Circular Economy in Europe

EEA Report
No 2/2016
Circular economy in Europe

Developing the knowledge base
TE, REFUR
IBU
BI
TR
S
IS
U
MAN FACTUR
RE
E
H,
, REPAIR,
RE
USE
D
RE
ISSN 1977-8449
EEA Report
No 2/2016

Cover design: EEA

Cover photo: AdShooter/www.istockphoto.com
Left photo: RapidEye/www.istockphoto.com
Right illustration: EEA
Layout: Pia Schmidt
Legal notice
The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the official opinions of the European Commission or other
institutions of the European Union. Neither the European Environment Agency nor any person or company acting on
behalf of the Agency is responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this report.
Copyright notice
European Environment Agency, 2016
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016
ISBN 978-92-9213-719-9
ISSN 1977-8449
doi:10.2800/51444
European Environment Agency

Kongens Nytorv 6
1050 Copenhagen K
Denmark
Tel.: +45 33 36 71 00
Web: eea.europa.eu
Enquiries: eea.europa.eu/enquiries
Contents
Contents
Authors and acknowledgements............................................................................................... 4

Foreword....................................................................................................................................... 5
Summary: a circular economy essential for Europe........................................................... 6
1 The circular economy and its benefits................................................................................ 8
1.1 The need for action.................................................................................................................. 8
1.2 What is a circular economy?................................................................................................... 9
1.3 What are the benefits?...........................................................................................................12
1.4 Challenges............................................................................................................................... 14
2 Enabling factors.................................................................................................................... 15
2.1 Introduction............................................................................................................................ 15
2.2 Innovative business models..................................................................................................15
2.3 Eco-design............................................................................................................................... 18
2.4 Extending the lifetime of products through reuse and repair.........................................18
2.5 Waste prevention programmes...........................................................................................20
3 Monitoring progress towards a circular economy........................................................... 22
3.1 Policy questions related to the material aspects of a circular economy.........................22
3.2 Material input.........................................................................................................................24
3.3 Eco-design............................................................................................................................... 26
3.4 Production............................................................................................................................... 27
3.5 Consumption.......................................................................................................................... 28
3.6 Waste recycling.......................................................................................................................29
3.7 Conclusion............................................................................................................................... 30
4 Circular economy in a wider context................................................................................. 31
4.1 Circular and green economy.................................................................................................31
4.2 Global aspects........................................................................................................................ 32
4.3 Ecosystem considerations.....................................................................................................33
4.4 Risks to human health and wellbeing.................................................................................33
4.5 Socio-economic issues...........................................................................................................33
References.................................................................................................................................. 34
Authors and acknowledgements
Authors and acknowledgements
Lead authors
Acknowledgements
Almut Reichel, Mieke De Schoenmakere (both EEA) and

Jeroen Gillabel (VITO)
Support from the European Topic Centre on Waste

and Materials in a Green Economy (ETC/WMGE),
Henning Wilts (Wuppertal Institute), Roberto Zoboli
(SEEDS), Mona Arnold (VTT), Nora Brggemann and
Francesca Grossi (both CSCP)
Support to framing and analysis

Jock Martin, Ybele Hoogeveen (EEA)
Bart Ullstein, Peter Saunders and Helen de Mattos

(Banson/World Spotlight)
Feedback from the European Environment

Information and Observation Network (Eionet)
through national focal points in 33 EEA member
countries and six EEA cooperating countries;
comments received from Austria, Belgium
(Flanders), Denmark, France, Netherlands, Poland,
Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey
EEA production support
Feedback from the European Commission (DG ENV,

DG GROW, DG ESTAT)
Editorial support
Antti Kaartinen, Brendan Killeen, Carsten Iversen,

Marco Veneziani and Pia Schmidt
Support from EEA colleagues including Ana Jakil,

Jasmina Bogdanovic, Pawel Kazmierczyk and Mike
Asquith
Foreword
Foreword
The European Environment Agency (EEA)'s publication

The European environment State and outlook 2015
highlights 'stimulating resource-efficient, low-carbon
economic and social development' as essential to
achieving the 2050 vision of 'living well within the limits
of the planet' as set out in the European Union (EU)'s
7th Environment Action Programme.
This requires Europe and the rest of the world to
move away from the current linear economic model
of take-make-consume-dispose, which relies on large
quantities of easily accessible resources and energy,
to a circular model in which planetary boundaries
are respected through resource conservation and by
maximising the use of resources already available
within the economy.
The concept of a circular economy has recently gained
traction in European policymaking as a positive,
solutions-based perspective for achieving economic
development within increasing environmental
constraints. This is reflected in the 7th Environment
Action Programme, which identifies the 'need for a
framework that gives appropriate signals to producers
and consumers to promote resource efficiency and
the circular economy'. It is also increasingly seen as a
business opportunity, for example through the efforts
of the Ellen McArthur Foundation. Moreover, European
countries increasingly indicate the circular economy as
a political priority.
In December 2015, the European Commission
published Closing the loop An EU action plan for the
circular economy, a new strategy that aims to support
the transition to a circular economy in the EU. The
action plan sets out a large number of initiatives that
address all stages of the life cycle, combined with
concrete targets on waste and the development of a
monitoring framework in cooperation with the EEA.
In this way, it takes important steps towards a circular
economy in Europe.
When I was appointed as Executive Director in 2013,
I made a commitment for the EEA to help Europe
achieve its long-term policy vision by focusing on
plausible transition pathways. Therefore, I am pleased
with the transitions perspective in the new strategy on

the circular economy, recognising that what lies ahead
of us is no less than a fundamental systemic change.
The EEA is prepared to support this transition through
analysis and assessments, in cooperation with the
European Commission, the European Environment
Information and Observation Network (Eionet) and
other stakeholders.
But what are the benefits of a more circular economy
and how can these, as well as potential negative effects,
be assessed? What needs to be done to turn theory into
practice, and what hurdles need to be overcome? And
how can current policies, alongside business and civil
society initiatives, contribute to the transition? Answers
to such questions can help policymakers, investors,
businesses, consumers and civil society to find the
most promising transition pathways.
The current knowledge base, however, is rather
fragmented. Better insight is needed into various
aspects of system dynamics, such as production
structures and functions, consumption dynamics,
finance and fiscal mechanisms, and triggers and
pathways for technological and social innovations.
Through this new series of circular economy reports,
the EEA aims to provide answers to some of these
questions and bridge knowledge gaps. The series
mainly targets policymakers at the EU and national
levels, but it also targets businesses and civil society.
This report draws on a wide range of knowledge
sources, both internal and external to the EEA. Through
compiling and interpreting the available information,
it touches on four dimensions of a circular economy:
the concept and benefits; the main enabling factors
and transition challenges; metrics for measuring
progress; and contextual issues that would require
attention from research or policy. In this way, the
EEA seeks to support policymaking by furthering the
understanding of the circular economy concept and its
implementation.
Hans Bruyninckx, Executive Director
Summary: a circular economy essential for Europe
Summary: a circular economy

essential for Europe
Europe is bound to the rest of the world through

multiple systems that enable two-way flows of
materials, financial resources, ideas and innovation.
As a result, Europe's economic, ecological and societal
resilience is and will continue to be significantly
affected by a variety of global and interdependent
social, economic, political, environmental and
technological trends.
Global material resource use in 2030, for example, is
expected to be twice that of 2010 (SERI, 2013), while
the most recent United Nations forecast suggests that
the global population is likely to exceed 11billion by
the end of the 21st century (UN DESA, 2015). With
7.2billion people today, however, the planet is already
struggling to meet humanity's demands for land,
food and other natural resources, and to absorb its
wastes. Indeed, there is evidence that some planetary
boundaries, which define a safe operating space
for human development, may already have been
transgressed. These include the biosphere's integrity,
nitrogen and phosphorus cycles, climate change and
land system changes (Steffen etal., 2015).
The pace of technological change, particularly in the
fields of information, communication, nano- and
biotechnologies, is unprecedented. These innovations
may help to reduce humanity's impact on the
environment and reliance on non-renewable natural
resources, but the uptake of new technologies is often
associated with uncertainty and risk.
In the face of these challenges and opportunities, the
EU aims to evolve its economic and social systems so
that its citizens will, by 2050, live well but within the
limits of the planet (EU, 2013).
A circular economy can contribute to this. Unlike
the traditional linear take-make-consume-dispose
approach, a circular economy seeks to respect
planetary boundaries through increasing the share
of renewable or recyclable resources while reducing
the consumption of raw materials and energy and at
the same time cutting emissions and material losses.
Approaches such as eco-design and sharing, reusing,
repairing, refurbishing and recycling existing products
and materials will play a significant role in maintaining
the utility of products, components and materials and

retaining their value.
The benefits for Europe could be considerable,
reducing environmental pressures in Europe and
beyond and minimising the continent's high and
increasing dependence on imports, which could
potentially become vital as other regions develop
and international competition for resources
increases. Circular economy strategies could also
result in considerable cost savings, increasing the
competitiveness of Europe's industry while delivering
benefits in terms of job opportunities.
The concept of a circular economy is relatively new at the
European level, and its overall economic, environmental
and social effects have yet to be fully assessed. The
concept has its roots in sustainable development, and
the term 'circular economy' has been used by countries
such as Germany and China for a number of years.
Some aspects of current policy development, particularly
in terms of waste and new business practices in several
sectors, are moving tentatively towards circularity, but
not necessarily in a systematic or coordinated way.
More information is needed to inform decision-making
and combine thinking about environmental, social and
economic impacts.
Inter-sectoral and political tensions are likely to develop
in the course of a transition, as there will inevitably
be winners and losers. While Europe remains a
powerhouse of knowledge and innovation, some of its
traditional businesses and their employees are likely to
suffer in the transition to a circular economy.
The overall aim is to manage all natural resources
efficiently and, above all, sustainably. The transition
to a circular economy will be multifaceted and will
therefore need to involve all stakeholder groups:
governments, businesses and finance, civil society
and citizens. It will require different business, finance
and even fiscal models, together with technological
and social innovation and the acquisition of new skills
and knowledge through education. The European
Commission's 2015 circular economy package
(EC,2015a) should play an important role in bringing
this about.
Summary: a circular economy essential for Europe
Charting progress
In parallel with the need to increase understanding of
the circular economy, it will also be important to chart
progress and identify where more work is needed to
achieve change. Some existing indicators are already
useful, but others will be needed to help guide the
development of supportive and flexible policies.
The transition to a circular economy will be
evolutionary. Innovation and change will bring
benefits but also create challenges. The development
of complex plastics and alloys increasingly used
in electrical and electronic products, as well as in
vehicles is a good example. Science, businesses

and governments are only beginning to understand
how to recycle them, avoiding the waste of valuable
and increasingly rare materials, while keeping
potentially hazardous substances out of the
biosphere, where they could affect ecosystems and
human health.
The series of circular economy reports to be
published by the EEA in the coming years based on
growing insights from science and innovation, as well
as other knowledge sources aims to support efforts
to make Europe's economy more circular and thereby
realise its full potential.
The knowledge base needed for a circular economy and the EEA's role
The transition to a circular economy is a complex process involving fundamental changes to production-consumption
systems that affect the environment. These include financing mechanisms, consumer behaviour, government intervention
such as tax policy, and technological, social and business innovation. Monitoring and assessing the related environmental
pressures and impacts is a core EEA activity.
Managing the transition will also require a better understanding of broad societal trends and the drivers of production and
consumption patterns. Prospective analysis and foresight techniques such as scenario-building or horizon scanning can
help identify possible triggers for the desired systemic changes. Such analytical techniques can also factor in shocks and
resilience, and allow institutions and decision-makers to prepare for the unexpected and undesired. These techniques will
have to be adapted to the process of transition towards a circular economy.
Examples of good practice that can be applied at broader scales can also inform analyses of policy options and effectiveness.
Obtaining relevant information from all actors involved will require cooperation across different sectors and between
organisations, a process to which the EEA intends to contribute.
All of this implies a substantial expansion of the evidence base, and while some indicators and assessments already exist,
there is much to be done to develop a comprehensive analytical framework. The analytical approach described in Figure 1.1
can be applied at the European, national or local levels, as well as to specific sectors or materials. The EEA aims to contribute
to this knowledge base in cooperation with its relevant partners and networks, including Eionet.
The circular economy and its benefits
1 The circular economy and its benefits
1.1 The need for action

