Depletion of natural resources and nature loss are perceived not only as a moral or an ecological issue, but also as economic, developmental, human health and justice issues, as the most vulnerable populations are the most affected. It is also an intergenerational justice issue, as we are leaving a complex legacy to our children, their children and future generations to come. The rate of extraction of natural resources has been increasing day by day, creating problems for all living creatures, including humans. In the words of the Secretary-General of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD):¹ 

The tension between the state of the planet, ever-growing human and consumption pressures, ever-increasing rates of extraction of natural resources, and our awareness and readiness to respond, are a sign of a society in transition, a society at its greatest fork in the road, a turning point, and facing its deepest system change challenge around what is perhaps the most existential of all our relationships: the one with nature. The nexus between water–energy–food has become the focus area globally with huge wastage of these resources accompanied by scarcity in several parts of the world. Global population and economic growth have increased the demand for resources, energy and food, resulting in mass production and mass consumption. This generates vast amounts of waste, exacerbating global environmental challenges, in particular climate change, resource depletion and marine pollution.

Chapter 1 discusses two key concepts expressed in the title of this book: sustainable development and the circular economy. Complementary to Chapter 2, this chapter focuses on issues relating to implementation: policy, legislation and standards developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Following a discussion on some of the pressures on the environment, in particular the consequences of resource depletion and resource wastage, policy implementation supported by legislation is discussed as it has been applied in a selection of countries, and in the European Union. Finally, standards developed by the ISO and relating to the circular economy are presented.

According to the latest United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) white paper, the world's population is now 7.954 billion and it is expected to surpass 9.7 billion by 2050.²  The World Bank estimates that this will be accompanied by a significant increase in the world's annual waste volume, from 2.01 billion tonnes today to 3.4 billion tonnes in 2050.³  Because of disparities in economic growth, daily per capita waste generation in high-income countries is projected to increase by 19% by 2050, compared to >40% in Low- and Middle-income Countries (LMICs), with greenhouse gas emissions increasing from 1.6 BT CO₂eq in 2016 (5% of global emissions) 2.6 BT CO₂eq by 2050 if current waste management practices remain unchanged.

Waste generation is a consequence of increased raw materials’ extraction, transformation into goods and products, their use by consumers and their subsequent discard, activities that rise with population growth coupled with economic growth, increased prosperity and increased purchasing power. Global material use has tripled over the past four decades, with annual global extraction of materials growing from 22 billion tonnes (1970) to 70 billion tonnes (2010).⁴  Global material use has been accelerating. Material extraction per capita increased from 7 to 10 tonnes from 1970 to 2010, indicating improvements in the material standard of living in many parts of the world.

The report identified the large gaps in material standards of living that exist between North America and Europe and all other world regions. Annual per capita material footprint for the Asia Pacific region, Latin America, the Caribbean and West Asia is between 9 and 10 tonnes, or half that of Europe and North America, which is about 20 to 25 tonnes per person. In contrast, Africa has an average material footprint of below 3 tonnes per capita.⁴ 

Climate change, resource depletion, rapid and unplanned urban growth and delivering adequate and sustainable housing are amongst the greatest challenges of the 21st century. To illustrate the latter challenge, countries such as India instituted policies and schemes to build houses for its homeless citizens through the Pradhan Mantri (Prime Minister) Awas Yojana (Urban) Mission launched in 2015 (also see Section 1.4.3). The mission provided central assistance to stateside implementing agencies for providing houses to all eligible families/ beneficiaries from the urban poor with a target of building 20 million affordable houses by 31 March 2022. Clearly the call on building and other construction materials was considerable, leading to the need for circularity in construction industries by using recycled, repurposed products and demolition materials.

In 1962 American biologist Rachel Carson, with her book Silent Spring, alerted the world to the environmental impact of chemical pesticides, inspiring the global environmental movement. Silent Spring is widely considered as one of the most important environmental books of the 20th century. In January 1969 the Santa Barbara oil spill released over 15 million litres of oil onto the California coast, killing thousands of animals. This disaster, which was the worst oil spill until that time, captured global attention. It became another alarm for the world to consider humans’ responsibility for conserving the environment. This led to the first Earth Day (22 April 1970), when 20 million people got together to celebrate our planet. Calling attention to a model of unsustainable economic growth, the UN established the Brundtland Commission in 1983, from which the seminal report of 1987 resulted (see Chapter 2), defining the framework for sustainable development.

Approved by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) as part of the September 2015 Resolution A/RES/70/1 Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,⁵  SDGs are an outcome of the intergovernmental process initiated at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro in June 2012.⁶  In September 2015 all member states of the United Nations agreed to adopt the 2030 Agenda. It is a universal action plan for global cooperation on sustainable development for the period 2015 to 2030. Under the commitment “leave no one behind”, the 2030 Agenda defined 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with 169 targets. These are discussed in Chapter 2; the SDGs are summarised here in Table 1.1 for convenience.

