environmental sustainability. Springer Science & Business Media; 2008.

7. Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S. A review on circular economy : the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J Clean Prod [Internet]. 2015; Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007

8. Lieder M, Rashid A. Towards circular economy implementation: A comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. J Clean Prod [Internet]. 2016;115:36–51. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.042

9. Wever R, Van Kuijk J, Boks C. User-centred design for sustainable behaviour. [cited 2018 Mar 15]; Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/19397030802166205?needAccess=true

10. Dunne D. User-centred design and design centred business schools. In: The Handbook of Design Management. First. Oxford: Berg; 2011. p. 128–43.

11. von Hippel E. The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process. Res Policy. 1976;5:212–39.

12. Wahl DC, Baxter S. The Designer’s Role in Facilitating Sustainable Solutions. Des Issues [Internet]. 2008;24:72–83. Available from: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/desi.2008.24.2.72

13. Crocker R. Unmaking waste. In: Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Product Design [Internet]. 2017. p. 250–65. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85022077920&doi=10.4324%2F9781315693309&partnerID=40&md5=f6e40812dd6e964ad14cfbf2a7ceb015

14. Cooper T. Which Way to Turn? Product longevity and business dilemmas in the circular economy. In: Chapman J, editor. Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Product Design [Internet]. Abingdon, UK: Routledge; 2017. p. 405–22. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85021912203&doi=10.4324%2F9781315693309&partnerID=40&md5=67811d68492af37e5f5289cf37b9c5b0

15. Vogtlander JG, Scheepens AE, Bocken NMP, Peck D. Combined analyses of costs, market value and eco-costs in circular business models: eco-efficient value creation in remanufacturing. J Remanufacturing [Internet]. 2017;7. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85025813017&doi=10.1007%2Fs13243-017-0031-9&partnerID=40&md5=800365c32dc488d4bdaa6c4536f0f4d6

16. Nußholz JLK. Circular business models: Defining a concept and framing an emerging research field. Sustain [Internet]. 2017;9. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85031029649&doi=10.3390%2Fsu9101810&partnerID=40&md5=4e0638bee817b8cd7aa8bcd497b5ab5d

17. Atlason RS, Giacalone D, Parajuly K. Product design in the circular economy: Users’ perception of end-of-life scenarios for electrical and electronic appliances. J Clean Prod [Internet]. 2017;168:1059–69. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85030663413&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jclepro.2017.09.082&partnerID=40&md5=67d6b5129abc6686b58ffaab8ff37d27

18. CACI Limited. The Acorn User Guide - The Consumer Classification. London; 2014.

50

Sustainable wealth creation based on disruptive, systemic and circular innovation, for emerging countries.

Author: C. Scheel - EGADE Business School, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico Abstract: The current excessive growth and globalization presents most innovators with a new dilemma: Invest in sustainable long-term projects with low economic returns or innovate with short-term incremental production projects and negotiate the environmental harm caused by an excessive industrialization (Jackson, 2009) (Scheel, 2016).

The conventional business paradigms, short term public policies and isolated social programs, are insufficient to solve sustainable growth; it is necessary to go beyond common practices, and adopt a systemic innovation approach, capable of recuperating the resilience of the planet and simultaneously producing increasing economic returns for the industrial engines of the regions, mainly for emerging countries (Scheel and Vasquez, 2013).

In order to arrive to an appropriate approach to create sustainable wealth with a holistic vision, the SWIT (Sustainable Wealth creation based on Innovation and Technology) framework has been designed. It is a system-centred innovation framework capable of leveraging the enabling conditions for creating and sharing value through the application of circular economy to linear production chains, residues, wastes and obsolete products, creating self-organized sustainable communities (Scheel and Vasquez, 2013; Scheel 2016; Senge et al., 2015) around the economic development poles of a region.

SWIT acts as a circular sharing value system capable of articulating resources, processes, and flows, to create and distribute economic wealth, to leverage social development and to recover a depleted environment, all under a viable and competitive economic framework.

The SWIT framework has been developed around three levels of economic and environmental activities (Scheel, 2016). A Product-residues value chain level, where the circularization of linear product chains occur, based on a zero-value residue (o-emissions) industrial ecology system (ZRIES) approach, (Chertow, 2007, (McDonough, W and Braungart, M, 2010). A cluster level, through the assembling of a regional circular value eco-system (CVES) designed to articulate the synergies of a cluster of multiple ZRIES businesses within a region, with a common goal to create self-sustainable benefits for all inhabitants of a regional community; and at Regional level, where a network of sharing value systems (SVS) is capable of providing the enabling conditions to articulate: resources, technologies, policies, infrastructure, resource allocation (holistic) management, synergies and inclusive governance; with all stakeholders of impact on the social, the environmental and the economic activities of a region. In order to make this framework possible, we have designed the DiSC (disruptive, systemic and circular) innovation approach program, which is the platform designed to create a new system oriented culture, as well as circular practices needed to develop and implement the SWIT framework on a region. Fig 1 shows the sequence of the topics that have been developed to create a systemic culture, and to articulate the circular economy principles to design and implement circular economy business models.

51

Fig. 1. The nine modules of the DiSC Innovation Program, designed to implement the SWIT framework and circularize firms, industries and communities of a region. The program consists of nine modules that manage topics as: from linear chains to networks of circular value systems; from waste to wealth; from conventional advantages to circular competitive advantages; from usual business strategies to sustainable strategies; as well as how to decouple economic growth from the environmental damage and natural resource productivity performance of a region. This program has been designed specially for developing countries where the enabling conditions are not well determined and/or not appropriated, in order to create a think tank with the capacities to: identify relevant cases, create opportunities, capabilities, enabling conditions, synergies and formulate strategies and governance; for the design of competitive sustainable businesses, aligned with a natural resources increasing returns, and the regeneration of natural resources within a region. In this paper we present the SWIT framework, its benefits and threats, and the DiSC Innovation Program, that has been designed to train entrepreneurs, businessmen, consultants, policy makers and academic instructors, for the creation of a critical mass of practitioners and thinkers focused on the achievement of sustainable wealth for firms and regions, based on a circular sharing value ecosystem, for developing countries. We will present multiple cases of circularity on firms, industries and regions that have been applied in the Latin-American region.

Created by C. Scheel 2015, updated 2017, 2018

THE GREAT CHALLENGE OF ECONOMIC GROWTH (Being sustainable AND economically viable)REASONS WHY WE NEED A CHANGE OF PARADIGMDISRUPTIVE INNOVATION TRENDSNew approach: SUSTAINABILITY BY DESIGN

1. FROM CONVENTIONAL TO DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION

WHY CONVENTIONAL INNOVATION MUST TURN TO SYSTEM CENTERED INNOVATION?SYSTEMIC THINKING APPROACH ROAD MAPHOW TO SOLVE THE DYNAMICS OF A CIRCULAR COMPLEX MODELEVOLUTION OF INDUSTRIAL MODELS, FROM LINEAR CHAINS TO CIRCULAR VALUE SYSTEMS

2. FROM REDUCCIONISTIC TO SYSTEMIC INNOVATION (from islands to archipelagoes)

WHY THE LINEAR MODEL MUST CHANGE?CIRCULAR THINKING APPROACH, AN ALTERNATIVE TO LIMITS TO GROWTH? THE NEW OPPORTUNITIES OF CIRCULARIZE A LINEAR CHAINS TO CIRCULAR VALUE SYSTEMS. NEW QUESTIONS EMERGE, IS CE NECESSARY?

3. FROM LINEAR CHAINS TO CIRCULAR SYSTEMS

DESIGN MENTAL MODELS for the dynamics of CE characteristicsMODELING THE SYSTEM DYNAMICS OF THE CIRCULAR PHENOMENA

4. MODELING THE DYNAMICS OF CIRCULAR VALUE SYSTEMS

ReSOLVE PRINCIPLES FOR CREATING CIRCULAR VALUE BEHAVIORS.CASES AND STRUCTURESTRANSLATING VALUE TO THE TRIAD OF STAKEHOLD-ERS, INTO A VALUE PROPOSITION FOR THE TREE DIMENSIONS: ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIETY.

5. CREATING VALUE THROUGH CIRCULAR DESIGN

CIRCULAR ECONOMY BUSINESS MODELS DESIGN ROAD MAP

THE CIRCULAR CANVAS MODEL, EMERGING VALUE FOR THE TRIAD OF STAKEHOLDERS

HOW TO TURN SUSTAINABLE INITIATIVES INTO CE BUSINESS MODELS

HOW TRANSFORM THE ReSOLVE principles into CE MODELS (PaS, C2C, SHARED SERVICES, ETC)

6. CREATION OF CIRCULAR ECONOMY BUSINESS MODELS

BUILDING BLOCKS OF CEDESIGN (cornerstone) of evolution of linear value chains into CIRCULAR VALUE systems

BUSINESS ADVANTAGES FROM A CE PERSPECTIVE

HOW DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY ENABLES CE AND ACHIEVE CIRCULAR SHARED COMPETITIVE VALUE ADVANTAGES

CREATING THE DIFFERENTIATION ADVANTAGE OF CEFROM WASTE TO WEALTH BUSINESS GENERATION (ZRIES: Zero-waste IE System): W2W processes

7. HOW "GREEN or SUSTAINABLE" COMPANIES CREATE "CIRCULAR" COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES

FORMULATING THE STRATEGY TO MAKE THE TRANSITION

THE CHALLENGE OF CE PROJECTS, HOW TO MAKE THEM ECONOMICALLY VIABLE AND COMPETITIVE

CREATING THE ENABLING CONDITIONS TO DELIVER A SUCCESSFUL CE PROJECT (Systemic leadership)

MEASURING THE EFFECTS (RISK, THREATS) AND BENEFITS OF CIRCULARITY OF A NO USUAL BUSINESS.

8. IMPLEMENTATION OF CIRCULAR VALUE SYSTEMS STRATEGIES

THE INTEGRATED SWIT STRATEGY: CREATING A SHARING VALUE SYSTEM SOCIETY

9. HOW CE CREATES SUSTAINABLE WEALTH FROM THE DECOUPLING OF ECONOMIC GROWTH FROM THE RESOURCE PRODUCTIVITY PERFORMANCE

DISRUPTIVE, SYSTEMIC,CIRCULAR INNOVATION FOR A SUSTAINABLE

SOCIETY (PROGRAM)

DISRUPTIVE, SYSTEMIC,CIRCULAR INNOVATION FOR A SUSTAINABLE SOCIETY (PROGRAM) - 5/6/18 - Mindjet

52

References: 1. Aguiñaga, E; Henriques I.; Scheel C; Scheel A. (2017) Building Resilience: A Self-sustainable

Community Approach to the Triple Bottom Line. Journal of Cleaner Production, Issue 173, pp 186-196, (P.V: Jan 2018, EV: Jan, 2017)

2. Benyus, J. M., 1997. Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature. New York: William Morrow and Co.

3. Brockington, D., 2012. A radically conservative vision: The challenge of UNEP’s towards a green economy. Dev. and Chang. 43, 409-422.

4. Chertow, M. R., 2007. Uncovering industrial symbiosis. J. Industrial Ecology, 11, 11-31. 5. De Kemmeter, M., 2013. New growth in the new economy: New measuring - new cooperation

Resources Systemics. Retrieved September 10, 2014 from: http://uhdr.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/new-growth-in-the-new-economy-resources-systemics.pdf

6. Ellen MacArthur Foundation Ed., 2013. A New Dynamic Effective Business in Circular Economy. Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing. UK. Retrieved from: http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/business/reports/ce2013

7. Jackson, T., 2009. Prosperity without Growth: Economics for a Finite Planet. Earthscan, London. 8. Korhonen, J., 2001. Ecosystem principles for an industrial ecosystem. Journal of Cleaner

Production. 9(3), 253–259. 9. Kraaijenhagen, C., van Oppen, Bocken N.; 2016. Circular Business. Ecodrukkers. 10. Lacy, P. Rutqvist, J., 2015. Waste to Wealth. Palgrave MacMillan. UK. 11. Lyle, J., 1996. Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development. New York.; J. Wiley. 12. McDonough, W. Braungart, M., 2010. Upcycling: Beyond sustainability. New York: North Point

Press. 13. Pauli, G., 2010. Blue Economy: 10 years, 100 innovations, 100 million jobs. New Mexico, USA:

Paradigm Publications. 14. Scheel, C., Vasquez, M., 2013. Regional wealth creation by leveraging residues and waste. Vie

et Science L'entreprise 194, 72-92. 15. Scheel, C., Aguiñaga, E. 2015. A systemic approach to innovation: Breaking the rules of

conventional regional development: the cases of Mexico, Colombia, India and Brazil. In International Cases on Innovation, Knowledge and Technology Transfer by D. Trzmielak and D.V. Gibson (eds.), pp. 95-113.

16. Scheel, C., (2016). Beyond sustainability. Transforming industrial zero-valued residues into increasing economic returns. Journal of Cleaner Production. 131(9), May. 376-386.

17. Senge, P., 2010. The Necessary Revolution: How Individuals and Organizations Are Working Together to Create a Sustainable World. New York: Doubleday.

18. Senge P, Hamilton H, Kania, J., 2015. The dawn of system leadership. Stanford Social Innovation Review. 27-33.

19. Stahel, W., 2010. The Performance Economy. UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 20. UNEP., 2013. Retrieved from:

http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/AboutGEI/WhatisGEI/tabid/29784/ 21. Webster, K., 2015. The Circular Economy a Wealth of Flows. UK: Ellen McArthur Foundation

Publishing

53

The Role of Disruptive Technology for a Circular Economy: Value Added by Data-Driven Intelligence

Authors: Uthayasankar Sivarajah and Jyoti Mishra - School of Management, Faculty of Management and Law, University of Bradford, UK Abstract: Industrial revolution has undoubtedly led to the mass production of goods enabled by new manufacturing methods resulting in a flood of products with high availability and low costs (Lieder and Rashid, 2016). Consequently, this has resulted in significant societal challenges such as rapid growth in emissions to environment, waste generation and landfill. Against this backdrop, the concept of circular economy (CE) has become a notable public and scholarly debate as a fundamental notion to improve resource efficiency by eliminating the concept of waste and lead to a shift away from the linear make-use-dispose model (Korhonen et al., 2018; Despeisse et al., 2017). Extant literature highlights CE from an industrial ecology, social sciences and product design view point (Urbinati et al., 2017; Heyes et al., 2017). However, there have been very few scholarly contributions that have focused on the role of disruptive technologies for a circular economy despite the Ellen McArthur Foundation acknowledging the role of digital technologies and intelligent assets and connectivity in the proliferation of CE (Morlet et al., 2016; Despeisse et al., 2017). This research aims to close this gap by exploring and evaluating the application of disruptive technologies, such as Internet of Things (IoT) and big data, to support the advancement of CE. In particular, the research seeks to explore the overreaching question of how data-driven intelligence gathered from IoT based devices could deliver added value for companies, users and society as whole for a CE? Through case studies, this study aims to explore if data-driven intelligence through IoT sensors could enable reduction of manufacturing waste by enabling a more targeted delivery of customised products that specify user needs in different context across the product/service lifecycle. For example, the French tyre company Michelin looked at ways to add sensors to its tyres, to understand wear over time (Morlet et al., 2016). This meant that customers could learn when to replace or rotate them according to their specific driving conditions resulting in cost savings and improving safety. On the other hand, for the company, the usage data of tyres meant that it could help shift its business model from selling tyres to leasing them and moving to product-service systems. In doing so, the company now has financial interest in using materials and processes that make recycling old tyres as efficient as possible. Consequently, understanding how disruptive technologies such as IoT coupled with big data analytics should play an important role for businesses in the transition towards CE by optimizing forward material flows and enabling reverse material flows. The prospect of implementation of closed-loop solutions harnessed by data-driven intelligence captured through IoT devices should not only improve the efficiency of the economy through new business opportunities but also seek to have a significant impact on society. References: Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., & Seppälä, J. (2018). Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecological economics, 143, 37-46. Despeisse, M., Baumers, M., Brown, P., Charnley, F., Ford, S. J., Garmulewicz, A., ... & Rowley, J. (2017). Unlocking value for a circular economy through 3D printing: A research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 115, 75-84. Heyes, G., Sharmina, M., Mendoza, J. M. F., Gallego-Schmid, A., & Azapagic, A. (2017). Developing and implementing circular economy business models in service-oriented technology companies. Journal of Cleaner Production. Urbinati, A., Chiaroni, D., & Chiesa, V. (2017). Towards a new taxonomy of circular economy business models. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 487-498. Lieder, M., & Rashid, A. (2016). Towards circular economy implementation: a comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 115, 36-51.

54

Morlet, A., Blériot, J., Opsomer, R., Linder, M., Henggeler, A., Bluhm, A., & Carrera, A. (2016). Intelligent Assets: Unlocking the Circular Economy Potential. Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

55

Designing circular product service systems: A content analysis of master graduation projects Authors: Sumter D.X, Bakker C.A and Balkenede A.R - Design for Circular Economy research group. Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology. The Netherlands Keywords: Design education; design competency; circular economy; circular product-service-systems; product design process Background: Research suggested that product design is an important supporting factor in the transition towards a circular economy (CE). De los Rios and Charnley (2016) state that ‘aside from performing a primary function, designers must ensure that products are suitable for multiple lifecycles and continue to appeal to potential consumers’ (p.117). However, while design education about sustainability is important, it is insufficiently embedded in the design curricula. Designers are not sufficiently trained to consider sustainability and circular economy principles as core elements in their design activities (Andrews, 2015). Hence, this study aims to identify competencies for circular design. Methods: We built a database of 88 CE Master Graduation projects. Reports were collected from the Education repository from the Delft University of Technology. The database only includes projects that were conducted at the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering with a focus on CE or subdomains within the CE field, such as cradle to cradle. The projects in the database are conducted between January 2010 and October 2017. We performed a qualitative content analysis (Mayring, 2000) on the database. First, we categorized the projects based on the type of output (e.g., tangible product, product service system (PSS), service or strategy). Next, we looked at the design process, the methods that were used and the challenges that emerged. Based on this we identified the competencies for circular design.

Preliminary Findings: We found that, based on the current analysis of 46 of 88 graduation project, 37% of the students (re)designed tangible products. Next, we detect that students who developed a PSS (22%) put an

Figure 1 Collection of covers from CE Master graduation projects

56

emphasis on either the embodiment of the product or the service rather than developing a unified circular PSS. Examples of this are respectively (1) designing an episodic storybook and actions items to help children pass on their toys once they have outgrown them but failing to design the system for collecting and redistributing the toys and (2) designing the service that a matrass manufacturer could offer on the B2B market but failing to specify the functional and material properties for the matrass itself. Lastly, we found that in particular students who developed a PSS tended to adapt the design process models. They used theory from domains, such as business model design, user-centered design and, service design, and incorporated additional phases and considerations in the design process. For example, one of the students used the Methodology for PSS (MEPPS) to find tools that could be used in the design process. Discussion: Our preliminary findings indicate that the design students specifically have difficulties with designing PSSs. This could point towards a possible misconception of what a PSS is and how to design one. Yet, product service systems (PSSs), in particular, are seen as potentially beneficial for a CE, because they can minimize material throughput (Tukker, 2015). The main competency that we derived from our analysis is the ability to develop both the product and the associated service system simultaneously with the overarching aim of recovering material resources. Based on this we envision that the traditional design process models that are taught within industrial design education, such as the Basic Design Cycle (Roozenburg and Eekels, 1995) need to be altered. In addition, we foresee a need to conceptualize how systems thinking could be applied to benefit circular PSS design and modify methods accordingly. Hence, there is a need to further explore what additional competencies designing circular PSSs requires. This paper will give a detailed overview of the kinds of competencies needed for designing circular PSSs.

REFERENCES: Andrews, D. (2015). The circular economy, design thinking and education for sustainability. Local Economy, 30(3), 305-315. De Los Rios, I.C., & Charnley, F.J.S. (2016). Skill and capabilities for a sustainable and circular economy: The changing role of design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 160(2017), 109-122. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Social Research, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/rt/printerFriendly/1089/2385 Roozenburg, N. F. M., Eekels, J. (1995). Product design: fundamentals and methods (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Tukker, A. (2015). Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy – A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97(2015), 76-91.

57

Overcoming Complex Product End-of-Life Management Challenges to Support the Circular Economy

Authors: Edwin Tam, PhD, PEng, Associate Professor and Susan-Sawyer-Beaulieu, PhD, PEng, Research Associate, Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Windsor, Canada Abstract: The circular economy offers an alternative vision for recovering materials and returning them to productivity as part of a sustainable future. This promise is especially appealing when facing the significant problem of plastic waste: of the 8.3B tonnes of plastic manufactured since the 1950s, only 23% has been recycled [WRWCanada 2018]. But in order to fulfill the circular economy, waste materials need to be efficiently and effectively returned to production. While much of the prior, popular efforts target the recycling of simple consumer products, such as plastic bags and beverage bottles, there are arguably greater challenges when considering multiple plastics from complex consumer products, such as electronics or automobiles that have reached their end-of-life (EoL). For example, industry itself recognizes that automotive plastic recycling is in its infancy [Hardcastle 2016]. The recent ban on waste plastics by China only adds to the uncertainty and concerns about recycling and recovery efforts [Bula 2018]. Therefore, to fully realize the circular economy, several significant issues must be addressed comprehensively at the critical EoL stage for complex products. Improving Purity of Materials Recovered from Complex Products Extracting waste plastics from other materials continues to present challenges, particularly when attempting to model the breakage of waste materials after being crushed or shredded to improve the separation process [Jekel and Tam 2007]. Complex products further feature multiple plastics joined through glue or welds. This innovation has greatly improved manufacturing flexibility and versatility, reducing the need for additional materials. However, such connections introduce co-joined plastics that renders separating the plastics back into their original plastics problematic. This reduces the level of purity that can be achieved from recovered materials, and their subsequent usability and marketability for plastics recycling [Barsha and Tam 2009]. Optimizing Materials Recovery Operations The operational challenges in recovering EoL materials from complex products are well illustrated in the automotive salvage industry as a case study. Canadian and US automotive recycling industries recover up to 86% of the parts and materials from end-of-life vehicles (ELV) via direct parts reuse, parts remanufacturing and reuse, and materials recycling, or used for fuel or energy recovery; as little as 14% is landfilled [Sawyer-Beaulieu 2009; Duranceau and Sawyer-Beaulieu 2011]. However, the majority of remaining materials are plastics that are landfilled. The efforts to decrease the landfilled portion of ELV-derived materials by integrating circular economy practices are hindered by:

● Industry privacy or reluctance. ● Legislation affecting how recyclable materials may be managed, e.g. presence of PCBs,

lead, mercury, or other heavy metals in shredder residue [Sawyer-Beaulieu 2009; Sakai et al. 2014].

● Limitations of existing post-shredder residue processing technology and practices to recover and segregate materials into pure material streams [Sakai et al. 2014; Santinia et al. 2010; Tian and Chen 2014].

● Difficulties establishing supply chains between recyclate generators and the end-users. ● Design choices that impede actual 3Rs (e.g., flame retardants in the plastics) [Petty et al.

2017]. Moreover, these issues often apply to recovering other consumer and industrial product wastes. This presentation details significant issues that must be addressed and offer insights from engineering and systems design perspectives to more effectively recover waste plastics from complex products in order to support the circular economy.

58

References: Barsha N., Tam E. 2009. The potential effects of alternative comminution methods for enhancing recycling from plastic products. A&WMA 102nd Annual Conference and Exhibition, June 16-19, 2009, Detroit, Michigan, USA. Bula, F. 2018. China’s tough new recycling standards leaving Canadian municipalities in a bind. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/chinese-ban-on-foreign-recyclables-leaving-some-canadian-cities-in-the-lurch/article37536117/ Accessed 2018Apr05. Duranceau C., Sawyer-Beaulieu S. 2011. Vehicle Recycling, Reuse, and Recovery: Material Disposition from Current End-of-Life Vehicles, SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-1151, 13 pgs, (April). Hardcastle, J.L. 2016. How to increase automotive plastics recycling. https://www.environmentalleader.com/2016/04/how-to-increase-automotive-plastics-recycling. Accessed 2018Apr05. Jekel L., Tam E. 2007. Plastics waste processing: communition size distribution and prediction. ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering. 2007:245-254. Petty, S., D. Lucas, O. Keen, R. Luedeka, M. Schlummer, R. Weber, J. Vijgen, M. Barlaz, R. Yazdani, B. Clark, L. Knudtson, J. Rhodes, B. Riise, S. Bellur, A. Blum, M.J. Castaldi, M. Diamond, G. Gallagher, M. Johnson, C. Koshland, A. Lindeman, B. Martel, Gretta Goldenman, T.L. Matz, W. Sullens, L. Wong, T. Allen, A.P. Casanova, C. Hamaji, M. Johnson and J.C. Warner. 2017. Methods of Responsibly Managing End-of-Life Foams and Plastics Containing Flame Retardants, Green Science Policy Institute, 91 pp., (March). Sakai, S., H. Yoshida, J. Hiratsuka, C. Vandecasteele, R. Kohlmeyer, V. S. Rotter, F. Passarini, A. Santini, M. Peeler, J. Li, G.-J. Oh; N. K. Chi, L. Bastian, S. Moore, N. Kajiwara, H. Takigami, T. Itai, S. Takahashi, S. Tanabe, K. Tomoda, T. Hirakawa, Y. Hirai, M. Asari , and J. Yano. 2014. An international comparative study of end-of-life vehicle (ELV) recycling systems. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 16(1):1-20. Santinia, A., C. Herrmannb, F. Passarinia, I. Vassuraa, T. Lugerb, L. Morsellia. 2010. Assessment of Ecodesign potential in reaching new recycling targets. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 54(12):1128-1134. Sawyer-Beaulieu, S. 2009. Gate-to-Gate Life Cycle Inventory Assessment of North American End-of-Life Vehicle Management Processes, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario. Tian, J., M. Chen. 2014. Sustainable design for automotive products: Dismantling and recycling of end-of-life vehicles. 34(2):458-467. WRWCanada.com. Plastic Facts. http://wrwcanada.com/en/get-involved/resources/plastics-themed-resources/plastic-facts. Accessed 2018Apr05.

59

Best practices for start-ups applying Circular Economy principles Insights from UK Start-ups

Author: Alisha Tudladhar - University of Bath, UK Keywords: Circular Economy, drivers, enablers, challenges, best practices, circular economy framework, motivations. Abstract: The current ‘linear’ economic system based on the principles of “take, make, waste” is unsustainable and incompatible with economic development aspirations. As a solution, the concept of Circular Economy (CE) that is more regenerative and restorative by design and intention has emerged. Despite its prevalence in recent years, management scholars have not fully discussed the implementation of CE in start-ups. Start-ups are becoming a world-wide trend because of their ability to innovate, drive job growth, build communities and improve work culture which thus impacts people and the economy. Despite the plethora of start-ups applying CE principles, management scholars have yet to address this important gap in knowledge. In the UK, organizations such as Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) are actively involved in mobilizing and educating large corporations to be part of their CE100 network with companies such as Google, H&M, Microsoft, Nike, etc. Large corporations often have the resources, budget and knowledge to pivot or start new practices, however, for start-ups this can be a challenge as their resource pool of funds and knowledge is often limited. CE can be an unknown territory for many practioners. Therefore, this paper aims to identify the best CE practices among start-ups. Using both primary and secondary data, this paper aims to deliver its findings by conducting an empirical study on start-ups in the UK with CE principles embedded in their business models to find the best practices and real-life examples that can create and advance CE. It is hoped that this paper will inform practioners and academics about the best CE practices applied by businesses.

References: Bateman, N. (2005) ‘Sustainability: the elusive element of process improvement’, International

Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(3), pp. 261–276. doi: 10.1108/01443570510581862.

Bell, J. (2014) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

Blomsma, F. and Brennan, G. (2017) ‘The Emergence of Circular Economy: A New Framing Around Prolonging Resource Productivity’, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3), pp. 603–614. doi: 10.1111/jiec.12603.

Bocken, N. M. P. et al. (2016) ‘Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy’, Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 33(5), pp. 308–320. doi: 10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124.

Boland, A., Cherry, M. G. and Dickson, R. (2014) Doing a systematic review: a student’s guide, Igarss 2014. doi: 10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2.

Brinkmann, S. (2018) ‘The Interview’, in The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (fifth edition), pp. 577–599. Available at: http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=X85J8ipMpZEC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=the+sage+handbook+of+qualitative+research&ots=D2JdP4P2ht&sig=2yyX34kiOQECsXb5-7QtsIU6rq8.

Bryman & Bell (2015) ‘Business Research Methods - Alan Bryman, Emma Bell - Google Books’, in Business Research Method , p. 777. Available at: https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=l7u6BwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=(Bryman+%26+Bell,+2015)&ots=AvRktdJUQl&sig=i1Iz0rJst1NPN8lSy7flARbOW6k&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=(Bryman %26 Bell%2C 2015)&f=false.

60

Collis, J. and Hussey, R. (2014) Business research : a practical guide for undergraduate and postgraduate students. Fourth edi. Basingstoke: Basingstoke : Palgrave.

Creswell, J. W. (2014) Research design : qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Fourth edi. Los Angeles, Calif.: Los Angeles, Calif. : SAGE.

D’Amato, D. et al. (2017) ‘Green, circular, bio economy: A comparative analysis of sustainability avenues’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, pp. 716–734. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.053.

Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (2017) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Fifth edit. Los Angeles: Los Angeles : SAGE.

Dimitrov, R. S. (2010) ‘Inside UN climate change negotiations: The Copenhagen conference’, Review of policy research, 27(6), pp. 795–821.

Egan-Wyer, C., Muhr, S. L. and Rehn, A. (2018) ‘On startups and doublethink–resistance and conformity in negotiating the meaning of entrepreneurship’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 30(1–2), pp. 58–80. doi: 10.1080/08985626.2017.1384959.

EMF (2015) Circularity Indicators For Measuring Circularity In A Circular Economy, Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Available at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/programmes/insight/circularity-indicators.

Geissdoerfer, M. et al. (2017) ‘The Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm?’, Journal of Cleaner Production. Elsevier Ltd, 143, pp. 757–768. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048.

Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C. and 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, pp. 11–32. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007.

Hopkinson, P. et al. (2018) ‘Managing a Complex Global Circular Economy Business Model: Opportunities and Challenges’, California Management Review, 60(3), pp. 71–94. doi: 10.1177/0008125618764692.

Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. and Hekkert, M. (2017) ‘Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions’, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, pp. 221–232. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005.

Lacy, P. and Rutqvist, J. (2015) Waste to wealth: The circular economy advantage. Springer. Lewandowski, M. (2016) ‘Designing the Business Models for Circular Economy — Towards the

Conceptual Framework’, Sustainability, 8(43), pp. 1–28. doi: 10.3390/su8010043. Lieder, M. and Rashid, A. (2016) ‘Towards circular economy implementation: a comprehensive review

in context of manufacturing industry’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 115, pp. 36–51. Linder, M. and Williander, M. (2017) ‘Circular Business Model Innovation: Inherent Uncertainties’,

Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(2), pp. 182–196. doi: 10.1002/bse.1906. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, A. D. (2009) ‘PRISMA 2009 Flow Diagram’, The PRISMA statement,

p. 1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed1000097. Murray, A., Skene, K. and Haynes, K. (2017) ‘The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration

of the Concept and Application in a Global Context’, Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), pp. 369–380. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2.

OECD (2012) OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction, Outlook. doi: 10.1787/9789264122246-en.

Osterwalder, A. and Pigneur, Y. (2013) Business model generation, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

Quarshie, A. M., Salmi, A. and Leuschner, R. (2016) ‘Sustainability and corporate social responsibility in supply chains: The state of research in supply chain management and business ethics journals’, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management. Elsevier, 22(2), pp. 82–97. doi: 10.1016/j.pursup.2015.11.001.

Sauvé, S., Bernard, S. and Sloan, P. (2016) ‘Environmental sciences, sustainable development and circular economy: Alternative concepts for trans-disciplinary research’, Environmental Development. Elsevier, 17, pp. 48–56. doi: 10.1016/j.envdev.2015.09.002.

Stratan, D. (2017) ‘Success Factors of Sustainable Social Enterprises Through Circular Economy Perspective’, Visegrad Journal on Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development, 6(1). doi: 10.1515/vjbsd-2017-0003.

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003) ‘Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review *’, British Journal of

61

Management, 14, pp. 207–222. Tukker, A. (2015) ‘Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy – a review’, Journal

of Cleaner Production, 97, pp. 76–92. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.049. Wager, E. and Wiffen, P. J. (2011) ‘Ethical issues in preparing and publishing systematic reviews’,

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 11(7), pp. 721–725. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-5391.2011.01122.pagex.

62

THEME C:

The design of effective CE practices, policies and governance

• Which forms of entrepreneurship is CE triggering? How do these align with theories of innovation and entrepreneurship?

• CE and theories of policy innovation? What policies are in place, which outcomes have they produced and what is needed?

• Potential implications and consequences of CE for developing countries (e.g. reshoring, global material and commodity circuits)

• What CE practices have existed in the past, how can they be evaluated and what can we learn from these?

• CE governance and policy: soft, strict, or otherwise (e.g., nudge), exploring in particular the role of incentives and legislation

• How circular value is created for diverse stakeholders, what value is created and how are differing interests accommodated?