The concept of the circular economy reflects the
recognition that European systems of production and
consumption need to be fundamentally transformed
to achieve the EU's 2050 vision of 'living well within the
limits of our planet' (EU, 2013) (Box 1.1).
In the last hundred years, the shift of an increasing
number of countries from low to high levels of human
development has brought an unprecedented increase
in natural resource use. Driven initially by economic
development in Europe and North America, and
subsequently elsewhere, world gross domestic product
(GDP) has increased 25-fold since 1900, bringing a
10fold rise in global resource extraction (Krausmann
etal., 2009; Maddison, 2013).
Box 1.1
These trends are likely to continue in the coming

decades, as growing populations in Asia and elsewhere
increasingly adopt the consumption patterns of
developed regions. Global economic output is projected
to triple between 2010 and 2050 (OECD, 2014) and
resource use may double by 2030 (SERI, 2013). For
Europe, these developments raise major concerns
relating to the security of access to natural resources
and the wider environmental impacts of escalating
global resource use.
Europe's economy depends on an uninterrupted flow
of natural resources and materials, including water,
crops, timber, metals, minerals and energy carriers,
with imports providing a substantial proportion of
these materials in many cases. Increasingly, this
dependence could be a source of vulnerability, as
Living well within the limits of the planet makes economic transition imperative
In March 2015, the EEA published The European environment State and outlook 2015 (SOER2015) (EEA, 2015a), which
provides a comprehensive assessment of the European environment and sets it in a global context. It informs European
environmental policy implementation and analyses the opportunities of achieving the EU's 2050 vision of 'living well within
the limits of the planet'. The report's three key conclusions are highly relevant to helping frame priority areas for action on
the circular economy.
First, EU environment and climate policies have delivered substantial benefits not only to the environment, but also to
the economy and human well-being. The European environment has seen marked reductions in emissions to air and
water, with, for example, the EU on track to meet its 2020 targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions. Meanwhile, the
industrial sector that manages natural resources and produces goods and services that reduce environmental degradation
grew by more than 50% between 2000 and 2012 (Eurostat, 2015a), one of the few sectors to have flourished since the 2008
financial crisis.
Second, and despite some successes, Europe faces both persistent and emerging challenges linked to its productionconsumption systems and a rapidly changing global context, as shown by a range of social, technological, economic,
environmental and political megatrends.
Third, achieving the 2050 vision requires fundamental transitions, especially in the systems that contribute most to
environmental pressures and impacts food, energy, mobility and housing along their entire value chain. This also
implies that wide-ranging changes to the enabling finance and fiscal systems will be required.
SOER2015 also highlights that achieving the 2050 vision will depend on action taken and investments made today across
the key systems, and that the criteria for long-term systemic change should deliver decent employment and salaries and be
equitable, while respecting environmental limits.
growing global competition for natural resources

has contributed to marked increases in price levels
and volatility. Even if not scarce in absolute terms,
many natural resources are unevenly distributed
globally, making access and prices more volatile and
exacerbating the potential for conflict (EEA, 2015b).
Uncertain and unstable prices can also disrupt the
sectors that are dependent on these resources, forcing
companies to lay people off, defer investment or stop
providing goods and services.
minimises the need for new inputs of materials and

energy, while reducing environmental pressures linked
to resource extraction, emissions and waste. This goes
beyond just waste, requiring that natural resources are
managed efficiently and sustainably throughout their life
cycles. A circular economy thus provides opportunities
to create well-being, growth and jobs, while reducing
environmental pressures. The concept can, in principle,
be applied to all kinds of natural resources, including
biotic and abiotic materials, water and land.
At the same time, rapid increases in extraction and

exploitation of natural resources are having a wide
range of negative environmental impacts in Europe
and beyond (EEA, 2014a). Air, water and soil pollution,
acidification of ecosystems, biodiversity loss, climate
change and waste generation put immediate, mediumand long-term economic and social well-being at
risk. While resource use in Europe has become
more efficient in recent years, resulting in absolute
reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases and
pollutants, the continent's burden on global ecosystems
remains considerable, particularly if pressures in the
countries of origin of imported products and materials
are taken fully into account (EEA, 2015a). In addition,
Europe's overall gains in resource efficiency may not
be sustained when the economic development of
countries hit by recent recession recovers.
Eco-design, repair, reuse, refurbishment,

remanufacture, product sharing, waste prevention
and waste recycling are all important in a circular
economy. At the same time, material losses through
landfill and incineration will be reduced, although these
may continue to play a much-reduced role in safely
removing hazardous substances from the biosphere
and recovering energy from non-recyclable waste.
Creating a circular economy in Europe can help

to address many of these challenges, and further
improving the efficiency of resource use has obvious
economic benefits, reducing costs and risks while
enhancing competitiveness. European leadership
in the transition to a circular economy also offers
opportunities to drive innovation in new materials and
better products and services, creating new jobs and
securing first-mover advantages in the global economy
(EMF, 2012; Accenture, 2014).
1.2 What is a circular economy?

In essence, a circular economy represents a
fundamental alternative to the linear take-makeconsume-dispose economic model that currently
predominates. This linear model is based on the
assumption that natural resources are available,
abundant, easy to source and cheap to dispose of, but
it is not sustainable, as the world is moving towards,
and is in some cases exceeding, planetary boundaries
(Steffen etal., 2015).
The Ellen MacArthur Foundation defines a circular
economy as one that is restorative, and one which aims
to maintain the utility of products, components and
materials and retain their value (EMF, 2015a). It thus
Several concepts and visualisations of a circular

economy exist; Figure 1.1 shows a simplified model.
The main idea is that waste generation and material
inputs are minimised through eco-design, recycling
and reusing of products. This will create economic
and environmental co-benefits, as the dependency
on extraction and imports declines in parallel with a
reduction in the emissions to the environment caused,
for example, by extraction and processing of materials,
incineration and landfill.
The outer circle represents the overall energy flows.
Relevant parameters are the total energy efficiency and
the share of renewables, which should both increase
compared with the linear model. The implications for
incineration are not straightforward. While energy
recovered through incineration can partly compensate
for (fossil) fuel use, incineration is to be minimised, as
the energy from incineration can be used only once and
thus removes materials from the loop.
The middle circle represents the material flows in
the recycling loop, distinguishing between abiotic
technical materials (such as metals and minerals) and
biological materials. An increased share of the latter
would, in principle, be beneficial, as they are truly
renewable, whereas technical materials are not. In
practice, technical and biological materials are often
mixed, which has implications for biodegradability
and recyclability. Furthermore, using more biological
materials may exert additional pressure on natural
capital, with impacts on ecosystem resilience
(Chapter4).
The inner circle represents reuse, redistribution, repair,
remanufacture and refurbishment, bypassing waste
generation and recycling and thus requiring minimal
Figure 1.1
A simplified model of the circular economy for materials and energy
TE, REFUR
IBU
BI
R
T
S
IS
Biolog
T ec h nic
ical
CONSUMPTION
AND STOCK
ls
i al
ria
ter
ate
ma
al m
U
MAN FACTUR
RE
E
H,
ECO-DESIGN
, REPAIR,
RE
USE
D
RE
PRODUCTION
AND DISTRIBUTION
MATERIALS
WASTE
EMISSIONS
Minimise
EXTRACTION AND IMPORT OF NATURAL

RESOURCES, INCLUDING ENERGY CARRIERS
11.5
3.0
Source:
10
INCINERATION
LANDFILL
tonnes of materials
per person were extracted
in the EU in 2014
(direct material consumption).
0.3
tonnes of waste
per person were incinerated
in the EU in 2012.
tonnes of materials
per person were imported
to the EU in 2014
(direct flows).
2.2
tonnes of waste
per person were sent to landfill
in the EU in 2012.
EEA based on Eurostat, 2015b, 2015c.
resource input. These approaches retain the value of

products, components and materials at the highest
possible level.
Box 1.2 lists the main characteristics of a circular
economy and a number of technical, economic or
social enabling factors required to effect the transition
to such an economy. The main characteristics will
Box 1.2
differ for different types of system, for example for

food that is consumed, metals that can be recycled or
water used in processing that can be recycled. Similar
principles, however, apply and some key characteristics
and enabling factors can be defined. While the list of
enabling factors is not exhaustive, it demonstrates the
wide range of changes that will be needed to trigger or
advance the transition.
Key characteristics and enabling factors of a circular economy
Key characteristics
Enabling factors
Less input and use of natural resources
Eco-design

minimised and optimised exploitation of raw materials, while
delivering more value from fewer materials;

products designed for a longer life, enabling upgrading, reuse,
refurbishment and remanufacture;

reduced import dependence on natural resources;

product design based on the sustainable and minimal use of
resources and enabling high-quality recycling of materials at the
end of a product's life;

efficient use of all natural resources;

minimised overall energy and water use.
Increased share of renewable and recyclable resources and
energy

non-renewable resources replaced with renewable ones
within sustainable levels of supply;

increased share of recyclable and recycled materials that can
replace the use of virgin materials;

closure of material loops;

sustainably sourced raw materials.
Reduced emissions

reduced emissions throughout the full material cycle through
the use of less raw material and sustainable sourcing;

less pollution through clean material cycles.
Fewer material losses/residuals

build up of waste minimised;

incineration and landfill limited to a minimum;

dissipative losses of valuable resources minimised.
Keeping the value of products, components and materials in the
economy

extended product lifetime keeping the value of products in
use;

reuse of components;

value of materials preserved in the economy through
highquality recycling.

substitution of hazardous substances in products and processes,
enabling cleaner material cycles.
Repair, refurbishment and remanufacture

repair, refurbishment and remanufacture given priority, enabling
reuse of products and components.
Recycling

high-quality recycling of as much waste as possible, avoiding
down-cycling (converting waste materials or products into new
materials or products of lesser quality);

use of recycled materials as secondary raw materials;

well-functioning markets for secondary raw materials;

avoidance of mixing and contaminating materials;

cascading use of materials where high-quality recycling is not
possible.
Economic incentives and finance

shifting taxes from labour to natural resources and pollution;

phasing out environmentally harmful subsidies;

internalisation of environmental costs;

deposit systems;

extended producer responsibility;

finance mechanisms supporting circular economy approaches.
Business models

focus on offering productservice systems rather than product
ownership;

collaborative consumption;

collaboration and transparency along the value chain;

industrial symbiosis (collaboration between companies whereby
the wastes or by-products of one become a resource for another).
Eco-innovation

technological innovation;

social innovation;

organisational innovation.
Governance, skills and knowledge

awareness raising about changing lifestyles and priorities in
consumption patterns;

participation, stakeholder interaction and exchange of experience;

education;

data, monitoring and indicators.
11
Central to achieving the necessary systemic changes,

however, will be to find synergetic economic and social
incentives, for example through financial mechanisms
that encourage consumers and producers to hire
rather than buy a product, while at the same time
stimulating the eco-design of the product.
Creating a circular economy requires fundamental
changes throughout the value chain, from product
design and technology to new business models, new
ways of preserving natural resources (extending
product lifetimes) and turning waste into a resource
(recycling), new modes of consumer behaviour, new
norms and practices, and education and finance.
Integration between policy levels and policy domains,
as well as within and across value chains, is also
essential. Action will be needed at all levels, from the
European to the local, and by all stakeholders, including
governments, businesses, researchers, civil society and
citizens.
While the EEA's analytical focus will mainly be on
the environmental effects of the transition, relevant
economic and social factors will also be analysed to
support the process. This is essential because of the
strong links between the use of natural resources,
human health and well-being, and the functioning of
ecosystems in Europe and globally through trade in
goods and services.
1.3 What are the benefits?

