A Systematic Literature Review on the CE

Journal Pre-proof
A Systematic Literature Review on the Circular Economy Initiatives in

the European Union
Purva Mhatre , Rohit Panchal , Anju Singh , Shyam Bibyan
PII: S2352-5509(20)30223-2
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.008
Reference: SPC 384
To appear in: Sustainable Production and Consumption
Received date: 28 March 2020

Revised date: 12 September 2020
Accepted date: 16 September 2020
Please cite this article as: Purva Mhatre , Rohit Panchal , Anju Singh , Shyam Bibyan , A Systematic
Literature Review on the Circular Economy Initiatives in the European Union, Sustainable Production
and Consumption (2020), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.008
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition
of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of
record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published
in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that,
during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal
disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
© 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Institution of Chemical Engineers.

A Systematic Literature Review on the Circular Economy Initiatives in the
European Union
Purva Mhatre1, Rohit Panchal1,*, Anju Singh1 and Shyam Bibyan1

1
National Institute of Industrial Engineering, Vihar Lake Road, Mumbai - 400087, India.
*Corresponding author: rohit.panchal.2017@nitie.ac.in
Abstract:
The circular economy (CE) paradigm fosters to rethink and redesign the manufacturing process,
usage and disposal pattern of products and services in an economy. In the past few years, CE has
gained tremendous momentum in terms of research and implementation. Apart from the
widening horizon of CE across the globe, numerous practitioners, policy-makers and
academicians have explored the scope to incorporate various sectors of industries and businesses
within the CE model. Evidently, a primary mechanism or system is required to facilitate the
transition to CE. With an aim to understand this mechanism, the article analyzes, through a
systematic literature review, the implementation of circular practices across the European Union
(EU) member states based on a framework of circular strategies, nutrient cycles, ReSOLVE
framework and circular business models. Further, the implementation of CE action plan
proposed in 2015 for the EU region, has facilitated circular practices in numerous industries,
owing to government policies and regulations. Additionally, it has helped in building the
required infrastructure, while providing a technological push for augmenting sustainable growth
in the region. Based on the analysis, it is inferred that recycling has been the most widely used
circular strategy for looping back materials into the system. Waste management, electrical and
electronic equipment industries and construction industries are a pioneer in CE implementation.
Also, macro level initiatives by governments and/or regional administrative bodies predominate
CE‟s implementation in the EU. A further transition to CE can be facilitated by government
policies, infrastructure and technological availability, awareness, stakeholder collaboration and
supply-chain integration.
Keywords: Circular Economy, European Union, CE strategies, Nutrient cycles, ReSOLVE

framework, Circular business models
1. Introduction
The need for sustainable development to ensure the availability of resources is of paramount
importance today, as the Earth hosts a population of 7.7 billion people whose needs and wants
have escalated incrementally over the past few decades. In fact, there has been an overshoot in
the planetary boundaries of the Earth, as the current production and consumption system requires
an equivalent of 1.7 Earths to replenish the resources consumed, while simultaneously absorbing
the pollution generated (World Economic Forum, 2019). Given the fact that the Earth possesses a
finite amount of resources, the need to utilize these resources optimally increases manifold
1
thereof (Galli et al., 2020). A novel concept of optimum and recurring usage of resources, which
has its foundation strongly based on the principles of sustainability, is that of „Circular
Economy‟ (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017). Embracing the CE could possibly help in avoiding a few
irreversible damages that may be incurred by consuming resources at a rate that exceeds the
Earth‟s capacity to replenish, in terms of biodiversity, air, soil, water and the climate (EMAF,
2015).
The term Circular Economy was first coined in Pearce and Turner‟s study titled „Sustainable
Economic Development‟ that emphasized the interlinkages between the economy and
environment, wherein the conventional economic paradigm, based on utilitarian benefit-cost
principle, is modified to allow for the concept of intergenerational utility (Turner, 1990). The
concept of CE presents a sustainable alternative to the usual linear model of take-make-use-
dispose, and replaces it with make-use-reuse-remake-recycle. By definition, “A circular
economy is an economic system that is based on business models which replace the „end-of-life‟
concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling and recovering materials in
production/distribution and consumption processes, thus operating at micro level (products,
companies, consumers), meso level (eco-industrial parks) and macro level (city, region, nation
and beyond), with the aim to accomplish sustainable development, which implies creating
environmental quality, economic prosperity and social equity, to the benefit of current and future
generations” (Kirchherr et al., 2017). The CE framework weaves together opportunities related
to innovation, competitiveness, productivity, wage upgradation and industrial strategy together
with environmental, socio-economic and climate objectives. According to the Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, (2015), CE has a “trillion-dollar opportunity with huge potential for innovation, job
creation, and economic growth” across the globe, given that the resource productivity is an
underexploited source of possible future wealth and competitiveness. Realization of this
untapped potential is possible only through a systematic and conscious shift in industrial
landscape, product design, business models, policies and regulations.
The concept of CE is based on premises of minimization of waste and pollution, extension of

useful life of products and materials and regeneration of natural systems. These premises lay the
foundation to the principles available for CE – redesign, reduction, reuse and recycle (Ghisellini
et al., 2016). Adopting CE principles has the potential to generate a net economic benefit, while
simultaneously benefitting the environment and the society at large (EMAF, 2015). Hence, the
European Commission aims to ensure coherence between the industry, the environment and the
climate, along with its existing energy policies, while looking to create an optimal business
environment for sustainable growth, job creation and innovation. In line with this goal, the
Commission adopted the European Union‟s (EU) action plan on Circular Economy, proposed in
2015 and established an ambitious agenda to transform the EU economy into a circular one,
wherein the value of products and materials is maintained for as long as possible, bringing
thereby major economic benefits along with social and environmental incentives. The EU has a
potential of generating €320 billion in value till 2025, encompassing CE investments in mobility
(€135 billion), food (€70 billion) and built environment (€115 billion) (Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, 2017). In the emergence and implementation of CE, the EU has been a pioneer, as
its member states have collectively initiated a number of policies and frameworks that promote
CE in various industries, businesses and services. Existing research on CE in the EU displays a
variety of studies illustrating CE implementation at micro, meso and macro levels in various
2
sectors and industries, and ably supported by case studies of products and services from
industries and/or firms. However, there seems to be a knowledge gap in the understanding of the
trend of implementation of CE in various industries. Moreover, one needs to an understanding of
the business models and the larger CE framework in order to facilitate suitable policy initiatives,
which would benefit both businesses and the policy implementing agencies. To bridge this gap,
this article aims to analyze; through a systematic course of study, the trends in CE initiatives in
the EU in the last decade.
The research questions addressed are:

 Which CE strategies are adopted in different sectors of economy (industries, businesses
and services) and what is the level of their implementation – micro, meso or macro?
 How are technical and biological nutrients cycled in a CE scenario?
 How can CE implementation be outlined based on the ReSOLVE framework?
 What are the different business models adopted by firms practicing CE?
The authors have identified research articles illustrating case studies, and analyzed the trend of
CE implementation with reference to business models and sustainability perspective; in the
process bringing to fore a comprehensive understanding of CE implementation in the EU.
This study is organized as follows: section 2 describes the „Research methodology‟. Section 3
titled „Results and Discussion‟, comprises of descriptive and content analysis along with the
interpretation of the results/findings. Notably, descriptive analysis illustrates the trends of
publication, describing year-on-year and country-wise publications. Under the content analysis
section, the authors bring about a complete analysis in terms of which CE strategies have been
used, and in in which sectors. Further analysis is based on different parameters, such as – flow of
technical and biological nutrients, ReSOLVE framework and business models – used to enable
CE. Finally, under section 4 i.e. „Conclusion‟, the study provides the academic and practical
inferences, limitations of this research vis-a-vis the future scope.
2. Research Methodology
A systematic review seeks to systematically search for, appraise and synthesize research
evidence. It is defined as a “means of identifying, evaluating and interpreting all available
research relevant to a particular research question, or topic area, phenomenon of interest” (Grant
and Booth, 2009). This study presents an analysis of case studies based on the implementation of
CE in the EU through a collective insight through theoretical synthesis of data analyzed on an
elaborate structural framework. Specifically, the authors have referred to Merli et al., (2018) for
its usage of methodology of this review paper.
To understand the trend of CE in the EU, descriptive and content analysis of case studies on CE
in the EU member states has been performed till July 2020. Scopus, Science Direct and Web of
Science databases have been used to select literature that has focused on case studies in the EU
in the last decade (2010-2020). The keywords used are “circular economy” and “case stud*”.
The search was specific to the EU member states including: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia,
Republic of Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Notable, in spite of the
3
UK leaving the EU in January 2020, this study has included case studies based in the UK. The
rationale for the same is that, it is done majorly because the case studies that have been
considered are from 2010 to 2020, and excluding the UK due to its exit in the last year (i.e. 2020)
seemed unjust, especially in view of important contribution to this review. The articles were
further selected by limiting the document type to „Article‟ and „Reviews‟ and published in
„English‟ language having source type as „Journals‟.
`
Figure 1: Framework for selection of papers from database
The number of research articles obtained at this stage was 455. Descriptive analysis was
performed using Biblioshiny interface of R software, whereby the publications trends in terms of
publishing journals along with their corresponding authors‟ country are described till July 2020.
Furthermore, for content analysis, the articles were filtered based on the research scope and
focus.
The research scope has been limited to the analysis of articles that had case studies of CE
implementation at product or service level, or at industrial parks, cities and/or regions. The
articles, which explicitly had the terms „circular economy‟, „reduce‟, „remanufacture‟, „recycle‟
and „resource efficiency‟ had been selected. The research focus was to determine the different
CE strategies which have been implemented in various sectors, whereby the authors mapped the
CE implementation based on the nutrient cycle, ReSOLVE framework as well as the circular
business models. The research papers were initially filtered by reading the title and the abstract,
and then finally after reading the complete article. The total number of articles selected for the
review were 151. As an example, the study by Leising et al., (2018) considered cases of three
different construction firms to determine how circular supply chains have effectively facilitated
CE in the construction sector. Thus, this paper was selected for content analysis. On the other
4
hand, a research paper that proposed a framework for CE in the construction industry (e.g.
Pomponi and Moncaster, (2017) study) with no case study to serve as an example was rejected
because the article cannot be analyzed to understand the business models of the implementing
agency.
The mode of CE implementation in different sectors helps in understanding the current trend
along with the future scope of CE implementation. 28 sectors are identified from the EMAF
Report, (2015) and 45 CE strategies where chosen based on the definition of Kalmykova et al.,
(2018). Importantly, the ReSOLVE framework is a crucial CE analysis tool proposed by Ellen
MacArthur Foundation, (2015). The archetypes of business models have been referred to from
Moreno et al., (2016). The research papers selected, were carefully analyzed to determine the
industry and/or the sector of economy in which the CE practices have actually been adopted.
Further, the selected research papers were also analyzed to determine the level of implementation
of CE initiatives i.e. if CE has been implemented at a micro level (i.e. product specific or within
a firm), meso level (i.e. industrial symbiosis, eco-parks) or at a macro level (i.e. regional or
national level). Further analysis was done based on the CE initiatives adopted for technical and
biological nutrients, ReSOLVE framework and circular business models. When analyzing the CE
with respect to its strategy or frameworks, each of the strategy or parameter which is a
constituent of the case study that has been implemented in the industry was identified, accounted
for and described. For example, a metal manufacturing industry would practice recycling metal
products along with material efficiency, resource recovery and waste reduction. Thus, if more
than one CE strategy was used in a particular sector, it was included in the description. Similar
approach has been followed for nutrient cycles, ReSOLVE framework and business models.
Figure 2 illustrates the structural framework along with analytical categories used for the
analysis.
5
Figure 2: Structural framework and analytical categories for analysis
6
3. Results and Discussion
The results have been divided into descriptive analysis and content analysis. Further, under
descriptive analysis, the trend of the year-on-year publications has been determined along with
the corresponding countries and relevant journals. The content analysis section on the other
hand, describes the implementation of CE in the EU.
3.1 Descriptive analysis

