Circular economy as assistance for sustainable development in OECD countries
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2021.001Keywords:
circular economy, sustainability, sustainable development goals, OECD countriesAbstract
Research background: Circular economy is of great importance, as it plays a vital role in ensuring the reuse of waste created and, therefore, reduces the waste of limited resources, which is the primary goal of the general economic concept. In line with the circular economy, sustainable development gains great attention, as the United Nations announced the sustainable development goals that should be reached by 2030. Hence, the current paper aims at examining whether the circular economy could be treated as an effective assistance tool for sustainable development of OECD countries.
Purpose of the article: The paper aims to investigate whether the circular economy could serve as an assistance tool for sustainable development and, therefore, seeks to determine if the circular economy could directly impact a country?s sustainable development.
Methods: First, the countries chosen were prioritised using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Evaluation Based on Distance from Average Solution (EDAS) methodologies. AHP method was used for weight assignment to the circular economy indicators that were further used for OECD countries? prioritisation procedure for which multi-criteria decision-making method EDAS was employed. Second, to reveal a link between the circular economy ranking results and sustainable development, a comparative analysis was done. Third, the impact of the country?s circular economy on sustainable development was evaluated using the fixed-effect regression model on four years of panel data from 2016 to 2019 for the sample of 32 OECD countries.
Findings & value-added: The comparative analysis of the circular economy?s prioritisation results and Sustainable Development Goals Index (SDGI) ranking showed 20 out of 32 matches, assuming a link between the circular economy and sustainable development could be made. The fixed-effect regression equation results demonstrate that the unemployment rate, poverty rate, air pollution exposure, and CO2 emission per capita negatively influence sustainable development. In contrast, indicators such as gross domestic expenditure on R&D, renewable energy, number of passenger cars in use, and households with Internet access positively impact SDGI. The hypothesis that the circular economy is seen as an assistance for sustainable development and directly affects a country?s sustainability was approved. The paper contributes to the scientific literature in the field of circular economy and sustainable development interaction and could be seen as an assumption for new research directions, focusing on the linkage between circular economy and sustainable development. Moreover, the obtained results could contribute to a country?s policy-makers by highlighting the essential indicators of a circular economy that should be considered while forming the strategy of a country?s sustainable development.
Downloads
References
Aiking, H., & de Boer, J. (2020). The next protein transition. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 105, 515?522. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.07.008.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.07.008
View in Google Scholar
Ajwani-Ramchandani, R., Figueira, S., Torres de Oliveira, R., Jha, S., Ramchandani, A., & Schuricht, L. (2021). Towards a circular economy for packaging waste by using new technologies: the case of large multinationals in emerging economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281, 125139. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125139.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125139
View in Google Scholar
Avdiushchenko, A., & Zaj, P. (2019). Circular economy indicators as a supporting tool for European regional development policies. Sustainability, 11(11), 3025 doi: 10.3390/su11113025.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113025
View in Google Scholar
Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42?56. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039
View in Google Scholar
Bravo, G. (2014). The Human Sustainable Development Index: new calculations and a first critical analysis. Ecological Indicators, 37(PART A), 145?150. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.10.020.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.10.020
View in Google Scholar
Bressanelli, G., Adrodegari, F., Perona, M., & Saccani, N. (2018). Exploring how usage-focused business models enable circular economy through digital technologies. Sustainability, 10(3), 639. doi: 10.3390/su10030639.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030639
View in Google Scholar
Calicioglu, Ö., & Bogdanski, A. (2021). Linking the bioeconomy to the 2030 sustainable development agenda: can SDG indicators be used to monitor progress towards a sustainable bioeconomy? New Biotechnology, 61, 40?49. doi: 10.1016/j.nbt.2020.10.010.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2020.10.010
View in Google Scholar
Ecologic Institute (2020). Support to the public consultation on a new circular economy action plan. Retrieved form https://www.ecologic.eu/17330.
View in Google Scholar
EEA (2016). Circular economy in Europe. Developing the knowledge base. EEA Report, 2. doi: 10.2800/51444.
View in Google Scholar
Ellen Macarthur Foundation (2013). The circular model ? brief history and school of thought. Retrieved form https://bit.ly/31MgEtd.
View in Google Scholar
Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2015). Delivering the circular economy: a toolkit for policy-makers. (Vol. 1). Retrieved form https://bit.ly/3cOHsiQ.
View in Google Scholar
Emas, R. (2015). The concept of sustainable development: definition and defining principles. Florida International University. Brief for GSDR 2015, 1?3. Retrieved form https://bit.ly/3uoSyRK.
View in Google Scholar
Esty, D. C., Levy, M., Srebotnjak, T., & De Sherbinin, A. (2005). Environmental sustainability index: benchmarking national environmental stewardship. New Haven: Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, 47?60.
View in Google Scholar
European Commission (2014). Towards a circular economy: a zero waste programme for Europe. Retrieved form http://bit.ly/33KsjIA.
View in Google Scholar
European Commission (2020a). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. Publications Office of the EU.
View in Google Scholar
European Commission (2020b). Consumption.
View in Google Scholar
European Commission (2020c). Raw materials.
View in Google Scholar
Eurostat (2001). Environmental pressure indicators for the EU. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-statistical-books/-/KS-36-01-677.
View in Google Scholar
Fan, J., Cheng, R., & Wu, M. (2019). Extended EDAS methods for multi-criteria group decision-making based on IV-CFSWAA and IV-CFSWGA operators with interval-valued complex fuzzy soft information. IEEE Access, 7, 105546?105561. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2932267.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2932267
View in Google Scholar
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. P., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The circular economy ? a new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757?768. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048
View in Google Scholar
Hickel, J. (2020). The sustainable development index: measuring the ecological efficiency of human development in the anthropocene. Ecological Economics, 167, 106331. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.05.011.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.05.011
View in Google Scholar
Jin, H., Qian, X., Chin, T., & Zhang, H. (2020). A global assessment of sustainable development based on modification of the Human Development Index via the Entropy method. Sustainability, 12(8), 3251. doi: 10.3390/su12083251.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083251
View in Google Scholar
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualising the circular economy: an analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221?232. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005
View in Google Scholar
Korhonen, J., Nuur, C., Feldmann, A., & Birkie, S. E. (2018). Circular economy as an essentially contested concept. Journal of Cleaner Production, 175, 544?552. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111
View in Google Scholar
Kraujalien?, L. (2019). Comparative analysis of multicriteria decision-making methods evaluating the efficiency of technology transfer. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 17(1), 72?93. doi: 10.3846/bme. 2019.11014.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/bme.2019.11014
View in Google Scholar
Kumar, B., & Verma, P. (2021). Biomass-based biorefineries: an important architype towards a circular economy. Fuel, 288, 119622. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel. 2020.119622.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119622
View in Google Scholar
Li, X. X., Liu, Y. M., & Song, T. (2014). Calculation of the green development index. Social Sciences in China, 6, 69?95.