SDGs have a strong focus on the means of implementation that include finance, capacity building, trade, policy, institutional coherence, multi-stakeholder partnerships, data, monitoring and accountability, public governance and technology.⁷  A number of targets under SDG 16 and SDG 17 also focus directly on the means of implementation, which “are key to realizing our Agenda and are of equal importance with the other Goals and targets”.⁵  The SDG framework emphasises national planning and regular progress reviews on the national level, complemented by voluntary reviews through the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF), a central platform for overseeing the follow-up and review of SDGs on a global level under the auspices of the UNGA and the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).⁵  According to the latest HLPF review, many countries “nationalized … targets for the 2030 Agenda in their national strategies and plans, including financing strategies and institutional mechanisms”.⁸  National legislation, policy frameworks and targets are critical for understanding and realising the SDGs in each country’s own perspective for their people, enablers and actors.

The circular economy and the so-called 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) are very important concepts that have gained increasing prominence as a tool that presents solutions to some of the world’s most pressing cross-cutting sustainable development challenges. The circular economy addresses the root causes, in which waste and pollution do not exist by design, products and materials are kept in use, and natural systems are regenerated, providing much promise to accelerate implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Given that massive changes to the way our societies and businesses are organised are essential to transition to a sustainable future, the circular economy holds particular promise for achieving the SDGs, including SDGs 6 on energy, 8 on economic growth, 11 on sustainable cities, 12 on sustainable consumption and production, 13 on climate change, 14 on oceans and 15 on life on land. A study reported that a circular economy development path could halve carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, relative to today’s levels, across mobility, food systems and the built environment.^9 ,10 

The circular economy has deep-rooted origins, conceptually characterised as cradle-to-cradle.¹¹  The design philosophy behind the concept is to consider all materials involved in industrial and commercial processes to be nutrients, in which two main categories are the actors: (1) technical and (2) biological. Its practical applications have gained momentum from the late 1970s and early 1980s to modern economic systems and industrial processes.

Ghosh has defined the circular economy as:¹² 

The concept of EPCD2 is characterised as the traditional linear economy based on a model of mass production, mass consumption and mass disposal. The transformation from a linear to a circular economy has gone hand in hand with the acceptance for the need to ensure sustainable economic growth. For example, since the early 2000s, Japan has been advancing the 3Rs ahead of the rest of the world and has been making progress in a steady manner, reducing the amount of final disposal and improving recycling rates.

The correlation between SDGs and the circular economy is discussed in Chapter 2. Natural resource management is directly tied to at least 12 of the 17 SDGs, according to the International Resource Panel.⁴  Concentration on natural resources to meet the Paris Climate Agreement commitments is so important that in its absence compliance to those commitments will be impossible. More efficient practices could cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2050.¹³  Effective management of natural resources is also a key component of poverty eradication and resilient economic growth.

The circular economy model offers a new opportunity for innovation and integration among natural ecosystems, reengineering businesses, our daily lives and society as well as resource and waste management. For maximum traction, the circular model of resource management should be defined in a holistic manner that is internationally accepted.

Currently available technologies can help to better manage energy demand, improve efficiency and support both low-carbon economic growth and job creation. But progress in the efficient deployment of these technologies faces a number of challenges, including non-technical barriers such as a lack of policy support, perceived and real project risk, lack of financial support for LMICs, lack of access to low-cost capital, long permitting timelines, community pushback, rebound effects and supply chain challenges.

While effective waste management may lead to the production of recycled products, there is generally a low awareness about the quality and characteristic of these products. The quality of recycled products depends on the competence and confidence levels of the supply chain of the waste starting from the source through to the use, disposal and resource recirculation stages. There should be standardisation of the recycling processes and recycled products. The effectiveness of the circular economy and the SDGs will depend to a great extent on whether national or international standards for a specific operation and products are available that can build customer and stakeholder confidence. Here the role of national standard bodies and the ISO is critical. It is noteworthy that the ISO technical committee 323 (ISO/TC 323) (Circular Economy) was formed in 2019 to develop standards relating to the circular economy (see Section 1.6).

