266
What links the various strands of ‘circular economy’ discourse in the UK is ‘systems thinking’ – that keeping resources in productive use is not just a matter for
individual fi rms on the one hand, or consumers on the other, but part of the whole
economic system. This holistic view distinguishes these initiatives from much of
waste management policy in the UK through the 1980s, 1990s and early twenty-fi rst
century, which has taken a predominantly ‘end of pipe’ view of the problems of
waste. It is also a step on from political discourse concerning ‘resource effi ciency ’,
which has often focused on industrial process effi ciency rather than the whole life
cycle of products, and is often unspecifi c as to which resources it is considering and
what kind of effi ciencies count most.
2 The European Union’s Development of Waste Policy
and Resource Effi ciency Initiatives
European policy and legislation provides the overarching framework for the development of circular economy thinking in Europe and the UK. Without the development of legislation to limit landfi ll, reduce carbon emissions, improve recycling of
key materials, introduce producer responsibility for end of life products, restrict
toxic substances in the environment, infl uence the design of products, develop ‘ integrated product policy ’ and, crucially, sign up leading businesses to the ambition of
greater resource effi ciency, circular economy thinking would have far less traction.
These actions have themselves been infl uenced by the more environmentally progressive European nations, in particular the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and
Sweden. The EU-promulgated notion of the ‘waste hierarchy’ is an important precursor to the ideas set out by many of those espousing the circular economy. The
waste hierarchy has legal force through the Waste Framework Directive (EC 2008 )
and indicates the order of preference for waste options: prevention before reuse,
reuse before recycling, recycling before energy recovery and lastly disposal. The
circular economy approach can be seen as a more systematic (rather than incremental and material-based) application of this thinking.
The requirement of the 2008 Waste Framework Directive , for all member states
to produce Waste Prevention Programmes by the end of 2013 (EC 2008 ), forced the
issue further and gave policy makers an opportunity to set out circular economy
ambitions. Much of the thinking behind this requirement had been done through the
Commission’s development of ‘ Integrated Product Policy (IPP)’ – a series of initiatives starting in 2003 to understand which products accounted for the greatest environmental impact. Work under the IPP banner promoted ‘life-cycle thinking’ and
advanced policy instruments, including the Ecodesign of Energy Using Products
Directive , which aims to reduce the impact of products (EC 2014b ).
Integrated Product Policy also underlies another relevant development – the process begun by the publication of the Roadmap to a Resource Effi cient Europe championed by Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik, and adopted by the full
J. Hill
What links the various strands of ‘circular economy’ discourse in the UK is ‘systems thinking’ – that keeping resources in productive use is not just a matter for
individual fi rms on the one hand, or consumers on the other, but part of the whole
economic system. This holistic view distinguishes these initiatives from much of
waste management policy in the UK through the 1980s, 1990s and early twenty-fi rst
century, which has taken a predominantly ‘end of pipe’ view of the problems of
waste. It is also a step on from political discourse concerning ‘resource effi ciency ’,
which has often focused on industrial process effi ciency rather than the whole life
cycle of products, and is often unspecifi c as to which resources it is considering and
what kind of effi ciencies count most.
2 The European Union’s Development of Waste Policy
and Resource Effi ciency Initiatives
European policy and legislation provides the overarching framework for the development of circular economy thinking in Europe and the UK. Without the development of legislation to limit landfi ll, reduce carbon emissions, improve recycling of
key materials, introduce producer responsibility for end of life products, restrict
toxic substances in the environment, infl uence the design of products, develop ‘ integrated product policy ’ and, crucially, sign up leading businesses to the ambition of
greater resource effi ciency, circular economy thinking would have far less traction.
These actions have themselves been infl uenced by the more environmentally progressive European nations, in particular the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and
Sweden. The EU-promulgated notion of the ‘waste hierarchy’ is an important precursor to the ideas set out by many of those espousing the circular economy. The
waste hierarchy has legal force through the Waste Framework Directive (EC 2008 )
and indicates the order of preference for waste options: prevention before reuse,
reuse before recycling, recycling before energy recovery and lastly disposal. The
circular economy approach can be seen as a more systematic (rather than incremental and material-based) application of this thinking.
The requirement of the 2008 Waste Framework Directive , for all member states
to produce Waste Prevention Programmes by the end of 2013 (EC 2008 ), forced the
issue further and gave policy makers an opportunity to set out circular economy
ambitions. Much of the thinking behind this requirement had been done through the
Commission’s development of ‘ Integrated Product Policy (IPP)’ – a series of initiatives starting in 2003 to understand which products accounted for the greatest environmental impact. Work under the IPP banner promoted ‘life-cycle thinking’ and
advanced policy instruments, including the Ecodesign of Energy Using Products
Directive , which aims to reduce the impact of products (EC 2014b ).
Integrated Product Policy also underlies another relevant development – the process begun by the publication of the Roadmap to a Resource Effi cient Europe championed by Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik, and adopted by the full
J. Hill