Advertisement

The Circular Economy

  • Robert C. Brears
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Natural Resource Management book series (PSNRM)

Abstract

Our current linear economic model follows a ‘take-make-consume-dispose’ pattern where natural resources are harvested for the manufacturing of products, which are then disposed of after consumption. This model has led to constraints on the availability of natural resources as well as the generation of waste and environmental degradation. In contrast, the circular economy aims to keep resources in use for as long as possible, extract value from them while in use, and recover and regenerate products and materials at the end of each service life.

References

  1. BAO, C., Y. Kishita, and Y. Umeda. 2017. Demand estimation of consumer durables in Southeast Asia in 2030: A business-as-usual scenario. Procedia CIRP 61: 635–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbier, E.B. 2003. The role of natural resources in economic development. Australian Economic Papers 42: 253–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bekkers, E., M. Brockmeier, J. Francois, and F. Yang. 2017. Local food prices and international price transmission. World Development 96: 216–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bounoua, L., P. Zhang, J. Nigro, A. Lachir, and K. Thome. 2017. Regional impacts of urbanization in the United States. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 43: 256–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braden, J.B., and J.S. Shortle. 2013. Agricultural sources of water pollution A2. In Encyclopedia of energy, natural resource, and environmental economics, ed. Jason F. Shogren. Waltham: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  6. Cui, L., and J. Shi. 2012. Urbanization and its environmental effects in Shanghai, China. Urban Climate 2: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Di, Q., Y. Wang, A. Zanobetti, Y. Wang, P. Koutrakis, C. Choirat, F. Dominici, and J.D. Schwartz. 2017. Air pollution and mortality in the medicare population. New England Journal of Medicine 376: 2513–2522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Du, D., X. Zhao, and R. Huang. 2017. The impact of climate change on developed economies. Economics Letters 153: 43–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. EEA. 2014. Resource-efficient green economy and EU policies. Available: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/resourceefficient-green-economy-and-eu.
  10. ———. 2017. Circular by design – Products in the circular economy. Available: https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/circular-by-design.
  11. EIA. 2016a. EIA projects 48% increase in world energy consumption by 2040 [Online]. Available: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=26212.
  12. ———. 2016b. International energy outlook 2016. Available: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/ieo/world.php.
  13. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. 2013. Towards the circular economy: Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. 1. Available: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation-Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf.
  14. European Commission. 2010. Report forecasts shortages of 14 critical mineral raw materials [Online]. Available: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-10-752_en.htm.
  15. ———. 2011. Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0571&from=EN.
  16. ———. 2014. Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:aa88c66d-4553-11e4-a0cb-01aa75ed71a1.0022.03/DOC_1&format=PDF.
  17. ———. 2015. Closing the loop – An EU action plan for the Circular Economy. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52015DC0614.
  18. Future Market Insights. 2016. Consumer electronics to be a US$ 3 trillion market by 2020: Report [Online]. Available: http://www.futuremarketinsights.com/press-release/consumer-electronics-market.
  19. Goodwin, N., H. Jonathan, Julie A. Nelson, Brian Roach, and Mariano Torras. 2013. Microeconomics in context. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  20. Gupt, Y., and S. Sahay. 2015. Review of extended producer responsibility: A case study approach. Waste Management & Research 33: 595–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Henckens, M., E. Van Ierland, P. Driessen, and E. Worrell. 2016. Mineral resources: Geological scarcity, market price trends, and future generations. Resources Policy 49: 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hoornweg, D., P. Bhada-Tata, and C. Kennedy. 2013. Environment: Waste production must peak this century. Nature 502: 615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hsiang, S., R. Kopp, A. Jina, J. Rising, M. Delgado, S. Mohan, D.J. Rasmussen, R. Muir-Wood, P. Wilson, M. Oppenheimer, K. Larsen, and T. Houser. 2017. Estimating economic damage from climate change in the United States. Science 356: 1362–1369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hughes, G., P. Chinowsky, and K. Strzepek. 2010. The costs of adaptation to climate change for water infrastructure in OECD countries. Utilities Policy 18: 142–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McKinsey and Company. 2011. Resource revolution: Meeting the world’s energy, materials, food, and water needs. Available: http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/resource-revolution.