The Global Circularity Gap Report in 2019 reported that only 9% of the world economy was circular.¹⁴  Due to the complexity of the sustainable development vision, most often its implementation needs to be supported by innovation designers, intermediaries and policymakers. They provide services and designs ushering appropriate radical changes in practices, policies and decision-making tools.^15 ,16  Although formulated for the agricultural sector, the UN Environment Programme’s (UNEP’s) compendium of policy tools to support implementation of the SDGs can be generalised as follows:¹⁷ 

• financing and technical assistance policies

• land access policies

• recognition of sustainability policies in master plans, urban zoning and instruments for territorial planning and land-use regulation

• policies for more sustainable water use and access

• policies and urban planning for local food production

• policies to strengthen markets for local producers

• policies that support research and data collection

• policy interventions for a circular economy – regulatory frameworks, fiscal frameworks, education, information and awareness creation, public procurement policies and innovation support schemes.

Policymakers should delineate up front the purpose/goal of their policies, to help optimise outcomes and to make explicit any trade-offs.

Because of the global nature of pollution, transnational agreements are often critical to achieve particular SDGs. Such is the case with marine pollution caused by discarded plastics, where studies have shown that plastic pollution is largely a regional issue with global implications.¹⁸  The Osaka Blue Ocean Vision (Figure 1.1), a voluntary commitment of the G20 countries, aims to “reduce the additional pollution by marine plastic litter to zero by 2050 through a comprehensive life-cycle approach”, with endorsements from 86 countries and regions (as of January 2021). The Vision addresses SDG 14 (Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources) and in particular Target 14.1 (By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kind, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution).

A compilation of policies relating to plastic pollution indicated that policies at the regional level were largely a European phenomenon (62% of regional policies in the inventory). At a national level, the upward trend in policy responses over the last decade largely reflected new policies introduced solely to address pollution from plastic bags, the instrument used most being a regulatory ban on plastic at some stage in the life cycle. National governments used regulatory instruments more frequently than economic instruments and information and/or behaviour change instruments in the sample analysed.¹⁹ 

The adoption of SDG initiatives is illustrated in the following sections in the case of a regional entity (the European Union) and a national entity (India).

As an active member of the UN, the Brundtland Commission’s seminal report on sustainable development (see Chapter 2) was the foundation stone for policy initiatives of the European Communities (EC) prior to 1993, and of the European Union (EU) thereafter.²⁰  Article B of the Treaty on European Union (1992), otherwise known as the Maastricht Treaty, introduced an objective of the Union to “promote economic and social progress which is balanced and sustainable”, with Article 2 undertaking:²¹ 

The consolidated version of the Treaty published in 2012 stated at Article 3(3):²² 

In 2001 the EU published its first Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS) “to achieve a continuous long-term improvement of quality of life through the creation of sustainable communities able to manage and use resources efficiently, able to tap the ecological and social innovation potential of the economy and in the end able to ensure prosperity, environmental protection and social cohesion”.²³  Renewed alongside a relaunch of the Lisbon Strategy in 2005, the SDS was updated in 2006 with the following priority areas for action to be achieved by 2010:

• climate change and clean energy

• sustainable transport

• sustainable consumption and sustainable production

• conservation and management of natural resources

• public health

• social inclusion, demography and migration

• global poverty and sustainable development challenges.

The 2001 SDS introduced an important objective to improve policy coherence, stating that “sustainable development should become the central objective of all sectors and policies”, and that “All policies must have sustainable development as their core concern” (original emphasis).

Following a declaration in 2009 by the European Council that “Sustainable development remains a fundamental objective of the European Union” and that the SDS “will continue to provide a long-term vision and constitute the overarching policy framework for all Union policies and strategies”, sustainable development as a policy imperative was incorporated in a new strategy termed Europe 2020, intended as a remedial to the 2008 economic crisis.²⁴  Particular emphasis was placed on combatting climate change and delivering clean and efficient energy. As the title indicates, the strategy extended the EU’s policy and delivery horizon for sustainable development from 2010 to 2020.

The UN’s adoption of its 2030 Agenda necessitated further reflection and review of the EU’s programme for sustainable development, not least because of a new set of SDGs and a new delivery horizon of 2030 (see Chapter for details). Responding to a reflection paper published by the Commission, the incoming presidency launched a revamped growth strategy, the European Green Deal (EGD) in December 2019 while continuing to mainstream the SDGs in EU policies. The EDG focused EU policy on the following themes:

1. increasing the EU’s climate ambition for 2030 and 2050

2. supplying clean, affordable and secure energy

3. mobilising industry for a clean and circular economy

4. building and renovating in an energy- and resource-efficient way

5. accelerating the shift to sustainable and smart mobility

6. from farm to fork: designing a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food system