There has been an incremental trend in terms of the number of articles published on CE case
studies in the EU. A total of 455 research articles have been published till July 2020 in 139
different journals, cumulatively by 1512 authors. A brief data on the publishing statistics is listed
in Appendix 1. Notably, being an emerging area of research and application, research papers on
CE case studies have increased incrementally since 2010. The numbers of published articles have
increased from just 1 in 2010 to 133 in 2019. By July 2020, 123 research articles have been
added to the existing list. The publication trend from 2010 to July 2020 is shown in Appendix 2.
The journals of significance include „Journal of Cleaner Production‟, followed by „Sustainability

(Switzerland)‟, „Resources, Conservation and Recycling‟, „Waste Management‟, among others.
Appendix 3 lists the 10 most relevant journals along with impact statistics. Importantly, Italy has
the maximum number of research publications (56), followed by United Kingdom (25) and Spain
(22). Appendix 4 lists the distribution of publication country-wise. The increasing number of
research articles indicates the growing popularity of the concept of CE, as well as its
implementation in industries and/or firms, along with its adoption at the regional or national
level.
3.2 Content Analysis

The CE stresses on a shift from the usual „take-make-use-dispose‟ model to a „take-make-use-
reuse-recycle‟ model. Effective implementation of the CE strategies in various businesses and
regions has the potential to provide economic, environmental and social benefits. Economic
benefits can be quantified in terms of material optimization and energy efficiency. Redesigning
processes and operations in the industrial system brings forth both environmental and social
benefits in terms of new employment opportunities and uniform resource allocation.
In the following sub-sections, the authors bring forth the results of analysis of the CE initiatives
that have been adopted under different sectors of the economy along with a detailed study of:
 Nutrient cycles – technical and biological,
 ReSOLVE framework, and
 Business models used
3.2.1 CE strategies and their implementation in different sectors

As mentioned earlier, CE has been adopted in various sectors of the economy, right from
manufacturing of electrical equipment, furniture and textiles to construction and waste
management. The research articles have been analyzed to determine a sector-wise
implementation of CE. Notably, the top five sectors with most published work on CE include
„waste management‟ followed by „electrical and electronic equipment‟, „construction industry‟,
„rubber and plastics‟ and „agriculture, forestry and fishing‟. On the other hand, the sectors with
the least number of case studies in literature include „pharmaceuticals, medicine and chemicals‟,
7
Design
Design
Circular
utilization
modularity
Eco design
Community
disassembly
By-products
involvement
Eco labelling
Down cycling
Customization
Sectors of economy
Bio-based materials
Cascading materials
Cross-sector linkages
for
for
strategies plot with
economy
Information & communication services, media &
Scientific R&D, other professional, scientific & technical
telecommunications
activities
Education
Human health and social work activities
Administrative & support services
Arts, entertainment and recreation
Financial and insurance activities
Legal & accounting head offices, consulting, architecture &
engineering, TIC
Distributive trades (incl. wholesale and retail trade)
8
Manufacture of wood and paper products, and printing
Public administration and defence; compulsory social security
occurrence in case studies is described in Appendix 6.
Real estate activities

Manufacturing of textiles, apparel, leather and related products
Construction
Manufacturing of transport equipment
Manufacturing of furniture
Table 2: CE strategies in various sectors
Water supply, waste & remediation

Manufacturing of electrical equipment, computer, electronic and
optical products
Manufacturing of machinery and equipment
Manufacturing of rubber, plastics, basic and fabricated metal
products
Transportation and storage
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
Manufacturing food, beverages and tobacco products
Mining and quarrying
Electricity, gas, steam and air-conditioning supply
Manufacturing
Manufacturing of of coke, refined petroleum,
pharmaceuticals, chemical
medicinal products
chemical, botanical
A detailed description of the number of cases identified in each of the sectors is listed in
Appendix 5. The meaning of each of the CE strategies implemented along with its frequency of
strategies (Kalmykova et al., 2018) with the sectors of industry in which they have been adopted.
understanding on CE implementation in different sectors is presented in Table 2 by plotting CE
„mining and quarrying sector‟ along with „entertainment & recreation‟. An elaborate
products
Accommodation and food service activities
Element recovery
Energy efficiency
Energy production
Energy recovery
Extended Producer
Responsibility
Bio-chemicals
extraction
Functional recycling
Green procurement
High quality
recycling
Incentivized
recycling
Industrial symbiosis
Life Cycle
Assessment
Infrastructure
building
Material substitution
Material productivity
Optimizing
packaging
Product as a service
Product labelling
Reduction
Refurbishment
Adaptable
manufacturing
Restoration
Reuse
Redistribution and
resell
Separation
Sharing
Socially responsible
consumption
Stewardship
Take back & trade-in
Taxation
Tax credits and
subsidies
Upcycling
Maintenance and
repair
9
Virtualization
The implementation of the CE strategies in different sectors can be inferred from the Table 2. As
can be observed, in the Information and communication services sector, virtualization has been a
key CE strategy. Businesses have essentially transitioned from its usual files and folders to cloud
storage of data, thereby enhancing the efficiency manifold, while reducing the ecological
footprint (Lindström et al., 2018). Data virtualization has also enabled easy access and more
efficient work. Thus, the transition to the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for Big data handling
and enhancing the technical knowledge of users to facilitate a smooth transition to virtualization
is imperative henceforth (Bressanelli et al., 2018). The transition to CE requires design thinking
and transdisciplinary learning environment. At a micro level, designers, architects and
manufacturers have been trained on the CE concepts but, a broader output may be achieved by
collaboration amongst various stakeholders and CE enablers for a larger scale of implementation.
This is brought to reality through community involvement in many universities and regions, and
by awareness drives and trainings (Wandl et al., 2019). As a step ahead, numerous cities in the
EU have started using Information and Communication technology (ICT) tools to facilitate urban
mining by determining stocks and flows of resources, as well as calculating carbon-dioxide
(CO2) emissions (Akande et al., 2019). In case of regional administration too, governments or
local bodies have adapted to the use of data storing platforms, community integration programs
and stakeholder collaboration networks to foster CE (Lisjak et al., 2017). In Spain for instance,
the government has been focused on providing economic incentives so as to increase the circular
flow of materials (Scarpellini et al., 2019). These include wastes from residences, commercial
spaces as well as manufacturing industries. In the consultancy sectors, such as legal aids,
engineering designs, architecture, along with trade and investment companies, virtualization
seems to be the CE strategy that is most implemented (Poponi et al., 2019; Wastling et al., 2018).
Moreover, numerous firms have also adapted to clean energy, resource efficient
product/structure designs and customization, in their attempt to be circular, as well as to
minimize the carbon footprint.
Of the various sectors, implementation of CE in the health industry requires careful