The EU's waste policies already contribute to the
development of a circular economy, mainly through
policy measures that favour recycling. But there are
Figure 1.2
benefits of a more extensive transition to a circular

economy in four areas: resource use, the environment,
the economy and social aspects such as job creation
(Figure 1.2). The transition process, however,
necessarily requires profound changes and thereby
also creates transition costs.
1.3.1 Resource benefits: improving resource security

and decreasing import dependency
A circular economy could increase the efficiency of
primary resource consumption in Europe and the
world. By conserving materials embodied in highvalue products, or returning wastes to the economy
as highquality secondary raw materials, a circular
economy would reduce demand for primary raw
materials. This would help to reduce Europe's
dependence on imports, making the procurement
chains for many industrial sectors less subject to the
price volatility of international commodity markets and
supply uncertainty due to scarcity and/or geopolitical
factors.
An estimated 612% of all material consumption,
including fossil fuels, is currently being avoided as a
result of recycling, waste prevention and eco-design
policies; the maximum potential using the existing
technology is estimated to be 1017% (EC, 2011a).
Using innovative technologies, resource efficiency
improvements along all value chains could reduce
material inputs in the EU by up to 24% by 2030
(Meyer,2011).
A recent study of the impacts of a switch to a circular
economy in the food, mobility and built environment
Transition from a linear to a circular economy
Costs of
restructuring
Linear economy
Economic
benefits
Environmental
benefits
Circular
economy
Stranded
assets
Winners and
losers
12
Social
benefits
Resource
benefits
sectors estimated annual savings of primary resource

inputs of EUR600 million in the EU-27(1) by 2030.
Achieving this would require systemic changes in
these sectors. For example, in the area of mobility,
changes would entail more sharing of cars and better
integration of transport modes, light-weight and
remanufactured cars, electrification of transport based
on renewables and self-driving vehicles. For the food
system, the study mentions more resourceefficient
and regenerative farming practices such as organic
or no-till farming, closing nutrient loops (for example,
phosphorus recovery from meat and bone meal)
and reducing food waste. Moreover, in the built
environment, systemic changes would include
factorybased industrial processes in construction,
smart urban planning, sharing of residential and
office space, and energy-efficient buildings (EMF and
McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, 2015).
1.3.2 Environmental benefits: less environmental

impact
The absolute decoupling of economic output and social
well-being from resource and energy use, and from
related environmental impacts, is the main objective of
the EU's resource-efficiency policy (EU, 2013). Indeed,
although current waste policies already contribute to
this, the European Commission estimates that different
combinations of more ambitious targets for recycling
of municipal and packaging waste and reducing landfill
could lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions
of around 424617 million tonnes of carbon dioxide
equivalent over 20152035, on top of reductions through
the full implementation of existing targets (EC,2015b).
Measures beyond waste recycling, however, could
further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It has been
estimated, for example, that, in the food and drink,
fabricated metals and hospitality and food services
sectors, resource efficiency measures could avoid
around 100200 million tonnes of carbon dioxide
equivalent emissions annually (AMEC Environment
& Infrastructure and Bio Intelligence Service, 2014).
Keeping materials in the loop would also help to
enhance ecosystem resilience and the environmental
impacts of mining primary raw materials, often outside
Europe.
The study of the potential in the food, mobility and built
environment systems mentioned above estimates a
prospective reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of

48% by 2030 and 83% by 2050 compared with 2012
levels, and a reduction in externality costs(2) of up to
EUR500 million by 2030 (EMF and McKinsey Center for
Business and Environment, 2015).
1.3.3 Economic benefits: opportunities for economic

growth and innovation
The linear take-make-consume-dispose approach
exerts great pressure on the environment and human
health, and can also reduce opportunities for increasing
the competitiveness of several sectors of European
industry. A circular economy, on the other hand, could
offer a platform for innovative approaches, such as
technologies and business models to create more
economic value from fewer natural resources.
A circular economy could provide significant
cost savings for various industries. For example,
implementation of circular economy approaches in the
manufacture of complex durable goods with medium
lifespans is estimated to result in net material cost
savings of USD340630billion per year in the EU alone,
roughly 1223% of current material input costs in
these sectors (EMF, 2012). For certain consumer goods
food, beverages, textiles and packaging a global
potential of USD700billion per year in material savings
is estimated, that is, about 20% of the material input
costs in these sectors (EMF, 2013).
Another study estimates the annual net benefits for
EU-27 businesses of implementing resource-efficiency/
circular economy measures such as waste prevention,
the recovery of materials, changing procurement
practices and the re-design of products. These range
from EUR245billion to EUR604billion, representing
an average of 38% of annual turnover (AMEC
Environment & Infrastructure and Bio Intelligence
Service, 2014).
1.3.4 Social benefits: sustainable consumer behaviour

and job opportunities
Social innovation associated with sharing, eco-design,
reuse, recycling and other developments can be
expected to result in more sustainable consumer
behaviour, while contributing to human health and
safety.
(1) EU-28 countries excluding Croatia.

(2) Externalities include carbon dioxide (EUR29 per tonne), traffic congestion, non-cash health impacts of accidents, pollution and noise, land
opportunity costs, opportunity costs related to obesity, adverse health effects due to the indoor environment and transport time (related to
urban planning).
13
A circular economy is also expected to create job

opportunities. Indeed, according to the European
Commission's impact assessment on a legislative
proposal on waste, increased recycling targets, the
simplification of legislation, improved monitoring and
the diffusion of best practice to achieve increased
recycling/preparing for reuse targets for municipal
and packaging waste, in combination with reduced
landfill of waste, could result in the creation of up to
178000new direct jobs by 2030 (EC, 2015b).
The development of fully circular value chains might
have significantly greater potential. Estimates for the
United Kingdom suggest that around 500000 jobs
could be created in a circular economy. While some
sectors may diminish, a net creation of jobs by 2030
is projected (Morgan and Mitchell, 2015). This study
also demonstrates how differing circular strategies
could generate different types of jobs. For example,
labour-intensive strategies, such as the preparation
and sorting of products and materials for reuse or
recycling, would mainly yield jobs for low-skilled
people; mediumskilled jobs are expected to be created
in closed-loop recycling and remanufacturing, and
highskilled jobs in bio-refining.
Replacing products with services could also provide
jobs for people with all levels of education. A recent
study (Ministre de l'Economie etal., 2015) estimated
that 2200 new jobs, mainly for blue-collar workers,
could be created by 2030 by applying circular economy
practices in Luxembourg's construction, automotive,
manufacturing, financial, logistics, research and
14
development, and administrative sectors, providing

opportunities for unemployed young people.
Finally, a meta-study reviewing 65 studies on
employment and the circular economy found generally
positive employment effects as a result of moving
towards a circular economy. The studies mainly
addressed energy and material savings; studies on
employment effects of sharing, recycling and further
approaches are scarce (Horbach etal., 2015).
1.4 Challenges
While the order of magnitude of expected
environmental, resource-related and socio-economic
benefits of a transition to a circular economy are
reasonably reliable, the exact numbers in existing
studies need to be treated with some caution, owing to
methodological and data limitations.
As in all transition processes, benefits will not be
evenly distributed: some industrial sectors, businesses,
regions and societal groups are likely to lose, while
others will benefit. For example, jobs in industries
producing virgin materials or low-quality consumer
goods, often outside Europe, could be lost through
such strategies. Policies will be needed to manage
these effects.
Realising the benefits will also depend upon how well
and quickly adequate skills and education for the
circular economy can be developed and rolled out.
Enabling factors
2 Enabling factors
2.1 Introduction
The transition to a circular economy requires
fundamental changes in many different areas of the
current socio-economic system. Although it is a complex
process that is difficult to predict, several crucial areas
of change can be identified in technical, economic and
social domains, with a focus on the enabling factors that
guide and accelerate the transition process (Box1.2).
These factors need to act simultaneously in order
to create reinforcing effects, and, critically, they all
require the support of adequate policy frameworks and
interventions.
Forwardlooking governments and business
organisations are increasingly analysing policy options
and their potential impacts, aiming to create favourable
conditions for a circular economy (De Groene Zaak,
2015; EMF, 2015b). At the EU level, the European
Commission's recent circular economy package
(EC,2015a) and the European innovation partnership
on raw materials (EC, 2012a) both aim to enable circular
economy approaches, while the EU's Horizon2020
research and innovation programme is set to invest
around EUR670million throughout 20162017 into
the EU's industry, with the aim of supporting circular
economy approaches (EC, 2015c).
One of the most powerful enablers of a circular
economy is business model innovation(3): business
models that successfully incorporate circular economy
principles have a direct and lasting effect on the
economic system. Without the adaptation of policy
frameworks, however, many innovative business
models will not be able to compete with existing linear
ones, or they might lose some or all of their benefits
when scaling up.
Eco-design, because it acts at the start of the value
chain, is a second important enabler, but, because the
current economic system does not reward ecodesigned
products, policies will need to provide the necessary
incentives to improve the circularity of products,
extending lifetimes, repair, reuse and recycling.
Reuse and repair are enablers whose relevance has

recently grown, with the rise of second-hand markets
and online repair communities complementing
smart policy interventions that stimulate reuse by
simultaneously tackling labour-cost barriers and
lowskilled employment challenges.
Waste prevention is an important strategy that cuts
across different areas of change, rather than being one
single enabler.
2.2 Innovative business models

2.2.1 Service- and function-based business models
These models relate to the functions of a product
instead of its physical ownership (lundh and Ritzn,
2001; Mont, 2007). Various types can be distinguished:
product-oriented services, which are centred on
product sales, including additional services such as
maintenance and take-back agreements; useroriented
services, which are based on product leases, rentals,
sharing and pooling; and result-oriented services,
which provide specific outcomes, such as the creation of
a pleasant climate in offices (Tukker and Tischner, 2006).
From an economic perspective, these models can
improve customer loyalty, increase market share
through product differentiation, scale up the value
of used products leading to reduced costs, and bring
new technologies to the market (Baines etal., 2007;
FORA, 2010; EMF, 2013). In addition, service-based
business models provide transparency for customers
about the costs of the whole use phase, whereas
uncertainties exist about costs of maintenance, repair
and replacement in purchase-based models (FORA,
2010). Nevertheless, these models may trigger negative
economic and social impacts on traditional value
chains, as they reduce the need for new materials and
products. Environmental benefits can be observed in
terms of reducing resource use and environmental
impacts through the substitution of products with
services.
(3) Different typologies of circular business models have been developed (for example, ETC/SCP and ETC/WMGE, 2014; van Renswoude etal., 2015).
15
Enabling factors
Box 2.1
Service- and function-based business models in action
In 2010, Xerox, a producer of copying machines, ventured into the managed service sector by enabling customers to lease
printing and copying machines, paying per print or copy made, with maintenance costs included in the cost per click. The
managed print services business model has been so successful that, by 2011, it accounted for nearly 50% of the company's
revenue (Xerox, 2015).
Rolls-Royce decided to offer performance-based power-by-the-hour contracts in its civil aviation business under which
customers paid a fixed maintenance price that guaranteed engine availability to lessees. By 2011, Rolls-Royce's revenue from
this service reached GBP6.02billion, that is, 53.4% of its total revenue (Smith, 2013).
Rebound effects, such as increased demand for a service

because it costs less than ownership, could, however,
arise.
2.2.2 Collaborative consumption

