National governments hold a privileged position: the ability to lead the discussion on societal goals and facilitate collaboration between different actors within society, spurring welfare improvements for their citizens. In doing so, governments have at hand a set of instruments that span from setting national strategies and convening stakeholders, to informing citizens about national priorities, incentivising economic actors through specific instruments or issuing laws and regulations.
National governments play a key role in the transition to a circular economy because of their leadership position: they set the goals and enforce the rules of the game through fiscal and economic measures and regulations.
By building on previous research and analysing circular policies and policy tools in use around the world, we present a framework of policy instruments that can be used to support the transition to a circular economy at the national level.
Check out our Urban Policy Instruments Framework for a set of policies applicable at subnational level.
This is a three tiered framework of policy instruments. Tier one indicates the key function that policy can have, Tier two presents key policy directions and Tier three presents the specific policy instruments that can be used by national policymakers to drive this change.
The key policy functions—Tier one—are:
Please refer to the PDF version of this content for the full framework, as well as illustrative examples.
This research and framework is aimed at professionals in the field of national policy, who are looking to structure and work with practical examples of how policy instruments are being applied across territories to advance the circular economy and other sustainability-related paradigms, such as green growth and eco-innovation.
The tiered approach, global geographical coverage of the examples included and the number of case studies make this work suited for use by researchers, consultants and policy analysts, whose work spans from academic research to advisory roles in public institutions, think tanks and the like.
Researchers can use the framework to structure analysis or to guide learning and research, and highlight emerging patterns, differences or relationships among circular economy policies.
Consultants may use the framework to establish a baseline for a nation, or to identify opportunities for policies that can support targets and goals. The framework is useful to structure analysis, and to extract a representative sample of cases for a given theme or region.
Finally, policy analysts can also benefit from the framework as a means to structure analysis, put together a policy mix and navigate repositories of examples.
This framework helps policymakers from national governments distinguish between the diversity of available tools and instruments applied worldwide, which could be useful to accelerate the transition towards a circular economy within certain contexts. It also highlights a variety of priority areas, such as energy, infrastructure, agriculture, or waste management, among others. Also, in the case where the debate on circular economy is yet to start or in its initial stages, this framework could act as a guide for designing a robust set of policies for the country in question.
Even if there is no explicit national circular economy strategy in place, there are likely several policies and strategies that already support the circular economy to some degree, and it is prudent not to 'throw the baby out with the bath water'. This assessment process could also help governments identify what institutional setting is necessary to move towards the achievement of circular economy goals.
Depending on legal structures, certain policies can be applied at different levels, from national to subnational. For example, the management of assets and land can take place at a national or subnational level, depending on the legislative mandate, as can the establishment of circular infrastructure or skills development, which can take place at the national level and then be applied to subnational.
Firstly, evaluate the legislative mandate of your federal agency or the agency you are working with to shortlist policies that are relevant and able to be applied. Moreover, for the effective implementation of the policies nationwide, it is crucial to have clear and institutionalised communication between different levels of government.
For example, the Australian Government is working in coordination with state governments, funding waste management and recycling infrastructure projects through the Recycling Modernisation Fund (RMF). Through National Partnership Agreements, the states and territories will receive funding. The allocation of funding to specific projects is the responsibility of state and territory governments, which will assess their jurisdiction’s major gaps in local reprocessing capacity (case study).
As the circular economy is cross-cutting, the approach in selecting a policy mix should itself be cross-cutting—and involve multiple departments and federal agencies and illicit a participative approach with industry and citizens. Depending on the list of priorities the government set for its transition to circularity, the collaboration would imply teaming up with specific sectors and Ministries, or having stakeholders come together that represent different actors within the economy.
For example, in 2016 the national government in the Netherlands, issued the Circular Economy in the Netherlands by 2050: a country-wide programme to achieve full circularity by 2050. This national initiative is led by the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, in coordination with the Ministries of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy, Foreign Affairs, Interior and Kingdom Relations, as well as the private sector, civil society organisations and research institutes. The broad collaboration for this programme is crucial as it has set five priority areas: the construction sector, biomass and food, consumer goods, plastics, and the manufacturing industry (Case study).
In some cases, the installation of specific institutions for the management of circular economy activities and monitoring of progress could be a good starting point. For example, in 2018 Chile opened a Circular Economy Office as part of the Ministry of Environment. This new office is tasked with the monitoring of regulatory activities regarding waste management, extended producer responsibility and the promotion of recycling (Case study).
In order to support a circular intervention, a nation will likely design and employ a mix of policies, depending on context and which policies are already in place. The prioritisation of policies can and will differ across these contexts. Further to this, different policy instruments will vary for nations based on how far along they are in their circular transition and legislative mandates.
For example, Italy wanted to introduce a technological standard for communicating the recycled content of products. To increase the visibility of such an initiative, Italian authorities partnered with an NGO formed by the National Association of Recyclers to develop a voluntary certification (label) based on the technological standard. To increase its adoption, the government introduced a regulation to integrate the certification as a requirement in its Green Public Procurement (GPP) process, and provided certified companies with the possibility of applying for subsidies and tax breaks (Case study).
The framework has been developed based on a combination of academic literature and case studies. In its first iteration, the Toolkit for Policy Makers from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) served as the basis. Using this foundation, the Circle Economy team collected over 400 case studies of governments across the globe supporting the circular economy and attributed these to the policy instruments put forward in the toolkit.
Check out 300+ examples of policies at national and subnational levels on Circle Economy’s Knowledge Hub.
Circular economy goals and interventions often spin off of national waste management policies that came about as early as the 1950s and 1960s, and have been extended and refined to include more circular concepts around design, industrial symbiosis and regeneration. The circular economy can be linked to the broader sustainability and environmental management movement beyond waste management. For instance, environmental education covers ‘nature’ at all levels of education, and has evolved in line with developments in the field. This movement can be naturally extended to include circular economy in schools and workplace training. Further research on how best to tie circular economy policies into existing environmental, sustainability and waste management profiles, will improve the application of this framework in the development of a suitable policy or mix of policies.
This framework includes policies as well as broader policy tools, so as to provide a larger set of ‘actions’ a national government can take to support a circular economy. This framework can be extended and improved by qualifying this more robustly, with differences across regions when required. Similarly, the framework can be extended to support profiling legislative mandates for different nations and regions.
Lastly, a final extension to the research will be to map the nation’s role in aligning with international standards and employing international cooperation, and how and where this should feature in the development of a circular economy national strategy.
We are striving to continually update our frameworks to ensure they remain relevant and are best suited to facilitate action. To this end, we welcome suggestions and comments on this framework from our Knowledge Community.
Please see this public google sheet for a list of the documents used in the analysis.
Bouwm, I.M., Gerritsen, A.L., Kamphorst, D.A., & Kistenkas, F.H. (2015). Policy instruments and modes of governance in environmental policies of the European Union: Past, present and future (WOt-technical report 60, pp. 1-46, Rep.). The Netherlands: Wageningen University.
European Commission & International Institute for Labour Studies. (2011). Policy options and instruments for a green economy (Ser. 12, Joint Discussion Paper).
Environmental Justice Organisations, Liabilities and Trade. (2012). Policy Instruments for sustainability. Retrieved from EJOLT Website
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2015). Delivering the circular economy: a toolkit for policymakers (pp. 1-177, Rep.). Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved from EMF Website
Innovation Policy Platform. (n.d.) Universities and public research institutions. The Innovation Policy Platform, OECD & World Bank. Retrieved from https://www.innovationpolicyplatform.org/content/universities-and-public-research-institutes
Jordan, A,, Wurzel, R.K.W., & Zito, A. (2005). The rise of ‘new’ policy instruments in comparative perspective: Has governance eclipsed government? Political Studies,53, 477-496. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2005.00540.x
Martínez, L., Aravena, A.H., Castello, N.F., & Urrutia, R.R. (2019). Economía circular y políticas públicas: Estado del arte y desafíos para la construcción de un marco político de promoción de economía circular en América Latina (pp. 1-76, Rep.). Lima: Centro de Innovación y Economía Circular. Retrieved from Konrad Adenauer Website Matisoff, D. C., Noonan, D. S., & Flowers, M. E. (2016). Policy monitor—green buildings: Economics and policies. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 10(2), 329-346. doi:10.1093/reep/rew009