consideration of equipment, tools and machines that can be shared, reused or recycled, owing to
the need to ensure high hygiene standards as well as ensure no toxicity or bio-hazards are
associated with reuse/remanufacture/recycle of equipment. The key to resource efficiency in this
sector is stakeholder cooperation, i.e. a clear communication among the procurement staff,
contractors, users and disposers, to enable waste reduction and efficient waste management
(Viani et al., 2016). In case of incontinence products or sanitary napkins for instance, bio-based
materials and customization based on users‟ requirements has proven to be an effective strategy
towards waste minimization and reduced ecological footprint (Willskytt and Tillman, 2019). A
general awareness and consensus among consumers has promoted the demand for environmental
friendly products and re-circulation (Maitre-Ekern and Dalhammar, 2019). Pharmaceuticals and
chemical industries have shown a clear implementation of substance or material recovery along
with waste treatment methods (Lee et al., 2014). This has enabled circling huge quantities of
many critical raw materials and common resources into the manufacturing system, reducing
thereby the potential hazards that may have been posed by contamination of surroundings, due to
disposal of waste and mining for virgin resources for new production.
10
The manufacturing of paper consumes numerous trees, energy and other resources. Wood or
timber is the commonly used raw material for furniture, window panes, shuttering aid, etc. Hence
it is only imperative that the consumption of paper and wood be reduced, or firms look for newer
strategies, which they could adopt in order to optimize the consumption of wood/paper. This may
be achieved by cycling the products back to the system, either by reuse, remanufacture or
recycle. Eco-design and design for disassembly are the most commonly used CE strategies for
furniture (Rieckhof and Guenther, 2018). Various components and raw materials in a product are
used across different value streams after the end of their useful life. This embedded extraction of
resources is known as „cascading‟; and as per the case studies analyzed, this CE initiative is
mostly adopted in the construction industry and wood & paper industry (Husgafvel et al., 2018).
In case of distributive trades, such as wholesale supplies and retail outlets, a closed loop supply
chain does play a key role in product reuse, refurbishment or recycle (Mishra et al., 2018). Eco-
labelling is known to be an effective way of promoting consumption of more environmental
friendly products; however, this has been largely dependent on consumers‟ preference, costs and
community awareness (Prieto-Sandoval et al., 2020). As inferred from a case study in Italy,
supermarkets keep clear records of logistics, and this helps in minimizing packaging to reduce
waste, thus enabling the CE (Marrucci et al., 2020). Additionally, in many cases packaging waste
has been used to generate energy using incineration, thereby closing the resource loop.
Construction and real-estate are possibly the most resource-intensive sectors, consuming
humungous amounts of materials and energy throughout their entire life-cycle. Building a
resilient and efficient circular supply chain is imperative in enabling CE in the construction
sector (Nasir et al., 2017). A circular supply chain enables reuse and recycle of wastes and
secondary materials while supporting a range of skilled labor by generating economic activities
in soft stripping, selective demolition and waste sorting. The use of Building Information
Modelling (BIM) tools has enabled construction planning activities in a resource-efficient
manner, while determining the salvage value of components like beams, columns, slabs, etc.
along with materials like steel, glass, aggregates and timber at the end of the service life of a
structure (Akanbi et al., 2018). Designing and implementation of site waste management plans,
do ensure the achievement of maximum potential to reuse and recycle wastes (Jiménez-Rivero et
al., 2017). For instance, construction wastes are collected, sorted and sent to suitable material
recovery facilities for a redefined use. Studies involving material flow analysis (MFA) help in
understanding the urban mining potential, or the resource stocks that may be available in a
structure or a building (Casas-Arredondo et al., 2018). Tools like of Life cycle assessment (LCA)
and Life cycle costing (LCC) are used to design and plan various stages of construction so as to
ensure a low carbon footprint structure (Ylmén et al., 2020). Use of circular buildings materials
and components i.e. materials that can be reused conveniently, such as glass, steel truss or timber
and prefabricated units are more common in usage owing to developers‟ concern for
sustainability (Nußholz et al., 2019).
In case of the manufacturing industry, be it automobiles, machinery or equipment, the transition

to CE has proved to increase economic benefits by material efficiency, resource reuse and
reduced wastage. An important step to implement CE in the manufacturing sector is to determine
the material dynamics, i.e. the stocks and flows of materials and products or components and
accordingly design the reuse or recycle strategies (Busch et al., 2014). The concept of reverse
supply-chain has become a predominant factor not just in waste management, but also in
11
monetizing or re-valuing resources, which would otherwise be treated as waste (Larsen et al.,
2018). Numerous manufacturing firms have begun to use the take-back and trade-in systems to
recover as much secondary materials as possible, enabling them thereby to recover products with
materials with the required specifications. Other CE strategies that have been implemented
within the manufacturing sector include design for modularity, or design for disassembly; this is
to facilitate ease of remanufacturing and recycling. Adaptable manufacturing is also used to
enable flexible utility of products for diversified uses within its service life or even after it.
Moreover, the use of LCA tools has facilitated designing and production of low carbon emitting
products. Next, in the plastics and rubber industry, the major barrier to enable CE in
manufacturing industry has been the lack of recycling facilities (Deshpande et al., 2020). This
has been overcome by industrial symbiosis and reuse of waste plastic in other industries such as
aggregates for construction, insulation materials and fiber boards.
The electrical and electronics industry, with its products using critical and rare earth metals, has
gradually started transitioning to CE. Facilities are set up to take-back products and recover
elements at malls, retails outlets or even industries. This step has reduced the dependency of the
manufacturers on virgin raw materials, and has thus reduced mining activities, eventually
decreasing the carbon footprint of electrical products thereof (Unger et al., 2017). AI and
algorithms have been developed to determine the material recovery potential at the end-of-life of
electrical appliances (Nowakowski et al., 2017). Other CE strategies that have been employed in
this industry, include are design for disassembly, facilitating refurbishment & recycle (Singh et
al., 2020). Incentivized recycling has been implemented by a few manufacturers, wherein
consumers have been entitled to monetary benefits by returning a product at the end of its useful
life. Collaboration with other firms or manufacturers has been practiced to facilitate material and
resource sharing in order to enhance material reuse/recycle.
The power sector today is focused on clean energy sources and is energy efficient in terms of
energy generation, so as to implement CE in the system. Charles et al., (2018), has shown that
the recycling of materials from waste electrical and electronic equipment for fabrication of solar
cells has been environmentally beneficial in comparison to primary resource-based production.
Also, offered a potential pathway to reduced energy payback times, reduced cost of energy
generation, and enhanced competitiveness; thus, increasing the intangible value for photovoltaic
manufacturers in the global market in which consumers are becoming increasingly
environmentally aware.
In the agriculture sector, CE has been implemented by making bio-fertilizers from

decomposition of wastes. Animal wastes are used to make manure, rich in phosphorus and
ammonia (Wandl et al., 2019). Energy generation by anaerobic digestion of waste is also
practiced in many agricultural units. In case of food and beverages, appropriate packaging has
played an important role in increasing the durability of products, thereby reducing waste
(Wohner et al., 2020). Other CE strategies used in the food and beverage sector include product
labelling, which is being widely used to increase consumption of organic products, as well as
energy production by valorization of food wastes.
Finally, in the waste management industry, the implementation of CE has been crucial. From
residences and commercial establishments to manufacturing and logistics, every sector gives out
12
tons of waste each day. Key CE strategies have been to sort waste into recyclable, bio-
degradable, high calorific value waste and trash. Incineration or valorization of waste to generate
energy is also increasing, reducing thereby the dependency in fossil fuels (Tomić and Schneider,
2018). The extended producers‟ responsibility and pay-as-you-throw policies, along with
community involvement, have all enabled efficient waste management practices (Bringsken et
al., 2018). In this sector, the governments and local administrative bodies in the EU member
states have been a key enabler of this transition to CE.
Based on the analysis in the section above, it is understood that numerous industries and
administrative bodies have implemented measures to adopt CE practices. True that the
penetration of CE strategies has been varied, owing to the economics involved in resource
cycling, technology and infrastructural availability and geopolitical circumstances. CE strategies
such as reduce, reuse and recycle are the most commonly used CE strategies. Additionally, use
of bio-based materials, eco-design and green procurement strategies have enabled
environmentally sustainable approach across industries. In fact, material and energy efficiency
have been key to CE‟s incorporation. The use of monetary equipment like taxation and
incentivized recycling has facilitated more circular supplies of both resources and products. The
future of CE implementation would include adapting to virtualization or dematerialization of as
many businesses as possible. Moreover, development of material stock and flow estimator would
aid in urban mining of numerous valuable and critical metals. However, the foundation towards a
successful transition to CE would essentially depend on collaboration of various stakeholders
like producers, suppliers and consumers along with larger communities to ensure a socially
responsible consumption and product stewardship, thereby creating a resource efficient future.
3.2.2 Level of CE implementation

