Circular Economy Awards Debate Q3: What policy changes could help?

Peter Lacy

Accenture Global Sustainability Services Lead; Chief Responsibility Officer, Global Mgmt Committee Member, plus Non-Exec at AeroFarms & WEF YGL…

Published Jan 14, 2015

+ Follow

Governments globally are not doing as much as they could to stimulate the Circular Economy—with a few notable exceptions-what policy, regulatory and legislative changes do you believe could help your Circular Economy business the most? What level does the focus need to be e.g. city, national, regional etc. What do businesses need from governments? What do governments need from business?

Rod Clare

The Sustainability Advantage (SA) program, helps shape circular thinking with the 5 E’s of demand management e.g. Economics, Engineering, Encouragement, Education (Enforcement). It is important to note that SA is not the regulator but rather an enabler or facilitator to help build the business case with internal and external public-private sector stakeholders often using life cycle thinking. The NSW government is committed to making it easier to do circular business in NSW. For example, it is currently incentivising circularity with its Waste Less Recycle More funding grants - over $460 million to increase recycling, infrastructure and end markets. The NSW government supports regulatory approaches to product stewardship and producer responsibility e.g. tyres, electronics and packaging. It also encourages and supports voluntary industry product stewardship initiatives. NSW has set aggressive recycling targets for domestic, commercial and industrial wastes underpinned by Australia’s highest landfill waste levies.The increased availability of recyclables in NSW is reducing risk of materials scarcity and volatile pricing for local manufacturers. Businesses have struggled in the past with regulatory definitions of waste, in particular the question of when does waste become a resource. The NSW regulatory framework provides a clear pathway for potential reuse of waste in thermal and land applications through its Resource Recovery Exemption process. NSW government is a large consumer of products and services and actively encourages green procurement. For example, it recently intoduced revised specifications, standards and industry codes of practice to allow use of some mining and manufacturing waste in road construction. In summary, if the Circular Economy is to be truly sustainable, we must increase the recovery and utilisation of wasted resources into value added materials and products with maximum consumer appeal. It must be led by industry and supported by government at all levels and jurisdictions. Sustainability Advantage is a finalist in the Cities and Regions category of the Circulars.

Parag G.

Two quick thoughts on this (especially as Waste Capital Partners works closely with cities and states). We are most concerned with policies concerning our end product - organic compost. 1. We are actively working with the state governments in India to shift their waste management tender systems from a "collect and dump" model to the model we innovated which has cities provide the facilities and the waste management company cover OpEx by environmentally processing garbage and selling the by-products (recyclables and compost). The first state to adopt this model is Telangana (pop. ~37 M) with Andhra Pradesh (pop. ~50M) cities potentially following suite. 2. There must be a change in India compost policy. Currently chemical fertilizer is subsidized leading to overuse and soil fatigue. Incentivizing the use of organic compost can rebalance the use of soil conditioner and stop the decrease in crop yields (and even improve them well beyond what they were originally).

Peter Lacy

Next question coming up!

Peter Lacy

On the 'how', I think we've heard some really practical measures below in specific areas. That's what we need. Clearly policy makers and governments have different tools they can use on this. In the book that Jakob Rutqvist and I have been working on 'Waste to Wealth' we dedicate a chapter to some of those and I look forward to sharing that. Jakob Rutqvist you may want to share the 5-6 main policy tools we've looked at as a contribution to this Circulars question

Peter Lacy

However, there is no doubt that we will need more policy and impact analysis on Circular Economy models in terms of the broader socio-economic landscape e.g. we do need to get a better grip on whether certain areas are net job creators and even if not, do they still produce better net outcomes for society. We have all seen the fall out over certain sharing economy models in terms of tax, safety etc. That's not going to go away so it's a debate that needs to be evidence-based and actively engaged with

Peter Lacy

It strikes me that there is a public policy discussion on 'whether' and then a practical discussion on 'what and how'. The 'whether' has recieved a lot of attention recently as pointed out with the EU package etc. The 'no camp' seems to be very dogmatic and ideological that this will make business uncompetitive. All the evidence points the other way I've seen

Peter Lacy

I have to say that's one of the more insightful threads I've seen on the policy debate and landscape. Particularly because there were some very practical measures in there. Thanks Dorte Vigsø Scott O'Connell Andy Hall Anette Timmer-Larsen Marcel Peters John Gardner Iris van Wanrooij Gregory Jaros Mariano Garces Gregorio Christian Lanng Freya Burton Di / Diane Booth Daniel Bede O'Connor Chris Hoskin

Dorte Vigsø

From own experience and listening to what businesses say that they need from government, these are some of the policy changes that springs to mind. As several of the comments have already pointed to, the importance of product transparency and better data as the basis for policy making. Target setting, for instance, seems difficult for now since the data for circularity is poor. Effective organisation of waste collection and sorting to secure a staple supply of reusable materials and resource to make them a reliable and affordable alternative to virgin resources. Regulatory framework conditions should support material loops. Eg. for companies that wish to take back their products or resuse their own waste. There may need to be public control to prevent scam-recovery? Finally, clear political vision statements combined with economic incentives such as taxes, or tax exceptions – , and innovative public spending creating a pull.

1 Like

Scott O'Connell

When we look at effective policies and the successful implementations that have yielded tangible benefits, it has been areas where the public, private and social sectors have all played a significant role in research, advocacy, implementation and oversight. For instance, Dell and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) are partnering to improve the global e-waste market through the creation in developing countries of operational and economically viable collection, dismantling and recycling networks that are safe and environmentally sound and that further power the circular economy for IT. Our work with UNIDO leverages market forces, multinational partnerships and the work of local, community-based organizations to build a sustainable solution model for e-waste management for developing countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. (http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/vn/press-releases/2014-09-22-dell-unido-e-waste-management) In addition, the use of green procurement policies and standards globally help create market-based incentives for business and government to work together to create more sustainable outcomes. As these procurement policies become more holistic to encompassing the entire life cycle of a product and/or service (from materials extraction, manufacturing, use and reuse/recycling), we should also be able to accelerate the growth of the circular economy.

2 Likes

Marcel Peters

The circular economy has to be driven by entrepreneurs, not by the government. Ofcourse if policy makers and politicians act, it will make a difference and potentially a big one. What happened in the past is no guarantee for the future, but we can be honoust to outselves and expect more from the entrepreneur than the government. The best way for the government to help entrepreneurs is to stop hastling them. The linear economy also wasn't born through goverment intervention. Having said this, let's not forget to ask for tax money flowing to the circular economy and not the other way around. Also high level interventions in capital markets could be effective. But if not... The entrepreneur will push through... Bundles Crowdfunds its capital expenditures... No gov needed for that part.

1 Like

See more comments

To view or add a comment, sign in To view or add a comment, sign in

LinkedIn respects your privacy

Circular Economy Awards Debate Q3: What policy changes could help?

Peter Lacy

Accenture Global Sustainability Services Lead; Chief Responsibility Officer, Global Mgmt Committee Member, plus Non-Exec at AeroFarms & WEF YGL…

More articles by this author

Explore topics

The long view: 15 years of the UNGC Accenture CEO sustainability study

Feb 10, 2023

1,200+ CEOs asked for 10 things from policymakers at COP26 – did they get them?

Nov 19, 2021

Accenture @ COP26 - our sessions and summaries

Nov 11, 2021

Recapping Accenture's week one at COP26

Nov 6, 2021

1,200 CEOs ask for 10 things from policymakers at COP to trigger a net-zero and sustainability revolution

Nov 1, 2021

COP26 – Five underestimated opportunities for business to accelerate progress toward a sustainable future

Oct 14, 2021

1,200+ New Ideas for a More Sustainable Future

Jun 4, 2021

Circular Awards Q5 (Final): Which disruptive tech has most potential?

Jan 16, 2015

Circular Econ Awards Q4: Consumerism, Obsolescence & Circular Economy?

Jan 15, 2015

Circular Economy Awards Debate (Q2) - Hard Numbers & the Business Case

Jan 13, 2015

Explore topics