Measuring circular economy transition potential for industrial wastes

Abstract

The circular economy (CE) represents a paradigm shift in global production system, promoting a transition away from the linear model towards maximizing resource intensity and value addition. For industrial waste management, the transition has led to a shift from quantitative-based concept of “expansion of recycling industry” to the pursue of optimum resource recovery quality through “waste as resource”. Studies have found that relying on the traditional indicator of “recycling rate” to evaluate WM performance can be “inaccurate, misleading and contributes to wrong policy decision”. This limitation arises from the inadequacy of the quantity-based matric to assess the intricate interdisciplinary nature of CE transition. Despite substantial efforts to develop alternative assessment indices, there is currently no commonly recognized assessment index to replace “recycling rate” for evaluating industrial waste management performance, which is partly due to the lack of comprehensive WM statistics required for effective performance evaluation. To address this issue, this paper proposes the “circularity performance index (CPI), as a swift and pragmatic method for evaluating WM performance. The CPI overcomes the limitations of the recycling rate by measuring the relative efficiencies of resource recovery, taking into account environmental, social, and economic perspectives. By utilizing readily available general industrial waste statistics, the CPI provides an integrated assessment that incorporates both quantity and quality considerations. Furthermore, the CPI is applicable at various levels, from micro to macro, enabling comparisons across different sectors and regions. To demonstrate the practicality of CPI, a case study involving 27 manufacturing sectors is conducted to exemplify its applicability at national and sectoral levels. The findings reveals a weak correlation between the quantity and quality of resource recovery, providing empirical support for the limitation of “recycling rate” and highlighting the advantages of CPI in evaluating resource recovery efficiency. The outcome underscores the significance of measuring resource recovery efficiency in assessing CE transition and draws attention to external factors that influence waste recovery decision, such as availability of recycling infrastructure and the cost of recycling.