  26. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  27. Mueller, H., D. P. Hamilton, and G. J. Doole. 2016. Evaluating services and damage costs of degradation of a major lake ecosystem. Ecosystem Services 22, Part B: 370–380.Google Scholar
  28. OECD. 2012a. Environmental outlook to 2050: The consequences of inaction. Key findings of water. Available: https://www.oecd.org/env/indicators-modelling-outlooks/49844953.pdf.
  29. ———. 2012b. Sustainable materials management. Making better use of resources. Available: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264174269-en.
  30. ———. 2015b. The economics of climate change. Available: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264235410-en.
  31. ———. 2015c. Material resources, productivity and the environment. Available: http://www.oecd.org/env/waste/material-resources-productivity-and-the-environment-9789264190504-en.htm.
  32. ———. 2015d. Material resources, productivity and the environment. OECD Green Growth Studies [Online]. Available: http://www.oecd.org/env/waste/material-resources-productivity-and-the-environment-9789264190504-en.htm.
  33. Pike, C., B. Doppelt, and M. Herr. 2010. Climate communications and behavior change: A guide for practitioners. Available: http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/551504/6527501/1271194957847/Climate+Communications+and+Behavior+Change.pdf?token=Eo1SlESh0gUlVMqJBMuyPLvVnuo%3D.
  34. PRB. 2004. Urbanization: An environmental force to be reckoned with [Online].Google Scholar
  35. PWC. 2015. The world in 2050. Will the shift in global economic power continue? Available: https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/the-economy/assets/world-in-2050-february-2015.pdf.
  36. ———. 2017. Capital project and infrastructure spending outlook [Online]. Available: https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/capital-projects-infrastructure/publications/cpi-spending-outlook.html.
  37. TEEB. 2010. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB [Online]. Available: http://www.teebweb.org/our-publications/teeb-study-reports/synthesis-report/.
  38. UN-Water. 2017. Wastewater: The untapped resource. Available: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/water/wwap/.
  39. UN. 2014. World urbanization prospects: The 2014 revision, highlights. Available: https://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/publications/files/wup2014-highlights.Pdf.
  40. ———. 2017. World population prospects. The 2017 revision. Available: https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Publications/Files/WPP2017_KeyFindings.pdf.
  41. UNEP. 2005. Life cycle approaches. The road from analysis to practice. Available: http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx0594xPA-Road.pdf.
  42. ———. 2015. International trade in resources: A biophysical assessment. Available: http://www.resourcepanel.org/international-trade-resources-biophysical-assessment.
  43. ———. 2016. Resource efficiency: Potential and economic implications. Available: http://www.resourcepanel.org/sites/default/files/documents/document/media/resource_efficiency_report_march_2017_web_res.pdf.
  44. UNESCO. 2015. Water for a sustainable world. Facts and figures. Available: http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/SC/images/WWDR2015Facts_Figures_ENG_web.pdf.
  45. VIJ, D. 2012. Urbanization and solid waste management in India: Present practices and future challenges. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 37: 437–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Way, T.K., M. Ong, J. Kai, S. Ho, and Michelle Kan. 2016. Is your waste a waste? Rethinking the linear economy. Asian Management Insights 3: 62–69.Google Scholar
  47. WHO. 2017. Global and regional food consumption patterns and trends [Online]. Available: http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/3_foodconsumption/en/index4.html.
  48. World Bank. 2016. The cost of air pollution: Strengthening the economic case for action. Available: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/25013.
  49. ———. 2017. What a waste: A global review of solid waste management. Available: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/17388.
  50. World Economic Forum. 2014. Towards the Circular Economy: Accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains. Available: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_ENV_TowardsCircularEconomy_Report_2014.pdf.
  51. WRAP. 2017. WRAP and the circular economy [Online]. Available: http://www.wrap.org.uk/about-us/about/wrap-and-circular-economy.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert C. Brears
    • 1
  1. 1.MitidaptionChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations