32 | Circular economy is gaining political momentum. Everyone seems to support the implementation of a circular economy. From conservatives to environmental politicians; big business to nongovernmental organisations; even the public participate by sorting, sharing and buying second-hand products. The potential benefits are convincing for both the environment and the economy. Through long-lasting design, maintenance, repair, reuse, remanufacturing, refurbishing, and recycling, global greenhouse gas emissions could be cut by 45%. Hence, according to the United Nations: “Circular Economy [is] Crucial for Paris Climate Goals”. Circular economy is also featured as holding an enormous market potential, comparable with the establishment of the European single market. For individual companies, a circular economy can minimise risks, reduce costs and increase revenue. Consequently, circular economy has emerged as a key principle for industrial development and environmental policy in many parts of the world, including China, Europe, the UK, Africa, and the USA. However, despite the strong advocacy for circularity, the approach has attracted a great deal of criticism from researchers and practitioners. To ensure that the circular economy does not exacerbate the already widespread inequality and environmental impact of the consumer society, it is timely to reflect on its various dimensions, criticisms, and potentially dark consequences. Putting all the criticisms into one place assists further dialogue and research so pathways to circularity become more concrete, inclusive and recognise the limits of our planet. FIVE RECURRING CRITICISMS These criticisms are scattered across a multitude of fields. 1. Complexities of defining circularity Advocates of the circular economy sometimes overlook the complexities of defining circularity. With more than 200 definitions, ranging from reducing resource usage, reusing products, repair, to refurbishment, shifting away from product ownership to services and designing applications for the sharing economy make it difficult to measure the impact. The concept is sometimes regarded as refurbished itself, or as an umbrella term bringing multiple resource management strategies together. Without clear goals, the circular economy is in danger of becoming a vague narrative. 2. Neglecting previous research Some circular economy advocates tend to ignore the dispersion and wearing out of materials, as well as the need for energy to keep systems going. There appears a lack of recognition of the limits to material properties and current manufacturing and reprocessing technologies. Not all materials can be reused or reprocessed, some will disperse into the environment, others can be contaminated, or wear down. The complexity of waste management and recapturing discarded resources underestimates the practical difficulties, for example recapturing the materials back in the production processes, the volatility of recycling markets, the appearance of new waste streams, where waste is processed in formal or informal economies, and restrictions on circulating toxic substances. Contrary to what advocates indicate, there is the need for further understanding of consumption practices to purchase. The expectation on consumers requires them to accept the changes created by designers, engineers, business and policy-makers. Furthermore, there appears a lack of appreciation of the volume of in-wasted materials stocked in existing infrastructures, organisations, and homes.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTI5NzM=