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2010). Regulatory policy and the road to sustainable growth (pp. 1-107, Rep.). Paris: OECD. Retrieved from OECD Website
OECD. (2011). Environmental taxation: A guide for policy makers. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from OECD Website
OECD. (2013). A toolkit of policy options to support inclusive green growth. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from OECD Website
OECD. (2016). OECD policy instrument for the environment: Database documentation. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from OECD Website
Sánchez, Á.P. & Deza, X.V. (2015). Environmental policy and eco-innovation: An overview of recent studies. Innovar, 25(58), 65-80. doi:10.15446/innovar.v25n58.52426
Silva, E. & Acheampong, R. (2015). Developing an inventory and typology of land-use planning systems and policy instruments in OECD Countries (pp. 1-52, Working paper No. 94). Paris: OECD. Retrieved from OECD Website
Tojo, N., Neubauer, A., & Bräuer, I. (2006). Waste management policies and policy instruments in Europe (pp. 1-108, Rep.). Lund: International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economies. Retrieved from Ecologic Website
United Nations Environment Programme. (n.d.) Switch Africa green. Retrieved from UNEP Website
White, R. & Heckenberg, D. (2012). Legislation, regulatory models and approaches to compliance and enforcement (pp. 1-27, Briefing paper No. 6). Tasmania: University of Tasmania. Retrieved from University of Tasmania Website
Luis Sosa - Research Analyst Circular Jobs Initiative
Alex Colloricchio - Sustainability Data Analyst
Marijana Novak - Data Strategist
Nicolas Raspail - Design Lead
Esther Goodwin Brown - Lead Circular Jobs Initiative
Natalia Papu - Researcher and Analyst – Circle Textiles Programme
Max Russell - Project Manager Cities
Matthew Fraser - Lead Circularity Gap Report Initiative
Laxmi Haigh - In House Journalist
Ana Birliga Sutherland - Editor & Research Intern
We, as individuals, buy products to fulfil our needs, from houses to food to electronics and other consumables. In powering our lifestyles with products, we use resources and produce emissions, thereby interacting indirectly with the environment and forming our environmental footprints. [1]
In this way, products are a tangible and accessible starting point to initiate circular change. Through products, we can consider the system in which those products operate, how they relate to academia, the public sector and the rest of the private sector, and how those actors and systems have to change to accommodate circular products. [2]
Consider the design and production of a fully recyclable jacket, an impressive feat that can be owned and operationalised by the jacket company. In a circular economy, that jacket would be utilised at its maximum capacity and then cycled into another product. Considering that the company already produced the jacket, what are the role of the citizen, the retailer, and the municipality in ensuring the jacket and its constituents are actually cycled?
The DISRUPT framework is a comprehensive list of circular strategies for products. It includes 80 tangible strategies that provide guidance and inspiration for you to render your product circular. These are wide-ranging: design guidance, decisions concerning inputs, use, and end-of-life, business models and collaboration in the supply chain and in the use of digital technologies to support circularity.
The strategies are clustered to each of the relevant elements in the Key Elements Framework for ease of understanding and search, and therefore by construction, are grouped into core and enabling strategies as defined and used in the Elements.
For reference, core circular strategies concern activities that directly influence material flows: for instance, by selecting alternative inputs, or cycling materials back into the system. Core strategies should be directly linked to performance indicators that reflect the physical volumes of materials, water or emissions.
When applied to products, core strategies would, for example, drive the selection of alternative biobased inputs to replace rarer or more emissions-intensive, yet traditional, materials, such as in the construction sector or for fuels. [3] A further example would be valorising product waste streams to ensure that the material, water and energy flows used to create and consume and dispose of the product are circular such as with organic streams, or plastics. [4], [5]
On the other hand, enabling strategies remove the barriers necessary for core circular strategies to prevail. These strategies encourage the conditions for circularity, but do not bring about a direct alteration to the material flows.
In the context of products, an enabling strategy would establish rental of essentially second hand products which would, potentially but not necessarily extend their life and usage intensity as in some cases such markets lead to an increase in consumption [6]. Another example would be conducting big data analytics on product or material flows which might enable but not necessarily bring about decisions that reduce material usage strategically. This could be for financial, or political, or other practical reasons. [7]
The DISRUPT Framework is for all product stakeholders who are looking to understand what strategies are possible to render products circular. This includes product developers, merchandising specialists, innovation managers, sourcing specialists, designers, product (line) managers and sustainability managers.