The research papers, after careful analysis have been scrutinized to determine the level of
implementation of the CE initiatives, i.e., if CE has been implemented at a micro, meso and/or a
macro level (Merli et al., 2018). Macro initiatives include activities developed at city, province,
regional or national level. From the analysis thus far, it is clear that most of the CE initiatives
(about 52%), have been at the macro-level. These macro-level initiatives redefine production and
consumption activities as a whole, and thereby go on to create a recycling-oriented society. In
other words, this means that most of the CE endeavors have been modelled by governments or
authorities at the national or regional level; implying thereby a comprehensive sustainable
policing as well as citizens‟ and local stakeholders' involvement. Furthermore, these macro-level
initiatives predominantly include endeavors in waste management (Luttenberger, 2020),
construction industry collaborations (Munaro et al., 2020), agriculture and forestry and public
administration (Avdiushchenko and Zajaç, 2019). Micro-level initiatives (34%) on the other
hand, address individual firms, organizations or industries. These include efforts taken by
individual organizations or industries to conform to the framework of the EU‟s directives for a
CE. These CE initiatives (i.e. at micro-level) have been observed majorly in electrical and
electronics industry, construction and real-estate industry, and in the manufacturing of wood,
furniture, paper and printing. Meso-level initiatives i.e. initiatives taken for a group of industries
together, or in industrial parks make up for 17% of the total CE initiatives. They include IT
industries, wood and paper manufacturing industries, metals fabrication units and electrical and
electronic equipment industry.
13
Most macro-level initiatives imply the fact that governments – individually and in collaboration
with other stakeholders – are keen on promoting green consumption of resources. In terms of
implementation, among the EU member states itself, Netherlands, Sweden and the UK are
leaders in terms of material efficiency, contributing significantly for moving towards a CE
(Masternak-Janus, 2019). Italy, Spain, Luxembourg and Cyprus on the other hand, have strongly
adapted the practices of sustainable production and consumption (Martín and Carnero, 2019).
Effectively, micro-level initiatives determine the willingness of individual firms or industries to
adopt sustainable practices. This is because of an environment conscious vision of firms, or
possibly the economic benefits posed by the circular strategy. The lack of meso initiatives may
indicate a lack of effective collaboration among industries. In fact, meso initiatives are more
beneficial in a way that the collaboration amongst industries can facilitate maximum closed loop
supply of resources and waste with minimum wastage or leakage. A future endeavor or policy
option could include for instance, promotion of industrial parks or industry collaborations for
sharing both resources and wastes.
3.2.3 Analysis of Nutrient cycles

Materials and energy that flows in an economy may be efficiently maintained by re-designing
product systems for efficient use of resources rather than focusing on waste treatment. In the CE
approach, this is achieved by categorizing materials into technical and biological nutrients
(EMAF, 2015). Categorizing the resources/materials into technical and biological cycles
essentially helps in determining both the approach and that technology that would be suitable to
establish a circular flow model.
The technical cycle encompasses man-made materials and substances that are hazardous to the
environment. It incorporates within its framework recycling, refurbishment/remanufacture,
reuse/redistribution and maintenance/prolonging product life. Of the total number of research
papers studied, 80% seemed to focus on technical nutrients, enlisting the strategies that have
been adopted in the EU member states under various industries and firms.
% CE strategies adopted for technical nutrients

Maintain
8%
Recycle
40%
Reuse
34%
Refurbish
18%
Figure 3: CE strategies for Technical nutrients
14
Recycle: Recycling encompasses a series of activities by which discarded materials are
collected, sorted, processed, and used in the production of new products. The percentage of
businesses that have adopted recycling is the highest i.e. at 40%. Recycling is extensively used in
construction, metals & fabrication, textiles, wood & paper, rubber & plastics, waste
management, electrical equipment, machinery and transportation equipment, along with the
manufacturing industry at large. For instance, collection and sorting have been adopted in
various retail businesses and supermarkets in Spain in order to facilitate the recycling process,
and reduce wastage of resources (Núñez-Cacho et al., 2018). In the construction and
infrastructure industry, as illustrated in a case study by Eberhardt et al., (2019), design for
recycling does have a significant impact on the material selection; and the material type
determines the building‟s embodied environmental impacts. For instance, in London, a firm
facilitated the production of REC100 - an asphalt plant that ensures 100% utilization of
reclaimed asphalt while resurfacing, rehabilitation or reconstruction of asphalt pavements
(Mantalovas and Di Mino, 2019). In the textile and apparel industry, improvement of waste
management within a firm per se based on its models and methodologies to recycle waste, has
increased its efficiency in terms of its use of resources twice the previous systems. In fact, this in
turn, has subsequently reduced the adverse environmental impact by three times (Rapsikevičienė
et al., 2019). Study by Unger et al., (2017) have shown that in the manufacturing of electrical
equipment, recycling of 80.5% reduces at least 215 kg of CO2 equivalent emissions per ton of
waste electrical and electronic equipment processed.
Refurbish/Remanufacture: Remanufacturing or refurbishment is a product recovery option

wherein products (or parts or components) are restored almost to new-like conditions in terms of
both quality and technical performance (Gehin et al., 2008). The process includes sorting,
inspection, disassembly, cleaning, reprocessing and reassembly (Hatcher et al., 2014).
Remanufacturing/refurbishment is used as a strategy in 18% of the research papers analyzed.
Both the environmental and economic benefits of this strategy are manifold, as compared to
conventional manufacturing. This is a more resource-efficient and resource-effective process, as
more the number of products remanufactured/ refurbished, longer is the life-span of component
parts of any product (Lindkvist Haziri et al., 2019). In a case study on baby strollers by Sumter et
al., (2018), they showed that the ability to develop circular business models is closely linked to a
product‟s design that could be evolved over multiple life-cycles, and offer circularity thereof.
Additionally, when linked with the environmental aspect, the number of remanufacturing cycles
could reduce CO2 emissions (Lieder et al., 2018).
Reuse/Redistribute: Reuse or redistribution has been mentioned in 34% of the case studies. In
simple terms, reuse is to use something again instead of throwing it away or sending it off to a
recycling company (Ali and Yusof, 2018). Reuse or redistribution spans across a wide range of
products, such as furniture, electrical appliances, etc. Rigamonti et al., (2019) studied 38 types of
packaging used in Italy and concluded that reuse of packaging materials plays a significant role
in increasing the lifetime of materials, preventing thereby the amount of waste generated, and the
need for final sinks. In Sweden, the lifetime of 70% laptops discarded by first users was doubled
through resale as second-hand laptops (André et al., 2019). Given a proper platform for sharing
and/or renting, reuse and redistribution does have a huge potential not just at the micro level, but
also both at the meso and the macro levels of implementation.
15
Maintain/Prolong: To maintain or prolong implies designing guidelines for promoting the
lifespan and durability of a product by adapting its design and studying the possibility of
upgrading to newer versions or through timeless designs by ensuring that it can be used for as
long as possible (Bovea and Pérez-Belis, 2018). Maintenance or prolonging the life of a product
by repair or use of high quality or durable materials has been a case in 8% of the research papers.
A case study by Geldermans et al., (2019), depicted that the circular components in built
environment projects, primarily focus on maintenance, reuse/redistribution and remanufacturing
in order to keep the components fit-for-purpose as long as possible. Moreover, the product
design and materials used, act as a critical factor in determining a product‟s lifespan (Rieckhof
and Guenther, 2018). Maintaining or prolonging the life of a product does have the benefit of
least economic and environmental costs as, compared to some of the other strategies, and thus is
highly advocated.
From analyzing the case studies, one could infer that most of the sectors or industries have
actually implemented recycling as a method to loop the resources back to the system. However,
this CE strategy has the maximum costs involved, and also has the highest ecological footprint,
as compared to the other modes such as reuse or remanufacture or refurbish. Thus, an ideal
approach to efficient CE implementation would be to follow a hierarchy of preference among CE
implementation i.e. repairs and maintenance, reuse, remanufacture or refurbishment and recycle,
respectively. Reuse of products can be promoted by enabling sharing or rental platforms, or by
promoting product-as-a-service model of business. Remanufacture and refurbishment can be
made more economically feasible by redesigning the product for disassembly. The setting of
take-back and trade-in systems across sectors along with suitable infrastructure would further
support recycling in the economy. Moreover, development of a scientific method to determine
the ease of disassembly of products for repair, reuse and recycle cab act as a key to support the
incorporation of a CE (Vanegas et al., 2018).
The biological cycle comprises of bio-based raw materials obtained from nature and are
considered as a part of the biological loop. The biological cycle framework encompasses the
following - extraction of biochemical feedstock, anaerobic digestion, regeneration and
farming/collection (EMAF, 2015).
16
% CE strategies adopted for biological nutrients
Extraction of
biochemical
Farming feedback
25% 18%
Anaerobic
digestion
Regeneration
27%
30%
Figure 4: CE strategies for Biological nutrients
Extraction of biochemical feedstock: The extraction of biochemical feedstock means applying