7. preserving and restoring ecosystems and biodiversity

8. a zero-pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment

Explicitly described as “the EU’s strategy for reaching the 2050 goal [of achieving climate neutrality – net zero by 2050]”, the EGD can be viewed as having a predominantly economic and environmental focus, despite its commitment to a “just transition” and for “sustainable competitiveness and social fairness and resilience”. To address more fully the broader aspects of the SDGs, supporting policies were proposed, for example on human rights, gender equality, taxation, minimum wage, education and skills. Nevertheless, the general consensus among commentators is that the EU continues to take a piecemeal approach to actioning the SDGs, and that there is a lack of cohesion in its policymaking processes, not least because implementation is left to the discretion of each Member State. The open question is whether it is sufficient for the EU to embrace sustainability and sustainable development in a general sense in EU policymaking with touchpoints to some of the UN SDGs and their targets, which it undoubtedly does, as evidenced in the Commission’s policy initiatives driving the eight themes of the EGD, or whether the EU should create more formal procedures to explicitly incorporate the UN SDGs and their indicators as a package into its policies, albeit tailored to suit regional circumstances (for instance, the EU tracks obesity as opposed to undernourishment under SDG 1).

There have been persistent calls from the Council of the EU (the Council of Ministers), the European Council (setting the overall political direction and priorities of the EU) and the European Parliament for the Commission to develop a comprehensive implementation strategy for the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs. The latest resolution of the European Parliament (June 2022) emphasises the urgency of the task, and “Calls for the Commission to adopt a new high-level EU 2030 Agenda implementation strategy … building on EU resolutions and policy directives aimed at achieving the SDGs, given that there are fewer than eight years left to achieve the 2030 Agenda …”.^25 ,26  Included in the strategy should be: (a) a new governance framework, led by a single high-level Commissioner; (b) a revised set of concrete measurable, EU-wide, time-bound targets; (c) an updated monitoring system and indicators bearing in mind the voluntary nature of regional and local SDG reviews; (d) a single financial plan to achieve the EU’s SDG objectives, linked to the above targets; and (e) a plan for the EU’s SDG diplomacy and international cooperation.

It remains to be seen which direction the Commission will take to address the concerns expressed by its governing bodies.

India’s national development goals and commitment to “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas” (Collective Efforts, Inclusive Growth) chimes with the aims of the SDGs. The National Institution for Transforming India (NITI Aayog) was set up by the Government of India in 2014 with the twin mandate to oversee the adoption and monitoring of the SDGs in the country and promote competitive and cooperative federalism among States and the Union Territories. As reported by NITI Ayog, continuous engagement with the 29 States and 7 Union Territories during the course of construction of the SDG India Index in partnership with United Nations India reinforced the belief that the SDGs can be achieved by India if they are achieved at the subnational levels with appropriate national legislation and policy instruments.²⁷  In fact, the SDGs, with their focus on equality, inclusion and the principle of “leave no one behind”, make the nations responsible to implement the same with significant roles. However, the wide diversities among the Indian states in localising the SDG agenda in their respective development planning–implementation–advocacy–evaluation strategies have created the need to document the varied localisation processes in different States and the lessons learnt, which will help to accelerate the country’s drive to achieve the UN 2030 Agenda.

India launched a set of legislations and various schemes following a holistic approach towards its 2030 SDGs. There have been a number of instances where, with the establishment of national rules and policy framework, the implementation of SDGs has proved to have been successful. The effective implementation of the rules and policy instruments are an important factor. India's SDG Index Score ranges between 42 and 69 for States and between 57 and 68 for Union Territories. Kerala and Himachal Pradesh are the front runners amongst the States, with a score of 69; Chandigarh and Puducherry are the front runners with a score of 68 and 65 respectively among the Union Territories surveyed.

A number of policies and legislative initiatives have been established to achieve SDGs, for example:

• Swachh Bharat Mission (Campaign Clean India)

• Beti Bacho Beti Padhao (Save the girl child, educate the girl child)

• Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (Communal welfare scheme providing housing in urban areas)

• Smart Cities

• Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (Financial inclusion to ensure access to financial services)

• Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gram Jyoti Yojana (Providing uninterrupted power to rural India)

• Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (Providing LPG connection to women below the poverty line).

The Namami Gange Mission was launched in 2014 as a priority programme with the objectives of effective abatement of pollution, conservation and rejuvenation of the River Ganges – a key policy towards achieving SDG 6. With a budget outlay of INR 2000 million for 2015–2020, major components included sewerage project management, urban and rural sanitation, tackling industrial pollution, water use efficiency and quality improvement, ecosystem conservation and the Clean Ganga Fund, among others.

The Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement in 2015 was taken up by the Government of India. India has set a set of policy instruments with ambitious targets to be achieved by 2030 to enable further reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. In 2021 India continued exercising significant climate leadership at the international stage under the International Solar Alliance (ISA), Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI) and the Leadership Group for Industry Transition (Lead IT Group). Initiative for sustainable finance have been adopted by various ministries, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI).