The strategies across the DISRUPT Framework can vary in prominence according to each product stakeholder and their own departmental priorities. Through this variance, the Framework can serve as a means to connect stakeholders and departments around circular strategies.
The DISRUPT Framework, thanks to its comprehensiveness, is also useful for researchers to structure information. This could aid, for example, comparative analysis across typologies of organisations.
The DISRUPT Framework is applied at the product level within an organisation. It, therefore, must be reapplied for every product line—although some strategies may have similar considerations in the context of the organisation. For example, procurement policies or available digital infrastructure may be consistent across product lines, but product design specifications or customer interactions will be unique and could even be considered independently.
The framework can also be used to conceptualise an idea in workshops which bring stakeholders together to brainstorm and select strategies that are relevant to investigate in the context of their product and organisation. Within Circle Economy, we use it most prominently in our On Course workshops for Fashion Brands.
The strategies should not be considered a checklist. This means that not every strategy is required to be implemented for a product to be circular. Strategies should be selected to support circularity goals in the context of the product and the organisation. The strategies can be combined in any number of ways to form a roadmap for product strategy development, and the strategies can be used as a means to rally and organise internal and external stakeholders.
We also use the DISRUPT framework across many of Circle Economy’s offerings.In the Circle Assessment Tool, it serves as the basis for self -assessment of circularity, as well as in the Circle Fashion Tool which has a specific application to fashion brands. The framework is in use in the Knowledge Hub—a digital repository of case studies about the circular economy—as a means to categorise case studies concerning circular products.
Lastly, the framework will be implemented in an upcoming Solution Provider Hub as a means to categorise organisations who support the implementation of circular product strategies across different domains.
The DISRUPT Framework was developed alongside the expansion of the Key Elements. Through extensive secondary research and literature review, we gathered case studies, articles and examples—as well as from our own projects and reports—and categorised these to form the strategies, which we then clustered to form the elements.
The elements were then used as a starting point to rederive the detailed strategies. Drawing from the wealth of knowledge across the organisation, gaps were filled via extensive consultations with circular economy experts and the portfolios at Circle Economy. These include expert insights from Textiles, Cities, Built Environment and the Circularity Gap Report, as well as the 2,000+ case studies we uncovered whilst building the Knowledge Hub.
The DISRUPT Framework strives to be a comprehensive set of product strategies, and consequently, it is in continuous development. As it continues to be applied in different contexts, we upgrade and edit strategies with practitioners to ensure a complete and useful set of strategies.
The DISRUPT Framework can currently be applied predominantly to product-based organisations and needs to be revised to better accommodate service organisations. Furthermore, the DISRUPT Framework could be linked to interventions at different system levels, such as how the organisation has to change to accommodate a certain product strategy or examples of policies concerning certain product strategies in different regions or contexts. This would be useful in facilitating a multidimensional understanding of the implications of a certain product.
To support operationalising circular strategies and building the surrounding ‘business case’: the DISRUPT Framework could be extended to house related performance indicators of strategies that can be applied at the organisational level, or more broadly in a city, a region or a nation. The uptake of a core strategy should directly influence metrics concerning material use of the product. In measuring the success of enabling strategies, two tiered performance indicators are required. First to measure the success of the strategy itself, and then to measure its intended effect on physical volumes of materials, water or emissions—and the related core strategy.
And following this, extended again to include impact indicators for each strategy as well, for instance how a strategy contributes towards emissions reduction or even employment opportunities.
[1] Adopting a Circular Business Model: Opportunities and Challenges for the Supply Chain Management
[2] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fiona_Charnley/publication/303749092_The_circular_economy_-_a_reappraisal_of_the_'stuff'_we_love/links/57503c2508ae4eed2740bd8b.pdf
[3] https://www.energyagency.at/fileadmin/dam/pdf/projekte/klimapolitik/Carbon_accounting_of_material_substitution_with_biomass__Case_studies_for_Austira_investigated_with_IPCC_default_and_alternative_approaches.pdf
[4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2873020/
[5] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652618336722
[6] http://web.mit.edu/2.813/www/readings/Thomas2003.pdf
[7] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740624X17304951
.svg)