biomass conversion processes and equipment to produce low volume, but high-value chemical
products, or low-value and high-volume liquid fuel. This generates electricity and processes heat
fuels, power, and chemicals from biomass. Notably, this initiative has been observed in 18% of
the case studies. A case study by Werle and Sobek, (2019) in Poland observed that in sewage
sludge management, principles of CE have been efficiently implemented by gaseous fuel
production and phosphorous recovery. The heating value of the gas produced was 5 MJ/m 3,
which further was used in internal combustion engines. Also, the phosphorous recovery potential
was found to be 22.06%.
Anaerobic digestion: Having a proportion of 27% in the total number of case studies, anaerobic
digestion is a process in which microorganisms break down organic materials, such as food
scraps, manure, and sewage sludge, in the absence of oxygen, thus producing biogas and a solid
residue. Energy production and energy recovery form an essential foundation to tap the unused
potential energy sources, while minimizing dependence on conventional energy sources, which
are fast depleting, and are letting out huge green-house gases (GHGs) in their production. Using
sewage waste to generate energy by anaerobic digestion is practiced at both micro and meso
levels in numerous countries, like Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK. From the findings of Tomić
and Schneider, (2018), it is inferred that waste-to-energy technologies can cover the local energy
needs of waste management and recovery system for both heat and electricity. Moreover,
technical and environmental assessments show that anaerobic digestion performs better because;
firstly, there is an efficient energy production and secondly, the CO2 emissions are reduced by
10% - 98.9% depending on the bio-waste categories (Demichelis et al., 2019).
Regeneration: The term „regeneration‟ means to „grow again‟. In the context of CE,
regeneration corresponds to trophic organization i.e. regeneration of biodegradable (food) waste
into energy (Diez et al., 2016). Comprising 30% of the total filtered literature, regeneration is an
important strategy in the biological cycle for CE implementation. Waste regeneration is done
17
through the extension of the products‟ life-cycle through reuse, involving high skills and
technological innovation, and the reactivation or valorization of waste as a first or second raw
material (Poponi et al., 2019). A case study on generation of electricity from animal waste by
Santagata et al., (2017) using LCA and cost assessment, confirmed that recovery of electricity
and matter is beneficial from both environmental and energy point of view. Regeneration, in
many instances has enabled preservation of the natural capital, along with essential ecosystem
services by shifting to renewable energy and material. Practicing regeneration is a way to retain
and renew of ecosystems‟ health and return the resources to the biosphere. Regeneration of the
urban ecosystem has numerous health and community benefits in terms of reduced pollution
levels, along with improved mental and physical health (Paredes-Sánchez et al., 2018). For
instance, the regeneration plan for the Stockholm city, which is based on the development and
integration of a livable city district with industrial and commercial functions has fostered
significant socio-economic and environmental balance in the region (Williams, 2019).
Farming/Collection:
Farming or collection implies the aggregation of bio-degradable or biological materials or
resources to be converted into energy or a nutrient rich manure. This looping strategy has been
constituted in 25% of the total case studies analyzed for biological nutrients. Farming or
collection of biological nutrients is key to efficient material and energy recovery. In a case study
in Spain, an optimal hydrogen supply chain network is designed to integrate hydrogen-rich waste
gas sources and converts them into liquefied hydrogen (Yáñez et al., 2018).
The biological nutrients are easily decomposable and usually non-polluting. These nutrients are
mostly converted into manure or digested to form bio-energy through agriculture and fishing,
food and beverages industry and waste management.
3.2.4 Analysis of ReSOLVE Framework

The CE principles of preservation of natural capital, optimization of resources and designing out
of negative externalities are translated into a set of six business actions termed as the ReSOLVE
framework meaning – Regenerate, Share, Optimize, Loop, Virtualize and Exchange. (Ellen
MacArthur Foundation, 2015).
18
% distribution of components of ReSOLVE
framework
Virtualize Exchange
4% 2%
Regenerate
Loop 34%
37%
Share
Optimize 9%
14%
Figure 5: Proportion of Circular Business Model archetypes
Regenerate: To regenerate means to envision and sequence the processes of resource

production, consumption and disposal in a way that the health of the larger ecosystem is
sustained, and the biological nutrients are returned to the biosphere (Morseletto, 2020). Having a
proportion of 34% amongst some of the other parameters of the ReSOLVE framework,
regeneration is observed as a CE business action, mainly in waste management, agriculture and
food sector, manufacturing of paper and wood, and the construction industry. Valorization of
waste or generation of electricity using refuse derived fuel are a few examples of regeneration
(Uche-Soria and Rodríguez-Monroy, 2019). The transition to renewable sources of energy is also
a potential approach to regeneration. On a macro scale, regeneration of the urban ecosystem has
numerous health and community benefits in terms of reduced pollution and improved mental and
physical health (Paredes-Sánchez et al., 2018). For example, the regeneration plan for the city of
Stockholm has developed and integrated a livable city district, with industrial and commercial
functions (Williams, 2019). Thus, regeneration, essentially operates on cycling the nutrients back
to the environment with no leakages or toxic emissions, while preserving or adding value to the
resource being cycled.
Share: This business action encompasses sharing of products or services, and the use/re-use of
second-hand resources, thereby prolonging the product life by repair and maintenance activities.
Sharing of resources, right from raw materials for manufacture to consumer products, is
observed in a diversified set of sectors, including the construction industry, manufacturing
electrical and electronics equipment, furniture, rubber and plastics, etc. Resource sharing in
regions or localities occurs across a range of activities, encompassing products and services
required for living, working and travel, that have the potential to reduce total consumption of
resources, while generating waste per capita (Geldermans et al., 2019). Although being an
important strategy to facilitate CE, the percentage of sharing is observed in just 9% of the case
studies, which essentially implies the need to promote and incentivize sharing of products and
resources. In fact, this can also be facilitated by developing stakeholder networks among supply-
chain operators, launching online platforms for sharing unused resources and enabling policies to
19
promote durable products over short-lived products. Apart from the environmental incentives of
reduced mining for new materials and minimized emissions, sharing of resources aids in building
the local social capital and increases public engagement.
Optimize: To optimize means to increase product performance or efficiency while removing

waste from production and supply chain by adopting practices like automation, big data and
remote sensing. In the content analysis, optimization was mentioned in 14% of the case studies
distributed across diversified sectors like manufacturing of electrical and electronics equipment,
machinery, furniture, waste management and construction. Optimization of resources is achieved
by adopting methods or technology that aids in efficient use of material by developing suitable
production and operating processes, and by reducing waste (Willskytt and Tillman, 2019). In the
construction sector for instance, resource optimization can be achieved through introduction of
high density, mixed-use development, smart grid and smart buildings; passive, zero-net energy,
zero carbon buildings; decentralized energy and water systems; logistics hubs and mass transit
systems (Williams, 2019).
Loop: The remanufacture, refurbishment or recycling of products or components implies to loop

in the resources. To keep the materials in a closed loop, it is essential to recover resources by
collection and segregation, reducing thereby premature disposal, while enabling sustainability
(Bridgens et al., 2019). Comprising of 37% of the case studies, looping of products, components
or resources has been practiced in almost every sector – from manufacturing of electrical
equipment, machinery, plastics and metals to the construction industry, or to packaging,
agriculture, food and beverages industry. Looping of resources is advantageous as the recovery
of product, components and/or waste resources creates numerous economic opportunities
(Cucchiella et al., 2018). Development of policies on reuse, market for second-hand use, training
people for remanufacture or refurbishment and institution of infrastructure for facilitating recycle
can promote more looping initiatives.
Virtualize: Virtualize in literal terms mean to dematerialize i.e. to create a virtual version of
something or digitization of daily trades or businesses. Adoption of virtualization is core to CE‟s
implementation (Álvarez and Ruiz-Puente, 2017). With 4% in the overall case studies analyzed,
virtualization is majorly practiced in the ICT sector, followed by planning for construction
management, and for modelling and designing products. Virtualization at a macro level,
determines the material, product or service flow that can provide the much-needed platform for a
holistic transition to implementing CE within a region. For instance, digitization in a city of
Portugal aided transformation of all the sectors, making the city circularity-friendly by
integrating different businesses, trades and transports, both economically and efficiently
(Cavaleiro de Ferreira and Fuso-Nerini, 2019).
Exchange: The meaning of exchange in the context of ReSOLVE framework is to improvise

upon a new technology or eco-friendly materials so as to ensure material efficiency, durability,
zero wastage and minimum emissions. The exchange component was observed in just 2% of
cases analyzed, presenting thereby the need to incentivize and develop policies for cleaner
production processes along with investment in research for efficient operating and manufacturing
processes. Exchanging traditional materials and technology to green materials and processes is
profitable not just economically, but also socially and environmentally – and can be quantified in
20
terms of reduced costs and low carbon emissions (Avdiushchenko and Zajaç, 2019; Cavaleiro de
Ferreira and Fuso-Nerini, 2019).
3.2.5 Analysis of Business models

The business models form a base to a firm‟s core principles. As per Moreno et al. (2016) the
business models for a CE have five major approaches:
 Circular supplies
 Resource recovery
 Product life extension
 Sharing platforms
 Product as a service
% distribution of CE Business models Product