Collaborative consumption is based on sharing,
swapping, bartering, trading or leasing products and
other assets such as land or time (Botsman and Rogers,
2010). While such peer-to-peer interactions have long
been practised on a local scale, they have developed
into a different dimension through the use of online
sharing marketplaces, through which the demand
for certain assets, products or services is matched with
their supply, usually through consumer-to-consumer
(C2C) channels.
Some for example the hugely successful Airbnb
model, which allows people to rent rooms and
apartments involve fees for individual transactions,
while others are only open to registered fee-paying
members, and some, typically smaller and often local
schemes, are cost-free for users. A 2014 global online
survey showed that 54% of European respondents were
willing to share or rent out their possessions for money,
while 44% were happy to rent goods and services from
others (Nielsen, 2015), suggesting that this model has
considerable potential.
Box 2.2
Positive economic effects include consumer access to

a broader selection of products and services without
incurring the liabilities and risks associated with
ownership. While outcomes for citizens are generally
positive, traditional businesses could experience
losses in the form of lower sales, while governments
might have to re-examine fiscal rules to guard against
diminishing tax revenues.
Environmental benefits include a decrease in the use
of natural resources, energy and emissions throughout
production and consumption cycles based on longer or
more intensive use of existing products (FORA, 2010).
That, however, might trigger negative environmental
impacts by promoting the longer use of inefficient
appliances, or an increase in mobility (Leismann etal.,
2013) through, for example, car sharing or low-price
access to holiday accommodation.
Social effects can be measured through enhanced
social interaction and cohesion, as well as job creation.
While the net effect on the creation of new jobs
is unknown, companies organising collaborative
consumption stimulate micro-entrepreneurship among
the general public (Dervojeda etal., 2013). The rapid
growth of some internet-based C2C platforms has
sparked discussion about fair competition, safety, risk
allocation and workers' rights, triggering the creation
of specific legislative frameworks. Issues of concern
Collaborative consumption in action
Peerby is an online platform that matches people in temporary need of a specific object with those who have the object and
are willing to lend it, free of fees. From its inception in 2011, Peerby has enabled 300000 lending and borrowing transactions
between its 100000 members, leading to a net decrease in the need for new products (Financial Times, 2014).
Operating with a similar C2C business model, the originally Dutch platform Thuisafgehaald (Shareyourmeal) makes it
possible for people to share spare homemade food. So far, the meal-sharing website has enabled people in eight European
countries to share around 133000 meals (Thuisafgehaald, 2015), reducing food waste and strengthening social ties between
neighbours.
16
Enabling factors
that might require regulation when collaborative

consumption is scaled up include taxation, property
rights, avoiding the creation of informal sectors in the
economy, and insurance.
Uptake of collaborative consumption is also influenced
by cultural factors, for example historic experiences of
forced collectivisation, and increased personal wealth
providing more assets to share, although interest in
sharing might, for economic reasons, be higher in
less well-off regions of Europe. Overall, the effects of
collaborative consumption business models depend on
the exact set-up of the model, including whether they
are oriented towards profit or non-profit.
2.2.3 Waste-as-a-resource business models

Business models aiming to use waste as a resource
promote cross-sector and cross-cycle links by creating
markets for secondary raw materials. These can reduce
the use of energy and materials during production and
use, and also facilitate locally clustered activities to
prevent by-products from becoming wastes: industrial
symbiosis.
Positive economic effects can arise from the availability
of cheaper materials diverted from waste as an
alternative to virgin materials (OECD, 2013), including
avoiding the costs of waste disposal and capturing the
residual economic value of existing material streams
(ETC/SCP, 2013). Positive environmental effects can be
measured as a net reduction in environmental pressure
from waste disposal and the production of virgin
materials.
Social effects include the reduction of municipal waste
disposal and other environmental costs (EMF, 2012).
Recycling chains that meet environmental and worker
safety standards have positive social impacts, but
Box 2.3
lockin effects can occur if the demand for waste as an

input reduces the incentive for waste prevention.
2.2.4 Finance mechanisms for innovative business

models
Circular business models require adapted finance
mechanisms. For example, with a changed perspective
on selling services rather than products, the property
rights of products are no longer transferred to the
consumer (buyer), but will be kept by the producing
company. Businesses will not receive payment at the
beginning of the product's life cycle, but will receive
payments during their period of use. The timing of cash
flow is therefore pivotal for new business models in the
circular economy. The relatively new, green-bond market
appears well-suited for this purpose (EEA, 2014b).
Moving some of the tax burden from traditional sources
(for instance, personal income taxes or social security
contributions) to activities damaging the environment
can also accelerate the transition from the linear to a
circular economic model. Environmental taxes can lead
to a reduction in labour costs and thereby encourage
labour-intensive activities such as remanufacturing
and repair, thus creating a more level playing field
between the innovative and traditional business models
(EEA,2014b).
Insight into the development and use of these financing
mechanisms and tax-based instruments, and the market
penetration of new business models, will thus be crucial
for analysing the transition process.
2.2.5 The importance of policy innovation

A common feature of most innovative business
models is their disruptive nature. This is positive, as
Waste-as-a-resource business models in action
The National Industrial Symbiosis Programme (NISP) in the United Kingdom is a network of more than 15000 participating
industrial companies that identifies mutually profitable transactions between companies to optimise the use of underused
or undervalued resources, including energy, water, waste and logistics. So far, NISP has enabled its members to divert
47million tonnes of industrial waste from landfill, generated GBP1billion in new sales and created and safeguarded more
than 10000 jobs (International Synergies, 2015).
Kalundborg is a medium-sized Danish town that, since 1970, has developed a symbiotic relationship between public
authorities and private companies to buy and sell waste, including steam, gas, water, gypsum, fly ash and sludge. The
benefits from this collaborative network include heat recovery equivalent to the annual electricity consumption of more than
75000 families, avoiding 240000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions and saving 3 million cubic metres of water through
recycling and reuse (Jacobsen, 2008).
17
Enabling factors
system change requires nothing less than disruptive

action, but new business models can also have
negative effects because, for example, no taxes are
paid or safety regulations are not met. These negative
effects are the result of existing policy frameworks
not keeping up with changing social, technological
and economic contexts. Policy innovation should
tackle this problem by finding solutions to eliminate
any potentially negative social consequences of
innovative business models while safeguarding or
even strengthening their positive environmental and
economic outcomes.
2.3 Eco-design
Eco-design delivers products made with fewer resources,
using recycled and renewable resources and avoiding
hazardous materials, as well as with components that
are longer lasting and easier to maintain, repair, upgrade
and recycle. Two approaches can be distinguished:
product redesign based on incremental improvements
to existing products and new product design
representing the development of new resource-efficient
products that can be repaired, upgraded and recycled
(UNEP and TU, 2009).
From an economic point of view, eco-design can reduce
production costs leading to increased purchasing power
for consumers, which in turn can improve their welfare
(EMF, 2013). If products are designed to last longer and
can be easily repaired or upgraded by product owners
or professional repair facilities, the value is retained in
society for much longer than if the product is discarded,
even if the materials are recycled.
Environmentally, eco-design can contribute to the
decoupling of economic growth from resource
consumption through a decreased use of materials
and energy, higher recycling rates and reduced waste
generation (EMF, 2013). Environmental rebound effects,
such as the longer use of relatively inefficient products,
Box 2.4
however, could occur, but depend strongly on patterns

of use (Gutowski etal., 2011).
Social effects include job creation and increased
consumer trust in sustainable products and services
(Fiksel, 2003).
The Ecodesign Directive requirements for energy-related
products provide a framework for setting minimum
environmental standards and energy efficiency
requirements for energy-related products (EU, 2009).
Although it has, in practice, been used mainly to set
energy efficiency performance criteria, it could also
be used more intensively to stimulate circular product
design, for example by ruling out design strategies that
hinder repair or exchange of faulty parts (EEA, 2014a).
2.4 Extending the lifetime of products

through reuse and repair
Extending the lifetime of products is a central enabler
of the circular economy, and reusing products and their
components, as well as remanufacturing, is one of its key
strategies. Reuse conserves the physical assets of raw
materials as well as the energy embedded in products or
components. Among others, the 7th Environment Action
Programme calls for measures to address product
durability, reparability, reusability, recyclability, recycled
content and product lifespan (EU, 2013).
The roles of reuse and preparation for reuse have been
significantly strengthened by the 2008 Waste Framework
Directive (EU, 2008), which established a five-step waste
hierarchy. Its first priority is to prevent waste from being
generated, followed by preparation for reuse, recycling,
recovery and, finally, disposal. The Directive provides
basic definitions for reuse and preparation for reuse:
reuse means any operation by which products or
components that are not waste are used again for
the purpose for which they were conceived;
Eco-design in action
Houdini Sportswear AB, Sweden, designs long-lasting products and also offers repair services, rental of outer garments
and own-brand second-hand clothes at its shops. The company started to use recycled polyester fibres in its products
and reached a proportion of 58% recycled materials in items sold in 2012/2013. At the same time, it is partnering with
other outdoor garment producers to phase out persistent, toxic and bio-accumulative per- and poly-fluorinated chemicals
(Houdini, 2013; Kirboe etal., 2015).
PUMA, another sportswear corporation, designed Clever Little Bag packaging for its shoes. This reduced cardboard use by
about 65% and is saving 20 million megajoules of electricity, 0.5 million litres of diesel and 1 million litres of water per year
and the bags can be reused (Daily Telegraph, 2010).
18
Enabling factors
preparing for reuse means checking, cleaning,

repairing or recovery operations by which products
or components that have become waste are
prepared so that they can be reused without any
other pre-processing.
One successful type of policy intervention is the linking

of reuse to social employment policies, offering jobs to
lower skilled or long-term unemployed workers. These
kinds of synergies are demonstrated by, inter alia, the
Kringloop Reuse Centres in Flanders, Belgium.
Reuse and repair might still be more widely applied

in lower income countries in Europe for economic
reasons and because of past experiences of limited
access to resources. However, these patterns are
being challenged by the increasing complexity of
products together with shorter innovation cycles and
rapidly changing market fashions, which lead to a
rapid loss in the value of products over time. Recently,
however, interest in reuse has increased significantly,
illustrated by civil society initiatives such as repair
cafes and the booming internet-based market
places that match sellers of used goods with buyers.
Emerging business models (Box 2.5) demonstrate a
variety of ways of prolonging the life of products or
components, saving costs and materials while creating
new jobs.
Based on a Dutch model, Flanders introduced a

network of reuse centres in 1992 (EC, 2009) with
the primary goal of preventing waste by reselling
discarded products. In more than 140 second-hand
shops grouped into 31 reuse centres, products such
as textiles, electronics, furniture, kitchen appliances,
books, records and bicycles are sorted, repaired and
resold (OVAM, 2014). Apart from saving 4kilograms
of waste per inhabitant per year, the network also
guaranteed employment to more than 3800 workers
in 2012 (full-time equivalent). The majority of these
have been long-term unemployed or have received
only limited education, and the network's reuse centres
provide them with both a stable income and practical
workplace experience. Added to this, the network
enables those with limited resources to obtain goods
they could otherwise not afford.
2.4.1 Policy incentives for reuse
Preparation for reuse and repair is generally

employment-intensive and often in the hands of
craftsmen and small companies, creating jobs at
the local level. Synergies with employment policies
therefore highlight the cross-cutting nature of this
topic, although additional measures aiming to lengthen
product life, diminish single-use products and reduce
waste will still be needed.
New and innovative business models often require

carefully designed policy interventions to become
mature, competitive and economically viable, while
at the same time avoiding market distortions. Reuse
initiatives, for example, are often supported by specific
policy initiatives, such as the establishment of local
and regional reuse networks, the development of
binding quality standards and warranty regulations
for second-hand products, or first attempts to ensure
the reparability of products. In France, for example,
manufacturers and retailers are obliged to inform
consumers about the period for which spare parts will
be available and manufacturers are obliged to provide
the repair sector with spare parts.
Box 2.5
There is also a global dimension to reuse as an enabling

factor for a circular economy. After first use, many
products, including electronic devices, cars and textiles,
are exported to developing countries where, due to
lower labour costs, manual sorting, repair and further
preparation for reuse are cheaper than in Europe
and demand for used products is higher. This has a
Reuse as part of the business model
An example of reuse being integrated into the business model of companies is the Aircraft Fleet Recycling Association
(AFRA), a not-for-profit association originally formed by 11 airlines to present a perspective on aircraft sustainability by
developing best practice and technologies for the management of the world's older fleet (Glueckler and Dickstein, 2015).
The organisation has published a best-management-practice auditable standard and provides training for its 28 accredited
members.
In 2013, 470 planes were disassembled, returning more than 6000 tonnes of components to service (Glueckler and
Dickstein, 2015). In 2014, the value of parts recovered and reintroduced to the market amounted to USD3.2billion. Other
projects, including PAMELA (Process for Advanced Management of End of Life of Aircraft), which is co-funded by the EU, also
aim to demonstrate that an aircraft can be dismantled safely and its components prepared for reuse in aviation or other
sectors (EC, 2011b).
19
Enabling factors
significant potential to develop global closed cycles,

resulting in economic, social and environmental gains.
However, it also presents challenges with regard to
ensuring that products are actually repaired or recycled
without damaging effects on human health and the
environment, and that such exports for reuse and
recycling are not just a way of circumventing national,
regional and international agreements on dealing with
wastes, including hazardous ones.
2.5 Waste prevention programmes

