267
Commission in September 2011 (EC 2011b ). The Resource Effi ciency Roadmap is
part of the Resource Effi ciency Flagship of the Europe 2020 Strategy, which the
European Commission describes as ‘the European Union’s growth strategy for the
next decade and aimed at establishing a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy
with high levels of employment, productivity and social cohesion’ (EC 2011a ).
The roadmap can be seen as a move to advance from the position reached by
virtue of decades of waste legislation, and guide member states and businesses
towards a consolidated and comprehensive vision of a resource effi cient, circular
economy. The roadmap does not place any legal obligations on member states, but
it does set a number of benchmarks and milestones (notional targets), and has an
ambition (vigorously debated) to agree indicators to measure resource effi ciency. It
has also given rise to the European Resource Effi ciency Platform (EREP), a multistakeholder group of infl uential politicians, business people, NGOs and academics
(EREP 2013 ). In addition, Horizon 2020, which is the EU’s framework programme
for research and innovation, is beginning to feature ‘Circular Economy’ and
‘Industrial Symbiosis’ as recognized terms, while OECD has started to refer to
‘Industrial Ecology’.
A parallel initiative has been the development of the EU Raw Materials Initiative
(EC 2014a ), which has examined the future prospects for the availability of raw
materials crucial to the economies of the EU. Fourteen materials, mainly metals,
have been identifi ed as critical and recommendations have been developed to secure
future supplies. These recommendations fall into three categories, or ‘pillars’: (1)
ensuring a ‘level playing fi eld’ for access to resources in third countries (often
referred to as ‘resource diplomacy’); (2) securing supplies within Europe, such as
reopening historic mines; and (3) improving resource effi ciency and recycling, not
least by highlighting how poor our current recovery of key metals is at present. It is
the third ‘pillar’ that has contributed to the growing circular economy debate.
In 2014, in an attempt to consolidate and extend the progress made to date,
Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik proposed a Circular Economy package
of new policy initiatives. This appeared at the very end of the 2010–2014 Commission
in July 2014 (EC 2014c ). Its principle measures were:
• A target of 70 % recycling for municipal waste by 2030
• A target of 80 % recycling of packaging waste by 2030
• Landfi ll bans from 2025 for plastics, metals, glass, paper, card and biodegradable
waste.
The policy package also included two non-binding targets: the Commission
wanted member states to adopt national strategies to reduce food waste by 30 % by
2025 and proposed a target of a 30 % increase in EU resource productivity by 2030.
The package was greeted with disappointment from environmental groups who
wanted more measures to stimulate activities such as re-use and remanufacturing
(the ‘inner’ or ‘tighter’ loops, as described by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation)
(EMF 2013 ). However, it was not welcomed by some key member states and leading business groups who felt that the 70 % target was unachievable, and that the
resource productivity target was not implementable, given the absence of good
13 Circular Economy and the Policy Landscape in the UK
Commission in September 2011 (EC 2011b ). The Resource Effi ciency Roadmap is
part of the Resource Effi ciency Flagship of the Europe 2020 Strategy, which the
European Commission describes as ‘the European Union’s growth strategy for the
next decade and aimed at establishing a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy
with high levels of employment, productivity and social cohesion’ (EC 2011a ).
The roadmap can be seen as a move to advance from the position reached by
virtue of decades of waste legislation, and guide member states and businesses
towards a consolidated and comprehensive vision of a resource effi cient, circular
economy. The roadmap does not place any legal obligations on member states, but
it does set a number of benchmarks and milestones (notional targets), and has an
ambition (vigorously debated) to agree indicators to measure resource effi ciency. It
has also given rise to the European Resource Effi ciency Platform (EREP), a multistakeholder group of infl uential politicians, business people, NGOs and academics
(EREP 2013 ). In addition, Horizon 2020, which is the EU’s framework programme
for research and innovation, is beginning to feature ‘Circular Economy’ and
‘Industrial Symbiosis’ as recognized terms, while OECD has started to refer to
‘Industrial Ecology’.
A parallel initiative has been the development of the EU Raw Materials Initiative
(EC 2014a ), which has examined the future prospects for the availability of raw
materials crucial to the economies of the EU. Fourteen materials, mainly metals,
have been identifi ed as critical and recommendations have been developed to secure
future supplies. These recommendations fall into three categories, or ‘pillars’: (1)
ensuring a ‘level playing fi eld’ for access to resources in third countries (often
referred to as ‘resource diplomacy’); (2) securing supplies within Europe, such as
reopening historic mines; and (3) improving resource effi ciency and recycling, not
least by highlighting how poor our current recovery of key metals is at present. It is
the third ‘pillar’ that has contributed to the growing circular economy debate.
In 2014, in an attempt to consolidate and extend the progress made to date,
Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik proposed a Circular Economy package
of new policy initiatives. This appeared at the very end of the 2010–2014 Commission
in July 2014 (EC 2014c ). Its principle measures were:
• A target of 70 % recycling for municipal waste by 2030
• A target of 80 % recycling of packaging waste by 2030
• Landfi ll bans from 2025 for plastics, metals, glass, paper, card and biodegradable
waste.
The policy package also included two non-binding targets: the Commission
wanted member states to adopt national strategies to reduce food waste by 30 % by
2025 and proposed a target of a 30 % increase in EU resource productivity by 2030.
The package was greeted with disappointment from environmental groups who
wanted more measures to stimulate activities such as re-use and remanufacturing
(the ‘inner’ or ‘tighter’ loops, as described by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation)
(EMF 2013 ). However, it was not welcomed by some key member states and leading business groups who felt that the 70 % target was unachievable, and that the
resource productivity target was not implementable, given the absence of good
13 Circular Economy and the Policy Landscape in the UK