• Theorising the ‘consumer’ within new circular business models and ecosystems • What are the social and cultural dimensions of the CE, including perspectives of work and

labour? • Varieties of political economy and comparative approaches to CE research • Circular cities in the 21st century, how are they defined and where is best practice? • What are the key framework conditions to increase circularity? • Distribution and access to products and services, and generating value across the system as

a whole, including; issues of power, culture, legitimation, trust, ethics, otherness, justice and responsibility

63

Strengthening circular academic collaboration South – North: designing frameworks and solving real societal problems

Authors: W.A.N Amaral, A. Ometto, J Costa – University of Sao Paulo, Brazil R. Burch, A. Marseille – Arizona State University, USA Abstract: This paper is about how lessons learned and experiences from leading research and teaching Universities could provide the basis for a long term and prolific South – North collaboration on circular economy (CE) implementation. In times when: i) society’s expectations are high about the roles and functions of academic institutions and organizations; ii) access to information is almost free and universal, and iii) the need to be on the cutting edge of the scientific breakthroughs and scientific production, adding and creating value to knowledge has become one of the major outcomes of the research – technology – innovation interfaces to show impact and capacity of addressing fundamental needs of society. Since the last decade, circular economy has become one of the most relevant themes for business and organizations, addressing and questioning current linear economic models and their constraints to tackle long term societal needs and expectations. In order for circular economy examples, cases and projects to gain scale, stakeholders mind set changes are essential, including academics and researchers. At Universities some stakeholders are already committed to their own research and teaching agendas, considering CE a new field to be explored. Despite differences among Universities (history, funding structure, core focus areas, cultural and social for example), one common challenge is therefore to motivate and engage faculty on circular economy themes and projects. Different strategies and pathways have been used by USP, ASU to bring faculty on board the circular economy momentum. The collective experiences from these Universities and concrete examples of motivating faculty to engage on circular economy issues, show that intense and coordinated efforts are necessary to transform CE concepts into concrete projects and thus to motivate faculty to devote time and efforts to these projects. This paper compares and discusses these different strategies. However in order to make a real impact on how we contribute to transform linear economy models, strengthening South – North collaboration is of paramount importance. In North America, specifically at Arizona State University, a successful strategy has been deployed to further develop a collaborative platform around developing a circular economy innovation ecosystem. The success of this strategy started with a partnership between the university and the City of Phoenix across several departments to deploy successful projects and programs focused on circular economy. Therefore exploring ways to share knowledge, co-create and collaborate through this collaboration. One of the fundamental pillars of circular economy is based on the assumption that single and isolated solutions generate short and reduced impacts, therefore addressing problems from a systemic and ecosystem perspective is required, creating the enabling conditions for collaboration, sharing lessons learned, learning from failed projects and taking into account cultural and social differences amongst regions, industry and institutions. Deployment of circular solutions is not only an expected outcome from Universities, but also rather a concerted effort from a broad array of stakeholders. And requires sound design frameworks to create opportunities for South – North collaboration and thus to transform linear economy thinking and making an real impact, creating a new breed of professionals, competencies and solving societal long term problems.

64

Pathways to Systems Change: Circular Fibres Initiative and Fair Trade Textiles

Authors: Matthew Anderson – Senior Lecturer in Business Ethics, University of Portsmouth, UK Diego Vazquez-Brust – Professor of Global Business Sustainability & Strategy, University of Portsmouth, UK Abstract: Recent programmes launched by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and Fairtrade International offer an opportunity to explore the different approaches to multi-stakeholder sustainability programmes in textile supply chains. This research uses bibliometric and document analysis (Bowen, 2009) to develop a network theory approach to assess the socio-economic implications of implementing CE as part of fair trade supply chains in developing countries. Circular Fibres Initiative: Launched by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation in May 2017, the Circular Fibres Initiative brings together stakeholders from across the industry to create a new textiles economy. The overarching vision of a new textiles economy is that it is aligned with the principles of a circular economy: one that is restorative and regenerative by design and provides benefits for business, society, and the environment. The new textile economy report includes a commitment to ‘a better deal for employees’ (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017). However, the social dimensions of circular economy remain, if not absent, notably under-developed (and under-researched) (Murray et al., 2017). The assumption that value is circulated among enterprises of all sizes in the industry, has not been sufficiently tested. Neither have inequalities in the distribution of value and risks been adequately conceptualised. Empirical research suggests trade-offs between eco-efficiency (value captured by enterprises) and eco-development (value captured by communities) in a circular economy (Paquin et al., 2015). Additionally, the mechanisms for ensuring that all parts of the value chain pay workers well and provide them with good working conditions have not yet been established; nor the social consequences of substituting imports of raw materials with circular inputs (e.g. the potential decrease in livelihood of raw material producers in developing countries). Fairtrade Textile Standard: The recent development by Fairtrade International of a full supply chain certification for textiles was a significant development beyond certification of cotton production. Launched in 2016, the Fairtrade Textile Standard was seen as an important response to the poor working conditions and health and safety failings, dramatically highlighted by the collapse of the Rana Plaza factory complex in Bangladesh (Fairtrade International, 2016a). The new standard covers textile manufacturers employing workers in the textile supply chain, including ginners, spinners, dyers, cut-make-trim factories as well as brand owners through contracts with Fairtrade International. A circular economy approach is not currently specified in Fairtrade standards – however, there is an opportunity to review approaches towards resource efficiency and biological cycles in Fairtrade agricultural systems. Fairtrade International’s current strategy, ‘Changing Trade, Changing Lives 2016-2020’, recognises that: ‘the global development agenda is shifting from a focus on poverty in developing countries to tackling global inequality and promoting sustainability’ (Fairtrade International, 2016b). There is a new focus on understanding the true economic, social and environmental costs of sustainability in Fairtrade value chains. To date, circular economy and fair trade initiatives have developed with limited interaction or shared learning (Anderson, 2015). There is an opportunity to consider what a hybrid version of these approaches to sustainable textile chains might involve and investigate potential pathways towards system-level change. There is a need for further empirical and conceptual work to understand the wider stakeholder implications and potential challenges of aligning these approaches.

65

References: Anderson, M. (2015), A History of Fair Trade in Contemporary Britain: From Civil Society Campaigns to Corporate Compliance, Palgrave Macmillan, London. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2017). “A new textiles economy: Redesigning fashion’s future” available at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/A-New-Textiles-Economy_Full-Report_Updated_1-12-17.pdf (accessed 14 March 2018). Fairtrade International, (2016a). “Fairtrade Textile Standard”, available at: https://www.fairtrade.net/fileadmin/user_upload/content/2009/standards/documents/TextileStandard_EN.pdf (accessed 14 March 2018). Fairtrade International, (2016b). “Fairtrade Global Strategy: Changing Trade, Changing Lives 2016-2020”, available at: http://www.fairtrade.net/about-fairtrade/our-vision/our-strategy.html (accessed 14 March 2018). Murray, A., Skene, K., & Haynes, K. (2017). The circular economy: an interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 369-380. Paquin, R. L., Busch, T., & Tilleman, S. G. (2015). Creating economic and environmental value through industrial symbiosis. Long Range Planning, 48(2), 95-107.

66

Value Capturing by different stakeholders in the context of the circular economy Authors: Ana Carolina Bertassini, Camila dos Santos Ferreira, Daniel Guzzo da Costa, Aldo Roberto Ometto, Janaína Mascarenhas Hornos da Costa – University Sao Paulo, Brazil Keywords: Circular Economy; Value Capturing; Business Models; Stakeholders Abstract: The economic activity in a circular economy (CE) enhance value retained in resources, such as products, components, materials, or energy, while meeting the needs of all stakeholders involved in this operation. Possible benefits in a CE are translated into value, since value represents “the set of benefits resulting for an exchange that are delivered to stakeholders” (RANA, SHORT, EVANS, 2012).

In the transition to a CE, Business Models are extremely important for clarifying the value flow among different stakeholders (DAGEVOS, VAN OPHEM, 2013; YANG et al., 2014). A business model defines: (1) the promise of value to different stakeholders (value proposition), (2) the activities and means by which value is provided to stakeholders (value creation and delivery), and (3) the value that is finally absorbed by those involved (value capture) (BOCKEN; RANA; SHORT, 2015). The focus of this research is in value capturing, since these benefits will sustain behavior change and relationship building among stakeholders, and through them it is possible to demonstrate positive externalities of a given solution.

This paper intents to clarify the importance of value capturing for the many stakeholders in the transition to a CE. In addition, based on a systematic literature review, potential organizations value capture is presented as a subset of stakeholders involved in systemic solutions.

Innovations in business models aiming to achieve a CE encourage the proposition and value capturing encompassing different environmental aspects, considering individuals, organizations and society (ADAMS et al, 2017). A specific value network may be composed by an extensive set of stakeholders (ANTIKAINEN et al, 2017, BOCKEN; RANA; SHORT, 2015, YANG et al., 2014). These may be: shareholders, internal customers, employees, departments, processes, suppliers, customers, users, cooperatives, partners, external sources of capital, governmental bodies, society, academic community, environment among other interested parties to the company business (ANTIKAINEN et al, 2017, BOCKEN; RANA; SHORT, 2015 ).

In the Innovation Business Model, organizations rethink new needs of customers by creating or realigning strategy, processes, resources, and revenue (JOHNSON, CHRISTENSEN, KAGERMANN, 2008). Considering the potential value captured by organizations, they can be translated into: improving brand reputation and legitimacy (HART, MILSTEIN, 2013); investment attraction (ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUDATION; WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM; MCKINSEY & COMPANY, 2016, ZHENG, HUANG, WANG, 2012), vanguard in standards and regulation (EUROPEAN COMISSION, 2017, ORMAZABAL et al., 2016); access to new markets (HILL, 2014); reduction of material costs; energy and disposal of end-of-life materials (TOLIO et al., 2017); reduction of resource dependence (DESPEISSE et al., 2017); building long-term relationships (EUROPEAN COMISSION, 2017); waste disposal / reduction (MASULLO, 2017); reduction of the use of natural resources (ANTIKAINEN et al., 2017); lower risk of volatility and material price (ADAMS et al., 2017); job creation (AID et al., 2017) and improvement in quality of life (DI MAIO et al., 2017).

Identifying the actual value captured by the stakeholders involved in a CE solution states whether the company's value proposition is meeting its objectives. Thus, a successful CE business model should guarantee that the proposed value to the stakeholders is in fact captured by them, as well as ensuring that value creation activities bring more impacts that are positive to the environment than today's businesses.

67

References: ADAMS, Katherine Tebbatt et al. Circular economy in construction: current awareness, challenges and enablers. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Waste and Resource Management. Thomas Telford Ltd, 2017. p. 15-24. AID, Graham et al. Expanding roles for the Swedish waste management sector in inter-organizational resource management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, v. 124, p. 85-97, 2017. ANTIKAINEN, Maria et al. Circular Economy Business Model Innovation Process–Case Study. In: International Conference on Sustainable Design and Manufacturing. Springer, Cham, 2017. p. 546-555. BRADLEY, Ryan et al. A Framework for Material Selection in Multi-Generational Components: Sustainable Value Creation for a Circular Economy. Procedia CIRP, v. 48, p. 370-375, 2016. BOCKEN, Nancy et al. A value-mapping tool for sustainable business modelling. Corporate Governance, v. 13, n. 5, p. 482-497, 2013. BOCKEN, N. M. P.; RANA, P.; SHORT, S. W. Value mapping for sustainable business thinking. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, v. 32, n. 1, p. 67-81, 2015. DAGEVOS, Hans; VAN OPHEM, Johan. Food consumption value: developing a consumer-centered concept of value in the field of food. British Food Journal, v. 115, n. 10, p. 1473-1486, 2013. DESPEISSE, M. et al. Unlocking value for a circular economy through 3D printing: a research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 115, p. 75-84, 2017. DI MAIO, Francesco et al. Measuring resource efficiency and circular economy: A market value approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, v. 122, p. 163-171, 2017. ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUDATION; WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM; MCKINSEY & COMPANY. The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of Plastics. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2016. EUROPEAN COMISSION. On the implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan. Report from commission to the European parliament, the Council, the European economic and social committee and the Committee of the regions, v. COM (2017), p. 24, 2017. FUNDAÇÃO ELLEN MACARTHUR. 2017. Uma economia circular no Brasil: uma abordagem exploratória inicial. Disponível em: <https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/languages/Uma-conomia-Circular-no-Brasil_Uma-Exploracao-Inicial.pdf>. Acesso em: 26 Jun. 2017. GEISSDOERFER, Martin et al. The Circular Economy–A new sustainability paradigm?. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 143, p. 757-768, 2017. HART, Stuart L.; MILSTEIN, Mark B. Creating sustainable value. The Academy of Management Executive, v. 17, n. 2, p. 56-67, 2013. HILL, Julie Elizabeth. The circular economy: from waste to resource stewardship, part I. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Waste and Resource Management. Thomas Telford Ltd, 2014. p. 3-13. MASULLO, Andrea. Organic wastes management in a circular economy approach: Rebuilding the link between urban and rural areas. Ecological Engineering, v. 101, p. 84-90, 2017. ORMAZABAL, Marta et al. An overview of the circular economy among SMEs in the Basque country: A multiple case study. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, v. 9, n. 5, p. 1047, 2016. RANA, P., SHORT, S. & EVANS, S., 2012. D2.1 - State-of-practice in business modelling and value-networks, emphasising potential future models that could deliver sustainable value, Disponivel em: http://www.sustainvalue.eu/publications.htm TOLIO, Tullio et al. Design, management and control of demanufacturing and remanufacturing systems. CIRP Annals, v. 66, n. 2, p. 585-609, 2017. YANG, Miying et al., Sustainable value analysis tool for value creation. Asian Journal of Management Science and Applications, v. 1, n. 4, p. 312-332, 2014 ZHENG, Ji Liang; HUANG, Yi; WANG, Zi Qiang. Study on Establishment and Application of Circular Economy Evaluation Index System for the Chemical Industry. In: Advanced Materials Research. Trans Tech Publications, 2012. p. 3455-3458. JOHNSON, Mark. W.; CHRISTENSEN, Clayton. M.; KAGERMANN, Henning. Reinventing Your Business Model. Harvard Business Review. 2008.

68

In which ways can law support the transition to a circular construction of buildings?

Authors: Dr. M.N. Boeve and prof. Ch.W. Backes - Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Introduction The great potential of the construction sector in enhancing the transition to a circular economy is widely recognized in Europe. According to the EU-action plan for a circular economy construction and demolition are among the biggest sources of waste in Europe.2 Much of this waste can be recycled, however the actual recycling rates differ considerably within the European Union.3 Moreover the quality of the reuse of building materials is low, they are often used in groundworks or road construction, not in new buildings. The construction sector clearly has a decisive influence on the level of circularity of their product. Especially the design phase of the construction of buildings is crucial as choice of design and materials define the use of resources. Circular buildings should be designed in such a way that all materials are suitable for high quality reuse or recycling. Questions arise on how law can support the transition to a circular construction of buildings. As for now regulations on the resource efficiency and circular use of materials in the built environment are at a beginner’s stage. At EU-level the main focus has been on measures to increase the energy performance of buildings. Specific targets on the circularity performance of buildings have not been set and legal measures have not been taken. The paper concentrates on the question which legal measures could be taken to stimulate the transition to a circular building sector. Furthermore, it discusses how such instruments would fit into the existing regime of EU law concerning building materials and energy efficiency of buildings4 and which new legal instruments would be necessary to stimulate that transition. Moving towards regulatory support for circular construction The EU focus on the energy performance of buildings could be extended to the circularity of buildings. The authors will deal with the suggestion to broaden the scope of the existing EU Directive on the energy performance of buildings by implementing targets for the circularity of buildings. Energy-efficiency and resource-efficiency are closely related and will impact each other. Research shows that a strict target on energy performance may lead to a decreased environmental performance since specific or extra materials need to be used to achieve that new target.5 Therefore, it is important to have a consistent, comprehensive legal framework covering both sustainability aspects. In the Netherlands, such a comprehensive regulatory framework already exists setting targets for the total environmental performance of buildings.6 However, even in Dutch regulations circularity is not fully addressed. The authors argue that circularity indicators and eventually targets should preferably be set at EU level to ensure a level playing field for the construction sector.7 As for the demolition of buildings it is important that valuable materials are identified and collected separately. At the EU level guidelines are available. However, these guidelines are on a voluntary 2 European Commission, Closing the loop - An EU action plan for the Circular Economy, COM (2015), 614 final, p. 16. 3 Technopolis, Regulatory barriers for the Circular Economy. Lessons from ten case studies, final report 13 July 2016, p. 44. 4 Especially the Directives on the Energy Performance of Buildings (Directive 2010/31/EU) and on Energy Efficiency (Directive 2012/27/EU). 5 W/E adviseurs, Onderzoek ‘Bepaling kwaliteitsniveaus milieuprestatie van woonfuncties’, Eindrapport, 14 november 2014, p. 29-30 (in Dutch). 6 Article 5.9 Building Regulation (Bouwbesluit). See also C. Backes, Law for a Circular Economy, Eleven International Publishing, The Hague 2017 (https://www.uu.nl/nieuws/oratie-chris-backes-law-for-a-circular-economy), p. 50-52 and M.N. Boeve, Bouwen in een circulaire stad, TO 2017/4, p. 167-176. 7 European Commission, Communication on Resource efficiency opportunities in the building sector, Com (2014)445 final, p. 4.

69

basis. Authors will discuss how regulations could be adapted to improve the legal regime on this point in order to enhance the recovery and reuse of valuable building materials.

70

Braking the silos –Transnational administrative networks: the circular economy platform Author: Sevasti Chatzopoulou - Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Denmark Responding to internal socioeconomic and international environment demands, the EU evolved into a significant policy innovator over time. The EU develops ‘entrepreneurial methods’, disseminates policy ideas, information and diffuses policy standards, particularly with respect to ‘science based’ knowledge regulatory policies. As a result, the EU plays a significant policy role in the international arena. In order to understand the EU’s role in policy diffusion externally, it is important to examine the EU transnational administrative structures and their characteristics that support such developments, which is the central interest of this paper. In 2011, the Commission introduced the Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe, where it proposed a framework for action and underlined the need for an integrated approach across many policy areas and levels. Three years later in 2014, in the attempt to eliminate waste of scarce resources the EU Commission introduced the Circular Economy (CE) platform, with the aim to boost global competitiveness, foster sustainable economic growth and social fairness, generate new jobs and tackle climate change in the globalized world. In 2015, introduced the new CE package in the aim to be even more ambitious, which included food waste. The CE constitutes a fundamental policy agenda that moves from the linear ‘take, make and dispose’ model to the circular model of ‘reduce, reuse and recycle’. For the first time, the CE links environmental and economic interests and interconnects in this way various EU existing policy areas (e.g. environment, food waste, chemicals, climate, growth, research and development). Despite a number of existing contributions in the literature, most studies focus on the goals and the potential benefits of the CE, and thus do not adequately examine the governance of the CE. This paper aims to fill this gap and specifically focuses on the administration of the CE. It suggests that the CE ‘closing the loop approach’ contributes to the construction of an EU ‘hybrid’ transnational administrative polity, and signifies the emergence of various transnational administrative networks with significant institutional and policy innovations. In the creation of CE, the Commission has broken down the silos, emphasizing the importance of coordination among different DGs (Environment, Growth, Agriculture, Health and Food, Research, Industry). Formal and informal interactions among the various actors intensified, as the CE package has been prepared by a core project team, co-chaired by First Vice-President Frans Timmermans and Vice-President Jyrki Katainen with the close involvement of the Commissioners for Environment (Karmenu Vella) and Internal market and Industry (Elżbieta Bieńkowska). A number of other Commissioners were involved in its preparation and helped identify the most effective tools covering a wide range of policy areas. In addition to inter-institutional collaborations among the various DGs, a number of expert scientific and advisory committees have been involved. Lastly, while the EU has a fundamental role to play in this process, the local, regional and national authorities are expected to enable this transition, at the implementation phase, that is not part of this paper. Despite the presence of administrative networks and interactions in EU other policy areas, these differ in the CE. The inter-institutional interactions for the CE lead to a new type of integrated transnational administrative integration, whose characteristics and implications this paper aims to unfold and systematically analyse. For this purpose, this paper studies the top-down induced horizontal coordination and sharing of responsibilities and resources among the DGs. It suggests that this did not only intensified but it differs in content than previous inter-institutional coordination in the EU. Within the CE, the various DGs actively complement each other within a common policy agenda. While one DG focuses mainly on the regulatory aspects, others are more involved on the policy targets and distribution of resources. Yet, it involves inter-institutional competition, negotiations and disagreements particularly with respect to allocation of competences and resources. Therefore, it necessitates a clear allocation of responsibilities among the DGs, e.g. to who is responsible for what

71

at which level, for the harmonizing legislation at the European level and better communicating the policy goals. This may also raise concerns of accountability and legitimacy.

72

Accelerating the Transition to a Circular Economy in Africa - case studies from Kenya and South Africa

Author: Peter Desmond – MA (Oxon) MA FCA MBA FRSA, Circular Economy Club Milcah Asamba – PhD Candidate Abstract: The transition from a linear economy (take-make-use-dispose) to a circular economy is gaining traction around the world. Opportunities are being identified by businesses and researchers for the Global South to leapfrog the problems that have been experienced with globalisation in the Global North. This paper explores the potential of a number of these opportunities across Africa in general and more specifically in the emerging nations of Kenya (solar power) and South Africa (mobile phones). Proposals are made for further research into lessons that can be learnt from successful case studies across the continent and strategies for implementation of policies and action plans. The focus of this paper is how circular business models and practices can benefit the development of African countries, particularly in the relief of poverty through the creation of jobs and careful use of scarce resources (Schmitz, 2015). In the Global North, particularly Europe, there are well-documented case studies of circular practices in multinational organisations. For example, Philips (“Pay Per Lux”), Desso and Interface (renting carpet tiles) and Renault (remanufacturing) (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013a). One approach favoured by some countries and cities in the Global North to accelerate the transition towards a circular economy, is the development of a roadmap which can provide a guide for key actors to collaborate towards specific goals (SITRA, 2016). In some parts of the Global South, particularly India, China and South America, there are numerous small-scale examples of circular practices e.g. waste collection and recycling, repair, refurbishment and biomass as a fertiliser in agriculture (Gower and Schröder, 2016). In contrast, African case studies are ‘hidden’ in the sense that they have yet to be documented through academic research. As a result, there is currently a gap in academia of how multinational businesses, through their global supply chains, are engaged with small and medium-sized enterprises and entrepreneurs in Africa. In this paper, examples of existing circular practices in Kenya, South Africa and Nigeria will be explored in the energy, electronics and automotive sectors. There is potential for research to be commissioned by the EU and individual national governments to understand the impact of the European Commission’s Circular Economy Package and the EU’s Extended Producer Responsibility legislation on emerging countries. Furthermore, the negative impact of the Global North’s export of waste for disposal in the Global South needs to be researched from both a health perspective and the detrimental effect being seen on the world’s oceans through such practices. Finally, a greater understanding needs to be achieved of how a circular economy can assist in achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. References: Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013a). Towards the Circular Economy Volume 1 - Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition, Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

Gower R. and Schröder P. (2016). Virtuous Circle, How the circular economy can create jobs and save lives in low and middle-income countries, Tearfund Schmitz, H. (2015). Africa’s biggest recycling hub? IDS Blog, available at https://www.ids.ac.uk/opinion/africa-s-biggest-recycling-hub, accessed 22 February 2018 SITRA, 2016 “Leading the cycle – Finnish road map to a circular economy 2016–2025” SITRA

73

Circular cities of the 21st century How are they defined and where are the best practices?

Author: Piyush Dhawan – German Chancellor Fellow, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Keywords: Circular Cities, Smart Cities Mission, Digitization, Circular Economy Abstract: In the 21st century, cities have become the world’s dominant demographic and economic clusters and they certainly deserve more nuanced treatment on our maps than simply as homogeneous black dots (Khanna, 2018). In a world, where today there are far more functional cities than there are viable states, and wherein by 2020 our civilization will witness and live with the first cohorts of the Generation C (“C” for connected), we need to think of cities that could cater to their aspirations (Puutio, 2018). A circular economy approach is interesting at the city-level for a number of reasons. For instance, technical and biological ‘nutrients’ become aggregated within city boundaries and can be found in quantities worth harnessing through urban mining (Li, 2015). In addition, stakeholders are geographically close and this in itself can aid collaboration to close resource loops (Morlett, 2014) While there is no universally accepted definition for a ‘Circular City’ the (Ellen Macarthur Foundation, 2017) has come up with a vision for it, which says that - “a circular city embeds the principles of a circular economy across all its functions, establishing an urban system that is regenerative, accessible, and abundant by design. These cities aim to eliminate the concept of waste, keep assets at their highest value at all times, and are enabled by digital technology.” According to (Prendevillea, Cherim, & Bocken, 2017) there is a need, as well as an opportunity, to gain understanding of what a potential future circular city constitutes. The concept of the smart city, on the other hand, has been gaining ground for some time and is seen as a vehicle for urban sustainability (Bakıcı et al., 2013; Cocchia, 2014; Bodum, 2015; Caragliu et al., 2011; Hollands, 2008). The smart city movement is concerned with gathering data to monitor and optimize resource use through technology which has been a key concept of the Circular Economy narrative (Ellen Macarthur Foundation, 2017). According to the (Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Government of India, 2018), which is responsible for implementing the urban renewal and retrofitting program in 100 cities in India under the program ‘Smart Cities Mission’, a Smart City is essentially one that “provides for the aspirations and needs of the citizens, where urban planners ideally aim at developing the entire urban eco-system, which is represented by the four pillars of comprehensive development - institutional, physical, social and economic infrastructure.” The city of Peterborough has an ambition of being a truly circular city by 20508. Other cities such as Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Haarlemmermeer, Glasgow are also in the preliminary phase of implementing circular economy strategies (Prendevillea, Cherim, & Bocken, 2017). Through in-depth interviews, the project9 shall identify key enablers in three cities in the UK, Netherlands and Germany (local government, private sector, universities, NGO’s and citizens of the city) and the framework conditions (funding mechanisms, regional collaborations, entrepreneurial conditions, demand conditions and others). The project would also draw lessons from the three European cities for India’s ambitious Smart Cities Mission.

8 http://www.futurepeterborough.com/circular-city/circular-peterborough-commitment/ 9 The project is part of the German Chancellor Fellowship that the author is part of for 2017-18. https://www.humboldt-foundation.de/web/german-chancellor-fellowship.html

74

References: Bakıcı, T., Almirall, E., Wareham, J., 2013. A Smart city initiative: the case of Barcelona. J. Knowl.

Econ. 4, 135–148. Bodum, L., 2015. Developments within geospatial technologies for the support of urban

sustainability towards smart cities. In: Onsrud, H., Kuhn, W. (Eds.), Advancing Geographic Information Science: The Past and Next Twenty Years. GSDI Association Press, Needham, MA, pp. 259–264

Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C., Nijkamp, P., 2011. Smart cities in Europe. J. Urban Technol. 1 (8), 45–59. Cocchia, A., 2014. Smart and digital city: a systematic literature review. In: Smart City. Springer

International Publishing, pp. 13–43. Ellen Macarthur Foundation. (2017). Cities in the Circular Economy: An Initial Exploration. Cowes,

Isle of Wight: Ellen Macarthur Foundation. Retrieved 03 12, 2018, from https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Cities-in-the-CE_An-Initial-Exploration.pdf

Hollands, R.G., 2008. Will the real smart city please stand up? City 12, 303–320, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13604810802479126

Khanna, P. (2018, 03 12). How much economic growth comes from our cities? Retrieved from World Economic Forum: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/04/how-much-economic-growth-comes-from-our-cities/

Li, J., 2015. Wastes could be resources and cities could be mines. Waste Manage. Res. 33, 301–302, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734242X15581268.

Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Government of India. (2018, March 12). What is a Smart City. Retrieved from Smart Cities Mission : http://smartcities.gov.in/content/innerpage/what-is-smart-city.php

Morlett, A., 2014. Cities as the front-runners of circular economy. London Infrastruct. Plan – Circ. Econ. Present

Prendevillea, S., Cherim, E., & Bocken, N. (2017). Circular Cities: Mapping Six Cities in Transition. Environmental Innovation and Social Transitions, 26, 171-194.

Puutio, T. A. (2018, 03 12). Here are 5 predictions for the future of our cities. Retrieved from World Economic Forum: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/02/here-are-5-predictions-for-the-cities-of-the-future

75

Application of CE principles to urban regeneration: The OPDC Area (London)

Authors: Teresa Domenech – Institute for Sustainable Resources, University College London Aiduan Borrion - The Engineering Exchange and Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering, University College London Abstract: Urban areas concentrate half of the world’s population and consume 70% of the resources and 1/3 of the energy globally (UNEP, 2013). It is expected that by 2050, 70% of the world’s population will live in urban areas. Future cities are also faced with the challenges of becoming more resilient in the face of problems such as climate change and increasing the efficiency with which energy and resources are being consumed while trying to solve existing social imbalances and support human wellbeing. Strategies to address these issues have evolved from purely reactive towards regenerative approaches that dwell on the complementary of natural capital and other forms of capital, including physical and human capital. The notion of the circular economy has attracted considerable attention in the last years as a way to move from highly resource inefficient linear systems of production and consumption towards more circular systems that are restorative by purpose and design and aim to maintain resources at their prime uses for longer through cycling loops to reduce the entropy of systems and its environmental implications, while exploiting business opportunities from underutilised resources. The adoption of circular economy principles at the urban level though is an area that has only recently been addressed in the literature. It builds, though, in the large body of research on urban metabolism and the more recent concept of ‘resource nexus’, which looks at the connections between systems of materials, energy, water and land, but also expands it to the analysis of other assets including innovation capacity, enabling technologies and new business models at the interface of the urban level. This report explores the application of CE principles to urban regeneration, with a focus on opportunities derived from waste. The paper looks at the case of the Old Oak Park Royal regeneration project in West London, the largest urban regeneration project in Europe, and the opportunities and challenges to apply CE principles in high density urban developments. Main focus of the paper is to address the current gap in methodological frameworks and metrics to evaluate application of CE principles at the urban level, where contributions are still scarce and fragmented. The research uses Material Flow Analysis to understand key resource flows coming in and out of the area and points at ways to harness the value of resources in accordance with CE principles. The paper explores different ways to optimise value of waste resources and in accordance with CE principles. The report provides a comparison of scenarios (baseline, energy self-sufficiency and circular economy) to assess potential and possible trade-offs between strategies and proposes policy recommendations to integrate CE principles in regeneration projects. Findings suggest a trade-off between ‘waste to energy’ and reuse/ recycling approaches and suggests to avenues to reconcile renewable energy from waste and high recycling rates.

76

Exploring the epistemic politics of circular economy: a research agenda with relevance for the governance of sustainable urban transformations

Authors: C.F. Fratini - Center for Design, Innovation and Sustainable Transitions (DIST), Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University, Copenhagen SV, Denmark and Department of Economics and Management (DISEI), Department of Architecture and Planning (DIDA), University of Florence, Firenze, Italy

S. Georg and M.S. Jørgensen - Center for Design, Innovation and Sustainable Transitions (DIST), Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University, Copenhagen SV, Denmark

Keywords: Circular economy, cities, policy framework, institutions, governance, comparative study

Research questions This paper explores the 'Circular Economy' imaginary as a 'matter of concern' with relevance for the governance of sustainable urban transformations. Our research builds on the following research questions:

1. How has the concept of circular economy developed over time and places? 2. Which governance arrangements underpin the translation of the circular economy framework

in cities? 3. Can the circular economy imaginary represent an opportunity for socially inclusive and

environmentally desirable urban transformations?

Method We engaged into a tree-folded research endeavor:

1. An in-depth literature review mapping the emergence and developments of the circular economy concept in time and space, with a specific focus on the urban contexts.

2. A comparative analysis of documented translations (e.g. plans, white papers, policy briefs, etc.) of the circular economy imaginary across three European metropolitan cities (i.e. Amsterdam, Paris and London) to explore which socio-material arrangements i.e. political commitments, institutions and material engagements characterize such translations reflecting on how they diverge and/or produce innovative elements in respect to reference point frameworks e.g. by the EU Commission10 and the Ellen Macarthur Foundation11.

3. The development of an analytical framework to explore the relation among socio-material arrangements, processes of knowledge co-production and normative dimensions of existing translations across scales and places to support future empirical investigations on whether and how the circular economy imaginary can support transformative pathways for socially inclusive and environmentally desirable value creation in cities.

Findings Circular economy exhibits a fair amount of interpretative flexibility over time and space. Last decade, has seen a dramatic increase of publications on ‘circular economy’, recognizing the need to develop new policies, technologies and methods for stakeholders’ involvement. Nevertheless, very few articles go into much depth on the interrelation between circular economy and urban transformations. Emphasis is given to prescriptive approaches underpinning expectations for innovation and growth and where circular economy appears to be used as a ‘branding’ label for things that urban actors have been working on for some years. Much of the literature focuses on Chinese cases of technical fixes to resources flows. The implementation of the circular economy concept in post-industrial contexts

10 Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/index_en.htm [Accessed 29/01/2018] 11 Available at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org [Accessed 29/01/2018]

77

remains largely un-explored. Not much attention is given to the organizational architecture and processes needed to translate the circular economy into effective political action, and to the active role that urban administrations can play. The comparative analysis shows that Amsterdam, Paris and London have engaged in quite different translations of the circular economy imaginary by aligning their engagement with circular economy to existing political priorities and institutional context: Amsterdam engaged with the circularity of building material, waste and energy through a “smart city” approach; Paris uses the circular economy imaginary as an unifying vision on which to base the legitimation of a newly established authority to govern urban development processes beyond municipal jurisdictions; London focuses on businesses with a product oriented approach aimed at low-carbon goods and resources flows for waste and energy utilities. None of the three cases engage with reflections about and/or measures to regulate processes of commodification of urban flows (e.g. waste), this risking to de-politicize infrastructures, urban spaces and services if not properly reflected, organized and regulated. Our research shows that in depth research on the implications of applying the circular economy in processes of urban transformation are, therefore, needed. Accordingly, we present an analytical framework to support future research in this direction.

78

Mapping circular financing models for cultural and natural heritage regeneration

Authors: Antonia Gravagnuolo and Luigi Fusco Girard – CNR IRISS Institute for Research on Innovation and Services for Development, National Research Council Francesca Medda – University College London Abstract: Circular economy is gaining increasing attention as a potential way for our society to increase prosperity, while reducing dependence on primary materials and energy. Many cities are shifting to a “circular paradigm” of urban development and a clear intention toward circular cities/regions is expressed at European level (Urban Agenda for the EU, 2018; ESPON, Pathways to a circular economy in cities and regions, 2016). The mutual cooperation of industries, cities, and communities in a circular perspective opens new fields of sustainable value creation (European Commission, 2015; EEB, 2016). In the “New Urban Agenda” (UN, 2016), the circular economy model is considered a critical strategy to manage ecological resources. The transition to a circular economy facilitates ecosystem conservation, regeneration, restoration and resilience in the face of new and emerging challenges (UN, 2015). Cultural heritage value is derived through the evolving interrelationship between history, ecosystems and culture, and is therefore often seen as a form of impure public good investment in which the public sector is the major investor. Despite its importance, however, few studies today provide comprehensive coverage of the financial aspects and investment mechanisms involved in the perpetuation of cultural heritage. In fact, choosing appropriate modes of financing cultural heritage and allocations of the public investments continues to stir debate. Furthermore, the role of public sector, as sole investor and supplier of cultural heritage redevelopment, is disputable. From a financial point of view the non-used cultural heritage is a "cost". Its creative functional re-use can reduce this "cost" transforming it in an investment. To implement operationally the reuse / regeneration of cultural and natural heritage, innovative financing, business and governance circular models should be identified, to mobilize new investments, with the aim of creating shared value, in particular through cooperative, synergistic, sharing and solidarity economic models (e.g. engaging social enterprise and the impact investing sector). The objective of this contribution is to map out the cultural heritage investment market as it exists today, and to examine case studies and theoretical approaches in order to offer the widest possible coverage of good practice and innovative investment mechanisms relating to cultural heritage, or mechanisms that have a potential to be successfully employed also for cultural heritage. In particular we aim to identify a framework to identify circular financing models. Circular financing models are related to multi-stakeholder win-win solutions of social-public-private partnerships, which should include a well-balanced mix of diverse financial mechanisms (CGD, 2013). Circular financing models should be able to create virtuous circles from public incentive to investors returns (both formal investors and the community) and back, also through the value capture of a percentage of plus value created. We focus on a set of financing and investment mechanisms widely experimented in Italy: Art Bonus, Valore Paese, Eco and Sisma Bonus, Mini bonds, Crowdfunding for cultural heritage (e.g. the case of Bologna), and on other tools that can leverage sustainable investments for cultural and natural heritage regeneration (Social Impact Bonds, Green bonds, Municipal bonds, Payments for Ecosystem Services, Cooperative Cities funding mechanisms). We explore also the “Impact Philanthropy” based tools such as the emerging Giving Circles applied mostly in Asia. We conclude our analysis by arguing that cultural heritage may render different impacts and financial returns because they have both tangible and intangible features; and therefore, most of the traditional investment mechanisms will need to be adapted accordingly. In some cases it may be necessary to formulate entirely new mechanisms for financing cultural heritage within a circular economy framework.

79

Out of Sight, Out of Mind, or Has Anything Changed for Labour in the Circular Economy? Framing Changes and Continuities through a Systematic Review

Authors: Elana Harrison - German Chancellor Fellow, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Manolchev, Constantine, University of Exeter Abstract: The positive impact of the Circular Economy (CE) on job creation is widely publicised. A number of studies (from Stahel, 1982 to Schroeder et al., 2018) highlight the possibility of CE creating additional European jobs and worker opportunities. However, despite sustained levels of interest in the potential for CE systems to capture value in products, materials and resources (Merli et al., 2018) there appears to be a theoretical gap in current approaches. Academics, NGO and governmental body reports have adopted a wide range of lenses and focused on production (Su et al., 2013), conceptual boundary-setting (D’Amato et al., 2017), products and services (Annarelli et al., 2016), sustainability (Geissdoerfer et al., 2016), business models (Antikainen and Valkokari, 2016) but apparently overlooked labour, despite it being central to both production and servicing in the CE model. This omission of labour from CE debates raises a number of questions, which this paper seeks to address. Does the promise of plentiful CE employment opportunities encounter the familiar problem of job polarisation (Goos and Manning, 2007; Sissons, 2011)? Is there scope for labour mobility, or does the growth of lower-paid, gig-economy jobs (Friedman, 2018) inject inequality and segmentation in the wider system? Through a systematic review of case studies across 22 industries including clothing, food and beverage, technology and automotive sectors, the study seeks to evaluate and challenge assumptions about the transformational impact of the CE system on job quality. Its purpose, in doing so, is to demonstrate the legitimate place of labour in CE discourses and issue the call for academic interest and debate. References: Annarelli A, Battistella C and Nonino F. (2016) Product service system: A conceptual framework from a

systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production 139: 1011-1032. Antikainen M and Valkokari K. (2016) A framework for sustainable circular business model innovation.

Technology Innovation Management Review 6(7). D'Amato D, Droste N, Allen B, et al. (2017) Green, circular, bio economy: A comparative analysis of

sustainability avenues. Journal of Cleaner Production 168: 716-734. Friedman G. (2014) Workers without employers: shadow corporations and the rise of the gig economy. Review

of Keynesian Economics 2(2): 171-188. Geissdoerfer M, Savaget P, Bocken NM, et al. (2017) The Circular Economy–A new sustainability paradigm?

Journal of Cleaner Production 143: 757-768. Goos M and Manning A. (2007) Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain. Review of

Economics and Statistics 89(1): 118-133. Merli R, Preziosi M and Acampora A. (2018) How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic

literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production 178: 703-722. Schroeder P, Anggraeni K and Weber U. (2018) The Relevance of Circular Economy Practices to the

Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Industrial Ecology. Sissons P. (2011) The hourglass and the escalator. The Work Foundation. Stahel WR. (2008) The performance economy: business models for the functional service economy. Handbook

of performability engineering. Springer, 127-138.

80

Do cities have enough environmental information to become more sustainable and circular?

Authors: Anna Petit-Boix and Sina Leipold - Chair of Societal Transition and Circular Economy, University of Freiburg, Germany Abstract: The UN Sustainable Development Goals can be approached at different geographical and organizational scales. Hosting more than 50% of the world’s population [1], cities are relevant hotspots that seek to comply with sustainability standards while meeting the needs of their populations. The circular economy (CE) is one of the concepts that is gaining popularity at the urban scale, aiming to reduce the pressure on the ecosphere through a number of strategies. In this context, city mayors, committees, and organizations promote certain initiatives that strive to achieve the goals of a sustainable CE. To what extent this is achieved by current local initiatives is barely known. For cities to select the most environmentally friendly initiatives, we need to study their environmental implications through quantitative research. In this context, our goal was to identify if there is an alignment between the CE-related initiatives promoted in cities and existing quantitative assessments. To do so, our analysis consists of three main parts. First, we collected data on CE-related initiatives reported by cities worldwide based on available CE webpages, local reports and newspapers, among other sources. Second, we conducted a literature review of peer-reviewed articles that quantify the environmental impacts and/or benefits of CE-related case studies using methods from the field of industrial ecology. This includes life cycle assessment, material flow analysis, and/or input-output analysis. Finally, we elaborated an integrated data analysis based on both city and article samples. We generated a group of CE strategies out of the local initiatives through an inductive process based on similarities. The scientific literature was also categorized accordingly. Our first results reveal a misalignment between research and practice. Waste management is a key topic both in the implementation and evaluation of CE. However, cities promote a wide range of initiatives that research has not entirely captured yet. Examples include urban planning or consumer-related practices, such as secondhand markets. This might partially hinder the identification of environmentally friendly initiatives that help cities approach sustainability. Hence, collaborative work is needed to help cities prioritize based on environmental criteria. [1] United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Population Division, World

Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision (ST/ESA/SER.A/366), (2015).

81

A suggestion for an Urban Circularity Index – How can existing findings, concepts, frameworks and standards be combined to serve as indication and alignment for circularity

in cities? Author: Josefine Koehler – Aalborg University, Denmark and Columbia University, New York Abstract: This research approaches and frames the necessity to monitor and measure both the state of circularity in cities and their progress towards circular economy (CE). A methodology for the application, a set of indicators and an aggregating formula for the urban circularity index is under development. In this abstract, the focus lays on summarizing the core provisional results, the indicator categorization and the resulting index.

Keywords: Circular Economy; Circular Cities; Circularity Indicators; Urban Circularity Index Introduction & Background As global challenges, such as climate change, growing population and depletion of resources, intensify year-by-year, CE has been acknowledged by many global organisations, initiatives and policy makers [5] due to its potential to reverse and address those challenges. Since areas of CE have been successfully applied on company levels [6], it is time to scale it up to a citywide picture. Cities are defined as complex systems [2] where indicators are crucial to assess transformational progress and to compare these systems in their past or present states [1]. Thus, they are one essential component of aligning actions to visions and to changes which need to be made to build social, human, natural and financial capitals [4]. This research aims to contribute to current and future investigations in measuring circularity in cities; it intends to complement and to extend efforts of leading organisations, such as the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) with its “Material Circularity Project” measuring circularity in businesses [3]. Thus, the purpose is not to create something new, rather to organise existing approaches and indicators into an index of urban circularity. Methods & Results Main principles of CE and criteria addressing circular cities have been studied and taken from existing literature. Interviews with potential stakeholders in NYC and London served as a means of reflection and verification. Based on the resulting list of principles and criteria, internationally known and applied sustainability frameworks, standards and concepts have been reviewed for indicators which imply and support those. Chosen indicators have been categorised as shown below (Table 1).

URBAN FLOWS & STOCKS

INDICATOR CATEGORY CAPITALS

Energy Material Circularity Indicators (& Carbon Productivity)

Natural & Manufactured Capitals

Water Food Goods & Services Waste Information (Money) GDP (per capita) Indicators Financial Capital Education Life Quality Indicators

(& Human Developing Indices)

Social & Human Capitals Security Income & Jobs

82

Housing Conditions Health Environmental Quality Civic & Public Engagement Infrastructure & Services Mobility Equality Culture, Diversity & Leisure

Table 1: Categorization of urban flows, indicator categories and capitals (own table).

The first five material flows (energy, water, food, goods & services and waste) address the natural and manufactured capitals which can be measured through Material Circularity [3] and Carbon Productivity [8] indicators. The flow of information refers to the financial capital, represented by GDP indicators. Factors such as education, health, security, or income imply the social and human capitals, measureable through Life Quality Indicators [7] and Human Development Indices [9]. Finally, the chosen indicators under each indicator category can be aggregated in the suggested formula (1) for the urban circularity index –considering the main goal of CE which is to decouple economic growth from finite resources and social and human capitals:

𝑈𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛𝐶𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 = 𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝐶𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟

𝐺𝐷𝑃𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟 + 𝐿𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟

𝐺𝐷𝑃𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟 (1) Conclusion: With its suggested set of indicators and urban circularity index, this research contributes to ongoing investigation of measuring circularity in cities. Once verified and adjusted due to further research and application in Aalborg, Denmark and/or NYC, USA, within the next three months, it will enable and support the effective transition towards circularity in cities. The criteria, that the indicators are taken from existing sustainability frameworks, standards and concepts, and that the research builds on existing works, e.g. from the EMF, facilitate the efforts of application, provide maximum transparency and call for collaboration and knowledge exchange. References: [1] Data Revolution Group (2014): Sustainable Development Goals: measuring progress on new

indicators and for all groups, UN Secretary General’s Independent Expert Advisory Group on Data Revolution on Sustainable Development, online: http://www.undatarevolution.org/measuring-sustainable-development/ [Accessed: 13th March 2018].

[2] Ellen MacArthur Foundation 1 (2015): Biopolus – A new operating system for urban living, Case Study, Budapest, online: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/a-new-operating-system-for-urban-living-1 [Accessed: 12th March 2018].

[3] Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2 (2015): Circularity Indicators: An Approach to Measuring Circularity, published: May 2015, online: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/programmes/insight/circularity-indicators [Accessed: 10th March 2018].

[4] Ellen MacArthur Foundation 1 (2017): Cities in the Circular Economy: An initial exploration, published 29th August 2017, online: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/publications/cities-in-the-circular-economy-an-initial-exploration [Accessed: 8th March 2018].

[5] Ellen MacArthur Foundation (n.a.): Case Studies, online: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies [Accessed: 28th February 2018].

83

[6] Fortune (2017): Businesses are facing a new reality. These are the ones that are succeeding, Peter Lacy, Accenture Strategy, 23th October 2017, online: http://fortune.com/2017/10/23/the-circulars-world-economic-forum-nike-method-sustainability/ [Accessed: 12th March 2018].

[7] OECD (2017): How’s life in 2017: Measuring Well-being, OECD Published, online: http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org [Accessed: 13th March 2018].

[8] Systemiq (2017): Carbon Productivity Tool, Prototype for a Carbon Productivity Tool: Framework, metrics and methodologies, developed by Systemiq, Future-Fit, Foundation and the Carbon Productivity Consortium, Version 1.0, June 2017, online: http://carbonproductivity.com/wp-content/uploads/Summary-of-carbon-productivity-tool-and-metrics-PDF-1.pdf [Accessed: 13th March 2018].

[9] United Nations (2016): Human Development Index, online: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi [Accessed: 8th March 2018].

84

Towards Circular Economy: Festivals as an arena for learning and transition

Author: Seonaid Lafferty – PhD Student, University of Cumbria, UK Festivals are a celebration of values and are an opportunity for meaningful connection and deeper learning. Mountain festival culture explores physical and mental limits, which are also the foundation of sustainability. Raworth’s framework ‘the safe operating space for humanity’ defines limits within the boundaries of social foundation and the environmental ceiling. To embed a Circular Economy (CE) is to challenge and eliminate the habitual linear, one-way flow of resources (Winston, 2014) for an approach that incorporates planning, communication and feedback loops. This paper is part of a larger PhD project with Kendal Mountain Festival (KMF) ‘a values-based measure of sustainability’. It’s purpose is to explore the organisational values of KMF in a way that harnesses its status as a leading event, explores its focus on sustainability and potential to deliver a strong message that mobilises CE. It is argued that social and economic sustainability are largely at the mercy of governmental institutions, yet organisations play a crucial role in achieving environmental sustainability (Bernal et al., 2018). KMF is a unique environment, which provides a playground for stakeholders to build new ways of thinking and test innovative approaches. As the outdoor industry continues to grow (European Outdoor Group, 2017), KMF is a unique environment for industry partners (e.g. it differs from a trade-show environment). Furthermore, it acts as a platform to analyse production and consumption patterns across stakeholder groups and at different scales; a principle that is at the heart of CE (Gardner, 2013). Establishing CE within the outdoor industry challenges paternalistic notions of saving the planet and becomes about developing a symbiotic relationship within planetary limits (Winston, 2014). The notion of cycles is at the roots of sustainability and echo’s throughout economic, social and environmental systems and processes. Not only is the pursuit of biophysical sustainability non-negotiable, it’s preconditioned (Porritt, 2005) and therefore economic growth must be decoupled from resource use (Weizsäcker, 2009). Transitioning to CE invites us to reconsider what success looks like; to reconsider our behaviour and dig deeper to distil and embody values. Discovering values, declaring areas for development and cultural change and agreeing a route forward in a way that speaks to the hearts a minds of people on an individual and collective basis is a slow process (Cummings and Worley, 2015). A festival presents an ideal environment for change that crosses boundaries between disciplines, industries and stakeholder groups, at a range of special and temporal scales. The research for this PhD is dynamic, incremental and reciprocal and takes place in-action. A values-based baseline of stakeholder behaviour will be mapped and challenges using scenario planning. Research will cross multiple disciplines and involve qualitative and quantitate analysis to make it relative and meaningful at a micro, meso and macro scale. The methodology will respond and adapt throughout the PhD to create a long-term strategy for sustainability at KMF in the form of a practical toolkit. Emphasis is placed on taking steps to continually monitor and evaluate behaviour patterns, systems operations and ecological impacts in an innovative way (Bocken and Short, 2016). References: European Outdoor Group, 2017. Overview of the European outdoor market [online] January 2018 [Accessed 24 January 2018] http://europeanoutdoorgroup.com/research/currentproject/overview-of-the-european-outdoor-market Raworth, K., (2012). A safe and just space for humanity: can we live within the doughnut. Oxfam Policy and Practice: Climate Change and Resilience, 8(1), pp.1-26. Bernal, E., Edgar, D. and Burnes, B., 2018. Building Sustainability on Deep Values through Mindfulness Nurturing. Ecological Economics, 146, pp.645-657. Bocken, N.M.P. and Short, S.W., 2016. Towards a sufficiency-driven business model: Experiences and opportunities. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18, pp.41- 61.

85

Cummings, T.G., Worley, C., 2015. Organisation Development and Change, 10th edition. Cengage, Stamford, CT. Ernst von Weizsäcker, E von., 2009. Factor Five: Transforming the Global Economy Through 80% Improvements in Resource Productivity. Earthscan. London. Gardner, G., 2013. Conserving Nonrenewable Resources. In State of the World 2013, pp. 99- 109. Island Press, Washington, DC. Porritt, J., 2005. Capitalism as if the world matters. Jeffery Hollender [online] January 2011 [Accessed 5 March 2018] http://www.jeffreyhollender.com/capitalism-as-if-the-worldmatters/ 3 Winston, A., 2014. The one thing every business dies without. Harvard Business Review [online] April 2014 [Accessed 12 March 2018] https://hbr.org/2014/04/the-one-thing-everybusiness-dies-without

86

A conjoint analysis of circular economy value propositions for consumers using washing machines in Stockholm as a case study

Authors: Michael Lieder, Farazee M.A. Asif and Amir Rashid - KTH Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, Sweden Abstract: In industrial practice a transition from a linear (take-make-dispose) to a circular product system (considering reuse/remanufacturing/recycling) requires the change of business models through new value propositions. In doing so the focus of the value proposition shifts from selling a physical product to providing access to functionality through business innovation. One key factor related to circular business transitions is market acceptance. It is particularly challenging to understand what complexity a new concept like circular economy (CE) brings to established businesses where the success and the failure of the business is dependent on customer’s acceptance of new value propositions. This paper empirically explores the opportunities of a circular business approach for washing machines in the city of Stockholm by quantifying and assessing customer preferences for CE value propositions for a business to customer (B2C) scenario. This study uses the method of choice-based conjoint analysis to investigate preferences based on three attributes:

1) Price and payment scheme 2) Environmental friendliness 3) Service level

After designing set of choice sets for the conjoint study a questionnaire is prepared for data collection purposes. In the next step, data analysis is carried out using the Cox regression model to create a mathematical model for discrete choices in SPSS. Finally, part-worth utilities for each of the attribute levels are visualized and choice probabilities for the different washing machine profiles quantified.

Results indicate that there is general interest in paying for access rather than for ownership in the Stockholm market. Service levels have the strongest impact on customer utility of a washing machine offer. If associated with reduction in CO2 emissions the number of remanufacturing cycles can increase purchase probability.

87

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment as a Legal Tool: Regulating for a Circular Economy

Author: Rosalind Malcom, LLB (Hons), PhD, Barrister – Director of Environmental Regulatory Research Group, School of Law, University of Surrey, Surrey, UK Abstract: Sustainable consumption affects two policy fields: consumer policy and environmental policy. Sustainability is an aim of consumer policy, and sustainable consumption is a component of environmental protection policy. One of the elements of both fields of policy is the durability of consumer goods: they should last as long as technically possible to save the resources and energy which would otherwise be necessary to replace them. But it is abundantly clear that “market mechanisms” are failing to achieve wholesale material change in the nature of products and the way in which they are used. Therefore, other mechanisms must be sought to promote more sustainable product systems: regulation must be the primary driver. Building on legislation such as the eco-design laws on a life cycle approach as part of a circular economy is the way forward given that most environmental impacts are currently regulated on a vertical basis where legislation is linked to the process rather than the product. Proponents of the life cycle approach rarely consider the legal implications of embodying it in regulatory frameworks. The necessity to establish an effective regulatory approach (a codex for the law relating to things – a codex rerum) is both to ensure integration of environmental questions into every aspect of product development and to achieve harmonisation and standardisation, commonalities where appropriate, leading to an efficient and effective approach to regulation. The ultimate concern is to achieve a system which is entirely harmonised with the needs of the environment; where an effective synthesis of economic, social and environmental factors is reflected in the means and manner of production, product life management and the behavioural aspects of consumption. This requires a fundamentally different legislative approach which addresses all phases of the life cycle from all dimensions – integrating process and product controls – and which would enable and encourage innovation, particularly in response to environmental needs. Regulation needs to be primary with other instruments available to complement it and it needs to start with government policy and a government determination to achieve a framework in which environmental measures are seen as an integral and indispensable part of the economy in order to advance technological development and generate a thriving market for such developments. This paper considers European Parliament initiatives for a lifespan guarantee for products alongside the development of eco-design regulations to incorporate lifecycle sustainability assessments as regulatory approaches to the advancement of a circular economy. [Report: How an EU Lifespan Guarantee Model could be Implemented Across the European Union, Prof Klaus Tonner and Prof Rosalind Malcolm for the JURI Committee of the European Parliament].

88

A New Investment Framework for Circular Cities Author: Francesca Medda – University College London, QASER Lab, UK Abstract: For the first time in history, more than half the world’s population lives in urban areas and this share is projected to reach 75% in 2050. The cities of today enjoy unprecedented prospects as hubs of economic opportunity and engines of national growth. However, cities are also facing extraordinary challenges, one of which is climate change, given that valuable environmental assets are potentially and increasingly vulnerable to threats from climatic events. Cities necessarily play a central role in actively combating and adapting to climate change impacts. Moreover, demographic imbalances can be witnessed in many cities, ranging from sharp growth prevailing in many transition economies, to aging and declining populations in several of the advanced economies. A third challenge is economic turbulence, which conveys long-lasting impacts, particularly on financing urban investment needs within the evolving policy context. The circular city investment framework treats the city as a consolidated and interdependent entity. Urban investments are thus examined as integrated sustainable urban investments, where a cross-subsidy process between projects can spread and decrease financial risks. Most importantly, the circular city model accelerates investments in projects like the adaptation of urban heritage assets without the need for grants or state aid, but rather by leveraging the different returns of the urban investments. There are few studies that provide comprehensive coverage of the financial aspects of the circular economy in cities. It is possible to find that two main concepts constitute the theoretical frontiers of how business models and investments will sustain and foster the urban circular economy:

1) Innovative financial mechanisms and alternative assets 2) Value creation

Within this context, urban circular economy business models generate outcomes based on the performance of alternative assets such as cultural heritage. In the circular economy production framework, the distinction between producer, provider, consumer, and owner is less stringent, and therefore, from a financial perspective, we assert that circular economy urban models are based on generation, capture and shared values using innovative financing mechanisms. Against this background, the investment framework for circular cities proposes three main approaches:

• Short Cycle Finance: where the aim is value creation

Actions: Maintenance, repair and shift to virtual services. Tools: crowd funding, pay per use, micro-finance, value segmentation.

• Long Cycle Finance: objective is the value capture

Actions: Adaptive reuse of cultural heritage, accessibility, multi-function. Tools: Social public and private partnerships, fiscal incentives and subsidies, revolving funds.

• Cascade Cycle Finance: objective is to determine the shared value

Actions: Creation of new combinations of urban assets, customisation, new products and cooperation in the urban value chain. Tools: blockchain, B2B, C2C, digital finance, urban portfolio. The application of innovative financing mechanisms like blockchains or revolving funds is therefore essential in ensuring that funding is scaled up, the funding gap is closed, and the transition to the circular economy is made. Within this financial framework, it is necessary to identify the social and environmental impacts that will be achieved through participation, co-ownership and co-production, and complementarities, as well as additionality of the existing financial mechanisms.

89

Governing the circular economy: developing effectiveness indicators for multi-level comparative analysis

Authors: David Benson and David Monciardini – University of Exeter, UK Abstract: The circular economy (CE) has become a key normative concept for disrupting unsustainable development patterns through better integrating environmental objectives within business models, raising questions over how its practical application is effectively achieved through governance innovation. A critical characteristic of the circular economy ‘is the valuation of materials within a closed-looped system with the aim to allow for natural resource use while reducing pollution or avoiding resource constraints and sustaining economic growth’ (Winans et al. 2017: 825; see also Ghisellini et al. 2016). Translating this normative aim into business reality is reliant on effective governance at multiple scales, involving steering of state and non-state actors – a feature examined in the paper. Governing the circular economy is being pursued through a variety of policy instruments worldwide. Five main instruments are employed to govern sustainable development generally: regulations; market based instruments (MBIs); information; voluntary approaches; and institutions (Jordan et al. 2012). Top-down regulatory approaches are evident in many contexts, for example in Italy where national and regional legal mechanisms were employed to develop eco-industrial parks that support circular economy principles (Conticelli and Tondelli 2012). Bottom-up, self-organising local networks are also prevalent in the spread of industrial symbiosis through voluntary means in countries such as Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands (Schwarz et al. 1997; Jacobsen 2006; Baas and Boons 2007). Yet, despite the growth of these governance measures for supporting the circular economy, there is little research aimed at developing universal indicators to measure the implementation effectiveness of these multi-level instruments. In developing such indicators, the paper considers three main questions. Firstly, how can we define circular economy governance? Both CE and governance are contested terms within academic and practitioner literature, therefore bringing them together requires careful conceptual consideration. Key normative features of these concepts are therefore developed from a critical review of prior research to establish a composite definition to guide our analyses. Secondly, what empirical indicators could be employed for measuring the effectiveness of circular economy governance? Theoretical notions of multi-level governance implementation effectiveness, derived from Hill and Hupe’s (2014) multiple governance framework, are employed to evaluate the extent to which CE objectives (e.g. materials valuation within production chains) are integrated into policy decision rules, their interpretation in business decision-making and actual application in business practice to achieve CE outcomes. Thirdly, how can these indicators be employed to measure effectiveness of circular economy governance at multiple scales? The paper then provisionally applies the indicators to one regional scale example from the UK to road test its utility, namely Cornwall Council’s Environmental Growth Strategy (Cornwall Council 2017). The potential for using Cornwall as a ‘living laboratory’ for governance learning on regional CE implementation effectiveness, both in the UK and other countries, is then discussed. References: Baas, L. and Boons, F. (2007) ‘The introduction and dissemination of the industrial symbiosis projects in the Rotterdam Harbour and Industry Complex.’ International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management 7 (5-6): 551-77. Conticelli, E. and Tondelli S. (2012) ‘Application of strategic environmental assessment to ecoindustrial parks: Raibano case in Italy. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 139 (3): 185–96. Cornwall Council (2017) Environmental Growth Strategy 2015-2065. Truro: Cornwall Council.

90

Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C. and 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. Hill, M. and Hupe, P. (2014) Implementing public policy. London: Sage. Jacobsen, N.B. (2006) ‘Industrial symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark: a quantitative assessment of economic and environmental aspects.’ Journal of Industrial Ecology 10 (1–2): 239–55. Jordan, A., Benson, D., Wurzel, R.K.W. and Zito, A.R. (2012) ‘Environmental Policy: Governing by Multiple Policy Instruments?’ In J. Richardson (ed.) Constructing a Policy-Making State? Policy Dynamics in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Schwarz, E.J., Steininger, K.W. (1997) ‘Implementing nature’s lesson: the industrial recycling network enhancing regional development.’ Journal of Cleaner Production 5 (1): 47–56. Winans, K., Kendall, A. and Deng, H. (2017) ‘The history and current applications of the circular economy concept.’ Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 68: 825-833.

91

From open dumps to the circular economy – The Portuguese Case

Author: Susana Paixão - Environmental Health Department – Coimbra Health School – Portugal Abstract: Portugal, until 1997 put the vast majority of its waste in open dumps without any kind of control. This year, the “Strategic Plan for Urban Waste” was drawn up, with the following main measures: the construction of adequate infrastructures for the disposal of waste, the closure of waste dumps and the implementation and promotion of selective collection. At this point, there was a clear commitment to the construction of landfills and the country was able to make a positive leap, which was very significant in relation to the scenario it presented until 1997 and what was possible to observe in 2000. Circular Economy is a strategic concept based on the reduction, reuse, recovery and recycling of materials and energy. By replacing the end-of-life concept of linear economy with new circular flows of re-use, restoration, and renewal, in an integrated process circular economy is seen as a key element in promoting decoupling between economic growth and increased consumption of resources The evolution of the European Union's environmental policies is highlighted in waste policies, the hierarchy of waste management, waste prevention, life-cycle thinking and eco-design. In December 2012, the European Commission published a document entitled "Manifesto for an Efficient Europe of Resources", which clearly states "... in a world with increasing pressures on resources and the environment, the EU has no choice but to Be going to the transition to an efficient circular economy of resources and ultimately regenerative. " The proposals already adopted by the European Parliament in March 2017 include ambitious recycling targets, specific targets for the reuse of municipal solid waste and packaging, improved selective waste collection, including bio-waste, European rules in the area of extended producer responsibility and Objectives by 2030. A Circular Economy cannot focus on recycling, as seems to be the bet of the Portuguese government. Its pillars are prevention, reuse, repair, updating and implementation. It will be essential to have mandatory targets that give clear signals to markets and society in general. In December 2016 the European Commission adopted a package of measures aimed at boosting the Circulars which will cause Portugal to have to revise its “Strategic Plan for Urban Waste 2020” given that the country has bet on Mechanical and Biological Treatment. The waste entering these centers comes from undifferentiated collection and the European Union wants recycling targets to be considered only if the waste comes from selective collection. This communication intends to make a state of the art of the evolution of urban waste management policies, in Portugal with particular emphasis on the Circular Economy.

92

Aiding transition to a global Circular Economy: Psychological Perspectives Author: Dr Paul Rogers - Visiting Research Fellow, Goldsmith’s College, University of London

Abstract: Since establishment of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation in 2010, both commercial and academic interest in the circular economy (CE) has rocketed. Yet whilst economic, business and marketing researchers have been quick to recognise the potential benefits, barriers and implications of circular economic thinking academic psychologists, it seems, are lagging behind. As of 12 March 2018 just ten citations involving the term “circular* econom*” as a TITLE (TI) or SUBJECT (SU) identifier appeared in the PsycINFO database; paltry, but up still up from the six in circulation eleven months earlier. Many of these cited papers are, perhaps understandably, inter-disciplinary by design (e.g., Murray, Skene & Haynes, 2017) with two of these studies - one on gossip amongst financial traders (Oberlechner & Hocking, 2004) and one on cycling performance efficiency (Schücker, Fleddermannn, de Lussanet, Elischer, Böhmer & Zentgraf, 2016) - having zero relevance to circular business models!

The relative dearth of (purely) psychological research on circular economic thinking is surprisingly given the mass of consumer psychology literature (e.g. Jansson-Boyd, & Zawisza, 2017; Norton, Rucker & Lamberton, 2015), the rise of environmental (e.g., Koger Du Nann Winter, 2010; Steg, van den Berg & de Groot, 2013) and more recently sustainability psychology (e.g., Jones, 2015; Scott, Amel, Koger & Manning, 2016), plus the expanding sub-discipline of economic psychology (e.g. Lewis, 2018; Kirchler & Hoeltz, 2018; Ranyard, 2018) and its cousin behavioural economics (e.g. Wilkinson & Klaes, 2012). Much work within economic psychology focuses on deviations from rational decision-making, this being the cornerstone of traditional (i.e. non-behavioural) economic theorizing (e.g., Raworth, 2017). As such, economic psychology might be an especially fruitful domain for CE researchers to focus their attention.

A number of academics - mostly housed in university business and/or marketing departments - are already moving towards a (more) psychological understanding of key circular economic concepts, particularly those focusing on possible psycho-social barriers to CE implementation. Such barriers include consumer perception of, and attitudes toward, remanufactured goods (e.g., Abbey, Meloy, Guide & Atalay, 2015; Hazen, Mollenkopf & Wang. 2016; Mugge, Jockin & Cocken, 2017) and access based consumption (e.g., Antikainen & Lammi, 2016; Baumeister & Wangenheim, 2014; Schaefers, Lawson & Kukar-Kinney, 2015).

The current paper offers a brief conceptual overview of several psychological constructs that are likely to influence CE acceptance. Such topics include psychological ownership (e.g., Jussila, Tarkiainen, Sarstedt & Hair, 2015), the extended self (e.g. Dittmar, Halliwell, Banerjee, Garðarsdóttir & Janković, 2008), possession attachment (e.g. Mugge, Schifferstein & Schoormans, 2010), contagion effects (e.g. Bower, Peynircioǧlu, & Rabinovitz, 2018), psychological essentialism (e.g., Gelman, 2013) and more generally, pro-materialistic attitudes and values (e.g., Kasser, 2004). Whilst these concepts may be familiar to many business and marketing scholars, the potential role these could play in diminishing consumer acceptance of remanufactured products and/or access based consumption - hence CE transition - remains largely unexplored. Evidence for such potentials will be considered.

References: Abbey, J. D., Meloy, G. Guide, V. D. R. Jr. & Atalay, S. (2015). Remanufactured products in closed-

loop supply chains for consumer goods. Production & Operations Management, 24(3), 488-503. doi: 10.1111/poms.12238

Antikainen, M., & Lammi, M. (2016). Consumer acceptance of novel sustainable circular services. Proceedings of the 27th International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM) Innovation Symposium (pp. 1-13), Manchester, UK, 19-22 June 2016.

Baumeister, C, & Wangenheim, F.V. (2014). Access vs. ownership: Understanding consumers’ consumption mode preference. SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2463076. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.

93

Bower, L. R., Peynircioǧlu, Z. F., & Rabinovitz, B. E. (2018). Contagion via magical thinking and via mere proximity: Differences as a function of target type. Experimental Psychology, 65(1), 49-60. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000389

Dittmar, H., Halliwell, E., Banerjee, R., Garðarsdóttir, R., & Janković, J. (2008). Consumer culture, identity and well-being: The search for the 'good life' and 'body perfect'. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

Hazen, B. T., Mollenkopf, D. A., & Wang, Y. (2016). Remanufacturing for the circular economy: An examination of consumer switching behavior. Business Strategy & the Environment, doi:10.1002/bse.1929.

Jansson-Boyd, C. V., & Zawisza, M. J. (2017). Routledge international handbook of consumer psychology. New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Jones, R. G. (2015). Psychology of sustainability: An applied perspective. New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Jussila, I., Tarkiainen, A., Sarstedt, M., & Hair, J. F. (2015). Individual psychological ownership: Concepts, evidence, and implications for research in marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 23(2), 121-139. doi:10.1080/10696679.2015.1002330

Kirchler, E. & Hoeltz, E. (2018). Economic psychology: An introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Koger, S. M., & Du Nann Winter, D. (2010). The psychology of environmental problems: Psychology for sustainability., 3rd ed. New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.

Lewis, A. (2018). The Cambridge handbook of psychology and economic behaviour (2nd edition). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511490118

Mugge, R., Jockin, B., & Bocken, N. (2017). How to sell refurbished smartphones? An investigation of different customer groups and appropriate incentives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 147284-296. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.111

Mugge, R., Schifferstein, H. J., & Schoormans, J. L. (2010). Product attachment and satisfaction: Understanding consumers' post-purchase behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27(3), 271-282. doi:10.1108/07363761011038347

Murray, A., Skene, K., & Haynes, K. (2017). The Circular Economy: An interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal Of Business Ethics, 140(3), 369-380. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2

Norton, M. I., Rucker, D. D., & Lamberton, C. (2015). The Cambridge handbook of consumer psychology. New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.

Oberlechner, T., & Hocking, S. (2004). Information sources, news, and rumors in financial markets: Insights into the foreign exchange market. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25(3), 407-424. doi:10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00189-7

Ranyad, R. (2018). Economic psychology. Chichester, UK: British Psychological Society / Wiley Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist.

Lodon, UK: Random House Business Books Schaefers, T., Lawson, S. J., & Kukar-Kinney, M. (2015). How the burdens of ownership promote

consumer usage of access-based services. Marketing Letters, 27(3), 569-577. doi:10.1007/s11002-015-9366-x.

Schaefers, T., Wittkowski, K., Benoit (née Moeller), S., & Ferraro, R. (2016). Contagious effects of customer misbehavior in access-based services. Journal of Service Research, 19(1), 3-21. doi:10.1177/1094670515595047

Schücker, L., Fleddermann, M., de Lussanet, M., Elischer, J., Böhmer, C., & Zentgraf, K. (2016). Focusing attention on circular pedaling reduces movement economy in cycling. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 279-17. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.07.002

Scott, B. A., Amel, E. L., Koger, S. M., & Manning, C. M. (2016). Psychology for sustainability., 4th ed. New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Steg, L., van den Berg, A. E., & de Groot, J. M. (2013). Environmental psychology: An introduction. BPS Blackwell.

Wilkinson, N. & Klaes, M. (2012). An introduction to behavioural economics (2nd edition). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan

94

Implementing Circular Economy Principles in Economic Activity Areas in Luxembourg Authors: Paul Schosselet and Jeannot Schroeder – ImpaKT Sàrl, Luxembourg Doughlas Mulhall – EPEA International Umweltforschung, Hamburg Germany Abstract: Due to the limited territory of Luxembourg and its spatial master plan dedicating 600 Ha more land to economic activity areas (EAA), it is of utmost importance to address impacts on neighbors and the environment, such as air or water emissions, noise and traffic. Recently, several big industrial development projects have also raised questions about the distribution of limited resources, namely water (Padiou, 2018). In 2014, the Luxemburgish Government commissioned the study “Luxembourg as a knowledge capital and testing ground for circular economy”, which served as a blueprint for subsequent initiatives to activate the potential socio-economic benefits identified by the study (Hansen et al., 2014). In 2016 the Ministry of Economy commissioned a follow-up study focusing on EAA. This paper describes the results. It presents tools and methods for developing EAA according to the principles of the circular economy (CE). The objectives of the study included analysis of the major material and energy stocks and flows, generated by the extension of an existing EAA Eselborn-Lentzweiler in Northern Luxembourg (Schosseler et al., 2017). The scope of the study included industrial symbiosis at the meso-scale (Ghisellini et al., 2016), but adopted a more holistic approach, based on Cradle to Cradle principles (McDonough and Braungart, 2002). For example, an EEA is designed and built in a modular way, so that residual value and materials health are improved, and the land can be returned to a greenfield at the end of the area’s use phase or repurposed without any loss of quality. Material stocks and flows, used for infrastructure, equipment and production respect biological and technological cycles. Energy is renewable, with a focus on solar and geothermal in the present case. Particular attention is paid to the integration of the EAA into the natural, geographical and social ecosystems, aiming at the creation of positive impacts for the neighborhoods, e.g. biodiversity and quality of life, rather than the traditional minimization of negative impacts. This includes multifunctional facilities and sharing of services not only within the area, but also with neighboring villages. The core of the methodology is a streamlined co-creation process, that involves multiple stakeholders, connected to the EAA at various stages, starting from the early planning. Every stage of the process is tied to a practical toolbox with qualitative and quantitative circular objectives for setting a roadmap that integrates the above-mentioned principles. Embedding this methodology into the legislative and regulatory framework for the planning and managing of the EAA is an important step. It provides not only security for companies, willing to adopt CE principles for their implementation in the area as well as their own activities but contributes to aligning economic objectives with environmental and social benefits, an aspect recognized as crucial for the contribution of the CE to a sustainable development (Murray et al., 2017). A strong involvement of public actors responsible for the development of the EAA, as well as realigning the sequence of their involvement are also key elements of the methodology. The approach is applicable to EAA beyond Luxembourg. References: Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C. and Ulgiati, S. (2016) A review on circular economy: The expected

transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 114, pp. 11–32.

Hansen, K., Mulhall, D. and Zils, M. (2014) Luxembourg as a knowledge capital and testing ground for the circular economy: National Roadmap for Positive Impacts. Tradition, Transition, Transformation, EPEA Internationale Umweltforschung GmbH. Available at https://www.luxinnovation.lu/news/luxembourg-knowledge-capital-testing-ground-circular-economy/ (accessed 9 March 2018)

McDonough, W. and Braungart, M. (2002) Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things, New York, North Point Press.

95

Murray, A., Skene, K. and Haynes, K. (2017) The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 140(3), pp. 369–380.

Padiou, G. (2018) Les yaourts grecs divisent Schneider et Dieschbourg [Online]. Available at http://www.lessentiel.lu/fr/luxembourg/story/Les-yaourts-grecs-divisent-Schneider-et-Dieschbourg-20029627 (accessed 9 March 2018)

Schosseler, P., Schroeder J., Mulhall D. (2017) Méthodes et outils pour la mise en œuvre de l’économie circulaire dans des zones d’activités économiques au Luxembourg, +ImpaKT Sàrl, EPEA Internationale Umweltforschung GmbH. Available at http://ecocirc-zae.lu/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Ecocirc_ZAE_LU_Rapport-1.pdf (accessed 9 March 2018)

96

Energy system change: Insights for the circular economy

Author: Iain Soutar - Energy Policy Group, University of Exeter, UK Abstract: Energy systems in the UK and beyond are undergoing processes of transformation / disruption across a number of dimensions, all with relevance to circular economy (CE) principles. Ongoing decarbonisation is reducing its environmental impact. The use of renewable energy technologies and associated technologies means that assets are increasingly decentralized and closer to end-use. The digitalization of energy and other sectors is promising to enhance the value of such assets. And together, there is the potential for greater levels of democratization in terms of system design, decision-making, and ownership being dispersed among publics. Considering these trends in relation to CE offers insights into the adoption of CE principles more generally. First, the coevolution of multiple sociotechnical innovations in the context of the climate change imperative is identified as a key driver of energy systems becoming more aligned with CE principles. Second, material changes in energy systems are encouraging a paradigm shift in terms of the principles around which energy systems are governed, i.e. from redundancy to flexibility. And third, while there is significant momentum behind these trends, they are also characterized by deep uncertainty, in terms of both their speed and direction, and also the nature and extent of their impacts across social, environmental and economic dimensions. Reflecting on ongoing energy system change in this way offers insights into how CE principles can be understood, and shaped, elsewhere.

97

London – An inclusive Circular City?

Author: James Taylor – Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK Abstract: Cities are central to global transformations and are set to play a pivotal role in meeting the targets set by both the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement. The stereotypical view is that cities and urbanisation are economically advantageous, with cities now accounting for over 75% of global GDP (The Circle Economy, 2018); yet simultaneously, cities are also seen as socially and environmentally deleterious, undermining global sustainability. At present, cities consume 75% of global natural resources and 80% of the global energy supply (UNEP-DTIE, 2012), whilst cities continue to be associated with social problems such crime, violence and poverty. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, notably through SDG 11 (UN, 2015), recognises the global importance of cities, the challenges they face, and the need for urban transformations in meeting the targets of the two global frameworks. Within this context, a number of cities are turning to the concept of the “circular economy” (CE), which re-imagines how flows of resources moving through economies might be ‘closed’, to inform urban transformations for a more sustainable future. The CE concept has been widely utilised by businesses and governments but has received relatively little critical academic engagement. Questions remain over just how transformative a concept it might be; with some critics arguing that its current design focused primarily on business models, whilst neglecting the need for wider structural change (Lemille, 2016). Moreover, the application of the CE concept to the city-scale is a recent phenomenon, and consequently it has yet to receive much academic attention, thus significant knowledge gaps on “circular cities” remain (Circular Cities Hub, 2016). London is an example of a city employing the CE concept; with the London Waste & Recycling Board (funded by the Greater London Authority) stating that its “vision is for London to be the leader in the delivery of circular economy” (LWARB, 2017), whilst also labelling London as “The Circular Economy Capital” (LWARB, 2015). London is a "global city", yet social issues such as inclusivity and inequality persist, as recently highlighted by the Grenfell Fire and Windrush scandal. This research primarily seeks to critically engage with London's adoption of the CE concept, particularly examining whether London's drive to become a "circular city" promises greater inclusivity. This is an important question, as many urban sustainability approaches have been critiqued for failing to address wider social issues, instead prioritising the economy and the environment. The overarching research question will be answered through three sub-questions: (1) Motivation – why is London adopting CE as a strategy? (2) How is London adopting CE as a strategy? (3) and what are the prospects and implications for inclusive urban transformation? By answering these questions, this research will contribute to a growing body of work that outlines emergent cases of circular cities in the 21st century and should contribute to addressing the existing knowledge gaps on "circular cities". To do so, this research draws on the approach taken by Prendeville et al (2017) to map six European cities that are in the process of adopting and implementing CE strategies. Prendeville et al construct and analyse cases using three types of data: documents; project mapping, using criteria from the ReSOLVE model (EMF, 2015); and interviews. Taking this approach and applying it to London provides greater scope for cross-case analysis. This should better situate London’s understanding of CE and its adoption strategy relative to other European cities. The work will also draw on recent work by IDS on Inclusive Urbanisation and Cities (IUC) to examine the findings in respect to inclusivity (Kasper et al, 2017).

98

References: Circular Cities Hub (2016) Circular Cities: Strategies, Challenges and Knowledge Gaps. September 2016. Available at: http://www.circularcitieshub.com/research-report/ Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2015) Delivering the Circular Economy: A Toolkit for Policymakers, Available at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/EllenMacArthurFoundation_PolicymakerToolkit.pdf Lemille, A. (2016) Circular Economy 2.0. April 2016. Available at: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/alexandre-lemille/circular-economy-20_b_9376488.html Kasper, E., McGranahan, G., te Lintelo, D.J.H., Gupte, J., Tranchant, J.P., Lakshman, R.W.D. and Nesbitt-Ahmed, Z., 2017. Inclusive Urbanisation and Cities in the Twenty-First Century (No. IDS Evidence Report; 220). IDS. LWARB (2015) Towards a Circular Economy. Available at: https://www.lwarb.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/LWARB-circular-economy-report_web_09.12.15.pdf LWARB (2017) London’s Circular Economy Route Map. Available at: https://www.lwarb.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/LWARB-London%E2%80%99s-CE-route-map_16.6.17a_singlepages_sml.pdf Prendeville, S., Cherim, E. and Bocken, N., 2017. Circular cities: mapping six cities in transition. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. The Circle Economy (2018) The Circularity Gap Report, 2018. An analysis of the Circular State of the Global Economy. January 2018. Available at: https://www.circularity-gap.world/ UN (2015) Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf UNEP-DTIE (2012) Cities and Buildings, UNEP Initiatives and Projects. Sustainable Consumption and Production Branch. Available at: http://www.unep.org/SBCI/pdfs/Cities_and_BuildingsUNEP_DTIE_Initiatives_and_projects_hd.pdf

99

The Circular Economy Imaginary: Revolutionary or Mundane?

Authors: Mike Tennant - Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London Fenna Blomsma - Institute for Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark Geraldine Brennan - CEEDR, Middlesex University Business School Abstract: In this paper we use the concept of imaginaries to critically explore the claims made by interpreters of the circular economy (CE), in particular the extent to which the CE can be seen as a radical departure from current industrial and economic practice and the likelihood of it being successful. Imaginaries can be thought of as a set of shared narratives and discourses that enable common understandings and activities, legitimizing particular ideas and practices that do and ought to happen (Taylor, 2002, Wright et al., 2013). They emerge when individuals or groups create new vocabularies that re-describe the present situation and provide a means to a better way of thinking about and acting in the world (Levitas, 2013). The circular economy can be thought of as an umbrella concept connecting a related set of ideas imagining new industrial production and consumption practices that result in the extension of resource life (Blomsma and Brennan, 2017). These ideas variously consider economic growth, job creation and environmental regeneration as direct drivers of this transition. As an analytical tool imaginaries allow an interdisciplinary and systemic critique of ideas and can be used to gauge the extent to which they may diffuse and take root in the social discourse. Barnett (2013) provides a framework for analysing imaginaries and exploring the degree to which they have the potential for meaningful change and are, or could be, embedded in existing societal structures and practices. The greater the degree of engagement with those, the more likely it may be that an imaginary may effect a transition. Here, various circular economy interpretations are explored for their range of engagement with theoretical and practical work; the depth to which they engage with the underlying principles and norms that structure industry and society; the degree of criticality and hope that the ideas espouse; the extent to which they increase individual and societal well-being; and the extent to which they allow for the reflexive evolution of the interpretations themselves, in the context of other societal changes. We conclude that the circular economy, as currently practiced, does not live up to the promise of the rhetoric that it was born out of. While there are glimmers of hope, the interpretations are focused almost solely and narrowly on developing a business case for action, with wider societal, political and environmental concerns being excluded in most cases. We are lead to question the idea of the circular economy as being revolutionary and ask what it does that wouldn’t already be done under economic signals. We provide some thoughts as to how this may be rectified References: BLOMSMA, F and BRENNAN. 2017. The Emergence of Circular Economy: A New Framing around Prolonging Resource Productivity. J. Industrial Ecology, 21(3), 603-614 BARNETT, R. 2013. Imagining the university, Routledge. LEVITAS, R. 2013. Utopia as method: The imaginary reconstitution of society, Palgrave Macmillan TAYLOR, C. 2002. Modern social imaginaries. Public culture, 14, 91-124. WRIGHT, C., NYBERG, D., DE COCK, C. & WHITEMAN, G. 2013. Future imaginings: organizing in response to climate change. Organization, 20, 647-658.

100

The role of law and regulation in transitioning to a circular economy Authors: Shann Turnbull - PhD, Principal: International Institute for Self-Governance, Sydney, Australia Prof. Dr. sc. Darko Tipurić, - Head of Department of Organization and Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, Croatia Abstract: The objective of this paper is to outline the role of law and regulation in transitioning to a circular economy. A vision for a circular economy is presented by reforming capitalism to mimic the laws of nature. Bio-mimicry results in replacing static, exclusive and perpetual property rights to realty, enterprises and money with ecological rules that are dynamic, inclusive and time limited. It also requires replacing silos of centralized hierarchical command and control systems of governance with distributed ecological networks of decision-making, communications and control. Elinor Ostrom shared the 2009 Nobel economics prize for identifying how ecological governance that she described as “polycentric compound republics” was widely used in pre-modern societies to avoid “the tragedy of the commons”. Modern humans are the only biota that attempts to reliably manage complexity with top down hierarchies. Hierarchies can only manage complexity incompletely because of bias, losses and omissions in the communication channels between different levels. Ecological governance can manage complexity comprehensively. Because ecological ownership and control introduce substantial economic benefits for the majority, they present compelling benefits for political activists to promote. There are manifold political, economic, social and environmental benefits arising from distributing the ownership and control of income producing assets widely to fund a Universal Wellbeing Income (UWI). The transition to a circular economy is immediately attractive as tax incentives can be used that at the same time reduce the size and cost of government. A crucial requirement for a circular economy to maintain the environment and humanity for eternity is the need to reduce the global population to a level that can be serviced by renewable services of nature. A UWI is one requirement to avoid over population by the poor producing children to look after them in their old age. Facilitating legislation is suggested for citizens to initiate local referendums to adopt urban property rights that provide sustainable affordable housing and infrastructure. New laws and regulations are required so official currencies do not: (a) create inefficiencies and climate change from mispricing resources, or (b) earn interest to exacerbate resource misallocation and inequality. Corporate constitutions require changes to minimize overpayments to investors creating inefficiencies and inequality not reported by accountants and so not discussed by economists or politicians. The problems created by non-ecological property rights have been exacerbated by democracy being degraded from the power and influence of a small minority who own the majority of private assets and influence the use of public assets. Achieving a sustainable steady state circular economy requires scholars and activists educating citizens how it can become more equitable, efficient resilient in providing wellbeing while consuming less. Democratizing property creates a third way to distribute national income other than through work or welfare to reduce the size and cost of government. Ecological ownership that funds a UWI removes the need for compulsory private funding of pensions and allows policies of full employment to be replaced with policies of fulfillment in work and/or leisure. References: iTurnbull, S. 2018, ‘A vision for an ecocentric society and how to get there’, The Ecological Citizen, 2018, 1(2): 141-142, <http://www.ecologicalcitizen.net/pdfs/Vol%201%20No%202.pdf>. ii Turnbull, S. 2015, ‘Sustaining society with ecological capitalism’, Human Systems Management, 34 (2015), 17-32, http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228320236_Sustaining_Society_with_Ecological_Capitalism.

101

iii Pirson, M. and Turnbull, S. 2015, ‘The future of corporate governance: Network governance – A lesson from the financial crisis’, with Michael Pirson1, Human Systems Management, 34 (2015), 81-89, <http://ssrn.com/abstract=1570924>. iv Nobel Prize Press Release 12 October 2009, https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2009/press.html v Ostrom, V. and Ostrom, E. 1971, ‘Public choice: A different approach to the study of public administration’, Public Administration Review, 31(2): 203-216. Ostrom, E. 1990, Governing the commons: The evolution for institutions for collective action, Cambridge University Press: UK. vi Turnbull, S. 2018, ‘Reliably simplifying the management of complexity’, Royal Society of the Arts, March 9, <https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/rsa-blogs/2018/03/reliably-simplifying-the-management-of-complexity>. vii Turnbull, S. 2015, ‘Winning government with policies for reducing inequality’, Evatt Foundation, 25 March, at: <http://www.evatt.org.au/news/winning-government-reducing-inequality.html>. A summary of: Turnbull, S. 1975, Democratising the wealth of Nations, Company Directors Association of Australia, Sydney, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1146062. Book launched by the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, Dr. Jim Cairns PhD. His review is posted at: https://www.finsia.com/docs/default-source/jassa-new/jassa-1976/a-review-of-shann-turnbulls-book-democratising-the-wealth-of-nations viii Refer to Chapter 14, pp. 83-87, Turnbull, 1975, op. cit. n. 7. ix The tax incentives are illustrated in: Turnbull, S. 2000, ‘Stakeholder governance: A cybernetic and property rights analysis’, in Robert Tricker (ed.) Corporate Governance: The History of Management Thought, pp. 401-413, Ashgate Publishing, UK https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=11355 and in the Appendix of Turnbull 1975, op. cit n. 7. x Turnbull, S. 2017, ‘Democratising the wealth of cities: Self-financing urban development’, Environment and Urbanisation, 29(1): 237-250, April 2017, DOI: 10.1177/0956247816685985. Published online March 24, abstract and link at: <http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956247816685985>. Turnbull, S. 2017, ‘Can Australia half the cost of housing as achieved by UK first Garden City?’ Presented to National Housing Conference, Sydney Convention Centre, 1 December, power points at: http://www.nhc.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/1201_0900_C2.03_NHA17_Shann-Turnbull.pdf with audio at: https://www.ahuri.edu.au/__data/assets/mp3_file/0021/15546/MIN18-Land-use-planning-value-capture-and-density-the-keys-to-affordable-housing-supply.mp3 after the first 65.5 minutes. 12.5 minutes presentation with 6 minutes Q&A. xi Turnbull, S. 2010, ‘Money, Renewable Energy and Climate Change’, Financiële Studievereniging Rotterdam, (FSR Forum), 12:2, pp.14–17, 19-22, 24, 25, 28-29, February, 2010, Erasmus University, Rotterdam. Working paper (2008) available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1304083. xii Turnbull, S. 2016, ‘Terminating currency options for distressed economies’, Athens Journal of Social Science, vol. 3, issue 3, July 2016, pp. 195—214, available from: <http://www.athensjournals.gr/social/2016-3-3-3-Turnbull.pdf>. Athens Institute for Education and Research: Working Paper, available from: <http://www.atiner.gr/papers/POL2015-1818.pdf>, also from: <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2728750>. xiii Turnbull, S. 1973, Time Limited Corporations, Economic Society of Australia and New Zealand, N.S.W. Division, Monograph No. 340, August, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-6281.1973.tb00173.x Turnbull, S. 1998, ‘Should ownership last for ever?’ The Journal of Social Economics, 27(3): 343-363, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1053535799800948 xiv Turnbull, S. 2014, "Strategies for promoting a sustainable de-growth society" presented to 4th International De-growth Conference in a Session on: ‘Drivers and strategies for social transformation’, room HS7, 14:30 – 16:30, Friday, September 5th, 2014, Leipzig University, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1769349

102

Innovation and waste management in the field of competitive incentive mechanisms. Two loose ends of a circular economy?

Author: Fabian Unterlass – Austrian Insitute of Economic Research Abstract: Innovation and new technologies on the one hand and circular economy on the other hand are two central concepts for our economic and social system. Innovation is seen both as a driving force for economic growth and technological progress, but also as a solution to major societal challenges such as climate change, demographic change, mobility, etc. The concept of circular economy is necessary in order to preserve the limited resources of our planet for future generations. In this paper I look at the compatibility of the circular economy and innovation in a competitive market-based incentive system. The competition of individuals, companies and other actors leads to the primacy of the decision criterion efficiency. The question of economic profitability arises both for those companies that want to take innovative paths (in the form of a new product or production process) and for waste management companies that want to reintroduce existing materials as secondary raw materials into the economic cycle. To put it bluntly, it has to pay off. The decision criterion of "it must pay off" becomes all the more binding the stronger the competitive pressure is. When it comes to economic survival, other potentially relevant decision factors take a back seat. The resulting incentives result in at least three serious areas of conflict between the innovation system and the implementation of a circular economy if the actors behave in line with the system. Firstly, the short lifespan of innovative products and equipment is at odds with the longevity and repairability that are important for a circular economy, as is also implicitly emphasised in the concept of the waste hierarchy. Secondly, the complexity generated by innovation and the large number of products, devices and compounds make it difficult to achieve high recycling rates. And thirdly, in order to resolve this complexity and diversity through targeted recycling and to return the raw materials back into the cycle, knowledge of the composition and structure of the products to be recycled is of central importance. However, this is counteracted by the interest of (innovative) product manufacturers to protect or keep secret their intellectual property. In this paper I analyse the underlying mechanisms. It becomes apparent that the relevant actors behave rationally from a (business) individual perspective with the given competition-based incentive system, but the system makes ecologically meaningful and necessary cooperative solutions for establishing circular material flows, such as those recorded in the waste hierarchy, more difficult. Competition thus undermines efforts and initiatives in many areas of the circular economy. In solving the major societal challenges, our society is very much placing its hopes in technological progress and the decision-making aid of market-economy pricing. If this approach is to be sustainable, then we must now begin to preserve the necessary high-tech raw materials for future generations. For this purpose, adjustments in the incentive-specific framework conditions of our economic and social system are absolutely necessary.

103

How circular value is created for diverse stakeholders, what value is created and how are differing interests accommodated?

Authors: Tobias Widmer, Dr Benny Tjahjono, Prof Michael Bourlakis and Dr Emel Aktas - Cranfield University, Cranfield School of Management, UK Abstract: Product-Service Systems (PSS), especially in their most advanced form, in which the solution is priced on an agreed performance rather than the resources involved are promoted as an emerging business model and a key building block of a circular economy (CE). However, research addressing sustainability-related issues in such business models was predominantly conducted for rather simple or highly standardised products but not so in an industrial context of more complex and customised, low-volume/ high-value products. The concept of CE derives from different schools of thought and has now come into a phase in which its validity is challenged and rigour is required to establish the concept and take it to achieve coherence in both academia and practice. Although CE is generalisable to a certain degree, the operationalisation of circular strategies with the aim to accomplish sustainable development differ within industries and sectors and suitable CE principles for industrial PSS seem to be required. Such CE principles can be defined as a moral rule or code of conduct in order to accomplish SD, governing behaviour and decision making with the aim to stepwise transform from a linear to a free, industrialised and circular economy. The study presents a set of CE principles derived from the literature to give guidance and clarity to practitioners in an industrial environment to align their decision-making process with the accomplishment of SD. We define integral value creation as the trade-off between benefits and sacrifices for multiple stakeholders involved or affected by a company’s activities. This approach is suggested to assess the overall value in the PSS and to identify the actions required to accomplish SD when orchestrating the supply chain network. The construct of integral value creation is supported by the aim to strive for strong sustainability, which assumes that man-made and natural capital are complementary, but not limitlessly interchangeable. The aim of this research project is to explore how the application of CE principles in an industrial context determines value creation and trade-offs for the stakeholders, hence give guidance to integral value maximisation.The contribution of this research is expected to be twofold, first by identifying the relationships that lead to trade-offs in value for the different actors, it is expected to align the interests in supply chain network and maximise the value in the system globally, rather than optimise it locally. Second, by empirically investigating the effects of CE principles on the value creation in the PSS it is expected to develop strategies to accomplish sustainable development by infusing CE principles in a company’s decision-making process and by doing so strengthen the link between CE and SD.By understanding the alignment of interests among the actors, the supply chain network can be strengthened as a unit and lead to competitive advantage, and to a true win-win situation for all participants. Understanding these connections is expected to lead to the identification of certain network topologies that support the implementation of circular PSS supply chains and contribute towards validating a CE. References: [1–7] [1] Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Towards a Circular Economy: Business Rationale for an

Accelerated Transition, 2015. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004. [2] F. Blomsma, G. Brennan, The Emergence of Circular Economy: A New Framing Around

Prolonging Resource Productivity, J. Ind. Ecol. 21 (2017) 603–614. doi:10.1111/jiec.12603. [3] J. Kirchherr, D. Reike, M. Hekkert, Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114

definitions, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 127 (2017) 221–232. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005.

[4] E. Loiseau, L. Saikku, R. Antikainen, N. Droste, B. Hansjürgens, K. Pitkänen, P. Leskinen, P. Kuikman, M. Thomsen, Green economy and related concepts: An overview, J. Clean. Prod.

104

139 (2016) 361–371. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.024. [5] S. Evans, D. Vladimirova, M. Holgado, K. Van Fossen, M. Yang, E.A. Silva, C.Y. Barlow,

Business Model Innovation for Sustainability: Towards a Unified Perspective for Creation of Sustainable Business Models, Bus. Strateg. Environ. 26 (2017) 597–608. doi:10.1002/bse.1939.

[6] M. Schenkel, H. Krikke, M.C.J. Caniëls, E. van der Laan, Creating integral value for stakeholders in closed loop supply chains, J. Purch. Supply Manag. 21 (2015) 155–166. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2015.04.003.

[7] BSI, Framework for implementing the principles of the circular economy in organizations – BS 8001:2017, (2017).

105

Can intelligent collection integrate informal collection for urban resource recycling in China? Authors: Yanyan Xue – State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Tsinghua University, China and Twente Centre for Studies in Technology and Sustainable Development, Twente University, Netherlands Zongguo Wen - State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Tsinghua University, China Hans Th. A. Bressers - Twente Centre for Studies in Technology and Sustainable Development, Twente University, Netherlands Abstract: Collection is the key section in sustainable solid waste management and resource recycling. In many developing countries, collection is mainly undertaken by informal sector and traditional collection, which is accompanied by the environmental, social, healthy and efficiency problems. Some top-down integration of informal collection experiments are proved unsuccessful. Meanwhile, internet and communication technology application in waste management generate new collection model: intelligent collection. In China, there are more than 100 emerging companies who engaged in intelligent collection of recyclables. Does such new collection become effective way to integrate the informal and traditional collection? To answer the question, we selected and interviewed 15 Chinese intelligent collection companies, identified their organizational model and comparative advantages, and analyzed their potentials to integrate the informal collection. We fund that intelligent collection in China are operated in two major patterns: human-human interaction collection (HH) and human–machine interaction collection (HM). HM collection is collection by machine. The machine is a cabinet embedded with ICTs devices including sensor, barcode and data communication devices. HH collection refers to collection by collators via assistance of ICTs. Intelligent collection in China has comparative advantages to informal collection, these include: 1) intelligent collection is more organized collection operated by company while informal collection is organized by freelance vendor, and 2) intelligent collection has more efficient material and cash flow, 3) intelligent collection is a multi-profit making model while informal collection is single linear profit making. 4) Intelligent collection can accumulate accurate and traceable massive data for policy making and management. Therefore, intelligent collection has potential to integrate the informal collection with these comparative advantages. However, in the current transition status of China, informal sector is in depression due to the various social, economical and city planning factors. Intelligent collection will partly integrate informal sector in short term, but replace it in the long run. Intelligent collection in China is still in its early stage, sustainable business model is not clear yet, the companies are anticipating substantial favorable policy from government. In the future, intelligent collection application in two areas is promising. First is establishing recyclables collection as supplement to the MSW management system can help reduce the waste generation and public cost. Second is establishing intelligent collection platform for some high resource value waste within the EPR framework can help to develop a formal collection system, ensuring the quantity and quality collection. There are experiential cases trailing for these two area.

106

THEME D: Sector and material specific application

• What enables, constrains or channels renewable energy system innovation at a local, regional, national and international level?

• What enables, constrains or channels materials system innovation (e.g. plastics, fibres, paper, minerals) at a local, regional, national and international level?

• What are the implications and strategic responses by industry sectors to CE disruption (e.g. automotive, high value manufacturing, extractive, aerospace, electronics, etc)

• What are the key drivers and barriers in a transition to a bio-based CE? • What is the role of regenerative agriculture in reshaping biological metabolisms and agri-food

systems? • Do CE models of re-use, re-purpose, re-manufacture integrate into life cycle analysis and other

analytical approaches (sustainable materials management.) • Materials in cities, which materials should go circular first? • Critical materials and CE – in tension or alignment? • What are the enablers for collaboration across different supply chains?

107

The development of a circular building assessment methodology encompassing environmental, economic and social parameters

Authors: Gilli Hobbs, Flavie Lowres, Kiru Balson, Mirko Farnetani - BRE, UK Katherine Tebbatt Adams - Loughborough University, UK Kathryn Bourke, Whole Life Ltd, Watford, UK Wim Debacker, Neethi Rajagopalan, Wai Chung Lam, Sofie De Regel - VITO, Belgium Elma Durmisevic - University of Twente, Netherlands Key words: Circular economy, buildings, economic, environmental, social, assessment, reversible building design, building information modelling. The built environment has been identified as priority sector for implementing circular economy approaches due to the large amount of resources it consumes and the sizeable volume of waste produced (Vanner et al. 2014; LWARB 2015; CircleEconomy 2016; Ellen MacArthur Foundation & SYSTEMIQ 2016). An important enabling factor for the circular economy is the ability to measure the economic, environmental and social impact of circularity approaches compared to the present linear approaches. Whilst there has been some research on this at a macro scale (Haas et al. 2015; Ellen MacArthur Foundation & McKinsey & Company 2014; Mitchell & James 2015; Pratt & Lenaghan 2015) and in specific sectors such as Information technology, textiles and consumer goods (Benton et al. 2015; Wilson 2015; Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2013) there has been less focus on the built environment, particularly, at the building level. However, it is increasingly common for economic and environmental assessments to be undertaken in the building sector to aid decision making. This paper presents the methodology of a circular building assessment (CBA) methodology which has been developed as part of the EU funded Horizon 2020 project, ‘Building As Material Banks’ (BAMB). In developing the methodology, a number of sequential steps have been undertaken including a review of current literature and practice, practitioner workshops to inform the scope and user’s needs, ‘unpicking’ current economic, environmental, social assessment and reversible building design methodologies and the subsequent ‘flagging’ of issues which may affect the measurement of circularity, together with proposed solutions. A key issue identified is that in order for a building owner to understand the full environmental benefits derived from the reuse of components in the building, the previous and potential future lifecycles should be considered. Additionally, there is a lack of data available to differentiate the environmental impacts of reuse compared to recycling. Economic assessment present difficulties in terms of the discount rates used, the boundary of a single building lifecycle, the uncertainty of residual values and how they should be included. The reversible building design assessment indicates the reuse potential of buildings and products and provides indicators of reversibility/circularity of a building. A case study of an office building has been used to test the current assessment approaches, acting as a ‘business as usual’ baseline, with a number of circular scenarios modelled including lifetime extension, reusable partitions and reclaimed bricks, to show the effectiveness of the proposed solutions. These solutions are then presented in a methodology, which encompasses how data can be derived to undertake a circular building assessment, through the use of Building Information Modelling (BIM), standard building specifications and product information, using vehicles such as material passports and environmental product declarations. The methodology also encompasses the presentation of the CBA assessment, as a suite of key performance indicators at both the building and elemental level, as well as the information requirements at each stage of the design process, together with the role of the key stakeholders. The methodology will be further refined by testing it on circular scenarios for a number of case study buildings. Furthermore, the methodology will be expanded to enable it to be applied and tested on existing buildings. These present a number of challenges in that the type and amount of information available to undertake a CBA is likely to be limited. Moreover, the opportunity to undertake circularity

108

approaches may be fewer. When fully tested and refined, the methodology will be instrumental in aiding decision-makers in understanding the economic, environmental and social consequences of designing and operating circular buildings, helping the building sector to transition to a circular economy. References: Benton, D., Coats, E. & Hazell, J., 2015. A circular economy for smart devices. Green Alliance,

London, UK Circle Economy, 2016. Circular Amsterdam: a vision and action agenda for the city and metropolitan

area, Circle Economy, Amsterdam, Netherlands Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013. Towards the Circular Economy - Opportunites for consumer

good sector, Cowes, UK Ellen MacArthur Foundation & McKinsey & Company, 2014. Towards the Circular Economy :

Accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains. World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland

Ellen MacArthur Foundation & SYSTEMIQ, 2016. Achieving “Growth Within,” Cowes, UK Haas, W. et al., 2015. How circular is the global economy?: An assessment of material flows, waste

production, and recycling in the European union and the world in 2005. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 19(5), pp.765–777.