as a
Sharing service
Product life
6% 2%
extension
9%
Circular
supplies
Resource 48%
recovery
35%
Figure 5: Proportion of Circular Business Model archetypes
Circular supply models – Accounting for 48% of the total case studies, the circular supply
models are the most commonly used business models in firms and businesses in the EU. This has
enabled the replacement of traditional material inputs derived from virgin resources with bio-
based, renewable, or recovered materials, thereby aiding in the reduction of the demand for
virgin resource extraction, while contributing to reduced carbon footprint in the long run. To
create value from used materials and products, it is necessary to collect them and take them back
to their origins (Barbaritano et al., 2019). Looping the materials, products or components is
facilitated by keeping the products or materials in use by reuse, remanufacturing, refurbishment
of products or components or recycling materials or extraction of biochemical from organic
waste. To keep the materials in a closed loop, businesses are expanded, or new models are
developed to recover and recycle valuable resources in an attempt to reduce premature disposal
(Bridgens et al., 2019). The take-back and trade-in systems have promoted reuse and this CE
initiative has made significant impact in manufacturing of electrical and electronic equipment,
along with the textile industry (Tran et al., 2018).
21
Resource recovery models – The term means, recovery of products, components or elements at
the end of service life of a product so as to give it a new functionality and thereby divert those
resources from final disposal. The recovery of residues and/or waste enables closing the flow
loop of materials and resources while creating economic opportunities in terms of sorting,
treatment and recycling (Cucchiella et al., 2018). Resource recovery, being a very laborious job
requires sufficient infrastructure and technology to make the process economically viable. It has
been majorly observed in electrical and electronics industry (Kulczycka et al., 2016). Critical and
rare earth metals are recovered in the sewage industry (Ilić and Nikolić, 2016). The recovery of
resources in different industries has proved to add economic benefits by recovery of metals, non-
metals and other usable materials from waste streams (Accorsi et al., 2015). A case study in the
UK shows the visualization approach adopted by a firm for modelling a building for
deconstruction and disassembly, using D-DAS Revit plug-in, hence facilitating recovery of
construction materials (Akanbi et al., 2019). Similar models have also been adopted in different
industries, wherein material passports are given to each of the elements, and the elements are
recovered for a similar or varied use. The policy of extended producer responsibility has been
key enabler of resource recovery, as the producers have been held directly accountable for
disposing their products. Therefore, the industries have adopted to resource recovery models to
monetize this policy by recovering as many resources and products as possible.
Product life extension – Extending the usage period of the existing products, slowing the flow
of constituent materials through the economy, and reducing the rate of resource extraction and
waste generation are some of the core aspects of life extension of a product. Although being an
important CE strategy, this model is observed in just 2% of the total case studies analyzed. Most
of the industries implemented product life extension by supporting a product through life cycle
services like maintenance, upgradation and repair (Kjaer et al., 2018). Taxation and tax credits
on the usage of raw materials and resources has promoted use of more durable and bio-based
resources, thereby reducing waste, while enabling more green practices (Fletcher et al., 2018).
Sharing platforms – Sharing platforms facilitate the sharing of underutilized products, reducing
thereby the demand for new products and their embedded raw materials. Among industries and
manufacturing units, cross-sector linkages have been established to enable the use of excessive
raw materials, products or wastes between various industries. In case of the end-point consumer,
products and services have been offered on a platform for customers to use through subscriptions
or short-term rentals. Sharing resources have helped in building local social capital and increased
public engagement. A case study by Kjaer et al., (2018) involving three products - bicycle, lawn-
movers and paint provider has shown both the environmental & economic benefits of sharing
platforms. Sharing information using online platforms has increased economic and
environmental performance of industrial symbiosis network and facilitated a strong stakeholder
collaboration network. Virtualization of resource stocks and flows had promoted reuse or recycle
of resources in many regions. In a case of a city in Portugal, digitization of resources had
impacted all the sectors, making the city circularity-friendly, whereby it had integrated different
businesses, trades and transports economically and efficiently (Cavaleiro de Ferreira and Fuso-
Nerini, 2019).
22
Product as a service – In this model, a product is treated as a service i.e., services are marketed
to consumers instead of products. This has facilitated green product design and efficient product
use, thereby promoting a reduced use of natural resources. Product usage as a service is
implemented through both the a meso and macro-level approach, by exchanging or replacing old
materials with advanced materials, which are sustainable, and by applying new technologies in
developing these renewed products and services. Exchange of goods and services has also
proved to be profitable not just economically, but even socially and environmentally in terms of
reduced costs, higher employment generation rate and low carbon emissions (Avdiushchenko
and Zajaç, 2019; Cavaleiro de Ferreira and Fuso-Nerini, 2019). Adoption methods or technology
such as AI, Big-data, etc. to enable sharing business models have reduced the waste outflows by
efficient use of materials (Willskytt and Tillman, 2019). In case of the construction sector,
resource optimization has been achieved by introduction of high density, mixed-use
development, smart grid and smart buildings with; passive, zero-net energy, zero carbon
buildings; decentralized energy and water systems; logistics hubs and mass transit systems
(Williams, 2019).
The deciding factor on the adoption and implementation of circular business models is what is
perceived by the company management. The final waste destinations are determined by market
(prices) rather than environmental criteria (Casas-Arredondo et al., 2018). A significant
development can be achieved in the product-as-a-service model by more collaborative use of
technology and facilitation of resource and knowledge exchange among manufacturers. Use of
durable materials for production and enabling more repair and maintenance facilities are key to
the realization circular business models.
4. Conclusion
A CE model is a self-regenerative model, wherein input waste resources are minimized, and
emissions along with energy losses are negated by slowing, closing and reducing the material
and energy loops. This systematic literature review has elaborated the implementation of CE in
the EU in various sectors. The analysis points to the fact that recycling is the most commonly
used CE strategy. Additionally, technical nutrients are looped more as compared to biological
ones. Most of the CE initiatives have been implemented at a macro level, i.e. in cities or regions
or nation-wide. The penetration of CE has been varied in various industries. While waste-
management, electrical and electronic equipment and construction industries are rapidly adopting
the CE principles, industries like mining and quarrying, health equipment and entertainment and
recreation have had a slow approach towards CE.
The authors have ensured their best to include as much literature as possible; however, the
review is limited as conference papers, field reports or company reports have been excluded
from the study. Moreover, research articles based on the case studies from the EU published by
authors affiliated to countries other than the EU have not been considered in this review. The
future research scope of this review could be a cross-country comparison of CE implementation.
The understanding of the barriers in the implementation of CE as well as an understanding of
which business models are effectively suitable for which industries, could also be an important
research scope. Another interesting scope may possibly be to study the impact of stakeholder
collaboration on CE in various industries. CE has emerged both in terms of research as well as
industry implementation. A continuous effort by academicians, policy experts, producers and
23
consumers towards CE possibly would be is a convenient way to achieve a holistic sustainable
future.
Declaration of interests
☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships
that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
☒The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered
as potential competing interests:
References:
Accorsi, R., Manzini, R., Pini, C., Penazzi, S., 2015. On the design of closed-loop networks for
product life cycle management: Economic, environmental and geography considerations. J.
Transp. Geogr. 48, 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.09.005.
Akanbi, L.A., Oyedele, L.O., Akinade, O.O., Ajayi, A.O., Davila Delgado, M., Bilal, M., Bello,
S.A., 2018. Salvaging building materials in a circular economy: A BIM-based whole-life
performance estimator. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 129, 175–186.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.026.
Akanbi, L.A., Oyedele, L.O., Omoteso, K., Bilal, M., Akinade, O.O., Ajayi, A.O., Davila
Delgado, J.M., Owolabi, H.A., 2019. Disassembly and deconstruction analytics system (D-
DAS) for construction in a circular economy. J. Clean. Prod. 223, 386–396.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.172.
Akande, A., Cabral, P., Casteleyn, S., 2019. Assessing the Gap between Technology and the
Environmental Sustainability of European Cities. Inf. Syst. Front. 21, 581–604.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-019-09903-3.
Ali, M.S.M., Yusof, R.N.R., 2018. Intention to Practice Reduce, Reuse & Recycle (3R) among
Expatriates Working in Malaysia. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 8, 276–295.
https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v8-i3/3928.
Álvarez, R., Ruiz-Puente, C., 2017. Development of the Tool SymbioSyS to Support the
Transition Towards a Circular Economy Based on Industrial Symbiosis Strategies. Waste
and Biomass Valorization, 8, 1521–1530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-016-9748-1.
André, H., Ljunggren Söderman, M., Nordelöf, A., 2019. Resource and environmental impacts
of using second-hand laptop computers: A case study of commercial reuse. Waste Manag.
88, 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.03.050.
Avdiushchenko, A., Zajaç, P., 2019. Circular economy indicators as a supporting tool for
european regional development policies. Sustain. 11(11), 3025.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113025.
Barbaritano, M., Bravi, L., Savelli, E., 2019. Sustainability and quality management in the Italian
luxury furniture sector: A circular economy perspective. Sustain. 11 (11), 3089.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113089.
Bovea, M.D., Pérez-Belis, V., 2018. Identifying design guidelines to meet the circular economy
principles: A case study on electric and electronic equipment. J. Environ. Manage. 228,
483–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.014.
Bressanelli, G., Adrodegari, F., Perona, M., Saccani, N., 2018. Exploring how usage-focused
business models enable circular economy through digital technologies. Sustain. 10 (3), 639.
24
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030639.
Bridgens, B., Hobson, K., Lilley, D., Lee, J., Scott, J.L., Wilson, G.T., 2019. Closing the Loop
on E-waste: A Multidisciplinary Perspective. J. Ind. Ecol. 23, 169–181.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12645.
Bringsken, B.M., Loureiro, I., Ribeiro, C., Vilarinho, C., Carvalho, J., 2018. Community
Involvement Towards a Circular Economy: a Sociocultural Assessment of Projects and
Interventions to Reduce Undifferentiated Waste. Eur. J. Sustain. Dev. 7, 496–506.
https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2018.v7n4p496.
Busch, J., Steinberger, J.K., Dawson, D.A., Purnell, P., Roelich, K., 2014. Managing critical
materials with a technology-specific stocks and flows model. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48,
1298–1305. https://doi.org/10.1021/es404877u.
Casas-Arredondo, M., Croxford, B., Domenech, T., 2018. Material and decision flows in non-
domestic building fit-outs. J. Clean. Prod. 204, 916–925.
Cavaleiro de Ferreira, A., Fuso-Nerini, F., 2019. A Framework for Implementing and Tracking
Circular Economy in Cities: The Case of Porto. Sustainability 11(6), 1813.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061813.
Charles, R.G., Douglas, P., Baker, J.A., Carnie, M.J., Douglas, J.O., Penney, D.J., Watson, T.M.,
2018. Platinized counter-electrodes for dye-sensitised solar cells from waste thermocouples:
A case study for resource efficiency, industrial symbiosis and circular economy. J. Clean.
Prod. 202, 1167–1178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.125.
Cucchiella, F., D‟Adamo, I., Gastaldi, M., Miliacca, M., 2018. A profitability analysis of small-
scale plants for biomethane injection into the gas grid. J. Clean. Prod. 184, 179–187.
Demichelis, F., Piovano, F., Fiore, S., 2019. Biowaste Management in Italy: Challenges and
Perspectives. Sustainability 11(15), 4213. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154213.
Deshpande, P.C., Skaar, C., Brattebø, H., Magerholm, A., 2020. Multi-criteria decision analysis (
MCDA ) method for assessing the sustainability of end-of-life alternatives for waste
plastics : A case study of Norway. Science of the Total Environment, 137353.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137353.
Diez, L., Marangé, P., Levrat, É., 2016. Maintenance best way for meeting the challenge of
regeneration. IFAC-PapersOnLine 49, 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.11.009.
Eberhardt, L.C.M., Birgisdóttir, H., Birkved, M., 2019. Life cycle assessment of a Danish office
building designed for disassembly. Build. Res. Inf. 47, 666–680.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2018.1517458.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017. Achieving Growth Within.
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org (accessed on 2 December 2019).
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2015. Circular Economy Report - Delivering The Circular
Economy. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org (accessed on 10 August 2019).
EMAF, 2015. Growth within: a circular economy vision for a competitive europe.
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org (accessed on 10 August 2019).
Fletcher, C.A., Hooper, P.D., Dunk, R.M., 2018. Unintended consequences of secondary
legislation: A case study of the UK landfill tax (qualifying fines) order 2015. Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 138, 160–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.07.011.
Galli, A., Halle, M., Grunewald, N., 2015. Physical limits to resource access and utilisation and
their economic implications in Mediterranean economies. Environ. Sci. Policy 51, 125–136.
25
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.002.
Galli, A., Iha, K., Moreno Pires, S., Mancini, M.S., Alves, A., Zokai, G., Lin, D., Murthy, A.,
Wackernagel, M., 2020. Assessing the Ecological Footprint and biocapacity of Portuguese
cities: Critical results for environmental awareness and local management. Cities 96,
102442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102442.
Gehin, A., Zwolinski, P., Brissaud, D., 2008. A tool to implement sustainable end-of-life
strategies in the product development phase. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 566–576.
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N.M.P., Hultink, E.J., 2017. The Circular Economy – A
new sustainability paradigm? J. Clean. Prod. 143, 757–768.
Geldermans, B., Tenpierik, M., Luscuere, P., 2019. Circular and flexible infill concepts:
Integration of the residential user perspective. Sustain. 11(1), 261.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010261.
Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., Ulgiati, S., 2016. A review on circular economy: The expected
transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J. Clean. Prod.
114, 11–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007.
Gilbert, P., Wilson, P., Walsh, C., Hodgson, P., 2017. The role of material efficiency to reduce
CO 2 emissions during ship manufacture: A life cycle approach. Mar. Policy 75, 227–237.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.04.003.
Grant, M.J., Booth, A., 2009. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and
associated methodologies. Health Info. Libr. J. 26(2), 91–108.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.
Hatcher, G.D., Ijomah, W.L., Windmill, J.F.C., 2014. Design for remanufacture : a literature
review and future research needs. J. Clean. Prod. 19, 2004–2014.
Husgafvel, R., Linkosalmi, L., Hughes, M., Kanerva, J., Dahl, O., 2018. Forest sector circular
economy development in Finland: A regional study on sustainability driven competitive
advantage and an assessment of the potential for cascading recovered solid wood. J. Clean.
Ilić, M., Nikolić, M., 2016. Drivers for development of circular economy - A case study of
Serbia. Habitat Int. 56, 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.06.003.
Jiménez-Rivero, A., Guzmán-Báez, A. de, García-Navarro, J., 2017. Enhanced On-Site Waste
Management of Plasterboard in Construction Works: A Case Study in Spain. Sustain. 9(3),
450. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9030450.
Kalmykova, Y., Sadagopan, M., Rosado, L., 2018. Circular economy - From review of theories
and practices to development of implementation tools. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 135, 190–
201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.034.
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., Hekkert, M., 2017. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis
of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 127, 221–232.
Kjaer, L.L., Pigosso, D.C.A., McAloone, T.C., Birkved, M., 2018. Guidelines for evaluating the
environmental performance of Product/Service-Systems through life cycle assessment. J.
Clean. Prod. 190, 666–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.108.
Kulczycka, J., Kowalski, Z., Smol, M., Wirth, H., 2016. Evaluation of the recovery of Rare Earth
Elements (REE) from phosphogypsum waste - Case study of the WIZÓW Chemical Plant
26
(Poland). J. Clean. Prod. 113, 345–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.039.
Larsen, S.B., Masi, D., Jacobsen, P., Godsell, J., 2018. How the reverse supply chain contributes
to a firm‟s competitive strategy: a strategic alignment perspective. Prod. Plan. Control 29,
452–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1390178.
Lee, J., Pedersen, A.B., Thomsen, M., 2014. The influence of resource strategies on childhood
phthalate exposure-The role of REACH in a zero waste society. Environ. Int. 73, 312–322.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2014.08.003.
Leising, E., Quist, J., Bocken, N., 2018. Circular Economy in the building sector : Three cases
and a collaboration tool. J. Clean. Prod. 176, 976–989.
Lieder, M., Asif, F.M.A., Rashid, A., Mihelič, A., Kotnik, S., 2018. A conjoint analysis of
circular economy value propositions for consumers: Using “washing machines in
Stockholm” as a case study. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 264–273.
Lindkvist Haziri, Sundin, Sakao, 2019. Feedback from Remanufacturing: Its Unexploited
Potential to Improve Future Product Design. Sustainability 11(15), 4037.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154037.
Lindström, J., Hermanson, A., Blomstedt, F., Kyösti, P., 2018. A multi-usable cloud service
platform: A case study on improved development pace and efficiency. Appl. Sci. 8(2), 316.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app8020316.
Lisjak, J., Schade, S., Kotsev, A., 2017. Closing data gaps with citizen science? Findings from
the Danube Region. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Information 6(9), 277.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi6090277.
Luttenberger, L.R., 2020. Waste management challenges in transition to circular economy –
Case of Croatia. J. Clean. Prod. 256, 120495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120495.
Maitre-Ekern, E., Dalhammar, C., 2019. Towards a hierarchy of consumption behaviour in the
circular economy. Maastrich. J. Eur. Comp. Law 26, 394–420.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X19840943.
Mantalovas, K., Di Mino, G., 2019. The sustainability of reclaimed asphalt as a resource for road
pavement management through a circular economic model. Sustain. 11(8), 2234.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082234.
Marrucci, L., Marchi, M., Daddi, T., 2020. Improving the carbon footprint of food and packaging
waste management in a supermarket of the Italian retail sector. Waste Manag. 105, 594–
603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.03.002.
Martín, C.J., Carnero, M.C., 2019. Evaluation of sustainable development in European Union
countries. Appl. Sci. 9(22), 4880. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9224880.
Masternak-Janus, A., 2019. Efficiency of materials management in the European Union. World
J. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 15, 354–365. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJEMSD-03-2019-
0019.
Merli, R., Preziosi, M., Acampora, A., 2018. How do scholars approach the circular economy? A
systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 178, 703–722.
Mishra, J.L., Hopkinson, P.G., Tidridge, G., 2018. Value creation from circular economy-led
closed loop supply chains: a case study of fast-moving consumer goods. Prod. Plan. Control
29, 509–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1449245.
Moreno, M., De los Rios, C., Rowe, Z., Charnley, F., 2016. A conceptual framework for circular
27
design. Sustain. 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8090937.
Morseletto, P., 2020. Restorative and regenerative: Exploring the concepts in the circular
economy. J. Ind. Ecol. 24, 763–773. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12987.
Munaro, M.R., Tavares, S.F., Bragança, L., 2020. Towards circular and more sustainable
buildings: A systematic literature review on the circular economy in the built environment.
J. Clean. Prod, 121134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121134.
Nasir, M.H.A., Genovese, A., Acquaye, A.A., Koh, S.C.L., Yamoah, F., 2017. Comparing linear
and circular supply chains: A case study from the construction industry. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
183, 443–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.06.008.
Nowakowski, P., Król, A., Mrówczyńska, B., 2017. Supporting mobile WEEE collection on
demand: A method for multi-criteria vehicle routing, loading and cost optimisation. Waste
Manag. 69, 377–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.07.045.
Núñez-Cacho, P., Molina-Moreno, V., Corpas-Iglesias, F.A., Cortés-García, F.J., 2018. Family
businesses transitioning to a circular economy model: The case of “Mercadona.” Sustain.
10(2), 538. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020538.
Nußholz, J.L.K., Nygaard Rasmussen, F., Milios, L., 2019. Circular building materials: Carbon
saving potential and the role of business model innovation and public policy. Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 141, 308–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.036.
Oezdemir, O., Krause, K., Hafner, A., 2017. Creating a resource cadaster-A case study of a
district in the Rhine-Ruhr metropolitan area. Buildings, 7(2), 45.
https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings7020045.
Paredes-Sánchez, J.P., López-Ochoa, L.M., López-González, L.M., Las-Heras-Casas, J.,
Xiberta-Bernat, J., 2018. Energy utilization for distributed thermal production in rural areas:
A case study of a self-sustaining system in Spain. Energy Convers. Manag. 174, 1014–
1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.08.080.
Pavlas, M., Šomplák, R., Smejkalová, V., Stehlík, P., 2019. Municipal Solid Waste Fractions and
Their Source Separation: Forecasting for Large Geographical Area and Its Subregions.
Waste and Biomass Valorization, 11(2), 725-742. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-019-
00764-0.
Pomponi, F., Moncaster, A., 2017. Circular economy for the built environment : A research
framework 143, 710–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.055.
Poponi, S., Colantoni, A., Cividino, S.R.S., Mosconi, E.M., 2019. The Stakeholders‟ perspective
within the B corp certification for a circular approach. Sustain. 11 (6), 1584.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061584.
Prieto-Sandoval, V., Mejía-Villa, A., Ormazabal, M., Jaca, C., 2020. Challenges for ecolabeling
growth: lessons from the EU Ecolabel in Spain. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 25, 856–867.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01611-z.
Rada, E.C., 2019. Special waste valorization and renewable energy generation under a circular
economy: Which priorities? WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 222, 145–157.
https://doi.org/10.2495/EQ180141.
Ræbild, U., Bang, A.L., 2017. Rethinking the Fashion Collection as a Design Strategic Tool in a
Circular Economy. Des. J. 20(sup1), S589–S599.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1353007.
Rapsikevičienė, J., Gurauskienė, I., Jučienė, A., 2019. Model of industrial textile waste
management. Environ. Res. Eng. Manag. 75, 43–55.
https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.erem.75.1.21703.
28
Rentizelas, A., Shpakova, A., Mašek, O., 2018. Designing an optimised supply network for
sustainable conversion of waste agricultural plastics into higher value products. J. Clean.
Rieckhof, R., Guenther, E., 2018. Integrating life cycle assessment and material flow cost
accounting to account for resource productivity and economic-environmental performance.
Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 23, 1491–1506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1447-7.
Rigamonti, L., Biganzoli, L., Grosso, M., 2019. Packaging re-use: a starting point for its
quantification. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 21, 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-
018-0747-0.
Santagata, R., Ripa, M., Ulgiati, S., 2017. An environmental assessment of electricity production
from slaughterhouse residues. Linking urban, industrial and waste management systems.
Appl. Energy 186, 175–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.07.073.
Scarpellini, S., Portillo-Tarragona, P., Aranda-Usón, A., Llena-Macarulla, F., 2019. Definition
and measurement of the circular economy‟s regional impact. J. Environ. Plan. Manag.
6(13), 2211-2237. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2018.1537974.
Singh, A., Panchal, R., Naik, M., 2020. Circular economy potential of e-waste collectors,
dismantlers, and recyclers of Maharashtra: a case study. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 27,
22081–22099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08320-3
Smol, M., Kulczycka, J., Kowalski, Z., 2016. Sewage sludge ash (SSA) from large and small
incineration plants as a potential source of phosphorus – Polish case study. J. Environ.
Manage. 184, 617–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.035.
Sumter, D., Bakker, C., Balkenende, R., 2018. The role of product design in creating circular
business models: A case study on the lease and refurbishment of baby strollers. Sustain.
10(7), 2415. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072415.
Tomić, T., Schneider, D.R., 2018. The role of energy from waste in circular economy and
closing the loop concept – Energy analysis approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 98, 268–
287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.09.029.
Tran, H.P., Schaubroeck, T., Swart, P., Six, L., Coonen, P., Dewulf, J., 2018. Recycling portable
alkaline/ZnC batteries for a circular economy: An assessment of natural resource
consumption from a life cycle and criticality perspective. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 135,
265–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.08.018.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., Smart, P., 2003. Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-
Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. Br. J. Manag. 14, 207–
222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375.
Turner, R.K., 1990. The Ethical Foundations of Sustainable Economic Development. Int. Inst.
Environ. Dev.
Uche-Soria, M., Rodríguez-Monroy, C., 2019. An efficient waste-to-energy model in isolated
environments. Case study: La Gomera (Canary Islands). Sustain. 11(11), 3198.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113198.
Ueberschaar, M., Dariusch Jalalpoor, D., Korf, N., Rotter, V.S., 2017. Potentials and Barriers for
Tantalum Recovery from Waste Electric and Electronic Equipment. J. Ind. Ecol. 21, 700–
714. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12577.
Unger, N., Beigl, P., Höggerl, G., Salhofer, S., 2017. The greenhouse gas benefit of recycling
waste electrical and electronic equipment above the legal minimum requirement: An
Austrian LCA case study. J. Clean. Prod. 164, 1635–1644.
29
Vanegas, P., Peeters, J.R., Cattrysse, D., Tecchio, P., Ardente, F., Mathieux, F., Dewulf, W.,
Duflou, J.R., 2018. Ease of disassembly of products to support circular economy strategies.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 135, 323–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.06.022.
Viani, C., Vaccari, M., Tudor, T., 2016. Recovering value from used medical instruments: A
case study of laryngoscopes in England and Italy. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 111, 1–9.
Wandl, A., Balz, V., Qu, L., Furlan, C., Arciniegas, G., Hackauf, U., 2019. The circular economy
concept in design education: Enhancing understanding and innovation by means of situated
learning. Urban Plan. 4, 63–75. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v4i3.2147.
Wastling, T., Charnley, F., Moreno, M., 2018. Design for circular behaviour: Considering users
in a circular economy. Sustain. 10(6), 1743. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061743.
Werle, S., Sobek, S., 2019. Correction to: Gasification of sewage sludge within a circular
economy perspective: a Polish case study. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26(35), 35422-35432
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06162-2.
Williams, J., 2019. The Circular Regeneration of a Seaport. Sustainability 11(12), 3424.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11123424.
Willskytt, S., Tillman, A.M., 2019. Resource efficiency of consumables – Life cycle assessment
of incontinence products. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 144, 13–23.
Wohner, B., Helene, V., Krenn, B., Krauter, V., Tacker, M., 2020. Science of the Total
Environment Environmental and economic assessment of food-packaging systems with a
focus on food waste . Case study on tomato ketchup. Sci. Total Environ. 738, 139846.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139846.
World Economic Forum, 2019. Harnessing the Fourth Industrial Revolution for the Circular
Economy: Consumer Electronics and Plastics Packaging. https://www.weforum.org/reports
(accessed on 6 October 2019)
Yáñez, M., Ortiz, A., Brunaud, B., Grossmann, I.E., Ortiz, I., 2018. Contribution of upcycling
surplus hydrogen to design a sustainable supply chain: The case study of Northern Spain.
Appl. Energy 231, 777–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.09.047.
Ylmén, P., Berlin, J., Mjörnell, K., Arfvidsson, J., 2020. Managing choice uncertainties in life-
cycle assessment as a decision-support tool for building design: A case study on building
framework. Sustain. 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125130.
Zijp, M.C., Waaijers-van der Loop, S.L., Heijungs, R., Broeren, M.L.M., Peeters, R., Van
Nieuwenhuijzen, A., Shen, L., Heugens, E.H.W., Posthuma, L., 2017. Method selection for
sustainability assessments: The case of recovery of resources from waste water. J. Environ.
Manage. 197, 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.04.006.
30