One of the established policies that supports the move
towards a circular economy is the EU's five-step waste
hierarchy established in the 2008 EU Waste Framework
Directive, prioritising the prevention of waste
generation. The Directive required EU Member States
to adopt waste prevention programmes by December
2013, and many countries included measures to foster
innovative business models, repair, reuse and ecodesign in their programmes.
Policy measures aiming to reduce waste also decrease
the overall need for raw materials and avoid both
waste and the emissions created along the value chains
of materials and products. They also offer a variety of
opportunities to reduce costs, from the purchase of
raw materials to the treatment and disposal of wastes.
Despite its undisputed potential, waste prevention
seems to be one of the most challenging strategies:
in 2012, more than 2.5billion tonnes of waste were
discarded in the EU, 101million tonnes of which were
hazardous (Eurostat, 2015d).
Waste prevention interacts with a wide range of
environmental and non-environmental policy areas
and covers a broad range of different activities along
the whole value chain, including all upstream and
downstream elements. Waste can be prevented in the
production phase by improving material efficiency,
Box 2.6
using processes that generate less waste, and product

and service innovation (EC, 2012b). In the distribution
phase, waste can be prevented, for example by good
planning of supplies and stocks, waste-reducing
marketing strategies, including avoiding buy-oneget-one-free offers that tend to generate waste by
incentivising the purchase of un-needed food, and
using less waste-intensive packaging. Waste can also be
prevented during the consumption phase, for example
by using products that are less waste-intensive over
their life cycles, keeping products in use for longer,
repairing, sharing or hiring products, and reducing
levels of consumption (EC, 2012b). Box 2.6 and Box 2.7
illustrate two different examples of waste prevention
policies applied in European countries.
Article 29 of the Waste Framework Directive obliged
all EU Member States to develop national waste
prevention programmes by the end of 2013. A review
of the first 27 programmes revealed, inter alia, that
countries/regions use a wide variety of indicators,
and 17 have set quantified targets, but with limited
use of monitoring systems. Around two-thirds of
policy instruments focus mainly on information and
awareness raising, with regulatory and economic
instruments accounting for only around one-third
(EEA, 2014c). The programmes outline the status
quo and future objectives, together with specific
measures needed to reach them. Based on their
specific framework conditions, countries and regions
have chosen different key sectors, waste streams and
policy approaches for the implementation of their
programmes.
The EEA's reviews of progress in Europe in 2013
and 2014 also highlighted a clear need to improve
the insight on implementation of waste prevention
measures (EEA, 2014c, 2015c). Future EEA analyses will
therefore focus on the impacts of specific measures
and initiatives for selected waste types or specific
waste-generating sectors, for example hazardous
waste, food waste or reuse systems (EEA, 2015c).
Waste prevention in the construction sector in Austria
The Austrian waste prevention programme identified construction and infrastructure development as one of the key sectors
for waste prevention and developed a building-passport concept as part of a building material information system (Reisinger
et al, 2014). This aims to connect architects, suppliers and statistical registers to enable the careful, selective demolition
of buildings, enabling reuse and high-quality recycling of building materials, and to support the prevention of waste by
extending the use of houses through improved maintenance schemes.
The building passport includes all of the necessary information for the waste-light operation of buildings, and records all
building activities, incorporated materials and technical equipment (Rechberger and Markova, 2011). Following several pilot
projects, the Austrian waste prevention programme is now working to standardise building passports and increase their use.
20
Enabling factors
Box 2.7
Food waste prevention in Spain
A study on food waste in Spain indicated that national average food loss and waste amount to around 176kilograms
per person per year. Alerted by the fact that Spain is ranked seventh in Europe in terms of volume of food loss and
waste (7.7million tonnes), the country has taken a proactive approach and adopted the More Food, Less Waste strategy
(MAGRAMA, 2013). The programme aims to reduce food loss and waste through the whole food supply chain, starting with
agriculture, through food processing and distribution, to consumption in households and the hospitality sector, and food
waste valorisation.
The strategy includes carrying out studies to understand where, how, why and what type of food loss and waste are
generated (MAGRAMA, 2015); promoting and sharing good practice and raising awareness; analysing and reviewing
regulatory aspects; collaborating with relevant actors; and promoting the development of new technologies. The
implementation period runs over three years.
21
Monitoring progress towards a circular economy
3 Monitoring progress towards a circular

economy
At present, there is no recognised way of measuring

how effective the EU, a country or even a company
is in making the transition, nor are there holistic
monitoring tools for supporting such a process.
A monitoring framework, as well as individual
indicators, across multiple levels would facilitate
policy development, measure environmental
performance and policy effectiveness, benchmark
products, sectors and countries, and improve business
investment decisions. Such a framework should
provide meaningful answers to policy questions
covering all relevant dimensions of the transition:
resource use and material flows, environmental
impacts, economic parameters, social well-being,
financing flows and policy effectiveness. Because of
the complex dynamics governing the transition, the
monitoring framework needs to be flexible, allowing
the adaptation of indicators and focus areas to
maintain its effectiveness throughout the evolution of
the transition.
This chapter looks at the challenges and solutions
related to developing such a framework to enable the
measurement of progress in the transition. In this
report, the focus is on the material side of the circular
economy, analysing which policy questions and
indicators would give insight into whether or not the
European economy is becoming more circular.
Indicators, however, have clear limits for giving
directions. Qualitative assessments are therefore
needed to complement them in the process of
monitoring progress towards a circular economy.
22
3.1 Policy questions related to the

material aspects of a circular
economy
Table 3.1 lists a set of policy questions that are
relevant when assessing progress towards a circular
economy with a focus on materials.
Some of these can be answered by using existing
indicators, whereas data and robust indicators do not
yet exist to answer others. Some indicators, such as
those relating to eco-design, can be better used at the
product level; others, such as those based on material
flows, can be used at a macro-economic level. Overall,
indicators related to material use and recycling cut
across all stages of the cycle listed in Table 3.1.
Tables 3.23.6 match the questions in Table 3.1 to
indicators that can answer policy-relevant questions
on progress towards a circular economy; some
are already available, but others still need to be
developed. Priorities will have to be identified for
investment in filling the gaps and linking indicators
to qualitative assessments. The set is by no means
exhaustive and should be considered dynamic.
Table 3.1
Policy questions related to progress towards a circular economy from a materials perspective
Material input
Are Europe's primary material inputs decreasing?

Are material losses in Europe decreasing?
Is the share of recycled materials in material input increasing?
Are the materials used in Europe sustainably sourced?
Eco-design
Are products designed to last longer?

Are products designed for disassembly?
Are recycled materials included in product design?
Are materials designed to be recycled, avoiding pollution from recycling loops?
Production
Is Europe using fewer materials in production?

Is Europe using a lower volume and number of environmentally hazardous substances in production?
Is Europe generating less waste in production?
Are business strategies shifting towards circular concepts such as remanufacture and service-based
offers?
Consumption
Are Europeans switching consumption patterns to less environmentally intensive types of goods and
services?
Are Europeans using products for longer?
Is European consumption generating less waste?
Waste recycling
Is waste increasingly recycled?

How far do materials keep their value in recycling processes, avoiding down-cycling?
How far is the recycling system optimised for environmental and economic sustainability?
23
3.2
Material input
Established indicators already exist

to measure primary material inputs.
While data on domestic material
consumption (DMC) are most widely available, raw
material consumption (RMC) is a modelled indicator
that includes indirect material flows associated with
imports and exports and thus reflects Europe's
overall material impact better than DMC. Indicators
to answer the policy questions on material losses, on
the share of recycled materials and on the sustainable
sourcing of materials still need further work, and
only limited data are available (Table 3.2). The EEA's
estimates of the share of recycled materials in EU
consumption of selected materials range from 42%
for iron and steel to just 2% for plastics in 2006 (EEA,
2011). Development work focusing on material flows
in a circular economy, on the contribution of recycling
to material demand and on supply risks is currently
under way at the European Commission under its
Figure 3.1
activity for creating a Raw Materials Scoreboard in

support of the European Innovation Partnership on
Raw Materials (EC, 2014).
The challenges in answering the final three policy
questions in Table 3.2 are illustrated by the example
of material losses, with minimising such losses
being one of the key characteristics of a circular
economy (Box1.2). The discrepancy between material
input, waste generation and recycling flows, shown
in Figure3.1, demonstrates that adequate data
are currently not available to enable macro-level
monitoring of the main losses and sinks. Of the waste
treated, less than half is recovered or recycled.
Loops are unlikely to close fully, partly because some
processed material is used to provide energy and is
thus not available for recycling. Another reason for
losses is the increasing complexity of products and
materials, for example plastic and metal alloys, which
are technically challenging to recycle.
Material flows and waste in the EU-28, 20122014
Emissions to nature
Imports
Exports
3.0 tonnes/person
1.3 tonnes/person
Direct
material
Minerals
input
Fossil fuels 23 %
(DMI)
Metals
14.6 tonnes/person
Biomass
Domestic
47 %
Materials in use or
material
added to stock
consumption
4%
(DMC)
26 %
13.3 tonnes/person
+ recovered
+ recovered
and recycled
and recycled
materials
materials
(e.g. buildings)
Unused
Domestic
domestic
extraction
extraction
used
11.6 tonnes/person
Waste
Generated 5.0 tonnes/person
Treated 4.6 tonnes/person
Waste recovered and recycled

46 %
Waste discarded
and sent to landfill
48 %
24
Waste
incinerated
6%
Note:
For waste statistics, latest data are from 2012 (dark green figures); for material flows, data are from 2014 (orange figures).
Source:
EEA, based on Eurostat 2015b, 2015c, 2015d.
Table 3.2
Policy questions and indicators for material input
Policy questions
Possible indicators
Are Europe's primary material inputs decreasing?
DMC or RMC
++
Are material losses in Europe decreasing?
Proportion of material losses in key material cycles
Diversion of waste from landfill (EEA indicator

WST006, underdevelopment)
++
Is the share of recycled materials in material input

increasing?
Share of secondary raw materials in material

consumption
Are the materials used in Europe sustainably

sourced?
Share of sustainability-certified materials in

material use
(by key materials)
Note:
Data availability
++, data readily available and/or indicator exists; +, limited data available that could be used to develop the indicator or experimental
indicator; , no data currently available to create the indicator.
While information is available on material inputs

measured as DMC or calculated as RMC, including the
amount of raw materials that need to be extracted
to produce traded goods, stocks are currently not
measured in the EU's statistical system and are much
more difficult to assess. Losses are, to some extent,
addressed in the EU's waste statistics, but the two
statistical systems of material flows and waste are
not compatible and thus cannot easily be used for
balancing inputs, stocks and losses. To reduce losses,
better information about where they actually happen is
needed. Eurostat is currently exploring possibilities for
linking waste data to material flow data.
Figure 3.2
The cumulative loss of aluminium

from the hard packaging cycle in
Flanders over time
Aluminium put on the market in 2014 (%)