Many countries have adopted the principles of the circular economy as part of their future strategies. For example, the circular economy is promoted as a top-down national political objective in India, the Republic of Korea and China, while, in other areas and countries such as the EU, Japan and the USA, it is a tool to design bottom-up environmental and waste management policies. The circular economy is a system that requires not only buy-in from governments to provide support with legislation and policies, but also the involvement of other stakeholders such as industries, academia, plant operators, municipal administration, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and government departments.²⁸  Table 1.2 demonstrates the perspective of circular economy implementation globally.

Rising interest has been observed in urban agriculture as a means to rebalance urban–rural linkages, bring nature back into the city, address nutritional insecurity of the urban and peri-urban poor and offer environmental benefits of lower food miles travelled. These bring opportunities for resource circularity as well as for a circular economy, such as recycling nutrients from food waste, utilisation of wastes generated from industrial, agricultural and municipal sectors, including wastewater treatment to farms. The signatory cities to the Milan Urban Food Pact have been developing food action plans, such as urban agriculture, emerging as a natural focal point with potential to advance a number of SDGs including sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11), good health and well-being (SDG 3), reducing inequalities (SDG 10) and zero hunger (SDG 3), in addition to environmental dimensions related to land, water and climate. Thus, the local and the national policy frameworks help in achieving the aims of the SDGs and of the circular economy.

A discussion is available on legislation pertaining to the implementation of the circular economy in several countries: Afghanistan, Australia, Bhutan, Canada, China, EU, Germany, India, Israel, Kenya, Laos, Mauritius, Malaysia, Nigeria, Norway, Serbia, South Korea, Thailand, UK, USA and Vietnam.¹²  Legislation enforcing circular economy implementation in most of the countries in the EU is relatively robust (see following section) and has been in place for an extended period, whereas several countries in Asia and Africa have yet to initiate the same.

As noted in Section 1.4.2, “sustainable consumption and sustainable and production” and “conservation and management of natural resources”, both desired outcomes of a circular economy, were recognised as priority areas for action in the EU’s 2001 Sustainable Development Strategy, updated in 2006. Indeed, in its Report On the implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan, the EU stated that “The circular economy is now an irreversible, global mega trend”.²⁹  The Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP), adopted in 2015, aimed to transition the EU’s economy from a linear to a circular model through 54 actions and four legislative proposals on waste. With these actions largely completed by and in 2019, the Commission adopted a new CEAP in 2020, with the following objectives:³⁰ 

• make sustainable products the norm in the EU

• focus on sectors that use most resources with high potential for circularity, such as: electronics and ICT, batteries and vehicles, packaging, plastics, textiles, construction and buildings, food, water and nutrients

• ensure less waste: reduce total waste generation and halve the amount of residual (non-recycled) municipal waste by 2030

• empower consumers and public buyers

• make circularity work for people, regions and cities

• lead global efforts on circular economy.

A resolution by the European Parliament in February 2021 required additional measures to achieve a carbon-neutral, environmentally sustainable, toxic-free and fully circular economy by 2050, including tighter recycling rules and binding targets for materials’ use and consumption by 2030. The Commission responded with a first package of measures in March 2022 to speed up the transition towards a circular economy by boosting sustainable products, empowering consumers for the green transition (for example by introducing a right to repair), reviewing construction product regulation and creating a strategy on sustainable textiles. New rules on reducing packaging waste, improving packaging design and moving to bio-based plastics were proposed in November 2022.

The 2019 European Green Deal (EGD) referred to in Section 1.4.2 explicitly lists “Mobilising industry for a clean and circular economy” as a priority action. The EU Industrial Strategy of 2020 also emphasises the benefits of a circular economy for improved resource efficiency, reducing dependencies and strengthening the EU’s resilience.

In 2021 the Commission prepared an EU Action Plan, Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil (the Zero Pollution Action Plan (ZPAP)).³¹  Described as “a cross-cutting objective contributing to the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and complementing the 2050 climate-neutrality goal in synergy with the clean and circular economy and restored biodiversity goals”, the aim of ZPAP is that by 2050, “air, water and soil pollution is reduced to levels no longer considered harmful to health and natural ecosystems and that respect the boundaries our planet can cope with, thus creating a toxic-free environment”.