A Systematic Literature Review on the CE

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Systematic Literature Review on the CE

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Systematic Literature Review on the CE

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal Pre-proof

A Systematic Literature Review on the Circular Economy Initiatives in

Purva Mhatre , Rohit Panchal , Anju Singh , Shyam Bibyan

To appear in: Sustainable Production and Consumption

Received date: 28 March 2020

© 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Institution of Chemical Engineers.

Purva Mhatre1, Rohit Panchal1,*, Anju Singh1 and Shyam Bibyan1

Keywords: Circular Economy, European Union, CE strategies, Nutrient cycles, ReSOLVE

The concept of CE is based on premises of minimization of waste and pollution, extension of

The research questions addressed are:

Figure 1: Framework for selection of papers from database

3.1 Descriptive analysis

The journals of significance include „Journal of Cleaner Production‟, followed by „Sustainability

3.2 Content Analysis

3.2.1 CE strategies and their implementation in different sectors

Real estate activities

Water supply, waste & remediation

Of the various sectors, implementation of CE in the health industry requires careful

In case of the manufacturing industry, be it automobiles, machinery or equipment, the transition

In the agriculture sector, CE has been implemented by making bio-fertilizers from

3.2.2 Level of CE implementation

3.2.3 Analysis of Nutrient cycles

% CE strategies adopted for technical nutrients

Figure 3: CE strategies for Technical nutrients

Refurbish/Remanufacture: Remanufacturing or refurbishment is a product recovery option

Figure 4: CE strategies for Biological nutrients

Extraction of biochemical feedstock: The extraction of biochemical feedstock means applying

3.2.4 Analysis of ReSOLVE Framework

Figure 5: Proportion of Circular Business Model archetypes

Regenerate: To regenerate means to envision and sequence the processes of resource

Optimize: To optimize means to increase product performance or efficiency while removing

Loop: The remanufacture, refurbishment or recycling of products or components implies to loop

Exchange: The meaning of exchange in the context of ReSOLVE framework is to improvise

3.2.5 Analysis of Business models

% distribution of CE Business models Product

Figure 5: Proportion of Circular Business Model archetypes

You might also like