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
24
20
23
20
22
21
20
20
20
19
20
18
20
17
20
16
20
15
20
20
14
20
As an example of material losses, Figure 3.2 shows

cumulative material losses related to the use of
aluminium cans in Flanders, calculated with a
Weibullbased partitioning model with parameters
chosen to mimic an average use phase of six months
(OVAM, forthcoming). The figure shows that, even in a
very circular system, with collection and pre-processing
rates of 97% each and recycling process efficiencies
delivering 97% recovery in the smelting process,
only 16% of the aluminium remains in the cycle after
10years.
Lost owing to recycling inefficiency

Lost owing to collection inefficiency
Still in use
Source:
Modelled by VITO, based on data from OVAM (forthcoming).
25
3.3 Eco-design
Eco-design is a strategic management
approach that considers the
environmental impacts of the full life
cycles of products, processes, services, organisations
and systems. Eco-design strategies, such as design for
recycling or disassembly, can facilitate remanufacturing
and closed loops in general, while also making products
suitable for servicing, leasing and hiring. Products
may include buildings and infrastructure, as well as
consumer products.
While eco-design is a key approach in a circular
economy, macro-level indicators that could answer the
policy questions listed in Table 3.3 barely exist; regular
data are not available for any of the possible indicators
listed. As a whole, progress in eco-design strategies
can best be monitored at the company and product
levels. Developing indicators that can monitor progress
towards eco-design at the EU or country level is a
significant challenge.
Table 3.3
Durability is influenced by a number of factors, such as

the resilience of materials and components, design that
enables repair and refurbishment, and fashion, while
lifetime also depends on patterns of use. Indicators
for design for recycling and disassembly are less
straightforward than, for example, the use of specific
materials in products. Design for disassembly enables
a decrease in the cost of dismantling a product, which
can in turn lead to enhanced recycling and reuse of the
product itself or its components. As a consequence,
waste flows associated with the product are reduced
and impacts associated with the production of new
products or parts are avoided. Absolute figures are very
product- and process-specific.
Policy questions and indicators for eco-design
Policy questions
Possible indicators
Are products designed to last longer?
Durability or lifetime compared with an industry

average for a similar product
Are products designed for disassembly?
Time and number of necessary tools for

disassembly
Are recycled materials included in product design?
Proportion of recycled material in new products
Are materials designed to be recycled, avoiding

pollution from recycling loops?
Share of materials where safe recycling options

exist
Note:
26
The material circularity indicator, developed by the

Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF and Granta Design,
2015), combines aspects of lifetime and intensity of
use with the proportion of recycled material and the
share of materials in a product that can be recycled
in a single indicator, applicable at the product or
company level.
Data availability
Developments at the macro-level, such as a decline in

material input or waste generation, are often difficult
to interpret and changes could, for example, be due
to structural changes in the economy rather than any
movement towards a circular economy. Monitoring
progress, therefore, should include developments
towards more circular business strategies. Examples of
how this could be measured include the involvement of
companies in circular economy networks and the share
of remanufacturing in the economy. Remanufacturing,
Table 3.4
Waste generation by production and

consumption activities in Europe
Index (2004 = 100) [EUR, tonnes]

120
110
100
90
80
Services gross value added
Services waste
Household expenditure
Municipal waste
Manufacturing gross value added
Manufacturing waste
Notes: Generated waste refers to waste excluding major mineral

waste such as mining waste or mineral waste from
construction and demolition. The geographical coverage for
manufacturing and services waste, and manufacturing and
services gross value added (in constant prices), is the EU-28
plus Norway; for municipal waste generation and household
expenditure, it is the EEA-33. Values for Croatia are missing
in manufacturing and services waste generation for 2006.
Source: EEA indicator CSI041/WST004, based on Eurostat data.
Policy questions and indicators for production
Policy questions
Possible indicators
Is Europe using fewer materials in production?
Material use for production compared to GDP

(potentially by sector)
Is Europe using a lower volume and number

of environmentally hazardous substances in
production?
Is Europe generating less waste in production?
Input of substances that are classified as

hazardous
Waste generation (production activities) (EEA

indicator CSI041/WST004)
++
Generation of hazardous waste in production

processes
++
Data availability
Are business strategies shifting towards circular

Involvement of companies in circular company
concepts such as remanufacture and service-based networks
offers?
Share of remanufacturing business in the
manufacturing economy
Note:
20
13
12
20
11
20
10
20
09
20
20
0
07
20
20
06
70
05
There are currently few means of monitoring clean

production directly from a material cycle perspective.
Data are regularly assembled on the production of
hazardous substances, including amounts produced
for export from Europe, but not on the amount actually
used in Europe, including imports.
Figure 3.3
20
Some data are available on material use in production

in different sectors, based on environmentaleconomic accounting (Table 3.4). Work is under way to
consolidate the methodology and data and this should
provide a more robust basis for indicators. Meanwhile,
established indicators exist for the generation of waste
in production by sector in Europe. Figure 3.3 shows
that, since 2004, the manufacturing and service sectors
have generated less waste in absolute terms, despite
their economic growth. Asimilar indicator could be
created for hazardous waste, based on existing data.
04
A circular economy aims for production

processes that minimise material
inputs and limit the output of
nonrecyclable or hazardous waste.
for example, uses existing products or components

to create new ones with the same properties as those
made from scratch, and is thus a way of minimising
the environmental impacts of production. The
European remanufacturing landscape is only now
being mapped (ERN, 2015), so further studies will be
needed to quantify the current size and structure of the
remanufacturing industry.
20
3.4 Production
27
3.5 Consumption
Consumption choices by citizens,
governments and businesses have a
considerable influence on the realisation of a circular
economy through their choice of products and services,
patterns of use, disposal options and behaviour.
Indicators such as the environmental footprint
of consumption in Europe and the generation of
municipal waste in Europe will reflect, on a macrolevel, the effects of making more circular choices such
as sharing existing assets, choosing longer-lasting
products or reusing, repairing and refurbishing
products instead of buying new ones. These indicators
will show the net effects of such consumption
developments on a macro-level. They balance material
inputs and waste avoided through more circular
consumption modes against additional environmental
pressures that result when, for example, people
spend income they have saved by renting instead of
owning on other goods and services. Such macro-level
indicators, however, cannot allocate the net effects to
specific changes in consumption behaviour.
The trends in material footprint per euro spent would
be more difficult to interpret; for example, a shift to
Table 3.5
Methods for calculating the environmental footprints

of household consumption, using environmentally
extended input-output tables or life-cycle analyses, are
available, but data availability is still limited and subject
to delays.
However, for monitoring the effects of different circular
consumption strategies and revealing their relevance
and effects, more specific indicators are needed. For
example, measuring the actual lifetime of products or
the market share of services that prepare for reuse
and repair could help answer the question of how long
products are actually used before being replaced with
new ones. Regularly produced data for such indicators,
however, do not currently exist.
A useful and established indicator for consumption
is the generation of municipal waste (Figure 3.3).
This decreased by 2% in Europe (EU-28 plus Iceland,
Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey)
between 2004 and 2012, and is decoupled from
household expenditure (EEA, 2015d).
Policy questions and indicators for consumption
Policy questions
Possible indicators
Are Europeans switching consumption patterns to

less environmentally intensive types of goods and
services?
Environmental footprint of consumption (including

materials) in Europe
Material footprint per euro spent (EEA indicator

SCP013)
Are Europeans using products for longer?
Actual average lifetime of selected products
Market share of preparing for reuse and repair

services related to sales of new products
Waste generation (consumption activities) (EEA

indicator CSI041/WST004)
++
Is European consumption generating less waste?
Note:
28
longer-lasting products and repair instead of buying

new would reduce environmental pressures per euro
spent if the expenditure stays the same or increases for
the same product or service unit.
Data availability
3.6
Waste recycling
One of the central pillars of a circular

economy is feeding materials back into
the economy and avoiding waste being sent to landfill
or incinerated, thereby capturing the value of the
materials as far as possible and reducing losses.
Recycling rates the amount of waste recycled as a
share of waste generated can be calculated from
regularly reported European waste data for several
waste streams. Recycling rates of municipal and
packaging waste, for example, have steadily increased
over the past 10 years in Europe (Figure 3.4), mainly
triggered by legally binding recycling targets. Some of
the data, however, might include rejects from sorting
and processing. Moreover, data include all forms
of material recovery, with no distinction between
downcycling, recycling or up-cycling.
reference model on municipal waste (ETC/WMGE, 2015)

could be used to calculate environmental effects and
costs/revenues of recycling systems for municipal waste.
However, this model does not allow for calculation of
trends back through time.
Indicators of quality would have to be set separately for
different materials. Innovative approaches are needed
to capture both the material quality and the suitability
of recycled materials for replacing virgin materials.
Figure 3.4
Recycling rate of municipal solid

waste and packaging waste in Europe
Recycling rates (%)

70
60
50
Indicators measuring how far materials keep their

value in recycling processes, and how far the recycling
system is optimised for environmental and economic
sustainability, are more difficult to calculate. In practice,
only a limited number of materials can currently be
recycled without a loss of quality. Reasons include
material mixes and additives that technically cannot
be separated, contamination and dissipative use. Even
materials that, in principle, can be recycled without a loss
of quality, such as metals and glass, can be downgraded
by contamination and the high cost of processing.
40
Attention therefore needs to be paid to extending the

quality and value of recycled material, starting from
the design of materials and products. More innovation
and increased efficiency are also required at all stages
of the recycling system: collection, pre-treatment and
processing. The turnover of recyclables in Europe could
give some indications of their value, and the European
Notes:
Recycling rates are related to waste generated. Recycling

of municipal waste includes material recycling and
composting/anaerobic digestion. Gap filling of data for
municipal waste was applied for Croatia and Iceland for
several years. Gap filling of packaging waste data was
applied for several years for Bulgaria, Liechtenstein, Norway
and Romania.
Source:
Draft EEA indicator WST005, based on Eurostat data

(Eurostat, 2015e, 2015f).
Table 3.6
30
20
10
13
Municipal waste (EU-28, Iceland, Norway,

Switzerland, Turkey)
Packaging waste (EU-27, Liechtenstein, Norway)
Policy questions and indicators for waste recycling
Policy questions
Possible indicators
Is waste increasingly recycled?
Recycling rates for different types of wastes/

materials (EEA indicator WST005, under
development)
How far do materials keep their value in recycling

processes, avoiding down-cycling?
Recycled material quality compared with virgin

material quality
Turnover of key recyclables
Environmental effects and cost/revenues of

municipal waste management in Europe
How far is the European recycling system

optimised for environmental and economic
sustainability?
Note:
20
12
11
20
20
10
20
09
20
08
20
20
07
06
20
05
20
20
04
Data availability
++
29
3.7 Conclusion
Current work on indicators that track progress towards
a circular economy has been driven, to a large extent,
by developments in material resource efficiency and
waste management. Such measures of eco-efficiency
classify resource flows according to the main categories
identified in material flow accounts and waste statistics.
While these are useful, the statistics fall short of
providing a basis for assessing some particularly
relevant aspects of a circular economy, such as material
losses and the qualitative aspects of recycling.
30
In addition, looking at the elements of a circular

economy holistically, challenges and large knowledge
gaps persist. More robust data are needed on new
business trends and sustainable consumption relating,
for example, to eco-design, the sharing economy,
and repair and reuse. Better descriptive social
indicators, indicators for industrial symbiosis and
waste prevention indicators would also provide greater
insights on progress.
Circular economy in a wider context
4 Circular economy in a wider context
4.1 Circular and green economy