Cumulatively, the EU has enacted a range of legislative instruments actioning the circular economy – 10 Communications, 7 Directives and 8 Regulations by mid-2020.³²  However, each Member State transposes EU legislation into its own national legislative systems, and implementation is also a matter for individual Member States. In this regard, researchers have identified a so-called “two-speed Europe” in terms of their transition towards a circular economy. Countries most advanced in this transition include Germany, Belgium, Spain, France, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. At a slower pace are countries of Central, Eastern and Southern Europe.³³ 

The popularity and awareness of the circular economy, supported by the implementation strategies of the SDGs, has been growing rapidly in several countries in the Asia Pacific region. Many of the countries in the region have adopted legislative instruments based on circular economy concepts and have been realising the benefits of implementation of those policies and targets. Countries such as Japan, India, China, the Republic of Korea and Australia have established specific legislation and have involved the cities, industries, the government and the academic fraternity in implementation. For example, the Japanese government is committed to transitioning to a circular economy and to becoming carbon neutral by 2050.

In recent years, the Government of Sri Lanka has recognised the importance of transitioning to a circular economy to address developmental challenges and promote sustainable development. This has led to the implementation of legislation, regulations and policies aimed at promoting circular economy practices.³⁴  Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regulations were introduced in 2018.³⁵  The EPR policy has been effective in managing plastic waste in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka has also implemented waste management regulations to reduce waste generation and promote resource efficiency – the National Waste Management Policy, established in 2017. Sri Lanka has been able to achieve a recycling rate of around 20%, with plans to increase this to 50% by 2030.³⁶ 

The Government of Sri Lanka has established green product design guidelines to encourage manufacturers to design products that are environmentally friendly, resource-efficient and easily recyclable. These guidelines were introduced in 2019 and apply to a range of products, including packaging materials, electronic goods and textiles.³⁷ 

Australia’s National Waste Policy Action Plan (NWPAP), agreed in late 2019, setting out 7 targets and 80 action items to implement its 2018 National Waste Policy. The plan was designed around five circular economy principles: avoid waste; improve resource recovery; increase use of recycled material and build demand and markets for recycled products; better management of material flows to benefit human health, the environment and the economy; and improve information to support innovation, guide investment and enable informed consumer decisions. The ACT Waste Management Strategy: Towards a Sustainable Canberra 2011–2025 was established with targets of decoupling waste generation from population growth, and expanding reuse of goods.³⁸  Table 1.3 presents the targets of the 2019 NWPAP and the actions realised by 2021.³⁹ 

In 2000 India established the Municipal Waste Management Rules. However, the effectiveness of the implementation was not encouraging, despite the scope for value creation out of waste in India with the generation of 62 million tonnes of municipal solid waste within a total waste generation of 1236 million tonnes. In 2014 the Government of India launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM; see Section 1.4.3) and in 2016 established six sets of waste management rules based on the circular economy and 5Rs (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Recover and Remanufacturing) principles and subsequently, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) guidelines and battery waste management rules, which are as follows:

• Guidelines on Extended Producer Responsibility for Plastic Packaging 2022

• Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016, as amended, 2022

• Construction & Demolition Waste Management Rules, 2016

• Biomedical Waste Management Rules, 2016

• Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016

• Battery Waste Management Rules, 2022

• E-waste Management Rules 2016, as amended in 2022

• Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules 2016, Second Amendment Rules, 2021

• National Policy on Resource Efficiency 2019 (Draft), which is yet to be finalised as of June 2023.

The SBM includes waste management as one of six components. Swachh Survekshan (a survey to assess rural and urban areas for their levels of cleanliness) was introduced by in 2016 as a competitive framework to encourage cities to improve the status of urban sanitation while encouraging large-scale citizen participation. Swachh Survekshan assesses the status of implementation of waste management rules and sanitation in different municipalities. The assessment criteria also include the resource efficiency of waste utilisation. In 2016 the survey was attended by 75 cities, while in 2022, 4320 cities participated and were assessed for their efficiency of waste segregation at source, waste treatment producing recycled products and energy recovery and other aspects (see Figure 1.2). The assessment criteria become more stringent from year to year, leading to institutionalising good practice. The eighth edition of Swachh Survekshan has been launched in 2023 – SS 2023 under SBM Urban 2.0. The evaluation parameters of SS 2023 will be out of 9500 marks including 48% for service-level progress and 26% each for the certification and citizens’ voice. The mission is being implemented under the overarching principles of “waste to wealth” and “circular economy”.⁴⁰ 

For industries a number of rules including EPR, the Zero Defect, Zero Impact (ZED) Scheme 2015, the Metals Recycling Policy and revised categories of industries were enforced and practised. A huge momentum has been created, with circular economy concepts adopted in many industries, municipalities and other sectors in India. In March 2021, 11 committees were formed, led by the concerned line ministries and comprising officials from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and NITI Aayog, domain experts, academics and industry representatives. The 11 focus areas identified by the Government of India are:⁴¹ 

• municipal solid waste and liquid waste

• scrap metal (ferrous and non-ferrous)

• electronic waste

• lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries

• solar panels

• gypsum

• toxic and hazardous industrial waste

• used oil

• agricultural waste

• tyres

• rubber recycling and End-of-life Vehicles (ELVs).