LWARB, 2015. London The Circular Economy Capital, LWARB, London. Mitchell, P. & James, K., 2015. Economic Growth Potentials of More Circular Economies, WRAP,

Banbury, UK Pratt, K. & Lenaghan, M., 2015. The Carbon Impacts of the Circular Economy Summary Report,

Zero Waste Scotland, Stirling, UK Vanner, R. et al., 2014. Scoping study to identify potential circular economy actions , priority

sectors, material flows and value chains, European Commisson, Brussels, Belgium Wilson, L., 2015. The sustainable future of the Scottish textiles sector: challenges and opportunities

of introducing a circular economy model. Textiles and Clothing Sustainability, 1(1), p.5.

109

“Feeding bellies not bins” - Closing the loop in the food systems to reduce food waste in UK. Authors: Maria Ariza and Shova Thapa Karki - Business and Management, University of Sussex, UK Research background and the aim Current food production and consumption system is highly unsustainable following the linear-system of ‘take-make-dispose’ (Borrello et al., 2017). This linear system, the basis of our economic production, does not have any space for the waste. However, food waste is a prevalent issue, posing a significant societal, economic, nutritional and environmental challenge (Halloran et al., 2014). Increasing demand for food, growing population and high rates of food waste across the food system calls for innovative sustainable solutions (Jurgilevich et al., 2016; Borrello et al., 2017). Researchers have emphasised on the role of circular economy in reducing food waste and contributing to sustainable food systems (Jurgilevich et al., 2016; Borrello et al., 2017). However, there is a lack of evidence on the role of circular economy in reducing food waste (Jurgilevich et al., 2016). The aim of this research is to fill this gap and explore how the circular economy approach can minimise the problem of food waste in the case study of the UK. Methodology Circular economy in the food system implies reducing waste generated, reuse of food, utilization of by-products and nutrient recycling (Jurgilevich et al., 2016). This research focussed on the end of the food supply chain, retail and final consumption. It adopted a case study approach to explore six case studies including two social initiatives (e.g. cooking with wasted food and campaigning to reduce it), and four businesses (e.g. restaurant, brewing company, retailer and catering company). The diverse cases provided a better understanding of wider issues in implementing circular economy to reduce food waste as well as the role of different actors in reducing food waste. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews (founders, employee, and experts), and secondary materials (company reports and website materials). Thematic analysis, using coding and themes identification, guided the analysis of the interviews and secondary materials. Results and implications Among the six case studies, four cases have adopted circular economy practices, such as circular supplies and resource recovery. The drivers for adopting the approach included frustration due to the lack of interest from government and retailers to reduce food waste, raise awareness among consumers, and to show that business can contribute to sustainability. The other two businesses are still following a linear model making profit from volume. However, they have implemented some measures to reduce food waste to reduce costs and to improve their brand image. Facilitating factors for adopting circular economy included close partnerships and collaborations between all actors. Two of the main barriers to implement circular economy approach identified from the cases were regulations and consumer’s attitudes. Findings showed that circular economy could play an important role in minimising food waste. This requires collaboration, change and transformation from multiple stakeholders, such as government revising their policies, social initiatives educating and involving communities, SMEs and start-ups playing a key role in adopting CE practices in their business, and retailers adopting strategies to reducing edible food waste. Nevertheless, the most important requirement is changing consumer attitudes and behaviour. Without consumer collaboration and changing habits, it will be just another marketing tool for businesses (Borrello et al., 2017). References Borrello, M., Lombardi, A., Pascucci, S., & Cembalo, L. (2016). The seven challenges for transitioning into a bio-based circular economy in the Agri-food sector. Recent patents on food, nutrition & agriculture, 8(1), 39-47.

110

Borrello, M., Caracciolo, F., Lombardi, A., Pascucci, S., & Cembalo, L. (2017). Consumers’ Perspective on Circular Economy Strategy for Reducing Food Waste. Sustainability, 9(1), 141. Halloran, A., Clement, J., Kornum, N., Bucatariu, C., & Magid, J. (2014). Addressing food waste reduction in Denmark. Food Policy, 49, 294-301. Jurgilevich, A., Birge, T., Kentala-Lehtonen, J., Korhonen-Kurki, K., Pietikäinen, J., Saikku, L., & Schösler, H. (2016). Transition towards Circular Economy in the Food System. Sustainability, 8(1), 69.

111

Circular business models in social enterprises: the case of the social housing corporation Authors: Manon Eikelenboom, Thomas B. Long and Gjalt de Jong - University of Groningen, Campus Fryslân, Sophialaan 1, 8911 AE Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.

The three pillars of sustainability explicitly include the social dimension, in terms of stakeholders, human well-being and human rights. The circular economy, however, is largely silent on the social dimension. Research and practice has concentrated on the redesign of manufacturing and service systems to benefit the biosphere. While this can provide benefits to communities, circular economy lacks explicit recognition of social aspects, such as user preferences (Murray et al. 2017). This is not only an important ethical limitation but could restrain the implementation of the circular economy. People’s choices, behaviors and lifestyles play a vital role in achieving sustainability (Fleischmann et al. 2016). Successful sustainability requires an understanding of the values and preferences of stakeholders (Dangelico et al. 2017). We argue that there is a need to understand how circular economy strategies link to and interact with social aspects. We use the social enterprise as a context to explore how these social aspects can be integrated into successful circular strategies. The transition from a linear to a circular strategy requires a change in an enterprises business model (Bocken et al. 2016). Multiple circular business model strategies have been identified (Bocken et al. 2016), but how they apply to the context of enterprises with explicit social goals is less clear. The inclusion of people in these strategies is important for social enterprises, however not addressed in the current literature. In order to investigate how social enterprises can engage in the circular economy we will address the following research questions: 1. How do social enterprises understand circularity in practice? 2. What are successful circular business model strategies for social enterprises? We answer these research questions through a case study in the Dutch social housing industry. Social housing corporations are private non-profit-making organizations with a social goal: providing low income tenants with affordable housing (Dewick & Miozzo, 2004). Housing corporations face increasing pressures to address their environmental sustainability due to the large environmental impact of their buildings (Pomponi & Moncaster, 2017). Through the adoption of circular business model strategies, housing corporations can reduce the negative environmental impacts of the building sector (Dewick & Miozzo, 2004). We will collect data using (1) grey literature, (2) participant observations, and (3) semi-structured interviews with employees and experts. We will compare the results with the existing circular business model strategies in order to create an adapted set of strategies for social housing corporations. Our results will highlight the unique strategies that enable social enterprises to engage in the circular economy. We extend current research by questioning the conditions under which the circular economy approach can lead to business model strategies which are not only environmentally and economically viable, but also socially responsible. Through the greater consideration of stakeholder needs and values in circular strategies, the circular economy will become more inclusive. Our study assists in (1) the successful implementation of the circular economy and (2) the identification of opportunities for the circular economy to respond to societal issues. References: Bocken, N.M.P., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C. & van der Grinten, B. 2016. Product design and business

model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering 33(5): 308-320.

Dangelico, R.M., Pujari, D. & Pontrandolfo, P. 2017. Green product innovation in manufacturing firms:

a sustainability-oriented dynamic capability perspective. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(4): 490-506.

112

Dewick, P. & Miozzo, M. 2004. Networks and innovation: sustainable technologies in Scottish social

housing. R&D Management, 34(3): 323. Fleischmann, K., Hielscher, S. & Merritt, T. 2016. Making things in Fab Labs: a case study on

sustainability and co-creation. Digital Creativity, 27(2): 113-131. Murray, A., Skene, K. & Haynes, K. 2017. The circular economy: an interdisciplinary exploration of

the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics 140: 369-380. Pomponi, F. & Moncaster, A. 2017. Circular economy for the built environment: a research framework.

Journal of Cleaner Production 143: 710-718.

113

A Model to Extend the Life of Materials Authors: A. Encinas-Oropesa, M. Moreno, F. Charnley, N. Simms

The Circular Economy model, underpinned by a transition to renewable energy sources, builds economic, natural and social capital; it provides a framework of thinking to accelerate the transition to low carbon economies. Development, production and use of both, new and current materials, play a key role in this transition. For example, there is a strong drive to use lightweight materials in automotive applications, as approximately 85% of the energy used by a car in its life, comes from the fuel used in the engine (Report for the Committee on Climate Change, 2013). Simultaneously, considerable efforts have been made to create and maintain materials flows through the application of Circular Economy Principles (CEP). A school of thought that addresses the CEP is Industrial Ecology (IE) (K. Webster, 2017). IE has been extensively researched and proposed as a strategy for materials flows related solutions e.g. the Great Recovery Reports (2013-16). Additionally, some materials issues have been studied from the product design point of view (C.A. Bakker et al.,2014; B. Bridgens et al., 2017) or as a part of an overall business model (E. MacArthur Foundation 2012 and 2015, V. Rizos et al., 2017). However, there is no generically applicable model to outline the steps necessary to implement Materials Life Extension from the IE point of view whilst addressing specific materials needs like making more lightweight materials. In response to these issues, this work builds upon multidisciplinary academic research carried out at Cranfield University since 2013. A Model to Extend the Life of Materials (MELM) has been designed to keep materials at their highest value possible by extending their useful lives whilst providing local socio-economic and environmental impact. The MELM comprises five core building blocks: IE, waste/composite material flow scenarios, waste valorisation, composite material manufacturing / characterization and prototyping. The sequence of these building blocks has been iteratively developed and evaluated through the use of multiple case studies across sectors, in particular, the case of the Tequila Industry by-product agave bagasse which has been valorised and characterised with the potential to be used as raw material for non-structural parts within the automotive sector in Mexico, i.e. air vents and/or cup holders. The MELM, considers the materials and waste flows across the whole system, quantifying for example, value such as job creation. A key element to attain and validate the MELM; is the synergy between , Social and Materials Science methodologies, e.g., application of ethnographic techniques to understand stakeholder’s requirements, SWOT and PESTLE analysis to evaluate socio-economic impact. Materials data is generated at laboratory scale through standard experimental tests, whilst advanced materials characterization techniques like thermal gravimetrical analysis (TGA), environmental scanning electron microscope and energy disperse X-ray (ESEM/EDX); are used to evaluate and understand materials properties, performance and failure modes. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and circularity indicator (CI) methods are proposed as a means to monitor material flows through the model ensuring environmental impact. The MELM provides a process for industries to generate new value from the analysis and innovation within materials flows through the application of CEP by extending the life of materials. The successful outcomes from MELM offer the possibility of adapting the model to utilize other waste based materials. The model provides evidence of local socio-economic growth as new job opportunities are created. Environmental impact is anticipated as waste collection and reuse would ensure a future in which waste is diverted from local landfills.

114

Decentralising materials measurement: a key driver for a bio-based circular economy Authors: Alysia Garmulewicz - University of Santiago, Chile Liz Corbin - University College London, UK Abstract: Small-scale, hyper-local methods for bio-based material experimentation and production are emerging, supported by the growth of distributed fabrication networks and maker culture (Karana et al., 2017). This creates the opportunity to seed and develop a decentralised bio-based materials economy that supports the transition to a circular economy. Yet, as bio-based materials introduce new agency and interactional possibilities, new tools and methods for measuring and communicating their behaviours becomes paramount in order to ensure their successful adoption. The use of standard methods of measuring materials is core to our ability to communicate material properties and to explore their potential applications (Ashby, 2005). Standard measures of strength, elasticity, and barrier properties are critical to assessing the possibilities and limitations of a given material, and encoding this information in agreed units of data allows communication between actors across supply chains. The current paradigm of materials characterisation must shift to realise the opportunities of designing with bio-based materials sourced from decentralised sources. The standard approach to characterising industrial materials presumes that the properties of a material will remain constant over long supply chains. This assumption can be upheld when it comes to many highly engineered materials, as they have been designed to be highly stable across a range of temperatures and humidities (Sudip and Cooney, 2012). Furthermore, the centralised nature of industrial material production (e.g. a relatively small number of large industrial facilities in markets with high barriers to entry) (Witter, 2015) makes their production conditions possible to standardise. As an ethos of decentralisation begins to emerge from within the materials community, the traditionally centralised approach to measurement and standardisation is disrupted by the very material nature of bio-based materials. These materials are locally attuned; they are often highly responsive to temperature and humidity and, being made from abundant ingredients, their production environments are numerous and thus harder to standardise. This complexity undermines our ability to encode accurate data about bio-based materials using standard measurement practices, thus presenting a significant barrier to widespread adoption of bio-based materials within industry. A decentralised, bio-based materials economy calls for a paradigm shift in materials characterisation, particularly the methods and tools necessary to gather and share data on material properties. In this paper we propose a roadmap to action a new paradigm of materials characterisation based on localised measurement, distributed data certification and open source hardware. Second, we outline how this system of measurement allows for locally-attuned, complex and time-dependant data on bio-based materials to be encoded, shared, and used for exploring product applications. Third, we report on preliminary results of characterising locally made bioplastics that illustrate the potential for developing decentralised bio-based supply chains for a circular economy. References: Ashby, M. (2005) Materials Selection in Mechanical Design (Third Edition). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Karana, E., Giaccardi, E., Rognoli, V. (2017) Materially Yours. In: J. Chapman (Ed.) Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Product Design (pp. 206-221). Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Sudip, R., & Cooney, R.P. (2012). Thermal Degradation of Polymer and Polymer Composites. In M. Kutz (Ed.) Handbook of Environmental Degradation of Materials (Second Edition) (pp. 213-242). Oxford, UK: William Andrew Publishing. Witter, D. (2015). Plastic & Resin Manufacturing in the US. IBIS World Industry Report 32521.

115

‘A Capability Maturity Model for the Circular Economy: an Agri-food Perspective’

Authors: Mickey Howard, Steffen Boehm, Dan Eatherley, Matt Lobley, Nav Mustafee and Lydia S. Vamvakeridou-Lyroudia – University of Exeter, UK Abstract: This paper explores the implementation challenges of introducing the circular economy (CE) as a potentially disruptive business model for firms aiming to achieve both whole system sustainability and clean business growth. We argue that, based on the interactions with our project partners, firms tend to start their CE journey by addressing internal operational issues first, then involve their supply chains, before ultimately engaging with the wider socio-political environment through various knowledge exchange mechanisms such as hubs or eco-parks. Yet the relationship between CE adoption and progression in circular capability is not always linear, with considerable uncertainty over how CE implementation and learning mechanisms progress, particularly in rural regions dominated by small medium enterprises (SME). We adopt the concept of the capability maturity model (CMM), already used in information systems applications (Paulk, 1993), and supply chain development (Lockamy and McCormack, 2004), to explore CE implementation. Through the development of our CE CMM model, we explore how a firm’s state of change can be represented using systems thinking (Ford, 2009; Xu et al., 2009) and to show the transition from current to future desired state. The attributes required of firms to address the CE can be represented using capability maturity to show how the build-up of connections, skills and capabilities can improve network and system performance (figure 1).

Figure 1 The Circular Economy Capability Maturity Model

1. Initiate

2. Manage

3. Improve

4. Inspire

• Efficiency focus• Waste reduction

• Effective measures:materials, energy, water• Linear connections• CE awareness

Boundary / scope:

CMM level:

Within firm Supply chain Sector

• Cont. improvement• Supplier involvement• Some closed loops• Known nutrients• Optimised SKUs• Skills focus

• Leads the sector• Drives best practice• Regenerative and

restorative• Regional capability• Investment plans• People focus

5. Govern• System governance• Policymaker links• Informs & informed

by civic society• Includes wider

stakeholders, NGOs• CE vision connects

local, regional and national interests.

Whole system

Model attributes: • Basic end-to-end connections are made

between energy, water, materials and waste. • Looped process design and renewable technologies begin to be introduced into energy, water and material regeneration.

• Energy, water, materials and people are all part of one interconnected and restorative systems design.

116

We use several modelling methods to understand the multiple stages, skills and capabilities in relation to CE implementation during our investigation. Based on empirical data from eight cases in the south-west dairy and baking sector in the UK, observed over two years involving value stream process mapping, systems modelling and computer simulation of the materials-energy-water nexus. A multiple case comparison method is supported by Value stream mapping, Qualitative system dynamics, and quantitative modelling using Discrete-event simulation.

Figure 2 Research methods – multi-modelling

Our data supports a multi-objective approach, that is: a progressive sequence of attributes, skills and capabilities for firms who seek to ‘climb the stairway’ of the CE capability maturity model. Yet only several firms we examined actually aspired to become a CE industry sector leader who ‘inspires, governs or influences’ the system at policy level, where the other firms seemed content to merely ‘manage’ or ‘improve’ their position in relation to more incremental, lower level process-based development. While our model is a useful starting point for business, its implied linearity (i.e. assumptions over firm progression) is at times misleading for interpreting the motives of firms with only moderate aspirations towards CE and sustainability. In terms of the theoretical implications of cumulative capabilities, we support the view of Flynn and Flynn (2004: 439) that the ‘sequential progression of cumulative capabilities’ was not always directly evident in our findings, leading to the notion that development of cumulative capabilities in any context is a ‘…complex endeavour, affected by many interrelated contingencies’ often occurring beyond firm boundaries (e.g. policy, legislation, civic involvement) and not limited to sequence of development. Our model provides an initial reference point for future CE investigators to advance thinking in this emerging and important field. Further research will extend our use of systems modelling and conceptualization into other industry sectors, also to investigate the relationship between specific strategic initiatives in CE (e.g. regional funding) and higher-level cumulative capabilities. References Flynn, B. B., and Flynn, E. J. (2004). An exploratory study of the nature of cumulative capabilities.

Journal of Operations Management, 22 (5), 439-457. Ford, A. (2009). Modelling the Environment, 2nd Edition, Island Press, pp.489, ISBN: 9781597264730 Lockamy III, A., and McCormack, K. (2004). The development of a supply chain management process

maturity model using the concepts of business process orientation. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 9 (4), 272-278.

Paulk, M. (1993). Capability maturity model for software. Encyclopedia of Software Engineering. John Wiley & Sons.

Xu, J., Li, J. and Wu, D. (2009) Optimizing Circular Economy Planning & Risk Analysis Using System Dynamics, Human & Ecological Risk Assessment: An Int. Journal, 15 (2), 316-331.

117

Financial systems and the circular economy Author: Tim Hughes - University of Exeter, UK The vision of the circular economy – that maximum value is extracted from resources during use, avoidable waste is eliminated, and unavoidable waste is reused or recycled – promises to deliver on the fundamental economic problem of how to efficiently allocate scarce resources. Alongside these economic benefits, the CE paradigm seeks to address the major social and environmental challenges of our time, by respecting natural resource constraints, and ensuring the benefits are equitably distributed. In this talk, we will question whether CE is viable in existing debt-based monetary systems, and we will argue that effective financial reforms will be a key element in a successful transition to CE. Indeed, given the benefits of CE, a transition may occur naturally under the right conditions. Specifically, there is a need for effective and innovative means of financing, and appropriate measures to account for social, natural and economic capital. Among the many financial barriers to adoption of CE, we see the following as particularly notable, and requiring systemic reform:

1. Money creation in the modern economy results in roughly equal amounts of money and debt [1]. At the same time there are large income disparities. This leads to a high demand for low cost goods due to low incomes, and for jobs which create low quality goods of pure durability to sustain incomes for servicing debts.

2. Large capital flows, particularly from developing to developed economies [2], have further exacerbated the demand and supply of low cost and low durability goods by reducing levels of low-skilled employment in developed economies to support export led growth in developing economies.

3. Financial deregulation and low levels of land taxation have shifted the focus of banks away from financing productive activity and towards financing real estate [3]. Housing costs are now a significant proportion of many peoples’ income, which are not reflected in government measures of inflation. Rising house prices, fuelled by money creation by banks, are thus undermining money’s role as a store of value. Also, the gains from holding land and benefitting financially from social infrastructure developments, is increasingly compromising the amount available for investing to secure a sustainable and productive future.

4. Externalities are not properly accounted for and are not treated on the correct scale. There is a need for more global coordination on issues such as climate change and tax evasion; and local regulation for issues such as affordable housing.

Fundamental to understanding and overcoming these barriers is an appreciation of the mechanisms of money creation. Accordingly, this talk will describe the credit creation theory of banking [4] and work by the speaker on a system theoretic analysis of the conditions under which debt-based monetary systems lead to long term increases in debt levels [5]. If time allows, we will then discuss possible innovative reforms with the potential to enable transition to CE, such as the use of debt-free money creation for social investments, and the role of local and/or digital currencies. References: [1] M. McLeay, A. Radia and R. Thomas, “Money creation in the modern economy”, Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin, Q1, 2014. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/quarterly-bulletin/2014/q1/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy [2] M. Wolf, “The shifts and the shocks: what we’ve learned – and still have to learn – from the financial crisis”, Penguin, 2015. [3] J. Ryan-Collins, T. Lloyd, L. Macfarlane and J. Muellbauer, “Rethinking the economics of land and housing”, Zed Books, 2017. [4] R.A. Werner, “Can banks individually create money out of nothing? The theories and the empirical evidence”, International Review of Financial Analysis, vol. 36, pp. 1-19, 2014 [5] T.H. Hughes, “Monetary system dynamics”, 20th International Federation of Control World Congress, Toulouse, 2017. https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/handle/10871/31166

118

Circular Economy and Health: Opportunities and Risks

Author: Dr Alistair Hunt - Department of Economics, University of Bath, UK Alistair Hunt is Lecturer in Environmental Economics at the University of Bath. Dr Hunt is an expert in the application of economic principles to project and policy analysis in the field of environmental management. He has expertise in the fields of cost-benefit analysis (CBA), monetary valuation of non-market impacts, including health and environmental impacts, economic analysis of natural resource policy and environmental economics. Dr Hunt has undertaken studies for the European Commission, WHO, OECD, UK Defra, UK Climate Change Committee, DFID, Innovate UK, World Bank and UNEP. Dr Hunt is a Contributing Author on THE IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report. Abstract: This presentation outlines the links between circular economy initiatives at the macro-economic scale. This will the role of perhaps the most important trend to impact on circular economy initiatives - that of globalization. One likely consequence of this trend is that technological innovations which have arisen from resource re-use and reduction strategies in circular economy initiatives in one country are more likely to be exported to other countries. As a result, economies of scale in manufacturing can be realized, further increasing the competitiveness of the technologies. On the basis of this logic, EMF (2015b), estimates that by 2030 the annual benefit of adopting advanced circular economy technologies could be €1.8 trillion, compared to current technologies. This technological diffusion in turn will then have broader health consequences than would otherwise be possible. These trends are likely to be further amplified by the global adoption of digitization in communication and other technologies. The same advantages are likely to apply to the technological diffusion of pollution abatement innovations that, when adopted, result in the reduction of health impacts associated with the pollution. Other things being equal, growth of world trade – including that in circular economy-enhancing technologies - would also suggest that employment levels increase (Horbach, et al. (2015)). Higher employment, in turn, is understood to have both direct positive psychological and physical health benefits, as well as indirect benefits resulting from the higher income allowing more healthy food to be consumed – see the case study below on food safety and healthy foods. Further health benefits associated with GDP growth resulting from globalization stem from the fact that increased expenditures on both public and private healthcare could be facilitated. Contrary to this positive view of globalization and its relationship to circular economy initiatives and health consequences, one tangible disadvantage of this trend is that comparative advantage encourages higher income countries to export their waste – as well as polluting production – to lower income countries. It is also possible that economic growth in countries dependent on exporting natural, non-renewable, resources could decline, resulting in lower levels of public health provision. Furthermore, it is likely that globalisation could exacerbate health impacts from emerging chemicals of concern by the increasing movement of chemical production to low-income and middle-income countries where public health and environmental protections are often scant. Most future growth in chemical production will occur in these countries.

119

Theoretical contribution to transition framework for whole system reconfiguration based on the analysis of Brazilian agro-food systems production, consumption and food waste

recycling Author: Armando Kokitsu – Brazilian Society of Ecological Economics

Key research questions:

• General question: How to accelerate national sustainability transitions by reconfiguring consumption and production systems?

• How to accelerate sustainable development of communities, cities and countries? • How any individual and informal groups of citizens can contribute to this acceleration? • How to identify problems, causes, consequences and solutions in a systemic way to

reconfigure a consumption and production system for sustainability transition? • How to integrate individual perspective into techno-economic, socio-technical and political

perspectives improving a meta-theoretical framework?

This paper is based on the analysis of a few Brazilian agro-food systems from production to consumption and recycling of food waste, research of articles, papers, videos, books, studies, interviews, and participation in international trainings with experts as well as based on personal experiences and reflections, one-to-one conversations and interviews, participation in informal special interest groups and action-research observation.

The Global Risks Report 2017 (World Economic Forum, 2017, Figures 1 to 4) presented some of the most important global risks as well as subjacent tendencies that could amplify them or change their interconnections over the period of next 10 years. A few of the most urgent problems that must be addressed are water crisis, food crisis, failure of climate-change mitigation and adaptation, extreme weather events, biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse. These problems are systemically interrelated (Bertalanffy, 1969) and should be considered criteria to choose the types of consumption and production systems of a country to be reconfigured as national priorities.

Findings:

• The main source of GHG in Brazil (74% of all GHG) are related to agriculture, livestock raising and change of land management (Climate Observatory, 2017, p.2) activities that are leading to failure of climate-change mitigation and adaptation, and change of weather events (Spera, Galford, Coe, Macedo & Mustard, 2016);

• Agro-food activities mainly the meat production and consumption system is also related to water crisis, food crisis, biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse in Brazil. This system is one of the most impactful on the triple bottom line (People, Planet and Profit) of the country (Heinrich Böll Stiftung, 2017);

• Corruption in Brazil is (and it has been perceived as) widespread (Corporación Latinobarómetro, 2016) and it should be considered an additional relevant criterion as systemic obstacle for sustainable development (Transparency International, 2011);

• When national institutions fail or are not acting fast enough, democracy should be improved through widespread information based on facts and science to create awareness (Hiatt & Creasey, 2012) among the largest possible number of citizens;

• To be effective it is important to add individual perspective to a meta-theoretical framework (Cherpa, Vinichenko, Jewell, Brutschin & Sovacool, 2018) because leaders and followers are not equal and each one can have different culture, values and reasons to resist to change (or adopt it) as explained by organization change management discipline (Hyatt & Creasey, 2012);

• It is important to listen and answer majority of voters so that they vote on parliamentarians and governors who have a triple bottom line mindset, an empathetic heart and a courageous will to do (Scharmer, 2016) and spread innovations (Rogers, 2003) that will be better for the majority of

120

the society at the same time that unprotected minorities are respected.

References: Bertalanffy, L. (1969). General Systems Theory. Foundations, development, applications. (2nd

ed.). New York: George Brasiller, Inc. Cherpa, A., Vinichenko, V., Jewell J., Brutschin, E. & Sovacool, B. (2018). Integrating techno-

economic, socio-technical and political perspectives on national energy transitions: A meta-theoretical framework. Energy research & Social science, 37, 175-190.

Climate Observatory. (2017) Greenhouse Gases Estimation System - Press Kit 2017. Retrieved from http://www.observatoriodoclima.eco.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/seeg2017presskit_FINAL.pdf

Corporación Latinobarómetro. (2016). Informe 2016. Retrieved from http://gobernanza.udg.mx/sites/default/files/Latinobar%C3%B3metro.pdf

Daly, H. & Farley, J. (2011). Ecological Economics. Principles and applications. (2nd ed.). Washington: Island Press.

Heinrich Böll Stiftung. (2017). Agrifood atlas. Facts and figures about the corporations that control what we eat. Brussels, Belgium.

Hiatt, J., Creasey T. (2012). Change Management. The People Side of Change. (2nd ed.).

Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations. (5th ed.). Free Press. Scharmer, C. (2016). Theory U. Leading from the future as it emerges. The social technology

of presencing. (2nd ed.). Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Spera, S., Galford, G., Coe, M., Macedo, M. & Mustard, J. (2016). Land-use change affects

water recycling in Brazil's last agricultural frontier. Global Change Biology, doi: 10.1111/gcb.13298

Transparency International. (2011). Global Corruption Report: Climate Change. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/global_corruption_report_climate_change

World Economic Forum. (2017). The Global Risks Report 2017. (12th ed.). Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GRR17_Report_web.pdf

121

Circular Cities: determinants of closed circulation of building materials. Author: Urszula Kozminska - PhD. Eng. Arch - Faculty of Architecture, Warsaw University of Technology Abstract: In 2030, cities will be inhabited by 80% of the human population. The urban metabolism of cities is constantly increasing [1] as well as the material-consumption of urban areas [2]. The amount of waste rises. Construction waste constitutes a significant fraction in the global waste stream - 10-15% of all waste [3] and 34% in Europe [4]). Moreover, it is estimated that further extraction of materials from natural resources will provoke a three-fold increase in raw material consumption by 2050 [3]. Therefore, future, intelligent urbanization requires a new approach to urban systems, which would integrate the issue of minimised consumption of raw materials and sustainable management of construction waste with urban planning and building design. Closed circulation in urban areas depends on economic, environmental, social and infrastructural determinants [5], [2], [1], [6] and is related to the amount of waste [7]. Spatial and pro-environmental policies and urban planning influence the way materials are used. Buildings and their forms, dimensions, volume, age, technical and aesthetic condition affect the use of materials [5], [6], [7], [8]. Circulation of building materials depends on their properties, on urban typologies, density [2], [9], function [10] and time [6]. These aspects affect the amount of waste, the frequency of renovation, the way of deconstruction and the lifespan of a building. Moreover, circulation of building materials within an urban unit is influenced by the processing abilities of a region and the quality of transport and infrastructure necessary to collect and process waste, which includes: selective waste collection points, organisation of demolition companies and of the market of reused materials [6], [11],[12],[13]. Environmental impacts, which affect the flow of building materials, include air pollution, energy and water consumption [12],[13] during the whole process of the extraction, transportation, processing and performance of materials. Material flows are influenced by materials' recycling potential and their impact on human health. Recycling of some materials is not environmentally effective [12]. Shrinking natural resources and necessity to reduce CO2 emissions may change the way and the source, from which materials are extracted [14], [15]. Material flows are influenced by such economic aspects as the country's level of economic development, the demand for reused materials, the presence of economic incentives [12], [13],[16] or by the cost of material [12] and the cost of the non-standard design and construction process [12]. Furthermore, the urban metabolism of building materials is influenced by such social determinants as: human customs, behaviours and daily practices [5], [17], [18]. Also environmental awareness, social perception, authorities' awareness, social status and engagement are closely related to closed material flows in the city [5], [7], [13], 17], [18], [19], [20]. The understanding of the decisive determinants of building materials’ circulation within a city shows the importance of sustainable practices in urban planning, architectural design and construction process, which should be integrated with adequate pro-environmental policies, economic incentives, educational programmes and open-access data systems. Only cross-sectoral, multi-level actions, which are based on profound analysis of decisive factors, can enable circular material flows in the cities. References [1] Kennedy C., Pincetl S., Bunje P., The study of urban metabolism and its applications to urban

planning and design, Environmental Pollution,(2011), 159(8-9), pp. 1965–73 [2] Barles S., Society, energy and materials: the contribution of urban metabolism studies to

sustainable urban development issues., Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol. 53, (2010), No. 4, pp. 439–455

[3] UNEP, Waste and Climate Change. Global Trends and Strategy Framework, (2011) [4] Eurostat, 2015. Generation of waste [env_wasgen] 2015 [5] Andenberg S., Industrial metabolism and the linkages between economics, ethics and the

environment, Ecological Economics, (1998) 24, pp. 311–320 6 [6] Agudelo-Vera, C.M., Leduc, W.R., Mels, A. R., Rijnaarts, H.M., Harvesting urban resources

122

towards more resilient cities, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, (2012), 64, pp. 3–12. 7 [7] Spoerri A., Lang D., Binder C., Scholz R. Expert-based scenarios for strategic waste and

resource management planning—C&D waste recycling in the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, (2009), 53, pp. 592–600 22

[8] Kennedy C., Cuddihy J., Engel-Yan J., The Changing Metabolism of Cities. Journal of Industrial Ecology, Volume 11, Number 2, 2007 18

[9] Deilmann C., Urban Metabolism and the Surface of the City, Guiding Principles for Spatial Development in Germany, German Annual of Spatial Research and Policy, (2009), pp. 1-16 23

[10] Hammer M., Giljum S., Hinterberger F. (2003). Material Flow Analysis of the City of Hamburg, “Quo vadis MFA? Material Flow Analysis – Where do we go? Issues, Trends and Perspectives of Research for Sustainable Resource Use“, Wuppertal, (2003) 24

[11] Brunner P.H., Urban Mining A Contribution to Reindustrializing the City, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 15, (2011), Number 3, pp.339-349 25

[12] Chong W., Hermreck C., Understanding transportation energy and technical metabolism of construction waste recycling, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, (2010), 54, pp. 579–590 26

[13] Zaman A. U., Measuring waste management performance using the “Zero Waste Index”: the case of Adelaide, Australia, Journal of Cleaner Production, (2014), 66, pp. 407–419 27

[14] Ruby A.I.(eds). Re-inventing construction. Ruby Press, Berlin, Germany, 2010 10 [15] Single Family House in Enschede, Detail, nr 12, 2010 28 [16] Niza S., Rosado L., Ferrao P., Urban Metabolism Methodological Advances in Urban Material

Flow Accounting Based on the Lisbon Case Study, Journal of Industrial Ecology Volume 13, (2009), N.3, pp.384-405 29

[17] Binder C., From material flow analysis to material flow management Part II: the role of structural agent analysis, Journal of Cleaner Production, (2009), 15, pp.1605-1617 30

[18] Quian S., Zuo J., Huang R., Huang J., Pullen S., Identifying the critical factors for green construction e An empirical study in China, Habitat International, (2013), 40, pp.1-8 31

[19] Radkiewicz P., Siemińska R. (eds.), Społeczeństwo w czasach zmiany. Badania polskiego generalnego sondażu społecznego 1992-2009, Scholar, Warszawa, 2009 32

[20] Bregier T., Kronenberg J. (eds.), Wyzwania zrównoważonego rozwoju w Polsce, Fundacja Sendzimira, Kraków, 2010 33

123

Collaboration: An enabler for Circular Supply Chain

Authors: Jyoti Mishra, Uthayasankar Sivarajah and Chiat Yin Lim - School of Management, Faculty of Management and Law, University of Bradford, UK Extended Abstract: There has been a recent drive for businesses to adopt circular economy (CE) business model to ensure resource efficiency and avoid price volatility, hence creating opportunities for innovative, efficient methods of production and consumption. This requires new form of partnerships and collaboration across the value chain (EMF, 2013). Businesses will need to work closely with their partners on how to unlock the potential of value chain. In CE, collaboration has thus become more of a necessity (Ghisellini et al., 2016) than an option aimed at creating mutual gains. Collaboration between different stakeholders throughout the supply chain network can lead to reductions in raw material utilization and waste generation (Giovanni, 2014). However, collaboration could not be easier because partners in the value chain may not be equally interested to engage in this processdue to low benefits or difference in strategic vision. Morever, there would be a need to overcome old paradigm of competing as independent entities (Hoffman & Locker, 2009). The issue excarbates when collaboration with existing partners may not be sufficient. In several case studies conducted by Mishra et al. (2018) it was identified that for an organisation to be circular, in addition to collaboration among existing partners, there might be a need to collaborate with new partners and initiate new partnerships where products could be designed for circularity. However, new international supply chains could bring new set of complex issues for example, new audit requirements and new procurement policies. Thus, collaboration for circular business remains a challenging area. Although literature identifies importance of collaboration for circular economy business models, research in this area is limited (Giovanni, 2014; Holimchayachotikul et al., 2014). This research therefore aims to explore the opportunities and barriers for partner organisations in the value chain towards circular supply chains. It is worth highlighting that collaboration in linear supply chain should not be considered synonymously with that in circular supply chain. In the later, the aim is not only to recycle materials but to keep values of products and materials in the loop for as long as possible (EMF, 2013). A case study approach will be taken in this research to address collaboration issues. The case of a leading mobile network provider in the EU, moving towards circular business model will be explored. The research will critically analyse how the case study is collaborating with its partners to transit from linear supply chain to circular supply chain based on the frameworks published in academia and other reports (EMF, 2013). This research has practical implications for organisations, and their supply chains, aiming to transit to the circular model. Future research should investigate how technology should be adopted to facilitate collaboration for circular supply chain. References EMF: Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013). Volume 1: Towards the Circular Economy. Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition" Cowes: Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing. 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. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007 Giovanni, P. (2014). Environmental collaboration in a closed-loop supply chain with a reverse revenue sharing contract. Annals of Operations Research, 220(1), 135-157. doi:10.1007/s10479-011-0912-5 Hofmann, E., and A. Locker. 2009. “Value-Based Performance Measurement in Supply Chains: A Case Study from the Packaging Industry.” Production Planning & Control 20 (1): 68–81. Holimchayachotikul, P., Derrouiche, R., Damand, D., & Leksakul, K. (2014). Value creation through collaborative supply chain: holistic performance enhancement road map. Production Planning & Control, 25(11), 912-922. doi:10.1080/09537287.2013.780313 Mishra, J.L., Hopkinson, P. and Tidridge, G. (2018). “Value Creation from Circular Economy led Closed Loop Supply Chains: A Case Study of Fast Moving Consumer Goods”. Production, Planning and Control. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1449245

124

Expanding frontier of design of effective CE practices, policies and governance, learning CE practices from post-coal mining regions

Author: Satoru Mizuguchi - Freelance journalist, member of Japan National Press Club, Co-editor of Springer’s series of Theory and Practice of Urban Sustainability Transitions Abstract: Design of circular economy has started from that of circular flow of materials and energy, then, expanded its scope even to time and spaces for its efficient use. The author proposes to expand the frontier of CE to circular flow of human resources and money for the two reasons.

Firstly, since elements of production constitutes by land (goods), labor and capital, the design of circular economy has to synthesize the circular flows of these three elements. And economist assumes the highest growth has been achieved when the most efficient use of these three elements are achieved. Secondly, even when circular flows of materials, energy and nutrients are achieved, human welfare would not be satisfied unless smooth transfer of human resources from older economy to newer economy occurred. We are living in the age of constant disruptions and destructions of present industries though digital and data revolutions. The author also proposes learning from transformations of post-coal mining regions would be useful to design effective CE practices, policies and governance for the following reasons. Firstly, circular flows of materials, energy, human resources and money are designed and tested at least partially in some of post-coal mining regions. For examples, wasted warm mine water has been tapped for district heating at Heerlen in Netherlands (Hiddes,et al 2014) and for spa-resort center at Iwaki in Japan(Iwaki shishi hensan iinkai,1989). Use of mine water is one of renewable energy business in the post-coal mining regions. Additionally, these facilities provide jobs locally to compensate unemployment from closure of coal mines if not enough. Heap of coal ashes created cement industry in several regions. Some of steel companies, often locating in coal mining regions, have been experimenting producing plastics, fuels and fertilizer from waste gas through creating circular loops inside production complex.

Wasted mining lands were redeveloped for residential as well as industrial purposes in many regions. Older miners were turned to early pensioners while younger ones were trained for new economy. Higher learning institutions were developed to train workers as well as students for adapting new economy. Local people in Katowice, coal & steel city of Poland and hosting COP24 of 2018, has been organizing business missions to several business congresses for inviting foreign investment to create new economy since the collapse of the Berlin wall, and making much fruitions (Mizuguchi, 2018). These transformations were not pursued without blood, sweat and tears. And the learning could reduce blood, sweat and tears for the future.

Huge governmental money has also been spent for mitigating regional tragedies and transitions for decades in many areas. The money had been mainly benefiting large mining corporations without sustainable regional developments in Japan (Yada, 2014), while Germany spent effectively in the Ruhr region (Schulz & Swchwartzkopff, 2016). The comparison among nations could also teach us effective CE practices, policies and governance. Finally, transition from coal dependent economy is an urgent task for mitigating climate change as well as air and water pollutions under the circumstances of 40 % of electricity is produced by coal globally. And the coal provides many jobs locally in India, China, South Africa, the emerging large emitters. The preceding exodus cases could teach us how we could make transition to circular economy. References: Hiddes L.,et, (2014) Smart Energy Regions, the Netherlands, http://www.smart-er.eu/sites/default/files/attachments/The%20Netherlands%20-%20Smart%20Energy%20Regions%202014.pdf Accessed 6 Apr 2018

125

Iwaki shishi hensan iinkai,eds (1989) Joban Tanden shi( History of Joban Coal Mining Regions, only available in Japanese): Iwaki city of Japan Mizuguchi S,(2018) Interview with city official of Katowice during MIPIM 2018, Cannes, France Schulz S& Swchwartzkopff J (2016) Instruments for a managed coal phase-out, German and international experiences with structural change, E3G briefing paper July 2016 Yada T (2014), Sekitan Sangyo Ron(Theory of Coal Industry, only available in Japanese): Hara Shobo

126

How do companies in the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods sector integrate Circular Economy in their Corporate Sustainability agendas?

Authors: Raphaëlle Stewart - Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark

Monia Niero - Aalborg University, Department of Planning, Centre for Design, Innovation and Sustainable Transition, Copenhagen

Abstract: Despite the increasing popularity of Circular Economy (CE) in the business practice, academic literature currently lacks insights on the extent and how the concept of CE is being integrated in corporate sustainability agenda. We used publicly available corporate sustainability (CS) reports to investigate the integration and implementation of CE in the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) sector, i.e. currently accounting for 35% of material inputs into the economy, a significant part of total consumer spending on tangible goods and 75% of municipal solid waste (EMF, 2012). Based on the analysis of academic literature on CE conceptualization, link between CE and sustainability and CE practices, we derived and addressed three research questions with regard to the FMCG sector:

1. How is companies’ uptake of CE in their CS reports? 2. How do companies link CE and sustainability in their CS reports? 3. Which CE practices do companies present in their CS reports?

We performed a systematic review of 46 CS reports in the FMCG sector released in 2016 and mentioning “circular economy” as identified in the Corporate Register database. To answer the first two research questions we adopted a content analysis approach, i.e. based on a systematic collection and analysis of the extracts in CS reports in which companies explicitly mention CE. Meanwhile to answer the third research question we adopted a mapping approach in which all CE-related practices reported by companies were mapped against a framework adapted from the study by Moreno et al. (2016). The results of the research were recently published in Stewart & Niero (2018). The main findings in terms of uptake of CE in CS agenda are that CE is mostly associated with the idea of recycling and reusing, consistent with the findings by Kirchherr et al. (2017); its systemic dimension is referred to in one-third of the sample and in most CS reports CE is associated with concrete activities, as opposed to just general statements. In terms of linkage between CE and sustainability, CE seems to be considered as a purpose to be pursued per se in many CS reports and the most widely mentioned aspects are environmental ones (resource scarcity, climate change or more generally environmental pressures) followed by economic aspects, whereas a lesser focus on environmental aspects was found by Kirchherr et al. (2017). In terms of CE practices, primarily activities reported in CS reports target operation (energy efficiency, renewable energy, recovery of operation waste), sourcing (use of recycled content and/or renewable material) and end-of-life (i.e. supporting recycling/recovery infrastructure activities), which have already been in place in linear economic systems. Practices related to circular product design and circular business models are reported only to a limited extent. Therefore, the breadth of CE-related practices remains to be explored, e.g. through practices at the core of consumer behaviors and initiatives related to the business model and by emphasizing the systemic dimension of CE. Moreover, the linkage between CE and sustainability needs to be further explored through the use of performance indicators and quantitative sustainability assessment tools.

127

References: EMF. 2012. Towards the circular economy Vol.1. Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Kirchherr, J, Reike, D, Hekkert, M. 2017. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 127: 221-232. Moreno, M, De los Rios, C, Rowe, Z, Charnley, F. 2016. A conceptual framework for circular design. Sustainability 8(9), 937; doi:10.3390/su8090937 Stewart R. & Niero M. (2018) Circular Economy in corporate sustainability strategies: a review of corporate sustainability reports in the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods sector. Business Strategy and the Environment doi.org/10.1002/bse.2048

128

Super Circular Estate: urban lab for circular building practices Authors: John van Oorschot and Michiel Ritzen - ZUYD University of Applied Sciences, Netherlands Abstract: Circular building technologies are expected to contribute significantly to the reduction of the environmental impact of the built environment. This requires a transition from linear towards circular construction practices, and the innovations that are required to support this transition are still to be fully developed. These innovations are not limited to technology but also encompass administrative innovations, ranging from incremental adjustments to radical changes of construction practices. Moreover, transition through the adoption of innovations tend to take place at a slow pace in the construction industry, despite the notion that construction practices need to be changed radically and have a significant impact on the environment. In order to improve the rate of change towards circular buildings, research and development projects are initiated by both research and industry. A notable example is the Super Circular Estate project in which the stakeholders, both from industry and research, attempt to develop and implement innovative circular building technologies12. Going beyond the desire to reduce the environmental impact, a key driver of this project is a large demolition surcharge due to local population decline in the Parkstad region in the South of the Netherlands. The deconstruction of obsolete and outdated housing results in a significant flow of building components and materials. As a result, the potent flow of building materials should be used to realize a circular built environment. One of the key challenges of the Super Circular Estate project is to extract building components and materials from a multistore apartment building of about 100 apartments (shown in Fig. 1), to construct new housing. Within the first stage a pilot building (a pavilion shown in Fig. 2) was erected to experiment with several demolition techniques, such as the re-use of a complete apartment, as shown in Fig. 3. During the second stage, running from 2018 to 2020, four detached dwellings will be designed and constructed based on building components and materials extracted from the apartment building. The aim of this stage is to investigate the optimal component size to be re-used, for example a complete apartment, smaller floor/wall slabs or recycling of concrete. In the third stage about thirty terraced, single family dwellings will be designed and constructed based on building components and materials extracted from the apartment building. Academics are involved in the project to assess the circularity of the new housing and develop the required knowledge to stimulate innovation in the project. This project aims to present an overview of required innovations to be developed as well as future research directions to support these innovations. We hypothesize that the transition to circular construction practices depends on process rather than technological innovations. This links in particular to the traditional conception that the demolition of buildings involve high costs rather that is provides an opportunity to extract valuable building materials.

12 http://www.uia-initiative.eu/en/uia-cities/kerkrade

129

Fig. 1. The original apartment building.

Fig. 2. The realized pavilion.

Fig. 3. A complete apartment is removed from the apartment building.

130

Re-thinking food futures: the role of regenerative agriculture and circular food systems

Authors: Stefano Pascucci13 - University of Exeter – Business School and Environment and Sustainability Institute (ESI) Emanuele Blasi - University of Tuscia, Department for Innovation in Biological, Agro-food and Forest systems (DIBAF) Massimiliano Borrello - University of Naples "Federico II" - Dept. of Agricultural Sciences, Agricultural Economics Luigi Cembalo - University of Naples "Federico II" - Dept. of Agricultural Sciences, Agricultural Economics and Policy Group Domenico Dentoni - Wageningen University - Management Studies Group and Global Center for Food Systems Innovation (GCFSI) Jessica Duncan - Wageningen University – Rural Sociology Group

Proposal prepared for the 2nd International GRAB-IT workshop 2018

'Organic farming and agro-ecology as a response to global challenges' June 27 to 29, 2018 Capri (NA), Italy

Keywords: Food Waste, Circular Economy, Blockchain, Human-sphere Abstract: Conventional agri-food systems can be defined by large-scale, highly industrialized agriculture which is often characterised by being resources extractive, hyper-specialised and exploitative (Pascucci and Duncan, 2017). Since conventional agri-food systems are becoming more and more dominant at an unprecented time and geographical scale, they are also becoming more and more connected with the global challenges humanity is facing in the 21st century. These challenges mainly derive by how these systems contribute and respond to changing demands of a rising world population, technological and infrastrcutural devleopment, climate change, geo-political and social instabilities, and in conjunction with the rise of unfair trading practices, issues of market transparency, food security, food scandals and food-related health problems.

While conventional agri-food systems have provided unprecedented growth, for example in terms of agricultural productivity, and have proven to be able to cope and adapt to systemic changes mainly through a massive and ubiquitarious application of technological solutions (Hammond and Dubé, 2012), they have also proven to be unable to feed the world in a safe, sustainable and just way (FAO, IFAD & WFP, 2015). In fact, the set of technological and institutional principles and practices supporting conventional agri-food systems has resulted in the creation of waste, reduction of (biological and cultural) diversity and ultimately fail to ensure access to food security to everyone. There is an increased evidence of the negative impacts of conventional agri-food systems which illustrates the need to re-think how we grow, process, sell, eat and dispose of food. Part of the negative impact of conventional food systems is due to the fact that they been designed in a linear way: natural resources are extracted, made into products (food, feed or fibre), consumed and disposed of, generating waste, detrimental emissions and pollution (Duncan and Pascucci, 2016). While these systems can be highly resource efficient, the drive to standardize and simplify leads to over-reliance on a few productive varieties and an over-dependency on external inputs, including biological materials, technologies and infrastrucutres. Moreover, linear agri-food systems are designed such that agricultural products are progressively separated from natural regenerative cycles, thus creating a physical and cognitive (cultural) distance between places of production and consumption.

13 The authors of this paper are engaged in the initiation and development of an international working group on “Food security and regenerative agriculture and circular food systems”.

131

When re-designing conventional and linearly-designed agri-food systems more than adaptation is required: it necessitates re-imagining and re-designing conventional food systems. To address the limitations of linearly-designed food systems, we draw inspiration from the cyclical metabolisms of circular economy and biomimicry, and analyse the potentials of designing regenerative agri-food systems, in which fostering soil health, diversity, abundance of ecosystem service provision, and a fair and just access to food represent the key design principles. Particularly in this paper we aim at theorising on the fundamental question of how to re-think food futures by looking at design principles of regenerative and circular agri-food systems at both global and local-community scale.

In our approach we suggest to explain the (un)likelihood of the emergence of novel agri-food systems, e.g. regenerative and circular agri-food systems, with a process model (Langley, 1999). Theorising with process data, in fact, implies to investigate a phenomenon through the relationship between events, from an historical, multi-level and multi-agency perspective (Langley, 1999). In our case fully regenerative and circular agri-food systems relate to »events« that sometimes have not yet happened, that are often future-facing, and still imaginary in many aspects. Thus we suggest to enrlarge a process theory methodological approach to utopian considerations, in which process data are collected not only in relation to past or »existing«, but also to »imaginary« events. In so doing we follow and enrich the recent literature on food utopias (Stock, et al. 2016). Particularly in order to develop our line of research enquiry we have developed a step by step process analytical approach: first we have mapped out the key structural challenges of linear agri-food systems which have led to their crisis and failure. In so doing we have identified three key sources of struggles for conventional and linear agri-food systems, and namely: (i) the extractive nature of their production systems; (ii) the exploitative nature of relations between humans, particularly in relation to labor, and between humans and living non-human entities; (iii) the exponential emergence of paradoxes in the access to natural resources and food. Based on this analysis we have developed alternative scenarios (utopias/disutopias) using the principles of regnerative agriculture and circularity applied to the design of food systems. Particularly, comparing and contrasting linear and circular principles and practices we have been able to develop utopian and disutopian scenarios and defined challenges and opportunities in alternative agri-food transition pathways. These scenarios are then used as basis to discuss connections between current regenerative principles and practices, for example in organic agriculture, permaculture and and agro-ecology, and issues of food security at different time and geographical scales. Reflections on how these scenarios can contribute to the development of a regenerative and circular economy inspired research agenda for agriculture and food systems are also widely discussed as concluding remarks.

References: Duncan, J. A. B., & Pascucci, S. (2016). Circular Solutions for Linear Problems. Solutions, 7(4), 58-65. FAO, IFAD & WFP. (2015) The state of food insecurity in the world: Meeting the 2015 international hunger targets: Taking stock of uneven progress. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Hammond, R. A., & Dubé, L. (2012). A systems science perspective and transdisciplinary models for food and nutrition security. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(31), 12356-12363

Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management review, 24(4), 691-710.

Pascucci, S., & Duncan, J. (2017). From pirate islands to communities of hope. Sustainable Food Futures: Multidisciplinary Solutions.

Stock, P. V., Rosin, C., & Carolan, M. (2016). Food utopias. Biological Economies: Experimentation and the Politics of Agri-food Frontiers, 212.

132

Blockchain encoding of Food waste behaviours in support of a Circular Economy

Authors: Amir M. Sharif and Zahir Irani - School of Management, Faculty of Management and Law, University of Bradford, UK

Abstract: It is now universally accepted that food waste is a mounting and ubiquitous societal issue that affects both developed as well as under-developed economies (FAO, 2011). Using Boulding (1966) as a reference point to highlight the importance of natural resource depletion, the authors bring together previous work on systemic drivers and archetypes underlying food waste behaviours (Sharif and Irani; 2016; Irani and Sharif, 2017), as well as the extant literature on Circular Economy (CE) definitions (Kalmykova et al., 2018; Kirhcerr et al., 2017; Merli et al., 2018), in order to present the development of a blockchain approach to encapsulating food waste behaviours as part of a strategy to improve inner-outer loop circularity of food supply chains (Hackius and Petersen, 2017). Noting the above, the research discusses and gathers together the disparate – some might say, even divergent – strands of the CE (as identified by Homrich et al., 2018). In order to go beyond the purely technical and biological spheres, the authors use the primary lens of the so-called “human-sphere” to frame the CE landscape with reference to food waste and the resulting impact of circularity (behaviours, culture, legislative and institutional): the latter social aspects of which have been largely neglected in research and practice (Ezzat, 2016). In doing so, the authors pose several research questions in the search for a shared context and ownership model of food supply and waste in terms of: RQ1: What are the underlying behavioural drivers for food waste from a CE perspective? Current framing of CE-related upstream or downstream aspects are solely tethered to industrial ecology or cradle-to-cradle narratives and not individual actor / social stakeholders; RQ2: How can sustainable business model archetypes (Bocken et al., 2014) be integrated with upstream and downstream points of cause-and-effect along the food waste chain? Again, current and / or emergent explanations of business model-driven CE have a paucity of waste hierarchies built which need to be overcome (Kirchherr et al., 2017); RQ3: What are the effects on upstream food supply chain actors, if a “no zero burden” approach to food waste creation is undertaken (Ilic et al., 2018)? Reversing the analysis of the food waste chain context to include fulfilment losses upstream may lead to a more consistent view of where regenerative solutions may be cited; RQ4: How can any barriers to CE-based food supply chains be overcome – i.e. the so-called FOSAT set of barriers (financial, operational, structural, attitudinal, and technological as defined by Ritzen and Sandstrom (2017)); RQ5: How can food waste ownership, behaviours and structural elements – including cause, effect, lifecycle, actor and zero burden variables - be included in CE business models (Urbinati et al., 2017) as part of a chain-wide validation mechanism to minimise food waste across inner and out loops – i.e. using a blockchain approach (Hackius and Petersen, 2017). Exploring these research questions, from the perspective of the human / social actor will allow those involved in food security and related research to bridge the divide towards the development of CE-aware food waste solutions. References: Boulding, K. (1966). The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth. In H. Jarrett (ed.) 1966.

Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy, Resources for the Future/Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 3-14.

Ezzat (2016). Sustainable development of seaport cities through circular economy: a comparative study with implications to Suez Canal Corridor project. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 509 – 522.

FAO (2011). Global food losses and food waste: the extent, causes and prevention, Food and Agriculture Organisation, United Nations, Rome, Italy, 2011.

133

Hackius and Petersen (2017). Blockchain in Logistics and Supply Chain: Trick or Treat?, In W. Kersten, T. Blecker and C. M. Ringle (Eds.) Digitalization in Supply Chain Management and Logistics, ISBN 9783745043280, October 2017, pp.3 – 18.

Homrich, A.S., Galvao, G., Abadia, L.G., and Carvalho, M.M. (2018). The circular economy umbrella: Trends and gaps on integrating pathways, Journal of Cleaner Production, 175 : 525 – 543.

Ilic, D. D., Eriksson, O., Odlund, L., and Aberg, M. (2018). No zero burden assumption in a circular economy, Journal of Cleaner Production, 182 : 352 – 362.

Irani, Z., and Sharif, A,M. (2016). Sustainable Food Security Futures: Perspectives on Food Waste and Information across the food supply chain, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 29 (1): 1 – 8.

Kalmykova, Y., Sadagopan, S., and Rosado, L. (2018). Circular economy – From review of theories and practices to development of implementation tools, Resources, Conversation and Recycling, In press.

Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., and Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions, Resources, Conversation and Recycling, 127 : 221 – 232.

Ritzen, S., and, Sandstrom, G.O. (2017). Barriers to the Circular Economy – integration of perspectives and domains. Procedia CIRP 64, pp. 7 – 12.

Sharif, A.M., and Irani, Z. (2017). Policy making for global food security in a volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world, Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 11 (4) : 523 - 534.

Urbinati, A., Chiarone, D., and Chiesa, V. (2017). Towards a new taxonomy of circular economy business models. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168 : 487 – 498.

134

Chemical safety as key consideration for circular food packaging systems

Authors: Birgit Geueke, Ksenia Groh, Greta Stieger and Jane Muncke - Food Packaging Forum Foundation, Switzerland Abstract: Food packaging plays an important role in today’s economy, as it facilitates storage, handling, transport, and preservation of food and is essential for preventing food waste. The market value of food packaging is estimated to be around 7% of the global food markets value, approximately U.S. $300 billion. Different materials are commonly used for food packaging, with plastics, paperboard, glass, metals (e.g. steel and aluminum), and multimaterial multilayers (e.g. beverage cartons) being the most prevalent types [1, 2]. Besides its beneficial properties, food packaging causes rising concern for the environment due to its high production volume, often short usage time, and problems related to waste management and littering [3, 4]. Additionally, food packaging can have a direct impact on human health, because chemical migration into food is a common phenomenon [5], and certain chemical exposures, especially in fetuses, infants and children, are associated with some chronic diseases [6]. Food packaging has been estimated to be a highly relevant source of chemical exposures [7], though many knowledge gaps exist that make its risk assessment challenging [8]. Reduction, reuse and recycling, but also redesign are tools supporting the aims of the circular economy and having the potential to decrease the environmental and health impact of food packaging. For packaging waste, recycling processes are already in place for many materials, and regulatory and industrial initiatives plan to further develop and expand recycling activities. In Europe and the U.S., the legal safety requirements do not differ for food packaging made of virgin or recycled materials. However, the use of recycled food packaging can have a direct impact on the chemical safety of food, because recycling can introduce and enrich hazardous chemicals, hence the presence of chemicals of concern is much more difficult to control in recycled materials. In this presentation, we review recycling processes of the most commonly used food packaging materials. We refer to the concept of permanent and non-permanent materials and its implications for the recycling of food packaging [9]. Further, we provide an overview of typical migrants from all types of recycled food packaging materials and summarize approaches to reduce chemical contamination. We discuss the role of food packaging in the circular economy, where recycling is just one of many tools and can be complemented by further measures to provide safe food packaging. References 1. Marsh, K., and Bugusu, B. (2017). “Food packaging--Roles, materials, and environmental

issues.” Journal of Food Science 72(3):R39-R55. 2. Poças, M.F.F., Oliveira, J.C., Pinto, H.J., Zacarias, M.E., and Hogg T. (2009).

“Characterization of patterns of food packaging usage in Portuguese homes.” Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A 26(9):1314-1324.

3. Geyer, R., Jambeck, J.R., and Law, K.L. (2017). “Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made.” Science Advances 3(7):e1700782.

4. Jambeck, J.R., et al. (2015). “Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean.” Science 347(6223):768-771.

5. Arvanitoyannis, I.S., and Bosnea, L. (2004). “Migration of substances from food packaging materials to foods.” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 44(2):63-76.

6. Braun, J.M., and Gray, K. (2017). “Challenges to studying the health effects of early life environmental chemical exposures on children’s health.” PLoS Biology 15:e2002800.

7. Biryol, D., Nicolas, C.I., Wambaugh, J., Phillips, K., and Isaacs, K. (2017). “High-throughput dietary exposure predictions for chemical migrants from food contact substances for use in chemical prioritization.” Environment International 108:185-194.

135

8. Muncke, J., et al. (2017). “Scientific challenges in the risk assessment of food contact materials.” Environmental Health Perspectives 125(9):095001.

9. Conte, F., Dinkel, F., Kägi, T., and Heim, T. (2014). “Permanent materials. Carbotech Final Report.” https://carbotech.ch/en/projekte/permanent-materials/

136

Technological Innovation System Framework for the Second Generation Biorefineries

Authors: Lora Tsvetanova, Laura Carraresi, Michael Wustmans, Stefanie Bröring - Institute for Food and Resource Economics, Chair for Technology and Innovation Management in Agribusiness, University of Bonn (Germany) Background and Motivation The concept of circular economy requires a gradual decoupling of economic activity from the consumption of finite resources and designing waste out of the system (MacArthur 2013). In this context integrated second generation biorefineries that can exploit various biomass components (such as crop residue, industrial biomass waste, perennial grasses, forest biomass) to generate fuels, chemicals and materials, can play a key role in the realization of a circular economy (e.g. Liguori, Faraco 2016). Yet, such biorefinery technologies need help in order to move down the learning curve and eventually reach competitiveness with fossil-based alternatives. It is, therefore, of great importance to discover the conditions under which innovations that are conductive to a more sustainable economy may emerge, develop, diffuse and thrive. As this question is a focal point for the research domain on technological innovation systems (TIS), we adopt the approach to analyse the advancements of second generation biorefineries. Other contributions on the topic have already examined the structure, the functional strengths and weaknesses of the biorefinery TIS but with a strong focus on forest biorefineries (e.g. Bauer et al. 2017; Giurca, Späth 2017). The current research, on the other hand, aims to understand the specific elements (relevant actors, networks, institutions and functions) of a biorefinery that utilizes non-food agricultural resources (such as crop residue or perennial grasses grown on marginal soils). Additionally, we attempt to describe the focal TIS in a broader context of existing (complementary or competing) technologies, as well as relevant industry sectors, market and policy structures that shape the landscape. Methodology A systematic step-by-step approach is applied in order to conceptualize the system. The starting point of the analysis includes decisions on (1) the level of aggregation, (2) the range of applications in which the technology is relevant but also (3) on the context structures, with which the second generation biorefinery TIS interacts – other TISs, or relevant industrial sectors (Bergek et al. 2008; Bergek et al. 2015). As there is no consensus among researchers on what methods to apply when analysing TIS, data for the current contribution was collected from multiple sources: patent documents (accessed through the tool Derwent Innovation), secondary data (overview of relevant literature, including international reports on the status of second generation biorefineries), and information gathered from semi-structured interviews with key actors within the innovation system. Preliminary results Results of the patent analysis indicate three major areas of application in which the second generation biorefinery technology is relevant: biofuels, organic fine chemistry and bio-based materials. This corresponds to previous findings (e.g. Giurca, Späth 2017) that position biorefineries as a cross-sectoral concept. Analogously, relevant actors in the second generation biorefinery TIS are firms from the biofuel and biochemical industries, as well as farmers, universities, research institutes and research-industry networks. In terms of contextual structures, the incumbent fossil-based systems and the first generation biorefineries are perceived as competing TISs, while agricultural innovation systems are seen as complementary ones.

References Bauer, Fredric; Coenen, Lars; Hansen, Teis; McCormick, Kes; Palgan, Yuliya Voytenko (2017): Technological innovation systems for biorefineries: a review of the literature. In Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining.

137

Bergek, Anna; Hekkert, Marko; Jacobsson, Staffan; Markard, Jochen; Sandén, Björn; Truffer, Bernhard (2015): Technological innovation systems in contexts: Conceptualizing contextual structures and interaction dynamics. In Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 16, pp. 51–64. Bergek, Anna; Jacobsson, Staffan; Carlsson, Bo; Lindmark, Sven; Rickne, Annika (2008): Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis. In Research policy 37 (3), pp. 407–429. Giurca, Alexandru; Späth, Philipp (2017): A forest-based bioeconomy for Germany? Strengths, weaknesses and policy options for lignocellulosic biorefineries. In Journal of Cleaner Production 153, pp. 51–62. Liguori, Rossana; Faraco, Vincenza (2016): Biological processes for advancing lignocellulosic waste biorefinery by advocating circular economy. In Bioresource technology 215, pp. 13–20. MacArthur, Ellen (2013): Towards the circular economy. In Journal of Industrial Ecology, pp. 23–44.

138

Towards a Normative Framework for Conducting Business in the Circular Economy The case of biomimetic enterprises

Authors: Saskia van den Muijsenberg MBA MSc* and Dr. Vincent Blok MBA - Management Studies Group, Wageningen University (The Netherlands)

*Note on the first author: Saskia van den Muijsenberg is PhD-candidate in biologically inspired business model design – redesigning organisations to flourish in the circular economy at the Management Studies Group, Wageningen University (The Netherlands). Her supervisors are prof. dr. O. Omta (promotor), prof. dr. J. Jonker (Radboud University) and dr. V. Blok (co-promotor). She has a background in Social Sciences (MSc, Radboud University), in Business Management (MBA, Twente School of Management) and in Biomimicry (MSc, Arizona State University). Introduction

The Circular Economy (CE) claims to be restorative and regenerative by design because it mimics natural cycles in which all resources flow continuously in loops. However, few enterprises have been able to reinvent themselves to take full advantage of CE’s potential.

It has rarely been conceptually explored how the ideal of CE translates into normative, concrete guidelines for business management. In this paper, we reflect on the question how organisations can operationalise the concept of CE in their business models to ensure restorative and regenerative outcomes. To this end, we reflect on companies that use biomimicry as a strategic framework for CE transition.

Problem statement: Key Challenge in implementing CE in Business

Circular business is currently mainly limited to recycling, energy efficiency and raw materials reduction (Jonker at al 2017). Recycling can be seen as a first step towards sustainability, but CE transitions based on higher circularity strategies call for more radical socio-institutional change (Constanza et al 2015). Without coupling business practice to Earth’s planetary boundaries (Rockstrom, 2009), CE remains a metaphor. Biomimicry is a source of design inspiration for a new industrial and economic paradigm that seeks to work with the laws of nature to identify solutions to sustainability challenges (Mead 2017, p 113). We suggest biomimicry as departure point for CE innovation, product design and new business models and strategies, as biomimicry views nature both as a model for innovation and as a measure/standard, for sustainability (Benyus, 1997; Blok et al, 2016). Case Study - Biomimicry as strategic framework for conducting business in the CE As an example, we discuss the case of Interface, who used biomimicry to become the world’s first sustainable carpet manufacturer in the world and achieved huge breakthroughs in resource use, manufacturing processes, organisational culture and partnerships. Interface demonstrates far more is needed than recycling alone to get business operations to zero footprint. All building blocks in the business model canvas changed over the last 20 years.