For the circular economy to realise its full potential, it is
important to consider how it resides within the wider
policy context, in particular the EU's 7th Environment
Action Programme. Recognising that environmental,
economic and social objectives are essentially
interlinked, the programme's three key objectives are to:
1. protect, conserve and enhance the EU's natural
capital;
2. turn the EU into a resource-efficient, green and
competitive low-carbon economy;
3. safeguard the EU's citizens from environmentrelated pressures and risks to health and well-being.
Taken together, these objectives reflect a 'green
economy' policy concept, with 'green growth' and
'sustainable development' related but not synonymous
concepts. In essence, economic growth should be
Figure 4.1
decoupled from environmental pressures in order to

maintain ecosystem resilience and prevent impacts on
human well-being. Resource efficiency gains would be
central to achieving this.
While a circular economy aims to increase resource
efficiency, and is thus instrumental in realising the
second key objective of the 7th Environment Action
Programme, it does not fully address preservation of
natural capital and prevention of environmental risks
to human health and well-being. In fact, the circular
economy can be represented as the core of a green
economy perspective that widens the focus from waste
and material use to ecosystem resilience and human
health and well-being (Figure 4.1).
This wider interpretation calls for integrated analysis of
the performance of production-consumption systems
that goes beyond the 'core' circular aspects, as outlined
in the previous chapters. Some further issues that merit
broader assessment and policy attention are discussed
below.
Circular economy and green economy
Waste
management
Waste
prevention
Resource
efficiency
Human well-being
Green economy focus
Circular economy focus

Waste Framework Directive
(and other EU waste legislation)
Ecosystem
resilience
Resource Efficiency Roadmap
7th Environment Action Programme
Circular economy package

Source:
EEA.
31
4.2 Global aspects

Decreased dependency on imports of strategic
resources may be an explicit objective of the circular
economy, but European production-consumption
systems depend on such imports and will not
operate in isolation. It is crucial to understand the
environmental pressures that arise along the value
chain, where these pressures will be critically felt
and how a transition to a circular economy may
influence those pressures. Only then can policy efforts
be targeted at resources and actors for which the
economic, environmental and social benefits of circular
approaches are greatest.
The main resource categories relevant to the
environment and human well-being are food, water,
energy and materials (including chemicals), with the
food, mobility and housing systems creating the
dominant pressures (Figure 4.2). All are influenced
by global megatrends (EEA, 2015b). Understanding
Figure 4.2
these global megatrends and their possible impact

on European production-consumption systems will
require further study. In addition, the environmental
and social implications of changes in supply chains,
both in Europe and abroad, should be understood.
Acircular economy, if widely applied on a global level,
in turn bears the potential to influence some of these
megatrends.
European policies are mostly targeted at impacts
that occur within Europe and at the production and
end-of-life stages of systems. As international trade
law limits intervention options, policy generally
relies on consumption-oriented approaches, such
as eco-labels, to influence the impacts of production
abroad. European and global businesses increasingly
work towards sustainable value chains. The United
Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (UN, 2015),
especially the goal to ensure sustainable consumption
and production patterns, can be expected to give
new impetus to public and private initiatives in this
Global megatrends (GMTs) and European production-consumption systems

Diverging global
population trends
GMT
1
Towards a more
urban world
GMT
2
GMT
3
Changing disease
burdens and risks
of pandemics
GMT
4
Accelerating
technological
change
GMT
5
Continued
economic growth?
systems
Eco
Food
Water
EU
Energy Materials
GMT
6
An increasingly
multipolar world
GMT
7
Intensified
global competition
for resources
GMT
8
Growing pressures
on ecosystems
GMT
9
GMT
11
Source:
32
EEA, 2015b.
Diversifying
approaches to
governance
GMT
10
Increasing
environmental
pollution
Increasingly
severe consequences
of climate change
area. Coherence between (policy) interventions on

the production and consumption side will be key to
achieving this.
4.3 Ecosystem considerations

Tackling systemic challenges such as climate change
and biodiversity loss requires an integrated approach
to ensuring food, water and energy security, as well as
fundamental changes in the production-consumption
systems involved. Trade-offs are numerous, however,
and should be carefully considered.
The objective of replacing non-renewable with
renewable resources in a circular economy, for
example, may increase competition for land and
thereby increase pressures on natural capital.
Biobased materials compete with production of both
food and biomass for energy generation, as well as with
land use for other purposes. In general, biomass is best
used in a cascade in which energy generation is the last
step rather than the first.
But even if biomass is primarily used for durable
products, environmental impacts are not
straightforward. A key example is wood as a
construction material. The benefits of this renewable
resource should be offset against the biodiversity
impacts of increased wood harvest, with current
harvesting rates in Europe already reaching 65% of
the annual increment (EEA, 2015e). Analogous to the
debate on bio-energy, the potential for uptake of biobased materials should be critically analysed in view of
overall biomass production and ecosystem resilience.
Overall, in the transition to a circular economy, it will be
crucial to monitor how far the environmental benefits
of circular approaches are realised or countered, for
example by rebound effects.
4.4 Risks to human health and

wellbeing
The assessment and governance of risks to human
health and well-being cut across all dimensions of
the green economy, and may deal with anything from
exposure to air, soil and water pollution to loss of
ecosystem services and impacts of climate change.
Of particular concern in the context of a circular
economy is our increasing reliance on chemicals. When
closing material loops, accumulation of hazardous
substances should, in principle, be prevented. A key
challenge in this respect is striking the right balance
between the quantities of materials to be recycled and

their (non-toxic) quality.
In the short term, clean material cycles will require
keeping potentially contaminated waste materials apart
and identifying waste types, products and materials
that should not be recycled. To increase the recycling
potential over time, the use of hazardous substances
in products and processes would have to be minimised
through eco-design. Reducing the accumulation of
hazardous substances in material cycles is already an
important goal of EU waste prevention policies.
There is also uncertainty about the impacts of new
products and technologies in a circular economy.
Policymakers will face difficult decisions, particularly
when dealing with commercial interests and socioeconomic trade-offs. Well-balanced precautionary
approaches need to be developed to reap the benefits
of innovation while minimising the risk of harming
ecosystems and human health and well-being.
4.5 Socio-economic issues

The prevailing linear economic system and the rules
governing it have been developed and matured over
many years. As new circular approaches emerge,
frictions between the existing linear system and the new
approaches are bound to arise. These may be perceived
as threats by some stakeholders, but as opportunities by
others.
Overall, the way socio-economic benefits and risks are
distributed, and how they are perceived by stakeholders,
will be crucial for the transition to a circular economy in
Europe. While several studies underline the potential of
the circular economy in terms of creating employment,
more attention needs to be given to net employment
benefits and to the distribution of benefits and transition
costs across different segments of the population, as
well as across regions.
For example, little is known about the quality of new
jobs that might be created in the circular economy and
the skills needed in employees. Remanufacturing might
bring industrial jobs back to Europe, but a move to
product-service systems could also replace highly paid
industrial jobs with lower paid service jobs. Similarly,
collaborative consumption might improve social
cohesion within a group of citizens, but it might also
discriminate against other societal groups.
Overall, it will be important to increase research efforts
to develop models and other tools for analysing socioeconomic and environmental interactions and trade-offs.
33
References
References
Accenture, 2014, Circular advantage Innovative business

models and technologies to create value in a world without
limits to growth, Dublin.
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure and Bio Intelligence
Service, 2014, The opportunities to business of improving
resource efficiency Final report on behalf of the European
Commission, Contract Ref. 070307/2011/610181/ETU/F.1.,
Northwich.
Baines, T. S., Lightfoot, H. W., Evans, S., Neely, A.,
Greenough, R., Peppard, J., Roy, R., Shehab, E., Braganza,
A., Tiwari, A., Alcock, J. R., Angus, J. P., Bastl, M., Cousens,
A., Irving, P., Johnson, M., Kingston, J., Lockett, H.,
Martinez, V., Michele, P., Tranfield, D., Walton, I. M. and
Wilson, H., 2007, 'State-of-the-art in product-service
systems', Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture,
221(10), 15431552.
EC, 2011b, 'End-of-life aircraft recycling offers high

grade materials' (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/
ecoap/about-eco-innovation/good-practices/eu/719_
en.htm) accessed 30 November 2015.
EC, 2012a, Communication from the Commission to
the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee
of the Regions: Making raw materials available for
Europe's wellbeing Proposal for a European
innovation partnership on raw materials (COM(2012) 82
final of 29 February 2012).
Botsman, R. and Rogers, R., 2010, What's mine is yours:

The rise of collaborative consumption, Harper Collins
Publishers, New York.
EC, 2012b, Preparing a waste prevention programme

Guidance document, European Commission,
DirectorateGeneral Environment.
Daily Telegraph, 2010, 'Puma ditches the shoe box for a

greener "Clever Little Bag"' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/7587375/
Puma-ditches-the-shoe-box-for-a-greener-Clever-LittleBag.html) accessed 18March 2015.
EC, 2014, Monitoring and evaluation scheme for

the European innovation partnership Strategic
implementation plan on raw materials (final of
26March 2014).
De Groene Zaak, 2015, Governments going circular

Aglobal scan by De Groene Zaak, Dutch Sustainability
Business Association, Breda.
Dervojeda, K., Verzijl, D., Nagtegaal, F., Lengton, M.,
Rouwmaat, E., Monfardini, E. and Frideres, L., 2013,
The Sharing Economy Accessibility Based Business
Models for Peer-to-Peer Markets. Case Study 12, European
Commission, Directorate-General for Enterprise and
Industry.
EC, 2009, 'Waste prevention best practices'
(http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/prevention/
practices.htm) accessed 5 November 2015.
EC, 2011a, Commission staff Working Paper
Analysis associated with the Roadmap to a Resource
34
Efficient Europe, Part II, accompanying the document

Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of Regions
'Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe' (SEC(2011)
1067 final).
EC, 2015a, Communication from the Commission to

the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions Closing the loop An EU action plan for
the Circular Economy (COM(2015) 614/2 of 2 December
2015).
EC, 2015b, Commission staff working document,
Additional analysis to complement the impact
assessment SWD (2014) 208 supporting the review
of EU waste management targets Accompanying the
document Proposal for a Directive of the European
Parliament and of the Council amending Directive
2008/98/EC on waste Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council amending
Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and
of the Council amending Directive 1999/31/EC on the
References
landfill of waste Proposal for a Directive of the European

Parliament and of the Council amending Directives
2000/53/EC on end-of-life vehicles, 2006/66/EC
on batteries and accumulators and waste batteries and
accumulators, and 2012/19/EC on waste electrical and
electronic equipment SWD(2015) 259 final.
EMF, 2015a, 'Circular economy overview' (http://www.

ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/
overview/concept) accessed 5 November 2015.
EC, 2015c, Commission invests 16billion in funding for

research and innovation over next two years, Press release
13 October 2015 IP/15/5831, European Commission,
Brussels.
EMF and Granta Design, 2015, Circularity Indicators

An approach to measuring circularity Project Overview,
Ellen MacArthur Foundation and Granta Design, Isle of
Wight and Cambrigde.
EEA, 2011, Earnings, jobs and innovation: the role of

recycling in a green economy, EEA Report No 8/2011,
European Environment Agency.
EMF and McKinsey Center for Business and

Environment, 2015, Growth within: A circular economy
vision for a competitive Europe, Ellen Mac Arthur
Foundation and McKinsey Center for Business and
Environment, Isle of Wight.
EEA, 2014a, Environmental indicator report 2014:

Environmental impacts of production-consumption systems
in Europe, European Environment Agency.
EEA, 2014b, Resource-efficient green economy and EU
policies, EEA Report No 2/2014, European Environment
Agency.
EEA, 2014c, Waste prevention in Europe The status in
2013, EEA Report No 9/2014, European Environment
Agency.
EEA, 2015a, The European environment State and
outlook 2015: Synthesis report, State of the environment
report, European Environment Agency.
EEA, 2015b, The European environment state and outlook
2015 Assessment of global megatrends, European
Environment Agency.
EEA, 2015c, Waste prevention in Europe The status in
2014, EEA Report No 6/2015, European Environment
Agency.
EEA, 2015d, 'Waste generation (CSI 041/WST 004)
Assessment published Mar 2015' (http://www.
eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/wastegeneration-1/assessment) accessed 26 November 2015.
EEA, 2015e, 'The European Environment State and
outlook 2015: European briefing on forests' (http://www.
eea.europa.eu/soer-2015/europe/forests#tab-based-onindicators) accessed 16 November 2015.
EMF, 2012, Towards the circular economy Economic and
business rationale for an accelerated transition, Volume 1,
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Isle of Wight.
EMF, 2013, Towards the circular economy: Opportunities
for the consumer goods sector, Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, Isle of Wight.
EMF, 2015b, Delivering the circular economy A toolkit for

policymakers, Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Isle of Wight.
ERN, 2015, 'European Remanufacturing Network'