The committees will prepare comprehensive action plans for transitioning from a linear to a circular economy in their respective focus areas. They will also carry out the necessary modalities to ensure the effective implementation of their findings and recommendations. The focus includes end-of-life products/recyclable materials/wastes that either continue to pose considerable challenges or are emerging as new challenge areas that must be addressed in a holistic manner.

The Government of Indonesia is in the process of strengthening its commitments and efforts in overcoming economic, social and environmental problems through low-carbon economy development and the implementation of circular economy concepts based on the SDGs and the target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to satisfy the Paris Agreement, by 2030. Due to inefficient disposal practices in industrial sectors, namely, food and beverages, construction, electronics, textiles and plastics, the projected increases in waste percentage by 2030 are 54%, 82%, 39%, 70% and 40%, respectively.⁴²  Vision Indonesia 2045 and development policies and strategies in Indonesia incorporate circular economy concepts.

As an initial step, a study of the environmental, economic and social potential for the implementation of a circular economy in Indonesia was conducted in five industrial sectors, namely, food and beverages, construction, electronics, textiles and plastics. This will lead to the development of the National Action Plan and including the circular economy in the next National Medium Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2025–2029. These five sectors represent 30% of Indonesia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and employed more than 43 million people in 2019.⁴³  The implementation of circular economy concepts in Indonesia contributes to an opportunity of economic growth, job creation and environmental sustainability. A study estimated that the circular economy could create 1.2 million new jobs and generate USD 10.2 billion in annual economic benefits for Indonesia by 2030.⁴² 

Host to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum for 2022, Thailand overcame geopolitical, economic and pandemic-related headwinds to successfully guide the group to a consensus on a Joint Leaders Statement and the landmark Bangkok Goals on the Bio-Circular-Green (BCG) Economy. In January 2021 the Thai government announced a policy of positioning the BCG economy as a component of its “national agenda (key themes)”. Thailand is still at an early stage of circular economy development while the country continues to make steady progress on the Global Green Economy Index, rising from 45th position in 2014 to 38th and 27th in 2016 and 2018, respectively.

The goal of a BCG economy is “to build a production and consumption system with less environmental impact through the promotion of agriculture and biotechnology-related industries, the encouragement of recycling, and the introduction of renewable energy”.⁴⁴  The agriculture–food, bioenergy–biomaterial–biochemical, medical and wellness, and tourism and creative economies are the four focus areas of the BCG economy, which are closely related circular economy and green economy areas. Since 2018 the Thai government has focused on the production and trade of food trays, plastic bags, PET bottles⁴⁵  and automobile/power generation fuel made from bioethanol derived from agricultural waste under a resource circulation programme. The four strategies under the BCG economy are:⁴⁶ 

• promote sustainability of biological resources by balancing conservation and utilisation

• strengthen communities and grassroots economy by employing resource capital, identity, creativity and advanced technology

• enhance sustainable competitiveness of Thai BCG industries

• build resilience to global changes.

The bioeconomy, circular economy and green economy share the common goal of environmental conservation with many overlapping aspects.

There are a number of policies and targets in Canada that encourage the implementation of a circular economy. Canada, specifically Ontario, became the first jurisdiction in the Americas to enact a comprehensive circular economy law, the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act 2016 (RRCEA). The Waste Diversion Act (WDA) was a government-managed scheme to oversee the diversion of target waste streams away from landfills in Ontario. RRCEA helps to implement circular economy principles that constitute resource recovery activities. The act encourages the extraction of useful materials or other resources from materials that might otherwise be waste, including through reuse, recycling, reintegration, regeneration or other activities.⁴⁷  Six sets of resource recovery Individual Producer Responsibility (IPR) obligations were imposed upon producers:

• designate materials

• define responsible parties

• set up a collection and management system for the end-of-life products and related packaging

• provide promotion and education

• register, report, auditing and recordkeeping

• reduce waste.

Canada has implemented IPR and the circular economy in plastics.⁴⁸ 

A new International Organization for Standardization (ISO) technical committee was formed in 2019 to connect the dots in a circular economy and to introduce standardisation in the process, products and procedure for implementation of the concepts of circular economy. The ISO Technical Committee 323 (ISO/TC 323, Circular economy) is made up of experts from over 65 different countries and growing. The impetus behind the committee began with a seminar held by the Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR) , the ISO member for France, where business leaders from many sectors expressed the need to move from a linear to a circular economy model. What followed was a French standard, XP X30-901, Circular economy – Circular economy project management system — Requirements and guidelines published in 2018. The positive response spawned ISO/TC 323.