With their latest biomimetic innovation, “Factory as a Forest”, Interface seeks to make their factories as ecologically productive as natural ecosystems. They measured the ecosystem services of the original local ecosystem next-door to the factory (# CO2 stored, # air cleaned, # biodiversity supported, etc.) and use the metrics, ‘ecological performance standards’, as benchmark for business operation. Method

We look conceptually at the implications of CE ambitions for companies, their business processes, and for their business models in particular. We reflect on cases of organisations that use nature both as a model and as a measure for sustainability to implement circular business practice.

139

We bring biomimicry and CE literature in dialogue with business model (innovation) theories to inform ecological management at the individual organisation level. We reflect on how organisations use ecological perspectives and metrics for regenerative business management to create net-positive results. In doing so, we develop a new normative framework for sustainability and for circular business model innovation. References:

Benyus, J. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. HarperCollins. 1997. Blok, V., Gremmen, B. Ecological Innovation: Biomimicry as a New Way of Thinking and Acting

Ecologically. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 2016, 29:203-2017 Constanza, R., Cumberland, J.H., Daly, H., Goodland, R., Norgaard, R.B., Kubiszewski, I., Franco,

C. An Introduction to Ecological Economics. Second edition, 2015. CRC Press. Taylor & Francis Group. Boca Raton.

Ehrenfeld, J. (2004) Industrial ecology: a new field or only a metaphor? Journal of Cleaner Production 12(8–10): 825–831.

Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P. Bocken, N.M.P., Hultink, E. The Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production. Volume 143, 1 February 2017, Pages 757-768.

Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., Ulgiati, S. A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production. Volume 114, 15 February 2016, Pages 11-32.

Harman, J. The Shark’s Paintbrush: Biomimicry and How Nature Is Inspiring Innovation. 2013. Nicholas Brealey, London, UK.

i2 & TactTiles, Interface. The commercialization story behind the modular carpet tile that mimics the forest floor to reduce material waste, and more. A Biomimicry Case Study. Published by Synapse by Biomimicry 3.8 Written by Biomimicry Business Intelligence. https://synapse.bio/blog//the-carpet-company-that-mimicked-the-forest-floor

Jonker, J., Stegeman, H., Faber, N.R. en Kothman, I. (2017). Eén zwaluw voorspelt veel goeds; resultaten van het landelijke onderzoek 2016-2017 naar Business Modellen voor de Circulaire Eonomie. Doetinchem: Stichting OCF 2.0

Mead, T., Jeanrenaud, S. The Elephant in the Room: Biomimetics and Sustainability? Bioinspired, Biomimetic and Nanobiomaterials. Volume 6 Issue 2, June 2017, pp. 113-121

Potting, J., Hekkert, M., Worrell, E. Hanemaaijer, A. Circular economy: Measuring innovation in the product chain. © PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency The Hague, 2017. PBL publication number: 2544

Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K et al. (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461(September): 472–475.

Wubben, E.F.M., Runge, N.A., Blok, V., "From Waste to Profit. An interorganisational perspecive on

drivers for biomass valorization", Journal of Chain and Network Science, Vol. 12 (3), 261-272

140

Circular economy in the real estate construction sector: A functional diversity perspective to study changing actor roles

Authors: Van Staveren, D., Cuppen, E. and Heurkens, E. – Delft University of Technology, Netherlands Vos, M. – Delft University of Technology, Netherlands and Arcadis & Anthea Group, Netherlands Keywords: Circular economy; real estate construction; governance; functional diversity; building process; collaboration Abstract: Circular economy has gained increasing interest in different sectors and industries as an answer to inefficient and unsustainable resource management. Also in the real estate construction sector circular economy principles could provide environmental and economic gain. One of the key challenges for transitioning to a more circular construction sector is to find new ways of organizing construction projects since the current constellation of functions and actors in building development processes is optimized to the use of virgin materials. In this paper, we analyse what actors involved in circular construction project do to achieve circular ambitions. Drawing on biodiversity- and ecosystems services theory, we develop a functional diversity framework to identify the functions performed by actors in circular building development, as well as the things that enable the actors to perform a particular function. This approach is popular in ecosystems services theory because it reveals which constellation of species optimally contributes to critical conditions for the functioning of ecosystems. Think of pollination, nutrient cycling and resistance to pests. Organisms are allocated to functional groups based on their functional traits. These are traits that make an organism compatible to execute a function. Functional diversity is introduced in ecology sciences for a reason similar to why we are introducing the perspective in the construction sector: “Functional diversity generally involves understanding communities and ecosystems based on what organisms do, rather than on their evolutionary history”. This is in line with the goal of this paper; getting insight into what people do to develop circular buildings. Thus, we translate the ecological functional diversity perspective to an actor-systems functional diversity perspective. Based on analysis of four cases of circular building development processes, we identify five functions that appear critical for realizing circular building development: 1) Connecting through vision, 2) Matching supply and demand, 3) Providing circular materials, 4) Constructing products and building elements, 5) Ensuring safety and quality. While these functions can also be identified in traditional building development, the way these functions are performed in circular building development were found to be different. A considerable amount of creativity was observed in the performance of functions. Furthermore, alternative labor forces played a key role in the success of the studied cases, such as people with a distance to the job market. Because unconventional materials were used in the construction process, also extra efforts and checks had to be done for compliance with building regulations (e.g. safety) and maintenance. Important traits that were identified for realizing the CE building were enthusiasm, idealism, ability to connect stakeholders, and creativity.

141

D. Sector and Material Specific Applications What enables, constrains or channels renewable energy system innovation at a local level?

Author: Simon Wright - PhD Candidate, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney. The perpetuation of the 'take, make, break' mentality implicit in the linear economy continues to generate ever increasing levels of pollution and waste and threatens to create a scarcity of key resources. At the same time, the need to transition to low carbon alternatives dominates the energy discourse. In recent years circular economy thinking (CE) has gained popularity as a means to address both of these issues, promoting the efficient re-use of waste as an input into production whilst embracing low-carbon technologies. Despite significant progress, CE has struggled to break out of its niche and displace dominant approaches to manufacturing and energy generation. Utilising the lens of of sustainability transitions and strategic niche management (SNM) in particular, this qualitative research focuses on a case study of an early stage community biomass project in regional Australia based on core CE principles. Drawing on 21 semi-structured interviews with key actors across the network, enablers and constraints of renewable energy system innovation at a local level are analysed using the hallmarks of successful strategic niches, namely networks, learning and expectations or vision. Additionally the influence of third party intermediaries is considered given their role in connecting local niches to existing regimes and accelerating sustainability transitions. The complexity and scale of the opportunity necessitates a collaborative approach to innovation. Consequently the network of actors is seen to play a critical role by participants. Driven by an emphasis on social value and economic transformation, the community-led nature of the network and its preference for self-organisation is seen as effective in retaining stakeholder engagement. Diversity in participation ensures the economic, social and environmental aspects are all adequately represented and the potential for creativity is maximised. Dynamic group membership proves effective when specialist actors are engaged on an 'as needs' basis typically to address technical issues, managed by the niche innovator and balanced by a stable, core management group. The adaptability and agility of the network is seen to support the innovation process, underpinned by a clear and common vision for the project. Major network vulnerabilities relate to resources, loss of key personnel and constraints of the funding programs. Learning is seen as highly collaborative and multidisciplinary focused on radical, replicable innovation and embodied in an informal and open exchange of ideas and active and ongoing dialogue between stakeholders. Formal knowledge management underpins this informality and brings structure to the learning process. The resultant innovation pathway is seen as chaotic and rapidly changing, occurring in fits and starts as resources enter and exit the network. Resource constraints and business model uncertainties predominate. Third party intermediaries play a critical role in providing linkages to knowledge, resources and other networks. The regional nature of the project accounts for the unusually active interest of State and Local Government in providing funding, bridging relationships and bringing long term credibility to the project. Whilst a wealth of research has been undertaken in the field, substantial gaps remain in our understanding of the theory and practice of CE. Applying the lens of SNM improves our understanding of the potential impact of networks to the innovation and learning process and the importance of the role of third parties in supporting the development of CE projects. Ultimately it is hoped that this research can assist in accelerating the transition to CE and a low carbon economy.

142

The Transition of Education on Biobased and Circular Sciences Author: Dr Emiel F.M.Wubben - Associate Professor Strategic Management, Wageningen University and Research, the Netherlands Abstract: In this Antropocene age, mankind weights on the carrying capacity of planetary ecosystems, caused by established practices in the past, requiring knowledge disruption in the present, to realise a sustainable society for future generations. The 21st Century challenges call for knowledge and education that will bring progress on a wide variety of topics, related to technology, environment, business, and society. This manuscript takes up the symposium-theme of ‘theory and practice of education and learning in the transition to a Circular Economy’. In particular, it shows the dilemma’s in the development of a new, interdisciplinary Master of Science programme and its three specialisations, oriented at the biotic or biological cycles in the Circular Economy, the socalled Biobased Economy. The Circular Economy-concept is characterised as an economy that is restorative and regenerative by design, distinguishing between technical and biological cycles (Ellen McArthurFoundation, 2014). Concerning the biotic cycles, for the Dutch the Biobased Economy is supposed to focus on the transition from fossil-based raw materials to biomass as a raw material. The authorities, companies, and research institutes in concert saw an enormous potential in linking up its strong economic clusters in agrifood, logistics and petrochemistry. Already in 2007, the Dutch published the ‘Government’s Strategic Agenda for the Bio-Economy’, and the European Commission published ‘En route to the knowledge-based bio-economy’. Policies and expectations have been set by the ‘Biomass Vision for 2030’, and by the 2017-publication ‘A Circular Economy in the Netherlands by 2050’. Already in 2010, the Port of Rotterdam allocates 80ha to a bio-based cluster, for the joint development of co-firing of biomass in power plants, better and more biofuels, and replacing fossils-based for green chemistry. (Rotterdam Climate Initiative (2014) Rotterdam Bioport). However, due to a convincing review of over 50 value added-oriented innovation trajectories, broad participation of stakeholders was sought for. This review on agrification projects showed that the biobased economy (BBE) could only become successful when embraced, as a systems innovation, by a broad spectrum of industries, authorities and research institutes (Bos, et al, 2008). Thus 2012 brought to life a programme board Biobased Economy, with the task to promote the cross-cutting theme BBE, and lead the interdepartmental Bio-economy programme. The lead for industry-university projects on BBE was taken up by the petro-chemical industry. On top of dedicated websites, dissemination projects, and expert committees, stakeholders set up the Centre for BBE (CBBE), a collaboration between the Wageningen UR and 7 universities for applied research, to jointly promote both education and (applied) research regarding the BBE. “The main challenge for the current generation of students is to work on improving resource efficiency and the use of land in order to meet all these needs, while not forgetting climate, biodiversity, multiple land use, recreation and social issues.” (CBBE (2015) Education for the biobased econom. A leaflet) In anticipation of the transformation to the BBE, and the need for BBE-specialised students, Wageningen UR set out to develop courses and programs for the BBE. Since 2006 various groups had worked on biobased education. The first fruits were a BSc minor Biobased Technology, in 2011 By 2015, also, a BSc minor Biobased Transition had been realised (both BSc minors: 24 ECTS). Now both BSc minors included the integrating multidisciplinary course Biobased Economy. By 2016, WUR had scheduled a MSc-specialisation Biorefinary and Conversion, building on research projects and an established bioprocessing edu programme. The promotional MOOC ‘Towards a biobased society’ had been realised, to be followed by an more academic, extensive BBE MOOC-programme, and the international student association IBBESS just started activities. BBE-earmarked academic consultancy training-courses, and BBE-oriented internships became popular. Accordingy, in

143

September 2015, it was decided to streamline educational innovations towards a broad Master of Sciences in BBE. The new BBE-MSc had to take the systems approach serious, it should ideally provide interdisciplinary learning trajectories, while providing disciplinary specialisation as wel. It should be attractive for students from economy, business and (chemical) engineering, while recognizable for the government and companies involved. A brainstorm provided various names, like biobased systems, and biobased economy. Circular Economy became more recognized during the formal accreditation procedure. A muti-disciplinary working group was set up, and a wider circle of teachers were activated, to work towards a point at the horizon, namely to start a full blown BBE MSc-program by (ideally) September 2018. A lot of procedural work was scheduled, in parallel. The working group and the CBBE had to work on a decision by the Executive Board of WUR, followed by the effectiveness test (macro doelmatigheidstoets), a labormarket study, and accreditation by the responsible authority NVAO. Private companies were searched for and invited to participate in a programme committee. Simultaneously, locally at WUR new specialisation programs and missing courses had to be formulated and formalized via the new study guide. Self-evidently, this was not a simple given, as scarce resources were at stake, both for short run innovations, and for long run, ongoing programme delivery. The economic affairs-ministry provided funds for the necessary educational innovations. A rather constructive approach of local and national stakeholders made it possible to submit the formal documents for the accreditation by mid-2017. to cut it short a panel visit for accreditiation was due Feb 218 and a list of minor comments were received for feedback and follow-up by March 2018. A positive resolutionn is expected with the two-year MSc-programme due to start by Sept 2018. Students must become successful actors in the transition to a biobased society. Thus the proposed MSc programme in Biobased Sciences aims to develop an interdisciplinary mindset, and provide specialisations ‘ that address (1) the initial biomass production and carbon capture, (2) the subsequent biorefinery and conversion processes necessary to provide biobased products and services, as well as (3) related business models and economic and societal aspects of the transition to a biobased society’ (See figure). To develop the combination of interdisciplinarity and specialization, and to couple a solid scientific basis with practice-oriented components, requires 120 ECTS. The MSc programme is built on foundation and three pillars: primary production, biorefinery and conversion, and socio-economic aspects (we here derive from the submitted proposal). At the start of the programme, specifically designed foundation courses enable the students to understand the principles behind successful (biobased) innovations. The second objective of these courses is to learn to think interdisciplinary and master a systems approach. The first foundation course is about the many concepts and disciplines that play a role in the biobased economy, in which ‘a sustainable future is created by moving from fossil resources to biomass resources for the production of food, chemicals, and energy-carriers.’ It deals with some 10 topics such as bioconversion, business, biomass production and consumer behaviour. the second foundation course targets the complex transition towards a biobased and circular economy, considering technical, social, environmental, and managerial, aspects, based on quantitative analyses. In-depth training is offered within the three specialisations, the internship, and the MSc thesis. Each specialisation comprises of both prescribed and (restricted) optional courses. The thesis must be carried out within one of the Chair Groups, involved in one of the specialisations, in combination with a research question of one of the other two specialisations. Accordingly, supervision is also executed jointly. In sum, by September 2018, Wageningen UR expects to promote the transition towards the Biobased and Circular Economy by developing students that are both scientific specialists and that can work in an interdisciplinary manner, promoting knowledge disruption in the present, to realise a sustainable society for future generations.

144

145

WORKSHOPS

146

(Re)thinking Circular Economy “from below” Coordinators: Sebastián Carenzo and Lucas Becerra - The Institute for Science and Technology Studies, National University of Quilmes (IESCT-UNQ), Argentina. Workshop proposal: The concept of Circular Economy (CE) is essentially based on a critical rethinking of the linear model of extraction-production-consumption-disposal that is predominant under the current local and global techno-productive regimes. The greater part of the development of this new perspective of analysis has been carried out in the context of developed countries and with particular orientation towards industrial production. So far, the concept is mainly focused on process engineering issues and artifacts that can be designed with the greatest number of loops either within a single productive unit or between interconnected units. In few words, the notion of circular economy is rooted in three principles: Design zero waste/pollution Keep products and materials in use Regenerate natural systems However, social movements around the globe have been stressing that this urgency to think about techno-productive systems that incorporate broad cycles to preserve both human work and nature is not (so) new. Throughout the Global South or the Non-Western North we have witnessed the emergence of organisational structures conducive to CE endeavours. Largely know as Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE) organisations (i.e. co-operatives and associations), these type of organisations have proven to play a key role for CE and yet they are underexplored. As we will evidence through this workshop´s debate in cities such as of Buenos Aires (Argentina), Cuenca (Ecuador), São Paulo (Brasil) or Belgrade (Serbia), local organizations and social movements are already deeply engaged in a broad debate around the analytical-normative conceptualizations that allow us to challenge and change the stabilized ways of conceiving socio-economic development and sustainability within a CE framework. The question that we will seek to answer in the discussion proposed for the workshop could be defined as follows: How does the concept of "circular economy" interact with other frameworks on sustainable inclusive development already elaborated "from below"? From the empirical point of view, this question becomes highly relevant since the incipient generalization of the CE concept has been much more a extrapolation from northern contexts and experiences, rather than been reviewed from other analytical frameworks, extremely present at the local level in the Global South. Such frameworks include those developed by scholars and social organizations in the fields of Social and Solidarity Economy and Social Technologies. A consequence is that, at the level of government administrations, we witness a kind of copycat of the mainstream concept of Circular Economy without any type of adaptation to the complexities presented by local and regional scenarios. Also, although some private sector companies are beginning to show interest in incorporating loops into their production processes, the results are still scarce and limited. Finally, practically no CE literature (e.g., case studies oriented towards innovations in process engineering / artifacts) focuses on, or even learn from, the challenges implied in this shift especially for local economies and productive ventures developed in the popular sectors. This is extremely frustrating since we see that many of the priorities of the CE concept, such as the reuse of productive inputs or the design of sustainable systems from the source, have already been developed in practice by actors who are not part of the mainstream Circular Economy literature, for example by worker co-operatives, rural movements and SSE organisations. In order to discuss this subject, departing from both an analytical and empirical perspective, the workshop will gather three ongoing research cases that informs about the links between the CE concept and others frameworks as the SSE and Social Technologies, among others. The expected outputs of this workshop are related to the opening of a conceptual discussion on how and to what

147

extent a Circular Economy “from below” perspective can nurture new public and private policies and actions of sustainable inclusive development. 1) Radical incrementalism of the Circular Economy through grassroots perspectives from Brazil. Jutta Gutberlet (Department of Geography, University of Victoria, UVic, Canada), Adalberto Mantovani Martiniano de Azevedo (Universidade Federal do ABC, UFABC, Brazil) The idea of waste being a resource to be circulating in our economy has always been central in the work of waste pickers all over the world. Waste pickers might not speak the same technical or academic language but they understand the concept of the Circular Economy, by retrieving materials from the waste stream to redirecting these resources into the recycling economy. They work independently or as groups organized in cooperatives, associations or networks. These grassroots initiatives have diverse skill sets and knowledges, developed through everyday experiences with waste, waste producers and large scale waste generators, as well as with different actors in waste management. Their assets and knowledge offer innovative perspectives on how to handle waste, how to add value or how to educate citizens on waste related issues. Our case study will bring in new perspectives from organized waste pickers and their leaders in Brazil, which recently also have accumulated significant know-how and knowledge on public and private partnerships dealing with reverse logistics for specific recyclable materials. We have accompanied a number of these initiatives over the last years and will provide insights to the assets they have developed, the bottlenecks they experience day by day and the lessons they have learned through their praxis. These waste pickers are major protagonists in waste diversion and have to be included in the dialogue and the application of the Circular Economy. By doing so new opportunities for achieving greater social and environmental justice will be created. 2) Social and solidarity economy organisations in the global south: theoretical and practical implications for CE. Alexander Borda-Rodriguez (Strategic Research Area in International Development and Inclusive Development, Open University, OP, United Kingdom) Social and solidarity economy (SSE) organisations are rapidly becoming a major economic and political force in the global south. SSE is includes different types of economic activities and almost exclusively works through organisations (i.e. co-operatives, associations and social enterprises). SSE organisations are setup and driven by principles and values that enable low income people to engage with society and the market in sustainable ways. Such values and principles also allow the development of sustainable and inclusive technologies that can greatly contribute to innovation in the CE. SSE and its importance to CE remains underexplored, there is little evidence-based research that show how the SSE organisations can develop bottom-up strategies that can feed into CE practices. In this paper I explore how SSE organisations can play a critical role in the development of CE strategies for low income people. Firstly, the paper explores the theoretical underpinnings of SSE and its conduciveness to CE practices, then it moves onto the analysis of evidence from several SSE organisations from the southern part of Ecuador, it explores how these organisations have been able to cope with challenges while developing sustainable practices that could became the basis for a CE in Ecuador. 3) A story about CE from Serbia Milan Veselinov, (The Academy for Circular Economy and NGO Un BeSo (United for Better Society, Serbia) In countries in transition where people are sold the story of “western” wealthy lifestyle, where consumption is all but responsible, where import prices (including fossils) are subsidized, there is so little space for a turn towards savvy-carbon diminishing-circular economy. In these same countries, environment is still seen as a “cost”, waste management likewise, while circular economy is mainly presented as a “super waste management”. Thus, people in these countries literally live out of extraction. If we are to ask people what is “Circular economy” in Serbia, in most cases they would describe it as something familiar, such as “energy efficiency”, “recycling” or “returning materials through waste

148

management”. They would seldom go to the description of a design phase, they would very rarely refer to the business models. The major difference in these two (Eastern and Western Europe) is the financial power of local and national governments and existence of true(r) role of a democratic governing agencies (in favor of the Western Europe). At the same time, sharing economy, leasing models, seeking of true social value of products, etc., were already present in the Eastern part, but nowadays these models are regarded as “for the poor”, repair is culturally devalued, and new, cheaper products are (almost) the only thing important. Hence, a cultural shift with the help of real-life case studies in business; hard-wiring and true networking in local government; and development through agencies in national governments are necessary in order to get the right picture about, first and the foremost: social and business benefits of a circular economy. That is why an Academy for Circular economy is to be established this year in Serbia, with a mission to inform business sector about the real-life use of CE tools (LCA, MFA, new business models, systems thinking, industrial symbiosis, etc.). On the macro level, there are agencies helping national bodies to understand and integrate inclusive strategies that would underpin further CE development. Thus, a “National strategy for a circular economy development” is being written with the help of the German GIZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit). Also, a new inclusive waste management system is being. Finally, there are a few examples of successful practice in business area:“Feplo”, “Car:Go”, “Daj-daj” diapers and “Eco Recycling” are just few examples that confirm the story about the primary rationale that came from trying to be more efficient, healthy or just first on the market, while supporting circular economy principles (even if without knowing it). 4) Epistemic, political and techno-cognitive facets of a Circular Economy "from below" perspective: the case of waste picker’s cooperatives in Greater Buenos Aires Sebastián Carenzo and Lucas Becerra, (The Institute for Science and Technology Studies, National University of Quilmes, Argentina) This presentation proposes to redefine the concept of Circular Economy by highlighting the experience of waste pickers cooperatives in Greater Buenos Aires, Argentina. This type of organizations plays a key role in the recovery and transformation of discarded materials that otherwise ends up buried in landfills. In this sense, they are not only providing innovative examples for grassroots involvement in inclusive waste management models, but also they are tracing new perspectives to frame the Circular Economy approach, by highlighting its social and cultural dimensions. This is, to focus not only on environmental sustainability but also on the techno-cognitive dimensions involved in production, consumption and final waste destination. We introduce one case study that illustrates how waste picker organizations provide selective waste collection services, not only to households, but to large industries. Even more, we focus in how they are also developing technological innovations to reuse or recycle the so-called "non-marketable recyclables", this is plastics (i.e. expanded polystyrene) and cellulose materials (beer bottles labels pulp) that do not have an stabilized demand by the local recycling industry due to arguments that focus on the absence of technical procedures that allow processing these materials. Particularly from a global South perspective it becomes evident that epistemic, political and techno-cognitive facets need to be added to the concept of CE, requesting a shift towards a CE that links environmental management and policy with community development and that recognizes waste pickers as major protagonists in the CE. Short biographies of the participating scholars: Adalberto Mantovani Martiniano de Azevedo is graduated in Public Administration from Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (1999), Master in Science and Technology Policy from the State University of Campinas (2005) and PhD in Scientific and Technological Policy from the same institution (2010). He has experience in the area of Science and Technology Administration, with emphasis on public organizations, in the areas of public policies of science and technology, evaluation of R & D programs and policies and management of innovation in public and private organizations. He was the coordinator of academic activities of the Group for Support to Innovation and Learning in Cooperative Organizations and Systems (GAIA), based in the CTI (Renato Archer Information Technology Center) from January 2011 to May 2012. He is currently Adjunct Professor of the Center

149

for Engineering, Modeling and Applied Social Sciences (CECS) at the Federal University of ABC (UFABC). Alexander Borda-Rodriguez is a Research Fellow in the Strategic Research Area in International Development and Inclusive Development. He holds an MA in Development Economics from the University of East Anglia and a PhD in International Development from The Open University (OU). Alexander’s work is in the areas of politics of inclusive development and innovation in the Global South and SSE organisations in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. His previous work explored the politics of knowledge for development and development aid in low income countries. Jutta Gutberlet has a PhD in Geography from the University of Tübingen, Germany and is currently a Professor in the Department of Geography at the University of Victoria in Canada. She applies community-based, participatory action research methods to social and environmental justice issues. Her research focuses on everyday development and livelihoods challenges of waste pickers, primarily in the global South, addressing poverty, sustainability and governance issues. Lately, she is interested in the social grassroots innovations and different governance questions and epistemologies of waste (see: www.JuttaGutberlet.com). Lucas Becerra is an economist (University of Buenos Aires), master of international studies (Torcuato Di Tella University) and doctor of social sciences from the University of Buenos Aires. In recent years, he has attended a large number of higher education courses, including a stay at the STEPS Center of the University of Sussex, United Kingdom. Currently he works as a full-time researcher at the National Council of Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET) and currently affiliated as professor-researcher to The Institute for Science and Technology Studies, National University of Quilmes (IESCT-UNQ). As a member of the research group of the Institute of Studies on Science and Technology of the National University of Quilmes participates in numerous research projects on topics related to national systems of science and technology, technologies for social inclusion, social studies of development, economy of innovation and social economy. His current research topics include: Processes and dynamics of design, production and implementation of technologies for social inclusion in Latin America; Socio-technical analysis applied to the economy of technological change and inclusive development, focusing on Circular Economy public policies. Milan Veselinov. After pursuing a project management/marketing corporate successful career for 6 years, he had decided to pivot his contribution towards creating a just, sustainable business. He had mastered a multi-disciplinary Industrial Ecology programme following the European MIND programme in TU Delft, University Leiden (The Netherlands) and Graz University (Austria) 2014-2016. In that endeavor he was active in side projects that would bring him closer to strategizing new, sustainable business setup, clean-tech world and the circular economy. In 2016 he visits Asia, in particular Thailand where he discovers Asian nuances of circular economy approach and wishing to contribute where it is mostly needed, he returns to Serbia in late 2016. There he had commenced two researches in 2017 for MOVECO discovering topics both in Serbia and Montenegro, such as “The role of EPR schemes and Eco-innovation supporting circular economy development” and “Current developments of regulatory frameworks and research and development in CE”. After he had discovered that the lack of understanding regarding CE is present he pushes for a mutual project with the Serbian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Climate KIC and himself in order to improve the acceptance of the term in business circles. Thus, the Academy for Circular economy is established in early 2018 with the mission to transfer real-life experience and practice to the business decision makers in Serbia. At the same time is engaged to design a pan-European education platform for “moving from words to action” with Climate KIC. The platform should enable targeted actors of the system to bring new solutions or to showcase their positive examples in order to unlock the circular economy in practice and speed up the EC’s CE action plan. Finally, as a lack of social awareness and acceptance is present regarding CE, in early 2018, he founds an NGO named Un BeSo (United for Better Society) that aims to improve the attitude of citizens towards waste and to unlock the real bottom-up power of CE in the society of Serbia and beyond.

150

Sebastián Carenzo is a full-time researcher at the National Council of Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET) and currently affiliated as professor-researcher to The Institute for Science and Technology Studies, National University of Quilmes (IESCT-UNQ). He holds a PhD in Anthropology from the Buenos Aires National University, and he conducted several collaborative ethnographic research with waste pickers co-operatives and social and solidarity economy organisations since 2004. His current line of research draws on both Science and Technology Studies and contemporary Material Culture approaches, in order to critically understand how social technologies developed by waste pickers co-operatives could be enhanced, legitimated and promoted within the waste management systems of the Buenos Aires metropolitan area. Actually he is also engaged in developing a socio-technical analysis applied to the economy of technological change and inclusive development, focusing on Circular Economy public policies.

151

Assessing circular value chain reconfigurations: A case from the bio-plastics industry

Coordinators: Hendrik Clausdeinken, Nicola Blum, Anastasios Nodaras and Catharina R. Bening In January 2018, the European Commission introduced its strategy for plastics in a Circular Economy (European Commission, 2018), emphasizing that environmental issues and forgone economic benefits of not reusing or recycling plastics make action necessary. Especially, closing loops for plastic packaging appear relevant and promising as packaging contributes to about 26% of today’s global plastic waste, while it is estimated that only 14% of this packaging waste is recycled (World Economic Forum, Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey & Company, 2016). For the reconfiguration of plastics value chains, “efforts and greater cooperation by all […] key players, from plastics producers to recyclers, retailers and consumers” (European Commission, 2018) are needed, while there are multiple ways to close loops (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013). Despite structural challenges in value chain reconfigurations and resource potentials, literature still lacks insights into solutions for such structural challenges and into technical and economic aspects (Linder, Sarasini, & van Loon, 2017; Pauliuk, 2018). Therefore, our study sheds light on existing challenges and solutions for a circular reconfiguration up- and downstream of the value chain, using semi-structured interviews (Flick, 2009). We map drivers and barriers for successful collaboration and consortia building for circular value chains in order to derive policy and management interventions that help fostering a circular economy. In addition, we use a quantitative model to uncover economic improvement potentials along the value chain (e.g. in logistics, material cost, production scale) for a pilot and large-scale production. Furthermore, the model should help us to understand necessary analytical and scoping steps for a techno-economic analysis of a circular value chain, hence, supporting practitioners and increasing academic knowledge. We accompany a case of an ongoing circular reconfiguration in the German bio-plastics industry. While the specific research case offers multiple options for closing loops, the most prominent option to close a loop is the upcycling of bio-plastic14 packaging, i.e., using recycled bio-plastic for a secondary application in a new consumer product. First interviews grant insights into the examined case of value chain reconfiguration from three perspectives. From a technical perspective, we see that the project’s successful progress highly hinges on the compatibility of the bio-plastic with existing processes. From an organizational perspective, we find that the long project history of the case led to a trust-based relationship among the involved stakeholders, which helps the project to continue, despite uncertainties about the economies and scales of production. Taking a systemic perspective, future challenges of the project are expected within the establishment of a collection and return system for bio-plastic packaging with sufficient return rates, being key for the final closed-loop value chain. References: Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2013). Towards the Circular Economy Vol.1: Economic and business

rationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. European Commission. (2018). A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy. Brussels. Flick, U. (2009). An Introduction To Qualitative Research (4th ed.). London, Great Britain: SAGE

Publications Ltd. Linder, M., Sarasini, S., & van Loon, P. (2017). A Metric for Quantifying Product-Level Circularity.

Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3), 545–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12552 Pauliuk, S. (2018). Critical appraisal of the circular economy standard BS 8001:2017 and a

dashboard of quantitative system indicators for its implementation in organizations. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 129(October 2017), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.019

World Economic Forum, Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey & Company (2016). The New Plastics Economy - Rethinking the Future of Plastics.

14 Please note that the term «bio-plastic» is used for the sake of brevity, while the examined plastic is bio-based and biodegradable.

152

Understanding wood cascading in the context of a circular economy – what are the barriers and enablers?

Coordinators: Matteo Jarre, Anna Petit-Boix and Sina Leipold – Chair of Societal Transition and Circular Economy, University of Freiburg, Germany Carmen Priefer and Rolf Meyer – Institute of Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany Recently, the circular economy has gained large political momentum in Europe. In the industrial sector, forest-based and bio-based industries have started to envision this concept in their operations. In light of this interest, the question is: What can a circular forest bio-economy look like and how can it be realized? Despite the considerable expectations connected to the circular economy, the analysis of its practical realization in different industrial sectors is just beginning. At the same time, the forest-based industry and forest-related scholarship have a long history of debating and analyzing the so-called “cascading” or “cascade use” of wood. Although cascading is distinct from circular economy, resource efficiency is a shared idea that might be pursued through life extension, material recycling or energy recovery, among others. Hence, existing knowledge on wood cascading could help to implement the circular economy in the bio-based sector. For this reason, we review the literature to identify current trends and debates in the context of wood cascading and relate these to the underlying ideas of a circular economy. To do so, we first generate a framework that depicts how cascading and the circular economy relate to each other in terms of concepts and implementation strategies. Based on this framework, we then identify agreements and disagreements on barriers and enablers related to the realization of cascading strategies in the forest-based industry. Our results show that barriers and enablers of cascading might be related to quantification issues, social and/or technical aspects, which could also be interconnected due to the role of different stakeholders in the different stages of a wood cascade. Based on these results, we draw major lessons learned for the realization of wood cascading while presenting remaining knowledge gaps. Finally, we relate these lessons learned to current practitioner debates from the forest-based sector and conclude by highlighting implications of these findings for the realization of a circular forest bio-economy in Europe. With this analysis, we seek to contribute to the development of a better conceptual and empirical understanding of a sustainable circular economy in the bio-based sector and inform practical application efforts.