(http://www.remanufacturing.eu) accessed
30November 2015.
ETC/SCP, 2013, Approaches to using waste as a resource.
Lessons learnt from UK experiences, ETC/SCP Working
Paper No 5/2013, European Topic Centre on Sustainable
Consumption and Production, Copenhagen.
ETC/SCP and ETC/WMGE, 2014, Reflections and lessons
learnt from EEA's work on sustainable lifestyles, ETC/SCP
and ETC/WMGE Working Paper, European Topic Centre
on Sustainable Consumption and Production and
European Topic Centre on Waste and Materials in a
Green Economy, Copenhagen and Mol.
ETC/WMGE, 2015, 'European reference model
on municipal waste' (https://etc-wmge.vito.be)
accessed30November 2015.
EU, 2008, Directive 2008/98/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008
on waste and repealing certain Directives (OJ L 312,
22.11.2008, pp. 330).
EU, 2009, Directive 2009/125/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009
establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign
requirements for energy-related products (OJ L 285,
31.10.2009, pp. 1035).
EU, 2013, Decision No 1386/2013/EU of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013
on a General Union Environment Action Programme
to 2020 Living well, within the limits of our planet
(OJL354, 20.12.2013, pp. 171200).
Eurostat, 2015a, 'Environmental goods and services
sector (env_egs)' (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/
35
References
environment/environmental-goods-and-servicessector/database) accessed 22 October 2015.
synergies.com/projects/national-industrial-symbiosisprogramme/) accessed 23 July 2015.
Eurostat, 2015b, 'Material flow accounts (env_ac_mfa)'

(http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database#)
accessed 26 November 2015.
Jacobsen, N. B., 2008, 'Industrial symbiosis in

Kalundborg, Denmark: A quantitative assessment
of economic and environmental aspects', Journal of
Industrial Ecology, 10(12), 239255.
Eurostat, 2015c, 'Treatment of waste (env_wastrt)'

(http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/waste/data/
database) accessed 26 November 2015.
Eurostat, 2015d, 'Generation of waste by waste
category and hazardousness (2012)' (http://ec.europa.
eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=
en&pcode=ten00109&plugin=1) accessed 23 July 2015.
Eurostat, 2015e, 'Packaging waste (env_waspac)' (http://
ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/waste/data/database)
Eurostat, 2015f, 'Municipal waste (env_wasmun)' (http://
ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/waste/data/database)
Fiksel, J., 2003, 'Designing resilient, sustainable
systems', Environmental Science & Technology, 37,
53305339.
FORA, 2010, Green business models in the Nordic Region,
Green paper, FORA, Copenhagen.
Financial Times, 2014, 'Insuring the sharing economy'
(http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b36efb60-7675-11e49761-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3ghmBV0AO) accessed
18 March 2015.
Glueckler, E. and Dickstein, J., 2015, 'Promoting
aircraft parts reuse in an environmental management
paradigm', presentation given at: Bilateral meeting on
activities of the Aircraft Fleet Recycling Association at
the EEA, Copenhagen.
Gutowski, T. G., Sahni, S., Boustani, D. and Graves,
S. C., 2011, 'Remanufacturing and energy savings',
Environmental Science & Technology, 45(10), 45404547.
Horbach, J., Rennings, K. and Sommerfeld, K., 2015,
Circular economy and employment, Lichtenfels,
Mannheim (https://sunstiftungsfonds.files.wordpress.
com/2015/06/ce_employment_13052015.pdf) accessed
5 November 2015.
Houdini, 2013, GRI-Rapport Maj 2013 April 2013,
Houdini Sportswear AB, Nacka.
International Synergies, 2015, 'National Industrial
Symbiosis Programme (NISP)' (http://www.international-
36
Kirboe, N., Sramkova, H. and Krarup, M., 2015, Moving

towards a circular economy Successful Nordic business
models, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.
Krausmann, F., Gingrich, S., Eisenmenger, N., Erb, K.H., Haberl, H. and Fischer-Kowalski, M., 2009, 'Growth
in global materials use, GDP and population during
the 20th century', Ecological Economics, 68(10),
2 6962 705.
Leismann, K., Schmitt, M., Rohn, H. and Baedeker,
C., 2013, 'Collaborative consumption: Towards a
resource-saving consumption culture', Resources, 2(3),
184203.
Maddison, A., 2013, 'Maddison project database'
(http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/maddison-project/
home.htm) accessed 20 March 2015.
MAGRAMA, 2013, Estrategia 'Ms alimento, menos
desperdicio' Programa para la reduccin de las
prdidas y el desperdicio alimentario y la valorizacin
de los alimentos desechados, Ministerio de Agricultura,
Alimentacin y Medio Ambiente, Madrid.
MAGRAMA, 2015, 'Informacin de inters Estrategia
"Ms alimento, menos desperdicio" Alimentacin'
(http://www.magrama.gob.es/es/alimentacion/temas/
estrategia-mas-alimento-menos-desperdicio) accessed
21 September 2015.
Meyer, B., 2011, Macroeconomic modelling of
sustainable development and the links between the
economy and the environment Final report, ENV.F.1/
ETU/2010/0033, Osnabrck.
Ministre de l'Economie, Ministre du Dveloppement
durable et des Infrastructures and Luxinnovation,
2015, Luxembourg as a knowledge capital and testing
ground for a circular economy (http://www.innovation.
public.lu/fr/brochures-rapports/e/ecomie-circulaire/
index.html) accessed 30 November 2015.
Mont, O., 2007, 'Consumption and ecological
economics: Towards sustainability', in: Pertsova, C.
C. (ed.), Ecological economics research trends, Nova
Science Publishers, New York, pp. 1344.
References
Morgan, J. and Mitchell, P., 2015, Employment

and the circular economy. Job creation in a more
resourceefficient Britain, Green Alliance, London.
SERI, 2013, 'SERI Global Material Flows Database'

(http://www.materialflows.net/home/) accessed
2December 2013.
Nielsen, 2015, 'Global consumers embrace the share

economy' (http://www.nielsen.com/apac/en/pressroom/2014/global-consumers-embrace-the-shareeconomy.html) accessed 9 April 2015.
Smith, D., 2013, 'Power-by-the-hour: the role of

technology in reshaping business strategy at RollsRoyce', Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,
25(8), 9871007.
OECD, 2013, Why new business models matter for

green growth, Green paper 2013/01, Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockstrm, J., Cornell, S. E.,

Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S. R., de
Vries, W., de Wit, C. A., Folke, C., Gerten, D., Heinke, J.,
Mace, G. M., Persson, L. M., Ramanathan, V., Reyers,
B. and Srlin, S., 2015, 'Planetary boundaries: Guiding
human development on a changing planet', Science,
347(6223), 1259855.
OECD, 2014, 'All statistics OECD iLibrary' (http://www.

oecd-ilibrary.org/statistics) accessed 17 July 2013.
lundh, G. and Ritzn, S., 2001, 'Functional sales
as a further approach to environmental product
development - a case study', in: Proceedings of the
Second International Symposium on Environmentally
Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, Tokyo.
OVAM, (forthcoming), Monitoring material losses
from the material cycle, Openbare Vlaamse
Afvalstoffenmaatschappij, Mechelen.
OVAM, 2014, De kringloopcentra in het Vlaamse
Gewest Opvolgingsverslag 2012, Openbare Vlaamse
Afvalstoffenmaatschappij, Mechelen.
Rechberger, H. and Markova, S., 2011, Entwicklung
eines Konzeptes zur Frderung der Kreilaufwirtschaft
im Bauwesen: Materieller Gebudepass und Design for
Recycling fr das Bauwesen, Technische Universitt Wien,
Vienna.
Reisinger, H., Buschmann, H., Walter, B., Lixia, R.,
Daxbeck, H., 2014, Gebudepass Erarbeitung
von Grundlagen fr die Standardisierung von
Gebudepssen als Gebudematerialinformationssystem,
Umweltbundesamt and Resourcen Management
Agentur, Vienna.
Thuisafgehaald, 2015, 'Over ons' (http://www.

thuisafgehaald.nl/over-ons/item42196) accessed 23 July
2015.
Tukker, A. and Tischner, U., 2006, 'Product-services as
a research field: past, present and future. Reflections
from a decade of research', Journal of Cleaner
Production, 14(17), 15521556.
UN, 2015, Transforming our world: the 2013 agenda for
sustainable development, A/RES/70/1, United Nations.
UN DESA, 2015, World Population Prospects: The 2015
Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables, Working Paper
No ESA/P/WP.241, United Nations, Department of
Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, New
York.
UNEP and TU, 2009, Design for sustainability A step-bystep approach, United Nations Environment Programme
and Delft University of Technology, Paris and Delft.
Xerox, 2015, 'Xerox 2011 report on global citizenship
Company profile' (http://www.xerox.com/corporatecitizenship/2011/company-profile.html) accessed
1December 2015.
van Renswoude, K., ten Wolde, A. and Joustra, J. D.,

2015, Circular Business Models Part 1: An introduction
to IMSA's circular business model scan, IMSA, Amsterdam.
37

2015 37 pp. 21 x 29.7 cm
ISBN 978-92-9213-719-9
doi:10.2800/51444
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS

Free publications:
one copy:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
more than one copy or posters/maps:
from the European Unions representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm);
from the delegations in non-EU countries (http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);
by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm) or calling
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*).
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).
Priced publications:

via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).
TH-AL-16-002-EN-N
doi:10.2800/51444

Kongens Nytorv 6
1050 Copenhagen K
Denmark
Tel.: +45 33 36 71 00
Web: eea.europa.eu
Enquiries: eea.europa.eu/enquiries

Circular Economy in Europe

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Circular Economy in Europe

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Circular Economy in Europe

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EEA Report

Circular economy in Europe

Circular economy in Europe

Cover design: EEA

European Environment Agency

Authors and acknowledgements............................................................................................... 4

Circular economy in Europe

Authors and acknowledgements

Authors and acknowledgements

Almut Reichel, Mieke De Schoenmakere (both EEA) and

Support from the European Topic Centre on Waste

Support to framing and analysis

Bart Ullstein, Peter Saunders and Helen de Mattos

Feedback from the European Environment

EEA production support

Feedback from the European Commission (DG ENV,

Antti Kaartinen, Brendan Killeen, Carsten Iversen,

Circular economy in Europe

Support from EEA colleagues including Ana Jakil,

The European Environment Agency (EEA)'s publication

with the transitions perspective in the new strategy on

Hans Bruyninckx, Executive Director

Circular economy in Europe

Summary: a circular economy essential for Europe

Summary: a circular economy

Europe is bound to the rest of the world through

Circular economy in Europe

the utility of products, components and materials and

Summary: a circular economy essential for Europe

vehicles is a good example. Science, businesses

Circular economy in Europe

The circular economy and its benefits

1 The circular economy and its benefits

1.1 The need for action

These trends are likely to continue in the coming

Circular economy in Europe

The circular economy and its benefits

growing global competition for natural resources

minimises the need for new inputs of materials and

At the same time, rapid increases in extraction and

Eco-design, repair, reuse, refurbishment,

Creating a circular economy in Europe can help

1.2 What is a circular economy?

Several concepts and visualisations of a circular

Circular economy in Europe

The circular economy and its benefits

A simplified model of the circular economy for materials and energy

EXTRACTION AND IMPORT OF NATURAL

EEA based on Eurostat, 2015b, 2015c.

Circular economy in Europe

The circular economy and its benefits

resource input. These approaches retain the value of

differ for different types of system, for example for

Key characteristics and enabling factors of a circular economy

Less input and use of natural resources

Circular economy in Europe

The circular economy and its benefits

Central to achieving the necessary systemic changes,

1.3 What are the benefits?

benefits of a more extensive transition to a circular