The ISO plans to develop a number of new standards based on circular economy concepts; many are in the developmental stage. Table 1.4 gives a glimpse of the standards under development through Technical Committee 323.^49–55 

In the ISO, the development of a standard follows a set path. A proposal for a new work item within the scope of an existing committee has to be submitted to the secretariat of that committee as a New Work Item Proposal (NWIP). Once the NWIP is accepted, responsibility of developing the standard is assigned to a working group. The working group develops the standard through various draft stages, to the final standard. In each of the stages voting of the member countries is conducted; the entire process can take a significant amount of time. As the circular economy is an important subject for all ISO TC 323 members, the development of the final standards should be expedited.

As noted previously, global waste generation is projected to increase to 2.59 billion tonnes by 2030 and 3.4 billion tonnes by 2050, a 70% increase from 2016 (2.01 billion tonnes); this continues to be an unexploited resource.

Secondary materials are embodied in trade activities. Next to the challenges connected with estimating the domestic extraction needed to enable the consumption of primary materials, there are also practical limitations to the accounting of secondary materials embodied in trade. Physical transaction data are scarce or unreliable, or outdated. Due to a lack of specific information, the estimate or forecasting of the available secondary materials in different sectors for exports and domestic use are not reliable, hindering effective planning for the use of these materials.

A standard entitled, Environmental Management and Circular Economy – Sustainability and Traceability of Secondary Materials Recovery: Principles and Requirements is under preparation by the members of the ISO TC 207/SC 5/ISO TC 323 Joint Working Group 14. The document is at present in the committee draft (CD) stage, of of June 2023, which will be elevated to the draft interim standard (DIS) and subsequently the final standard will be released after the voting process. The proposed ISO/CD 59014:2022 standard provides principles and requirements for enabling the sustainability and traceability of activities and processes in the recovery of secondary materials and addresses secondary materials, resources not recovered as materials and non-recovered wastes in the value chain of an organisation.

National bodies may also develop their own standards. The Bureau of Indian Standards has been carrying out a programme for developing a guideline standard for resource efficiency and secondary raw materials, which is being led by the author of this chapter. The standard, currently in the committee draft stage, focuses on the role of subsistence activities to ensure safe and healthy working conditions and continual improvement of well-being, livelihoods and professional practices while performing waste collection and treatment activities. The standard defines subsistence activity as activities conducted by an organisation involving an individual(s) or groups of individuals/families while earning below the living wage.

We need to halt and reverse nature loss by conserving more of the natural environment that we have left, restoring what is possible and sustainably managing the rest. Transitioning to a carbon-neutral and nature-positive society and economy is the only path to a safer and more equitable future for humanity. Material wastages need to be reduced and consumption patterns have to be redesigned, enhancing their life cycle. The combined strengths and capabilities of formal and informal sectors are required to improve the management of electronic, plastic, construction, demolition and biomedical waste. While hazardous wastes and nuclear wastes have attracted the attention of policymakers because of their destructive potential on human health and the environment, municipal wastes are the most neglected types of resources and have received relatively poor attention in many countries.

The circular economy and associated business models have emerged as a promising strategy, gaining increased attention and support in society and by different national governments around the world. Circular business models provide many opportunities that are more sustainable and restorative than existing linear models. The linear models based on extract–produce–consume–dispose–deplete (EPCD2) causes more extraction of natural resources, which is unsustainable. The circular economy offers opportunities worth trillions of dollars, employment generation, an enhanced economy, resource efficiency and, ultimately, environmental sustainability.

Implementing innovative technologies based on the 3Rs and circular economy principles are potentially more sustainable in the long term. Holistic zero-waste management strategies based on integrated tools, systems and technologies are required for the transition phase of a society. Selection or application of waste treatment technologies for zero-waste cities should consider holistic intergeneration resource recovery and product stewardship. In zero-waste city planning and design, the material flow of the city should be designed and managed in a balanced way, while taking into account differences in lifestyles, values and personal behaviours. More generally, the waste disposal behaviour and awareness of consumers needs to be addressed in the context of a country's complex socio-cultural and economic conditions, while committing all resource recovery sectors collectively to develop sustainable waste management systems.

The presence of the national legislation is the first step to provide a foundation for a country’s activities related to the circular economy and sustainable development goals. International standards, working in tandem with national legislation and standards, will accelerate the transition to a more sustainable future.

The author acknowledges the support of the Going Global Partnerships – Industry Academia Collaborative Grant, funded by the British Council and Aston University, UK, to the International Society of Waste Management, Air and Water, India.