153

A Bio-Based Circular Economy? – Stakeholder Perspectives Coordinators: Sina Leipold and Anna Petit-Boix - Chair of Societal Transition and Circular Economy, University of Freiburg, Germany

The European Union has recently introduced the ‘circular economy’ as high-level strategy to move our societies beyond the limits to growth. In the eyes of European policy makers, we will reach a circular economy through business innovation based on circular economy principles. Yet, we know next to nothing about how European businesses perceive or take up this strategy and whether it contributes to business innovation. To fill this gap, this paper analyses the business community’s view on the circular economy. It focuses on the bio-based sector as one of the most resource-intensive in Europe and scrutinizes EU level debates as well as business practice in Germany. The analysis is based on 45 documents and participant observation data from European and German stakeholders of bio-based industries. The data was analyzed using deductive categories derived from circular economy principles business model archetypes identified in the scientific literature. While the circular economy principles are used to systematize the understandings of the circular economy among stakeholders, the sustainable business model archetypes are used to categorize and contextualize business practices described by stakeholders. The results show that business stakeholders currently relate the circular economy predominantly to established practices and to technological business models. This leaves considerable room for innovation in areas like social or organizational business models. Yet, the directions and effects of current activities remain uncertain. A connection of the debates about the circular economy and the bioeconomy could be beneficial to discuss possible directions and their effects. As our results show, exploring the relation between the circular and the bioeconomy highlights the need to define which cycles contribute most to a ‘sustainable’ future economy. Exactly this definition has been criticized to be lacking from existing guidelines and standards developed for businesses. Hence, strengthening the link between circular and bioeconomy debates may provide a crucial step towards defining the ‘sustainability’ of the circular economy and, thus, towards setting clear priorities for ‘sustainable’ business practices. These results contribute to a better understanding of businesses’ perceptions, uptake and implementation of the circular economy concept, which is necessary for further policy development towards a circular economy. The analysis is by no means conclusive but aims to give an overview of where ‘hotspots’ of definitions and activities lie. By focusing on the perspective of the bio-based sector, this paper also aims to integrate the scientific debates on the circular economy and bioeconomy, which were largely disconnected so far.

154

The circular business model of Inditex: towards a more sustainable fashion industry Coordinators: Ángeles Pereira, Adolfo Carballo, Xavier Vence and Xosé Miguel Alcalde – University of Santiago de Compostela (USC) Growing awareness of both resources stress and the polluting effects of the fashion industry has led leading brands to adopt more sustainable strategies and to innovate towards circular economy business models in order to increase resource and energy efficiency and reduce their environmental impacts. The objective of this paper is to analyze the circular business model of the leading global fashion company Inditex, which is called Join Life. Two distinguishing aspects are key to understand this business model: 1) Inditex does not directly make the products that sells, instead it provides specifications to tiered networks of suppliers, who then manufacture the goods to order; 2) The value proposition brings circular principles to the fashion consumption pattern. Inditex circular business model includes a number of strategies aimed at the different value chain stages: from more sustainable sourcing (recycled and renewable fibers), use of sustainable technologies in manufacturing and sustainable logistics, eco-efficient stores and headquarters, to responsible care and take-back programmes at the consumption end. Based on qualitative methodologies developed within the R2PI project, this paper focuses on sourcing (recycling from leftovers and new fibers) and take-back programmes. The Circular Economy (CE) strategy of Inditex is heavily supported by key partners, namely suppliers, NGOs and consumers. The company trains its fashion designers and buyers to design and demand circular garments (higher percentage of recycled / renewable fibers). Inditex also allocates an important budget to basic R&D, aimed at developing new fibers and recycling technologies. This effort is transferred downstream to the main suppliers, who are responsible for searching for more sustainable fibers and fabrics. In 2017, 70 million clothes were put in the market under Join Life, and 8% of Zara’s sales worldwide were from Join Life Sustainable Collection. Linked to circular sourcing there are take-back programmes. In collaboration with NGOs and the final consumers, Inditex collects garments, which extend their life through second-hand sales or re-enter the textile industry as recycled raw materials. In 2017 there were recycling programmes in 12 markets, 579 stores. From a contextual point of view, the main drivers to circularity of Inditex are: growing awareness about the scarcity and price volatility of raw materials (polyester and natural fibers, as well as water and energy), NGOs campaigns in favor of fair labor conditions and environmental responsibility of leading companies, as well as the race towards CE among competitors. The way towards CE in the fashion sector faces several hurdles, amongst others: slowly technological developments on new fibers and recycling technologies; and regulations, such as international trade agreements on textile, the recent China prohibition of waste importations, specific regulations related to fibers and chemical composition of fabrics. In order to enable further advance in the circularity of the fast fashion industry, the Inditex case suggests that strong political efforts should be made in: including the fashion industry as key area of the Circular Economy Action Plan, with specific objectives for reusing and recycling; developing stricter regulation and standards for garments manufacturing; promoting R&D and incentivizing the use of recycled raw materials against primary and non-renewable ones; promoting renewable energies; and raising consumers’ awareness.

155

Innovation to overcome limited resources: How Israel uses and reuses water assets

Coordinators: Jeff Dodick, Steven Zecher and Yamit Naftali - Jerusalem Institute for Policy Research Abstract: Israel’s water system is composed of private and public organizations along a circular value chain from water storage to waste treatment. Using a value chain approach, we describe it as a largely organic, centralized system that mimics the natural water cycle, maximizing efficiency and rewarding performance. Israeli stakeholders are guided in their efforts by environmental need, government policy, as well as technological drivers which encourage cooperation and innovations. As part of the EU’s Horizon 2020 project, R2Pi, we have classified these relationships as a case study of prototypical business models that illustrate the efficient, continuous use of resources. These circular business models are described as follows: “remaking” (repairing damaged water resources and restoring them to active and safe use), “re-conditioning” (waste water is treated to a suitable level for reuse in agriculture), “circular sourcing” (treating and reusing water sources within a single user operation) and “co-product recovery” (recovering waste materials such as sludge from the water to be used as fertilizer and energy stock). Another business model is “resource recovery” (e.g. water used in growing food is transferred out of the water cycle and into the food production value chain). In addition to these business models, we identified two additional enabling business models that provide both access to and more efficient use of water services. These enabling business models build on the concept of “water as a service,” including partnerships that retain ownership of the facilities but “lease” them to provide water services and performance-based services that reward less water usage and lower water waste. The conditions driving these business models have included overuse and damage to the natural aquifers, expensive and fragmented waste water treatment, less regional rainfall, and growing population and water use intensity. As a result, the national government maintains public ownership of water resources, consolidated water authorities, built national water infrastructure systems, committed public support for new water technologies and solutions, including sea and brackish water desalination, and transparent water system measurement, monitoring, and security systems. Israel has adopted a series of market and non-market measures which have successfully reduced water demand. Market mechanisms include: block pricing, extraction levies and water markets permitting trading (for the agricultural sector) have been effective measures. Non-market mechanisms include water quotas, non-quota use restrictions, demand management, and public awareness campaigns. The government actively supports continuous innovation through direct and leveraged investments in research and development in both public and private firms. Importantly, public facilities serve as beta sites for testing and providing “proof of concept” for new technology; the result: over 300 companies involved in water sector technology, 120 of which are seven years old or younger and an estimated $2.5 billion in water technology and equipment exports annually. Moreover, Israel produces about twenty percent more water than it consumes itself annually, allowing it to export water to countries in its region. In sum, Israel has developed a water-based CE with a value proposition providing clean, ready water on demand, reliable infrastructure and measurements systems to ensure effective service delivery.

156

Circular Built Environment, Barriers and Enablers Coordinator: Doug Morwood - Whole Earth Futures Abstract: Converting circular economy ideas and thinking into practice for the built environment has typically been a challenge. Wasteful processes, expensive, energy intensive and rigid in design, the conception and construction of the built environment has remained much the same for decades. BAM Construction has a bold ambition to bring circular design and build into the heart of their business model. Building on the success of the CIRCL Pavilion in the Netherlands they would like to roll that circular approach out across other European territories. Aspects explored as contributions to this circular built environment approach include:

• Energy efficiency including the use of renewable energy • Maximising material value and use • Building as materials bank • Modular design for effective utilisation and longevity • Designed for disassembly • Products as a service • Sharing and utilisation of space (mutualising the use of assets) • Off-side fabrication and build • IoT, sensors, smart data, digitalisation

Barriers and Enablers Due to the nature of the project and the current lack of circular maturity in the construction sector, a process to understand the context, barriers, enablers, opportunities and threats to establish options and design criteria is key. Understanding the circular build process against the context of procurement, economic viability and customer demand is critical: A. Opportunity Assessment Based on a breakdown of building components, identify what ‘circular economy’ means for each. For example: 1) Building design and information / BIM

a) Having and holding a record of all materials used, to facilitate re-use/re-cycling during future maintenance and end-of-life

b) Design the building based on a total lifetime cost perspective, and an understanding of total lifetime carbon impact. E.g. not to sacrifice in-use cost (e.g. energy) by cutting corners to achieve lower build cost.

c) Design options for low-carbon/renewable energy where feasible. Certainly, design to be as energy efficient as possible in use.

2) Construction process: a) Ensuring re-use/re-cycling of all on-site waste by contractors

3) Building materials a) Using materials that can maximise use of recycle materials b) Using materials that are recyclable when they need to be replaced or at end-of-life

4) Building services (in-use) a) Consideration of procuring key areas as a service, where this makes lifetime cost sense. E.g.

Lighting as a service; Flooring/carpeting as a service b) Ensuring in-house facilities management or outsourced/contractors operate on CE principles

– i.e. no waste, using recycled/non-toxic products (e.g. for cleaning etc.) 5) Decoration and fit-out

a) Using non-toxic materials e.g. paint, etc. b) Procuring refurbished/remanufactured furnishings: chairs, desks, etc.

157

c) Procuring refurbished ICT/telecoms equipment 6) Any other opportunities for circular innovation B. Prioritisation Assess where CE would have the biggest impact? (based on cost, carbon). This could include some financial modelling. C. Feasibility assessment For each of the above (1-6), deemed ‘high priority’:

• What are the key feasibility criteria (e.g. must not be more expensive than ‘benchmark X’) • What is the minimum requirement/ambition • able to provide solutions; include in procurement specs • What is the most ambitious action? (e.g. done by a leader elsewhere)

D. Implementation Putting into action points under ‘feasibility assessment’ above. E. Review and learning What barriers and enablers became apparent internally within the organisation and externally in the macro context including policy, investment, procurement, supply chain capacity and capability?

158

Panellists Biographies Jeff Dodick Jeff has a B.Sc. and M.Sc. in biology and earth science, both from the University of Toronto and a M.B.A. from the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. His Ph.D. is in Learning Sciences from the Weizmann Institute of Science. From 2004 – 2012 he lectured at the Science Teaching Department at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. From 2012 to present he has been teaching International Business and Strategy at Ben Gurion University and researching issues connected to the circular economy and cooperative business environments. Doug Morwood Doug, CEO of Whole Earth Futures, is a Systems Design Practitioner with over 20 years experience in strategic development and organisational design. With a distinct passion for seeking grand challenges and the key stakeholders equally motivated to solve them, he constantly explores better ways to unlock potential and re-design ecosystems. Doug, working with a range of key partners, has developed a new Economic/Humankind Model for Growth – based on four pillars: Health; Education; Social Justice and the Environment – with an active involvement in resource efficiency and circular economy. Yamit Naftali Yamit is an economist and project manager at the Jerusalem Institute for policy research. In this capacity she has led the MAROM project and the research on SMBs in Jerusalem. Before joining the Jerusalem institute she worked at “pareto” as an economist, at “Giza Zinger Eben” as an analyst, and in the ministry of interior as a chief coordinator. Yamit has a B.A. in philosophy, economics and political science, and a MBA in finance, both from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Ángeles Pereira Ángeles is an interim part-time lecturer at the Department of Applied Economics and Research Associate at ICEDE Research Group, at University of Santiago de Compostela (USC). She holds a PhD in Economics and Busines and a M.Sc. in Economic Development and Innovation. Her research focuses on the Service Economy, eco-innovation, servitization and sustainability in the agri-food sector. She has participated in several European and Galician research projects. In R2PI project, she has conducted case studies on circular economy business models in Electronics, Textile and the Agri-food industries. Steven Zecher Steve is the project director the Milken Innovation Center at the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies. His work focuses on financing strategies with an emphasis on public-private-philanthropic capital structures. Zecher has extensive experience in urban and regional development policy, project finance, small-business and real estate lending, and community and economic development. Zecher has led innovative projects on affordable housing, social investment, capital market development, solid waste financing, heritage district financing, biomedical industry financing, infrastructure financing, financial inclusion, and regional project financing. Zecher holds a bachelor’s degree in politics from Brandeis University and a master’s degree in urban planning from the University of Pittsburgh.

159

Circular Economy Business Models: approach and key findings from R2π project Coordinators: Jeff Dodick – Jerusalem Institute for Policy Research

Ángeles Pereira – University de Santiago de Compostela (USC) This workshop aims to present key findings of R2π project and collect insights from different stakeholders on the main challenges faced by organisations during the transition towards a circular economy. The objectives of this event are twofold: (1) understand the main obstacles and enablers to the implementation of circular economy business models and (2) identify the key policy requirements needed to promote the widespread adoption of circular economy in Europe. The workshop will be 90 minutes long. In the co-joined papers we present, we examine three different disparate product sectors: Fashion, Built Environment and the Water system. Each of the panellists presents the key insights gained from case studies developed within the R2π project, according to the following outline:

1. Main strengths and weaknesses of the model 2. Key framework conditions affecting circularity in the sector 3. Suggestions for further circularity in the sector

Each panel presentation will be 15 minutes long and 45 additional minutes will be allocated to discussion with the audience. Background R2π – Transition from Linear to Circular is a European Union Horizon 2020 project focused on enabling organisations and their value chains to transition towards a more viable, sustainable and competitive economic model. R2π examines the shift from the broad concept of a Circular Economy (CE) to one of Circular Economy Business Models (CEBM) by tackling market opportunities and failures (businesses, consumers) as well as policy opportunities and failures (assumptions, unintended consequences). R2π unfolds in diverse contexts with a strong emphasis on stakeholder involvement and exchange, employing mixed-methods, case studies, desktop research, feasibility assessments (including surveys) and policy formulation. The ultimate objective of the R2π project is to accelerate widespread implementation of a circular economy based on successful business models and effective policies: to ensure sustained economic development, to minimize environmental impact and to maximize social welfare. Our research has identified seven different CEBM’s divided into three value chain parts:

1. Production: a. Re-make: manufacturing steps acting on an end-of-life or product in order to return it

like new or better performance with warranty to match b. Circular sourcing: sourcing recycled or renewable materials that can be returned to

either the technical or biological cycle c. Re-condition: Fixing of a fault / asthenic improvement of a product, but with no

additional warranty on the product as a whole includes repair and refurbish 2. Consumption:

a. Access: Providing end-users with access to the functionality of products / assets, instead of ownership.

b. Performance: Focus on guaranteed performance level or outcome based on the functionality of a product. Typically provided as a product-service bundle.

3. End of Life: a. Resource Recovery: Materials / products at end-of-life are incorporated into different

products or use used as inputs for another process.

Our research experience and its findings should point the way towards other sectors / companies who are not yet circular making the first steps towards greater sustainability. Preparatory questions for participants:

1. What are the main challenges in the shift towards Circular Economy business models?

160

2. What structures, business models, tools, guidelines, etc. need to be created/improved to enable the transition?

Which policy initiatives would enable companies/organisations to transition?

161

Circular Economy in the Global South – Perspectives from Development Studies

Coordinator: Patrick Schroeder – University of Sussex The Institute of Development Studies has been developing a research programme and post-graduate teaching programme on the circular economy in the context of international development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This session will provide an overview of current circular economy focused research at IDS on issues relating to developing countries. In particular, the session presentations will make links between the circular economy and international developmental issues such as post-conflict reconstruction, small and medium size business development in low income countries, electronic waste management and recycling, and socio-economic inequalities. These issues are all closely related to the SDG agenda and so far not explicitly addressed by mainstream research on the circular economy. Furthermore, this session will provide MA Candidates from IDS, a new generation of circular economy researchers, the opportunity to present their research and engage with an international expert audience.

The introduction will highlight the relevance of the circular economy to the SDGs based on this recently published article in the Journal of Industrial Ecology http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.12732/full and outline the Development Studies perspective regarding the circular economy.

Paper Presentations (10-15 mins each)

1. Colombia`s peace: a circular economy model in the post-conflict era – Julian Polanco Sierra

2. Policy implications to encourage the Urban Mining industry for proper e-waste management in the Global South; a case-study of South Korea – KiKwang Song

3. The circular economy and social challenges. Case-study of Biovalor, Uruguay – Laura Franco Henao

4. How can the Circular Economy create inclusive growth in low income countries? –

Michael Wassermann

Extended abstracts of the paper presentations:

Presentation 1: Colombia`s peace: a circular economy model in the post-conflict era Presenter: Julian Polanco Sierra

The official ratification of the peace agreement between the government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-EP), has shifted the attention back to the several pressing challenges that the country faces in an unprecedented post-conflict era. Having ended a decades-long armed conflict, Colombia barely began to quantify the dimensions of its own tragedy. Social and economic goals remain the top priorities of a nation that must reinvent itself. A comprehensive circular economy agenda can be a start. This paper will explore and describe the window of opportunity for Colombia in relation to the circular economy as a potential framework to achieve new development pathways and support the reconstruction efforts.

In recent years the concept of Circular Economy (CE) has been gaining significant attention in different academic, governmental and business spheres. The concept considers an economy that is restorative and regenerative where the end-of-life notion is replaced with processes that turn goods and materials into resources for others, closing loops in industrial ecosystems and minimizing waste.

162

The circular economy represents an opportunity to transform the linear economy through a set of ideas and practices that integrate economic development with environmental and social wellbeing.

However, the circular economy agenda has significantly focused on high-income countries, underestimating the benefits that circular models can offer to developing countries. An alternative economic model for low and middle-income countries could decouple growth from the increasing depletion of natural resources and environmental impacts with potential gains in poverty reduction, employment, and sustainable development.

The rationales underlying the concept of the circular economy allow the discussion and research to be reframed into the study of ways in which developing countries could leapfrog straight to circular models and sustainable development pathways. Thus, Colombia, in transition to peace, could take full advantage of circular institutions to reduce disparities between regions, tensions between social segments, and tackle drivers of violence. Given this window of opportunity, the Colombian government launched in 2015 the program “Misión de Crecimiento Verde” which defines scenarios and policy options for the circular economy in Colombia over the next decade.

In addition, the demobilization of FARC opens up former war zones for development, holding out the promise of an inclusive growth model in harmony with the interests and needs of those who have been instrumentalized by the dynamics of the internal armed conflict. Technical innovation, new business models, and alternative institutional arrangements could become a vehicle towards a coordinated framework for improving the quality of life of Colombians. For example, some agricultural businesses, food and construction companies in different regions of the country are already including circular models in their business strategies.

Challenges coming with the need for the economic and social development of Colombia demand radically new solutions. A transition towards the creation of circular models requires the promotion of the principles of reduction, reuse, and recycling. Rather than being imposed under a top-down approach, the circular economy strategies will need to be co-developed with a diverse body of stakeholders who fully understand the complexity of local, regional and national realities. A new development vision in accordance with the uniqueness of this crucial moment is needed to support economic and social objectives with a strong emphasis on the livelihoods of those at the base of the pyramid.

Therefore, balancing the benefits and risks of the circular economy will be essential for promoting inclusive economic growth in Colombia. If well implemented, a circular economy model for Colombia could contribute to the still-unfinished process of nation-building and the improvement of living conditions across populations and regions. Presentation 2: Policy implications to encourage the Urban Mining industry for proper e-waste management in the Global South; a case-study of South Korea Presenter: KiKwang Song With the growing attention to Circular Economy (CE), diverse pragmatic approaches of the CE have been suggested by mentioning opportunities and benefits from socio-economic and environmental perspectives (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2013, 2015). Urban mining, which is one of those, is an alternative extraction of precious and rare materials such as gold, silver, and cobalt from End-of-Life products (Baldé et al. 2017). In this regard, some studies have been exercised to discover positive externalities of the urban mining sector (Krook and Baas 2013, Jung et al. 2015, Gutberlet 2015), while there are a few attempts to shed light on various constraints to promote the urban mining industry. Besides, the scope of those a few is, in general, limited to the context of Global North. Hence, this research will focus on constraints and policy implications to foster the urban mining sector in South Korea so as to explore benchmarking points for the Global South. The presentation analyses constraints and the process of addressing those in order to build and boost the urban mining industry in South Korea with four different aspects - legal, technical, financial, and supply perspectives. First of all, apart from legal enforcements such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), this presentation illustrates regulatory obstacles that urban mining enterprises have experienced to obtain permission from the authority not as landfill but as a factory. Secondly, the technical constraints are delivered in South Korean context. While other high-income countries in the Global North such as Japan have developed the urban mining sector, the government

163

of South Korea has recently launched relevant policies and legal framework. This is directly linked to the lack of proper technologies and strategies to collect, disassemble, and extract precious materials from End-of-Life products. Specifically, as safer and more delicate technology for disassembly is attributed to the healthier working environment of urban mining industry and its profitability, the approaches of government in South Korea to tackle those obstacles might be helpful to governments in the Global South. Thirdly, since most stakeholders in the urban mining industry are small-medium enterprises (SMEs), the financial portfolio is not diverse and resilient. In other words, it is highly likely that those enterprises leave this sector when facing financial disturbance in consecutive years. Thus, an attempt to explore how the South Korean government has changed and implemented subsidies for SMEs in recycling sector will be a valuable opportunity for the Global South. Lastly, as the urban mining industry is to extract precious metals from end-of-life products, the supply of end-of-life products by collection plays a key role in this value chain. To put in other words, it is evident that the higher rate of e-waste collection is one of the preconditions for the sustainability of the urban mining industry. Hence, it is valuable to examine how the government has aimed to increase the rate of e-waste collection through cooperation with stakeholders in the private sector in South Korean context. To sum up, despite the fact that the urban mining sector is on the way to the prosperity both in the Global North and South, it is evident that this sector has potentials to address various issues related to e-waste management. Therefore, exploring and analysing the circumstances in South Korea as one of the followers in this industry will give us policy implications to encourage the urban mining industry in the Global South context as an alternative of effective e-waste management. Presentation 3: The circular economy and social challenges. Case-study of Biovalor, Uruguay. Presenter: Laura Franco Henao

Poverty and inequalities are outcomes of the current system which is not prepared for the 9 billion people estimated by 2050. Time is running out and emerging economies will not have enough resource access or the capacity to develop at a cheap cost using the strategy that developed economies previously took. Why have we resigned ourselves to the conclusion that only one model is valid staying caught in an unequal system? Now is the time to question ourselves, to learn from each other and bring humanity back to economics to stay as Kate Raworth states, between social and planetary boundaries. We must go beyond economic growth and an increasing GDP pursuit which has proved to have a detrimental effect as it happens at the expense of many people’s well-being.

Circular economy models need to undergo additional efforts towards taking into account social challenges. So far, they have been motivated by economic and environmental reasons. However, let’s not restrict ourselves to designing out waste but take a step further towards designing out poverty and tackling inequalities at the same time. This paper will provide the rationale for the circular economy to address the issue of widening inequalities. As the current linear model is redesigned, the circular economy offers the opportunity for a mind shift, a paradigm shift, a change of values from profit-maximization driven businesses to an inclusive value creation model. Nevertheless, if we are changing the model, we need to know what we are changing it to. I believe it provides a solid ground to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and to stay within social and planetary boundaries.

Research gaps have been identified about the outcome of the circular economy in relation to poverty, gender and inequalities. The social impact is being currently debated specially in forums and social networks underlying the importance of open source data. Research about this topic in developing countries is still scarce (but increasing) remaining mainly focused in Asia (in particular, China) and Europe. However, there are case studies of circular economy practices in developing countries. As they become more available and visible, other practices will be taken up. I think it is important that the circular economy is not only about individual businesses following its principles but about creating a wider network among the different actors. The circular economy must not be left just

164

to the private sector. In this paper, I will take a closer look at the circular economy framework called the Circular Economy 2.0 and at the particular case of Uruguay. I will identify the potential of its transition referring specifically to the Biovalor project. Moreover, I will also identify the missing aspects.

Finally, for a transition to an inclusive circular economy to occur, some recommendations are provided. It will take time to find evidence to counter uncertainty around the circular economy as well as to gain more space in both the academia and professional spheres. Nonetheless, we are a bit closer to a new era. Presentation 4: How can the Circular Economy create inclusive growth in low income countries? Presenter: Michael Wassermann

Until recently, most research on the Circular Economy (CE) has focused on high income countries and the transitions large multinational corporations have made to promote CE in their own business models. This has left a huge gap in the research in identifying small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) in developing countries who promote CE. Large multinationals may be able to reduce waste and improve profits through CE, but gender inequalities, poverty and a power imbalance would still exist in the world even if many large companies are part of the Circular Economy. Questions still remain on how CE can create inclusive growth for the world including low income countries. This paper argues that the CE can be a powerful tool in creating inclusive growth and SMEs have the qualities take the lead on CE business adoption in low income countries paving the way towards inclusive growth. It does this in three sections.

First a critical analysis of how CE is a potential path for creating inclusive growth is presented. The majority of research on CE has focused on European economies and the large benefits adopting a CE model provides such as three percent annual resource productivity growth. There is a greater potential for CE than what most research suggests. The Circular Economy can reduce income inequalities, increase gender equality, and much more all while promoting environmental stability. This will require a reimagining of what CE can do. This paper takes an inclusive growth framework already available in the literature and argues how each area of this framework is achievable through CE enterprises.

The second section of this paper provides an argument for why SMEs are important to low income country growth and how SMEs can be the most effective in adopting CE business models. In low income countries SMEs contribute over 70% of employment and 60% of GDP. When considering employment outside of the agricultural sector SMEs account for 90% of employment in some countries. If there is strength in SMEs then there will be strong economic output for these countries overall. Circular Economy SMEs will take this strong economic output one step further by creating inclusive growth. SMEs also have many advantages over their larger peers that will assist them in terms of CE adoption. Research has shown SMEs to be more efficient than larger companies, better equipped to adopt new technologies, and are integral for boosting innovation in their sectors.

Lastly, several case studies are presented, showing that inclusive growth is possible through Circular Economy SMEs. These case studies are taken from different sectors throughout the world. This paper then suggests which sectors may be most effective in implementing CE business models. This paper concludes by providing policy suggestions for low income countries and strategies for multinational corporations on how they can support and encourage local SMEs to adopt CE business models.

165

To what extent must a whole supply chain collaborate for an end-product to be considered circular?

Coordinators: Simon Roberts – 2degrees Birgit Mertens – Johnson and Johnson Alison Stoewll – Lancaster University Management School The purpose of this panel is to explore whether an end-product can be defined as ‘Circular’ if its impact at all stages of the supply chain is not transparent. Three speakers will discuss what is meant by circularity in relation to an end-product: Presentation 1: How technology creates visibility in global supply chains Simon Roberts from 2degrees, will talk about the importance of creating visibility along the supply chain. He will explain how a digital platform is being used to create dialogue between suppliers and customers, providing a forum for individual operational managers within factory facilities who would otherwise be invisible to each other, and identifying areas of resource efficiencies, risks and environmental impacts which can be reduced or removed through collaboration and good practice. Presentation 2: The realities of creating a circular product Birgit Mertens from healthcare products company Johnson and Johnson will illustrate the considerations required and challenges faced at the different stages of production. Based on one of the products in their portfolio, as a use case for the discussion, Johnson & Johnson will provide insight from industry into the realities of creating a circular product. Presentation 3: Is ‘true’ circularity possible? Alison Stowell from Lancaster University Management School concludes the presentations by exploring the implications of encouraging visibility in supply chains and circularity. Using the example of e-waste, attention will be paid to operational practices that might encourage, albeit unintentionally, the recreation of production systems based on specific power relations and differentiated societal values. The intention is to show how ‘true’ circularity is especially challenging. Questions addressed in the presentations:

1. How technology can create engagement, collaboration and drive a shift to circular approaches/adoption of circular approaches/models.

2. How to address complexity and implement circular solutions within a product-specific supply chain.

3. Whether understanding circularity is a help or hindrance? Questions posed to the conference attendees:

1. What is the role of both trust (and compliance?) in the supply chain in order to work to visions of circularity?

2. What critieria will allow us to define a product as circular? e.g. having visibility? 3. How do we incite a vision of circularity that encourages adoption and execution of business

practices? Biographies: Simon Roberts is an analyst at 2degrees working on developing knowledge and collaboration in the M2030bee platform, a hive-mind for resource efficiency. His challenge is how to leverage social proof, and the best peer-reviewed and verified knowledge about practice, to drive performance improvement within organisations and across supply chains. He has spent time studying circularity and the Blue Economy in particular and holds an MPhil in Industrial Sustainability from Cranfield University,

166

partnering with Cambridge University. His most recent research is in using networking techniques to model the adoption of clusters of sustainable production practices. Dr Birgit Mertens is a Senior Principal Global Environment Manager at Johnson & Johnson. Following completion of an MSc in Bioscience Engineering from Leuven University, Birgit then undertook further study at Ghent University, graduating first with an MSc in Environmental Sanitation and then with a PhD in Applied Biological Sciences. Over the past 12 years she has held various roles at Johnson and Johnson all concerned with their environmental impact, and her current role sees her leading Johnson & Johnson’s environmental strategy worldwide and across their various divisions including consumer, pharmaceutical and medical. A key pillar of the strategy is their ‘waste to value’ programme into which circular approaches are embedded. Dr Alison Stowell is a Lecturer in Organisation, Work and Technology at Lancaster University Management School, UK. Prior to moving into academia, she has worked in both public and private sector organisations holding Administration, Application Development and Testing, Service Management and Service Operations roles at the Crown Prosecution Service and IBM. Alison is also a member of the Pentland Centre for Sustainability in Business, an interdisciplinary university-wide research centre at Lancaster. She is a Social Scientist specialising in waste and sustainable development, particularly e-waste - although her curiosity relates to most forms. Alison has worked on numerous projects and is currently looking into e-waste quantification for REPIC UK.

167

Accelerating the remanufacturing agenda in Europe

Coordinator: Rachel Waugh - Oakdene Hollins Remanufacturing has been well described as having a high value role in the realization of the Circular Economy ambition within Europe, and beyond. By keeping components and their embodied material in use for longer, significant environmental benefits can be realized, while also providing opportunities to create highly skilled jobs and economic growth. Despite these accolades, remanufacturing is an undervalued and under-recognised part of the industrial landscape and is not a targeted element of the Circular Economy within the EU. The European Remanufacturing Network (ERN), a two-year Horizon 2020 project, sought to form, coordinate and support a network of European remanufacturers and identify targeted recommendations to key actors to produce a European remanufacturing action plan. A key legacy of the ERN was the creation of the Conseil Européen de Remanufacture (European Remanufacturing Council, CER) as a catalytic forum for providing a voice and platform for remanufacturers across Europe and facilitating the development of relationships and information transfer between the key stakeholders, such as policy makers, educators and researchers, companies and businesses. A broad range of academic research exists on the three operational strands of remanufacturing:

• remanufacturing business models - evaluation of aspects of existing and best practice business models for closed loop remanufacturing, e.g. Vogtlander et al.15;

• remanufacturing processes - identification of existing and development of novel processes for remanufacturing process steps, e.g. Singh and Jain16; and,

• design-for-remanufacturing, e.g. design strategies for facilitating remanufacturing at end-of-life, e.g. Anthony and Cheung17.

Where this research involves direct and targeted collaboration between academics and remanufacturers, significant operational benefits can be realized through efficiency and productivity gains, cost reduction and improved competitiveness. However, for most remanufacturers, who are not directly involved in (or even aware of) this research, it often remains an untapped resource. A challenge for researchers is how to disseminate research findings to remanufactures, many of whom are SMEs with little experience of seeking out and applying academic research. In addition to operational remanufacturing aspects, there is a more limited research activity on the impact of national and international policy on remanufacturing. This research is at the early stages of exposure to policy makers, e.g. through lobbying to influencing policy, and is therefore yet to impact on industry. This panel discussion will involve representatives from and industrial members of the CER (participants TBC) as they explore the questions of where and how academic research could practically support their businesses and remanufacturing activities, both in their current form, and as they continue to drive forwards with innovation in the field. The underlying issues that may be discussed include how to overcome the barriers identified during the ERN’s development of the targeted recommendations and the European remanufacturing action plan and how industry and academia can collaborate internationally towards circularity. These barriers were identified via a combination of literature review and stakeholder consultation. During the ERN project, more than 600 people contributed to the discussion of barriers through the market study, case studies and workshops18. The barriers identified include: • Remanufacturing is not a targeted element of the Circular Economy within the EU. • Remanufactured products and processes do not enjoy the same financial incentives as other

elements of the Circular Economy.

15 Vogtlander, J.G., Scheepens, A.E., Bocken, N.M.P. et al. Jnl Remanufactur (2017) 7: 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13243-017-0031-9 16 Singh, H. & Jain, P.K. Jnl Remanufactur (2016) 6: 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13243-016-0024-0 17 Anthony, C. & Cheung, W.M. Jnl Remanufactur (2017) 7: 97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13243-017-0035-5 18 Karvonen, I., Jansson, K., Behm, K. et al. Jnl Remanufactur (2017) 7: 159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13243-017-0038-2

168

• Internationalisation of remanufacturing is being hampered by different national policies, tariff barriers, standards and definitions.

• Awareness of and confidence in remanufactured products amongst public and domestic purchasers is low.

• Future business leaders, product designers and process operators are not well supplied by conventional training courses.

• Existing remanufacturers and potential new businesses lack capacity or knowledge to grow and adapt their business models and practices.

• Lack of an international research agenda is hampering the spread and advancement of remanufacturing state of the art.

• Lack of a technology research platform capable of supporting sector level collaborative research.

• ‘Conventional’ business models and processes are not supportive of remanufacturing for a wide range of products.

• Design for Remanufacture is not a standard component of the design process. • OEM and third-party remanufacturers may have conflicting business interests. • Core return for B2C goods is poor, often resulting in unusable, low quality items unfit for

remanufacture.