View in Google Scholar
Libby, R., & Blashfield, R. K. (1978). Performance of a composite as a function of the number of judges. Organisational Behavior and Human Performance, 21(2), 121?129. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(78)90044-2.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(78)90044-2
View in Google Scholar
Liu, Y., Li, H., An, H., Guan, J., Shi, J., & Han, X. (2021). Are the environmental impacts, resource flows and economic benefits proportional? Analysis of key global trade routes based on the steel life cycle. Ecological Indicators, 122, 107306. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107306.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107306
View in Google Scholar
Marino, A., & Pariso, P. (2020). Comparing European countries? performances in the transition towards the Circular Economy. Science of The Total Environment, 729, 138142. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138142.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138142
View in Google Scholar
Marti, L., & Puertas, R. (2020). Assessment of sustainability using a synthetic index. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 84(January), 106375. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106375.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106375
View in Google Scholar
Millar, N., McLaughlin, E., & Börger, T. (2019). The circular economy: swings and roundabouts? Ecological Economics, 158, 11?19. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon. 2018.12.012.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.12.012
View in Google Scholar
Morseletto, P. (2020). Targets for a circular economy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 153, 104553. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104553.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104553
View in Google Scholar
Murray, A., Skene, K., & Haynes, K. (2017). The circular economy: an interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 369?380. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2
View in Google Scholar
OECD (2019). Waste management and the circular economy in selected OECD countries (OECD Envir). OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264309395-en.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264309395-en
View in Google Scholar
Philp, J., & Winickoff, D. E. (2018). Realising the circular bioeconomy. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, 60. doi: 10.1787/31bb2345-en.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/31bb2345-en
View in Google Scholar
Ranta, V., Aarikka-Stenroos, L., & Väisänen, J.-M. (2021). Digital technologies catalysing business model innovation for circular economy?multiple case study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 164, 105155. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105155.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105155
View in Google Scholar
Rashid, A., Asif, F. M. A., Krajnik, P., & Nicolescu, C. M. (2013). Resource conservative manufacturing: an essential change in business and technology paradigm for sustainable manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 57, 166?177. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.012.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.012
View in Google Scholar
Razminiene, K. (2019). Circular economy in clusters? performance evaluation. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 14(3), 537?559. doi: 10.24136/eq.2019.026.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/eq.2019.026
View in Google Scholar
Roblek, V., Meško, M., Bach, M. P., Thorpe, O., & Šprajc, P. (2020). The interaction between internet, sustainable development, and emergence of society 5.0. Data, 5(3), 80. doi: 10.3390/data5030080.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/data5030080
View in Google Scholar
Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234?281. doi: 10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5
View in Google Scholar
Saaty, T. L. (1985). Decision making for leaders. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-15, 3, 450?452. doi: 10.1109/TSMC.1985.631 3384.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1985.6313384
View in Google Scholar
Saidani, M., Yannou, B., Leroy, Y., Cluzel, F., & Kendall, A. (2019). A taxonomy of circular economy indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 542?559. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.014.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.014
View in Google Scholar
Shahbazi, S., & Jönbrink, A. K. (2020). Design guidelines to develop circular products: action research on Nordic industry. Sustainability, 12(9), 3679. doi: 10.3390/su12093679.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093679
View in Google Scholar
Shyamprasad, V., & Kousalya, P. (2020). Role of consistency and random index in analytic hierarchy process?a new measure. In D. Dutta & B. Mahanty (Eds). Numerical optimization in engineering and sciences. Advances in intelligent systems and computing, Vol 979. Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-3215-3_22.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3215-3_22
View in Google Scholar
Souter, D. (2012). ICTs, the Internet and sustainability: a discussion paper. Retrieved from www.iisd.org.
View in Google Scholar
Tadić, S., Krstić, M., & Brnjac, N. (2019). Selection of efficient types of inland intermodal terminals. Journal of Transport Geography, 78, 170?180. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.06.004.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.06.004
View in Google Scholar
Tjahjono, B., & Ripanti, E. F. (2019). Circular economy ? what does it mean for remanufacturing operations? EFFEKTIVITET, 1, 5?7.
View in Google Scholar
UNDP (1990). Human development report 1990. Concept and measurement of human development. In United Nations development programme. New York: United Nations.
View in Google Scholar
United Nations (2007). Indicators of sustainable development?: guidelines and methodologies. New York: United Nations.
View in Google Scholar
United Nations (2015). Sustainable development goals. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org.
View in Google Scholar
United Nations (2020a). Take action for the sustainable development goals. New York: United Nations.
View in Google Scholar
United Nations (2020b). The sustainable development goals report. New York: United Nations.
View in Google Scholar
Veleva, V., Bodkin, G., & Todorova, S. (2017). The need for better measurement and employee engagement to advance a circular economy: lessons from Biogen?s ?zero waste? journey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 154, 517?529. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.177.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.177
View in Google Scholar
Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. (1996). Footprints and sustainability. In Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the earth. New Society Publishers.
View in Google Scholar
Weitz, N., Persson, ?., Nilsson, M., & Tenggren, S. (2015). Sustainable development goals for Sweden: insights on setting a national agenda. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2Olpon4.
View in Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Oeconomia Copernicana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
