Developing New Indonesia Circular Economy Indicators: A Lesson Learnt from European Union

Siti Afiani Musyarofah, Alva Edy Tontowi, Nur Aini Masruroh, Budhi Sholeh Wibowo, IDAA Warmadewanthi, Arman Hakim Nasution, Mohamad Khoiru Rusydi, Gogor Arif Handiwibowo, Gita Widi Bhawika

Abstract


Circular Economy (CE) right now has been a point of interest among countries in the world as a commitment of the Paris Agreement to solve global environmental problems, which are simultaneously beneficial to economics. However, presently there is no single indicator available that easily be used as a CE standard due to various stresses among the countries. There are different approaches among countries in developing CE indicators, although they are still within the scope of the environmental and economic aspects. CE indicators could be developed based on region covering several countries, government/country level, and company level. Those indicators refer to the region and government policy and market or users of the product and a society where its public area would receive waste that the company might produce. This review will discuss only European Union and Poland, representing regions and countries. A region like the European Union (EU) considers ten indicators for CE, consisting of 21 sub-indicators. These indicators include self-sufficiency in raw materials, procurement for the green public, waste generation, food waste, recycling rate, recovery of specific waste streams, recycled materials to raw materials demand contribution, raw material trade-in, investment, jobs, and gross value-added, patents of secondary and recycling raw materials. While Poland, as a member of the EU, developed 25 CE indicators based on the seven dimensions of the economic point of view, such as economic prosperity, zero waste, innovative, renewable energy- based economy, low carbon, smart economy, and spatially effective economy. Implementing a Comparative Analysis Method that compares one indicator to another, the results show that 6 of 10 indicators belonging to the EU overlap with four indicators of 25 belonging to Poland. Covering all indicators of both regions and countries, thus it would become 29 selected indicators that might be useful for developing Indonesia CE- Indicators, which are presently unavailable yet.


Keywords


Circular Economy; Country; Environment; Indicator; Region

Full Text:

PDF

References


United Nation, “Paris Agreement,” 2015, doi: 10.1017/s0020782900004253.

G. Moraga et al., “Circular economy indicators : What do they measure,” Resour. Conserv. Recycl., vol. 146, pp. 452–461, 2019.

J. Cantzler, F. Creutzig, E. Ayargarnchanakul, A. Javaid, L. Wong, and W. Haas, “Saving resources and the climate? A systematic review of the circular economy and its mitigation potential,” Environ. Res. Lett., vol. 15, no. 12, 2020, doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/abbeb7.

R. Merli, M. Preziosi, and A. Acampora, “How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic literature review,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 178, pp. 703–722, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.112.

Z. Yuan, J. Bi, and Y. Moriguichi, “The circular economy: A new development strategy in China,” J. Ind. Ecol., vol. 10, no. 1–2, pp. 4–8, 2006, doi: 10.1162/108819806775545321.

K. Winans, A. Kendall, and H. Deng, “The history and current applications of the circular economy concept,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 68, pp. 825–823, 2017, [Online]. Available: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364032114007898.

S. Vanhamaki et al., “Bio-based circular economy in European national and regional strategies,” Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plan., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 31–43, 2019, doi: 10.2495/SDP-V14-N1-31-43.

European Commission, “Measuring progress towards circular economy in the European Union – Key indicators for a monitoring framework,” 2018.

A. Avdiushchenko and P. Zajaç, “Circular economy indicators as a supporting tool for european regional development policies,” Sustain., vol. 11, no. 11, 2019, doi: 10.3390/su11113025.

Y. Geng and B. Doberstein, “Developing the circular economy in China : Challenges and opportunities for achieving ‘leapfrog development,” Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol., vol. 15, pp. 231–239, 2008, doi: 10.3843/SusDev.15.3.

C. Liu and R. Côté, “A framework for integrating ecosystem services into China’s circular economy: The case of eco-industrial parks,” Sustain., vol. 9, no. 9, 2017, doi: 10.3390/su9091510.

W. Jiao and F. Boons, “Policy durability of Circular Economy in China: A process analysis of policy translation,” Resour. Conserv. Recycl., vol. 117, pp. 12–24, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.10.010.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12962/j23546026.y2023i1.16368

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


View my Stat: Click Here

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.